Potential rule changes- a discussion paper for clubs

[nobbyiscool]

sorry if there's already a thread- i couldn't find one on the first 3 pages...

Adrian Anderson has released a discussion paper for clubs for the annual review of the game. There's discussion for a couple of rule changes on there, being

- interchanges, and whether to limit their use
- rushed behinds
- kicking the ball backwards

now, for my opinion- i think there's merit in changes to rules in all these areas. but does the afl think it will kill them to leave the rules alone, just for a couple of years?

its screams amatuerism to me for them to keep saying 'this is wrong, we must change it'.

 

[memberforever]

sorry if there's already a thread- i couldn't find one on the first 3 pages...

Adrian Anderson has released a discussion paper for clubs for the annual review of the game. There's discussion for a couple of rule changes on there, being

- interchanges, and whether to limit their use
- rushed behinds
- kicking the ball backwards

now, for my opinion- i think there's merit in changes to rules in all these areas. but does the afl think it will kill them to leave the rules alone, just for a couple of years?

its screams amatuerism to me for them to keep saying 'this is wrong, we must change it'.

Its an absolute joke that another rule change is being considered.

MODS WE NEED A POLE ON THIS AND RESULTS SHOULD BE SENT TO THE AFL

 

[Lucev23]

To be honest The only one I would half consider is the interchange one.

 

[summerthebat]

I don't think any of those rules should be changed.

 

[drewie_rama]

just leave the game alone

 

[Flukey!]

FFS, leave the friggin game alone.

Deadset morons will ruin our game

 

[Chewy]

It's good to see that the AFL are prepared to canvas opinions rather than make changes and thrust them on the competition without consultation. This is an improvement on their previous modus operandi. But I wonder if the clubs will be self-serving or will they do what's best for the game?


Interchanges, and whether to limit their use

No.

Rested players = better quality football
Tired players = inferior football, cheap goals

They think this will stop flooding, but it won't. Not one bit.

This rule change will spell the end of the "natural" footballer
If they bring this in, eventually all players will need to be elite endurance athletes.



- (Deliberately) rushed behinds

The number of rushed behinds has DOUBLED in the last 3 seasons.
It's a plague. Bad for the game. Ruins the enjoyment of fans
Rewards mediocrity.

Take away their reward (possession of the ball) and call for a bounce.

Overnight, the number of deliberately rushed behinds will disappear tenfold.
Please, please, please, bring this rule change on!

Don't award 3 points!
That would give the umpires too much power to decide the result of close games.
It would also alter the way we've scored games for over 100 years.

Take the ball off the squibs and bounce it.



No Mark for Kicking the ball backwards

Yeah, why not? This won't affect things greatly anyway.
Teams kicking backwards are usually in hurry to switch and play on anyway.

The rule change will stop teams milking the clock in an unfair manner.

 

[BIGBEZ]

To be honest The only one I would half consider is the interchange one.

It is getting out of hand, a bit of Gridiron feel is starting to creep in!

In the old days, if a player came off, he stayed off, my old man told me stories that he had to lean across the boundry to get stiched up, then played on!


Then again, my old man told me he used to walk 20 miles to school bare foot in the middle of winter, carrying his school shoes so they wouldnt get scuffed!

 

[ChrisFooty]

reverse the hands in the back rule please.

No. No more rule changes.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

I dont think play-on for a backwards kick will have a detrimental effect on the game. If a team wants to deliberately kick backwards, call it play on. I'm happy with the rule change.

Rushed behinds - leave alone. Already teams have rushed too many times this season and its cost them wins. The coaches will sort this out. If anything its got worse because of the automatic kick-in. The best solution is to get rid of the immediate kick-in and bring back the old rule of kicking in after the umpire has waved the flag, and the rushed behinds will dry up. The talk about the rushed behinds is a classic example of one rule change forcing another.

Interchange - leave it alone. Getting rid of the automatic kickin will give players a chance to catch breath,and maybe there would be slighktly fewer interchanges.

 

[SodaPop]

I peez me off rules changing every year!
They wanted to include the "No mark for backward kicks" last year but felt they were making too many changes at once. They'll definetly introduce it this year!
I say p1ss off the hands in the back and bring in the backward kick rule, then no more changes for 5 years!

 

[Footylover1]

sorry if there's already a thread- i couldn't find one on the first 3 pages...

Adrian Anderson has released a discussion paper for clubs for the annual review of the game. There's discussion for a couple of rule changes on there, being

- interchanges, and whether to limit their use
- rushed behinds
- kicking the ball backwards

now, for my opinion- i think there's merit in changes to rules in all these areas. but does the afl think it will kill them to leave the rules alone, just for a couple of years?

its screams amatuerism to me for them to keep saying 'this is wrong, we must change it'.

