Analysis Would the stand rule still have been introduced if Geelong had won the 2020 premiership?

[PhatBoy]

Sorry, are you suggesting that the AFL media actually do serious journalism and ask hard questions of the AFL?

Just stop and think about the rule changes recently.

Have any been trialled?
Have any worked entirely as intended?
Has scoring increased?


the AFL introduce rule changes without serious thought or interaction with other parties (clubs, players, umpires). They change interpretations week to week and even across around. This isn't a conspiracy, it's what they do. Half baked amateur, narcissistic, and poorly thought through. And notice the media rarely say anything negative. they are all in on the game, because the AFL control it. It's just how the AFL works. If you think that there haven't been alto of rule changes, and that all of those has been well thought through and introduced in well structured and careful manner, then good for you. To me, and many others, the AFL is a bunch of cowboys who live in some incestuous world where they can control their reality. The "Boys Club".

So they’ll do reports about a betting scandal that compromises the entire integrity of the most historic and prestigious award in the game, and arguably the greatest coach of the AFL era potentially being guilty of racially abusing or dominating his players and their families but they’re tiptoeing around this colossal ‘scandal’ where the umpire says ‘stand’ in order to bring down an entire club


Right.


That makes a gargantuan amount of sense.

 

[Grin]

Defend him for being employed.

Yeah.

You can’t make this s**t up.

I thought you were better than this.
You can't even acknowledge an impression of a conflict of interest, even if it was no more than that, and you certainly don't seem to have an issue that he himself couldn't recognise his own conflicts of interest, and had to be forced out of his role, against his will, because of them.
Yours and other Geelong posters responses do nothing more than reinforce the impression that he was Geelong's man in the AFL and therefore you'll agree with and vigorously defend any and every decision he made.

I'm sorry I tried to have a sensible discussion with you on this, but in my defence, I've ofter found you an intelligent and thoughtful poster. Not on this topic though. Apparently you'd rather stick your fingers in your ears and yell blah blah blah! rather than have an intelligent discussion.

 

[Dr Tigris]

So they’ll do reports about a betting scandal that compromises the entire integrity of the most historic and prestigious award in the game, and arguably the greatest coach of the AFL era potentially being guilty of racially abusing or dominating his players and their families but they’re tiptoeing around this colossal ‘scandal’ where the umpire says ‘stand’ in order to bring down an entire club


Right.


That makes a gargantuan amount of sense.

The stories you're talking of are criminal or close to criminal.

Changing the rules is what the AFL does all the time. Doing it to positively impact on a particular game style is what they actually say the intent is. it isn't a scandal. God's sake, it's just what the AFL does.

Now the whole Geelong thing is a separate issue to the stand rule. SHocking looks totally compromised. No idea if he actually was/is. Don't care much anymore.

What annoys me (in order) is that:

1. the AFL are a bunch of Muppets who cannot make rule changes in a professional and structured way. They tend to make the game worse, and/or introduce poorly umpired games through uncertainty int eh rule and interpretations.
2. the game style they seem to want is one that I am not that enamoured with. I prefer more pressure and contests, with quick unpredictable moves and a sort of gladiatorial last man standing feel. I love clinical football, but it often ends up begin boring as there is no contest.
3. That the RFC was disadvantaged by the rule changes. The 2 top teams most advantaged when the rule was introduced were Geelong and West Coast. WC fell off a cliff. Geelong picked up a great KPF they needed and other smart pick ups and tinkered with their game plan and won a premiership. So this is purely that I like winning premierships. Sucks that they changed the rules explicitly to encourage a style different to the Tigers game plan. It worked - bugger it.

In 2021 both the Tigers and Cats didn't adapt well to the changes - Tiges especially sucked. in 2022 the Cats adjusted really well. the Tigers did too. But the Tiges midfield was Prestia or bust. So when he went down goodnight and goodbye. Notice that the better run teams do better. But the Tigers had a major weakness in their squad and fixed it this off season. Geelong did that a couple of years ago and got the reward.

