Will the proposed rule changes affect our list and recruiting?

[Jimmae]

1. More time allowed for prior opportunity instead of purely gauging it based on taking on the (usually immediate) oncoming player

2. 25 metre penalties, and throw them around like crazy when a player doesn't immediately pick up the ball and instigate returning it to the opposition, i.e. if you have to remind them, it's 25 metres; no holding up the play for time on call

3. Continue paying holding/blocking frees as has been done recently

4. More calls on chopping the arms to prevent defenders from rattling a marking player's arm (i.e. hitting their ulnar nerve when they can't reach for the spoil)

5. Opposite wing boundary umpire to come in 5-10 metres (preferably on an angle) at stoppages to give another view, and be allowed to overrule the current controlling umpire).

 

[footyfan1978]

Panel member that suggested a 25 metre goalsquare needs a straight jacket FFS!

Blighty will break out of it.

 

[footyfan1978]

Last touch out of bounds is stupid.

This. When push comes to shove , this will not come in.

I believe the starting formation after a goal is likely to get up and interchange use cut back big time. Probably 2019 we shall see it fully. In doing this we might even benefit most. I believe Kerr could kick a lot of goals with the congestion of forward lines reduced significantly.

 

[GapInIkonPark]

Just thinking about the 25mt. square/arc/whatever.
That could take some time to get things rolling. A little hop and skip....on the runway...and 25 mts. to make your mind where you launch from.
That could take relative ages from the point being scored to getting the ball moving again. This is not that simple.

Last touch out: No problem, but the relative use of the rucks diminishes somewhat.
A possible issue: Whose body did that ball come from last....Touch review.....PLEASE NO.

Designated start positions: I don't like it on instinct, but happy to see it.

You want the player who kicks out to not be in two minds / change his mind. The runway will cause problems if the player changes his mind.
The short chip sideways will always be on.

I like the 25 meters and Arr0w suggestion of no interchanges during a stoppage in play (where the ball is not in the half of the ground where the interchange is).

My suggested rule changes:

1. Play on if the kick hasn’t travelled 30 metres.
2. Play on if the kick goes backwards.
3. Dropping the knees treated the same as ducking the head, no free kick for high tackle if it is brought on by the player with the ball.
4. Tweak the in the back rule so the defender can use his hands to hold his position as the forward is backing into him. Currently treated as a push.
5. If player is not on his feet, he can’t have or take possession of the ball.
6. Bring back the substitute. Need it for when a player is injured, particularly early in the game, and for the period a player is tested for concussion.

 

[Blue Pulse]

I'm just going to start watching another sport, one that doesn't change the rules every season, yet alone every couple of weeks.

 

[JustaBattler]

It sounds good on face value, but fitter teams will be able to build numbers around the ball without too many issues.

Mentioned it here earlier, but how do we police who touched the ball last?
It's not always so straight forward, so in uncertainty, what does the umpire do? Just make a Hail Mary call or do we find ourselves going 'upstairs'?

Cameras are there to show up every situation. What would we do?

Nothing is ever perfect - except my 5 iron 165 meter slight draw to a tight pin location landing 5-7 meters past and spinning backwards towards the hole with massive fizz - truly an awesome thing to behold A genuine shock and awe shot every time! Almost as good as that perfect power fade it has taken me a decade to get right - 250 - 270 meters every time with a dispersion of maybe 20 meters on a bad day or a lot of sideways wind- eliminate the left eliminate the left side!!


AFL is getting boring really boring as in really really boring - with coaches congesting things up and removing the spectacle and drama of one on ones - like good golfers, AFL coaches want to eliminate risk everywhere and dumb things down to a grind. UGHHH I've got maybe 2 years left in me as far as AFL interest goes - was hoping to se #17 before 2020 - but wont happen.

 

[passmark]

I wasn't all that concerned with the changes but I'm now listening to Whateley pumping this up for all it's worth, I'm worried.

Why he and Mike Sheahan are even on a panel scares me. He and Sheahan strike me as the sort of well spoken middle management you now find in the public service who come up with a new holiday roster system, except they are making the biggest changes to my game in 150 years. That saying "a camel is just a horse that was designed by a committee" looks a distinct possibility.

