Someone seriously needs to change the direction of the game before it's too late.

[RedLegs#5]

This game is becoming extremely agitating to watch.

Daniel Chick summed it up on the field today..."It's not netball" (or something to that effect). How is it possible that AFL players are having to resort to saying such things?!

I fully understand the AFL wanting to appeal to future generations. I know they want more and more kids to play the game. BUT, you have to allow contact!

This hand in the back rule is beyond ridiculous. It's frustrating supporters and football experts alike. There is no consistency because there cannot be consistency. The umpires know if they pay it all the time they'll be involved in the game way too much. It occurs nearly every play. So, they pay it every so often, thus making it look beyond ridiculous. You can't blame them though...it's an extremely difficult rule to moderate. How can you moderate one of a footballer’s most basic and natural reactions, to protect their space?

Head touching! Ok, of course you can't hit a player in the head. But when players duck and someone happens to touch a hair on their left eyebrow....how is that a free kick!? Surely we can't be that precious!? I go for Melbourne but I completely agree with Chick's comments today after his BARBARIC sheppard. Players are slowly learning how to milk the rule as well, thus creating something no one wants to see...diving. Peter Bell is a good example of this (sorry freo fans...but it's the truth).

And holding the ball?!?! It's getting to the stage where MOST of these decisions are ridiculous. We allowed a few silly decisions in it’s first year and then slowly let it trickle into a few more soft decisions…but now…they’re just everywhere. Players who go and get the ball are being punished. It's becoming easier and easier for soft fringe players to shine simply because they no longer need to get the ball first, just hold the ball into their tougher and more desperate opponent. However, once again, the umpires cannot be blamed.

It seems as if these rules are slipping underneath our guard. They are being created and enforced at a slow but steady pace, and will, without recognition, forever be apart of, and ruin our game.

This sport will lose its popularity if these rules stay/ are added on to (and there will be more rules).

Do what you can. Write letters, call up radio stations.

GO AWAY DEMETRIOU!

 

[Demonheart]

That free paid against Chick was an absolute joke.

 

[Quinz]

It was a complete joke, a perfectly legal shepard, and I would say that even if it wasn't one of our players.

 

[Mickdog]

So whats the option?

Allow hands on the back? Allow pushing in the back? How can you pinpoint a diference?

If a player go's high then its a high tackle. I would prefer not to worry about it and scrap that but no sport in this modern world can allow anycontact with the head. It can cause death.

Personally I would go one way with holding the ball. If you don't dispose the ball correctly its a free kick. No bullshit about prior crap or whatever they call it. If you don't dispose you get pinged

 

[RedLegs#5]

So whats the option?

Allow hands on the back? Allow pushing in the back? How can you pinpoint a diference?

If a player go's high then its a high tackle. I would prefer not to worry about it and scrap that but no sport in this modern world can allow anycontact with the head. It can cause death.

Personally I would go one way with holding the ball. If you don't dispose the ball correctly its a free kick. No bullshit about prior crap or whatever they call it. If you don't dispose you get pinged

1. Moderate hands in the back how it used to be moderated. If the umpire believes a footballer has UNFAIRLY and EXCESSIVELY dealt with his opponent, i.e. punching arms, pulling jumpers, ACTUALLY pushing in the back, then it's a free kick. Are you telling me you didn’t enjoy tussles between Carey and Jokovich, Salvagni and Lloyd? It wasn’t hard to judge an unfair spoil before…it’s no harder now.

2. There's a massive difference between hitting/ tackling someone head high and TOUCHING someone head high. It's not hard to see. What happened to common sense?

 

[Adelaide Hawk]

Got news for you ... it's already too late. The game has never been worse to watch, and yet we have record crowds in attendance and record TV rights deals. We, as a sporting public, only have ourselves to blame.

Personally, I rarely go to the footy these days because I hate the way the game is played, but there are thousands of people out there who are supporting the modern trends.

 

[RedLegs#5]

Got news for you ... it's already too late. The game has never been worse to watch, and yet we have record crowds in attendance and record TV rights deals. We, as a sporting public, only have ourselves to blame.

Personally, I rarely go to the footy these days because I hate the way the game is played, but there are thousands of people out there who are supporting the modern trends by continuing to support it.

