Will the proposed rule changes affect our list and recruiting?

[CJMB]

Disagree, zone defences just makes the game another rugby style territory game.

36 players in one part of ground is dull as all ****

Endless rotations to maintain zones sucks big time.

I could not give a shit about loose man in defence.

Far more excited to see contests of skill v skill of players win the ball in the area and not boring keepings off kicking ball sideways and backwards to get around congested zones and find that "loose man" to avoid a contest. It is a mutation of the game. I know some like it, as some like rugby but go watch rugby if you like more of that type of stuff.

If you a tv viewer you miss how horrible it looks at the ground and win ball with no one forward.
Z Z z z

Cannot wait to see a backline work to beat a gun like Curnow without a loose man down there to try to make it two on one as much as possible.

To be fair, the only element of rugby that isn't technically a contest is off a penalty kick for touch/points or kicking to convert after a try. I'd actually argue 'the contest' is the primary component of the sport, pretty much every rule is geared around it. Play starts with a contestable kick, the play itself is all contested and is continuous after the tackle, and when it does actually stop it restarts with (depending on the reason it stopped) either another kick, a lineout or a scrum, all of which are contestable.

Just pointing out that using rugby as an example of avoiding a contest is kind of like saying you watch darts for the foot skills.

 

[Beer n Skittles]

Did Ess end up winning?

Yep. High scoring game though. Carey still kicked 10 anyway

 

[footyfan1978]

Yep. High scoring game though. Carey still kicked 10 anyway

Was there.
Was great game to see live at ground.
Carey left foot banana was special.
AFL membership was better bang for buck than I getting now.
The desire to get to games as neutral has dropped off since too much of game played with 36 players in one part of ground and rotate players on and off to maintain status quo.

 

[footyfan1978]

Just pointing out that using rugby as an example of avoiding a contest is kind of like saying you watch darts for the foot skills.

Yes, which I was not. So all good. Rugby style territory game was my context. Ugly and dull for someone the could not care less about rugby.

 

[Captain Cripps]

Unfortunately there's a mood for change driven in large part by people who can't really define what is wrong with it. They just know it was better in the90's, 80's, 70's whatever.

Well, go back and watch games from the 70's and a lot of games in the 80's , on the whole the skills are shit. If you put that stuff on display now you wouldn't watch it if it was in your back yard.

One of the biggest cheerleaders is Whateley. But I have to ask, why would we take any notice of Gerard Whateley? TBH i don't think his thoughts on the game should carry anymore weight than the man in the street. People with decades of experience and expertise are divided on the issue.

And beware Hocking. In any other field of endeavour he'd be a mediocre exec and professional lanyard wearer. Here he's been given the keys the the game and he's desperate to make changes to validate his position.

Let's look at his one big decision so far, the MRO. What an abysmal failure, by any standard. Worse than what it replaced and (although he kept it quiet) the outcomes can be decided by the guy who implemented the new body, Hocking himself!!

Do we really want these changes put in place when they haven't exhausted the many ways of freeing up the game via simple interpretation of rules?

+100 points a piece a game isn't a cure all but some of the proposed changes could further injure the sport.

Post of the day

 

[Masqualero]

Yep. High scoring game though. Carey still kicked 10 anyway

That is someone every fan should check out highlights for, amaze-balls

 

[Masqualero]

Was there.
Was great game to see live at ground.
Carey left foot banana was special.
AFL membership was better bang for buck than I getting now.
The desire to get to games as neutral has dropped off since too much of game played with 36 players in one part of ground and rotate players on and off to maintain status quo.

They were playing two men loose in the back, you have already stated you hate loose defenders.

Do you like them or not bro!?

 

[footyfan1978]

They were playing two men loose in the back, you have already stated you hate loose defenders.

Do you like them or not bro!?

You lost the plot. So far out of context. My views already covered.
Change is coming for the good.

Will it effect our list and recruiting? That is the question posed for thread.
Yes, for the better based on players we drafted recently.
We need to know exact changes before draft time ideally.
Will be interesting to see they finalised it all in time

 

[DangerousD]

AFL article about scrapping the bench altogether and shortening games.

