Training Pre-Season 2024

[Vader]

No they didnt. They always name a squad 26. 4 emergencies and the sub came from the emergencies.

Now it looks like they name 3 emergencies but the sub comes from the 23

At the end of the day, the sub used to come from the emergencies. That is no longer the case.

 

[crows dude]

At the end of the day, the sub used to come from the emergencies. That is no longer the case.

Yeh so they name 23 players and three emergencies. Instead of 22 and four. Seems a pointless change. Just get rid of it and have a 5 man bench

 

[Vader]

Yeh so they name 23 players and three emergencies. Instead of 22 and four. Seems a pointless change. Just get rid of it and have a 5 man bench

I prefer going backwards in time... where the entire bench were effectively substitutes - back to when players were on the ground for 100% of games, unless injured (at which point they were effectively subbed out).

5 players on the bench is at least 2 too many.

 

[Bearded Clam]

Fuxkn idiots..

All this will result in is players trying even harder to get hit head high..

You get a free kick and the opportunity to rub it into your opponent that he’s gonna be tribunal bound next week..
in an sly attempt to make him nervous about it and start thinking about that and not the task at hand..

Gillion has handed the reigns to another moron molded perfectly in his own form.. this shit wont stop until it becomes a non contact sport..

 

[Carmo]

On twitter there is some company advertising that they are going to be supplying acceleration sensors to the AFL. It looks like it will be in mouth guards from the pic I glanced at briefly.

I don't mind tightening the rules if things like the sensors which will tell how hard someones head was actually hit comes into play. Least it will be fair for all. Cough McAdam Cough.

 

[George Kramer]

Amendments to AFL Rules

The League has confirmed several rule amendments ahead of the 2024 season

www.afl.com.au

Love how they refer to “home” for the GF. I look forward to us playing a “home” grand final at AO one day

 

[Crow till I die]

Getting lucky: Moneyball theory reveals the AFL teams who’ll rise and fall in 2024

Robbed side primed for top four push; pretender may be exposed: AFL ‘24 sliders, risers revealed

www.foxsports.com.au

Adelaide Crows

2023 record: 11-12, 116.8%

2023 Pythagorean wins: 14.22 (gap of 3.22)


2024 prediction: Improve

And now we get to be positive! Yay!

Pythagoras would make the case Adelaide was a better team than Port Adelaide in 2023, despite the six-win gap between the two, with two Showdown wins for the Crows supporting his story.


But we know how things went for Matthew Nicks

Matthew Nicks

Age

49

Ht

187cm

Wt

88kg

Pos.

Fwd

Career

Season

Last 5

D

13.6

3star

K

9.4

4star

HB

4.2

3star

M

4.1

4star

T

1.7

4star

G

0.7

4star

No current season stats available

D

6.6

2star

K

4.4

2star

HB

2.2

2star

M

2.2

3star

T

1.4

4star

G

0.4

3star

’ men. They lost five games by a kick, including a pair of defeats to premiers Collingwood by a combined three points, plus the absolute robbery that was the Sydney botched goal review game.

Put it this way: against the top four, Adelaide went 3-4 with a percentage of 114.5%. They were right there in the finals race, and should’ve been in September, where they would’ve been every chance to beat Carlton... and then Melbourne was clearly gettable... sorry, we’re only making Crows fans sad again,

It doesn’t have to be just a painful, wasted year though. It was a sign of things to come, and most experts will have Adelaide as a riser in 2024. They’re primed to be the yearly team that makes the leap into the top four - after all, they were already fourth on Pythagorean wins last year.

Some of that is the fact they got to play West Coast twice, boosting their percentage, sure. But you don’t accidentally win a bunch of games by huge margins. Their eighth-biggest win of the year was by 31 points; their eighth-biggest loss of the year was by six.

It’s not all beer and skittles, because their key defensive stocks have been severely weakened by injuries and free agency, but an opening seven weeks which includes five games against teams which finished below them in 2023 should allow them to build a solid base for a finals campaign.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

The Maynard rule.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

Fuxkn idiots..

All this will result in is players trying even harder to get hit head high..

You get a free kick and the opportunity to rub it into your opponent that he’s gonna be tribunal bound next week..
in an sly attempt to make him nervous about it and start thinking about that and not the task at hand..

Gillion has handed the reigns to another moron molded perfectly in his own form.. this s**t wont stop until it becomes a non contact sport..

Apparently players are responsible for accidents... whilst the AFL executive are not even accountable for being competent!

 

[Tex Danger]

Yeh so they name 23 players and three emergencies. Instead of 22 and four. Seems a pointless change. Just get rid of it and have a 5 man bench

It’s how it was done when we used to have subs.

It’s really just to protect the sloane, cotchin type situations where both clubs , knowing that they would be sub chose to name them in the 22 and make them a “late withdrawal” and move to sub as they didn’t want to name them as outs

It’s really just a mindset shift from the sub been seen as an emergency who can be activated to a legitimate part of the selected team (as those coaches said, they didn’t see the player going from the 22 to sub as being an “omission”)

 

[Peter Doherty]

Weren't there some clubs towards the end of last year, who made the decision to always name the sub on the Thursday?

