Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 49 to 60 of 67

Thread: Proposed Rule Changes......warranted or complete BS?

  1. #49
    RWOs Black Sheep AnnieH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    At Goodesy's Place
    Posts
    10,789
    yeah no.
    Leave the game alone.
    Wild speculation, unsubstantiated rumours, silly jokes and opposition delight in another's failures is what makes an internet forum fun.
    Blessed are the cracked for they are the ones who let in the light.

  2. #50
    I like the ruck rule as I hate seeing ruckmen have to give the ball off straight away if they are dominant enough to take possession, particularly when the opposition is either not contesting the ruck or making a token effort to do so. My hope is that those are the situations when the new interpretation is allowed.
    Today's a draft of your epitaph

  3. #51
    Senior Player
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    1,002
    Quote Originally Posted by liz View Post
    The around-the-body rule relaxation is because so many of today's players seem to have lost confidence in their ability to kick drop punts. How it is adjudicated will make all the difference. From very tight angles, close to goal, it will make it easier to convert a shot after the siren. From further out, players tend to run out a bit to get the angle right and enough distance on the kick. Will that be allowed (in practice).

    The changes to the ruck prior opportunity and hands-in-the back rule seem pointless to me. Neither seems to be a rule that needs fixing. Players have adjusted over the past decade to the hands-in-the-back rule and rarely infringe nowadays. Removing this restriction will just bring in a further difficulty for the umpires in adjudicating whether there was a push or whether the player in front was accentuating contact. The ruck prior opportunity rule was brought in to prevent ruckmen taking possession, instead trying to encourage them to hit the ball away from the ruck contest. How allowing them to take possession will open up the game I have no idea.

    The zone changes at centre bounces will really only prevent a team stacking its backline after a goal when they are trying to protect a slender lead late in a game. I guess it might marginally affect teams who like to always play a spare man in defence. It's just that players won't be able to start in that position at centre bounces.

    I don't mind the changes around kickouts and free kicks deep in defence. They will make it slightly easier for teams to rebound from defence but are less of a change than extending the goal square. I reckon they do need to apply the existing deliberate rushed behind rules more tightly if they are going to increase the value of a kick-out from a behind.
    I actually like the fact that rucks are going to be treated equally to other players. Getting the ball out to the mids will still be the object unless there is an intent to hold up play, such as when protecting a scoring advantage.I think the umpires can manage that scenario.

    I also don't mind the hands in the back rule, which, in my opinion was brought in to stop the brilliant Micky O, who was reading the ball so far ahead of everyone else, that he held his space with his hands and rarely pushed a player forward in the process. It should be remembered that the main reason for the original rule is player safety and fairness where a giant shove in the backside with any part of the body gives an unfair advantage.Mickey O did neither of these, he just kicked too many goals for the establishment. We seem to be back to the status quo.

    Not so sure about the zone idea. I think it could favour the teams with the best midfield even more. It will be interesting to see what happens in the pre season competition.

    Sent from my SM-T805Y using Tapatalk
    We have them where we want them, everything is going according to plan!

  4. #52
    Travelling Swannie!! mcs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Canberra
    Posts
    5,019
    Quote Originally Posted by liz View Post
    The around-the-body rule relaxation is because so many of today's players seem to have lost confidence in their ability to kick drop punts. How it is adjudicated will make all the difference. From very tight angles, close to goal, it will make it easier to convert a shot after the siren. From further out, players tend to run out a bit to get the angle right and enough distance on the kick. Will that be allowed (in practice).

    The changes to the ruck prior opportunity and hands-in-the back rule seem pointless to me. Neither seems to be a rule that needs fixing. Players have adjusted over the past decade to the hands-in-the-back rule and rarely infringe nowadays. Removing this restriction will just bring in a further difficulty for the umpires in adjudicating whether there was a push or whether the player in front was accentuating contact. The ruck prior opportunity rule was brought in to prevent ruckmen taking possession, instead trying to encourage them to hit the ball away from the ruck contest. How allowing them to take possession will open up the game I have no idea.

    The zone changes at centre bounces will really only prevent a team stacking its backline after a goal when they are trying to protect a slender lead late in a game. I guess it might marginally affect teams who like to always play a spare man in defence. It's just that players won't be able to start in that position at centre bounces.

    I don't mind the changes around kickouts and free kicks deep in defence. They will make it slightly easier for teams to rebound from defence but are less of a change than extending the goal square. I reckon they do need to apply the existing deliberate rushed behind rules more tightly if they are going to increase the value of a kick-out from a behind.
    As always Liz, you sum it up well. I don't mind the change to the ruck interpretation, as it'll mean a greater need for genuine ruckman - which is a unique part of our game and something I want to see encouraged per say, rather than discouraged. But it is not a rule that really needed fixing - and its impact on open play is a good comment. And like you say, the changes to the hand in the back rule seem to only create yet another grey area full of interpretation.

