The AFL should be brought down and replaced by a new governing body

[Carringbush2010]

If uou arr forming a breakaway league you would - like superleague did - offer more money.

And how did superleague work out?

 

[kranky al]

And how did superleague work out?

Superleague eventually joined back up

which is what id expect from this - albeit with a new league admin that represents all states not just 1

 

[Carringbush2010]

Superleague eventually joined back up

which is what id expect from this - albeit with a new league admin that represents all states not just 1

It was a breakaway league that didn't successfully break away.

So going by your logic, your idea is to create a breakaway, have it fail and then rejoin the AFL.

I think you're just wishing hard now, you don't like the current product and you're desperate for ways to make it 'right' in your eyes.

Is that a fair assumption?

 

[Kwality]

And how did superleague work out?

For those not across Super League in Aus:

Super League war - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

The Super League war was the dispute over control of the top-level professional rugby league competition in Australia and New Zealand in the mid-1990s, between the Australian Rugby League (ARL) and the Australian Super League.

Super League, backed by Rupert Murdoch and News Corporation, competed with the ARL, supported by Kerry Packer and Optus Vision, in and out of court for broadcasting rights and supremacy in the sport.[1][2][3] Super League had attracted several clubs disenchanted with the existing administration, and introduced two new clubs, as it attempted to establish itself as the dominant competition. After much legal action, when the ARL tried to block the new league, Super League ran one season parallel to the ARL's in 1997.[4] At the conclusion of that season a peace deal was reached and the two leagues united to form the National Rugby League, which continues today.

 

[Carringbush2010]

For those not across Super League in Aus:

Super League war - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

The Super League war was the dispute over control of the top-level professional rugby league competition in Australia and New Zealand in the mid-1990s, between the Australian Rugby League (ARL) and the Australian Super League.

Super League, backed by Rupert Murdoch and News Corporation, competed with the ARL, supported by Kerry Packer and Optus Vision, in and out of court for broadcasting rights and supremacy in the sport.[1][2][3] Super League had attracted several clubs disenchanted with the existing administration, and introduced two new clubs, as it attempted to establish itself as the dominant competition. After much legal action, when the ARL tried to block the new league, Super League ran one season parallel to the ARL's in 1997.[4] At the conclusion of that season a peace deal was reached and the two leagues united to form the National Rugby League, which continues today.

And?

 

[Carringbush2010]

For those not across Super League in Aus:

Super League war - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

The Super League war was the dispute over control of the top-level professional rugby league competition in Australia and New Zealand in the mid-1990s, between the Australian Rugby League (ARL) and the Australian Super League.

Super League, backed by Rupert Murdoch and News Corporation, competed with the ARL, supported by Kerry Packer and Optus Vision, in and out of court for broadcasting rights and supremacy in the sport.[1][2][3] Super League had attracted several clubs disenchanted with the existing administration, and introduced two new clubs, as it attempted to establish itself as the dominant competition. After much legal action, when the ARL tried to block the new league, Super League ran one season parallel to the ARL's in 1997.[4] At the conclusion of that season a peace deal was reached and the two leagues united to form the National Rugby League, which continues today.

Ok I'm confused, you react to my question with a . How is a failed super league in a different sport relevant to this thread?

 

[Freomaniac]

So the analysis you’re taking from the article you posted is completely theoretical and not based on what the article actually said?

you really want vince russo to run the AFL dont you? lol

 

[Les Malone]

As usual kranky al has it all wrong, i dont mind the AFL running the AFL, however they should not be running Australian Football, they should not be the self imposed keeper of the code, there should be a clear independent body who considers rule changes and where funding goes for grass roots AF that benefits football not the AFL.

ATM it is one and the same.

 

[Our Game]

As usual kranky al has it all wrong, i dont mind the AFL running the AFL, however they should not be running Australian Football, they should not be the self imposed keeper of the code, there should be a clear independent body who considers rule changes and where funding goes for grass roots AF that benefits football not the AFL.

ATM it is one and the same.

I agree 100% There should be an independent commission running Australian Football overall not just the AFL!

 

[RedV3x]

I agree 100% There should be an independent commission running Australian Football overall not just the AFL!

Most people think this would somehow require a momentous change but one change would require very little.
Umpiring should be independent in that laws for AFL should not necessarily filter down.
Every other league besides AFL starts with the same set of laws but some leagues have their own modifications.
Also the laws for football overseas are different and it would be good if these differences could be standardised.
That, doesn't require much funding at all.
The AFL is a business and should be divorced somewhat from grassroots. The AFL has made huge gains in some states
but arguably, some would say at the expense of other states.
The AFL has been involved in some large investments overseas but generally AFCs around the world receive little support.
It would be hard to see a setup where an independent entity would receive enough funding to be practical
but I do believe that the AFL should rationalise it's spending.
Expenditure has to be more closely aligned with a percentage of income.
In today's Covid19 climate that probably is being done in a negative and necessary way
but in better times more has returned to the game itself.
The AFL should be moving closer to the GAA model rather than the NFL model.