The AFL has made no secret that it's constantly looking to make the game quicker and more open.

It does mean that players with great endurance and who have the ability to run hard both ways become more and more valuable.
Slow players and especially slow tall players will become less valuable. We are already seeing that with slow tall forwards and ruckmen.
Same with players with poor endurance...even if you are a star footballer, what's the point if you can't get to many contests because you're exhausted?

The teams at the top of the ladder atm are running the opposition into the ground...able to run hard to apply huge defensive pressure and then also surge forward when they get the ball.

I disagree here and i get frustrated when i hear players and supporters say this (maybe they might no better), i think its much more likely that coaches will be forced to actually play players in certain positions because they can't get to every contest. We would hopefully return to having a player who plays out of the square with the instruction to only work our fwd half and perhaps small forward who work in tandem.

I also wonder if the players association could play a part here, the AFL bring in no interchange or heavily reduced and the AFLPA make sure coaches don't make players have unrealistic playing loads.

 

[Iamcarlton]

Kerr as one example of many, will love leading into more space up forward and not needing to run up other end of ground to maintain 18 man team zone defence. Instead of many players kicking a goal and going to the bench we will see most stay on the ground and ready to go again straight again. Can see SPS game going to another level too, where his weapons can be put to more attacking use. Skillful players going to shine out even more and our recruiting in a great spot to benefit asap. Curnow going to be super scary for opposing sides. Will be harder to double team as often as possible. One out he going to kill key defenders that cannot keep up his running and leaps to mark the ball.

If the game does open in up in near future we'll better make sure we beef up our midfield soon because we will get run ragged .
Weve got the structure almost ready for more open footy but nowhere near enough run imo .

 

[footyfan1978]

If the game does open in up in near future we'll better make sure we beef up our midfield soon because we will get run ragged .
Weve got the structure almost ready for more open footy but nowhere near enough run imo .

Agreed. But we doing that anyway this off season for sure. Come on down Walshy!!!
The changes for most part will barely be noticed. The biggest difference is a viewer at the ground live, you will realise you see 36 players down one end of ground a rarity, rather than a regular thing we see now.

 

[Arr0w]

I don't think the AFL needs dramatic changes to start with, just some subtle changes.

• Get rid of players having to nominate for a ruck contest, just throw the ball up/in and let the players work it out. If there is a 3rd man up, penalise the side. Will save time and won't allow for multiple players getting to the next stoppage
• Don't allow interchanges during a stoppage of play, after a goal/goal review, ball up, throw in.
• Last touch free kick over the boundary line unless in a marking contest
• Starting 6 defenders/forwards, inside a 25 metre arc from goal, at centre bounces

All easy to adjudicate and will speed up the game and reduce stoppages

 

[gbatman]

Can't stand this push for change. There's excellent football being played every week. There are also a few poor games. This is the way it's always been. In fact the bad games in the 90s and 80s in mud pits were worse than what we get now. The push is from older generation and they only don't like it because they don't get it or because it's different.

They don't replay games from the 90s and prior that weren't classics and you don't remember them. They were bad. Lower pressure, lower skills.

I believe the game is in a good state. I think GCS and GWS have diluted the talent a little but the game is still good. Watching teams like Richmond play, they play as good of a game as you will ever see. I think the game is great now because it's harder and watching people succeed in a harder environment is better for mine.

I'd go with the 6,6,6 thing. Against Freo when they threw an extra back it would have affected that game. That has merit but it will suit better teams a little more. It's going to be a pain for umpires and I hope it's an AFL only thing. The long goalsquare thing would work a little but I'd rather not see it, perhaps I'm being anti progression, but I don't think it would be visually good. Last touch is ridiculous although I could accept last possession. I think being more aggressive towards deliberate out of bounds has been a good thing. Keeps the ball more central and more in play.

As for our strategy, I don't think it changes. Just keeps the focus on speed and running ability more and to be honest, that's already where it should be at.

