With the changes announced yesterday in the Rules committee ie: Bartlett.,Geischen, Sawers, Schwab ,all gawn. Replaced by Worsfold , Michael Christian, Wayne Campbell, Hayden Kennedy, it will be interesting to see if there are any major changes in the rules. In leaving Bartlett has stated that the interchange has forced the game into a hybrid including aspects of soccer, rugby and NHL. He claims that get rid of the interchange and get our game back. I suppose it all depends on who actually drives the decisions , ex players or the AFL bureaucrats. We all know who make the final decisions.
With the changes announced yesterday in the Rules committee ie: Bartlett.,Geischen, Sawers, Schwab ,all gawn. Replaced by Worsfold , Michael Christian, Wayne Campbell, Hayden Kennedy, it will be interesting to see if there are any major changes in the rules. In leaving Bartlett has stated that the interchange has forced the game into a hybrid including aspects of soccer, rugby and NHL. He claims that get rid of the interchange and get our game back. I suppose it all depends on who actually drives the decisions , ex players or the AFL bureaucrats. We all know who make the final decisions.
As in get it back to what it was before we had a "rules committee"?
The decision to stop paying free kicks is what changed our game, not the interchange.
Overall for the better, imo, but still...
Need to stop coaches dictating what happens in terms of rule changes.
Need to stop coaches dictating what happens in terms of rule changes.
Yep. Should have zero input.
The game is better than ever in my opinion. Some like to romanticize the past, but free kicks are paid at less than half the rate they used to be, the game is faster, players are braver and more skillful.
Right at this point I'd like to say I don't have a heck of a lot of confidence in Wayne Campbell to do anything right. Leaves a trail of successes & sackings behind him approaching Schwab level.
The game is better than ever in my opinion. Some like to romanticize the past, but free kicks are paid at less than half the rate they used to be, the game is faster, players are braver and more skillful.
I agree with bits of this, but not the whole hog.
Watch some 70s & 80s football. Particularly the marking contests, which is what they were. They just didn't grapple, not anywhere near as much. They weren't anywhere near as worried about their opponents. They were almost all after the ball, almost all of the time - ie playing it according to the law, rather than the interpretations we have now. I wouldn't mind the game angling back a bit more towards that. Admittedly it's better than the mid-00s when Hudghton/Harry O/Wambell were regularly playing centre-half-limpet.
My major concern is that there is too much hidden in the packs that now form and there is far too much negative emphasis. Although appreciating good defensive play, I can't forget the fabulous open football that Henry mentions above. Game is faster but many other aspects meh. Braver, nah there is far more protection for the player now, not that I'm saying bring back the biff. Personally I think any player in AFL has big cohones as the risk of injury just from the game eg: Hird/McVeigh is the biggest danger. Any way, who said faster is better? Ask your wife.
My major concern is that there is too much hidden in the packs that now form and there is far too much negative emphasis. Although appreciating good defensive play, I can't forget the fabulous open football that Henry mentions above. Game is faster but many other aspects meh. Braver, nah there is far more protection for the player now, not that I'm saying bring back the biff. Personally I think any player in AFL has big cohones as the risk of injury just from the game eg: Hird/McVeigh is the biggest danger. Any way, who said faster is better? Ask your wife.
But the packs last 3 seconds* then you're out & ■■■■-bolting one way or the other.
When I think of ugly footy I think of 15cm deep mud in the middle of the MCG and 10 fat blokes who could barely run scragging each other. Not all that attractive.
*EDIT: hah, you did say to ask your wife
Point the finger at Ben Cousins for the mass interchanging we see today.
Rotating players on him was the only way to keep up.
It's been expanded from there.
Agree about the mud,10 FB s etc. But that was the grounds, and the type of player to cope with the conditions. And the fact that they were being paid peanuts
. That's why I loved to watch footy at the old Sth. Melb and Junction ovals. Just like playing golf on the sand belt courses. The upgraded MCG and Etihad surfaces got rid of the Nichols, Gabbo, Mick Nolan types.
Edit- Your wife !
Stop the pre-game briefs that seem to change precedent from week to week. The small amount of precedent that is inevitable, stop being too gutless to overrule it as a bad decision during a game which then stops a ■■■■ decision from building up steam and becoming the norm.
Stop the sub rule, stop interchange caps.
Stop the below the knees rule.
Our game would be 20-30% better straight up.
Well the AFL Rules Commitee only makes recommendations - It's the AFL Commission that approves rules changes.
Point the finger at Ben Cousins for the mass interchanging we see today.
Rotating players on him was the only way to keep up.
It's been expanded from there.
and when you see the influence of other sports such as ice hockey, with the high rate of line changes they make
Well the AFL Rules Commitee only makes recommendations - It's the AFL Commission that approves rules changes.
How dare you suggest the Commission take responsibility for anything.
The rules are unclear, most situations are a toss up. The officials can call it either way.
Other sports have bad officiating but the rules are clear, it is obvious when an official has made a mistake. In our game you can show a reply of an incident and still have no idea if the call is right or wrong.
I don't get why interchange is a problem. The rules committee brings in changes to speed the game up, so players and coaches adjust to it by having more rotations. The Rules committee creates a problem and rather than saying, 'We ■■■■■■ up, let's fix it' they pretend they didn't create the problem and try to bring in more new rules.
I also don't see how the game is a hybrid. Just because there are elements of this sport that are comparable to other sports, it doesn't mean there is a problem.
The only rule changes needed are to scale back the rules and to make them more clear.
I think the rules committee just try to justify there existence by over doing it with rule changes.
Well the AFL Rules Commitee only makes recommendations - It's the AFL Commission that approves rules changes.
How dare you suggest the Commission take responsibility for anything.
The Commission knocked back the Rules Commitee recommendation at the end of 2012, that rotations be capped at 80 for 2013. But you could argue there non-decision re rotation caps in 2014. The 120 ( really 129 ) which is the AFL current average.
They need to ■■■■ off the “rules committee” making up interpretations & form a committee to actually go through the rules & rewrite them to reflect how the game’s played.
KB doesn't realise that the game has changed in a lot of other areas than the interchange in order for rotations to be a significant coaches tool, but will still harp on about not needing it in his day, which he thinks magically proves his point. Pointless to argue with him.
Overall the simplistic idea that it is one specific thing or another that is "ruining the game", is exactly why rules committee and the AFL keep changing the rules, without realising that half the time they are actually trying to fix the consequences of their own knee jerk reactions.
They will, however, continue to blame it on the coaches or hide behind the spurious idea that it is the umpiring that is being criticised, rather than the mess they are making it for the umpires. But hey, passing the buck is what it's all about in the AFL right?
Stop the pre-game briefs that seem to change precedent from week to week. The small amount of precedent that is inevitable, stop being too gutless to overrule it as a bad decision during a game which then stops a **** decision from building up steam and becoming the norm.
Stop the sub rule, stop interchange caps.
Stop the below the knees rule.
Our game would be 20-30% better straight up.
Revoke any rule that Kevin Barlett has chairman of the Rules of the Game Committee has been responsible for introducing and the game would 7928% better.
Cannot believe that hypocritical flog, any muppet who was involved in bringing the idiotic hands-in-the-back rule into being should not be criticising anyone else for damaging the game!!