March champions they’ll drop off
1 Like
Lions on top of the Ladder at this point.
Screw Brisbane.
How’s the CokeBlitz website holding up? That wasn’t some rubbish BLT game you can glibly ignore!
1 Like
Sydney just behind the Bears on percentage… and other things.
1 Like
Just quoting myself for being right! 
4 Likes
All the teams that went deep into the finals last year lost except Richmond, where there was a fair discrepancy in talent on the field.
The extra few weeks of preseason has to be playing a part here
They have last years cup to hold their tears.
I wouldnt worry about West Coke.
some round 1 observations.
-
Be careful what you call an ‘upset’. Equalisation has generally worked, so there is very little between outside of the very best, and very worst. Many teams are going to be caught in the mediocre trap of sitting in that mid table group forever, without having the ability to spike up into the top 2-3 rung.
-
Hawthorn winning was NOT an upset. The bookies had that one wrong.
-
McCluggage - just purring up through the gears as an AFL midfielder. A lot to like!
-
Rule Changes - Have they actually created the opposite effect of the ‘spin’ being put down the fans’ throats? Forwards now have to compete with more congestion - it is harder and they have to work. Hence, scores lower. Forwards - work harder.
If my gut feel is correct, the 666 is a furphy and setting us up for zones in the future. The league better watch out - all you will do is create conjestion where forwards dont want it. To ‘fix’ the game and take it back, you need to change what has changed. Players now can cover more space, more quickly and the grounds are the same size, or in VFL park’s case smaller. Take 2 players off per team, and start with that.
-
Skills are deplorable. The Coll-Geel game was a $hit show in skills. Do players have too long off now? 2 JLT games was clearly not enough this season - with the rule changes, the runner changes and still trying to give kids exposure, 3 games is probably the minimum needed.
-
Media - stop mentioning coaches who dont like the runner rule. The whole point is to take the coaching manipulation away. Of course they wont be happy - hence it is working!
We want to “fix” the game? The 666 doesnt look like it will do it.
16 per side, 2 on the bench. No runners at all, AFL coaches boxes and benches are not allowed live data feeds. Get the game back to how it was organically growing until absolutely manipulated by coaches and data from about the 90’s.
2 Likes
This type of thinking is how we ended up with 6-6-6
It was a joke.
Brissy and the Swans at the G will be good.
We just need to turn up in big numbers to support!
16 players on the field is a bit drastic.
It all started when the extended the bench on the back of a few injuries during games that apparently disadvantaged a side for a few quarters.
Return to two on the bench and they will tire far quicker.
Our game has been butchered enough without doing something as drastic as less players on the field.
Lets just call it farkin AFL$ Stadium. Its not going to change ownership for 30-40-50 years
Names, they will changer according to the $$$$$$ they offer to AFL$
You do realise that was Sheedy who had the extended bench brought in?
actually, exactly the opposite is true but go on…
No, Sheedy campaigned and got the extended bench brought in so he, as a coach, could manipulate the game more. Great as a coach and for a coach, but horrible for the game in the long-term.
Remember, coaches destroy and break-down this game. They have to be controlled and are not the go-to stakeholder on rule changes. They are actually the enemy to the game in a sense.
Yes, they will tire quicker. You do realise that is the the whole point right? LOL. The goal of these ARTIFICIAL rules such as limiting rotations, the ‘sub’ etc is to get the players to tire. What I am proposing gets us BACK to how the game was in an ORGANIC sense, not the artificial one which wont work as coaches adapt.
If we use rules or changes as levers for the game - they have to be turned off, as well as on. Ie we had no bench, then a 19th, then 20th man, then 2 on the bench, then 4 on the bench, then 3 and a sub, then 4 again etc - what I am saying is perhaps we have gone too far, so instead of limiting rotations and going 666 - we simply go back to the 2 on the bench and release that lever. The rest falls into place.
16 a side is not drastic at all for our game. The VFA played with 16 per side since the 50’s. It is a much better solution (and makes 100% pure sense as players can cover more ground as professional athletes, but the grounds are not getting bigger relatively) then bringing in rules which make no sense such as 666.
We now have 12 players dumped into both forward lines. Brilliant. 
Thing is, these stupid committees setup to change rules need to justify their own salary - so the ridiculous is introduced not the simple roll-back of the rules to how the game was before manipulation occurred.
2 Likes
If we are bringing in all these rules to tire the players quicker, why did we bring in new rules to quicken the game up about 10 years ago?
Because people are idiots.
1 Like
I’d have 8x on the bench with no rotations. Once you’re off, you’re off. Just like it was before Mal Brown returned a substituted player back in 1977 or whatever year it was and stuffed things up.
Ok, tiring players out to the point of death probably isn’t a good idea so I will instead settle for 4x on the bench with a maximum of 10x rotations per quarter, 40x rotations per game. And in finals, 3x rotations per 10 minute half should the game end in a draw and go into extra time.
MAXIMUM OF 10x!
Edit: Mal Brown returned a substituted player to the field whilst player/coach with Claremont in the 1975 season which contravened the rules as they were at the time. Brown was replaced as capt/coach of Claremont for the 1977 season by former Essendon superstar, Graham Moss.