Page 1 of 6 12345 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 12 of 61

Thread: New AFL Rules and Interpretations for 2016 Season

  1. #1
    Go Swannies! Site Admin Meg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    In the Brewongle
    Posts
    3,296

    New AFL Rules and Interpretations for 2016 Season

    There are several changes in rules, or adjudication of rules, for the coming season. I am wondering what effect we expect them to have in general and specifically on the Swans. And also Id be grateful for clarification of what the last change Ive listed below actually means.

    1. Abolition of the substitute position, a return to four interchange players and a reduction in interchange rotations from 120 to 90.
    In announcing this change the AFL said it was expected it would see an average reduction in game time per player per game of five minutes. However I assume the average time per player spent on the field per rotation will be longer (as will be the average time spent on the bench between each rotation). Hence the need to be able to maintain skill levels while more exhausted. Is that what others expect?

    2. A stricter adjudication on what is acceptable in tackling, with the Match Review Panel to enforce a stricter definition of dangerous high tackles that cause forceful high contact.
    I assume this would mean the type of tackle that led to Ted Richards being concussed last year would be penalised by the MRP.

    3. A stricter application of the deliberate out-on-the-full rule.
    This one has me worried umpires calls on these have often seemed to me to be arbitrary as it was just how do you read intent when a player kicks over the heads of players to an open space near the boundary line? Remember the free kick against Ted Richards in the 2012 grand final? Equally however there was a match in the H&A, I think last year, when Ted walked backwards over the boundary line between the goal posts when under pressure whilst in possession of the ball I assume that would now cost us a free kick which is probably reasonable.

    4. An increase in the size of the protected area around the mark with a trial on the potential new distance during the 2016 NAB Challenge to determine whether the new distance during the season will be 8 or 10 metres. Players manning the mark to be able to move laterally only. Umpires also to strictly monitor the handover of who is guarding the mark.
    Im a bit confused by this one. I think the current rule is a protected area of 5 metres. An increase to 10 (or even to 8 which I think is what they are trialing in the NAB) is a big increase. Does this mean in effect that no player can enter an 8 (or 10) metre square box either side of and in front of the mark? That is a large no-go zone which would be very easy to breach without deliberate intent, and with a potential, very large 50-metre free kick penalty for getting it wrong.
    Will this give Buddy added protection as he swings out on his left arc to kick for goal?
    And what does it mean for a kick for goal taken from right on the boundary line where a player wants to side step? And where a line of opposition players line up to try to crowd the kicker. Will the opposition line now have to be 8 (or 10) metres away? It would certainly help the kicker if that were to be the case.


    Id be grateful for anyones clarification/interpretation/views on any or all of the above.

  2. #2
    Senior Player
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    1,749
    My understanding is that no change has been made to stepping over the goal line under pressure. As has always been the case, you would expect to be penalised if it was the boundary line.

  3. #3
    Go Swannies! Site Admin Meg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    In the Brewongle
    Posts
    3,296
    Further to my comments above re new "protected area" I've just read in the SMH that it will be trialled at 10 metres during NAB, then will be set at either 10 or eight for the season proper. I had it the other way round.

    It quotes Wayne Campbell (umpires' coach):

    "If you're caught in the protected area when there's a mark or free kick, you've just got to make every effort to get out," he said.

    "This rule has been introduced to stop that player planting his legs at five metres, putting his hands up and stopping the ball getting back into the corridor."

    Hmmmm! I hope the umps are lenient with their judgement of 10 metres or we are going to see a LOT of 50-metre penalties.

  4. #4
    On the average time point, it would make sense to me that what you say about longer time on-field per rotation and off-field per bench will be the outcome. Also, I recall in one of Horse's recent interviews he was expecting the ruck role to now favour more mobile players capable of getting around the ground more. Implies a lot more time on the ground for them I think.
    CIA Agent to Policeman: "Have you ever had anti-terrorist training?"
    Policeman: "Yes, I was married once."

  5. #5
    Go Swannies! Site Admin Meg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    In the Brewongle
    Posts
    3,296
    Quote Originally Posted by Matimbo View Post
    Also, I recall in one of Horse's recent interviews he was expecting the ruck role to now favour more mobile players capable of getting around the ground more. Implies a lot more time on the ground for them I think.
    Good point. Average time per player on the field could mean quite a lot less for some (players/roles) and considerably more for others.