In some sad way...I agree. People are coming out of the woodwork though. Today Barassi wrote an article (albeit not about the right points imo). People can see something is wrong with the game. I hope legends of the game will make more of a stance about this softness when they leave it (i.e. Archer).

 

[Mickdog]

1. Moderate hands in the back how it used to be moderated. If the umpire believes a footballer has UNFAIRLY and EXCESSIVELY dealt with his opponent, i.e. punching arms, pulling jumpers, ACTUALLY pushing in the back, then it's a free kick. Are you telling me you didn’t enjoy tussles between Carey and Jokovich, Salvagni and Lloyd? It wasn’t hard to judge an unfair spoil before…it’s no harder now.

2. There's a massive difference between hitting/ tackling someone head high and TOUCHING someone head high. It's not hard to see. What happened to common sense?

And nobody complained about the umpires before?

I would agree going back to how it used to be is the best way to go but people are still going to complain. At least now it is black and white.

 

[scooter600x]

So whats the option?

Allow hands on the back? Allow pushing in the back? How can you pinpoint a diference?

If a player go's high then its a high tackle. I would prefer not to worry about it and scrap that but no sport in this modern world can allow anycontact with the head. It can cause death.

Personally I would go one way with holding the ball. If you don't dispose the ball correctly its a free kick. No bullshit about prior crap or whatever they call it. If you don't dispose you get pinged

The rule used to be if you made two movements it was a free.

 

[Major Colvin]

The thing I have never understood, more than bad umpiring, is the inability for coaches or players to make any criticisms of the umpires whatsoever. Sometimes it is plain to see that umpiring is terrible. Coaches are criticised, players are criticised so why are umpires immune? Surely they can handle it.

I could not believe my ears a few years ago re: James Hird/Scott McLaren saga ($20,000 !!! don't get me started on whats wrong there ) when McLaren's comment to the media was "please respect the privacy of the my family at this time" or something?!? HA. You'd think someone had been murdered. Then we have umpires who are ego-maniacs a la Darren Goldspink. These people need to be put in there place when they do wrong which is the one redeeming feature of Sam Newman.

And then we all witnessed the contradiction between the hands and the back rule, and Kevin Bartlett coming out and saying that Mark McVeigh's mark WAS a mark! This a bit off the topic, but the AFL's arrogant stance of 'the umps are never wrong' is disgusting.

 

[Dagless]

Got news for you ... it's already too late. The game has never been worse to watch, and yet we have record crowds in attendance and record TV rights deals. We, as a sporting public, only have ourselves to blame.

Personally, I rarely go to the footy these days because I hate the way the game is played, but there are thousands of people out there who are supporting the modern trends.

luckily weve got the SANFL to fall back on, where the skills are obviously to a lower degree and it is almost impossible to play modern footy well, and anyone who tries normally loses lol

 

[RedLegs#5]

The thing I have never understood, more than bad umpiring, is the inability for coaches or players to make any criticisms of the umpires whatsoever. Sometimes it is plain to see that umpiring is terrible. Coaches are criticised, players are criticised so why are umpires immune? Surely they can handle it.

I could not believe my ears a few years ago re: James Hird/Scott McLaren saga ($20,000 !!! don't get me started on whats wrong there ) when McLaren's comment to the media was "please respect the privacy of the my family at this time" or something?!? HA. You'd think someone had been murdered. Then we have umpires who are ego-maniacs a la Darren Goldspink. These people need to be put in there place when they do wrong which is the one redeeming feature of Sam Newman.

And then we all witnessed the contradiction between the hands and the back rule, and Kevin Bartlett coming out and saying that Mark McVeigh's mark WAS a mark! This a bit off the topic, but the AFL's arrogant stance of 'the umps are never wrong' is disgusting.

Agreed. But the decisions start at the top with Demetriou. As frustrating as they are, the umpires can only work with the rules they've been given. I don't blame them for being confused. Why don't people abuse Demetriou for creating the damn problem in the first place.

 

[general mac]

Pure and simple fact : The VFL gave way too much power to the newly formed AFL.

Everyone knows that absolute power weilded from the top of an organization is dangerous. Well they have managed to f--- up the only game of football I used to think worth following.

I have not bought a membership this year and am slowly weening myslef off of this silly sniffeling little game the AFL have created out of the greatest game in the world.

Well done AFL you managed to screw it up for everybody.