Why does this AFL administration always insist on making bloody rule changes for? Leave the game alone as it is for pete's sake.

If there has to be a couple of rule changes it should be getting rid of the "Hands in the Back" rule and bringing in limited interchange bench moves and the kicking the ball backwards rule.

Please AFL, do not bring in the 3 points for a rushed behind or the supergoal rule, do not change the scoring system. I have hard enough time explaining the scores to my American friends as it is. lol

LEAVE THE SCORES AS THEY ARE AFL!!!

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

- (Deliberately) rushed behinds

The number of rushed behinds has DOUBLED in the last 3 seasons.
It's a plague. Bad for the game. Ruins the enjoyment of fans
Rewards mediocrity.

Take away their reward (possession of the ball) and call for a bounce.

Overnight, the number of deliberately rushed behinds will disappear tenfold.
Please, please, please, bring this rule change on!

Don't award 3 points!
That would give the umpires too much power to decide the result of close games.
It would also alter the way we've scored games for over 100 years.

Take the ball off the squibs and bounce it.

The reward (immediate possession of a new ball out of a bucket when your opponents are out of position) is much bigger than it used to be (possession of the ball after the crowd's given it back and after the umpire has waved his flag and opponents have had time to man up). Best way to get rid of the reward is get rid of the unfair play-on rule.

 

[BIGBEZ]

I dont think play-on for a backwards kick will have a detrimental effect on the game. If a team wants to deliberately kick backwards, call it play on. I'm happy with the rule change.

Rushed behinds - leave alone. Already teams have rushed too many times this season and its cost them wins. The coaches will sort this out. If anything its got worse because of the automatic kick-in. The best solution is to get rid of the immediate kick-in and bring back the old rule of kicking in after the umpire has waved the flag, and the rushed behinds will dry up. The talk about the rushed behinds is a classic example of one rule change forcing another.

Interchange - leave it alone. Getting rid of the automatic kickin will give players a chance to catch breath,and maybe there would be slighktly fewer interchanges.

Good points, there seems to always be a domino effect with rule changes, new rule, new prob!

 

[BIGBEZ]

Definatley get rid of the deliberate out if bounds rule, as a junior, we where taught to 'hit the boundry line' if in bad enough trouble, it was part of football, it is impossible to enforce, I see every week, many, many deliberate out of bound plays, disguised by a 40m kick, its a crap rule, get rid of it!

 

[Port01]

The reward (immediate possession of a new ball out of a bucket when your opponents are out of position) is much bigger than it used to be (possession of the ball after the crowd's given it back and after the umpire has waved his flag and opponents have had time to man up). Best way to get rid of the reward is get rid of the unfair play-on rule.

I agree, but it seems that unforeseen results of past rule changes need to be fixed with brand new and totally different rule changes. It is a vicious cycle which allows oxygen thieves like Adrian Anderson to justify their existence.

 

[Dean3]

One thing I would say about rushed behinds is that in my memory we haven't seen the deliberately rushed behind from a "point kick-in" as much as we have this season. IMO, if you fail to take a kick-in, get called to play on and then rush another behind, the behind should count, and there should be a ball-up 15m out directly in front. If a team is 5 points in front with a minute to go, there is nothing to stop them repeating this charade 3 or 4 times and running the clock down to zero.

Otherwise, no other changes.

 

[catsgirl17]

Leave the game alone

 

[4#Didak#4]

The only rule changes I want to see is reversing some of the recent new rules & interpretations!

Things that annoy me in the current game:
The push in the back rule interpretation - has been flogged to death I know but the fact is it is impossible for umpires to consistently umpire this. I like what they are trying to acheive with it but the negatives outweigh the positives. Therefore go back to the way it was or get an extra 2 or 3 umpires (god help us)

Give the poor guy going after the ball a fair go. So many times the guy going in to make the play in contested situations gets pinged for holding the ball. Playmakers are penalised. Results in players sitting off a contest waiting for someone to jump on instead of going after it themselves. The intention of penalising in this way was to stop continuous masses of players causing ball ups - fair enough but the easiest way to fix this is borrow from Rugby Union - when you hit the ground you have to release the ball - hands off it! If you have hands on the ball while on the ground you get pinged. If you keep your feet you are given the chance to get rid of it.

The Quick Kick In. Kind of like it but hate it as well. This is from Gaelic footy & makes the game flow well plus is good for the TV coverage. But it is causing other problems such as rushed behinds and encouraging the uncontested style of footy. Lets not do the 3 point thing as that will just casue some other problem. Go back to how it was. One of the great tactical parts of the game was the kick out setups & it encouraged more contests - who doesnt love contested football!

Anyway they are my gripes.

