get rid of the holding the arm while tackling. Go back to traditional tackling, the chicken winging i a terrible look.
I disagree actually, I think it’s a good way to tackle because theoretically it increases the chance of getting an illegal disposal free since his arm is impeded. The problem is the ■■■■■■ umpires don’t reward the tackler often enough.
I see what your saying but there is some terrible injuries coming from it.
If they reward the tackler I think it’ll work.
No more placing the ball on the ground when tackled. No more handing it to a teammate when tackled.
Not sure how the hawks will compete.
Instead we get tacklers trying to destroy opponents because there is almost nothing that can be done to gain a free kick. And now we penalise players for ‘dangerous’ tackles.
What was much saying, how was it not backed up?
Healy put it pretty well, congestion is strangling the game, we have to set the sherrin free
Put the full forwards back in the goal square for me. Joey would kick a ton
More of a question but, where does everyone sit with the dangerous sling tackle? I know it doesn’t play a part in congestion and low scoring but if we were to fix parts of the game, what would we do about this.
What was much saying, how was it not backed up?He was saying that it se there are not enough good players and more importantly and restricting the interchange.
I could not give a ■■■■ about the bench, the more you make it that player have to stay on the ground, the more we jut get marathon runners and tonns of injuries.
If they reward the tackler I think it'll work.No more placing the ball on the ground when tackled. No more handing it to a teammate when tackled.
Not sure how the hawks will compete.
Instead we get tacklers trying to destroy opponents because there is almost nothing that can be done to gain a free kick. And now we penalise players for ‘dangerous’ tackles.
This…so much this.
Stop cloning yourself thread!!
I knew the machines would get conscious one day … this can’t be good.
Footy is in a bad state when the likes of Whateley, Anderson, Malthouse, King and Healy are called upon to sort out the game. What a bunch of morons.
Whateley is just your very average AFL accredited media buffoon who has no feel for or knowledge of the game.
Anderson - yesterday’s man. Single handedly responsible for the rules committee, match review panel, and many of the problems we have already.
Malthouse - another yesterday’s man, too old and should go where all old Richmond footballers go.
King - A man going through a midlife crisis who discovered statistics, trying to Americanise our game.
Healy - Boy he must have been a bad physiotherapist because he is even worse as a footy commentator - another AFL apologist
Changing rules, interpretations etc is just a waste of time. The maggots can’t even adjudicate on the rules we have now. Last week against Port Bags was pinged for a dangerous tackle (when did that rule come about) and then was spear tackled later on and nothing. And don’t get me started on the free against Hurley.
We all went bananas a few years back when the “in the back” interpretation re-emerged for the marking contest - not any more.
Reduce the interchange to 15/quarter for each team. Tighten up on the prior opportunity interpretation. If the player with the ball takes on the tackler and is pinged - HOLDING THE BALL. IF the player with the ball is tackled and his arms are pinged there is no way he can legitimately dispose of the ball correctly (the dawks do it every time) - HOLDING THE BALL. How many times in a game after a mark or free does the opposition player run over the mark when guarding it (again the hawks do it every time and are never penalised).
When a pack forms the maggot must run straight in, grab the ball and toss it up without delay. Now they let the pack get bigger, then blow the whistle, then wait for everyone to take up their position, then tell everyone where they want to back away to, then wipe their hands and after 10- 15 secs throw the ball up.
Benfti mentioned that the Coll vs PA game a few weeks back had 138 stoppages. I watched that game and thought it was a ripper - close, tough and hard contest (and it was a wet night).
Sam Newman mentioned something interesting on TFS just before (only watched it due to Hirdy segment):
Was to have the HB/Wingers/HF prohibited to enter the centre square at the initial ball-up. So only the ruckman and 3 mids to contest the ball and clear it out with even numbers around the ball…
Get rid of as many things as possible that have to be interpreted. Prior opportunity, straight arm, two actions, deliberate anything, etc.
Reinstate the ball must be disposed of by hand or foot and get rid of spilling free in a tackle.
Reduce the interchange bench to two players, then reduce the rotations.
It’s the AFL’s own fault. They are the ones who, a number of years ago, wanted a game of continuing action with no stopping and starting. They relaxed the holding the ball rule (not paying a free for a ball spilled from a tackle) so that the ball and the play would keep moving along as opposed to if a free kick is paid the play stopping while the player got the ball, went back over their mark, waited and looked around for a team mate to pass to.
Just pay holding the ball/dropping the ball.
