Strategy Are the new rules for 2019 from the shadows designed to stop Richmond's unique successful set-up?

[TigerImposter]

Yep.
Coaches aren't working on pressure any more. They're simply ensuring theirs is up to standard with the rest of the competition. Coaches are now working on how to beat the pressure - because that will be a major point of difference if you can figure it out, and that's what wins flags.

By changing the rules to negate pressure, coaches will have to waste time trying to get pressure back to where it is now, and then start working on how to beat it again. Pressure is king and rules won't dethrone it.

Pressure can be dethroned only if you have a skilfully and professionally prepared list who can handle it and beat it in a united manner and dish it out at the same time. As Defibrillate mentioned getting a good list of skilful players to handle pressure is extremely difficult with an 18 team competition and this is the issue to a lot of ugly games , but player development is the key to survival.
This is why FD have now become a big issue unlike previously. Back in the days it was the coach that pretty well ran the show and nobody knew the wiser. We now have sports psychologists and scientists , medical crews, elite fitness staff etc etc with a pile of coaches as well as blokes on laptops recording every move and fart a player makes. It’s harnessing these small bits of information on individual players and giving feedback to the FD that will make the difference between success and failure. This is why teams can go from a low position one year to premiers the next season. Watching Richmond in 2016 to 2017 was an eye opener as the players were unrecognisable in terms of size strength endurance and conditioning.
The professionalism of the behind the scenes crew was extremely evident at VFL games with all the contraptions they were using to gather data on players and the feedback they were giving back. I’d never seen it at that level of expertise at Tigerland before . We’re basically running our vfl team as if it was an AFL set up and this has set the standard so high that our depth is so deep that even with a season like this year with injuries and suspensions
we can cover the losses. We can bring in rookies or late picks and they will get the same opportunities to develop as everybody else selected above them. I remember under the Coburg Tigers some blokes had never even met TW the coach and just rotted away ending up inferior to when they first arrived .
Watching other AFL clubs VFL teams it can clearly be seen the gaps between their methods and ours. The only club that invests just as much into the FD at VFL is Collingwood ( any wonder as Balme was last there) and I used to be envious with how they were professionally set up in preparation of their future players, but their methods have now even fallen behind ours and this is why they’re now imitating us.
Changing the rules with zones will do nothing to the spectacle of the game bc if you don’t have professional FD’s that prepare players to cope with the skills and fitness of the demands of the game then you will get flogged anyhow. I believe implementing these rules could exacerbate the current situation even greater with uglier viewing that will cause people to lose further interest.

 

[Madness101]

The one change that I'm sure will come in next year is the rotations going down to 40 -60. Hopefully lower.

This will help us, IMHO.

We always run over the top of sides, this change will tire teams more quickly.

Sydney will be the team that suffers the most.

 

[Tiger2709]

As long as they are willing and able to run both ways harder and faster than the opposition and always help out team mates even at the expense of their own game, they will always be up near the top, its there work rate and growing skill with the ball by both hand.and foot that others can't match at the moment.

Doesnt hurt having so many mid field guns and one of the best forwards in rare form and probably the best backline in the comp either

Feel the love.

 

[JAKLAUGHING]

The current buzz word in footy at the moment seems to be 'pressure'...
What does it mean?!?...define it?!?...quantify it?!? measure it?!? describe it?!?!...it...it...it...
At the moment Richmond and pressure are mentioned in the same breath by every footy scribe...hand in hand and inter twinned..
Can you/we talk about what Richmond successfully did do and now does on the footy field without mentioning the word 'pressure' ?!?! At all once...?!?
Pressure the oppo player...pressure is in the form of DRioli...in the form of Rance...in the form of DMartin...
Can it be simply that Richmond recognize and maximize their footballing strenghts greater than the oppo teams currently can?!?
And formalize those strenghts through our footy department?!?
So now i have replaced one buzz word with another...'pressure' with 'strenghts'...
What is it at the moment that Richmond does that maximizes their footy strenghts (more than the oppo) and converts to a winnable game plan...?!?
Or what is it that the oppo don't do that loses them games against Richmond?!?
To win a Premiership every successful side must be 'on the same page' by their coach and players...hawks/cats/tigers of the60/70s
To win a Premiership every successful side must be bigger/stronger than their oppo...
Bombers under Sheeds...Lions with their crushing 3peat and what the bombers tried to introduce before Wada/Asada stopped them...
I think that it's going to take some fine footy brains and journalists (MFlanagan) over time to catalogue/define why this Richmond side is such a standout...
And a new benchmark...