 

[Bunk Moreland]

As usual kranky al has it all wrong, i dont mind the AFL running the AFL, however they should not be running Australian Football, they should not be the self imposed keeper of the code, there should be a clear independent body who considers rule changes and where funding goes for grass roots AF that benefits football not the AFL.

ATM it is one and the same.

All of the revenue for that funding is generated by the AFL clubs.

So what happens when the AFL says “no worries - you’re not getting any funding from us”.

Or the WAFC, which owns cash cows in the WCE and Freo. Why are they going to hand over money to this new body?

 

[Les Malone]

All of the revenue for that funding is generated by the AFL clubs.

So what happens when the AFL says “no worries - you’re not getting any funding from us”.

Or the WAFC, which owns cash cows in the WCE and Freo. Why are they going to hand over money to this new body?

who used to own the laws of the game before the AFL ?

 

[The_Wookie]

All of the revenue for that funding is generated by the AFL clubs.

So what happens when the AFL says “no worries - you’re not getting any funding from us”.

Or the WAFC, which owns cash cows in the WCE and Freo. Why are they going to hand over money to this new body?

Essentially this is why the ANFC folded - all the money was with the VFL. When the VFL said screw it and went their own way, the ANFC

who used to own the laws of the game before the AFL ?

ANFC were considered the national governing body, and responsible for running the national championships. When the VFL stopped paying any attention to them, they died a rapid death - gone not long after the Commission was formed in 1993, but ostensibly powerless after 1986.

 

[Bunk Moreland]

Essentially this is why the ANFC folded - all the money was with the VFL. When the VFL said screw it and went their own way, the ANFC


ANFC were considered the national governing body, and responsible for running the national championships. When the VFL stopped paying any attention to them, they died a rapid death - gone not long after the Commission was formed in 1993, but ostensibly powerless after 1986.

Precisely. End thread.

 

[Les Malone]

Precisely. End thread.

that is precisely why the game is in a constant state of flux, because the people that make the money change the rules in an attempt to make more money and not necessarily for the good of the game and definitely not for the health of the grass roots of the game, not even for the health and wellbeing of the players

there should be separate independent body that looks at rules and a separate independent body that runs the game below AFL level, on both boards the AFL would have a representative

and they should be funded if needs be by the AFL

the AFL should not be the keeper of the code and rule changer

 

[Bunk Moreland]

that is precisely why the game is in a constant state of flux, because the people that make the money change the rules in an attempt to make more money and not necessarily for the good of the game and definitely not for the health of the grass roots of the game, not even for the health and wellbeing of the players

there should be separate independent body that looks at rules and a separate independent body that runs the game below AFL level, on both boards the AFL would have a representative

and they should be funded if needs be by the AFL

the AFL should not be the keeper of the code and rule changer

You can say “should be” all you like. What’s the solution? And why would the AFL sign up to it? That’s what we need

 

[Les Malone]

You can say “should be” all you like. What’s the solution? And why would the AFL sign up to it? That’s what we need

that's right, i can say it all i like, and i like saying it

that's the solution or something similar

the AFL has the power, they wont relinquish it i imagine and until they do, we get rule changes forced upon us by the likes of Sheedy and unlimited interchange etc, or one year hands in the back OK, next year its not

i would be interested if other sports have this arrangement of tampering with the rules like lab rats get tampered with

an independent rules committee i imagine would be much more circumspect with rule changes and also take into account grass roots

 

[RedV3x]

an independent rules committee i imagine would be much more circumspect with rule changes and also take into account grass roots

You might improve your case if you referred to law changes and not rule changes.
Most changes have been in interpretation and implementation.
IMO the AFL have finally returned marking and tackling interpretations to what they should be
but rucking is diabolical.
Luckily, umpiring in grassroots is pretty much as it has always been.

 

[Bunk Moreland]

that's right, i can say it all i like, and i like saying it

that's the solution or something similar

the AFL has the power, they wont relinquish it i imagine and until they do, we get rule changes forced upon us by the likes of Sheedy and unlimited interchange etc, or one year hands in the back OK, next year its not

i would be interested if other sports have this arrangement of tampering with the rules like lab rats get tampered with

an independent rules committee i imagine would be much more circumspect with rule changes and also take into account grass roots

I’m not sure all leagues have to adopt AFL changes. I distinctly remember memos in local footy over the years regarding rules like

- “hands in the back”
- quick kick in before goal umpire has waved flags

and others that weren’t being adopted in our league.