Also, this whole we need to restrict the interchange to tire the players out so that they can’t get to the contest and congest things up seems counter intuitive to me. Wouldn’t it be better if the players were less tired so that they could run into space and away from congestion. It seems to me that the play gets congested because the players are tired.
Sam Newman mentioned something interesting on TFS just before (only watched it due to Hirdy segment):Was to have the HB/Wingers/HF prohibited to enter the centre square at the initial ball-up. So only the ruckman and 3 mids to contest the ball and clear it out with even numbers around the ball…
He went a bit further.
No other player could enter the centre square until the ball came out.
I like the idea, but you’ll have the wingmen hedging their bets, then loading up down back and end up having an 8 on 8 forward line to kick to.
I don’t think there is a answer to the problem with new rule changes.
I’d be willing to go back to when we last liked the look of footy (to me it was late 1990s / early 2000s) and revert all rule changes back to the way they were then. Then I’d pick and choose which rules to add back in.
I’d bring in the sped up kicking in from a behind rule, reduced time at set shots for goal and maybe the cap on interchanges.
No hands in the back rule, no sub vests, no stupid ducking rule, no stupid deliberate out of bounds because the ball bounced end on end twenty times and rolled out of bounds, etc.
The only new rule I’d like implemented is rushing of the behind should be judged the same way as a deliberate out of bounds.
It’s simple, but the AFL won’t be brave enough to say, we parked the game up so they’ll keep tinkering with the current rules and far the game up even more in the process.
Yep, club will just soley focus on endurance, we will miss out on the footballer that way.
To me we have to reduce the number that get behind the ball, thats why the game has turned into a congested stoppage fest
Penalise players for not disposing of the ball correctly. Placing the ball on the ground, handing off to a teammate, releasing it in a tackle. None of these get penalised any more. Players now can get spun though 720 degrees and still not be penalised for holding the ball.
Stop allowing players to shepherd the mark. They are normally more than 5 metres from the player with the ball, so technically an illegal block, penalise them for it.
Get rid of the call back from the bounce. If the ball goes to the advantage of one team, stiff ■■■■, thats what the bounce was introduced for, the element of chance.
The rule was introduced that if a second player from the same team falls on a player being tackled and that helps lock the ball in that a free against would be paid, implement the freaking rule.
Stop rewarding players for deliberately seeking high contact. They have done it to stop players leading with there heads, now do it to stop players lifting arms to cause tackles to slide high. Easy to do, if the tackle starts below the shoulder and then slips high, meaning all real force is gone from the tackle, call play on. If the tackle directly hits the neck or head penalise it.
At a stoppage, stop dithering and move the ball, after all that’s why they got rid of the bounce around the ground so that the umpire could grab the ball and throw it straight up without waiting, implement the freaking rule.
The rules are there, the humps just refuse to pay em because they think that blowing the whistle will slow down play. Go watch a late 90’s game and it is invariably quicker than todays game, and the umps weren’t afraid to blow their whistles.
Not sure less rotations and less players on the bench will help. It might change it now but teams will simply look for players with huge tanks.
If you really want to fix the game remove anything that needs interpretation and re write the rules so there is no doubt at all. I don’t care if holding the ball rule is a 15 page document as long as it’s there in black and white for everyone to understand clearly.
So Fox Footy ran a really interesting round table discussion on the state of the game, it was hosted by Whateley, and it featured, Adrian Anderson, Mick Malthouse, David King, and Gerard Healy. They discussed where the game was, and where they thought it should be.
What was interesting was 2 things
Among many possible suggestions that came up, removal of the sub. allowing the clock to continue to run after a point, but the most interesting one was starting points, as in points where certain players have to start at the bounce, but to a lesser extent stoppages, kind of like the restricted area where the rucks compete. because what agreed on is is the game is far to congested now. There was a game a few weeks ago between Collingwood and port where there were 138 stoppages, they figured that more than half the game was dead ball. Also that in the last 3 years only 2 teams have averaged over 100 points a game, and both those teams played off in the grand finals each year. Compared to 6 years ago when half the comp did.
What are people around here thoughts about where the game is at, and possibly what can be made to try and bring it back to more of the spectacle it was 10 years ago.
Not related to reducing congestion, but one rule change I’d love to see is awarding 3 points for a rushed behind, whether it is by the defender or attacker. Only missed set shots should be awarded 1 pt. This rewards the attacking team that can apply pressure while also giving the defending team a choice of whether to try and gain control of the ball again at the cost of 3 points. Right now, it’s a no brainer to concede the rushed behind.