- Thread starter
- #51
Even getting rid of the bounce (just throwing it up every time) would save time. No recalled bounces or bounce setup time
-
AFLW 2024 - Round 8 - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
Game time "more than likely" to be reduced from 2012
- Thread starter grimface_87
- Start date
- Tagged users None
Even getting rid of the bounce (just throwing it up every time) would save time. No recalled bounces or bounce setup time
- Feb 21, 2006
- 21,143
- 20,164
- AFL Club
- Melbourne
- Other Teams
- Turtles NYJets Celtics Spurs Fake Sports
I agree with the sentiments in this thread. Since when has any supporter ever complained that the game is too long? When has any player, coach or fitness staff member ever brought it up as an issue? Just another in the long line of shit ****sticks like Demetriou & Anderson have shoved down our throats. Why do we cop it?
Everyone says they do such a great job because they got $1.25B for the TV rights. They didn't get that WE GOT THAT. We are the people who buy record memberships for the clubs we love, turn up week in, week out, take out Foxtel subscriptions to watch more games and tune in each Friday night to watch a footy game we have been waiting for since the last weekend. The fans make this game as popular as it is, with the popularity of the game any monkey with half a brain could get the money for the TV rights.
I am seriously sick to death of these idiots screwing with our game. Go back and watch some games from the late 80's early 90's. There's a reason the time-on rule was changed because teams used to kill the ball and play along the boundary trying to get throw-ins and ball-ups for the last 10 or sometimes even 20 minutes to kill the game once they had a big enough lead. Northey's Demons teams were specialists at it and won the 1987 Night Grand Final basically using this tactic for the whole last quarter. Bring this back and the second halves of games will be stoppage after stoppage and once possession is obtained kick to kick around the defensive half of the ground. Yeah that's sure to sky-rocket ratings and draw fans to the game.
As said, you want to trim time from the game - get rid of the bounce, have the umpires ball the thing up straight after a stoppage like they sued to, get rid of the green light for commercials after the goals, stop bringing players back "over their mark" to line up with the goals when they are kicking in from the back pocket etc etc Over-officiating is what creeps the time up and is ruining the game as a spectacle, not the quarters being too long.
Everyone says they do such a great job because they got $1.25B for the TV rights. They didn't get that WE GOT THAT. We are the people who buy record memberships for the clubs we love, turn up week in, week out, take out Foxtel subscriptions to watch more games and tune in each Friday night to watch a footy game we have been waiting for since the last weekend. The fans make this game as popular as it is, with the popularity of the game any monkey with half a brain could get the money for the TV rights.
I am seriously sick to death of these idiots screwing with our game. Go back and watch some games from the late 80's early 90's. There's a reason the time-on rule was changed because teams used to kill the ball and play along the boundary trying to get throw-ins and ball-ups for the last 10 or sometimes even 20 minutes to kill the game once they had a big enough lead. Northey's Demons teams were specialists at it and won the 1987 Night Grand Final basically using this tactic for the whole last quarter. Bring this back and the second halves of games will be stoppage after stoppage and once possession is obtained kick to kick around the defensive half of the ground. Yeah that's sure to sky-rocket ratings and draw fans to the game.
As said, you want to trim time from the game - get rid of the bounce, have the umpires ball the thing up straight after a stoppage like they sued to, get rid of the green light for commercials after the goals, stop bringing players back "over their mark" to line up with the goals when they are kicking in from the back pocket etc etc Over-officiating is what creeps the time up and is ruining the game as a spectacle, not the quarters being too long.
Where is the consultation with fans as promised last month?
It's a spectator sport, not a business invented to make administrators richer. Fools.
It's a spectator sport, not a business invented to make administrators richer. Fools.
Stock standard AFL meeting concludes.
Demetriou notices there's still two minutes until the meeting is officially meant to conclude.
Everyone twiddles their thumbs and looks at one another for a good minute.
A small voice in the background utters "W-we.....could, um...reduce game time, or something"
Demetriou: "Brilliant, that'll do for today everyone. Seeya next week"
Demetriou notices there's still two minutes until the meeting is officially meant to conclude.
Everyone twiddles their thumbs and looks at one another for a good minute.
A small voice in the background utters "W-we.....could, um...reduce game time, or something"
Demetriou: "Brilliant, that'll do for today everyone. Seeya next week"
Consultation with fans? From the AFL? Good one.
"It has been something discussed and monitored by the laws of the games committee and we will get more feedback from clubs, supporters and broadcasters."
- Anderson
http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/208/newsid/120612/default.aspx
The recent AFL survey was the perfect opportunity to gauge public opinion on this, but it was apparently not raised. The suggestion did make an appearance in the 2010 survey where, IIRC, it proved highly unpopular.
Everything I've read so far leads me to believe the decision has already been made - perhaps several months ago as part of the TV rights agreement - with only the details to be finalised.
Just leave it alone, ****!!
All this bs about 35 minute quarters; how many have we actually had this year?
And reducing the length will reduce fatigue, so we'll need another rule change next year to fix that.
All this bs about 35 minute quarters; how many have we actually had this year?
And reducing the length will reduce fatigue, so we'll need another rule change next year to fix that.
Wouldn't this basically completely stuff up virtually all stats/records?
Riders of Rohan
Club Legend
Not really, game time was reduced in 94 was it?
Yeah, but the trade-off was to correct an anachronism by adding time when the umpire called for a bounce, or when the ball went out of bounds. It was a positive change as it negated the time-wasting benefit of forcing a stoppage, as well as time-wasting during the stoppage itself. I don't recall noticing any net effect on the duration of the game.