 

[PhatBoy]

I thought you were better than this.
You can't even acknowledge an impression of a conflict of interest, even if it was no more than that, and you certainly don't seem to have an issue that he himself couldn't recognise his own conflicts of interest, and had to be forced out of his role, against his will, because of them.
Yours and other Geelong posters responses do nothing more than reinforce the impression that he was Geelong's man in the AFL and therefore you'll agree with and vigorously defend any and every decision he made.

I'm sorry I tried to have a sensible discussion with you on this, but in my defence, I've ofter found you an intelligent and thoughtful poster. Not on this topic though. Apparently you'd rather stick your fingers in your ears and yell blah blah blah! rather than have an intelligent discussion.

What am I defending mate? He had a job, was entrenched to do it for a certain period, and arranged a future role with another employer.

Why does that need ‘defending.’
****en hell this isn’t human rights abuses or government politics it’s a ****ing member of a sporting body. If they didn’t deem it appropriate that he keep going in one role, fine, I couldn’t give a shit.

He doesn’t need ‘defending’ because of it.

 

[Sttew]

We all know (even you) the reason that Richmond aren't the best version of themselves though.

Rance
Astbury
Houli
Ellis
Caddy
Higgins
Butler
Grigg

Sorry, are you suggesting that the AFL media actually do serious journalism and ask hard questions of the AFL?

Just stop and think about the rule changes recently.

Have any been trialled?
Have any worked entirely as intended?
Has scoring increased?


the AFL introduce rule changes without serious thought or interaction with other parties (clubs, players, umpires). They change interpretations week to week and even across around. This isn't a conspiracy, it's what they do. Half baked amateur, narcissistic, and poorly thought through. And notice the media rarely say anything negative. they are all in on the game, because the AFL control it. It's just how the AFL works. If you think that there haven't been alto of rule changes, and that all of those has been well thought through and introduced in well structured and careful manner, then good for you. To me, and many others, the AFL is a bunch of cowboys who live in some incestuous world where they can control their reality. The "Boys Club".

why would the AFL introduce a rule to impede one of its most profitable clubs in favour of what Tiger supporters call a ‘minnow’ club? It does not make sense. Think about it….

 

[PhatBoy]

The stories you're talking of are criminal or close to criminal.

Changing the rules is what the AFL does all the time. Doing it to positively impact on a particular game style is what they actually say the intent is. it isn't a scandal. God's sake, it's just what the AFL does.

Now the whole Geelong thing is a separate issue to the stand rule. SHocking looks totally compromised. No idea if he actually was/is. Don't care much anymore.

What annoys me (in order) is that:

1. the AFL are a bunch of Muppets who cannot make rule changes in a professional and structured way. They tend to make the game worse, and/or introduce poorly umpired games through uncertainty int eh rule and interpretations.
2. the game style they seem to want is one that I am not that enamoured with. I prefer more pressure and contests, with quick unpredictable moves and a sort of gladiatorial last man standing feel. I love clinical football, but it often ends up begin boring as there is no contest.
3. That the RFC was disadvantaged by the rule changes. The 2 top teams most advantaged when the rule was introduced were Geelong and West Coast. WC fell off a cliff. Geelong picked up a great KPF they needed and other smart pick ups and tinkered with their game plan and won a premiership. So this is purely that I like winning premierships. Sucks that they changed the rules explicitly to encourage a style different to the Tigers game plan. It worked - bugger it.

In 2021 both the Tigers and Cats didn't adapt well to the changes - Tiges especially sucked. in 2022 the Cats adjusted really well. the Tigers did too. But the Tiges midfield was Prestia or bust. So when he went down goodnight and goodbye. Notice that the better run teams do better. But the Tigers had a major weakness in their squad and fixed it this off season. Geelong did that a couple of years ago and got the reward.

I’ll put my football out for you.

