Would 15 or 16 a side work and would you want it?

[footyfan1978]

Do we factor in going from 25 minute quarters to 20 (admittedly with more time on) as a factor?

Biggest single drop between seasons was 1993 to 1994, average points per team per game down from 105 to 94.

There was also other changes that happened between 1993 and 1994 such as to make finals you only needed to make the top 8 out of the 15 teams in it as opposed to top 6 in 1993. There were also only 20 rounds in the season of 1993 so that season in itself a bit of an outlier in general for a number of reasons because the team 4th bottom in league in 1993 won half it's games, averaged over 100 so that season in general probably the most even seasons there maybe has ever been in league history. The bottom three teams of Swans, Tigers and Bears were very ordinary but all the other 12 teams in season more than capable of beating each other on any day. There any number of factors in going back to 22 rounds in 1994 and only needing to make the top 8 that could see a difference in way teams attacked or defended from the previous season to try to break from the big pack of twelve teams all relatively close in ability to win from week to week.

1994
Playing time for a quarter amended to 20 minutes plus time-on instead of 25 minutes plus time-on.
Introduction of third field umpire.
Introduction of third interchange player.

History of Rule Changes - AFL.com.au

Every Rule Change dating back to 1858.

www.afl.com.au

 

[footyfan1978]

No just no. Did wenot learn from afl x?

Apparently he never watched it so learned nothing.

 

[footyfan1978]

The game has evolved

Mutated is probably the word you needed....

 

[footyfan1978]

The number of times play grinds to a halt because there's no target in front of the ball shits me.

It universally shits most football fans. That comes about when all players on team go down one end of ground for territory battle.
The territory battle of forward press and team defence is when it is at the extreme of congestion. When a team keeps a forward line to kick to as a target the game is a lot less congested and a lot more interesting to watch as a fan.
It not rocket science to me to see if the ball is in either 50 metre arc and there a ball in or ball up you untangle this extreme congestion by simply saying each teams needs to have 3 of their team forwards up the other 50 metre arc and 3 of opposing team defenders down there too. Then it up to coaches if they want to keep the other 15 players on their team down one end , which unlikely to happen for obvious tactical reasons.

 

[Pessimistic]

What are you even talking about?
We've never had starting positions for every stoppage and never will.

‘there were limited trials in vfl scratch matches in 2020 or something. Reduced numbers was due to shortage of make up numbers the starting positions was an intentional trial

 

[footyfan1978]

‘there were limited trials in vfl scratch matches in 2020 or something. Reduced numbers was due to shortage of make up numbers the starting positions was an intentional trial

So your comment made no sense then. Thanks for clarifying what you were trying to post in that vague post.

 

[The Rocks]

It is a must for AFLW. But Gil doesn't have the guts!

On RMX1941 using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Baird]

The OP included an article quoting Chris Scott to support his argument. He is the last person the AFL should listen to when it comes to improving the aesthetics of the game. Having 16 a side makes it easier for teams to play keepings off, which is exactly how Geelong plays. Chris Scott also wanted reduced playing time because he knew that it would suit his old players.

Whatever rules you put in place, coaches will find ways to counter them based on their teams strengths.

Chris Scott is an enemy of the game, no doubt. Guy should be deregistered and exiled to Nauru for all the unwatchable games he's caused.

 

[Dr Tigris]

I disagree re the rule changes. They have been poorly thought through and unlikely to open the game up. Particularly the stand rule almost forces teams to set up more defensively and therefore slow the game down.

The key reason why scoring has dropped, and therefore people think the game has slowed down, is because coaches have learnt how tot stop the opposition scoring. Basically any decent team now would crush any team of the 80's or 90s. until the elite 1990 team adjusted at least. I reckon there is more pressure and actually speed in the game now than ever. Look at an old game and see how long players were free and how much time they had to move the ball on. Pressure kills skill, and wins games.

So the key thing to go back to 1990 football is to remove/reduce pressure. So one tackle per minute or contact is limited. Maybe you are only allowed to sprint once per minute. Something like that. Otherwise you are trying to stop people doing things better because they know how to do it.

