Is the old VFA set to make a comeback?
That can be the only conclusion of Mark Evans’s statement today of the AFL considering 16-a-side senior footy.
If they keep tampering with the game, I for one will stop watching.
Farking hands off you pole smoking muppets!
3 Likes
No it’s not.
Also remember when Mark Evans was going to “fix football”?
If they keep tampering with the game, I for one will stop watching.Farking hands off you pole smoking muppets!
Agree.
There must be more rule changes n AFL each year than every other sport in the world combined.
Bit hard to promote the game as a spectator/fan when you couldn’t possibly know the rules.
And even after all the AFL’s recent tampering, average score per game is still down this year
If they want less players then boy have I got an idea for them.
#theportthe
I bet KB has something to do with this. Why are they this relevant hobbit have anything do do with the game has always been beyond me.
They guy who had rules changed because of the way he expoited the rules, reckons everyone in the modern game is taking advantage of the rules.
Incredibly ironic
Game was doing just fine before all these self-indulgent kents came along. They just wanna leave their mark on what they think is their product. They’ll all be long dead and the game will continue. Leave it alone.
Speed the game up, slow the game down, speed the game up, slow the game down, speed the game up.
Don’t understand the opposition to the idea, personally. The VFA 16-a-side games were always more open, and in some ways more enjoyable to watch than VFL at the time. And certainly way more attractive than today’s game. For me the modern congestion/stoppage game style is repugnant. Taking four players off the ground would have to open the game up. We would get more high marking, more room for skilled players to show their stuff. Bring it on.
1 Like
Don't understand the opposition to the idea, personally. The VFA 16-a-side games were always more open, and in some ways more enjoyable to watch than VFL at the time. And certainly way more attractive than today's game. For me the modern congestion/stoppage game style is repugnant. Taking four players off the ground would have to open the game up. We would get more high marking, more room for skilled players to show their stuff. Bring it on.
I disagree entirely that we’d have a significantly more open game, more high marking OR more room for skilled players
The coaching/tactics have evolved way too much to allow that
1 Like
You would want to trial it first in the preseason games, but if anyone thinks the current flooding, crowded, rolling maul, overly defence oriented, low scoring game is good to watch, then I have got news for you - it’s ■■■■■■.
Everyone on here says how great the game was to watch back in the 80’s & 90’s when it was tough in the clinches, but still free flowing. Well I’ve got news for you, the only way I can ever see something vaguely like this ever returning, is to free up some space on the ground.
Modern players are just so farking fit compared to their predecessors (& have no set positions anymore), they can just keep running & running. 16 trying to do the work of 18, might be the only way to create space.
This is completely different to the umps changing their rules on HTB, or incorrect disposal or chopping of arms or whatever else is shiny this week.
This isn’t a rule change, this is a game changer, which just might make the game a lot more watchable than the current slugfest.
You would want to trial it first in the preseason games, but if anyone thinks the current flooding, crowded, rolling maul, overly defence oriented, low scoring game is good to watch, then I have got news for you - it's ■■■■■■.Everyone on here says how great the game was to watch back in the 80’s & 90’s when it was tough in the clinches, but still free flowing. Well I’ve got news for you, the only way I can ever see something vaguely like this ever returning, is to free up some space on the ground.
Modern players are just so farking fit compared to their predecessors (& have no set positions anymore), they can just keep running & running. 16 trying to do the work of 18, might be the only way to create space.
This is completely different to the umps changing their rules on HTB, or incorrect disposal or chopping of arms or whatever else is shiny this week.
This isn’t a rule change, this is a game changer, which just might make the game a lot more watchable than the current slugfest.
The only way you’ll see that again is to introduce zones.
They should introduce a new ‘no rule changes’ rule.
1 Like
So do I need to start a “Best 20” thread, or will we have 6 on the bench? Might resurrect the second rucks that way…
Big clubs should consider forming their own league
Sick of these utterly incompetent arsehats
Don't understand the opposition to the idea, personally. The VFA 16-a-side games were always more open, and in some ways more enjoyable to watch than VFL at the time. And certainly way more attractive than today's game. For me the modern congestion/stoppage game style is repugnant. Taking four players off the ground would have to open the game up. We would get more high marking, more room for skilled players to show their stuff. Bring it on.I disagree entirely that we’d have a significantly more open game, more high marking OR more room for skilled players
The coaching/tactics have evolved way too much to allow that
Possibly. I’m basing my expectations on the old VFA style, which I’m not sure if you remember, was very open and flowing. To my mind, good footy to watch which allowed skills to flourish. Perhaps coaching could reduce 16 a side back to congestion, but I think it is worth a try in order to find out.
Regardless whether it is by the introduction of zones, or reducing player numbers, I am all in favour of any change which puts a knife through the heart of the current congested slug-fest.
Don't understand the opposition to the idea, personally. The VFA 16-a-side games were always more open, and in some ways more enjoyable to watch than VFL at the time. And certainly way more attractive than today's game. For me the modern congestion/stoppage game style is repugnant. Taking four players off the ground would have to open the game up. We would get more high marking, more room for skilled players to show their stuff. Bring it on.I disagree entirely that we’d have a significantly more open game, more high marking OR more room for skilled players
The coaching/tactics have evolved way too much to allow thatPossibly. I’m basing my expectations on the old VFA style, which I’m not sure if you remember, was very open and flowing. To my mind, good footy to watch which allowed skills to flourish. Perhaps coaching could reduce 16 a side back to congestion, but I think it is worth a try in order to find out.
Regardless whether it is by the introduction of zones, or reducing player numbers, I am all in favour of any change which puts a knife through the heart of the current congested slug-fest.
So you think the skills were able to flourish in this game? Seriously, I’d expect an under 12s side to have more skills than AFL players 30 years ago
Just pay incorrect disposal. All problems will be solved.
1 Like
Another drug scandal.
Self-imposed bye week without football.
One of the big clubs imploding, again.
“What do you think about 16 a side?”
They should introduce a new 'no rule changes' rule.
Future AFL anouncement to be made half way through the imminent finals series
“We are tweaking the interpretation of the no more than 18 on the ground per side rule, and have instructed the umpires to begin counting at three instead of one. We are confident in the umpires ability to implement this interpretation consistently”