 

[FreddyTwoShoes]

I thought you were better than this.
You can't even acknowledge an impression of a conflict of interest, even if it was no more than that, and you certainly don't seem to have an issue that he himself couldn't recognise his own conflicts of interest, and had to be forced out of his role, against his will, because of them.
Yours and other Geelong posters responses do nothing more than reinforce the impression that he was Geelong's man in the AFL and therefore you'll agree with and vigorously defend any and every decision he made.

I'm sorry I tried to have a sensible discussion with you on this, but in my defence, I've ofter found you an intelligent and thoughtful poster. Not on this topic though. Apparently you'd rather stick your fingers in your ears and yell blah blah blah! rather than have an intelligent discussion.

I presume you've got a link to a reputable article with details of Hocking being "forced out of his role, against his will"?

...or is it a bit like the "Hocking is quoted saying he brought in the stand rule to bring ruination to Richmond" Q-anon crap? IE. Still no article/link provided for that.

 

[Falcon3518]

I haven’t worn a uniform since high school, but sure.

Quality comment mate, you seem like a very smart individual.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[Anthony80]

Do you have literally any proof at all that it was ‘brought in to hinder Richmond.’

Yes, since the AFL found the chink in our armour our defence has gotten worse when previously even a season ending injury to Alex Rance didn't affect it. You know because the system and all.

That’s like saying t20 was brought in to hinder the Australian test side because they happened to be the best at the time and they haven’t been for most of the time since.

I don't follow cricket but I'm pretty sure they still play test cricket and test cricketers don't play t20, but I may be wrong?

It was brought in to try and improve the game and your inability to cope with the fact that your team hasn’t stayed at the top won’t change that

Did people stop going, were memberships for clubs at an all time low and "improving the game" was the only way to get them back?

The fact is that the stand rule was brought in to hinder Richmond, but I do understand where you're coming from though. If I wasn't a Richmond fan I might be making your arguments, but I would like to think I'd be honest enough to acknowledge that the AFL gave us a leg up by hindering our finals conquerers from '17, '19 & '20, which if you think about it, wasn't that long ago.

 

[PhatBoy]

Yes, since the AFL found the chink in our armour our defence has gotten worse when previously even a season ending injury to Alex Rance didn't affect it. You know because the system and all.

I don't follow cricket but I'm pretty sure they still play test cricket and test cricketers don't play t20, but I may be wrong?

Did people stop going, were memberships for clubs at an all time low and "improving the game" was the only way to get them back?

The fact is that the stand rule was brought in to hinder Richmond, but I do understand where you're coming from though. If I wasn't a Richmond fan I might be making your arguments, but I would like to think I'd be honest enough to acknowledge that the AFL gave us a leg up by hindering our finals conquerers from '17, '19 & '20, which if you think about it, wasn't that long ago.

Still no closer to growing a set.

Do you make this amount of excuses for everything you discuss or have you actually got a spine stronger than that of a jellyfish and can just accept reality on other topics?


Your team isn’t that good anymore, they were awesome for a while.

F***ing quit moaning and deal with it.

 

[Sttew]

So the Tigers became too old, too slow and too bad,

Bingo! You have lost players like Rance, Astbury, Houli, Ellis, Caddy, Higgins, Butler, Grigg, and we can even add Stengle. Sure you've brought in new players but like previous multi-premiership teams, you eventually fall away. If Richmond supporters are not prepared to acknowledge this and simply blame the demise on conspiracy theories then there's no point continuing the discussion. It just gets too tiresome and ridiculous

 

[Anthony80]

F*** off mate. Stop making excuses and grow a set.

I fail to see what anything said here has to do with growing a set?

Why have Geelong and Sydney stayed at or near the top for 16 and 18 seasons respectively?

Because they've had really good players.

 

[Sky]

Definitely some spot fires breaking out but I’ve seen far worse threads than this. Despite the squabbles there has actually been some decent discussion about the rule itself, which is the whole point of the main board - genuine football discussion.

For that reason it gets to stay open but I agree it would be nice if people could check their egos at the door. We have a place for team supporters to banter and throw mud at each other; this ain’t it.