But of course in the current in same world of deregulated free market economies that we live in, the AFL will go unchecked becuase of one thing and one thing only - they are making obsene amounts of money.

 

[Adelaide Hawk]

In some sad way...I agree. People are coming out of the woodwork though. Today Barassi wrote an article (albeit not about the right points imo). I hope legends of the game will make more of a stance about this softness when they leave it (i.e. Archer).

Barassi can't really talk. He turned his back on the welfare of Victorian (and Australian) football by blindly supporting a national competition at any cost. He, and many other football people benefiting financially from the game, have continued to tell us the game has never been better so they can justify the bloated incomes they derive from it.

We don't need the Barassis of this world complaining about the game, we need the current coaches and executives to say the game needs a change of direction. They are the only ones empowered to do anything about it. Sadly, they never will.

You know what it would take for this to happen? Just one round of football where nobody turned up for the games or watched them on television. That's all. The AFL would go straight into panic mode. Once again, this won't happen because there are too many fans who blindly support the game even though they think it stinks.

 

[Major Colvin]

Also, I HATE, HATE, HATE the justification that the 'game is in the best shape its ever been' because we are getting record crowds. NEWSFLASH, Australia's population is expanding. There will always be increase in crowds. Most of who hate what the game has become still attend to support our teams. THAT DOES NOT MEAN THAT ALL IS OK. The hands in the back rule is just about the last straw as far as I'm concerned. The game is turing into a hybrid of basketball and netball. Contested possession is treated with suspicion and is discouraged. Coaches arent allowed to voice opinions. Rules are made without any regard for there conseqences. The game is becoming a joke!

 

[Osmodiar]

Unless contact causes bleeding it should be play on.

 

[thatswhatimtalkinabout]

Barassi makes 12 points and fortunately only 1 of them is necessary to restore the game to some sort of sembelance of the great game we knew - 2 interchange players and 2 emergencies.

Sheedy should be shot for this bullsh*t idea (3, then 4 interchange) that even he would cringe at now looking at was once a great game.

I'm not up for debate with Bummer supporters with this one. It is a blight on the game!

 

[JoondalupJ]

This game is becoming extremely agitating to watch.

Daniel Chick summed it up on the field today..."It's not netball" (or something to that effect). How is it possible that AFL players are having to resort to saying such things?!

I fully understand the AFL wanting to appeal to future generations. I know they want more and more kids to play the game. BUT, you have to allow contact!

This hand in the back rule is beyond ridiculous. It's frustrating supporters and football experts alike. There is no consistency because there cannot be consistency. The umpires know if they pay it all the time they'll be involved in the game way too much. It occurs nearly every play. So, they pay it every so often, thus making it look beyond ridiculous. You can't blame them though...it's an extremely difficult rule to moderate. How can you moderate one of a footballer’s most basic and natural reactions, to protect their space?

Head touching! Ok, of course you can't hit a player in the head. But when players duck and someone happens to touch a hair on their left eyebrow....how is that a free kick!? Surely we can't be that precious!? I go for Melbourne but I completely agree with Chick's comments today after his BARBARIC sheppard. Players are slowly learning how to milk the rule as well, thus creating something no one wants to see...diving. Peter Bell is a good example of this (sorry freo fans...but it's the truth).

And holding the ball?!?! It's getting to the stage where MOST of these decisions are ridiculous. We allowed a few silly decisions in it’s first year and then slowly let it trickle into a few more soft decisions…but now…they’re just everywhere. Players who go and get the ball are being punished. It's becoming easier and easier for soft fringe players to shine simply because they no longer need to get the ball first, just hold the ball into their tougher and more desperate opponent. However, once again, the umpires cannot be blamed.

It seems as if these rules are slipping underneath our guard. They are being created and enforced at a slow but steady pace, and will, without recognition, forever be apart of, and ruin our game.

This sport will lose its popularity if these rules stay/ are added on to (and there will be more rules).

Do what you can. Write letters, call up radio stations.

GO AWAY DEMETRIOU!

Remove Demitrio Anderson and Bartlet.This game will disappear if someone doesn,t go back to proper rule setting for umpires to follow.Why can,t coaches complain about rubbish decisions .Is this the AFL or the CIA, crickey its a game of bloody football ,plus Geishin could take a walk too, or show some spine. I think they all probably get paid too much!

