Runners - To Have or To Hold?

[Meg]

I wondered what others think about the limitations placed on the use of runners this season?

I suspect the Swans might have inadvertently provided part cause for the change after Jeremy Laidler seemed to linger on the ground giving coaching support in the closing stage of our close win over North Melbourne last year.

When announced I thought it was a good move. But I hadn’t thought through possible negative aspects of not being able to get messages to the players - as first shown by the innovations introduced to provide signals from the boundary.

John Longmire very rarely makes public criticism of the AFL. But he has been vocal twice in recent weeks on the runner change, stating quite strongly that he believes the limitations should be dropped from next season.

His first comments followed Buddy’s re-injury of his hamstring in the match against Hawthorn, after Buddy had spent eight minutes on the sideline waiting for a player to rotate off the ground. Longmire didn’t explicitly say that Buddy’s body might have cooled down too much but that was the obvious implication. Longmire did say they very much wanted Buddy back on but couldn’t get the message out to get a player off.

Then in his press conference after Saturday’s match Longmire expressed frustration that he couldn’t get messages out to support the very young players we had on Saturday. That issue would have been exacerbated because it was a low scoring match with only 14 goals in total. (This wasn’t mentioned by Longmire but occurred to me when I thought about the issue.)

What do you think?

[KSAS]

Personally from a supporter's perspective I've never been a fan of runners as I thought they were used excessively and tactically by coaches. I can understand Longmire's frustration particularly with our young team, but I hope the AFL remain strong on this. This is where leaders like McVeigh, Parker, Kennedy & Rampe come into vogue with marshalling the young troops. Players should able to learn & work out without runners. I accept it may cost games at times, even finals but so be it. Better for the long run imo. I believe players should have the freedom to think & read the game (footy brain) as it's a skill in itself.

I also think if they further reduce the rotation numbers, not only will it simply things but be indusive to opening up the game. Make the game 18 v 18 as it was originally intended rather than 22 v 22 as it is today. I'm a traditionalist and whince when I hear coaches/supporters say their team is a rotation down!

[707]

Nick Maxwell was the constant 19th man for GWS two years ago, got highlighted by the media how he was always plugging a hole for opposition kick ins.

I prefer there to be no runners during play but understand that has the most impact in low scoring matches which means it impacts us most :-)

[barry]

Nick Maxwell was the constant 19th man for GWS two years ago, got highlighted by the media how he was always plugging a hole for opposition kick ins.

I prefer there to be no runners during play but understand that has the most impact in low scoring matches which means it impacts us most :-)

Highlighted by the victorian media no doubt. Same as NSW sides seem to be the reasons for most rules changes (19th man, kung fu kick, Salary cap, academies). Vic sides can perform systematic drug cheating, but its the evil NSW clubs which is the problem. <rant over>

I'm no fan of runners, and like the current system. If the coaches want more messages delivered, then score more goals.

[Ludwig]

I also prefer the current system with no runners. I thought they were a blight on the game. It's natural for young players and teams with less experience to be slower adjusting to changes in game situations. It's just part of the game. It's up to the coaches to teach their players what to do in various game situations as part of training, and to have the leaders on the field implement changes on the go. And we should get a better messaging system through interchanges.

[rb4x]

I hate runners on the field also. Should only be necessary for non players to be on the ground when there is an injury. Do not like the excessive use of interchange either. Players should have the stamina to last the full game. Allow interchanges only at the breaks and after goals and dramatically reduce the number available to a team.

[RogueSwan]

No runners makes footballers like Hodge and McVeigh (when he's on the field) all the more valuable.

[Blood Fever]

No runners makes footballers like Hodge and McVeigh (when he's on the field) all the more valuable.
So true. Pity about Father Time catching up with Jarrod.

[barry]

So true. Pity about Father Time catching up with Jarrod.

2019: Swans record with McVeigh playing Played: 5, Won:2 (40% winning)
2019: Swans record without McVeigh playing: Played: 12. Won 4 (33% winning)

[Blood Fever]

2019: Swans record with McVeigh playing Played: 5, Won:2 (40% winning)
2019: Swans record without McVeigh playing: Played: 12. Won 4 (33% winning)

Your point?

