New Rule Changes

[Proud Pies]

http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/afl-changes-rules-to-make-game-faster/2005/11/25/1132703375886.html

AFL changes rules to make game faster
Email Print Normal font Large font By Michael Gleeson
November 26, 2005

In one of the most dramatic overhauls of the game, the AFL has announced a host of rule changes designed to stamp out negative tactics and make the game a more free-flowing spectacle.

The new rules are clearly designed to combat the growing number of defensive strategies creeping into the game, such as flooding and especially scragging, and to encourage more one-on-one contests.

Sydney, the eventual premier, was one club singled out for criticism by the AFL last season, earning a public rebuke from league chief executive Andrew Demetriou for its "ugly" play early in the season.

Fearing a slide into a stop-start form of rugby, the AFL has moved to arrest the trend by changing several rules and announcing a strict crackdown in the interpretation on a range of others.

The key changes are:

· Players do not need to wait for the umpire to wave his flags before kicking in after a behind. Spare balls will be positioned behind the goals to speed up the restart of play.

· Players will be given less time to take a set shot at goal - just 30 seconds. When that time has expired, play-on will be called. This is already being called the Matthew Lloyd rule, in recognition of the Essendon full-forward's slow, deliberate goalkicking routine.

· Time-on will be called automatically whenever a bounce is signalled around the ground without the umpire needing to signal separately.

· Players taking a mark or free kick in the goal square will be lined up directly in front of goal and not be put on an angle.

· Umpires will more strictly enforce the rule of kicking the ball deliberately out of bounds.

· Taggers will be monitored more closely for infringements off the ball.

· 50-metre penalties will be applied more readily for infringing players who have marked the ball.

· Boundary umpires will throw the ball in more quickly.

· Stricter policing of holding the man and blocking in marking contests.

The AFL coaches were yesterday briefed on the changes. They were surprised by some and queried why - at a time of record crowds and TV audiences - the league felt the need to tamper further with the rules.

The coaches, many of whom played as defenders, and all of whom understood the value of defence, wondered why defensive tactics were being targeted.

[Proud Pies]

But wait, there's more.......

http://www.heraldsun.news.com.au/footy/common/story_page/0,8033,17366342%255E20322,00.html

Hurry up, Lloydy
26 November 2005 Herald Sun
Mike Sheahan and Damian Barrett

Umps to crack down on prolonged set shots at goal
THE AFL stands accused of snubbing its coaches after the controversial decision to alter several rules and interpretations for next season.

Melbourne coach and AFL Coaches Association president Neale Daniher said last night: "We're disappointed and frustrated, and a bit concerned that we've been kept at arm's length.

"We weren't consulted and we believe we can play a role in the combined intelligence of where the game's going.

"We're concerned about just who is influencing the AFL and the direction of the game. We don't really know."

Daniher said the coaches had expressed their disappointment to AFL football operations manager and Laws of the Game committee chairman Adrian Anderson at AFL House yesterday. The coaches' association executive also expressed the view to the commission later in the day.

Daniher also revealed the coaches would push for the introduction of mature-age rookies. They believe players older than the current age limit of 23 are disadvantaged because clubs are reluctant to draft them, knowing they are committed for two years.

One of the most interesting rule changes is likely to mean Matthew Lloyd may have to ditch his trademark grass-tossing routine.

As of next season, players taking set shots for goal will be afforded just 30 seconds before being told to "play on" by umpires.

The change is almost certain to become known as the Lloyd Rule. The Essendon full-forward was clocked by Champion Data in 2005 as taking an average of 44sec from 69 set shots at goal. He peaked at 62sec.

Anderson denied Lloyd and Carlton's Brendan Fevola -- average of 47sec and a high of 72 -- had been targeted for perceived time-wasting.

But Anderson still felt the need to call Lloyd on Thursday night to tell him about the rule interpretation change, despite not making the news public until yesterday.

"From what I understand, umpires will be coming out to explain to players exactly what the new interpretation means so at this stage it is difficult to know exactly what it will mean," Lloyd said last night. "But I am generally about the 30sec mark anyway.

"There have been exceptions -- but usually that is about the mark -- so I don't envisage I will need to make any change to the way I normally prepare."

Essendon chief executive Peter Jackson said: "Umpires blow time on when a lot of these forwards are preparing to kick anyway so I don't see how it is a time wasting issue."

"Kicking goals is how you win games of football. You wouldn't want to lose a final because the umpire is hurrying a player to kick for goal instead of blowing time on."

Carlton coach Denis Pagan said he agreed with most of the rule changes and was confident Fevola would have no problems with the new rulings.

