AFL wanting fan feedback on rule changes

[sportsmaniac89]

So anyway it has emerged that the AFL are wanting fan feedback on 7 proposed rule changes.

How the hell can they possibly come up with 7?

Anyway for your chance to vent visit http://www.afl.com.au/aflrulesyoursay/tabid/16504/default.aspx

Let's send a message that we want nothing changed for once

 

[dogbert]

They don't really care what the fans think, the whole point of this 'survey' i so the AFL can say yeah we are interested in the fans opinion, look, we released a survey to prove it!

Anyway, found the first question interesting, they don't give an option for no capping of the interchange bench, so looks like it's a given something is going to happen.

 

[greatwhiteshark]

I noticed they did not ask,

Do you think we should continue to penalise the player who is going for the ball and is first to the ball?

As we want to slow the game down a touch do you think we should revert back to waving the flags before the ball can be kicked back into play?

They won't listen anyway.

 

[albundysmate]

as if they would take any notice of what we say. they will just do the opposite to what we all want. no rule changes

 

[albundysmate]

they want to cap the interchange to 80 and reduce quarteds to 29 to 30 minutes. what does that mean. it will be 30 straight minutes and no stopping of the clock like back in the day

 

[HugeJohnson]

Half time is 20 minutes in duration. Would you support half time being reduced by approximately 2 minutes (to 18 minutes)?


What are they hoping to achieve with this?

 

[BEEG]

They dont care what we think

But im hoping if enough fans get on board and stop them trying to change rules they have no choice

The games the best it has ever been

 

[jonesy86]

If anything is going to be done with the interchange, I like the 3 interchange and 1 substitute set-up. Capping at 80 after the average has gone over 115 this year is too much of an overreaction.

 

[Sloth]

Anyway, found the first question interesting, they don't give an option for no capping of the interchange bench, so looks like it's a given something is going to happen.

I didn't answer that one as there was no option for "Leave it the bloody hell alone"

So I just left a comment instead.

 

[Thommo 42]

the quarters would be shorter if umpires didn't need to wait to bounce the bloody ball for the commercial break

 

[beez]

Half time is 20 minutes in duration. Would you support half time being reduced by approximately 2 minutes (to 18 minutes)?


What are they hoping to achieve with this?

This would be a good thing considering the AFL are concerned with increasing quarter lengths interfering with broadcasters.

 

[PTizzle]

I wouldn't mind them shortening the time between goals and bounce so that TV can't cram ads in, but apart from that I just wish they'd stop stuffing around with the rules.

Hitting the post and going through for a goal is a really dumb idea. If it hits the post it's a poster.

 

[MagpieJoel]

Where is the "no change" option on (c)?

 

[sportsmaniac89]

I didn't answer that one as there was no option for "Leave it the bloody hell alone"

So I just left a comment instead.

Same here.

Just left a comment saying "leave it alone and let it evolve"

 

[pdave54]

I noticed they did not ask,

As we want to slow the game down a touch do you think we should revert back to waving the flags before the ball can be kicked back into play?

Am I the only one confused, first they want to speed it up, now they want to slow it down

If anything is going to be done with the interchange, I like the 3 interchange and 1 substitute set-up. Capping at 80 after the average has gone over 115 this year is too much of an overreaction.

If they went for two interchange plus two substitutes would that automatically decrease the number of interchanges

the quarters would be shorter if umpires didn't need to wait to bounce the bloody ball for the commercial break

too bloody right

Having said that, I say leave the rules as they are. Get the interpretations of the ones we have right. And sack Razor!!

 

[legend166]

Only one I really agree with is number 5. The advantage rule as it stands is ridiculous with it being totally up to the descrection of the umpire as to whether something is advantageous or not. Leave it up to the player.

The only problem I see with that is that there will be an increase in 50m penalities if they are still strict with that interpretation. There might be a 50/50 decision paid and a player might think it's theirs, and they go to play on because of advantage and a 50m is paid against them.

 

[albundysmate]

what about the one , where if a ball hits the post and goes through the middle they will give it a goal. how ridiculas is that

 

[BlueTouchPaper]

Question 1c) is an absolute communist propaganda trap.

I can see the response from the AFL now;

"98% of fans who took the survey voted to introduce substitutes, only 2% favoured the cap"

A cap of 80 interchanges, a number that we've not seen in the game for three years.

Sheer stupidity.

 

[AG]

what about the one , where if a ball hits the post and goes through the middle they will give it a goal. how ridiculas is that

I actually don't mind that one. It would be nice to have a year without changing the rules but I'd rather they just change the rule with that one rather than bring in video technology or more umpires.

 

[Bonuspoints]

It will take away a lot of ambiguity, but it won't help in cases like the Hawkins GF goal in 09 or the Byrnes denial vs the Pies on the weekend. The umps got them wrong as they didn't see it right and thats an element of potential human error we'd have to live with. I'm fine with it as when I think about all the decisions made in a year it doesn't happen often enough.

I'd rather we go with it being a goal if it goes through that than having two goal umps and/or waiting on replays. I can't think of another sport that has a rule which says its a no-score or reduced score if it makes contacts with the post/ring before going in/through. It may be a unique feature of our game, but its not a defining one. I liked the excitement from the NAB cup years when the trialed it being play on when it came back into play so if they go this way I'd want that included.

I would like to ask that everyone that contributes to the feedback survey to make use of the comments options to give their thoughts on other rules. Even if it doesn't really fit the question put down what you think. Take this as an opportunity to voice your opinion on what you hate about the rules.

For me I added that I thought their was too much emphasis in the rules on a players safety by others and not enough about that player being responsible for their own safety. A player should not be given a free kick by thrusting their head at an opponent or if they cause an opponents arms to slide up over their shoulders and make contact with the head.

 

[OzBomber]

What about the push in the back rule? It's probably the worst rule going around.

Pretty crap survey if you ask me.

 

[Upgrayedd]

I voted for shorter quarters, interchange caps and that if it reflects off the post into the goals it should be a goal

 

[Marlin01]

I think Rugby Union has the solution to the advantage problem. At the moment, players sometimes stop when they hear the whistle. Take the whistle out of the situation. When an infringement occurs, the umpire holds up his hand and play continues for a short period. Once the umpire has determined whether advantage occurred or not, he either lowers his hand and play continues or brings the ball back and the free kick is taken.

 

[robertg22]

Kudos to the AFL for asking the fans. Whether they listen to us is another matter.
Of the interchange amendments I most agree with it would be the 3+1 sub. If they change it to 80 per game (INCLUDING breaks) that would be a serious misstep. Is the current system of it being uncapped taking anything away from the game? Not at all IMO.
As for shortening the quarter & half time breaks, I fail to see the point in this. FWIW I think it couldn't hurt to trim the half time break by a couple of minutes. As a fan sitting at the ground you always feel like that is dragged out a little too far. Quarter time is barely enough to even go take a piss at the bigger games given the queues, so leave that as is.

 

[Subprime]

A goal has had to go clean thru since the 1859 rules.

Some drop kick in the media looking for a talking point brings it up and now they're surveying people on it FFS.

Peeece orrf.