Autopsy 16-minute quarters: which teams are winners and losers from this?

[Jack_1870]

Hate it.
Lets see what Dangerfield has to say if you tell him the salary cap would have to be reduced by 20% to match,tell Gil AFL memberships would also have to be reduced by 20% and of course TV rights would need to be reduced by 20%.Only fair.

 

[dont bowl there]

I think currently we have a sample size of one, so lets wait and see on that.

Hear me out for a second - here is my take:


The game constantly evolves and adapts to the current climate. Coaches make decisions based on what will be the most effective game style to win matches. My hypothesis would be hard tackling, pressure and congestion around the ball will be less rewarded in the shorter format. The shorter quarters mean that attrition and grinding your opponents down will no longer reap the rewards that it has over the last few years. Given it is less rewarded coaches will make decisions to implement a different set of tactics, quite possibly where coaches prioritise skills and ability to attack over defensive pressure.

To me, shorter quarters could see the end of the Roos/Lyon play book.

I think too many people are caught up on the concept of a change and want to rail against it, rather than examine what that change could potentially mean.

To me, I'm keen to observe the changes we see this year on the field and then make an assessment on whether those have improved the game or not.

I think the opposite is true, Ross Lyon for instance would only need to strangle a team for 16mins rather than 20mins. That's actually a much easier task for the players both mentally and physically. Ross would have LOVED to be coaching during the 16min quarter season, he could try and keep a team to under 5 goals and then try and find 6 himself. Fremantle always had issues keeping the pressure up for the entire quarter as players physically fatigued and mentally switched off.

The fact Lyon and Roos are no longer coaching in the AFL seems to suggest their game style had already been surpassed.

 

[FRUMPY]

I think currently we have a sample size of one, so lets wait and see on that.

Hear me out for a second - here is my take:


The game constantly evolves and adapts to the current climate. Coaches make decisions based on what will be the most effective game style to win matches. My hypothesis would be hard tackling, pressure and congestion around the ball will be less rewarded in the shorter format. The shorter quarters mean that attrition and grinding your opponents down will no longer reap the rewards that it has over the last few years. Given it is less rewarded coaches will make decisions to implement a different set of tactics, quite possibly where coaches prioritise skills and ability to attack over defensive pressure.

To me, shorter quarters could see the end of the Roos/Lyon play book.

I think too many people are caught up on the concept of a change and want to rail against it, rather than examine what that change could potentially mean.

To me, I'm keen to observe the changes we see this year on the field and then make an assessment on whether those have improved the game or not.

Its been shown the last 15 years, you dont change rules to 'open the game up' - none of the rule changes have worked and most have in fact caused more harm than good. Doesnt mater what you do, coaches will find a way to make the game dour and boring

 

[FreeTK]

I think the opposite is true, Ross Lyon for instance would only need to strangle a team for 16mins rather than 20mins. That's actually a much easier task for the players both mentally and physically. Ross would have LOVED to be coaching during the 16min quarter season, he could try and keep a team to under 5 goals and then try and find 6 himself. Fremantle always had issues keeping the pressure up for the entire quarter as players physically fatigued and mentally switched off.

The fact Lyon and Roos are no longer coaching in the AFL seems to suggest their game style had already been surpassed.

The benefit of a pressure style are that it takes the energy out of the opposition who are getting tackled more than it does the tackling team. The team imposing a pressure style game then can coax opponents into making mistakes and errors under fatigue.

Couldnt you argue the opposite though? St Kilda never stood a chance in the grand final replay as the game was always going to be more open with both teams very tired. When a team comes along that masters these tactics the game will never open up at any stage as they wont get tired.

Like I said, its just a hypothesis, and you may indeed be correct, we will have to wait and see.

In terms of St Kilda- They had been backing up week after week all season. I don't think they lost the replay due to physical fatigue. To me, they lost because of the lack of effort from being mentally fried due to not putting the game away the week before + losing 09. I think Brendan Goddard recently have an interview saying just as much.

 

[FreeTK]

Its been shown the last 15 years, you dont change rules to 'open the game up' - none of the rule changes have worked and most have in fact caused more harm than good. Doesnt mater what you do, coaches will find a way to make the game dour and boring

I'm not saying you change it in order to achieve that. I am saying, we should hold off our judgments and see how 16 minute quarters play out. If it does result in more open attacking footy at the expense of congestion/repeat stoppages/pressure footy, we should consider keeping it beyond this year.