 

[HTT]

The one change that I'm sure will come in next year is the rotations going down to 40 -60. Hopefully lower.

This will help us, IMHO.

We always run over the top of sides, this change will tire teams more quickly.

Sydney will be the team that suffers the most.

In terms of helping us yes hopefully it’s lowered but if we want the game to “look better” (whatever that means), it’s really not going to help.

Kicking ability suffers far more from fatigue than running ability.

 

[JR82]

Are the new rules a way of stopping the Richmond set-up as having a unfair competitive advantage because the players are just too strong in what they bring in their unique set-up.

Some in the AFL do not like it? Some do not want Richmond too successful? Is it some do not want some home truths to come out that the type of players Richmond have a simply too effective under the current rules for big, tall, slow lumbering forwards in particular?

When was the last time drastic changes like this was brought in to modify the game?

Are others admitting it is very difficult for other teams structures to get the better of Richmond's current structure?

Certainly from the media yes. the 6/6/6 won't affect us too much as we always have players fwd of the ball to kick to anyway.

 

[DoItForCaptBlood]

Bevo ripping into Scott on the proposed rule changes.

http://m.afl.com.au/news/2018-07-10/fighting-like-cats-and-dogs-bevo-hits-back-at-scott

Good to see some voice for the no change is happening.

 

[Tiger Toffee]

Bevo ripping into Scott on the proposed rule changes.

http://m.afl.com.au/news/2018-07-10/fighting-like-cats-and-dogs-bevo-hits-back-at-scott

Good to see some voice for the no change is happening.

Backs up what i have been saying, Geelong are the main drivers behind these stupid changes closely followed by Hawthorn, these changes are not for the good of the game they are for the good of Geelong and Hawthorn.

 

[biaseddustyfan]

inb4 we 2peat and then they make a rule that clubs are excluded from the GF if they're going for a 3peat

 

[Nop returns]

Backs up what i have been saying, Geelong are the main drivers behind these stupid changes closely followed by Hawthorn, these changes are not for the good of the game they are for the good of Geelong and Hawthorn.

100% Scott and dangerfield have been the most vocal. **** i hope Geelong miss the finals just to see these campaigners squirm.

 

[DoItForCaptBlood]

100% Scott and dangerfield have been the most vocal. **** i hope Geelong miss the finals just to see these campaigners squirm.

Different agendas though imo. Dangerfield is head of the players union (not association). And as a union, he is after shorter games (15 min quarters), shorter season (17 games - play each team once), basketball type free flowing noncontact play (to protect the players).

Not sure what the game might become, but it will need a name change. How about AFLX!

 

[Weightman]

While we are on it, how come it’s now open season on someone who gets a free kick paid against?
Not just us but Rance got attacked after getting pinged for htb. Vlastuin wouldn’t have elbowed Parker if he hadn’t been jumping on him etc
Again, not just us but it’s just gotten out of hand.

Agree the examples you cite are common, umpires should reverse the free kick, while on it pay holding the man, I hate it when a player isn’t in possession yet and gets tackled no free, a player gets tackled and drops the ball play on, taggers should be targeted by umps, ball it up quickly at stoppages, let players have a contest especially the big forwards and backs.

 

[DoItForCaptBlood]

The main rule being discussed it seems is the numbers in arcs at stoppages. As this is being done at u18s and aflw, I was hoping someone who watches it could bring in a comment. The obvious one to me without ever seeing it, is players will run in as soon as it is thrown up, and have to run back immediately if another stoppage occurs. So a team getting easily beaten and locking it in, will have forwards (and the oppo players) running up and back each and every time. Wow what fun that would be.

Here is what afl.com article confirmed..