 

[jerry springer]

Leave the game alone

leave the game alone

 

[Chewy]

The reward (immediate possession of a new ball out of a bucket when your opponents are out of position) is much bigger than it used to be (possession of the ball after the crowd's given it back and after the umpire has waved his flag and opponents have had time to man up). Best way to get rid of the reward is get rid of the unfair play-on rule.

This was exactly why I argued against the quick kick-in rule.
I argued that it would encourage even more deliberately rushed behinds (and it has)

A soft rule change would be to say that if the ump called it deliberate, the full back should wait until the umpire has waved his flag.
Slow them down. Take away the added advantage they've been given. This is the least we could do.

But this still rewards them for their cowardice. They still gain an unopposed possession.

I would strip the ball off them. You'd find they'd stop doing it altogether.
They'd lose the benefit. Not only would they concede 1 point, but they'd be risking potentially another 1 point, or 6 points.

The purpose of rules is to get players to play to the spirit of the game.

We penalise players for deliberately taking the ball over the boundary line, excpet if it's between their own behind posts.
Then we penalise them a measly 1 point and hand them the ball.

 

[And_ROOS]

Goddamn it the rushed behinds are the AFLs fault for wanting this basketball version of football. If they didnt introduce the immediate play on rule then this wouldnt be an issue and the tactic of a defensive set up would return. Why do we have to tolerate this? No other sport in the world cops this nonsense.

Hell when they put these new rule changes forward in local football everyone laughed them off. Why? Because they are rubbish. Fire Demetriou and Anderson now, they have done nothing for the game at all. All this talk about the games finances, ANYONE could have brokered a deal with 7 and 10 for the rights.

 

[Chewy]

The only rule changes I want to see is reversing some of the recent new rules & interpretations!

Things that annoy me in the current game:
The push in the back rule interpretation - has been flogged to death I know but the fact is it is impossible for umpires to consistently umpire this. I like what they are trying to acheive with it but the negatives outweigh the positives. Therefore go back to the way it was or get an extra 2 or 3 umpires (god help us)

Give the poor guy going after the ball a fair go. So many times the guy going in to make the play in contested situations gets pinged for holding the ball. Playmakers are penalised. Results in players sitting off a contest waiting for someone to jump on instead of going after it themselves. The intention of penalising in this way was to stop continuous masses of players causing ball ups - fair enough but the easiest way to fix this is borrow from Rugby Union - when you hit the ground you have to release the ball - hands off it! If you have hands on the ball while on the ground you get pinged. If you keep your feet you are given the chance to get rid of it.

The Quick Kick In. Kind of like it but hate it as well. This is from Gaelic footy & makes the game flow well plus is good for the TV coverage. But it is causing other problems such as rushed behinds and encouraging the uncontested style of footy. Lets not do the 3 point thing as that will just casue some other problem. Go back to how it was. One of the great tactical parts of the game was the kick out setups & it encouraged more contests - who doesnt love contested football!

Anyway they are my gripes.

Stop worrying about the unfair free kicks for one second.
There are only six or seven times per game where this annoys you.

Think about how these rules have altered the way the game is played.


At EVERY marking contest - players are jumping up for the high mark
No more cheating - no more hands in the back (not as much anyway)
More exciting marking contests.

At EVERY "in and under contest" - players dive on the ball and flick the ball out in the blink of an eye.
No more ball-up after ball-up after ball-up after ball-up.....
It's an unfair rule, but it's improved the game out of sight.


People spend too much time whinging about a couple of free kicks.

They need to look at the big picture.

 

[plugger47]

Goddamn it the rushed behinds are the AFLs fault for wanting this basketball version of football. If they didnt introduce the immediate play on rule then this wouldnt be an issue and the tactic of a defensive set up would return. Why do we have to tolerate this? No other sport in the world cops this nonsense.

Hell when they put these new rule changes forward in local football everyone laughed them off. Why? Because they are rubbish. Fire Demetriou and Anderson now, they have done nothing for the game at all. All this talk about the games finances, ANYONE could have brokered a deal with 7 and 10 for the rights.

Well said. And just ANYONE did broker the deal.

 

[LVAK]

Its an absolute joke that another rule change is being considered.

MODS WE NEED A POLE ON THIS AND RESULTS SHOULD BE SENT TO THE AFL

Aren't you just throwing the baby out with the bathwater because people don't like the 'hands in the back rule'?

Our game has a long history of rule changes. Ranting that we don't need them would be to dismiss many changes that have been very worthwhile. We just have to be careful about which ones to implement and not be afraid to change ones that didn't work.

The only one I agree with is the kicking backwards rule. It has been trialled in the VFL and the only feedback that I've heard is positive. The only problem with this one is on an oval shaped ground, what is backwards?

I don't mind rushed behinds in general play but maybe you could ban them from an exisiting kick-out