Rushed rule will improve-I Dont think so Gieschen!

[bards]

I hate the fact that the commissioners get full control over the game. I know that they are elected by the clubs and that the club boards are elected by members, but it still sucks. Even clubs, ours included have their own agenda's when it comes to rule changes. Different coaches at different times see a benefit for their current team, and support a rule. Clarko for instance is supposed to be behind this rule as they think that the most dangerous forward lines will benefit the most. This is why, the "we vote for the board, who vote for the commission" doesn't work. It doesn't matter who we put onto a board, at the end of the day, we have no say on rule changes. Yet, it is us, the fans/members/supporters that make the game what it is. Most people I have spoken to, from all different clubs don't like the game being messed with, yet "it's supported" by clubs. Hogwash!
Imagine if The EPL clubs could get together and change rules in Soccer. You can't even imagine it, the game is pure and doesn't need changing. AFL on the other hand I would rather watch anytime, so why does it need to be changed? I think TV is partly responsible, because the game does look worst on TV. When someone kicks backwards on TV, all you can see if where he kicks it, and people start sooking about going backwards. When you're at the game though you can see the open space that is being brought into play by the backward kick. The AFL need to realise that the game itself, Australian Rules Football, is not actually there game. They are the premier league, but decision they make on rules end up filterering through and effect everyone.
Now, I have been rambling on, but my point is... "If it aint broken (and its not), don't fix it! - And if you think its broken, ask those the use it (the fans) and they will tell you its not (as shown by record crowd numbers and record memberships)

 

[Pessimistic]

I can see the equivalent of a corner in soocer evolving in footy.

Just blaze away at goal or go for a 'dribble out in the pocket.

The worse result for attacking team is apoint - the defenders get a kick out.

once there is a throw in within the pocket arc, set up to 'sweat' the defenders unlit they concede another throw in or even better a deliberate OOB or Bingo a free kick at goal (with much better percentage returns than a corner kick in soccer.

is that what we want to see ?

 

[brew]

What a load of tripe

Say Guerra has the ball and wants to concede a rushed behind, can he stand in front of the line and wait to be tackled or bumped over?

 

[noosa hawk mad]

What can we do as supporters to stop this Rule is there any thing we can do ??????

 

[carntheroos4eva]

What can we do as supporters to stop this Rule is there any thing we can do ??????

Nothing.
Learn the rules.

 

[carntheroos4eva]

What a load of tripe

Say Guerra has the ball and wants to concede a rushed behind, can he stand in front of the line and wait to be tackled or bumped over?

He can kick it to himself and play on.

Yes but he will be penalised holding the ball if tackled.

It's not a load of tripe.
Umpiring footy isn't a load of tripe. It is fun and enjoyable. Learn the rules, It's like learning how to cook a new meal that you haven't had before.

 

[Matt Murder]

What a load of tripe

Say Guerra has the ball and wants to concede a rushed behind, can he stand in front of the line and wait to be tackled or bumped over?

That was my line of thinking. Have a designated guy inches inside the field of play and wait for him to be pushed tackled bumped molested over the line. Problem solved.

 

[Mr Meeseeks]

What can we do as supporters to stop this Rule is there any thing we can do ??????

I doubt it.

This makes me so freakin angry.

 

[Mr Meeseeks]

That was my line of thinking. Have a designated guy inches inside the field of play and wait for him to be pushed tackled bumped molested over the line. Problem solved.

Yup. Then in 2 years the rules committee will have another knee-jerk reaction and introduce yet another change.

They dont seem to realise that clubs are always going to try and exploit the rules and every change they make will be exploited, leading to more changes as we slowly drift further and further from the game we know and love.

****ers.

 

[apiro]

I'm not too worried whether they introduce this rule or not. Clarko is the most adaptable of all AFL coaches so it might just work to our advantage.

 

[RogerC]

The rule is a stupid one, granted. But at least they haven't gone overboard with the application of it. To judge by the way they're interpreting it, you'd have to be absolutely blatant in order to give away the free. If that keeps up, then I won't be too concerned.