One rule change the Competition Committee is considering – and has included in club trials – would see sides field six players in the three zones of the ground at centre bounces and stoppages.

The assistant coach argues starting points are irrelevant at centre bounces – the game's "lowest density stoppage" – and sees a significant downside to them at other stoppages between the arc.

"I hope the people making those changes have watched a lot of VFLW footy and TAC Cup and seen the true impact of it, because it's a big change from the way our game's been played," he said.

"What the VFLW clubs have found is the girls who play the deep forward or deep back roles do a lot of shuttle runs up the ground.

"Then there's a stoppage, so they go back inside 50, then they go back up the ground again – and they're not getting anywhere near the ball while this is happening.

"You're going to need some really fit players to be able to handle that, because we still want players to get involved in the play … so that will be a challenge."

 

[Shazza_]

The main rule being discussed it seems is the numbers in arcs at stoppages. As this is being done at u18s and aflw, I was hoping someone who watches it could bring in a comment. The obvious one to me without ever seeing it, is players will run in as soon as it is thrown up, and have to run back immediately if another stoppage occurs. So a team getting easily beaten and locking it in, will have forwards (and the oppo players) running up and back each and every time. Wow what fun that would be.

Here is what afl.com article confirmed..

One rule change the Competition Committee is considering – and has included in club trials – would see sides field six players in the three zones of the ground at centre bounces and stoppages.

The assistant coach argues starting points are irrelevant at centre bounces – the game's "lowest density stoppage" – and sees a significant downside to them at other stoppages between the arc.

"I hope the people making those changes have watched a lot of VFLW footy and TAC Cup and seen the true impact of it, because it's a big change from the way our game's been played," he said.

"What the VFLW clubs have found is the girls who play the deep forward or deep back roles do a lot of shuttle runs up the ground.

"Then there's a stoppage, so they go back inside 50, then they go back up the ground again – and they're not getting anywhere near the ball while this is happening.

"You're going to need some really fit players to be able to handle that, because we still want players to get involved in the play … so that will be a challenge."

sounds like a dogs breakfest

 

[JAKLAUGHING]

Backs up what i have been saying, Geelong are the main drivers behind these stupid changes closely followed by Hawthorn, these changes are not for the good of the game they are for the good of Geelong and Hawthorn.

Geez zones down at Kitty Litter park would make it a fortress and almost guarantee finals berth every year for geelol...
not sure how they would cope at the 'G' in the Finals...

 

[Drofder]

Geez zones down at Kitty Litter park would make it a fortress and almost guarantee finals berth every year for geelol...
not sure how they would cope at the 'G' in the Finals...

Have we heard anything about how well or not these trial games over the bye rounds went ??

Absurd that you'd try and bring in such radical change without sufficient lead time eg 2 years for clubs to prepare, manage lists etc.

 

[Bemoreboyddog]

Are the new rules a way of stopping the Richmond set-up as having a unfair competitive advantage because the players are just too strong in what they bring in their unique set-up.

Some in the AFL do not like it? Some do not want Richmond too successful? Is it some do not want some home truths to come out that the type of players Richmond have a simply too effective under the current rules for big, tall, slow lumbering forwards in particular?

When was the last time drastic changes like this was brought in to modify the game?

Are others admitting it is very difficult for other teams structures to get the better of Richmond's current structure?

No third man up came in after we won the flag. We’ve struggled big time since. Not just due to that, obviously, but it certainly hasn’t helped.

 

[DoItForCaptBlood]

A player (Masten) has voiced his opposition to the rule changes. One of the 1st players to do so I think.

But better was the Great Man, Bobby Skilton, has really ripped into the AFL with the continual changes and states they need to simply leave the game alone. These are the people who hopefully really have an impact on decisions. The strong advocates for change will of course find a polite way to dismiss the opinions as from 'old and out of touch' explayers, but I hope more legends of the game let Gil and Hocking know, they need to take a seat and stop trying so hard at being campaigners.

Unfortunately Blight is for massive rule changes and is front and centre of the decision makers. But hopefully Lethal, KB, Sheeds take the no change side. Then more retirees from 80s/90s back it up.

