Rules The new man on the mark rule is utterly ridiculous.

[Grrr]

half a step could decide the cricket world cup, or the NBA championship....

Maybe it will, in cricket.

 

[Grrr]

are you suggesting the Tiger try to speed up play when they dont have the ball?

Jayden Short's 958m gained last Sat. night suggests they do.

 

[Fat Nyfe]

All the media personalities were falling over themselves to praise the rule and Steve Hocking after literally 1 round of practice games.

Not sure whether they are

a) Mostly dinosaurs who just hate the modern game and want it to go back to the 80s
b) Paid shills by the AFL to give the rule changes good PR.

I'd say it's probably a combination of both.

 

[RUNVS]

All the media personalities were falling over themselves to praise the rule and Steve Hocking after literally 1 round of practice games.

Not sure whether they are

a) Mostly dinosaurs who just hate the modern game and want it to go back to the 80s
b) Paid shills by the AFL to give the rule changes good PR.

I'd say it's probably a combination of both.

or, and this may be a shock, perhaps they are genuine with their opinion.

 

[Fat Nyfe]

or, and this may be a shock, perhaps they are genuine with their opinion.

Doubt. Even if you are genuinely open minded to the rule change, if you were sensible you'd want to see 2 months of proper H&A games or more to have a good enough sample size supporting your opinion before declaring it a revolutionary change and Steve Hocking a God.
The fact they've been so quick on the gushing praise, it does not come across as genuine at all.

 

[RUNVS]

Doubt. Even if you are genuinely open minded to the rule change, if you were sensible you'd want to see 2 months of proper H&A games or more to have a good enough sample size supporting your opinion before declaring it a revolutionary change and Steve Hocking a God.
The fact they've been so quick on the gushing praise, it does not come across as genuine at all.

they are likely being hopefully. I am as well. I like how the change has affected games in the preseason but I am weary that clubs will find a way to counteract it. Doesn't change the fact I am hopeful though.

 

[queensberryrules]

Footscray won a flag in 1954 mastering it as a whole team tactic. An absolute disgrace.


They were doing it for years.

“John Schultz’s form and Brownlow Medal win were highlights of 1960, with Footscray improving only slightly from the previous season to finish tenth. Former player Bill Findlay was appointed Whitten’s assistant coach in 1961. A meteoric rise up the ladder (due in part to a game plan centred around the ‘flick pass’ and its promotion of fast, play-on football) saw Footscray defeat Geelong in the last round to make the finals. Victory over St Kilda in the first semi-final was followed by a win against Melbourne in the preliminary final, when rover Merv Hobbs took what some consider the ‘mark of the century’ over Melbourne’s Trevor Johnson. The grand final, between Footscray and Hawthorn, was the first time two of the teams admitted to the VFL in 1925 met to play for the premiership. Footscray, led by captain/coach Ted Whitten, took an 8 point lead into the main break, but the Bulldogs wilted in the heat and Hawthorn claimed their first VFL flag, in front of 108,000 people.”

Here is great demonstration of it..




And here’s a BF thread about it..

Discussion - The flick-pass and throw-pass

From Wikipedia: One notable variant of the handpass was known as the flick pass, in which a player could use his open hand instead of his fist to propel the ball. The legality of the flick pass has varied throughout the history of the game; it became legal in the 1930s, and in the late 1950s and...

www.bigfooty.com

Interesting.
Of 88 HBs in 61 GF, 18 were flick passes.

 

[JezzasOnTheAsphalt]

Jezza, pretty sure the rule is DESIGNED to allow the kicker more freedom to cut corners by getting a head start on thee man on the mark. That EXACTLY what they're trying to do. As always tho, there are inintended consequences with un-thought-out rules that haven't been trialled. Tjer s dreamers here believing that it's opened up the play and dramatically increased scoring. A goal. That's how much scoring is up. As Dimma said, the biggest change to the game has been the reduced interchange at the same time as putting the quarters back to full length. Tiredness, if anything is what opened up SOME games in the practice matches.

