Opinion The 'Carlton related stuff that doesn't need it's own thread' thread Part 2

[HavUEvaSeenTheRain]

In theory yes, but I can see it turning into a shitshow

There are other ways to open up the game, which won't lead to further inconsistencies in interpretation

I hate the rule but I do think it will open up the game and it will probably be the most frustrating rule change yet.

Edit. Just imagine if Castagna lead you to the ball and marks just outside the 50 So you take the mark knowing he can’t score, (he would also be able to kick from a distance he could score from with no one on the mark) just to have Dusty stroll past you without you being able to do nothing to block his run and have a fairly simple shot for him on goal. Would be infuriating to watch.

 

[Earls Smother]

I’d like hear your reasons as to why it will make a “huge” difference.

The game was basically 18 defenders versus 17 attackers when a player was forced to be stationary after taking after a mark /free kick (but the man on the mark effectively was not). This evens it up to 17 versus 17, until play-on is called. Or even tilts the balance in favour of the attacking team having closer to 18 v 17, as the player with the ball initiates the next play.

It will all come down to the discipline of the players on the mark to accept they are out of play (other than to stop the player with the ball running in a straight line towards goal) and staying still. The clubs that better prepare for it will be advantaged in terms of not giving away 50m penalties - as they should be. I read that Brisbane were doing a session recently solely to practice this, and a club would be negligent to not do so.

There is no doubt it will be benefit the clubs with elite ball users who will be able to run and receive more easily. It will also benefit the sides with strong marking forwards, as delivery should be of a higher standard more often. This should see more goals kicked. These are aspects of the game we want to see being benefitted IMO.

Thankfully from our point of view, it should suit us more than a defensive side like say Sydney.

 

[JustaBattler]

I hated watching players run over the mark by moving sideways forwards in an arc - blocking the inside kick/ anticipating the whistle being blown and generally crabbing the space of the marking player - some teams eg Richmond crabbed forward so much that they pushed the marking player back 20 meters. It was all on the umpire to try and adjudicate an angled move on the part of a defender - each time a mark was taken - they have enough on their hands.

I like the rule's intent.

 

[Arr0w]

I hated watching players run over the mark by moving sideways forwards in an arc - blocking the inside kick/ anticipating the whistle being blown and generally crabbing the space of the marking player - some teams eg Richmond crabbed forward so much that they pushed the marking player back 20 meters. It was all on the umpire to try and adjudicate an angled move on the part of a defender - each time a mark was taken - they have enough on their hands.

I like the rule's intent.

I like the rules intent, just concerned about the consistency of adjudication.

Easy for the player on the mark, stand until umpire calls play on, or player disposes the ball.

Where it will become inconsistent is when the player with the ball is allowed to drift off the line of the mark too far before the umpire calls play on.

 

[JustaBattler]

I like the rules intent, just concerned about the consistency of adjudication.

Easy for the player on the mark, stand until umpire calls play on, or player disposes the ball.

Where it will become inconsistent is when the player with the ball is allowed to drift off the line of the mark too far before the umpire calls play on.

To me it reads like making clear what the standing the mark rule has always been/should have been - but yes consistency will be the test as always.

I reckon the biggest problem with the rules ( apart from the difficulty of getting consistent umpiring ) is the fact that coaches see gaming the rules and manufacturing plays around that intent as a key component of their job description.

I dont like the introduction of positional requirements on field ala netball. Good teams should be able to exploit presses or flooding - and if they aren't good enough to do so - so be it.

 

[thylacine60]

And to add a little context to these flaws, played in the period 2002 to 2012.
If you’re susceptible to outward displays of frustration then timing couldn’t have been more “perfect” God knows I was.
Poor bastard.

Punching out of his weight division pretty much every game.

 

[FitzroyBlueBagger]

It's going to be like the protected zone 50m penalty, players getting pinged for not even interrupting play.

The worst idiotic rule is the extra 50m penalty for the guy with ball sprinting into the opposition after receiving a 50m penalty.