Oh you’re a mod. Makes more sense now that you won this week. Must’ve hacked the sim mate

 

[CatToTheFuture]

We had injuries that game.

You guys woulda won both flags those seasons.

You were 26 pts against worse off this season than in '19, so your defence statiscally is pretty much the same.
But we're talking about the stand rule being brought in to hinder Richmond because all the other teams were just going through the motions on the mark where as Richmond pressured, so obviously the stand rule was brought in to hinder only one team and not the rest that were just going through the motions on the mark, so for them nothing really changed, and only Richmond could no longer be the best version of themselves.

Maybe the defence is statistically similar because we adapted to the change by changing our system.

You're comparing a backline that used to just kick it sideways for 3 quarters and featured immobile talls like Henderson and earlier Taylor, to one where the least mobile player is Sam De Koning and they play on from anywhere.

If the rule was there to help Geelong's 2021 game style, then why did Geelong leave that game style in 2021?

 

[Anthony80]

Your team isn’t that good anymore, they were awesome for a while.

I've acknowledged this by saying we weren't allowed to be the best version of ourselves, so it's quite obvious we aren't as good as when we were allowed to play unhindered.

 

[Grin]

I presume you've got a link to a reputable article with details of Hocking being "forced out of his role, against his will"?

...or is it a bit like the "Hocking is quoted saying he brought in the stand rule to bring ruination to Richmond" Q-anon crap? IE. Still no article/link provided for that.

Wow. I've really touched a raw nerve. I didn't come here to stir the pot, just raise what I saw as a legitimate issue.

It did not occur to him that he would be leaving the competition in the lurch when he told AFL CEO Gillon McLachlan at the start of July he would be moving to the top job at Geelong, because he fully intended to complete the season running the AFL’s football operation.
But McLachlan reportedly made it clear that Hocking, who did not see this coming, would have to leave immediately. For a start, the game would not accept the future Cats CEO overseeing match review decisions by Michael Christian.
Even if the football boss continued his role until October stripped of his on-field judicial responsibilities the game’s integrity would have been an ongoing talking point in spite of Hocking’s deserved honourable reputation.
So, he reluctantly left head office less than two weeks ago, also leaving a significant vacuum at a tough time. This as he heads toward a job that will not be his until October 1 as he works in transition with long-serving Cats boss Brian Cook until Christmas.

Timing of Hocking’s departure is unfortunate in challenging times

As AFL clubs take flight around Australia, chased by COVID-19 in a mad scramble towards the finish line of the 2021 season, the unfortunate timing of Steve Hocking’s departure from head office has not been lost on any of the key parties involved.

www.theage.com.au

 

[PhatBoy]

I fail to see what anything said here has to do with growing a set?

Because they've had really good players.

That can cope with rule changes. Probably the defining characteristic of everyone to go through either club realistically

 

[CatToTheFuture]

Rance
Astbury
Houli
Ellis
Caddy
Higgins
Butler
Grigg

why would the AFL introduce a rule to impede one of its most profitable clubs in favour of what Tiger supporters call a ‘minnow’ club? It does not make sense. Think about it….

But it's to get government support for a stadium expansion that was .... approved years ago....?

 

[PhatBoy]

I've acknowledged this by saying we weren't allowed to be the best version of ourselves, so it's quite obvious we aren't as good as when we were allowed to play unhindered.

No, you haven’t acknowledged shit. You’ve excused it.

They have been allowed to be whatever version they want to be under the same regulations as 17 other teams and they couldn’t manage it.

 

[CatToTheFuture]

Wow. I've really touched a raw nerve. I didn't come here to stir the pot, just raise what I saw as a legitimate issue.