I think quicker ballups and no nominating would be a good thing. Encourage more athletic and mobile ruckmen which is good for the game.

 

[Arr0w]

Can't stand this push for change. There's excellent football being played every week. There are also a few poor games. This is the way it's always been. In fact the bad games in the 90s and 80s in mud pits were worse than what we get now. The push is from older generation and they only don't like it because they don't get it or because it's different.

They don't replay games from the 90s and prior that weren't classics and you don't remember them. They were bad. Lower pressure, lower skills.

I believe the game is in a good state. I think GCS and GWS have diluted the talent a little but the game is still good. Watching teams like Richmond play, they play as good of a game as you will ever see. I think the game is great now because it's harder and watching people succeed in a harder environment is better for mine.

I'd go with the 6,6,6 thing. Against Freo when they threw an extra back it would have affected that game. That has merit but it will suit better teams a little more. It's going to be a pain for umpires and I hope it's an AFL only thing. The long goalsquare thing would work a little but I'd rather not see it, perhaps I'm being anti progression, but I don't think it would be visually good. Last touch is ridiculous although I could accept last possession. I think being more aggressive towards deliberate out of bounds has been a good thing. Keeps the ball more central and more in play.

As for our strategy, I don't think it changes. Just keeps the focus on speed and running ability more and to be honest, that's already where it should be at.

I think quicker ballups and no nominating would be a good thing. Encourage more athletic and mobile ruckmen which is good for the game.

I am 52 G-Man, so I guess i would qualify for the older generation remark, yet I don't disagree with you. I believe the standard of games as a whole are much better than previous decades.

Surely, some slight amendments, that would reduce opinion based interpretations, would be a good thing for the game? Such as removing all the meaningless wasted time for ruck nominations, reducing boundary throw ins, would reduce congestion and speed the game up further

 

[gbatman]

I am 52 G-Man, so I guess i would qualify for the older generation remark, yet I don't disagree with you. I believe the standard of games as a whole are much better than previous decades.

Surely, some slight amendments, that would reduce opinion based interpretations, would be a good thing for the game? Such as removing all the meaningless wasted time for ruck nominations, reducing boundary throw ins, would reduce congestion and speed the game up further

Yep, think play stops too long for a stoppage. What was the reason for nominating rucks anway? I can't for the life of me think of one.

I was watching an old black and white game the other day and the umpires just came in and balled it up, things didn't stop.

I feel like boundary throw ins have been reduced.

I think the state of the game has declined in some areas because there are too many teams and talent has been diluted. The better sides play very good football.

People who have a problem with the game need to consider whether it's them and how they have changed or whether it's the game because people as a whole are turning up in good numbers and paying good money to watch football at stadiums on fox footy and watching the game in general.

Having 9 quality games a week is a pipe dream and unachievable IMO.

I'm for changes but changing the fabric of the game is something that I think is unnecessary.

Perhaps a kickout square of 15m would not change things too much but enough to encourage zone beating play.

I'm happy for the 6,6,6 thing to be trialled.

I honestly think it's up to the coaches. There are a number of teams who have beaten the flooding and congestion by playing on and kicking long and with their run. It's up to other teams to follow suit. But perhaps the talent isn't deep enough for everyone to do that.

I would love to see no nominations, just a quick throw up/throw in.

 

[Arr0w]

I like all the rule changes apart from the hands in the back in a marking contest

FMD, get ready for interpretations to become inconsistent all over again

 

[The Bighouse]

• At kick-ins, a player will no longer need to kick to himself to play on from the goalsquare.

No more stepping over the line infringements then.

 

[Arr0w]

• At kick-ins, a player will no longer need to kick to himself to play on from the goalsquare.

No more stepping over the line infringements then.

Will just be a case of play on, when they do

 

[Arr0w]

Traditional playing positions at centre bounces

• Clubs must have six players inside both 50m arcs, with one player inside the goalsquare.
• Four midfield players must start inside the centre square with the two wingmen stationed along the wing.

