Chris Scott calls Buckley's prior opportunity idea ‘silly’

[K]

How the interchange cap has failed to fix footy

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2018-07-14/how-the-interchange-cap-has-failed-to-fix-footy

'AFL.com.au's coaching source instead believes the way teams are choosing to play the game is the major cause of congestion.

"We're in a copycat league and we've followed the last two premiers," he said.

"The Bulldogs were a heavy handball team around the contest and put numbers around the contest, while Richmond plays an extra forward that comes up to the stoppage.

"It's mostly (Kane) Lambert who plays that role, and they play an extra inside the stoppage as well."
...

University of South Australia professor of exercise science Kevin Norton was a paid AFL consultant for 14 years up until 2013, researching players' on-ground movement. ...

"The interchange rule is essentially exhausted and so we might need to go to zoning, lower player numbers on the field or other options," Norton said.

The bemoaning of AFL clubs increasingly drafting athletes over 'natural footballers' will accelerate if further interchange limitations or starting points come in, according to Norton and the coach.'

[K]

Proposed AFL changes a blight, says Buckley, but impress Dangerfield

https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/proposed-afl-changes-a-blight-says-buckley-but-impress-dangerfield-20180718-p4zs7h.html

[Jezza]

Blight is a flog and been irrelevant for nearly 20 years now.

The hysteria around the 'state of the game' has been nauseating. Leave the game alone!

[K]

A sport in need of a little time and space

https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/a-sport-in-need-of-a-little-time-and-space-20180720-p4zso8.html

'...
Collingwood coach Nathan Buckley reckons it's a bad idea. "I don't like it. I think it will be a blight on the game," he said.

Passionate advocate for change Malcolm Blight fired back, arguing that "change is coming and it must come … and for those who don't like it, resign and go and join the unemployment queue".

But for all the back and forth, history shows that changes have punctuated the course of Australian Rules football. In fact, it's never been left alone.

The reason for this is simple. Each era of the game has brought with it more sophisticated coaching and analysis, which means tactics and game plans have been implemented that exploit the rules in the pursuit of a competitive advantage.
...

So what will the AFL do? History shows they'll probably make changes and, whatever they decide on, they'll probably get it right.

Rules were introduced to deal with issues of hacking and flick passing in the early days of the game. In 1969 the VFL banned players from kicking the ball out on the full. In the '90s they introduced the "deliberate out of bounds" rule. In the 1970s they introducing the "diamond" and, later, the "centre square". Over the years the number of interchange players increased and most recently the AFL has moved to combat rising rotations.

All changes were made to correct the game or to try to make it better. Not all worked, but many did.
...'

[David]

To a hammer, everything looks like a nail. So goes the AFL rules committee.

[K]

Radical rule floated: Two goal squares at one end

https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/radical-rule-floated-two-goal-squares-at-one-end-20180724-p4zte3.html

"While a set-up of six players inside each 50-metre arc at both ends, four players in the centre square and two players outside the square has gained strong internal AFL support, the AFL’s game analysis group also has discussed different options for expanding the goal square, including one in which there would be ‘‘two squares’’ – the enlarged 18 metres x 18 metres one and the existing smaller one (nine metres in length).

Under this ‘‘two goal squares’’ concept – which might be too complex to be ultimately adopted – there would be two possible ways to kick in, one ‘‘slow’’ kick in following a set shot, when the player kicking in could use the whole enlarged 18m box; the other a ‘‘fast’’ kick out that would follow a scrambled score, such as a rushed behind or snap and with more players surrounding the ball.
Under the latter ‘‘fast’’ option, the player could use the current smaller goal square, to complete the kick in quickly. This would be taking into account the delay caused by clearing the larger box."

[Skids]

[Skids]

Some of my favourite rule changes over the years....

1860
Tripping, holding and hacking outlawed.

1877
The ball not to be handed to a teammate.

1897
Free kick for push from behind introduced.
Present scoring system introduced – six points for a goal and one point for a behind.

1930
Use of a replacement (19th man) permitted for the first time. Once replaced a player could not return to the field.
Holding man-holding ball rule amended. A player was not permitted to drop the ball when tackled. A handpass or kick had to be attempted. The amendment was repealed two months later because of its unpopularity.

1939
Reintroduction of general boundary throw-in. Frees were no longer awarded when the ball was kicked out of bounds.
Holding man-holding ball rule revised. Free to be paid against player who deliberately dropped ball when tackled.

1940
Introduction of rule determining that the ball could not be kicked in after a behind had been scored, until the goal umpire had finished waving the flag.

1946
Two reserves (19th and 20th men) permitted for the first time. Once replaced, a player could not return to the field.
Siren replaced bell at the MCG.

1950
Siren replaced bell at all venues..... only took 4 years

1964
Coaches were permitted to address players on field at quarter-time for the first time.
Goalposts fitted with protective padding.

1969
Introduction of the free against player kicking ball out of bounds on the full.

1975
Centre diamond amended to become centre square.
Video-tapes of incidents became admissible evidence at VFL tribunal hearings.

1976
Introduction of the two field umpire system. (Should of stayed this way IMO)

1978
Interchange player system introduced.

1981
Fifteen metres instead of 10 metres allowed for running with ball without it making contact with the ground.

1988
Player awarded free obliged to kick the ball. REMEMBER THIS??? No dish off for the shot on goal!!
Replacement of 15-metre penalty with 50-metre penalty.

1990
Player awarded free again given option of kick or handpass. SANITY prevailed!

1994
Playing time for a quarter amended to 20 minutes plus time-on instead of 25 minutes plus time-on.
Introduction of third field umpire.
Introduction of third interchange player.
Introduction of third boundary umpire, using rotational interchange system in pairs.

1998
Introduction of fourth interchange player.

2002
Minimum distance of ball travel for a mark increased from 10 metres to 15.

2004
Size of centre square increased from 45m to 50m.

2013
A free kick to be awarded against any player who makes forceful contact below the knees of an opponent (does not apply to smothers with the hands or arms).
Umpires to throw the ball up for all field stoppages during the game. The bounce will continue to be used at the start of each quarter and after goals.
Separation of ruckmen at stoppages, with no contact permitted until the ball has left the umpire.

http://www.afl.com.au/afl-hq/the-afl-explained/rule-changes-18582013

So, when you hear people say "Leave the game alone".... why?
It has continually evolved and will continue to do so.

That's not to say that some ideas are absolutely ridiculous though

[RudeBoy]

I understand they are also considering introducing an 'offside' rule.

[K]

[E]

The best rule change to improve our game is quite simply that a backwards kick should be called play on. Of course since teams like Hawthorn and WCE use it so effectively, it will never be implemented.

Do you honestly think they would be trying to change the rules if Geelong and Hawthorn were 1-2. Note how few rule changes they made while those teams were winning 6 of 8 flags. Collingwood wins a flag and they reduce rotations almost immediately. Hawthorn and Geelong win 6 of 8 (Hawthorn essentially playing keepings off), nothing to see here!!! Tigers get good on the back of intense pressure - game broken we need to come up with a system that plays to the strengths of the Cats and Hawks! Shockingly, Dangerfield LOVES the changes......

[E]

[K]

Late-season rule trials would 'demean' the AFL, says Leigh Matthews

https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/late-season-rule-trials-would-demean-the-afl-says-leigh-matthews-20180725-p4ztl4.html

'The AFL is set to introduce rule tweaks next season and will consider putting them to the test in matches that have no bearing on the top eight during this year's final home-and-away rounds.
...

"It seems demeaning to me, a bit like it's demeaning the game," Matthews told Macquarie Sports Radio.

"I kind of thought when I played myself and coached my players, every game was like a grand final." '

[RudeBoy]

I agree with Lethal. It's a ridiculous idea.

FFS, trial any rule changes in the VFL next year, over many weeks and all games, so there is a decent sample to study.

My fear is these bozos running/ruining our game are simply bureaucrats who have to come up with rule changes to justify their existence.

My only brief for any possible rule changes, is to reduce the number of rules and simplify the game. Surely that isn't be too much to ask for?

[K]

COMMENT: The one thing rules trials must not affect

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2018-07-25/comment-the-one-thing-rules-trials-must-not-affect

Cal Twomey then mentions not one but three things that could be distorted by late-season trials: draft order, Brownlow Medal, Coleman Medal.

I agree all three could be tarnished.