List Mgmt. 2020 Trade Thread - Part IV

[bird_man]

very very interesting

I love those 2nd tier changes.

People will cry about the AFL making more changes but really it's just bringing our game back to what it was with a stay at home forward line.

Really keen to see how that goes.

 

[Ducky Tie]

I love those 2nd tier changes.

People will cry about the AFL making more changes but really it's just bringing our game back to what it was with a stay at home forward line.

Really keen to see how that goes.

I’m fine with the lower league changes.

I don’t like them complicating the man on the mark rule even further when it was already a farce.

Riewoldt was spot on earlier in the year. Reduce the time when a player takes a mark around the ground, from 7 to 3 seconds. Throw the ball up straight away rather than waiting for everyone to gather around the stoppage.

Disappointed we didn’t get those rule changes. In terms of opening up the game, the kick out change and the man on the mark moving laterally rule both do nothing to open the game.

Interchange numbers being reduced may work. Impossible to know, but I’m not convinced that making players more tired will enhance the quality of the game.

I do agree though that there will be complaints and criticisms no matter what the AFL does.

 

[BrutThough]

very very interesting

I think limiting the interchange is pointless and won't do anything to produce a better product. Tired players won't make the product better and lead to more scoring. All it will do is decrease the skill level within the game and lead to clubs picking athletes over footballers. But no excuses for Hill here, this suits him perfectly.

Also think mandating 3 players inside 50 for each throw in or stoppage is only going to slow down everything. Think 1 player per team is enough for their desired result. Hopefully this doesn't get implemented at AFL level.

 

[bird_man]

I’m fine with the lower league changes.

I don’t like them complicating the man on the mark rule even further when it was already a farce.

Riewoldt was spot on earlier in the year. Reduce the time when a player takes a mark around the ground, from 7 to 3 seconds. Throw the ball up straight away rather than waiting for everyone to gather around the stoppage.

Disappointed we didn’t get those rule changes. In terms of opening up the game, the kick out change and the man on the mark moving laterally rule both do nothing to open the game.

Interchange numbers being reduced may work. Impossible to know, but I’m not convinced that making players more tired will enhance the quality of the game.

I do agree though that there will be complaints and criticisms no matter what the AFL does.

I think 3 seconds is not enough.

There's little upside from taking a mark when you don't have the time to go back and make a decision.

It would make the game worse I think.

 

[CaptainRisky]

Why can't I post on the Random Discussion board?

Looks like they have heard your an ITK

 

[Ducky Tie]

I think 3 seconds is not enough.

There's little upside from taking a mark when you don't have the time to go back and make a decision.

It would make the game worse I think.

Yeah three might be a bit quick. 4-5 though would probably work. At the moment, all that comes from the seven seconds is players bombing long down the line. Any kicks to a deliberate target generally come from a quicker play on from a mark anyway.

 

[Keg still on legs]

Fiora with a moustache.

But what a splendid moustache

 

[StCicatriz]

i would have liked them to finalise list sizes and salary cap before the free agency window started before they started looking at rule changes

 

[George]

Why can't I post on the Random Discussion board?

You were permanently banned on there for trolling.

 

[Munga]

very very interesting

Reduced lateral movement on the mark??? That's BS unless they stop the player who has the kick from wandering inside like they always do. Some players (like those at Richmond) come inside a few metres and it's all good by the umps... then some players (like those at St Kilda) don't even move off the line but feign to kick and they get called to play on. Sometimes the umps go looking for trouble where there isn't any.

 

[austinnn]

I think 3 seconds is not enough.

There's little upside from taking a mark when you don't have the time to go back and make a decision.

It would make the game worse I think.

3 seconds is fine, ample time for an in play disposal decision. Count it yourself, you'll see.

A little bit of chaos makes the game more interesting, and all the reset time for every mark does make it a bit boring.

 

[George]

very very interesting

They just can't stop messing with the game can they. If they just left it alone I'm sure it would naturally work itself out.

 

[12Chill]

Reduced lateral movement on the mark??? That's BS unless they stop the player who has the kick from wandering inside like they always do. Some players (like those at Richmond) come inside a few metres and it's all good by the umps... then some players (like those at St Kilda) don't even move off the line but feign to kick and they get called to play on. Sometimes the umps go looking for trouble where there isn't any.

We must learn to take advantage of this when we have the ball. Having a Hill or Jones type running to collect a handball receive after someone marks it. The man on the mark can see it coming but can’t move laterally to pre-meditate and close it off/chop it off until the handball is actually made or our guy moves off the mark. By then he will have no chance of getting to them by the time Hill/Jones blow past the man on the mark with pace.

 

[RWB4life]

Leave battle with a huge tank in the goal square and have him run out every time.

On SM-N985F using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Diehard Saint]

For me, a 50m penalty for a player accidentally running in the mark zone , trying to get back is absolutely excessive. Especially when you can see they have no intention of holding up the play. Should be reduced to 25m if they have to keep it.

Players having to nominate to contest in the ruck is also ridiculous. If they don’t want a third man up just pay a free kick against the team where two players go up.

Dont mind the interchange reduction as it favours the players whose fitness is their strength....looking at you Hilly!

Overall, not a fan of constant rule changes though.

 

[Barrels]

But what a splendid moustache

View attachment 1014104

 

[Premium]

North de-listed Paul Ahern

15

Paul Ahern

Age

28

Ht

183cm

Wt

85kg

Pos.

D/M

Career

Season

Last 5

D

17.5

4star

K

9.6

4star

HB

7.9

5star

M

2.3

2star

T

1.7

4star

MG

296.8

4star

D

4.0

1star

K

3.0

1star

HB

1.0

1star

M

1.0

1star

T

0.0

1star

D

20.4

5star

K

9.6

4star

HB

10.8

5star

M

3.0

3star

T

2.4

4star

MG

334.4

5star

, they picked him up from GWS when he did his ACL x 2 , so he missed playing his first year for North , his 2nd year he plays against the Eagles and gets 37 possessions and 12 clearances , the following 2 years he plays 7 games and 6 games and now he is de-listed.
I can't believe a kid who killed it playing the Eagles now finds himself de-listed and he only just turned 24 - does anyone know much about this kid.

 

[bird_man]

3 seconds is fine, ample time for an in play disposal decision. Count it yourself, you'll see.

A little bit of chaos makes the game more interesting, and all the reset time for every mark does make it a bit boring.

No I disagree.

A lot of the time it takes a few extra second for a play to open.

Giving a player 3 seconds every time they mark the footy just goes too far away from what our game is and would give players less advantage from taking a mark IMO.

I think there are much better ways to improve the game

 

[Pardon me]

The lateral mark movement is going to be hilarious whenever Buddy lines up for goal and the ump calls a 50 against.
Can’t wait to watch all these fifties for players doing what comes natural and thats simply following the ball carrier run up off around the mark to get extra distance.

 

[Johnnyrayflamingo]

You were permanently banned on there for trolling.

Trolling what?

 

[Johnnyrayflamingo]

Looks like they have heard your an ITK

Most likely. More scared of the hard truth it seems.

 

[MCG-Unit]

Frawley is locked in 100%

Like the rest of Victoria South Aust

 

[gringo2011]

Like the rest of Victoria

Not any more. That's an SA thing now.

 

[Saintos The ITK]

If you mark a any torpedo or a punt that travelled further than 56 meters you should be allowed a 9 meter advance on the mark.

 

[PoppedCorn]

I gotta say.....i laughed out loud when typing that out