AFL - Good Ideas, Terrible Ideas, Too Many Ideas, No Idea


I’d actually give a tick to quite a few of them.

1 Centre bounce positions. Cross. Not needed.

2 kick-ins, no kick to self. Big cross. Stupid idea

3 No player within 10 metres of goal square at kick-in. Big cross. Another stupid and unnecessary idea.

4 Defender marks in goal square; man on mark brought out to 10 metres. Tick. It’s what happens already.

5 & 6 Runners and water carriers. Big tick. They’ve been a blight on the game for years. Collingwood’s runner-inflicted own goal in the GF was poetic justice.

7 Umpire contact. Cross. Unnecessary.

8 50 metre penalties a) defender not allowed to impede player with the ball - tick. Sensible. B) play on before new mark has been set - big cross. Chaotic.

9 Kicking for goal after the siren. Tick. What matters is where he kicks, not where he starts his run up.

10 Hands in the back. Tick. Hands in the back should never have been a rule anyway. Pushing in the back has always been a free kick.

11 Ruck contests - taking possession. Tick. Reverses a previous stupid rule change. Designated ruckman — big cross. The whole designated ruckman thing is ridiculous and this will make it more ridiculous.

Just btw, there are more like 13 rule changes, not 9. I wish someone would take Garry Hocking outside and shoot him. Every year these people come up with ideas that are poor solutions to non-problems. Of the ones I’ve given ticks, only the runners and water carriers rules are really new. Hands in the back and ruckman taking possession are simply reversing previous stupid changes, and the others either reflect the status quo or restate the current rule.


Given the umpires and MRP at the time couldn’t manage to work out that Lindsay Thomas ignoring the footy to slide in, studs first, and snapping a guy’s ankle was dangerous… no, common sense is not enough.


Same with the Toby Greene flykicks

The umpires and MRP can’t actually see how it’s possibly dangerous to flykick someone

You just can’t rely on common sense. They’re very simple creatures.


Which is why they actually brought in the hands in the back rule.
Umpires were rubbish at telling what was a push and what was ‘holding your ground.’ They were all pushes.
So back to the one motion/two motions coin toss, I guess.


Surely there’s some “dangerous conduct” rule or something that umpires can use for these instances that aren’t explicity stated in the rules. It can’t be that hard to apply common sense decisions to dangerous actions that fall outside the normal acts of a game


Of course there is!

But it does take common sense to apply it.
And we constantly see guys get away with clearly dangerous acts - that actually legitimately injure opponents - not just “have the potential” to injure, the little ■■■■■■■ need to be told what to do, with a specific rule.

Relying on the common sense of umpires does not work.


The blokes who made this stuff up, have to keep doing this because the name of the game is actually BUM’S ON SEATS FOR selected AFL staff. Meanwhile, trying to stay awake at your desk has become harder because they are paid to keep thinking up this stuff.



Sure - my. Question was what is the actual wording of the current rule. Is it black and white or too ambiguous?


It’s a friggen weird rule - and very hard to understand. I though they were getting rid of the confusing counter-intuitive rules but now add this weird one from leftfield that wasn’t needed.


I’m actually ok with it.

Too many time players give front on contact these days without being penalised. Allowing Greane and other to out the foot up will stop them pretty quick.


If it’s just one guy up per team there would be no reason the first guy can’t just back out and leave another to go instead. And the second guy would have a run up, and the opposition ruck wouldn’t know who/where the contest will come from.


…and that’s been happening in one form or another for 100 years.


The AWFL deemed Improvements were needed. Naturally Gillon checked himself out in the mirror to make sure he himself “was a good look” He soon realised that the Chinese political leader strategy was not enough. In this rare interview McLachlan was amazingly frank.



I had a good conversation with a friend about this new rule and we both thought it could give players like McNernan a real boost. Shaun is not the greatest ruckman but if he is allowed to grab the ball out of the ruck he then becomes a monster midfielder who can break away with the ball. Wishful thinking I know but this rule has potential to change the role of certain ruckmen. It will be interesting to see new strategies during the pre-season and if we can get an advantage from it.


Hey, does anyone have a Michael Christian costume, 8 new rule interpretations and an 18m goalsquare? I’m going to a Halloween party and I need to dress as the scariest thing I can think of…


If you really want to scare some folks


MOD: spoilered.




This bloated bigoted idiot blowhard is the scariest thing I can think of, …


That’s the most apt use of the term blowhard ever.


That’s a hilarious photo. Just lazing around the pool in a jumper, smart jeans and dress shoes. You know, as you do