Anderson explained the new set shot interpretation: "It is 30sec from the time of a mark or free kick other than in the case of injury or undue delay."

In total, the AFL commission endorsed the Laws of the Game committee's recommendations to change three rules and to apply different interpretations to a further seven.

The significant changes to be introduced next year, from the NAB Cup onwards, included:

SCOPE for players to bring the ball back into play before a goal umpire has waved his flag;

ALLOWANCE for a shot at goal from directly in front of goal when a mark is completed inside the goalsquare. "The kick shall be taken from directly in front of goal, from a spot horizontally across from where the mark or free kick was awarded," Anderson said;

AUTOMATIC "time on" from the moment an umpire crosses his arms to signal a ball-up to when the ball is bounced;

STRICTER interpretation for kicks deliberately sent out of bounds;

GREATER focus on detection of infringements by players.

Driving most of the changes was a need to address one of the AFL's core objectives -- to "maintain and enhance the appeal of our game".

Trends from the past 40 years, with a particular concentration on the past six, were analysed as part of the rule-change process undertaken by the Laws of the Game committee.

The committee observed the game had developed at a "significantly higher speed but in a more stop-start, less continuous fashion".

[Eunos]

I love "The Lloyd" rule already!

[Nutmeg]

AAARRRGGHHHH!

Must we keep "reinterpreting" (read: changing) the rules every single bloody year??? In ten year's time, the game will be virtually unrecognisable.

"Quick, speed the game up, I only have the attention span of an ADHD-suffering gnat so quick quick quick hurry up kick it in ball it up don't bother with the flags keep moving keep the ball moving i don't care that you're only human faster faster FASTER!!!"

[Johnson#26]

Its pretty silly, once more by the AFL. The game is just about fine as it is. The stoppages, like it or not, are generally part of the game, and its not in need of speeding up.

The kicking for goal rule from straight in front makes sence. The others I'm not sold on. Speed, speed, speed. Maybe they need to slow down.

[MagpieMad]

[perthmagpie]

I like alot of them. But worry about the stricter OOF interpretation. Its not a problem now and doesn't detract from the game. I can't trust the umpires to police without going overboard for the first few months.

[skaman]

The "Lloyd" rule is a good'n. What makes him any more "special" than say Jimmy (Llloyds not fit to tie his bootlaces) Clement, for instance!
Peter Jackass' comment, that "forwards win matches", is crap. Yes, they CAN win matches, but are not THE team and our superb backline have also won many a match, with little forward help.

Agreed, the OOF rule is pretty well interpretated ATM, no need for further tightening IMO.

Some of the tagging stratagies could come under more scrutiny. The kicking in rule is also a winner in my book.

One I'd still like to see come in is still the third umpire in goal disputed circumstances. We have the technology, use it. Would not detract from the spectacle, or waste much time at all.

[Lone Ranger]

As part of the kick in rule they said:

Anderson said the chance for players to kick the ball in quicker - an average of nine seconds under the new rule as trialled in the pre-season competition compared to 16 seconds under the old rule - would mean less chance for opposition teams to set-up their defensive zones.

This practice has led to the much derided short kick-in to a nearby teammate, thus eliminating one opportunity for fans to see players fly for pack marks.

This just shows their absolute stupidity. To have a "pack" mark their actually needs to be a pack. The quicker the defender can bring the ball back into play, the LESS chance for a pack to form.

Do they actually think through any of their rules changes?

They made players kick it quicker in order to "reduce flooding". Of course having less time to find a team mate ENCOURAGES the opposition to flood as it is more effective.

Again, do they actually think these things through, or just make knee jerk rules changes?

[MagpieMad]

[Woods Of Ypres]

Yesterday i managed to overhear a conversation between Paul Roos and Chris Connelly as they walked down Spencer St from Telstra Dome.
I can tell u that Roosy is not impressed at all with these new changes and lack of consultation. Probably no suprises there though!

[Eunos]

Agreed Tess.
The coaches will only agree to rule changes that benefit their team as it stands in that particular season.

They are to close to make rational decisions.

[pietillidie]

True, but by the same token you wouldn't want to be 'Steve McKeed' and have the game plan you've been working on for twenty years impaired by rules you were neither consulted on or warned about. All of the coaches have been around a hell of a lot longer than the latest market-fad induced rule change. I'm not saying all rule changes are bad, but I'd hate to think the current rule changes are more influenced by fly-by-night marketing consultants than senior coaches (I know there's a rules committee etc., but we know the AFL loves its marketing people...).

[Johnson#26]

[Cannibal]

I like the special timeclock idea, Johnno! When the 30 seconds are up, let it blow a great big raspberry!