    All I see with the centre bounce change is it will invariably extend the period between goals, which equals more $$$ for the AFL in advertising revenue. I don't feel its really going to make much change, bar as you say the spare man in defence. Players are so fit now it'll only take 15 or 20 seconds for them to get into the positions intended anyway.
    "You get the feeling that like Monty Python's Black Knight, the Swans would regard amputation as merely a flesh wound."

  5. #53
    Regular in the Side Matty10's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Southbank, VIC
    Posts
    999
    Quote Originally Posted by liz View Post
    I don't mind the changes around kickouts and free kicks deep in defence. They will make it slightly easier for teams to rebound from defence but are less of a change than extending the goal square. I reckon they do need to apply the existing deliberate rushed behind rules more tightly if they are going to increase the value of a kick-out from a behind.
    Changes to the rules, in general, piss me off - particularly when there is no certainty about what they will do. These changes are bizarre. If there was not a build-up to the need for change to occur (which I think is a false dilemma) then the public and media would be questioning the intent more.

    The kick out change is fraught with danger. My worry is that teams will be less likely to take shots on goal - particularly if players are on tight angles or far out from goal - as they will deem the opportunity given to the opposition as too high a risk. I foresee more kicks going back within the forward 50 and and players holding onto the ball or stalling when streaming forward to goal. Shouldn't the reward for shots on goal be encouraged (not penalised) if we want higher scoring games?

  6. #54
    It's Goodes to cheer!! Site Admin ScottH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Master of the house, keeper of the zoo
    Posts
    23,594
    Blog Entries
    2
    TOO MANY rule changes in one go, me thinks.

    How quickly will they be able to monitor the 6-6-6 rule?

    The hands in the back rule is still very open to interpretation.
    Will still see a lot of wrong decisions paid either way.

  7. #55
    Goes up to 11
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    2,966
    Most of these rule changes are pretty sensible and in response to calls for addressing particular issues.

    Now let's see which teams (ie coaches) are quickest to adapt. It'd be good if we were for once.....

  8. #56
    Quote Originally Posted by jono2707 View Post
    Most of these rule changes are pretty sensible and in response to calls for addressing particular issues.

    Now let's see which teams (ie coaches) are quickest to adapt. It'd be good if we were for once.....
    Unfortunately there are no Sydney based AFL umpires to come and give us some guidance before the season.

  9. #57
    Veterans List Ludwig's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Chiang Rai
    Posts
    5,880
    The new kick in rules will favour teams with quicker ball movement. It's a good thing that we've been bringing in quicker players in recent times. Players like Linkg and Stoddart may be required to help move the ball in rebound from defence. Blakey too could be a useful player in marking contests if we kick the ball long out of the defensive zone to the midfield. Smith could start to become a liability unless his one on one defensive work remains first class. Lloyd may be better playing on the wing than in his usual role in defense, although he is an elusive runner.

    On the other side of the coin, we will need to up the defensive pressure by our forwards. I feel we have the speed, but need to be more effective in stopping the ease of the opposition moving the ball out of their defensive zone.

    The new rules also favour the revival of the ruckman. The smaller backup ruckman won't work anymore. Teams will have to put up a stong contest at every stoppage. I'm not sure how this will play out for the Swans, but Naismith and Cameron look to be better choices than Sinclair at first glance. I wonder if Amartey's athletic game would be well suited to the new rules even though he is undersized. He looks as he has the frame to bulk up to ruckman size and he does jump well. The dinasaur ruckman will remain a thing of the past. The tall athletic player like Brody Grundy looks to be the modern prototype. There will be a lot tactical maneuvering next year around these rules.

  10. #58
    Goes up to 11
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    2,966
    Quote Originally Posted by barry View Post
    Unfortunately there are no Sydney based AFL umpires to come and give us some guidance before the season.
    Good thing we have things like aeroplanes and telephones and stuff then.

    No excuses for any team not to engage with the umpires as much as possible on these changes next preseason.

  11. #59
    Regular in the Side
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    636
    Quote Originally Posted by barry View Post
    Unfortunately there are no Sydney based AFL umpires to come and give us some guidance before the season.
    The AFL send umpires around the clubs to train with and officiate in practice matches. They need to have match practice as well, it gives them an opportunity to trial the rules, explain how they are to be interpreted.
    sprite

  12. #60
    Quote Originally Posted by barry View Post
    Unfortunately there are no Sydney based AFL umpires to come and give us some guidance before the season.
    Planes and boats and trains....

Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 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