 

[JoondalupJ]

So whats the option?

Allow hands on the back? Allow pushing in the back? How can you pinpoint a diference?

If a player go's high then its a high tackle. I would prefer not to worry about it and scrap that but no sport in this modern world can allow anycontact with the head. It can cause death.

Personally I would go one way with holding the ball. If you don't dispose the ball correctly its a free kick. No bullshit about prior crap or whatever they call it. If you don't dispose you get pinged

Also if you CAN'T dispose its got to be a ball up. How many times do you see some poor bugger grab the ball get smothered by about six players ,some his own, he can hardly move and if he's not wriggleing around some umpires say he's laid an egg and bang he's pinged for holding the ball and he never had a chance , the BAD word here is that SOME umpires think he's laid an egg. They all have a different perception.

 

[JoondalupJ]

And nobody complained about the umpires before?

I would agree going back to how it used to be is the best way to go but people are still going to complain. At least now it is black and white.

At least now its black and white! Are you joking?

 

[- PC -]

So whats the option?

Allow hands on the back? Allow pushing in the back? How can you pinpoint a diference?

I think most on here want the contest. Most here have played football at most levels and we know the squibs and we know who pushes and we know who makes the effort

Our problem is we cant see past our own bias and admit some frees were there for the opposition. Heard one Eagles nuffy today complain that Melbourne got any frees by saying the Eagles were making the play how could they be penalised

The contest is open to interpretation and its difficult. One of the more frequent saying is '' we dont mind the ones they give its the ones they miss''

Yet I recall the best game from last year? or the year before was the Adelaide Roos game in Melbourne where the whistle was put away and the players had to make the game. Sure it got bogged down at times but the umpires didnt make any mistakes of consistency

My 2c on rule change for flooding and tempo footy, needs one change and one change only

An uncontested mark is called a play on situation after 4 seconds where-as a contested mark is counted a play on , 10 seconds after, but only once the player has stabilised himself

 

[- PC -]

And nobody complained about the umpires before?

.

Not as much as they do today...and do you know why?

Because 20 years ago there were 4 cameras at 4 games and 1 or 2 cameras at the other 2 , most decisions didnt have the scrutiny because it was only the people at the ground who had any sense and as noted before 50% would say the umpire got it right and 50% say they got it wrong.

Now we have 11 cameras at each ground, we have player cam, sky cam, goal cam etc etc etc... an umpire has to make sure it is spot on

Mark Fraser made a valid point today... and he knew he was a poor bouncer... but next weekend go for a 10 km run and then grab a footy and bounce it perfectly... let me know how you go

 

[BK Eaglesfan]

Head touching! Ok, of course you can't hit a player in the head. But when players duck and someone happens to touch a hair on their left eyebrow....how is that a free kick!? Surely we can't be that precious!? I go for Melbourne but I completely agree with Chick's comments today after his BARBARIC sheppard. Players are slowly learning how to milk the rule as well, thus creating something no one wants to see...diving. Peter Bell is a good example of this (sorry freo fans...but it's the truth).

Yep, this is disappointing. Saw several times over the weekend players pick up the ball look up, see a player coming the other way and drop their head back down to try and draw head high front on contact (and no I'm not talking about the Bruce / Kerr incident).

 

['51 Bewick]

Barassi makes 12 points and fortunately only 1 of them is necessary to restore the game to some sort of sembelance of the great game we knew - 2 interchange players and 2 emergencies.

Sheedy should be shot for this bullsh*t idea (3, then 4 interchange) that even he would cringe at now looking at was once a great game.

I'm not up for debate with Bummer supporters with this one. It is a blight on the game!

Oh, so you don't want an argument, and expect us to just accept your opinion. OK I won't argue; I'll just state a fact -
You are an absolute moron, NOW RACK OFF!!!

 

[thatswhatimtalkinabout]

Oh, so you don't want an argument, and expect us to just accept your opinion. OK I won't argue; I'll just state a fact -
You are an absolute moron, NOW RACK OFF!!!

Yes, that is what these pages are for, expressing an opinion, dopey. Nothing you will say will change my thoughts on the matter.

Perhaps, however, if you feel so strongly about it, try mounting an argument that is based on fact and your opinion for rebuttal rather than personal abuse.