It did not occur to him that he would be leaving the competition in the lurch when he told AFL CEO Gillon McLachlan at the start of July he would be moving to the top job at Geelong, because he fully intended to complete the season running the AFL’s football operation.
But McLachlan reportedly made it clear that Hocking, who did not see this coming, would have to leave immediately. For a start, the game would not accept the future Cats CEO overseeing match review decisions by Michael Christian.
Even if the football boss continued his role until October stripped of his on-field judicial responsibilities the game’s integrity would have been an ongoing talking point in spite of Hocking’s deserved honourable reputation.
So, he reluctantly left head office less than two weeks ago, also leaving a significant vacuum at a tough time. This as he heads toward a job that will not be his until October 1 as he works in transition with long-serving Cats boss Brian Cook until Christmas.

Timing of Hocking’s departure is unfortunate in challenging times

As AFL clubs take flight around Australia, chased by COVID-19 in a mad scramble towards the finish line of the 2021 season, the unfortunate timing of Steve Hocking’s departure from head office has not been lost on any of the key parties involved.

www.theage.com.au

The quote there sure makes it seem like a potential conflict of interest was identified and avoided ahead of time. Integrity demonstrated

 

[CatToTheFuture]

I've acknowledged this by saying we weren't allowed to be the best version of ourselves, so it's quite obvious we aren't as good as when we were allowed to play unhindered.

It's not my club, it's the sport that is wrong.....

 

[CatToTheFuture]

Definitely some spot fires breaking out but I’ve seen far worse threads than this. Despite the squabbles there has actually been some decent discussion about the rule itself, which is the whole point of the main board - genuine football discussion.

For that reason it gets to stay open but I agree it would be nice if people could check their egos at the door. We have a place for team supporters to banter and throw mud at each other; this ain’t it.

Not sure what decent discussion you've seen. This is like Donald Trump yelling about Hunter Bidens laptop

 

[Anthony80]

Maybe the defence is statistically similar because we adapted to the change by changing our system.

But you guys had to change the system to win a flag. Why did Richmond need to change their system, a system so good that our lack of AA representation compared to other "dynasty" teams speaks to how good our system was. You know we won a flag no one thought we could in '19 without Rance, why, because of our system.

You're comparing a backline that used to just kick it sideways for 3 quarters and featured immobile talls like Henderson and earlier Taylor, to one where the least mobile player is Sam De Koning and they play on from anywhere.

How easy is it though to "play on from anywhere" when the man on the mark is a statue? I ask myself how many goals Steven Kolyniuk may of scored if the stand rule was around in his day?

 

[Zevon]

Not sure what decent discussion you've seen. This is like Donald Trump yelling about Hunter Bidens laptop

Clearly haven’t read the whole thread then. Like I said, there have been some usual suspects making nuisances of themselves, but there’s been some good discussion about the stand rule itself too. People are allowed to have an opinion on it.

 

[FreddyTwoShoes]

Wow. I've really touched a raw nerve. I didn't come here to stir the pot, just raise what I saw as a legitimate issue.

It did not occur to him that he would be leaving the competition in the lurch when he told AFL CEO Gillon McLachlan at the start of July he would be moving to the top job at Geelong, because he fully intended to complete the season running the AFL’s football operation.
But McLachlan reportedly made it clear that Hocking, who did not see this coming, would have to leave immediately. For a start, the game would not accept the future Cats CEO overseeing match review decisions by Michael Christian.
Even if the football boss continued his role until October stripped of his on-field judicial responsibilities the game’s integrity would have been an ongoing talking point in spite of Hocking’s deserved honourable reputation.
So, he reluctantly left head office less than two weeks ago, also leaving a significant vacuum at a tough time. This as he heads toward a job that will not be his until October 1 as he works in transition with long-serving Cats boss Brian Cook until Christmas.

Timing of Hocking’s departure is unfortunate in challenging times

As AFL clubs take flight around Australia, chased by COVID-19 in a mad scramble towards the finish line of the 2021 season, the unfortunate timing of Steve Hocking’s departure from head office has not been lost on any of the key parties involved.

www.theage.com.au

Thank you. Fair play - hadn't seen that before.

Good to see that he didn't fight it, and stepped aside as an honourable man would. A less honourable man may have stayed schtum regarding his plans, in order to stay employed until his next job started.

But again, thank you for providing a link.