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

[SplintWhisky]

That's the thing. I'll watch Hawthorn play, but I will barely watch a game as a neutral because by and large they're not exciting to watch any more. Probably not what the broadcasters and the AFL want to read.

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

 

[Art Vandelay_]

has Steve Hocking added anything positive in his current role?

Yes!

Get out of jail free cards for The Little Master.

Also; Shit idea with tackling from the AFL.

 

[Herne Hill Hammer]

Correct, third man in makes it impossible to get the ball out, perhaps that should be looked at. (only when they play schoolyard stacks on).

Someone with more knowledge can correct me if I'm wrong, but I think in Rugby League, what you're describing is a Flop. A third player coming in after the tackle has been completed and flopping on top of the tackled player. It is a penalty.

 

[The Warlord]

Hey giantroo have you got that GIF/vid of Cunners welcoming Dom Tyson to the North Melbourne Footy Club?

If he did this to his tagger, it'd be a free against no doubt.

 

[The Warlord]

Yes!

Get out of jail free cards for The Little Master.

Also; s**t idea with tackling from the AFL.

I'm glad the Australian Football Sports Entertainment Programming Network benefits Geelong.

Given the amount of my tax dollars that have gone into building the set down there where episodes are filmed, its some small consolation.

 

[Retzlaff]

I’m giving Hocking the benefit of the doubt and believe he wants to see the removal of Mark Robinson’s “The Tackle”

 

[Beer n Skittles]

Ping scragging taggers who are tackling opponents before the ball is even bounced. It has gotten a bit out of control.

 

[The Warlord]

I’m giving Hocking the benefit of the doubt and believe he wants to see the removal of Mark Robinson’s “The Tackle”

If that were the case I'd be willing to take it even further and have Robbo's tackle removed entirely.

Although given both his alcohol consumption and hideous visage, I find the prospect of him ever being to attract a mate let alone execute the reproductive act to completion so slim as make the above procedure redundant.

But given he's an Essendon supporter we should do it anyway.

 

[The Warlord]

Ping scragging taggers who are tackling opponents before the ball is even bounced. It has gotten a bit out of control.

Dylan Clarke getting plaudits for "taking the scalp" of blokes like Cripps and Cunnington - by tackling them from behind before they have possession.

 

[Grrr]

Someone with more knowledge can correct me if I'm wrong, but I think in Rugby League, what you're describing is a Flop. A third player coming in after the tackle has been completed and flopping on top of the tackled player. It is a penalty.

And nor do I know the intricacies of Rugby, but yes when the player is held down for too long, it is a penalty.

 

[Art Vandelay_]

Depends if you support Geelong or not

I know I just joked about it but I do think tiger fans in particular genuinely believe A: that rule changes under Gil and Hocking hurt Richmond and B: Benefit Geelong.

The latter isn't true.

6-6-6: We've been a side that's played a +1 in defence for the best part of 15 years. Scarlett has numerous AA awards playing as that sweeper, as does Enright. So how does that benefit us? Remember Scarlett is our defence coach now and has us set up with that system. Often with Blicavs or Stewart as that loose man.

Sure we've done ok out of the rule up forward and have become the highest scoring side this season. But did that rule benefit our forward line or did we plan for it? We have delisted Menzel and McCarthy up forward. Dropped Parsons and Fogarty (neither are actually forwards). Meanwhile high half forward Parfitt is down on goals this season. We planned for their rule change by sending the best 1v1 player since Ablett Sr (his son) down to the forward line. Blooding Miers, recruiting a tackling machine (Atkins) from our VFL side and trading/FA acquiring good tacklers in Rohan and Dahlhaus.

So not sure how you can say a rule that doesn't benefit us in defence, and at the time didn't benefit us up forward, until we planned for it, somehow is the AFL looking after us thanks to former player Steven Hocking. Meanwhile the 11-5 Lions have suddenly become the 2nd best scoring side when over the last 3 seasons they've been 13th, 13th and 14th.

This tackling rule wouldn't benefit us. Last time we weren't in the top 8 in the comp (often top 5) for tackling was Bomber's last season, 2010.

Conversely; On the advice of the AFL doctors, with no verifiable proof at its medical harm, the AFL removed the 3rd man up rule, for which with Blicavs we were unquestionably the team that was harmed the most by that change. Took the best part of two seasons to find him a new role in the team too.

So I know some of you lot at Punt Rd love a bit of banter, fine. But for those who genuinely believe Hocking/Gil rule changes benefit Geelong. Well it's not exactly supported by facts.

 

[Art Vandelay_]

I'm glad the Australian Football Sports Entertainment Programming Network benefits Geelong.

Given the amount of my tax dollars that have gone into building the set down there where episodes are filmed, its some small consolation.