You can hear it in his voice just what a hard on he's got to promote the changes, I note he doesn't ever mention he's on the panel. Gerard already has his arse covering well in place.

 

[thylacine60]

can I just say I'm too scared to even enter this thread - discussing the potential clinical death of my one sporting love is too painful - so I won't

 

[GoBlues!]

can I just say I'm too scared to even enter this thread - discussing the potential clinical death of my one sporting love is too painful - so I won't

No.

 

[thylacine60]

geez....

 

[footyfan1978]

I wasn't all that concerned with the changes but I'm now listening to Whateley pumping this up for all it's worth, I'm worried.

Why he and Mike Sheahan are even on a panel scares me. He and Sheahan strike me as the sort of well spoken middle management you now find in the public service who come up with a new holiday roster system, except they are making the biggest changes to my game in 150 years. That saying "a camel is just a horse that was designed by a committee" looks a distinct possibility.

You can hear it in his voice just what a hard on he's got to promote the changes, I note he doesn't ever mention he's on the panel. Gerard already has his arse covering well in place.

I get your fear with Whateley. He is a tosser. Probably barely played the sport. His first love is horse racing , reading and essays. However Sheahan certainly played the sport and has genuine love of the game. I got no issue with him being on there when genuine football people like Blighty and Matthews lead the discussion. Sheahan understands his place is just to ask questions. Whately probably thinks he knows all given nerdy manner he speaks in. Hopefully the Lethal Leighs pay him lip service and the real decisions are done by footballers like himself and Blighty. I trust Blight more than anyone to right this ship. He has come through the game taught by Barassi no less. One of the great thinkers of our game. He in turn by greats beforehand. Blight understands where our great game come from and what made it unique and great. He also taught Steve Hocking so probably has most influence of what happens going forward. Have faith this will be the kicker. Hopefully Whateley is just there to report back what he hears as a media person. But suspect he has little influence on their actual discussions. Lets hope so.

 

[passmark]

I get your fear with Whateley. He is a tosser. Probably barely played the sport. His first love is horse racing , reading and essays. However Sheahan certainly played the sport and has genuine love of the game. I got no issue with him being on there when genuine football people like Blighty and Matthews lead the discussion. Sheahan understands his place is just to ask questions. Whately probably thinks he knows all given nerdy manner he speaks in. Hopefully the Lethal Leighs pay him lip service and the real decisions are done by footballers like himself and Blighty. I trust Blight more than anyone to right this ship. He has come through the game taught by Barassi no less. One of the great thinkers of our game. He in turn by greats beforehand. Blight understands where our great game come from and what made it unique and great. He also taught Steve Hocking so probably has most influence of what happens going forward. Have faith this will be the kicker. Hopefully Whateley is just there to report back what he hears as a media person. But suspect he has little influence on their actual discussions. Lets hope so.

I just hope they don't overreach. These *ers will be dead in 30 years and so will the game if they * it up.

 

[footyfan1978]

I just hope they don't overreach. These ******s will be dead in 30 years and so will the game if they **** it up.

Agreed. So important to get right.

 

[MileHigh]

In a nutshell, below are the proposed changes.

How will this affect our teams chances? Has our recent recruiting been compromised? Will it affect who we target.
My gut feeling that we should be ok as we haven't selected too many contested ball monsters and plodders.
Also, lukosius just got whole lot more attractive and Ollie Wines a lot less.


1: Extend the size of the goal square so the player kicking in can launch the ball over the centre of the ground and automatically clear the congestion. One panel member even suggested the size of the square be increased to 25 metres.

2: Last touch out of bounds. This has been introduced at SANFL level and has been proven to reduce the amount of stoppages and the length of games.

3: Designated starting positions at centre bounces. Three forwards inside a 25m zone, three forwards between 50 and 25m, six midfielders, and the defenders in the same formation as the forwards.


Also being strongly considered is four umpires with two staying inside the 50m arcs at each end to observe the forwards and defenders, and there is a strong push to reduce the 50m penalty to 25m.

These changes will be announced in October of this year and implemented in the 2019 season.

Hate to shoot the messenger, but this absolutely absurd. All of them. Why is there's congestion? Because AFL limits rotations so players are too tired to run to space. So rather than fix this they will add another layer of rules, and when that doesn't work another layer of rules. Go back to unlimited rotations. Let the teams savvy enough to use bench rotations efficiently and properly prosper.

