|
|
|
View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
Pies4shaw
pies4shaw
Joined: 08 Oct 2007
|
Post subject: | |
|
Dave The Man wrote: | Pies4shaw wrote: | Dave The Man wrote: | ronrat wrote: | Luke Hodge, Dangerfield and Blicavs have twitted their disapproval. Stiff. |
Also Hurts our Mitch McCarthy who would been perfect 3rd Man Up |
Assuming he ever gets up to standard to play VFL football. |
So you think McCarthy is a Utter and Complete Hack and we wasted on someone that could not even play in the U-12's |
No, of course not. He may be a good player. I do, however, think that one need not assess the impact of a rule change by reference to a fellow who has never played (and may never play) senior footy for us. |
|
|
|
|
RudeBoy
Joined: 28 Nov 2005
|
Post subject: | |
|
Now the AFL should limit the interchange to one at a time and only after a goal has been scored and at the 1/4 and 1/2 time breaks. Alternatively, reduce the number right down to 40 or 10 per quarter. That will slow the game down a bit and reduce the swarming packs all over the ground.
And/or reduce the teams to 16 a side like the old VFA. One thing is for sure, there is far too much congestion nowadays, with set positions almost disappearing completely. |
|
|
|
|
jackcass
Joined: 01 Mar 2005 Location: Bendigo
|
Post subject: | |
|
RudeBoy wrote: | Now the AFL should limit the interchange to one at a time and only after a goal has been scored and at the 1/4 and 1/2 time breaks. Alternatively, reduce the number right down to 40 or 10 per quarter. That will slow the game down a bit and reduce the swarming packs all over the ground.
And/or reduce the teams to 16 a side like the old VFA. One thing is for sure, there is far too much congestion nowadays, with set positions almost disappearing completely. |
I'd be happy with a total 40 a game with a few tacked on for injured players |
|
|
|
|
stui magpie
Prepare for the worst, hope for the best.
Joined: 03 May 2005 Location: In flagrante delicto
|
Post subject: | |
|
jackcass wrote: | RudeBoy wrote: | Now the AFL should limit the interchange to one at a time and only after a goal has been scored and at the 1/4 and 1/2 time breaks. Alternatively, reduce the number right down to 40 or 10 per quarter. That will slow the game down a bit and reduce the swarming packs all over the ground.
And/or reduce the teams to 16 a side like the old VFA. One thing is for sure, there is far too much congestion nowadays, with set positions almost disappearing completely. |
I'd be happy with a total 40 a game with a few tacked on for injured players |
I'd be happy with a rule that says a team must have a minimum of 2 players inside their forward 50 arc at all times _________________ Every dead body on Mt Everest was once a highly motivated person, so maybe just calm the **** down. |
|
|
|
|
Pies4shaw
pies4shaw
Joined: 08 Oct 2007
|
Post subject: | |
|
^^^ Problem for us - we only have one forward. |
|
|
|
|
stui magpie
Prepare for the worst, hope for the best.
Joined: 03 May 2005 Location: In flagrante delicto
|
Post subject: | |
|
Cox tied to a bungy rope staked to the goalsquare that lets him go no further than 20, from goal and Moore roaming the arc 1m inside works for me. _________________ Every dead body on Mt Everest was once a highly motivated person, so maybe just calm the **** down. |
|
|
|
|
Tannin
Can't remember
Joined: 06 Aug 2006 Location: Huon Valley Tasmania
|
Post subject: | |
|
stui magpie wrote: | I'd be happy with a rule that says a team must have a minimum of 2 players inside their forward 50 arc at all times |
I'm OK with that.
but just for fun, consider a rule tht says teams must have two players inside their defensive 50 at all times. Now the forwards are going to run off them, of course, and hang around just outside 50 here the defenders can't man them up. But, if they get the pill there, they ain't going to have anyone to pass it to, so they'll have to have big pings from 55 or 60. For those who love a long goal, it would be a great game to watch.
(I hasten to add that I mention that only for a giggle. It's not a rule that any sane person would actually bring in.)
(Which, now that I think of it, makes it a virtual certainty. The AFL are at genius-level in the inventing stupid rules department.) _________________ �Let's eat Grandma.� Commas save lives! |
|
|
|
|
Tannin
Can't remember
Joined: 06 Aug 2006 Location: Huon Valley Tasmania
|
Post subject: | |
|
OK, seriously now, rules I'd like to see brought in:
(1) High contact. The umpire shall pay a free kick against the player who initiates high or dangerous contact. don't care who has the ball. Don't care who is tackling or bumping or anything else. If high contact is made (other than by accident), you pay a free against. If the tackler goes in high: pay a free against. If the player with the ball ducks into it, free to the tackler. If they both contributed equally, play on.
The AFL is slowly, slowly comiong around to my point of view on this. This year's tweak is another small step in the right direction.
(2) Rushed behinds. No intent, no deliberate mind-reading bullshit. If a defender touches the ball last before it passes through the goals, it is two points. Two. No exceptions, no grey areas, can tap it through accidentally, deliberately, it can come off his arse or his elbow, he can have a set shot backwards from outside the defensive 50 if he wants to. If it crosses the goal line, it's 2 points.
Simple. Practical. You can rush a behind any time you like. Your call. Do it three times and it's as good as a goal against though, so try not to!
(4) "Minor" striking offences. All striking offences to be punished with a suspension. None of this meaningless fine and a few points caper. If it wasn't a very hard punch, then a suitable suspension is 1/4 of a match. Yes, 1/4. You cannot play in the first quarter of next week's game. After quarert time, your suspension is over and you can take the field as usual. For these fractional-match suspension only, you may (if you and the club so desire) a full match in the next-lower competition instead. For example, Player Jones of Geelong is found guilty of low-level striking (a jumper punch in this example) and suspended a quarter match. He can still play next week (but has to sit out the first quarter), or he can play a full game in the reserves.
(Possibly a 1/4 game won't be enough. After a trial period, if need be, we can raise it to a half game suspension, but I reckon a quarter sould do the trick)
(4) Ball-twirling. If the umpire observes a player preparing to take a kick twirling the ball in his hands, he shall immediately call "play on". This includes kicks after a mark, after a free is awarded, set shots at goal, and kicks in from the defending goal. A player who twirls the ball more than twice shall have a free kick awarded against him.
But why? Because it drives Mr T. Tannin bloody nuts, that's why! Hold the ball, kick the ball. If you want to twirl it in your hands, get a job as a trained seal in a circus. _________________ �Let's eat Grandma.� Commas save lives! |
|
|
|
|
Big Dan
Joined: 12 Jun 2006 Location: The Outside World
|
Post subject: | |
|
3rd man up isn't such a big deal.
A thick coach who can't plan for it is.
18 players from each time on the ground.
3rd man up effectively means it becomes 16 v 17.
How can you continually lose possession of the ball when you are out numbering the opposition at a stoppage like this?
Personally, I'd like to see 18 man up. Also throw in multi ball (like a pinnie) if you kick 3 in a row. Also go to 4 teams at once on round grounds, with goals on each side of the ground. Whilst I'm at it, shoot the ball up with an air cannon - let that sucker go 50-60m in the air - that'll mess with the rucks heads! |
|
|
|
|
Skids
Quitting drinking will be one of the best choices you make in your life.
Joined: 11 Sep 2007 Location: Joined 3/6/02 . Member #175
|
Post subject: | |
|
Excellent rule modifications Tannin!
Especially points 2 & 4.
Make it so😎 _________________ Don't count the days, make the days count. |
|
|
|
|
Dave The Man
Joined: 01 Apr 2005 Location: Someville, Victoria, Australia
|
Post subject: | |
|
Tannin wrote: |
(4) Ball-twirling. If the umpire observes a player preparing to take a kick twirling the ball in his hands, he shall immediately call "play on". This includes kicks after a mark, after a free is awarded, set shots at goal, and kicks in from the defending goal. A player who twirls the ball more than twice shall have a free kick awarded against him.
But why? Because it drives Mr T. Tannin bloody nuts, that's why! Hold the ball, kick the ball. If you want to twirl it in your hands, get a job as a trained seal in a circus. |
Because the Idiots at AFL House like Stuffing around with the Game when not Needed _________________ I am Da Man |
|
|
|
|
35forever
"I feel sick - dada dada dada da"
Joined: 23 Feb 2005 Location: Physical=Sunshine Coast -- Mental=Vic Park
|
Post subject: | |
|
stoliboy wrote: | AFL had to wait until Hawthorn had had their chance at four premierships in a row. They can change the rule now.
With Collingwood they changed the interchange rule straight after we won the flag. |
You couldn't be suggesting the AFL doesn't love us all up, could you? Time & again I hear that the 8 is damn near set by Rd. 6, making early games crucial. Naturally we were so damn successful in 2016 we had to get a fairly easy draw.
...Both Grand Finalists in the first 3 games, yeah, that seems fair!
As for the rule change, it sounds okay in theory, but this habit they have of making big rule changes as a knee jerk reaction and NOT trying them out in the pre-season first. This has allowed the game to dodge a bullet or two, such as that idiotic soccer-style out of bounds rule a couple of years ago. _________________ "If at first you dont succeed...
... oh who cares, we did it!!!!!"
-me, 2010
"The pies are going to the big dance!"-P.Daicos 2010
Visit My Website! |
|
|
|
|
think positive
Side By Side
Joined: 30 Jun 2005 Location: somewhere
|
|
|
|
|
Jezza
2023 PREMIERS!
Joined: 06 Sep 2010 Location: Ponsford End
|
Post subject: | |
|
Good news. I just hope it's enforced properly. _________________ | 1902 | 1903 | 1910 | 1917 | 1919 | 1927 | 1928 | 1929 | 1930 | 1935 | 1936 | 1953 | 1958 | 1990 | 2010 | 2023 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You can download files in this forum
|
|