Not sure if it has been discussed, but I think the 16 minute quarters really favour Collingwood, whose system seems to be energy intensive. I know West Coast have been able to grind them down in many of the last encounters between the two. I could see the Pies really benefitting and making hay out of this.

 

[dont bowl there]

The benefit of a pressure style are that it takes the energy out of the opposition who are getting tackled more than it does the tackling team. The team imposing a pressure style game then can coax opponents into making mistakes and errors under fatigue.

I watched literally every single Ross Lyon Fremantle game and I can tell you we got tired towards the end of quarters, it happened almost every single game. That was a mixture of physical and mental fatigue. You have it completely backwards when it came to Ross Lyon football, he demanded HIS players get more numbers around the ball which meant HIS team had to work harder to get to the contest.

 

[Dank Academy]

Media - More revenue through more commercial breaks
AFL - More revenue through more commercial breaks because of more sponsor exposure. More leverage for next media rights deal.
Players - More revenue through media rights deal and less work
Fans- Less AFL, less value for money

 

[FreeTK]

I watched literally every single Ross Lyon Fremantle game and I can tell you we got tired towards the end of quarters, it happened almost every single game. That was a mixture of physical and mental fatigue. You have it completely backwards when it came to Ross Lyon football, he demanded HIS players get more numbers around the ball which meant HIS team had to work harder to get to the contest.

If that was true and teams that play the Lyon's playbook were more fatigued than their opponents, than it would have been a game style that went unrewarded.

Like I said, my argument is a hypothesis and we will have to wait and see how the game adapts over the course of the season.

 

[dont bowl there]

If that was true and teams that play the Lyon's playbook were more fatigued than their opponents, than it would have been a game style that went unrewarded.

Like I said, my argument is a hypothesis and we will have to wait and see how the game adapts over the course of the season.

It did, most seasons his Fremantle teams would burn out towards the end of the season. It was an exhausting game style.

 

[dont bowl there]

If that was true and teams that play the Lyon's playbook were more fatigued than their opponents, than it would have been a game style that went unrewarded.

Like I said, my argument is a hypothesis and we will have to wait and see how the game adapts over the course of the season.

Your argument might have merits, happy to see how it all unfolds but Lyon would have loved 16min quarters. That was my issue with your post.

 

[cleanhands]

surprise surprise, dickhead dangerfield is all for it:

Dangerfield backs time reduction

Patrick Dangerfield has backed the concept of reducing the time players are on the field

www.geelongcats.com.au

Flog, flog flog, “put huge demand on players” that’s why you put your hand out for massive salaries will “lessen the demand on players” how about you lessen your bank account, you are a payed professional $$$$ demand effort, you are not some part timer who makes time from his job to play football FMD I’m so sick of this isolated bubble these people live in, to much to say do what you are paid for and play football

 

[BigPond101]

Hate it.
Lets see what the Dangerfield has to say if you tell him the salary cap would have to be reduced by 20% to match,tell Gil AFL memberships would also have to be reduced by 20% and of course TV rights would need to be reduced by 20%.Only fair.

Dangerfield would make sure his pay stayed the same and the rest of the team dropped more than 20 % to make up the difference. His flogness has no limit

 

[Demonic Ascent]

And now Hocking has said they're considering "1 or 2 additional interchange players" WHY???

Shorter quarters plus increased interchange bench with normal weekly schedule equals even more defensive snoozefests

The AFL is jumping the shark

 

[WestCoast05]

Eddie McGuire says families don’t have hours to spend at the footy these days. Based off what exactly? The flog has done nothing but talk out of his arse the last few weeks. I’m sure Eddie bases his opinions off all the normal families he knows that go to the People haven’t stopped going to the footy. If people want to make the commitment to going to the footy I daresay they want it to be worth their while in terms of game length.

Gee there are some absolute tools in the media.

We have a PAID waiting list to be able to go to the footy as large as Eddie's ego.

Complete tools - 100% agree with the notion that because it is their week in week out jobs that they want to reduce their own workload - absolute tools.

 

[WestCoast05]

I know I am in the minority but I think the game goes for to long between the first bounce and final siren. I don't mind shortening the quarters a bit and a reduced half time break.

You want me to finish a bottle of gin in a shorter timespan? Selfish prick, think about my health.

 

[cleanhands]

The AFL won’t even consult the passionate football follower, they will ask the corporate boxes who sit there during the game punching down red wine and Chardonnay getting loud and obnoxious, their answer would be “f***ed if I know, how longs a game now”; and tv rights how many more ads can we squeeze in during longer breaks, corporate lunches will go longer so they can hit the half pissed nuffies for more money.
Meanwhile the kids are sitting there asking their parents where’s everyone going........ games over kids

 

[Billy ray]

 

[Redline]

You want me to finish a bottle of gin in a shorter timespan? Selfish prick, think about my health.

Haha, don't worry my wife and kids barely listen to me, I doubt AFL House will.

 

[BlueandGoldforever]

It did, most seasons his Fremantle teams would burn out towards the end of the season. It was an exhausting game style.

Mick Malthouse agrees. He was scathing of the game style.

 

[Dangerousfield]

Dangerfield would make sure his pay stayed the same and the rest of the team dropped more than 20 % to make up the difference. His flogness has no limit

Not sure who I'm more sick of, Maguire or Dangerfield, just wish both of them would STFU.

Dangerfield comes across as an entitled tosser.

If the game time is reducing by 20% then fans are getting 20% less viewing of actual footy but you can bet there will be more ads jammed in there somewhere. If we are getting 20% less game time then players should expect to get less $ and we should get a 20% reduction in membership fees and gate prices.

What/who is driving this? I thought 20% reduction in game time was to allow lots of 4 and 5 day breaks so they could jam in more games. Now that we have the standard breaks being programmed going forward, leave the game time at 4 x 20 mins. This is very much like products that stay the same price but there's new packaging with less product in the packet/bottle.

Oi, AFL, leave OUR game alone, stop your effing fiddling!

 

[cleanhands]

Not sure who I'm more sick of, Maguire or Dangerfield, just wish both of them would STFU.

Dangerfield comes across as an entitled tosser.

If the game time is reducing by 20% then fans are getting 20% less viewing of actual footy but you can bet there will be more ads jammed in there somewhere. If we are getting 20% less game time then players should expect to get less $ and we should get a 20% reduction in membership fees and gate prices.

What/who is driving this? I thought 20% reduction in game time was to allow lots of 4 and 5 day breaks so they could jam in more games. Now that we have the standard breaks being programmed going forward, leave the game time at 4 x 20 mins. This is very much like products that stay the same price but there's new packaging with less product in the packet/bottle.

Oi, AFL, leave OUR game alone, stop your effing fiddling!

Cadbury’s football........pay more get less

 

[Big Sauce 21]

And now Hocking has said they're considering "1 or 2 additional interchange players" WHY???

Shorter quarters plus increased interchange bench with normal weekly schedule equals even more defensive snoozefests

The AFL is jumping the shark

Think I might hit up the nrl this year. Watch lions fixtures only. The comp is turning into a joke.

 

[Plugger35]

Think I might hit up the nrl this year. Watch lions fixtures only. The comp is turning into a joke.

The NRL is well ahead of the AFL so far this year, they've got their season back up and running two weeks earlier and they haven't reduced the length of games.

They've reduced the number of referees but that isn't such a bad thing, I wouldn't mind seeing less umpires as there is less chance of them making bad decisions.

 

[banzai]

Hocking on Foxfooty just said that the 16 minute quarters and other changes are for this year only as they need to remain flexible for anything that could happen. Hopefully this remains the case.

 

[Flying Fox]

Not sure who I'm more sick of, Maguire or Dangerfield, just wish both of them would STFU.

Dangerfield comes across as an entitled tosser.

If the game time is reducing by 20% then fans are getting 20% less viewing of actual footy but you can bet there will be more ads jammed in there somewhere. If we are getting 20% less game time then players should expect to get less $ and we should get a 20% reduction in membership fees and gate prices.

What/who is driving this? I thought 20% reduction in game time was to allow lots of 4 and 5 day breaks so they could jam in more games. Now that we have the standard breaks being programmed going forward, leave the game time at 4 x 20 mins. This is very much like products that stay the same price but there's new packaging with less product in the packet/bottle.

Oi, AFL, leave OUR game alone, stop your effing fiddling!

Unfortunate username. But yes, I agree entirely.