Sent from my CPH2005 using Tapatalk

Totally... Lacking a little commonsense...

 

[KnaveyBlue]

I hate the rule but I do think it will open up the game and it will probably be the most frustrating rule change yet.

Edit. Just imagine if Castagna lead you to the ball and marks just outside the 50 So you take the mark knowing he can’t score, (he would also be able to kick from a distance he could score from with no one on the mark) just to have Dusty stroll past you without you being able to do nothing to block his run and have a fairly simple shot for him on goal. Would be infuriating to watch.

Going to be a lot of this all over the ground. I reckon the run-past handball receive>long kick is probably going to be the most important part of ball movement in general play next year.

 

[FitzroyBlueBagger]

The AFL have done us a favour with the timing of this rule change.

We have the likes of Saad, Williams, Willo, Martin, Newman etc. streaming past as our receive and deliver players.

It's not long ago we would have had O'Shea, Mullett, Kerridge and Shaw involved in such chains.

Surely Harry at $34 is good value for the Coleman?

I’ve had a little nibble $20 on each of Harry $34 for the Coleman and Walsh $67 for the Brownlow...

 

[Blue__Balls]

What will be interesting is to see is how you can shepherd the man on the mark. Should have to be 5m away from the man on the mark until play on is called. Infringe and your team loses the ball.

Think what you've suggested it exactly what is going to be in place. 5m protected zone around the player on the mark that no other player is allowed to enter (presumably except for the player with the ball...?) until play on is called.

Standing room only: the small AFL rule tweak changing the game

Coaches say a seemingly minor rule change is having a bigger impact in pre-season trials than any other, and the AFL believes it will make footy a better spectacle.

www.theage.com.au

Removes shepherding the man on the mark (which I think should have just been a simple rule anyway) and means you can't have multiple players on the mark during a shot on goal.

There's a very worrying line in that article though...

" Umpires will be encouraged to give more latitude to the player with the ball to move off their line before “play on” is called."

They're going to give them more latitude?!

 

[FitzroyBlueBagger]

What will be interesting is to see is how you can shepherd the man on the mark. Should have to be 5m away from the man on the mark until play on is called. Infringe and your team loses the ball.

Shepherding on the mark should have been outlawed a long time ago...

 

[Earls Smother]

I’ve had a little nibble $20 on each of Harry $34 for the Coleman and Walsh $67 for the Brownlow...

Haha. I've had exactly the same nibbles.

Walsh was $51 on Ladbrokes, but $67 with TAB. Pays to shop around.

Multi the 2 into us to make the 8 @$2.50 and you never have to work again.

 

[Metalcrusher]

Think what you've suggested it exactly what is going to be in place. 5m protected zone around the player on the mark that no other player is allowed to enter (presumably except for the player with the ball...?) until play on is called.

Standing room only: the small AFL rule tweak changing the game

Coaches say a seemingly minor rule change is having a bigger impact in pre-season trials than any other, and the AFL believes it will make footy a better spectacle.

www.theage.com.au

Removes shepherding the man on the mark (which I think should have just been a simple rule anyway) and means you can't have multiple players on the mark during a shot on goal.

There's a very worrying line in that article though...

" Umpires will be encouraged to give more latitude to the player with the ball to move off their line before “play on” is called."

They're going to give them more latitude?!

It will encourage more man on man defending rather than zones ....

 

[FitzroyBlueBagger]

Haha. I've had exactly the same nibbles.

Walsh was $51 on Ladbrokes, but $67 with TAB. Pays to shop around.

Multi the 2 into us to make the 8 @$2.50 and you never have to work again.

Tried doing the double (McKay & Walsh) into each other but TAB didn’t allow it, yeah like your little 2 leg multi good luck with that

 

[Coops93]

flawed but probably under-rated ultimately - never shirked, left it all out there, can't ask more than that...........

I heard a story years ago that forwards hated playing on him because they never felt like they got on top of him.



