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

What do you think of the reduced quarters?

  • Not sure yet

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    11

Remove this Banner Ad

Current quarters are too long, 20+ time on used to be okay when quarters would average 25-28 minutes but now they are extended out to 30+ because of time freezing during all stoppages.. Remove the stoppages and wont need to shorten the quarters.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Current quarters are too long, 20+ time on used to be okay when quarters would average 25-28 minutes but now they are extended out to 30+ because of time freezing during all stoppages.. Remove the stoppages and wont need to shorten the quarters.
You will get teams deliberately wasting time if you remove the stoppages.
 
Whateley is a campaigner flog as well
I use to like him but he's getting close to unbearable now. It's getting to the point where Robbo is actually the more rational one on that show!
 
When you look at the NRL, returning tonight and there is no shortening of games, just one less ref? But no AFL, we need to change the length of the game and maybe introduce more players. complete and utter ****wits the AFL.

When you look at the NRL as the prefered way to do things, you know the AFL have stuffed up
 
Dangerfield comes across as an entitled tosser.
Don't all union heads?

Speaking of union heads, has any AFLPA player leader been as vocal as Patrick? No one really cares about unions at the best of times, and having a vocal head who constantly talks about changes that are unpopular to fans really is a good way to lose the support of said fans.
 
Last edited:
The media have been talking about shortening games for a few years now. My opinion is channel 7 want to shorten games to fit in a 2 hour window on tv, can have games all weekend with no crossover between games and makes it easier for Thursday/Monday night games and possibly even Friday doubleheaders.

It's all driven by the broadcasters, players have now jumped on it as they see an opportunity to lessen their workload.
Yep, spot on. The strange thing about this is shortening of quarters is that it won't keep these mysterious "2-hour-attention-span" people watching that TV channel for longer - they'll just get to possibly now see who wins, rather than apparently zoning out just after 3/4 time.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Are there 3 bigger FW's involved in AFL at the moment than (in no particular order), Hocking, Gil and everywhere.
Leave the f*n game alone you absolute FLOGS.
Dangerfield is on the podium without any doubt

Gold - Dangerfield
Silver - Gil
Bronze - Hocking

Eddie Everywhere misses a medal because no one takes him seriously, he's just all noise
 
Frankly, when I watch most neutral games by the time each quarter gets to about the 20-22 minute mark I'm thinking "Is this still dragging on?"
Frankly, i do the same for my team’s games
 
When you look at the NRL, returning tonight and there is no shortening of games, just one less ref? But no AFL, we need to change the length of the game and maybe introduce more players. complete and utter *******s the AFL.

When you look at the NRL as the prefered way to do things, you know the AFL have stuffed up

They have well and truly shown the afl up. Were pushing the issue hard and got what they wanted.
 
When you look at the NRL, returning tonight and there is no shortening of games, just one less ref? But no AFL, we need to change the length of the game and maybe introduce more players. complete and utter *******s the AFL.

When you look at the NRL as the prefered way to do things, you know the AFL have stuffed up

Ha, I remember when the superiority of AFL administrators over the NRLs was widely accepted by all. Nobody would ever claim that now... what's happened?

To be out-administered by a sporting organisation that's run by men who'd otherwise be cleaning toilets or laying bricks for a living is a disgrace.
 
Having 20 minute quarters put AFL matches on a par with rugby union and rugby league matches which go for 80 minutes, you would never see ARU or NRL administrators cutting their matches back to 64 minutes so I don't know why people think it's acceptable for AFL administrators to do this with AFL matches.

Clock keeps ticking when the ball isn't in play in rugby codes.
 
Quite like the shorter quarters. If it reduces the chance of injuries to players, even better. Also liking the play each team once idea. A much fairer way to run a competition.

5 minute quarters would reduce the risk even further.

Or no quarters at all. That way nobody gets hurt.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

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

Back
Top