I'm so glad (sarcasm) that we're forced to play finals at the G given how many of my tax dollars have gone into that concrete jungle

 

[Mikevk123]

Btw this all rubbish. The true reason they want to limit tackling is because all the concussions/head trauma some of the players are receiving. They are trying to back themselves out of a corner. You have seen many players retire due to concussion lately and I bet you they will most likely sue the AFL in a few years time. If the AFL were honest and revealed this as their true reason it wouldn’t be such an outrage. The people in charge keep everything secret to line their own pockets. The drug taking and mental health excuses. The gambling issues with Beams And Gibbs. It’s all about money and the image the AFL Present. I truely believe these guys are corrupt.

 

[Coasters7]

I agree with the people who say just pay the free kicks that go unpunished. Throwing the ball is at epidemic proportions, as is dropping the ball.
Laying on someones back, more often than not another bloke climbs on top and the poor bastard at the bottom has 2 people on his back.
I hate rolling maul footy but tackles in open play are exciting and a feature of the game.
Methinks Hocking might wish he had stated their concerns differently.

The problem with this is they’ve already screwed it up too much. Players are now accustomed to doing what they want and it’s going to take a few 100+ free kick games (which will be worse), to fix what they’ve created. If you went out there and paid everything that’s there, there would be a free kick every stoppage without fail. So it’s going to take time and worse games to undo. But the AFL aren’t one to admit they’re wrong so just expect more rule changes that aren’t even relevant. Just enforce the original rules and throw the ball up immediately, problem solved.

 

[The Warlord]

I'm so glad (sarcasm) that we're forced to play finals at the G given how many of my tax dollars have gone into that concrete jungle

Yeah, I was also being sarcastic - The Sports Entertainment Complex mostly benefits "big clubs" like those who routinely rack up WADA and ASADA suspensions like Collingwood and Essendon ...

Gaz does get special treatment, but he got it at the GC too.

 

[The Warlord]

Btw this all rubbish. The true reason they want to limit tackling is because all the concussions/head trauma some of the players are receiving. They are trying to back themselves out of a corner. You have seen many players retire due to concussion lately and I bet you they will most likely sue the AFL in a few years time. If the AFL were honest and revealed this as their true reason it wouldn’t be such an outrage. The people in charge keep everything secret to line their own pockets. The drug taking and mental health excuses. The gambling issues with Beams And Gibbs. It’s all about money and the image the AFL Present. I truely believe these guys are corrupt.

Agree entirely on all.

There's a concussion class action coming.

 

[Marcel Proust]

 

[Milanista28]

I'm sure the surveys and polls they conducted show the common fan agrees with this stance on excessive tackling.

 

[Mikevk123]

Agree entirely on all.

There's a concussion class action coming.

The problem with the AFL is their lying. They use excuses to push agendas. They don’t want another Essendon saga. If they were open and honest about combating concussion and if they said that was the reason for the changes I think most people wouldn’t be that fussed. Its the arrogance of Gil and the board. They like to bring politics into our sport to please the sponsors and all that but don’t care when something they actively promote(Gambling) causes problems for their players. All the secrecy between mental health and drugs is also a joke. They learned after the Fevola and Cousins situation. If they truly want to fix the sport they need to be honest and listen to the fans.

 

[UnitedWarrior93]

**** off steve hocking and Gill, the game is just getting ****ed more and more every week.

 

[The Warlord]

The problem with the AFL is their lying. They use excuses to push agendas. They don’t want another Essendon saga. If they were open and honest about combating concussion and if they said that was the reason for the changes I think most people wouldn’t be that fussed. Its the arrogance of Gil and the board. They like to bring politics into our sport to please the sponsors and all that but don’t care when something they actively promote(Gambling) causes problems for their players. All the secrecy between mental health and drugs is also a joke. They learned after the Fevola and Cousins situation. If they truly want to fix the sport they need to be honest and listen to the fans.

Its all about "managed outcomes". Its what happens when there's no overarching supranational accountability like in other sports.

Look what happened when the AFL managed outcome came into contact with one for the first time with the doping stuff.

 

[Mordecai]

can anyone explain the "how" to me for this?

id really like to know

 

[greatwhiteshark]

You want to get rid of thee muppets in charge then stop bloody attending.
They know that no matter what they do you will all keep showing up.
You want all these rule changes to stop or be returned to what they should be stop going to games, empty stadiums is the only voice they will hear.
And for those who think your club needs you there to support them, they don't really. They are all funded by the league and whether you are there or not will have no impact on them.
Gil and Hocking are taking this all to new levels, if you want it to stop them start not going to games.

 

[Mitchell Madness]

When they received the memo to run the game, I wonder if autocorrect kicked in and made it "ruin"

 

[RedBullRacing]

I've said it before, but if you want to get the game to where it was in the 80s/90s with free flowing 100 goal seasons then you need to force 3 forwards at a minimum into a fwd 70m zone. But only because the way the game has evolved naturally due to exploitation from coaches.