The density rule.

[Howard Littlejohn]

The thing I would start with is to instruct umpires to actually pay "holding the man" when a player hasn't yet got control of the ball. All the little jumper holds and getting an arm across a player who is in front; they are holding, call them as such. The good players who can win and use the ball in a contest would then have more chance to win and use the ball.

 

[Carringbush2010]

You're the footballing equivalent of an SJW.

?

 

[Carringbush2010]

It doesn't matter which players are in the zone, just as long as each team has the minimum amount in there.

And I and many have said all along: one way to minimise traffic at stoppages is to ball up/ thrown in immediately or instruct the rewarded player to move the ball on!

OR

We could introduce a radical change called zoning.

Do we really want zoning and zone rules? Like off side? Reckon that would take away the uniqueness of our game.

 

[Lavender Bushranger]

And I and many have said all along: one way to minimise traffic at stoppages is to ball up/ thrown in immediately or instruct the rewarded player to move the ball on!

OR

We could introduce a radical change called zoning.

Do we really want zoning and zone rules? Like off side? Reckon that would take away the uniqueness of our game.

I don't understand that.

Teams want to move the ball quickly when they have it. They don't chip it sideways and backwards for laugh.

They do it because teams stack numbers behind the ball. Forcing them to rush it and play on, plays precisely into the hands of the team that is initiating flooding and congestion.

That's precisely what the AFL are trying to avoid.

 

[Mningasimisonda]

?

I looked here and being the footballing equivalent of the father of the son of God seems like your best option.

https://www.acronymfinder.com/St.-Joseph-the-Worker-(SJW).html

 

[Carringbush2010]

I don't understand that.

Teams want to move the ball quickly when they have it. They don't chip it sideways and backwards for laugh.

They do it because teams stack numbers behind the ball. Forcing them to rush it and play on, plays precisely into the hands of the team that is initiating flooding and congestion.

That's precisely what the AFL are trying to avoid.

Yet that is not everyone's gripe, seems the main gripe is "stacks on the mill for the whole 120 mins" (your words IIRC), not chipping it around half back to keep possession.

It's pretty simple stuff, the less numbers around a stoppage and the amount time in a stoppage is the goal right? I have mentioned there are ways to reduce the numbers at stoppages and the amount of time in a stoppage ad nauseum.

On the bolded, that's without the ball right? So there's no actual congestion around the ball - so either the possession team turns it over and the opp outrun on transition (you know that free flowing footy)

OR

The possession team kicks down the line, a contest, the ball goes to ground for what is seemingly forever before the ump blows the whistle but then we wait another period for ruck noms (sometimes enough that I can get another can and not miss anything).

So I will mention it - again -. There seems to be 2 ways of fixing it

A/ Zoning - yuck for many reasons and not to mention unnecessary

B/ Instead waiting for the kettle to boil while the ball is under the deck, FFS UMPIRE IF IT'S NOT GETTING OUT - IMMEDIATELY - THEN BLOW THAT F***** WHISTLE THEN BALL IT - IMMEDIATELY -! DON'T F***** WAIT FOR A RUCK NOM IT'S NOT U8'S!

Sorry those emojis weren't directed at you, it just p***** me off watching that when it is so easily !!!!! fixable

Geelong v Dogs game was a classic example of what the game should look like - without zones!

 

[Monkey King]

Ew. I ******* hate these goals. No team skill required, no avoiding or dodging, just one bloke that's fast. I will he happy to never see one again.

100% agree.

 

[Snake_Baker]

They have to do something. The game is dying in front of me.

 

[RunningBounce]

You don't actually give two stuffs about the integrity of the game.

How is changing the nature of the game caring about its integrity?

i see your point. You don't like AFL and think more rules would help you enjoy it more.

But you're looking for a different word than integrity. Your probably thinking "You don't give two stuffs about the innovation of the game."

 

[Snake_Baker]

If "innovation" means that winning elite games of football is based upon enacting a suburban under 12's match, then it is a cancerous "innovation"

"Malignant mutation" would be a better term.

 

[Lavender Bushranger]

How is changing the nature of the game caring about its integrity?

i see your point. You don't like AFL and think more rules would help you enjoy it more.

But you're looking for a different word than integrity. Your probably thinking "You don't give two stuffs about the innovation of the game."

I think the point is that the nature of the game HAS changed.

 

[NoobPie]

They have to do something. The game is dying in front of me.

haha

 

[Cdog71]

I agree with paying holding the ball and dropping the ball, players are running to every contest because it rarely ends up as a free kick.
Another thing that is affecting the game is that there are 5 teams that are crap at the moment and it’s an awful spectacle

 

[Mitchell Madness]

Remove harsh interpretation of deliberate out of bounds. That will force teams to have players wider. If they don't it will fatigue the players as they'll be running more to get to throw one, rather than sitting back waiting for the free against.

