Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 13 to 24 of 25

Thread: Rules of the game

  1. #13
    Veterans List
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    Castlemaine, Vic.
    Posts
    4,819
    The new 'man on the mark' rule is a classic case of AFL over reach and their solution for an inconsequential 'problem' is just stupidity. Hocking is a spud....this league is run by spuds. It's gobsmacking.....

  2. #14
    Senior Player sharp9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Cust, New Zealand
    Posts
    2,379
    Simple tweak is to make the 30 seconds a shot clock like basketball...in others words 0:00 equals “play on”.

  3. #15
    Veterans List
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    9,920
    Quote Originally Posted by The Runner View Post
    Ben Brown runs back to take his kicks. If you think he's a blight on the game, you are worrying about the wrong things.
    The delaying of a player taking a free kick is a real issue, and something umpires need to crack down on. The rules are already in place for that, they just need to focus on it.

    I like the adjustment of not allowing a player to change on the mark. Really opens the play up behind them, as they can't move back and allow another player to get back and cover the mark. It will really get play moving.
    When a player stands over the ball and doesn't allow the player who has been paid the free to pick it up, is blatant time wasting to allow players to flood back into defence. The other one that irks me is when the player on the mark is pushed or blocked by another player from the team that is taking the kick. Should be obstruction and 50 metres. Both of these are Hawthorn tactics.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by sharp9 View Post
    Simple tweak is to make the 30 seconds a shot clock like basketball...in others words 0:00 equals “play on”.
    I don't like any form of a shot clock. It is just a knock off from another sport. Just call time on until the player kicks it. If he handballs off it's play on. The time keepers know what they are doing.

  4. #16
    Senior Player sharp9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Cust, New Zealand
    Posts
    2,379
    Quote Originally Posted by Nico View Post
    When a player stands over the ball and doesn't allow the player who has been paid the free to pick it up, is blatant time wasting to allow players to flood back into defence. The other one that irks me is when the player on the mark is pushed or blocked by another player from the team that is taking the kick. Should be obstruction and 50 metres. Both of these are Hawthorn tactics.

    - - - Updated - - -



    I don't like any form of a shot clock. It is just a knock off from another sport. Just call time on until the player kicks it. If he handballs off it's play on. The time keepers know what they are doing.
    yeah I really hate that the clock runs down. That’s a great idea...stop time when Mark/free kick is whistled An’s start when ball is kicked

  5. #17
    The sudden trend of 5-8 players on the mark in front of goal is horrible to watch.

  6. #18
    Regular in the Side Velour&Ruffles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Fools' Paradise
    Posts
    622
    Quote Originally Posted by Mel_C View Post
    So if you're manning the mark you have to basically stand like a statue now otherwise it's 50 metres. What is wrong with this administration?

    If they want the game to flow quicker they need to start penalising players that continue holding down their opponent after a free is paid. It happens time and time again and yet nothing happens. But if you step over the mark by 1cm you are penalised 50 metres.
    +1000
    My opinion is objective truth in its purest form

  7. #19
    Quote Originally Posted by The Runner View Post
    The sudden trend of 5-8 players on the mark in front of goal is horrible to watch.
    Can't say I've witnessed that so frequently but is typical with a critical kick after the siren. What's the issue? It makes sense because the defending team is trying lawfully to make it harder for the kicker to goal. That's what they're meant to be doing. I suppose if they outlaw it for everyone then it's an even playing field - but why make yet another rule when you don't have to and the situation doesn't arise that often?
    All opinions are not equal. Some are a very great deal more robust, sophisticated, and well supported in logic and argument than others. -Douglas Adams, author (11 Mar 1952-2001)

  8. #20
    Go Swannies! Site Admin Meg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    In the Brewongle
    Posts
    3,973
    Quote Originally Posted by bloodspirit View Post
    Can't say I've witnessed that so frequently but is typical with a critical kick after the siren. What's the issue? It makes sense because the defending team is trying lawfully to make it harder for the kicker to goal. That's what they're meant to be doing. I suppose if they outlaw it for everyone then it's an even playing field - but why make yet another rule when you don't have to and the situation doesn't arise that often?
    I agree bloodspirit. In fact it intensely annoys me if our players DON’T do this when an opponent is taking a critical set shot after the siren (when it is safe to leave other opponents unguarded).

  9. #21
    On the veteran's list
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Swans Heartland
    Posts
    1,696
    Simple solution to fix things is to return to the rules at midnight before interchange was brought in. 19th and 20th man. Once you’re off you’re off. If Bobby Skilton played today you wouldn’t see him resting in the forward pocket and creating havoc, you’d see him on the bench waiting to come back on. The best players should never be off.

  10. #22
    Im not sure who the "Genius" is who thinks that low scoring can be fixed with these 3 piddly rule changes. But FFS time to hang em up mate! Its time for some fresh minds!

  11. #23
    Go Swannies! Site Admin Meg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    In the Brewongle
    Posts
    3,973
    Article today about the three rule changes.

    In my view, the best para is:

    ‘This steady decline in scoring is because team defence has become very good at stopping opposition scoring, with every player required to defend regardless of their role and where they are on the ground.’

    Too little respect is given to the elevated defence skills of today’s elite AFL player.

    I also agree that if the AFL really wants to increase scoring they should drastically cut interchange rotations - beyond the 75 limit now to be allowed (as per comment in this thread above). I note the reservation based on ‘player welfare’ but is there any evidence that there were more injuries pre the introduction of the rotation rule?

    And I hate the so-called ‘nuclear option’ of zones to be trialled in the VFL/East Coast comp. That would be a drastic change to the game - and most unwelcome in my view. 6/6/6 has taken the notion far enough already.


    https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/...20-p56gd2.html

  12. #24
    Veterans List
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    9,920
    Quote Originally Posted by The Runner View Post
    The sudden trend of 5-8 players on the mark in front of goal is horrible to watch.
    This has happened on and off for years. As long as players are behind the man on the mark it is acceptable. Can't have more than one man on the mark. Make it 5 metres behind the mark and it stops.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 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