Kick-ins

• At kick-ins, a player will no longer need to kick to himself to play on from the goalsquare.
• Following a behind, the man on the mark will be brought out to 10m from the top of the goalsquare, rather than the existing five metres.

Marks and free kicks in defence

• When defenders mark or receive a free kick within nine metres of their own goal, the man on the mark will be brought in line with the top of the goalsquare.

Runners and water carriers

• Team runners may only enter the playing surface after a goal has been kicked and must exit before play restarts.
• Water carriers are not permitted to enter the playing surface during live play.

Umpire contact

• Players will be prohibited from setting up behind the umpire at centre bounces.

50m penalties

• The player with the ball:

• 1. Must be allowed to advance the mark by 50m without the infringing player delaying the game.
  2. Will be able to play on while the 50m penalty is being measured out.

Kicking for goal after the siren

• A player who has been awarded a mark or free kick once play has ended:

• 1. Will now be able to kick across their body using a snap or check-side kick
  2. BUT must kick the ball directly in line with the man on the mark and the goal.

Marking contests

• The 'hands in the back’ rule interpretation has been repealed so a player can now:

• 1. Place his hands on the back of his opponent to protect his position in a marking contest
  2. PROVIDED he does not push his opponent in the back.

Ruck contests: prior opportunity

• A ruckman who takes direct possession of the ball from a bounce, throw-up or boundary throw-in will no longer be regarded as having had prior opportunity.
• Where there is uncertainty over who is the designated ruckman, the ruckman for each team will still be required to nominate to the field umpire.

 

[Robbo's my hero]

I would say a normal kick in will not change. Step on the line and it will result in a ball up.

 

[The Bighouse]

I would say a normal kick in will not change. Step on the line and it will result in a ball up.

The goal “square” is irrelevant for the kick outs now apart from setting the man on the mark.

 

[BlackGoanna]

My understanding is that the extended 25m square, will not be square, rectangular or arc shaped. The proposal is a mushroom shape . It will also undergo a name change from goal square to circumcision zone. Players will be able to move down the shaft and then veer suddenly right or left to achieve extra penetration from the defensive zones. Visually attractive to international viewers from the aerial shots on GF day. Only concern is how this may be taken up in the AFLW?

 

[Robbo's my hero]

The two blights on the game that don’t appeal to me have not been addressed. Stacks on the mill and throwing the ball. I’m not convinced these changes will add to the spectacle. Congestion will still be a problem. What happens to the exclusion zone where a 50 metre penalty is paid and a player can take advantage while the penalty is still being stepped out?

 

[TooBlue14]

After watching the AFL video about the new rules http://m.afl.com.au/video/2018-10-11/exclusive-the-new-rules-revealed
How might this impact on Carlton in 2019.

A couple points:
1. Kick ins - no need to kick and a 10 metre area to run. I can see this will be handy for whomeber is our best kick and whomever is our longest kick. How do we set up defensively against this?

2. Rucks are free to grab the ball and get prior oppprtunity. We need our ruckman improving their ability to use handball. This will be the new thing. Another dimension to the ruckman and the stoping of Shaun grigg getting a game I reckon. Can we tuck cripps?

3. Wingers need to stay on the wing and can’t float behind or in front of the Ball. No more Melbourne or hawthorn running off the back of the square. Cripps gets more clearances? Kicking forward as quick as possible to get 1 on 1s are guaranteed now. What will richmond do? They won’t get extra men inside 50 and will need marking targets.

Teams that have talls and pure inside mids that can distribute are benefited heavily. I think this helps Melbourne and Carlton. We need to now push our game plan be innovative in this new space.

If we name round 1:

Plowman, Marchbank and Weitering in the backline AND McGovern, McKay and Curnow in the forward line. How do teams match up on us defensively and how will teams go with their forward line. I’m guessing we will see the return of talls and long kicking. Obviously once the bal hits the deck we revert to the pressure game plan but we need to be capable of doing both. Athletic talls is the future.

 

[ShanDog]

New rules all sounded pretty fine to me. Will be interesting to see how they affect the game, but nothing jumps out as silly.