Remove the quick kick in and deliberate rushed rule. Will see cleaner rebound disposal, and again, force players to sit back more rather than crowd the ball handler.

Blow the whistle. Umpires still circle around the pack, and often cause the congestion

Stop ruck nomination. It takes ages to nominate and is a tactic by teams to get players in close. Allow third man up. I know that pissed people off, but when it was allowed, we saw teams able to break the congestion with a thump forward. It only happened 2-3 times a game, and the rule was only implemented to stop a few teams playing the athletic ruckman as a midfielder and being "unfair" to the teams who didn't have one

 

[YippeeYiYeo]

The only method of zoning I would support for is X number of players inside both 50m arcs before centre bounces. Make the half forwards/backs start further away from the 1st clearance before the inevitable bees hive occurs.

Just an extension of the current centre square rule without dramatically needing to be over complicated for the umps.

 

[Lavender Bushranger]

Yet that is not everyone's gripe, seems the main gripe is "stacks on the mill for the whole 120 mins" (your words IIRC), not chipping it around half back to keep possession.

It's pretty simple stuff, the less numbers around a stoppage and the amount time in a stoppage is the goal right? I have mentioned there are ways to reduce the numbers at stoppages and the amount of time in a stoppage ad nauseum.

I think therein lies the biggest problem of all.....

'Everyone's gripe' is not the same.


For me it's not necessarily black and white. I hate the rolling maul - but I also don't think 'high scoring' is necessarily 'great footy'.

I like the offense to flow - but 'end to end' footy is boring.

I like defence and a contest - but watching Richmond play puts me to sleep.


To be as specific as I can be, personally, what I despise is the 'team defence' element of modern footy. Watching 18 guys form a zone in one third of the ground, then a few small hacks that can't play football at all but can tackle try to spook the other team into kicking it to them. They eventually do, because the guys setting the zone are super fit, super fast and are fresh as they can take a break whenever they feel like it.
So they then either win the ball and then kick it back into their F50 which is horribly congested, and we do this same thing again for as long as it takes for one of the teams to crack. Or, the team coming out of defence doesn't kick it directly to the team that has set up the zone, but instead scrambles it to the boundary line and we spend god knows how long with 36 players in a rolling maul.

BORING!!! It's just unwatchable.

I don't think kicking more goals make great footy. I don't think free flowing footy is always great footy.

I think one on one contests, between footballers is what makes footy great. I think this is what has always made it great. Contests within the main contest.


I'm not necessarily 'pro zones'. I just know that something needs to be done. The game is just rubbish. Something needs to be done to fix it.

And it won't just evolve. What we see right now, is the result of it evolving! It was always going to go this way.

We have coaches who are paid to win, and know that defence wins sporting games.

The reason for this, is that coaches want the game low scoring and defensive, and basically their number 1 aim is to stop the opposition players from executing the fundamentals skills of aussie rules footy. That's actually what they're trying to achieve. They've always wanted the game to look like it does now. But now they've been given the tools to make it happen.

Think about that for a second. 18 coaches, trying to stop players from executing the skills of aussie rules footy. And we wonder why the game is boring?

If we give these coaches unlimited resources, super fit players - and allow them to rest as much as they want, they're naturally going to get very, very good at stopping the opposition from executing the fundamentals of the game.

And here we are.


It's the coaches that wrecked it. And the only way to fix it, is to reduce their influence.

Once again...

No runners
No quarter and 3rd quarter addresses
Each player only gets one rest per half


No matter what rule changes the AFL introduce, coaches will find a way to stop players from executing the basic fundamental skills of the game.


Teams will still have strategy and tactics. But they won't be as well drilled in them as they are now. Players will be forced to play footy instinctively.

Which personally, is all I want.

 

[Lavender Bushranger]

All the AFL's rule changes and tweaks have basically been introduced to react to coaches exploiting existing rules.

Rather than change rules - why not just reduce the ability for coaches to exploit existing ones?

 

[HTT]

I think therein lies the biggest problem of all.....

'Everyone's gripe' is not the same.


For me it's not necessarily black and white. I hate the rolling maul - but I also don't think 'high scoring' is necessarily 'great footy'.

I like the offense to flow - but 'end to end' footy is boring.

I like defence and a contest - but watching Richmond play puts me to sleep.


To be as specific as I can be, personally, what I despise is the 'team defence' element of modern footy. Watching 18 guys form a zone in one third of the ground, then a few small hacks that can't play football at all but can tackle try to spook the other team into kicking it to them. They eventually do, because the guys setting the zone are super fit, super fast and are fresh as they can take a break whenever they feel like it.
So they then either win the ball and then kick it back into their F50 which is horribly congested, and we do this same thing again for as long as it takes for one of the teams to crack. Or, the team coming out of defence doesn't kick it directly to the team that has set up the zone, but instead scrambles it to the boundary line and we spend god knows how long with 36 players in a rolling maul.

BORING!!! It's just unwatchable.

I don't think kicking more goals make great footy. I don't think free flowing footy is always great footy.

I think one on one contests, between footballers is what makes footy great. I think this is what has always made it great. Contests within the main contest.


I'm not necessarily 'pro zones'. I just know that something needs to be done. The game is just rubbish. Something needs to be done to fix it.

And it won't just evolve. What we see right now, is the result of it evolving! It was always going to go this way.

We have coaches who are paid to win, and know that defence wins sporting games.

The reason for this, is that coaches want the game low scoring and defensive, and basically their number 1 aim is to stop the opposition players from executing the fundamentals skills of aussie rules footy. That's actually what they're trying to achieve. They've always wanted the game to look like it does now. But now they've been given the tools to make it happen.

Think about that for a second. 18 coaches, trying to stop players from executing the skills of aussie rules footy. And we wonder why the game is boring?

If we give these coaches unlimited resources, super fit players - and allow them to rest as much as they want, they're naturally going to get very, very good at stopping the opposition from executing the fundamentals of the game.

And here we are.


It's the coaches that wrecked it. And the only way to fix it, is to reduce their influence.

Once again...

No runners
No quarter and 3rd quarter addresses
Each player only gets one rest per half


No matter what rule changes the AFL introduce, coaches will find a way to stop players from executing the basic fundamental skills of the game.


Teams will still have strategy and tactics. But they won't be as well drilled in them as they are now. Players will be forced to play footy instinctively.

Which personally, is all I want.

Do you reckon players only having one rest per half is going to help them ‘execute the basic fundamental skills of the game’?

Go run 5k (considerably less than what they’d run in a half now) with only 1 rest and then a) hit a target 40m away (clearing congestion) then b) run another 150m at about 15km/h (pretty much the length of the field in about 40sec - which causes congestion)

Tell me which one is easier

 

[Snake_Baker]

Do you reckon players only having one rest per half is going to help them ‘execute the basic fundamental skills of the game’?

Go run 5k (considerably less than what they’d run in a half now) with only 1 rest and then a) hit a target 40m away (clearing congestion) then b) run another 150m at about 15km/h (pretty much the length of the field in about 40sec - which causes congestion)

Tell me which one is easier

It's the endurance aspect of modern football that has facilitated the tactical vandalism of the contemporary game.

Remove rotations, bring in zones, revert to a longer kicking game and open the game up.

I get that as a Richmond supporter you have a vested interest in swarm football, but your club will adjust quickly just like the others.

 

[NoobPie]

It's the endurance aspect of modern football that has facilitated the tactical vandalism of the contemporary game.

Remove rotations, bring in zones, revert to a longer kicking game and open the game up.

I get that as a Richmond supporter you have a vested interest in swarm football, but your club will adjust quickly just like the others.

Richmond supporter. Do you reckon he’s an sjw as well?

 

[Snake_Baker]

Richmond supporter.

Your mob has screamed blue murder against rule change from day dot because it waters down and changes course over the massive head start you get over the comp in football department spending.

Do you reckon he’s an sjw as well?

Triggered much?

 

[HTT]

It's the endurance aspect of modern football that has facilitated the tactical vandalism of the contemporary game.

Remove rotations, bring in zones, revert to a longer kicking game and open the game up.

I get that as a Richmond supporter you have a vested interest in swarm football, but your club will adjust quickly just like the others.

Lol

We didn’t invent the modern, more tactically aware version of the game. We aren’t the only club doing it. Every other team worth their salt, at national, state and even local level plays a similar style. Pressure and pressing are the current pinnacle of tactics. Someone’s going to overcome it - and in fact Richmond are planting the seeds of that. Our point of difference is no longer our pressure, it’s our ability to beat the pressure.
But, every team needs to apply that pressure. If you change the game, to stop pressure, the coaches will be working to get that pressure back. Sure for a few years you might get high scoring basketball shit but then they’ll figure it out and we’ll be back to square one.

Instead, leave the game alone, let the coaches figure out how to actually beat pressure, then pressure will become redundant, gone forever except for some cases, much like flooding.

 

[Masqualero]

They have to do something. The game is dying in front of me.

Go watch your local side then.

 

[Masqualero]

It's the endurance aspect of modern football that has facilitated the tactical vandalism of the contemporary game.

Remove rotations, bring in zones, revert to a longer kicking game and open the game up.

I get that as a Richmond supporter you have a vested interest in swarm football, but your club will adjust quickly just like the others.

Thatd be dope, beat your man then sprint to your next teammate, handball over the top and repeat till you get a shot on goal.

That is what will happen if the game goes man on man at this skill level.

 

[NoobPie]

Your mob has screamed blue murder against rule change from day dot because it waters down and changes course over the massive head start you get over the comp in football department spending.



Triggered much?

Hahaha!!!! Aaawwww, aren’t you just adorable?!