 

[Styxx]

I don't think more rules will fix anything.

If anything less rules and clearer rules will help. Banning the third man has caused a lot of congestion as you don't have a guy coming over the top and smashing it out of the area.

 

[Metalcrusher]

The more over regulated the game becomes the more confusion is injected into the adjudication.

For every rule they introduce, it is an AFL coaches job to come up with a counter that benefits their team ….

More rules do not equal better game.

 

[Blubagger71]

I wonder if it's not the game that needs more regulation but footy departments. Each club seems to have so many people around thinking up ways to manipulate the rules that, whenever a rule is changed or introduced, it is manipulated to the hilt within a month. Even that playing field with a harder footy department cap with a focus on player welfare rather than game strategy. Then we will find out who can coach!

 

[BluStreak]

I get twitchy reading things like this.
So you want to penalise the guy going for the ball even more and give it to the guy who sits off and waits to tackle?
Sent from my SM-G900I using Tapatalk

For me there is a couple of ideas that come to mind.
The tackle is a part of our game and when correctly applied should be rewarded.
I believe that the players would adapt to this quickly by tapping the ball forward (when under pressure) which moves the ball quickly and out of the congestion.
Teams that have good stoppage set ups will always play that scrum type game until forced out of it.
Which i believe paying the incorrect disposal free will do.

 

[Blue__Balls]

No issue with extending the goal square. 25m is excessive, just push it out to 15-18m or thereabouts.

Not a fan of last touch with an oval ball. Bad bounce = turnover? No thanks. Don't think it's enough of an issue anyway to be honest.

Zones...don't mind them for centre bounces I suppose. Having multiple zones at each end is a bit much though. Four forwards + four defenders in each 50m arc until the ball is bounced. Hard to police for other stoppages. Best outcome I could see would be a similar set-up to centre stoppages at all other stoppages (ie. only 8 players involved), but I just can't see a realistic way of umpiring it.

Love the 25m penalty instead of 50m. Keep the 50m penalty in the back pocket for nasty late hits or umpire abuse only.

I'd also like to see a 25m minimum kick for a mark to be paid. Would help spread the field even more. Spread the field and the kick-mark strategy becomes a little harder to pull-off, as defenders have more time to intercept. The skillful players will shine more. And by spreading the field more, you open up more space for the run and carry players to do their thing.

No thanks to the sub rule. Screws with player development too much for mine.

Interesting seeing people's thoughts on interchange. Lower interchange = tired players. Some say that means forwards/defenders stay at home more, some say it means teams create the rolling scrums to slow the game down. I dunno which is true. Leave it alone, see what the other changes do first.


My suggestions:
- 18m goal square
- 4x players in each 50m arc per team for centre stoppages
- 25m penalty for less serious infringements
- 25m minimum kick distance for mark to be paid

 

[ajb72]

Before any rule is introduced I would like to see some smart people actually think about how any new rules will impact the game.

The knee jerky football league keeps bringing in the new rules which make things worse.

And as an side, if they bring in zones I'm gone from AFL.

 

[footyfan1978]

They are not bringing in zones

 

[King Karl]

This hasn't been mentioned in this thread yet but I did just read on the AFL site about potentially reducing the length of games. WTF is wrong with people these days that they can't sit through a full game of sport? Why is the response to sport to always shorten it? They are playing 10/10 cricket now in some areas instead of 20/20! What's next, 1/1? I saw an argument this week where people were suggesting to shorten men's tennis to best of three sets in Grand Slams. WHY???

The people that complain about the length of sport are the same people who rush home from work to watch four straight hours of reality TV. They have no issue with spending their entire Sunday catching up on the Kardashians but can't spend two hours watching the footy on a Saturday night? Why are we (potentially) changing the rules for people who are clearly not passionate about the game and are unlikely to be actively contributing to the footy economy regardless of what rules are implemented?

I also don't understand the notion of people being 'entertained' by scoring. The Sydney/West Coast rivalry was in my opinion the best of the modern era, they were also some of the lowest scoring games in those seasons. Who cares? What gives people so much more entertainment watching the ball go through the sticks than a gripping, compelling contest?* Soccer has been the most popular global sport since it's establishment and on average ~2 goals a game are scored? When was the last rule change they had in soccer?