I think time wasting is further negated by umpires calling 'play on' 'play on' to guys who want to hold on to the ball to count out time
It was that final between Adelaide and Essendon in 93, when after Essendon hit the front, they continuously punched the ball back over the line to count down the time
Thereby breaking the hearts of many in the city of Adelaide while they were powerless watching the clock tick down to zero, life ebbing away to the crows one would say
But the rules have been changed to negate those tactics where 1. if you punch the ball back over the line on the full its termed out of bounds on the full, 2. the deliberate rule has been tightened so much more with the ruling of 'no one in the vicinity' free kick 3. a player who thinks chipping the ball around to teammates and then having a drink from the trainer because hes thirsty now cant because they have to 'play on play on' after 10 seconds
The finals are fine, but when you get frivolous Regular season games like Fremantle and the Western Bulldogs in Round 24 where neither team had anything to play for - and its still 3 and a half hours to get through pointlessness, something needs to be done!
Shorten the game!
The finals are fine, but when you get frivolous Regular season games like Fremantle and the Western Bulldogs in Round 24 where neither team had anything to play for - and its still 3 and a half hours to get through pointlessness, something needs to be done!
Shorten the game!
Aside from the fact that the above is a criticism of the length of the season itself...where do you get 3.5 hours from? Go to a game starting at 2:10 and you're out of there by 4:50. Shorten the breaks if necessary.
Reduce half time to 10 minutes. Reduce the break between bounces to 15 seconds, not 30+. Don't call time off and on for things like ball ups.
Right there you probably pull back 20-30 minutes of actual time from a game without reducing the football content.
Right there you probably pull back 20-30 minutes of actual time from a game without reducing the football content.
Blue and Gold Blood
Norm Smith Medallist
get the **** out adrian anderson you shit ****. Stop ruining our game!!!
- Apr 29, 2009
- 2,407
- 2,815
- AFL Club
- North Melbourne
- Other Teams
- Waterford GAA, Glenorchy, Hob (BBL)
The finals are fine, but when you get frivolous Regular season games like Fremantle and the Western Bulldogs in Round 24 where neither team had anything to play for - and its still 3 and a half hours to get through pointlessness, something needs to be done!
Shorten the game!
Surely, then, the problem lies with supporters, players, coaches and administrators with some ridiculous idea of what constitutes "meaning" in a game - what there is to play for. The problem is that we've stopped thinking, for the most part, in terms of individual team v team contests, and matches only matter when they affect our whole season, chances at the eight, chances at draft picks (if you're that way inclined), etc. It's a mentality issue.
As others have said, the old changes made sense: time-on in certain situations to prevent time-wasting tactics. This proposal is nothing short of on-a-whim change-for-the-sake-of-change alteration.
by (consultation with) 'fans', i think AD and AA really mean television executives. and by 'going too long', i think they really mean it's not as neatly packaged into timeslots. afl fans do come up with some reactionary solutions and their own crazy rule changes but shortening the matches has never been something brought up en masse if at all.
to shorten the game by 10 minutes, for example... i fail to see how that is for any other benefit than a telecaster. 3 extra minutes of ads to the hour. to say people are complaining of game length and then reduce it by 10 or so minutes overall is farcical.
for all we know, feedback is along the lines of 'did not show the song at the end of the game'.
to shorten the game by 10 minutes, for example... i fail to see how that is for any other benefit than a telecaster. 3 extra minutes of ads to the hour. to say people are complaining of game length and then reduce it by 10 or so minutes overall is farcical.
for all we know, feedback is along the lines of 'did not show the song at the end of the game'.
- Feb 11, 2011
- 1,781
- 1,419
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
Is there anything at all that we can do as supporters save for boycotting games/Foxtel packages?
Do we have any sort of avenue to impact the game? (Not counting the AFL supporters survey was embarrasingly bias)
Yet another major change to our game that will be introduced with no input from us.
Do we have any sort of avenue to impact the game? (Not counting the AFL supporters survey was embarrasingly bias)
Yet another major change to our game that will be introduced with no input from us.
Suspect it's more to fit it into a timeslot.
So a game finishes at 10:30, instead of 10:47.
also for:
1. When the ball goes out of bounds
2. When the ball goes through for a score
cleomenes
Cancelled
- Nov 18, 2010
- 1,483
- 2,052
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
As a number of us have noted, this proposed change has nothing to do with football and everything to do with television. The suggestions people have put forward reduce on field time but not playing time. The players probably quite like the delays that allow a few seconds to regain wind. Why remove them?
As others have noted, the real increase in match time has come from the addition of ad-break time after goals. This is really noticeable here in Tassie where our local TV station doesn't inflict after goal ads on us (bless them).
TV has created the problem. Let it live with it. Supporters just want to watch football. We don't want the game fiddled with incessantly by committees looking to justify their existences.
We don't like to see the CEO bullying the players and clubs to follow a vision that only he has.
LEAVE THE GAME ALONE.
As others have noted, the real increase in match time has come from the addition of ad-break time after goals. This is really noticeable here in Tassie where our local TV station doesn't inflict after goal ads on us (bless them).
TV has created the problem. Let it live with it. Supporters just want to watch football. We don't want the game fiddled with incessantly by committees looking to justify their existences.
We don't like to see the CEO bullying the players and clubs to follow a vision that only he has.
LEAVE THE GAME ALONE.
Riders of Rohan
Club Legend
97 second ad break in our first match against St. Kilda this year. Nearly all of them went for over a minute.
Live or on delay?
Honestly, I've never sat at a game thinking that the break after scoring a goal is too long.
