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

[FlowersByIrene]

The one noticeable difference is the ability to walk almost up tot he man on the mark (just by vearing two metres off to the side) to enable a lot of easier shots at goal. Not the intended result of the rule as advertised (which was to oPeN tHE pLAy) but definitely appears to be the intended result of Hocking, Gil and the corrupt mess that is the AFL (more goals = more ads)

 

[owen87]

why did they introduce AFLX?

They wanted a version of AFL that can be played on rectangular fields, like soccer pitches.

They then tried playing it with actual AFL players to sell the idea.

They then realise that actual AFL players are way too good to demonstrate AFLX in the setting it's likely to appeal to; schools and casual leagues.

 

[Obeanie1]

To think there is no message from above to promote the new rule changes is pretty naive. Meanwhile whenever a current player does an interview and is asked about it, they usually play it down. The players who are actually experiencing everything going on behind the scenes, and know exactly what has changed in their style from the year previous.

Stand rule only comes into effect when the umpire calls STAND. Until then, the mark can move wherever they want. In the quick plays, the umpire doesn't even say stand. It does not have an impact on quick plays. These function EXACTLY the same as previous years. The rule only has an impact on slow plays. When they happen the kicker can hit lower kicks. It makes it slightly easier to pierce through a zone or press. So it's more attractive to teams to try to kick through the field rather than go kamikaze with handballs and direct movement. But not by a whole lot, teams are definitely still doing the latter frequently.

Players getting interviews play it safe. They aren't going to provide an in depth analysis on how they and their team are utilising / reacting to any new rules. Play a 'straight bat' and say nothing. That is the standard SOP regarding umpires, rules and tactics.

As for commentator promoting the new rule well there was a fair few bagging the crap out of this rule preseason. There still is. So how does that work?

I listen to the more knowledgeable commentators and use my eyes. Even blind Freddy can see the STM rule is creating better open access to play on or kick into the corridor.

Why do we now have forwards staying in the forward 50 more?

Because now the mids have much more opportunity to kick more accurately through the corridor and more opportunity to play on around the man on the mark. All equals better, faster ball movement and if you have that you need a forward to kick to. Win - win.

 

[Vassp]

They wanted a version of AFL that can be played on rectangular fields, like soccer pitches.

They then tried playing it with actual AFL players to sell the idea.

They then realise that actual AFL players are way too good to demonstrate AFLX in the setting it's likely to appeal to; schools and casual leagues.

thanks, but I knew that already. it was a reply to the poster.

 

[footyfan1978]

The man on the mark rule is really nice around the ground but for set shots at goal it seems a bit ridiculous. Players are trying to exploit it, and then screwing themselves over.

The purpose of the rule was to free up congestion. Its purpose was not to try and make set shots easier or effectively allow players to kick from marks taken ~5 metres farther away.

Maybe we just say that the man on the mark rule does not apply to defenders inside their defensive 50?

I said this after one look at it live and thought given it sounds like this rule was brought mainly for traffic of players between the arcs, I not sure it needs to be part of inside 50m free kicks and marks.
But I still only just seeing it for a few games so there maybe some other reason they want it all over the ground. Maybe they think umpires would find it hard to police different from inside the arcs to outside the arcs.

 

[juss]

I don't mind the player having to be still, but there is too great a lag between the kicker running off and the umpire calling play on, that delay makes it far too easy for the kicker to just waltz around and deliver unpressured kicks into 50 or have a much easier shot on goal.

 

[D-N-R]

Umpires need to make sure the player with the ball is behind the mark before calling stand. Ive seen players 3 or 4 metres off the mark play on and the defender is rooted to the spot. He should be able to cover the player until he moves behind the mark and then get told to stand.

 

[D-N-R]

Players getting interviews play it safe. They aren't going to provide an in depth analysis on how they and their team are utilising / reacting to any new rules. Play a 'straight bat' and say nothing. That is the standard SOP regarding umpires, rules and tactics.

As for commentator promoting the new rule well there was a fair few bagging the crap out of this rule preseason. There still is. So how does that work?

I listen to the more knowledgeable commentators and use my eyes. Even blind Freddy can see the STM rule is creating better open access to play on or kick into the corridor.

Why do we now have forwards staying in the forward 50 more?

Because now the mids have much more opportunity to kick more accurately through the corridor and more opportunity to play on around the man on the mark. All equals better, faster ball movement and if you have that you need a forward to kick to. Win - win.