Balling it up quickly, reducing interchange and tightening the no prior rule I think I can deal with no problem at all. The netball analogy for the zones needs to be kept up because it hits the for change hard. When Derm said it on 360, Slobbo's face contorted beautifully. And then reprimanded Derm for using 'emotive' words. Loved it!!

 

[Vassp]

This is a topic that frustrates the hell out of me. My $0.02 - let the game evolve on its own.

What is currently happening is that pressure on the Ball has developed more rapidly than the skills of the average player. The pressure ratings have progressively ramped up over the last 3-4 years and skill levels are stagnant in a congested pressurised environment. The result is poor execution which looks awful. The solution is pretty simple - improve the skills (including recruiting for greater skill). If you want to see the solution - watch the first half of our Prelim final last year when GWS could beat our press pretty readily. It was impressive but in the end pressure held sway over the full 120 minutes. By tinkering with the rules now I think we’re actually condemning the game to the acceptance of poor skills whereas I think we should demand its improvement. This will take time but it’s all part of the games evolution.

As a close follower of the round Ball game, AFL is frustrating for its lack of tactical nouse historically (its only recently been addressed in the last 10-15 years) and the testosterone based philosophy to sorting problems is still hugely prevalent. We essentially have a possession based game of skill and brains - but statistically, given the potential rectruiting population, over 18 teams we currently have a shallow gene pool. Soccer has faced the pressure dilemma (eg Borussia Dortmund under Juergen Klopp) but solutions evolved over a few years. By tinkering at the first sight of any problem lessens the integrity of the game, creates more problems than you started with and condemns skill development to stay poor which will definitely hurt the game in the long run. The AFL needs to be patient and watch for evolution. The modern coaches are clever and will solve these problems. And what we are seeing week after week with the Tiges is finals like football which seems to only have merit in everyone’s eyes come September - perplexing!!

In the mean time come and get us!!

Rant over.

Spoken like a scholar, especially the last part about bringing finals footy every game. People complained when Hawthorne was playing keepings off, called it touch footy. But we have all applauded finals type pressure football, player have to earn every possession. Richmond bring that level every of pleasure most weeks and people complain over it because that’s what they do. I don’t care if we if kick 20 goals or 10. I’d rather the game be thrilling. For people who want more goals that become meaningless- go watch basketball (not knocking the game btw).
The competition is closer than ever, and as an earlier poster said we are leagues better overall than teams of yesteryear. If you want proof just watch Richmond from the 90s compared to Carlton of now.

 

[Vassp]

This is a topic that frustrates the hell out of me. My $0.02 - let the game evolve on its own.

What is currently happening is that pressure on the Ball has developed more rapidly than the skills of the average player. The pressure ratings have progressively ramped up over the last 3-4 years and skill levels are stagnant in a congested pressurised environment. The result is poor execution which looks awful. The solution is pretty simple - improve the skills (including recruiting for greater skill). If you want to see the solution - watch the first half of our Prelim final last year when GWS could beat our press pretty readily. It was impressive but in the end pressure held sway over the full 120 minutes. By tinkering with the rules now I think we’re actually condemning the game to the acceptance of poor skills whereas I think we should demand its improvement. This will take time but it’s all part of the games evolution.

As a close follower of the round Ball game, AFL is frustrating for its lack of tactical nouse historically (its only recently been addressed in the last 10-15 years) and the testosterone based philosophy to sorting problems is still hugely prevalent. We essentially have a possession based game of skill and brains - but statistically, given the potential rectruiting population, over 18 teams we currently have a shallow gene pool. Soccer has faced the pressure dilemma (eg Borussia Dortmund under Juergen Klopp) but solutions evolved over a few years. By tinkering at the first sight of any problem lessens the integrity of the game, creates more problems than you started with and condemns skill development to stay poor which will definitely hurt the game in the long run. The AFL needs to be patient and watch for evolution. The modern coaches are clever and will solve these problems. And what we are seeing week after week with the Tiges is finals like football which seems to only have merit in everyone’s eyes come September - perplexing!!

In the mean time come and get us!!

Rant over.

Another stellar post, thank you for the wisdom..

see we do have intelligent followers.