WTF!? - AFL wants to reduce "excessive tackling"

[Professor Knowall]

Pay or free kicks, Holding the man is rife in the game. Head high Contact is rife in the game. Pay the frees ... But also make the tackles be legal, I am fed up with tackling players getting players high and blaming it on the bloke with the ball. ...

Spot on - also the amount of so-called tackles where a player piles on to the back of a player with the ball at full pace, driving him head forward that once would have have been paid as in the back, but is now just let go. The interpretation of a legal tackle has become far too slack.

 

[Coops93]

And more injuries. Great!

Was there more injuries 15 years ago?

 

[Adelaide Hawk]

Sliding Doors: IF Port does indeed seek to 'terrorise' Dusty ... THEN

Dustin Martin, Mitch McGovern, Darcy Moore, Port, St Kilda, plus more in the Doors' spotlight

www.afl.com.au

If	you actually bothered to take a moment to understand what Steve Hocking meant when he said he was hoping to "get a balance back in so that (tackling) is not a feature of the game" before you sprinted to outrage ...
then	you wouldn't have looked as silly as you now do.

Yes, it's amazing how many people haven't grasped what Hocking is on about. Nobody is suggesting tackling isn't a vital ingredient in our game, but I've seen games where it is just tackle, tackle, tackle, and it's no fun to watch. I've made note that in their keenness to tackle, players are being grabbed even before they take possession of the ball, and it's not being penalised. It will be interesting to find out what they have in mind.

 

[dean33]

I'd vote we reduce excessive Steve Hocking tbh. He's too much of "a feature" of the game right now.

I prefer his brother much more than him, and I don’t like his brother.

 

[BlueandGoldforever]

Exact same thing for me. About 2-3 years ago I would watch at least 3 games of football a week. Now it is only Richmond then don't think about it anymore

I am the same and in fact I even missed the first four West Coast games at the beginning of the season, the first time ever! The AFL are killing the game.

 

[BlueandGoldforever]

Love their metrics for determining the success of the new rules is that attendance and TV viewers are up from last year.

Perhaps numbers are up due to not having Carlton on every Friday night like last year? (although they are starting to play better now)
More blockbuster games through Easter and ANZAC weekends.
Teams like Brisbane doing better and being exciting getting more crowds in QLD who may drop off when they are down.
Fremantle, at least initially, performing better so will likely get more crowd.
Perhaps Channel 7 has had better FTA games so natually more people are watching?

Oh no, it's the rules that has done it!

A big reason for numbers being up is the increase of standalone games - Thursday nights help enormously with this.

 

[Benji85]

 

[BG__]

Rule changes/wanting to make rule changes is just a power trip for these guys. They get off on it i reckon.

 

[Better Loosen Up]

Was there more injuries 15 years ago?

Was there the same demands on players 15 years ago?

 

[Professor Knowall]

Reducing or, better still, abolishing interchange altogether (just like it was in the first 130 years of our game) will slow players down, making for more time and space and thus reducing impact injuries - just like it used to be before the worse rule change ever, being interchange which was introduced straight from American sport and was never right for our game.

As for "greater demands on players" - no there won't be. Coaches will be forced to adapt to the new situation (all the players no longer being physically able to charge up and down the field all through the game and instead resort back to positions and one on one positional play, as it was before interchange stuffed it all up.

 

[Coops93]

Was there the same demands on players 15 years ago?

That's what increased the interchanges. Lower them and there'll be less demand for the reason you first gave.

 

[Le Grille]

View attachment 711507


View attachment 711508

If you were a snivelling little prick who likes the smell of his own farts.....

Then you are likely to be Damian Barrett

 

[tzman]

Just make the third man tackle properly. At the moment they are allowed just to dive onto the player. Pay free kicks if they make any contact with the head or back. No rule change just stricter interpretations. This would allow stop players trying to force a ball up, Players being tackled would have to make a genuine attempt at clearing the ball or be pinged for holding.

 

[greatwhiteshark]

If you were a snivelling little prick who likes the smell of his own farts.....