To clarify, I don't mean in terms of playing ability, plenty felt like that, but rather talking ability. The story I was specifically regaled was a forward had already kicked 6 on him and he came to the bench annoyed because Brett kept asking him if he was going to kick a goal this afternoon. It would probably annoy me too tbf.

 

[Macca43]

It will encourage more man on man defending rather than zones ....

Bombers' intra-club shows just how tough the new man on the mark laws are

Kyle Langford is the first, but we’re betting he won’t be the last…

www.theroar.com.au

I don't think this is doing anything to open the game up.

 

[thylacine60]

You'd tear your hair out sometimes particularly when he blamed those around him but geez he played through some trying times. Had a belter in that finals win over * I recall.

 

[FitzroyBlueBagger]

New body. New haircut.

Harry is primed and ready to explode.

He’ll tear some teams apart this year, think he has some big 6,7,8 goal games in him when he fully clicks...

 

[Benaly28]

If we beat Richmond round 1. Or if we make the top 8 in 2021 I’ll be the first to post on the main board how good was silvagnis picks in 2015. How good was that late pick up Williamson. How good was the drafting of McGovern, plowman, Marchbank, pittonet, Martin, Gibbons, Kennedy, Newman and Setterfield. How many list managers has brought in that many best 22 players.

big footy is an extension of the AFL media. Loves the negative. Carlton had 5-6 very popular threads on the main board where EVERYONE sunk the boots in. I’m not humble. fu** em. I’ll be letting them all know about it.

Not IF but WHEN.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[RPCB]

He’ll tear some teams apart this year, think he has some big 6,7,8 goal games in him when he fully clicks...

Its unbelievable that in the trolling about Carlton over the years, I was told a few times that SOS stuffed up our 1st rounders more times than he didn’t. Weitering, McKay , Curnow, Cuningham (same draft, all 1st rounders), SPS, Dow, LOB, Walsh, Stocker, Kemp, Philp were all SOS 1st rounders.

That is such a good track record. All those very good names and McKay has the tools to be the best of the lot.

 

[Macca43]

You'd tear your hair out sometimes particularly when he blamed those around him but geez he played through some trying times. Had a belter in that finals win over * I recall.

Him getting concussed against the Eagles the next week was a significant loss.

 

[Arr0w]

It will encourage more man on man defending rather than zones ....

I think it will be the opposite

 

[FitzroyBlueBagger]

Its unbelievable that in the trolling about Carlton over the years, I was told a few times that SOS stuffed up our 1st rounders more times than he didn’t. Weitering, McKay , Curnow, Cuningham (same draft, all 1st rounders), SPS, Dow, LOB, Walsh, Stocker, Kemp, Philp were all SOS 1st rounders.

That is such a good track record. All those very good names and McKay has the tools to be the best of the lot.

I have only been around a couple of years so i didn’t see the comments on Weitering McKay Curnow and others early on being busts, trade them out, which is quite astonishing in itself those three IMO you could see the huge potential in them becoming elite but needed time too develop... Another player I’ve called out earlier on was Fisher being a future star and should never be traded after comments that he should, I’ve had Dow and others backs all along as well, kids need time to develop injuries setbacks have stagnated a few along the way... It’s fine having an opinion on players but sometimes people just ride off youngsters way too quickly without any reasonable commonsense...

 

[RPCB]

I have only been around a couple of years so i didn’t see the comments on Weitering McKay Curnow and others early on being busts, trade them out, which is quite astonishing in itself those three IMO you could see the huge potential in them becoming elite but needed time too develop... Another player I’ve called out earlier on was Fisher being a future star and should never be traded after comments that he should, I’ve had Dow and others backs all along as well, kids need time to develop injuries setbacks have stagnated a few along the way... It’s fine having an opinion on players but sometimes people just ride off youngsters way too quickly without any reasonable commonsense...

Definitely. Would like to say that it was never on this board, it always came from opposition supporters. But what would people on the outside know about our list anyway?

 

[Canyouhearthedrums]

Harry will probably have enough prune to win the Coleman but I worry about his kicking....