I understand what the rule is trying to achieve. That head start which you mention refers more to ball movement I think but my comment was in regards to set shots in particular.
Players with a natural arc to their set shot routine get quite an advantage compared to the players who run in dead straight now.

 

[queensberryrules]

Jack Riewoldt thinks the reduced rotations are far more impactful than the stand still on the mark. Yet the focus here is on the man on the mark, which seems to be a reversion to norm.

 

[RUNVS]

Jack Riewoldt thinks the reduced rotations are far more impactful than the stand still on the mark. Yet the focus here is on the man on the mark, which seems to be a reversion to norm.

Reduced rotations are awful as all it means is clubs recruiting athletes over footballers in the future.

In the short term it creates more injuries and a worse quality of football in the final quarter.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Reduced rotations are awful as all it means is clubs recruiting athletes over footballers in the future.

In the short term it creates more injuries and a worse quality of football in the final quarter.

It does bring outside players into the game late though which can only be a good thing. Gut running mids are worth their weight in gold.

 

[Grrr]

Reduced rotations are awful as all it means is clubs recruiting athletes over footballers in the future.

In the short term it creates more injuries and a worse quality of football in the final quarter.

You could argue that the reduced rotations will perhaps do more than the man on the mark to get footy flowing because once players get tire, they are less likely/able to do the chasing and harassing that makes football the pressure game it is today. That might mean more direct football. I know from a Richmond perspective we do a lot of scoring late in the Q because teams cannot generally go the full distance for whatever reason.

 

[RUNVS]

You could argue that the reduced rotations will perhaps do more than the man on the mark to get footy flowing because once players get tire, they are less likely/able to do the chasing and harassing that makes football the pressure game it is today. That might mean more direct football. I know from a Richmond perspective we do a lot of scoring late in the Q because teams cannot generally go the full distance for whatever reason.

Once players tire then teams are just going to get more defensive as it requires less effort to defend than attack.

 

[greatwhiteshark]

All the media personalities were falling over themselves to praise the rule and Steve Hocking after literally 1 round of practice games.

Not sure whether they are

a) Mostly dinosaurs who just hate the modern game and want it to go back to the 80s
b) Paid shills by the AFL to give the rule changes good PR.

I'd say it's probably a combination of both.

They are paid puppets of head office. There is not one independent media source that covers AFL. All of them simply spread the word head office tells them to.

 

[Grrr]

Once players tire then teams are just going to get more defensive as it requires less effort to defend than attack.

No usually, mistakes happen more when teams tire, team discipline and structures drop off which costs goals.

 

[Lynch takes a mark]

No usually, mistakes happen more when teams tire, team discipline and structures drop off which costs goals.

This the way I see it as well, makes it really damn hard to create 2 on 1 in the backline when the flankers are coughing their rings out on the wing from zoning up for the long kick out of F50 by the opposition.

Not to mention the enchanced ability to switch the ball through the square from the man on the mark rule opening up the 45.

 

[FlowersByIrene]

No usually, mistakes happen more when teams tire, team discipline and structures drop off which costs goals.

Oh so that's why finals are the highest scoring affairs. Becuase the teams tire and its so easy to score. Wow, thanks for pointing that out... oh wait. Hold on. Finals are generally lower scoring than regular season games. Wait, but how does that align with your unfounded comment? I want to believe you but can you please spell it out for me?

 

[Grrr]

Oh so that's why finals are the highest scoring affairs. Becuase the teams tire and its so easy to score. Wow, thanks for pointing that out... oh wait. Hold on. Finals are generally lower scoring than regular season games. Wait, but how does that align with your unfounded comment? I want to believe you but can you please spell it out for me?