 

[Les Malone]

I’m not sure all leagues have to adopt AFL changes. I distinctly remember memos in local footy over the years regarding rules like

- “hands in the back”
- quick kick in before goal umpire has waved flags

and others that weren’t being adopted in our league.

a couple of examples of AFL rule changes bought in to benefit the AFL and allegedly open up the game to enable more goals and, higher ratings and ultimately more $$$ - which i might add backfired

whilst the AFL now has a cap on I/C the WAFL doesnt as that would mean more umpires to umpire it from the bench so has remained unlimited, the game already requires so many it cant justify any more so sticks with unlimited when it probably shouldn't have even gone that way in the first place

whats even more stupid is the WAFL colts have a rule that in any given situation there must be at least 2 defenders and two attacking players inside the 50 at all times, --- the reason -- so AFL scouts can see reasonably open play to judge a players draft worth

 

[RedV3x]

I’m not sure all leagues have to adopt AFL changes. I distinctly remember memos in local footy over the years regarding rules like.

AFL law changes and interpretations are usually immediately adopted by the state leagues and amateurs.
Juniors play modified football until the "premiership years" when they adopt the standard laws.
If you are affiliated with the AFL then it would be unusual to not to play by the AFL law book.

I remember being instructed on some really silly marking interpretation when the AFL were overcompensating for marking interference.
I ignored the change but my partner didn't and he got roundly roasted and that instruction was dropped after that one game only.
Old West Australian umpires go by the simple premise that a player must have eyes for ball and only co-incident contact is allowed.
It's taken a long time but the interpretation has returned to what it was (in W.A. and S.A. at least)
There was a time when i hated being an umpire because I was instructed to call "play on - ball knocked free" when it deserved a free.
In the AFL now, a player taking possession of the ball and has the ball knocked away is penalised because he didn't legally dispose of the ball.
IMO that is a good result and so is tackling. A tackle must legal, controlled and not dangerous but it also can be forceful.

Most people and even AFL commentators don't know the AFL laws.
Some people say the bump is dead. The bump is alive but a player must take the care to execute it properly.
In the AFL game a player was given an off-the-ball free kick for something relatively minor.
The commentators said "you cannot do that".
Hello, there's a law that says the ball has to be within 5m (and non-marking) for any contact to be legal.
And by the laws of the game, almost every single AFL ruck contest (other than centre bounce) is ruck interference.

 

[RedV3x]

a couple of examples of AFL rule changes

Are you asking or giving examples ?

whilst the AFL now has a cap on I/C the WAFL doesnt as that would mean more umpires to umpire it from the bench so has remained unlimited, the game already requires so many it cant justify any more so sticks with unlimited when it probably shouldn't have even gone that way in the first place

Anybody understand a word of that?

the WAFL colts have a rule that in any given situation there must be at least 2 defenders and two attacking players inside the 50m

Well that is very sensible but also a little sad to see that we need a law to force football back to what it used to be.
This could very well be a sign of the future to overcome congestion programming.

 

[RedV3x]

that is precisely why the game is in a constant state of flux,

that is precisely why the AFL game is in a constant state of flux,

Outside of the AFL, Australian Football continues on much the same as it always has in spite of these changes.
I increasingly enjoy going to the WAFL and watching WAAFL games because of this.

 

[The_Wookie]

I’m not sure all leagues have to adopt AFL changes. I distinctly remember memos in local footy over the years regarding rules like

- “hands in the back”
- quick kick in before goal umpire has waved flags

and others that weren’t being adopted in our league.

The 50m penalty wasnt adopted by many leagues, the sub rule, and many other AFL "made for tv" rules. They are guidelines, with firm rules only for things requiring AFL assistance. Likewise the last touch out of bounds rule in the SANFL was never taken up by the AFL or others.

 

[RedV3x]

The 50m penalty wasnt adopted by many leagues,

I don't know of any adult 18-a-side competitions that didn't adopt the 50m penalty.
IMO the 50m penalty should be the length of a good kick, thus reduced to 30m in the AFLW.

the sub rule, and many other AFL "made for tv" rules. They are guidelines, with firm rules only for things requiring AFL assistance.

Things like the kick-in procedure are laws. Others are determined by league circumstances.

Likewise the last touch out of bounds rule in the SANFL was never taken up by the AFL or others.

That is a law change made by the SANFL. It was taken up in part by the AFLW.
A lot of overseas leagues have modified boundary laws.