Then you are likely to be Damian Barrett

The bottom line is that Barrett is highly paid to be the AFL spokesman, he wouldn’t know one end of a footy from the other yet people actually believe he is a footy journalist. He is just a highly rewarded puppet of theAFL.

 

[gavaniacono]

Hocking wants tackling not to be a feature of the game. Clearly he is eyeing soccer mums, hemophiliac children, and casuals as the future supporters and players of the game.

 

[Obeanie1]

Reducing or, better still, abolishing interchange altogether (just like it was in the first 130 years of our game) will slow players down, making for more time and space and thus reducing impact injuries - just like it used to be before the worse rule change ever, being interchange which was introduced straight from American sport and was never right for our game.

As for "greater demands on players" - no there won't be. Coaches will be forced to adapt to the new situation (all the players no longer being physically able to charge up and down the field all through the game and instead resort back to positions and one on one positional play, as it was before interchange stuffed it all up.

So only interchanges if a player is injured?

 

[Professor Knowall]

So only interchanges if a player is injured?

Pretty much - or limited to concussion tests. Basically go back to just having substitutes like in soccer - and like our game had for it's first 130 years and worked well, though we could have 4 rather than just 2.

 

[Pessimistic]

Fake news apparently, according to Whateley

PR fail by hocking then

 

[gavaniacono]

he wouldn’t know one end of a footy from the other

They are normally pretty similar, possibly identical. What about "a goal from a point post", or "a ruck from a rover", or "simile from metaphor".

 

[mike123]

That's what increased the interchanges. Lower them and there'll be less demand for the reason you first gave.

You can’t really lower them though.

 

[mike123]

Reducing or, better still, abolishing interchange altogether (just like it was in the first 130 years of our game) will slow players down, making for more time and space and thus reducing impact injuries - just like it used to be before the worse rule change ever, being interchange which was introduced straight from American sport and was never right for our game.

As for "greater demands on players" - no there won't be. Coaches will be forced to adapt to the new situation (all the players no longer being physically able to charge up and down the field all through the game and instead resort back to positions and one on one positional play, as it was before interchange stuffed it all up.

Getting rid of interchanges will only affect players ability to spread from congestion, coaches will adapt by turning all their players into one paced grinders that can still clog up space.

 

[Demonic Ascent]

For me, that tackling skill isn't so well executed if they end up lying flat on top of him, but they, umpires / league by deeming that to no longer be a free kick are empowering them to keep doing it.

I was watching one of the shows in the wash-up of the weekend's games and the umpiring around Cunnington being tagged was really very poor. They showed multiple instances of Cunnington being tackled or at the very least, ******ed before he had even taken possession. As soon as he took possession, the tackle was already 3/4 of the way completed, he never stood a chance. (the show may have been On The Couch)

It happens every week to the best players of every team. Oliver cops it the worst for us but I have no doubt opposition supporters would find instances of Harmes or whoever doing it to their best midfielder too. The scragging is ridiculous and all teams do it and get away with it. Has to stop.

 

[KermitJagger]

Getting rid of interchanges will only affect players ability to spread from congestion, coaches will adapt by turning all their players into one paced grinders that can still clog up space.

This. It would also make already declining skill execution go further down the toilet. Tired legs are behind the declining goal conversion rates, and the skyrocketing turnover rates.

Games have gotten tighter and more like mauls every time the interchange cap has been reduced.

Being able to rotate players and keep them more fresh doesn't only increase tackling, it also allows the more explosive players to break more tackles and get on the burst more often.

If interchanges were to be reduced or removed, you could pretty much say goodbye to player diversity.

 

[OnceWeWereKings]

Kudos to Adelaide for playing a trial match last night to see how this would look.

 

[wilsonmatic]

This. Dont take 20 seconds allowing a pack to form.

Bring back 3rd man up so the ball can be knocked 15m or 20m forward.

Undo the damage done 3 years ago and problem solved !

Yes! They banned 3rd man up, which was a natural and effective part if the game, and now they complain about congestion.. Seems like Hocking wants to abolish the defensive aspects of the game.. Im sick of this mother ****ar!