I understand that if crowd and tv ratings drop significantly (I don't believe they have to this stage?) change needs to occur. But, please, AFL start small. If they bring in knee jerk rule changes like zoning, last touch out of bounds or no interchanges, prepare to lose a larger slice of your audience than those current part time followers who would be much happier watching The Block or MKR on their weekends anyway.

*I must admit I am probably in the extreme minority who finds live golf and test cricket enthralling so perhaps I'm just an outlier.

 

[Das2Blue]

I Agree with King Karl's Rant...

 

[passmark]

This hasn't been mentioned in this thread yet but I did just read on the AFL site about potentially reducing the length of games. WTF is wrong with people these days that they can't sit through a full game of sport? Why is the response to sport to always shorten it? They are playing 10/10 cricket now in some areas instead of 20/20! What's next, 1/1? I saw an argument this week where people were suggesting to shorten men's tennis to best of three sets in Grand Slams. WHY???

The people that complain about the length of sport are the same people who rush home from work to watch four straight hours of reality TV. They have no issue with spending their entire Sunday catching up on the Kardashians but can't spend two hours watching the footy on a Saturday night? Why are we (potentially) changing the rules for people who are clearly not passionate about the game and are unlikely to be actively contributing to the footy economy regardless of what rules are implemented?

I also don't understand the notion of people being 'entertained' by scoring. The Sydney/West Coast rivalry was in my opinion the best of the modern era, they were also some of the lowest scoring games in those seasons. Who cares? What gives people so much more entertainment watching the ball go through the sticks than a gripping, compelling contest?* Soccer has been the most popular global sport since it's establishment and on average ~2 goals a game are scored? When was the last rule change they had in soccer?

I understand that if crowd and tv ratings drop significantly (I don't believe they have to this stage?) change needs to occur. But, please, AFL start small. If they bring in knee jerk rule changes like zoning, last touch out of bounds or no interchanges, prepare to lose a larger slice of your audience than those current part time followers who would be much happier watching The Block or MKR on their weekends anyway.

*I must admit I am probably in the extreme minority who finds live golf and test cricket enthralling so perhaps I'm just an outlier.

A lot of these issues are non issues as well.

I'm still not convinced there is a need for any radical change.

6 times a year there's topics that the swarm of footy talking heads get angry about. I remember when getting suspended for the bump if the guy got concussed had people screaming "it's netball" "I'm done with footy" .

Same rubbish with the sling tackle, interchange (too much, too little) etc. All the footy vultures on radio and telly need something to bleat about. Whateley whinging about a priority pick or score review like we are considering sending troops into Russia. Most of this this stuff is noise and echos of people who need to be heard.

IMO tweaking the rules is the best way with the occasional major change if required (centre square or diamond), out of bounds on the full etc.

A terrific example of unexpected consequences is the WCE moving from Subi to Optus Stadium. It changed the shape of the ground from long and narrow to a bit short and fat. Adam Simpson, who I would consider as one of the most honest and least self serving (unlike Clarko and Bucks), said that the WCE had asked that the new oval dimensions remain similar dimensions to Subiaco because they believed the dimensions gave them an advantage at home and they could adjust to MCG/Etihad dimensions through training . He also believed his list was better suited to a long narrow ground.

He has since admitted they were very very wrong and that the new dimensions have been a major reason they have been playing better at home and away .

Frankly, it doesn't matter what gaggle of luminaries or experts they get in the expected outcomes are a MASSIVE GUESS.

 

[passmark]

Another example.

Yesterday was a terrific game for scoring and hard footy. Just heard it was on the back of a large amount of goals scored from stoppages, remember that's those things we are trying to stop!

It also was a lot of play on and, unless you listened on radio, Brian Taylor whinged all day that the umps called play on much much earlier than they normally do.

I'm sure there's other reasons but this game is so fluid and has the benefit of umpire interpretation that the game can, for the most part, be altered easily.

Another example of experts not knowing a ******* thing look at the last 5 years on what is considered necessary in terms of player type to win games when you look at rucks, forwards, mids, hybrid players.

It's all over the shop.