And in any case why is pressure so bad? I love high pressure contested games. Scoring can be low but the game is thrilling. A 100 - 150 point game is boring as all get out.

The rule makers and many in these threads think the footy of their youth is the best, therefore we should recreate that. That ship has sailed, sunk and is full of fish now.

Now on reducing numbers on the field. Interesting idea. Look at rugby 7s v rugby 15. One is pure attack and the other is more balanced between attack and defence. I prefer the balance. But a smaller number of players will create more space and speed the game up. Which is likely to be a double sided sword.

But please, I hope the AFL will introduce new rules following a proper assessment through at least one year in a lower level league. And eliminate the new rules brought in, that have not had the impact that was intended. i.e. act like a professional organisation.

 

[greatwhiteshark]

I disagree re the rule changes. They have been poorly thought through and unlikely to open the game up. Particularly the stand rule almost forces teams to set up more defensively and therefore slow the game down.

The key reason why scoring has dropped, and therefore people think the game has slowed down, is because coaches have learnt how tot stop the opposition scoring. Basically any decent team now would crush any team of the 80's or 90s. until the elite 1990 team adjusted at least. I reckon there is more pressure and actually speed in the game now than ever. Look at an old game and see how long players were free and how much time they had to move the ball on. Pressure kills skill, and wins games.

So the key thing to go back to 1990 football is to remove/reduce pressure. So one tackle per minute or contact is limited. Maybe you are only allowed to sprint once per minute. Something like that. Otherwise you are trying to stop people doing things better because they know how to do it.

And in any case why is pressure so bad? I love high pressure contested games. Scoring can be low but the game is thrilling. A 100 - 150 point game is boring as all get out.

The rule makers and many in these threads think the footy of their youth is the best, therefore we should recreate that. That ship has sailed, sunk and is full of fish now.

Now on reducing numbers on the field. Interesting idea. Look at rugby 7s v rugby 15. One is pure attack and the other is more balanced between attack and defence. I prefer the balance. But a smaller number of players will create more space and speed the game up. Which is likely to be a double sided sword.

But please, I hope the AFL will introduce new rules following a proper assessment through at least one year in a lower level league. And eliminate the new rules brought in, that have not had the impact that was intended. i.e. act like a professional organisation.

I agree with you that the pressure on the player with the ball is far higher than ever before but here is the kicker. The game has never been more uncontested. 60% of the modern game is uncontested. Yes the modern game sees the ball move much quicker but mostly through all players free of an opponent. You go back to the 80's and 90's and you would never see players allowed to stand around on their own as coaches allow now.
The best pressure sides won in the 80's and 90's and still win today. The biggest difference is players no longer play positions. But the game is most uncontested it has ever been in it's history right now. If a player is struggling to get a kick and find the ball in todays game then that player is a very average player.

 

[Dr Tigris]

I agree with you that the pressure on the player with the ball is far higher than ever before but here is the kicker. The game has never been more uncontested. 60% of the modern game is uncontested. Yes the modern game sees the ball move much quicker but mostly through all players free of an opponent. You go back to the 80's and 90's and you would never see players allowed to stand around on their own as coaches allow now.
The best pressure sides won in the 80's and 90's and still win today. The biggest difference is players no longer play positions. But the game is most uncontested it has ever been in it's history right now. If a player is struggling to get a kick and find the ball in todays game then that player is a very average player.

Yes, and no. Nowadays teams shut down scoring opportunities and set up to score against teams doing much the same.

Back in the day players were more one on one, and therefore being completely unmarked was unusual. Now teams just don't care if you move the ball backwards or sideways and rack up possessions. The short kick forward is very hard to stop, and so short diagonal movement is fairly easy. But that is because teams shut down that dangerous option. So the uncontested possessions being so high is exactly because of the pressure - on dangerous positions and ball movement. If you see footage of a the game from above you can see good teams maintain a defensive structure as the ball moves around - they make it very hard to get into a scoring position. breaking through that defensive set up is the core of today's AFL. In the 1980-90s it was much easier and so teams wouldn't need those uncontested possessions to get the ball forward.

It's one of those things, the more one thing is true it causes something that looks opposed to be true.