Sorry I haven't the imperial data to prove what I am saying, anymore so than RUNVS with his opposite reaction, or the post above you who agrees with me, so yes it's a bit of a hunch. Richmond score heavily at the end of Q's. I'm sure we are not the only team, but as a rule arm wrestles usually bust and one team falls because they can't go the distance. They mentally or physically tire.

Scores were higher years ago when there were no interchanges years ago. Players tired and elite athletes like Crawford and Harvey just couldn't be stopped. Team structures these days require great running to cover ground, that won't be so easy. Jack R mentioned it first not me. But as I said, it's an idea, care to spell out yours.

 

[RUNVS]

Sorry I haven't the imperial data to prove what I am saying, anymore so than RUNVS with his opposite reaction, or the post above you who agrees with me, so yes it's a bit of a hunch. Richmond score heavily at the end of Q's. I'm sure we are not the only team, but as a rule arm wrestles usually bust and one team falls because they can't go the distance. They mentally or physically tire.

Scores were higher years ago when there were no interchanges years ago. Players tired and elite athletes like Crawford and Harvey just couldn't be stopped. Team structures these days require great running to cover ground, that won't be so easy. Jack R mentioned it first not me. But as I said, it's an idea, care to spell out yours.

Actually we will have data. We just need to see the scoring breakdown by quarter in every match in round 1 and compare it to the scoring data of round 1 in 2019, so see as a percentage how much of the total score was scored in the final quarter in 2019 compared to 2021.

 

[FlowersByIrene]

Sorry I haven't the imperial data to prove what I am saying, anymore so than RUNVS with his opposite reaction, or the post above you who agrees with me, so yes it's a bit of a hunch. Richmond score heavily at the end of Q's. I'm sure we are not the only team, but as a rule arm wrestles usually bust and one team falls because they can't go the distance. They mentally or physically tire.

Scores were higher years ago when there were no interchanges years ago. Players tired and elite athletes like Crawford and Harvey just couldn't be stopped. Team structures these days require great running to cover ground, that won't be so easy. Jack R mentioned it first not me. But as I said, it's an idea, care to spell out yours.

Oh yeah i'll take my insight from the notoriously switched on Jack Riewoldt, thanks Grrr

 

[Grrr]

Oh yeah i'll take my insight from the notoriously switched on Jack Riewoldt, thanks Grrr

Well I'll take his insights over yours or pretty much any other person on this site, other than those who have played nearly 300 games of footy.
You may not like him personally and fair enough, but he is a fair footballer, with a great football IQ.
Also, I asked you for your views, but I guess you'd rather just take pot shots.

 

[mxett]

Doubt. Even if you are genuinely open minded to the rule change, if you were sensible you'd want to see 2 months of proper H&A games or more to have a good enough sample size supporting your opinion before declaring it a revolutionary change and Steve Hocking a God.
The fact they've been so quick on the gushing praise, it does not come across as genuine at all.

think most people have given the rule change a pass 'at this early stage'. You're being a bit hysterical

 

[Grrr]

Actually we will have data. We just need to see the scoring breakdown by quarter in every match in round 1 and compare it to the scoring data of round 1 in 2019, so see as a percentage how much of the total score was scored in the final quarter in 2019 compared to 2021.

I think we'll need to see how it goes over the season as teams adapt.

 

[footyfan1978]

Jack Riewoldt thinks the reduced rotations are far more impactful than the stand still on the mark. Yet the focus here is on the man on the mark, which seems to be a reversion to norm.

Certainly 90 to 75 rotations is virtually nothing overall. I'm not convinced the man on mark ruling is going to have much impact. Having watched two games in full I barely noticed much difference. I had to even remind myself sometimes to even look out for it. What was 3rd rule change/adjustment? None of them sounded anything big to me.
The most important change since last season is just getting back normal length games again.

 

[RUNVS]

I think we'll need to see how it goes over the season as teams adapt.

True, but we can still get initial impressions based on the data of round 2019 vs round 1 of 2021. It will give us some insight.