Wouldn't mind if we did that.

 

[Tex Danger]

Weren't there some clubs towards the end of last year, who made the decision to always name the sub on the Thursday?

Wouldn't mind if we did that.

Regularly happened, but I guess when it’s coming from emergencies it’s hard to hide anyway (traveling, held out if reserves etc)

Feel less likely to give that info away in this new set up.

AFL could have just made them name the sub

 

[baldandbroke]

I’d prefer 6 on the bench no concussion sub. Keep the per game substitution limits.

There could be two injuries / concussions per team and it wouldn’t influence the contest or result that badly.

We’d also get to see more players given opportunity to play at the highest level.

 

[Apsaalooke]

I prefer going backwards in time... where the entire bench were effectively substitutes - back to when players were on the ground for 100% of games, unless injured (at which point they were effectively subbed out).

5 players on the bench is at least 2 too many.

The more subs there are the less tired players get, so there's more congestion, more ball ups, more tackles, more flooding.
That's not what fans go to the footy to see.

 

[crowholder]

Apparently players are responsible for accidents... whilst the AFL executive are not even accountable for being competent!

This is common across the board. Not restricted to the AFL. It is sad though.

 

[CrowToon]

I happily support the notion that once a player leaves the ground they are responsible for whatever happens thereafter.

Incidental high contact generally though means they may as well make the tribunal a 9-5 Mon-Fri gig

 

[Vader]

The more subs there are the less tired players get, so there's more congestion, more ball ups, more tackles, more flooding.
That's not what fans go to the footy to see.

That's an interesting twist - the usual argument is the exact reverse. The standard argument is that the more rest they get, the harder they can run when they're on the field, getting to more contests - hence more congestion, and more flooding.

The standard argument is that increasing fatigue reduces congestion, but possibly at the cost of more injuries.

 

[Samcro24]

That's an interesting twist - the usual argument is the exact reverse. The standard argument is that the more rest they get, the harder they can run when they're on the field, getting to more contests - hence more congestion, and more flooding.

The standard argument is that increasing fatigue reduces congestion, but possibly at the cost of more injuries.

That’s what he said

 

[Scorpus]

That's an interesting twist - the usual argument is the exact reverse. The standard argument is that the more rest they get, the harder they can run when they're on the field, getting to more contests - hence more congestion, and more flooding.

The standard argument is that increasing fatigue reduces congestion, but possibly at the cost of more injuries.

I'm not convinced that fatiguing players leads to reduced congestion and a better product.

Coaches have always prioritized defense. I think it's had the effect of deprioritizing highly skilled, athletic players who have poor endurance, and prioritized the more common lower skilled player with endurance. In an environment with forced fatiguing, coaches would rather a player that can get to their defensive position than one that can use skills in the open.

The flow on effect is that in choosing endurance over skill for all but the elite players that can do both, general gameplay is less skilled, less open and more congested because players aren't good enough to clear congestion or burst from packs.

What's compounded this is the umpires refusing to pay incorrect disposal as teams move to the "drop the ball when tackled and get a ball up" method of defense. In addition, the ruck nomination rule and removal of third man up has made it harder to clear the ball from a stoppage, it gives teams more time to get numbers to the contest and (surprise, surprise) increases congestion.

Here's my quick look at scoring and fatiguing players doesn't seem to have worked. The period with 4 on the interchange and no cap (with teams doing like 150 rotations a game) scored nearly 2 goals a game higher than the last few years with a cap.

Of course factors like other rule changes and the introduction of new teams probably influenced this as well

 

[Vader]

That’s what he said

FMD... I really need to learn to read things properly.

You, and Apsaalooke are both absolutely correct.

 

[Brown_DOG68]

I happily support the notion that once a player leaves the ground they are responsible for whatever happens thereafter.

Incidental high contact generally though means they may as well make the tribunal a 9-5 Mon-Fri gig

So you'd be OK with a layer being rubbed out for 1 or 2 matches after taking a screamer where his knee connects with an opponents head?

...and what if his knee connects with a teammates head? Get suspended for that as well. It's probably where this heading.

 

[FR0GGY]

Hopefully that’s 1/3 of the AA forward line

 

[DJ75]

If we can get Thilthorpe up to AA squad level as a forward, we will be near impossible to stop.

 

[CrowToon]

So you'd be OK with a layer being rubbed out for 1 or 2 matches after taking a screamer where his knee connects with an opponents head?

...and what if his knee connects with a teammates head? Get suspended for that as well. It's probably where this heading.

Nah not really the marking contest so much as the Maynard stuff. But i get that there begins to be grey areas and that's hard.

 

[Mostyn]

The more subs there are the less tired players get, so there's more congestion, more ball ups, more tackles, more flooding.
That's not what fans go to the footy to see.

Maybe, but it also means less tired skill errors, more speed of ball use, faster rebound from turnovers etc.