[stevoswan]

Your point?

That we are 21% better when Macca is playing?:tongue:

[barry]

That we are 21% better when Macca is playing?:tongue:

Would be almost dead even if the siren in Perth had blown a couple of minutes earlier.

[Mel_C]

Personally I rarely used to take notice of the runners so I don't have a strong opinion. However, I think runners are important for the younger teams like ours.

As a compromise what about if there was a cap on how many times per quarter the runner can go on the ground? And a time limit on how long they can stay on the ground so they can't stay out there coaching?

[Burra]

Your point?

Yeah, Victorians suck!

[Meg]

As a compromise what about if there was a cap on how many times per quarter the runner can go on the ground? And a time limit on how long they can stay on the ground so they can't stay out there coaching?

Damien Barratt (yeah, I know) was confident on today’s ‘Access All Areas’ AFL video that some form of relaxation of the limits would be in place for next year.

[barry]

As a compromise what about if there was a cap on how many times per quarter the runner can go on the ground? And a time limit on how long they can stay on the ground so they can't stay out there coaching?

I can just imagine the AFL adding two more interchange stewards to monitor it.
More umpires than runners.

[stellation]

Personally I rarely used to take notice of the runners so I don't have a strong opinion. However, I think runners are important for the younger teams like ours.

As a compromise what about if there was a cap on how many times per quarter the runner can go on the ground? And a time limit on how long they can stay on the ground so they can't stay out there coaching?
I think a cap on the number of times they can enter the ground + a time limit sounds like a sensible idea, they already have interchange stewards so I don't think it would be too hard for the AFL to put a system in place to monitor it.

I have no idea what the rules are for runners getting on/off after goals, but they should be able to determine appropriate time limits from there. Maybe 5 times max per quarter, for a total time on ground of 20 times however long is allowed for after a goal being kicked before the next bounce (so for 20 minutes?).

[Bloody Hell]

No runners.

Bad for young players, good for old players.

I remember an interview with Michael DiVenuto a few years ago speaking about how batting coaches had ruined batsmen in cricket. When he was younger there were no coaches and players had to rely on senior players to learn and work out the rest for themselves. This meant that if something was going wrong in the middle of the game, the players had the knowledge to fix it themselves, where as players reliant on coaches have no idea and have to wait to be told how to fix it (oversimplification). I think it's a good analogy for this situation - more power to the player.

Short term loss, long term gain. With a young team we are currently at a disadvantage, but last weeks 1 point loss will be a good learning experience.

[bloodspirit]

Yeah, while it would may be advantageous for us at the moment while we have such a young team to have runners, overall i like that runners are not on the field and getting in the way. Learning how to play without constant coaching is part of the game (as Bloody Hell points out). Coaches still get to coach the players all week long, between quarters and after goals. Surely this can be enough? Adapt. Get used to it. All teams are in the same boat.

[Meg]

“The AFL's football operations manager, Steve Hocking, ....... revealed the League is now attempting to find a balance in terms of how often they (runners) are used.”

"It's worth saying that where runners were at last season was extreme. Where the runners are at this year is extreme as well. We just need to find some middle ground."

Clubs have strongly suggested a preference for more in-game access for runners, AFL footy boss Steve Hocking says AFL, coaches seek middle ground after 'extreme' runner rule change - AFL.com.au (http://m.afl.com.au/news/2019-07-24/afl-coaches-seek-middle-ground-after-extreme-runner-rule-change)

[Blood Fever]

“The AFL's football operations manager, Steve Hocking, ....... revealed the League is now attempting to find a balance in terms of how often they (runners) are used.”

"It's worth saying that where runners were at last season was extreme. Where the runners are at this year is extreme as well. We just need to find some middle ground."

Clubs have strongly suggested a preference for more in-game access for runners, AFL footy boss Steve Hocking says AFL, coaches seek middle ground after 'extreme' runner rule change - AFL.com.au (http://m.afl.com.au/news/2019-07-24/afl-coaches-seek-middle-ground-after-extreme-runner-rule-change)

Typical AFL corporate speak. Perhaps ' middle ground ' could have started this year.