I'm trying to recall the rushed behinds in the GF. The most blatant ones I can think of where one where Guerra had a free from an out-on-the-full, waited and waited for a free player and then stepped over the line - that was in the second quarter. There was one where somebody got a free kick in the third, the telecast cut away to Harley in the rooms, and the next thing you knew we'd run the ball back about 50 metres for a rushed behind. There was one Birchall walked back over the line in the third as well, from a mark about 15 metres out. And a mark to Williams in the last, where he ran back about 20 metres to rush a behind.

I reckon those four were unnecessary. There might have been others, but I can't really think of any. Not when we were under no pressure at all. With those four we were just being overly careful. If it's those sorts of things they're planning on penalising, I'm not too fussed.

But the thing is, those rushed behinds only happened because we were in a Grand Final, and were intent on taking absolutely no chances - great way of calming nerves, and keeping everyone focussed. In the general run of the season, you don't usually see it.

But I still think the rule is bad for the game. And as Jason Dunstall pointed out the other night, it actually makes the game uglier. There's this mad scramble in front of goal, everyone intent on locking the ball in. At least a rushed behind frees the game up immediately, and brings the ball into the middle of the ground reasonably quickly.

 

[carntheroos4eva]

What our players need to do is to smother the ball when a defender tries to handball the ball through the goals we should try and get our guys to block the path through so that the player doesn't do that.

 

[The Kipster]

What a load of tripe

Say Guerra has the ball and wants to concede a rushed behind, can he stand in front of the line and wait to be tackled or bumped over?

great point Brew

typical Geish, the last of the great comb-overs has done it again

 

[noosa hawk mad]

I'm not too worried whether they introduce this rule or not. Clarko is the most adaptable of all AFL coaches so it might just work to our advantage.

Yes I'm sure our master Coach will make it work to our advantage BUT for the game we all love it is being killing slowing rule by rule IMHO!

 

[hawker5]

As far as I am concerned the rush behind scenario is as a direct result of the rule change forcing the game to be played at a quicker pace. Today you will hear the umpire call play on after 5 seconds therefore the player with the ball has no opportunity but take the ball over the line.

NO MORE RULE CHANGES

 

[Splash]

Great.I wonder what new rule we really need will come in next season.

 

[Adelaide Hawk]

I wonder ......

1. Would this have been an issue had the Cats won the GF?

2. Has this rule change occured as an over-reaction from angry Rules Committee people because they took a pasting at the bookies.

3. After the plethora of rules changes over the years in the name of "improving the game", why it has gone backwards in terms of being a spectacle.

 

[Dragz]

What a load of tripe

Say Guerra has the ball and wants to concede a rushed behind, can he stand in front of the line and wait to be tackled or bumped over?

As i've mentioned in other threads, guaranteed that this will happen sooner or later to someone. Then we'll have a ridiculous situation where someone will be standing there with the ball and the forward won't want to tackle them because then they'll allow the quick kick out of defense.

 

[Spursfan]

Yup. Then in 2 years the rules committee will have another knee-jerk reaction and introduce yet another change.

Spot on

I want to know what the end game is in all this ?? what do they actually want the game to look like? Its sad i sometimes hope the game's suffers in popularity so these peanuts running it get the message...

 

[timhawx]

Maybe they should just change the rules so the player kicking out has to wait till the umpires have signalled the point and the field umpire signals them to play the ball ...... LOL

New rule means someone will come up with a new tactic ...its only a matter of time.

I can feel a new flood coming on

 

[Psycosis]

The main problem that i have with the rule.What do you class as rushed, it's all or nothing.That's why i class it as " CRAP RULE " the ump have enough too worry about.Leave the rules alone they fix themselves.

 

[raff23]

As far as I am concerned the rush behind scenario is as a direct result of the rule change forcing the game to be played at a quicker pace. Today you will hear the umpire call play on after 5 seconds therefore the player with the ball has no opportunity but take the ball over the line.

NO MORE RULE CHANGES

Absolutely spot on mate , As i have stated in another thread this is the real issue which the AFL are either choosing to ignore or are too stupid to realise that it is one of the main reasons there are alot of rushed behinds, go back to the 15 second rule FFS at least give teams a chance to spot a target somewhere.