Maybe forwards are staying in position because of limited rotations. Are they spending more time on the ground?

I'll wait and see how teams adapt to it. I think there is a bit of uncertainty atm and teams are getting caught out.

 

[The Passenger]

All up I think the new rule is a net positive. The only jarring thing for me is watching the man on the mark look on helplessly while skilled players arc out and take advantage of it, but I imagine I will get used to it.

Even if it's helped to open things up a bit it looks terrible watching one bloke stuck to his position whilst his opponents can run around him. Umpires appeared pretty liberal on how far off their line the player with the ball could traverse, both with shots on goal and through the middle of the ground.

I think the interchange limit has probably opened things up more with defensive structures harder to keep when players are running on a 90-95% tank, as opposed to permanently running on full.

 

[Obeanie1]

Maybe forwards are staying in position because of limited rotations. Are they spending more time on the ground?

I'll wait and see how teams adapt to it. I think there is a bit of uncertainty atm and teams are getting caught out.

Reduced rotations are another factor yes. No one rule change has brought about the game style change on its own.

 

[Obeanie1]

Umpires need to make sure the player with the ball is behind the mark before calling stand. Ive seen players 3 or 4 metres off the mark play on and the defender is rooted to the spot. He should be able to cover the player until he moves behind the mark and then get told to stand.

Good pick up that.

 

[melbournemartin]

I said this after one look at it live and thought given it sounds like this rule was brought mainly for traffic of players between the arcs, I not sure it needs to be part of inside 50m free kicks and marks.
But I still only just seeing it for a few games so there maybe some other reason they want it all over the ground. Maybe they think umpires would find it hard to police different from inside the arcs to outside the arcs.

Well they know where the mark is taken and the arcs are very obvious. I'd just say "if you are on the mark inside the 50, you can move as you like".

There are some players like Tex Walker who can regularly kick 55+ that might exploit (i.e. you have to be still if on the mark just outside the arc) but it wouldn't be very common.

 

[Swansujelly]

I stopped noticing the motm after 5 mins, the rule will get nuanced as all new rules do as the season progresses. Will be interesting to see how it evolves

 

[TheWoodenSlug]

Does anyone still think this? Best start to the season for ages imo - I'm actually enjoying neutral games again. Fast ball movement, forwards kicking bags...good stuff.

The higher ups deserve criticism for a lot of things they do, but credit where it's due on this one. Too early to tell? Perhaps, but its been a massive success so far.

 

[Quinz]

Enjoying neutral footy more than I have in years. Not sure it's all down to the rule changes but whatever it is is working well right now

 

[mxett]

is it too early to call the rule changes a success? So many good flowing games, high skill, key matchups going 1v1, and far fewer stoppages. Havent enjoyed neutral games this much in ages

 

[RUNVS]

is it too early to call the rule changes a success? So many good flowing games, high skill, key matchups going 1v1, and far fewer stoppages. Havent enjoyed neutral games this much in ages

There have been 3 teams just this round who have reached the 100 point or more mark.

 

[HTT]

There have been 3 teams just this round who have reached the 100 point or more mark.

Scoring is not up on previous years

 

[RUNVS]

Scoring is not up on previous years

I heard from one of the commentators yesterday that scoring was up by around 11 points? I could be wrong.

 

[mxett]

Scoring is not up on previous years

really? Can remember after round one the commentators were saying we'd had 3 games over 100 points compared to a dozen or so for the entire season last year

 

[hawkman]

is it too early to call the rule changes a success? So many good flowing games, high skill, key matchups going 1v1, and far fewer stoppages. Havent enjoyed neutral games this much in ages

That teams still haven't been able to lock game yet is a great sign

Only thing they need to crack down on is marks being paid for less than 15m

 

[HTT]

I heard from one of the commentators yesterday that scoring was up by around 11 points? I could be wrong.

To the end of R2 teams are scoring 84ppg
Last year it was 67.75 (factoring shortened quarters 84.7)
2019 it was 79.8
2018 it was 90

 

[HTT]

really? Can remember after round one the commentators were saying we'd had 3 games over 100 points compared to a dozen or so for the entire season last year

Because last year was 16min quarters. The scoring rate hasn't increased.

 

[hawkman]

To the end of R2 teams are scoring 84ppg
Last year it was 67.75 (factoring shortened quarters 84.7)
2019 it was 79.8
2018 it was 90

It is 93 for the 5 games this round

 

[Blue1980]

It is 93 for the 5 games this round

Could increase again the way the Eagles are going