  6. #6
    Swans2win graemed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Randwick, Sydney.
    Posts
    271
    With regard to Rule #4, I feel this may impact on Hawthorn more than most as they guard the corridor and use men behind the ball to create pressure by pushing the envelope. If the opposition have the room to hit targets either by playing on quickly or having more space when in possession, the Hawks will have to be more circumspect with their off the ball running especially with fewer rotations.

  7. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by Meg View Post
    Further to my comments above re new "protected area" I've just read in the SMH that it will be trialled at 10 metres during NAB, then will be set at either 10 or eight for the season proper. I had it the other way round.

    It quotes Wayne Campbell (umpires' coach):

    "If you're caught in the protected area when there's a mark or free kick, you've just got to make every effort to get out," he said.

    "This rule has been introduced to stop that player planting his legs at five metres, putting his hands up and stopping the ball getting back into the corridor."

    Hmmmm! I hope the umps are lenient with their judgement of 10 metres or we are going to see a LOT of 50-metre penalties.
    I cannot see what possessed them to go down this path. A player has always had the freedom to take his "free" kick.
    I'm not physic but I see lot's of unearned 50m penalties.
    Now. Has any body thought of the OBVIOUS ramification - the abolishment of the kick on the angle.
    No more screw punts just run around and slam it through!!!!!!!!!
    give it to the game

  8. #8
    McVeigh for Brownlow RogueSwan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Coffs Harbour - home of Swans summer camp
    Posts
    4,140
    Quote Originally Posted by graemed View Post
    With regard to Rule #4, I feel this may impact on Hawthorn more than most as they guard the corridor and use men behind the ball to create pressure by pushing the envelope. If the opposition have the room to hit targets either by playing on quickly or having more space when in possession, the Hawks will have to be more circumspect with their off the ball running especially with fewer rotations.
    I don't think it will bother Hawthorn at all. Clarkson seems to be a very adaptable coach.
    "Fortunately, this is the internet, so knowing nothing is no obstacle to having an opinion!." Beerman 18-07-2017

  9. #9
    Go Swannies! Site Admin Meg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    In the Brewongle
    Posts
    3,296

    New AFL Rules and Interpretations for 2016 Season

    Quote Originally Posted by cos789 View Post
    I cannot see what possessed them to go down this path.
    ................
    Now. Has any body thought of the OBVIOUS ramification - the abolishment of the kick on the angle.
    No more screw punts just run around and slam it through!!!!!!!!!
    The AFL explanations I have seen for introducing this change have all been in terms of assisting the kicker to bring/keep the ball in the corridor. I haven't seen any official comments about the impact on kicking for goal (your point, and my question in last dot point above).

    Also, the tougher interpretation of "deliberate out of bounds" is likely to encourage kicking towards the centre and away from the boundary.

    So it appears to me that someone in AFL Land has determined that kicking through the corridor makes for more "attractive" football.

    These changes would certainly seem to suit a team such as Port Adelaide which has always favoured playing through the centre. Others (including the Swans?) might have to adjust their game plans.

    Ps: I recall early in Mike Pyke's AFL career that he expressed bemusement about the constant changing of AFL rules. I must say I share his puzzlement.

  10. #10
    Swans2win graemed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Randwick, Sydney.
    Posts
    271
    Quote Originally Posted by RogueSwan View Post
    I don't think it will bother Hawthorn at all. Clarkson seems to be a very adaptable coach.
    I agree with your assessment of Clarkson but the point I am making is that their current game style will have to change probably more than many others.

  11. #11
    McVeigh for Brownlow RogueSwan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Coffs Harbour - home of Swans summer camp
    Posts
    4,140
    Quote Originally Posted by Meg View Post
    ... Ps: I recall early in Mike Pyke's AFL career that he expressed bemusement about the constant changing of AFL rules. I must say I share his puzzlement.
    It would be great if just one year, just one, they left everything alone and let the game evolve itself.
    "Fortunately, this is the internet, so knowing nothing is no obstacle to having an opinion!." Beerman 18-07-2017

  12. #12
    Carpe Noctem CureTheSane's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Knoxfield, Victoria
    Posts
    4,899
    The game will only 'evolve itself' in a negative way
    I have no problems with the new rules.
    The difference between insanity and genius is measured only in success.

Page 1 of 6 12345 ... LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO