Jump to content

  • Latest Podcast: Paul Roos

Diamond_Jim

The Game, the Press and the future

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, Diamond_Jim said:

Lots of talk about the game being substantially reduced as a spectacle due to the manic press that so many clubs are employing.

Draining on spectators and draining on players. Sure there are some stars that can adapt but perhaps we are being robbed of witnessing the skills of  the lesser players. (Think our own Jayden Hunt in this regard.)

 

Our game has gone backwards since the congestion has taken oven all space to run into.

 

The Press has also gone backwards, ever since Mike Williamson retired.  And X players took over the media sheds.

 

The spectacle is useless these days, as older watchers cannot tell who the-hell has just run on, and just run off, and who's on 2nd !!!

Who'z playin on whom?

 

No positional play, no specialist players (Lockett, Daicos, Flower), no man on man matchups.

 

It's become a Soccer/Basketball hybrid of boring-ness.

Good for coaches who like moving magnetic pieces on a white-board.

 

Painfull to sit and watch,, I cannot watch a whole game on TV anymore with all this congested play craap.

 

Let us all start a new competition on VFL grounds and bring back OUR game,,,  and bring back the biff.

Edited by DV8
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, Diamond_Jim said:

Lots of talk about the game being substantially reduced as a spectacle due to the manic press that so many clubs are employing.

Draining on spectators and draining on players. Sure there are some stars that can adapt but perhaps we are being robbed of witnessing the skills of  the lesser players. (Think our own Jayden Hunt in this regard.)

--------------------

Any ideas:

  • less players
  • Zones
  • Change holding the ball to two chances for disposal

What do the experts and the watchers on this forum suggest.

For the tacticians... an even harder question ... how do you negate the press other than by the quick kick which more often comes back at you anyway.

 

Reduce the interchange bench back to 2 or 3 players.... and have 3 emergencies that can only come on for players with serious injury. to be decided by the Umpires Officiating Doctor for the match.. do not trust the clubs for this decision.

 

Stop listening to the coaches, Re interchanges etc.   Listen more to the main stakeholders of OUR game.  Us, the supporters.

 

 Also cap rotations per Qtr. And lower than we have now.

Cut out the diving and dropping to knees to win frees...  suspend the culprits.

Edited by DV8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, DV8 said:

 

Let us all start a new competition on VFL grounds and bring back OUR game,,,  and bring back the biff.

Strange you should mention this because over the weekend I was wondering to myself if there were still an independent VFA comp would they be trying different rules in order to improve their product.

Perhaps we could trial zones etc in the VFL. Playing the mini me seniors style has its obvious benefits but it seems a good place to start.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Diamond_Jim said:

Strange you should mention this because over the weekend I was wondering to myself if there were still an independent VFA comp would they be trying different rules in order to improve their product.

Perhaps we could trial zones etc in the VFL. Playing the mini me seniors style has its obvious benefits but it seems a good place to start.

 

 

All this playing to OUR brand stuff in the VFL, is strangling suburban footy.

 

The AFL are allowing the game to be killed off at the roots...   in the hearts of the footy followers.

The VFL games aren't playing to WI_ they are playing to learn OUR way/style of game.   Which is wrong for Aussie rules watchers.

 

Aussie rules watchers are spending their time &  money watching players in the nursery/kinder of AFL footy.  Who are not playing to win at all costs, but "trying to play a style"_

 

Not good for Aussie rules diehards.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Simple.

Reduce the teams to 16 and take out the wingmen. There are no specialist wingmen anymore anyway. Keep 22 because the AFLPA would not agree to reducing the number per team. Therefore 6 on the bench at any time. This would take 4 players off the ground and reduce congestion. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, DV8 said:

 

All this playing to OUR brand stuff in the VFL, is strangling suburban footy.

 

The AFL are allowing the game to be killed off at the roots...   in the hearts of the footy followers.

The VFL games aren't playing to WI_ they are playing to learn OUR way/style of game.   Which is wrong for Aussie rules watchers.

 

Aussie rules watchers are spending their time &  money watching players in the nursery/kinder of AFL footy.  Who are not playing to win at all costs, but "trying to play a style"_

 

Not good for Aussie rules diehards.

Not sure this is correct -AFL are just reacting to coaching changes and manipulation. 

But we have to face reality where the largest stakeholders in the game are the TV stations and their audiences - which moves with the times. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Big Carl said:

Simple.

Reduce the teams to 16 and take out the wingmen. There are no specialist wingmen anymore anyway. Keep 22 because the AFLPA would not agree to reducing the number per team. Therefore 6 on the bench at any time. This would take 4 players off the ground and reduce congestion. 

The old VFA rules Big Carl ... Wonder if there was any historical reason for the different numbers.

Does illustrate that different branches of the game survived well enough with different rules. Very innovative the VFA with their early adoption of free to air TV.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The game style will evolve, a few years back the Roos/Malthouse years it was team defense, it has changed to more focus on defending and winning the ball where it is so teams get scored against as soon as it clears the scrimmage.

What will happen is a club will work a way and it will most likely be Hawthorn to beat the pressure.  This will be drafting kids that have high skill level that will kick the ball low and hard over 20-30m.  It will change at the moment at U18 level they are testing for athletes this will evolve to kids that actually have the skill set to play at a high level and clubs will back themselves to make them fit enough.

The game is being played the way it is today because clubs want the ready made player, you need to be able to run and jump first, kick and mark second and clubs are backing themselves to teach players how to kick once they get them.  To me if you can't kick at 18 your bad habits are already there and it is impossible to go from a average kick to elite, you can improve a little but not a lot.  Fitness you can always improve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've got a novel idea, when a player goes to ground with the ball under him, or pulls the ball in, he has to hit it out, fine. But if someone sits/lays/ jumps on his back why not pay an in the back free kick, I'm sure this would reduce the amount packs and mauls that develop. Funny I"m sure they used to pay it that way in the old days instead of penalising a player who can't lift his body with 3 players on top of him to hit the ball out.

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, DaveyDee said:

Not sure this is correct -AFL are just reacting to coaching changes and manipulation. 

But we have to face reality where the largest stakeholders in the game are the TV stations and their audiences - which moves with the times. 

They are not, we must stop thinking that companies are the bosses, they are not.

 

The people are the bosses, at the checkout...  we are the shoppers, of products, and like back in the good days, the customer is always right. we have become hoodwinked by listed companies getting bigger via takeovers and monopolisation of industries.

 

We don't have to watch tripe on TV.   And we don't have to pay at the turnstiles.

 

And it sounds very much like the people are turning their backs on the tripe being served up.

 

I watch maybe one game a week, if its on free to air nowadays, and cannot sit thru the whole game, because of the ugly press and lack of inspiration, with individual efforts a rarity.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, buck_nekkid said:

I would say bananas, but that would be rude.

 

One banana, two bananas, three bananas, four?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On a more serious note, i think reducing the number of rotations even further is worth trying. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Went to the Port v North game on Saturday as a neutral observer.

Port were the better side by a fair margin skill wise. Can only recall one or two clean passages of play by Port. Just a boring game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, DV8 said:

They are not, we must stop thinking that companies are the bosses, they are not.

 

The people are the bosses, at the checkout...  we are the shoppers, of products, and like back in the good days, the customer is always right. we have become hoodwinked by listed companies getting bigger via takeovers and monopolisation of industries.

 

We don't have to watch tripe on TV.   And we don't have to pay at the turnstiles.

 

And it sounds very much like the people are turning their backs on the tripe being served up.

 

I watch maybe one game a week, if its on free to air nowadays, and cannot sit thru the whole game, because of the ugly press and lack of inspiration, with individual efforts a rarity.

People ebb and flow with the weather, the teams results, venues, times etc etc etc 

Sponsorship & TV stations have the $$$ and normally a single consistent voice - not saying you ignore the audience but audiences are fickle. 

The game is in very good shape - IMHO all is well on the AFL "homeland" front now to expand internationally must be the goal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, DaveyDee said:

People ebb and flow with the weather, the teams results, venues, times etc etc etc 

Sponsorship & TV stations have the $$$ and normally a single consistent voice - not saying you ignore the audience but audiences are fickle. 

The game is in very good shape - IMHO all is well on the AFL "homeland" front now to expand internationally must be the goal.

I can't agree DD. I think the game is craap.  What they've done to it.

I find it so hard to get inspired by it.

 

And the vfl is no longer about winning, but about teaching. and for what,,, the press.....  phuckkk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, loges said:

I've got a novel idea, when a player goes to ground with the ball under him, or pulls the ball in, he has to hit it out, fine. But if someone sits/lays/ jumps on his back why not pay an in the back free kick, I'm sure this would reduce the amount packs and mauls that develop. Funny I"m sure they used to pay it that way in the old days instead of penalising a player who can't lift his body with 3 players on top of him to hit the ball out.

A week or so back there was a story on the AFL web site. Buddy Franklin was about to take a shot on goal and he wiped the ball with a chux wipe that the trainer brought out. "You can't do that" said the ump. Later the wise men of the media wanted to know what was up. "You can't do that "said Steve Hocking. "You can only wipe the ball with your jumper, your shorts or your socks. No chux wipes."

The story went on to say that Franklin was "correctly allowed" to take his kick.

As I do, I ran to the official laws of the game. Can you believe, there is nothing in the rules about wiping the ball and what you can/can't wipe it with. The only rule that might be in play is 15.11.1(b) which says a free kick will be awarded against a player who "interferes" with the football. Whatever that might mean. It's not defined.

So either Franklin is allowed to wipe the ball with a chux, or he gave away a free which wasn't paid.

And we see this kind of bull*** every game, every week. "Laws" of the game that don't actually exist, or "laws" of the game that are ignored.

Which brings me to rule 15.2.5,  Diving on Top of the Football. "Where a Player is in possession of the football by reason of diving on
top of or dragging the football underneath their body, the field Umpire shall award a Free Kick against that Player if they do not immediately knock the football clear or Correctly Dispose of the football when Correctly Tackled."

We see this all the time. Why no free?

Or rule 15.4.5,  Prohibited Contact and Payment of Free Kick. "A field Umpire shall award a Free Kick against a Player where they
are satisfied that the Player has made Prohibited Contact with an opposition Player. A Player makes Prohibited Contact with an opposition Player  if the Player: ... (b)  pushes an opposition Player in the back, unless such contact is incidental to a Marking contest and the Player is legitimately Marking, attempting to Mark or spoil the football;" No ifs or buts. No allowances. Black and white. Push in the back = free.

Again, we routinely see guys piledriven into the turf with a player or players squarely on their back. No free.

What is going on? Imagine if in tennis ... you're watching Wimbledon. Federer vs Nadal ... Nadal double faults. Ump says nothing. Nadal gets third serve. It's another fault. Nadal gets fourth serve. No one blinks. Then Federer keeps hitting it after it's bounced twice. Nadal protests. Ump says each time, play the rally again. No one blinks. Then players decide not to change ends. Later the tournament director says something like, the ump felt there was no disadvantage to either player due to the similar conditions at each end of the court. And everyone swallows it.

That's what we've been conditioned to in this game. It's weird. It's perverse. It's just wrong. And the AFL don't give a f*** that they are permitting this corrupted version of Aussie Rules to be played week in week out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, DaveyDee said:

People ebb and flow with the weather, the teams results, venues, times etc etc etc 

Sponsorship & TV stations have the $$$ and normally a single consistent voice - not saying you ignore the audience but audiences are fickle. 

The game is in very good shape - IMHO all is well on the AFL "homeland" front now to expand internationally must be the goal.

DD percentage wise of the growing population, game attendances are receding. It survives mainly because a pay TV company pays a lot of money to acquire football as a loss leader. International expansion is a pure cost driver... strange that one of the AFL commissioners was the fellow who decided to expand Bunnings into the UK... now witnessing one of the greatest write offs in retail history.

Never assume the golden goose will stay around.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, DV8 said:

I can't agree DD. I think the game is craap.  What they've done to it.

I find it so hard to get inspired by it.

 

And the vfl is no longer about winning, but about teaching. and for what,,, the press.....  phuckkk

Fair enough, if today's games of football do not inspire you - maybe you have to vote with your feet and if enough people join you - change to suit your way of thinking could happen. 

For me the VFL has evolved into an AFL 2nds competition because the AFL teams have the money to support teams to act as a development league for their players. 

Best of luck hope things change for the better for you. 

Edited by DaveyDee

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Mazer Rackham said:

A week or so back there was a story on the AFL web site. Buddy Franklin was about to take a shot on goal and he wiped the ball with a chux wipe that the trainer brought out. "You can't do that" said the ump. Later the wise men of the media wanted to know what was up. "You can't do that "said Steve Hocking. "You can only wipe the ball with your jumper, your shorts or your socks. No chux wipes."

The story went on to say that Franklin was "correctly allowed" to take his kick.

As I do, I ran to the official laws of the game. Can you believe, there is nothing in the rules about wiping the ball and what you can/can't wipe it with. The only rule that might be in play is 15.11.1(b) which says a free kick will be awarded against a player who "interferes" with the football. Whatever that might mean. It's not defined.

So either Franklin is allowed to wipe the ball with a chux, or he gave away a free which wasn't paid.

And we see this kind of bull*** every game, every week. "Laws" of the game that don't actually exist, or "laws" of the game that are ignored.

Which brings me to rule 15.2.5,  Diving on Top of the Football. "Where a Player is in possession of the football by reason of diving on
top of or dragging the football underneath their body, the field Umpire shall award a Free Kick against that Player if they do not immediately knock the football clear or Correctly Dispose of the football when Correctly Tackled."

We see this all the time. Why no free?

Or rule 15.4.5,  Prohibited Contact and Payment of Free Kick. "A field Umpire shall award a Free Kick against a Player where they
are satisfied that the Player has made Prohibited Contact with an opposition Player. A Player makes Prohibited Contact with an opposition Player  if the Player: ... (b)  pushes an opposition Player in the back, unless such contact is incidental to a Marking contest and the Player is legitimately Marking, attempting to Mark or spoil the football;" No ifs or buts. No allowances. Black and white. Push in the back = free.

Again, we routinely see guys piledriven into the turf with a player or players squarely on their back. No free.

What is going on? Imagine if in tennis ... you're watching Wimbledon. Federer vs Nadal ... Nadal double faults. Ump says nothing. Nadal gets third serve. It's another fault. Nadal gets fourth serve. No one blinks. Then Federer keeps hitting it after it's bounced twice. Nadal protests. Ump says each time, play the rally again. No one blinks. Then players decide not to change ends. Later the tournament director says something like, the ump felt there was no disadvantage to either player due to the similar conditions at each end of the court. And everyone swallows it.

That's what we've been conditioned to in this game. It's weird. It's perverse. It's just wrong. And the AFL don't give a f*** that they are permitting this corrupted version of Aussie Rules to be played week in week out.

Yes I'm sure the interpretation of the rules have 'evolved' to allow what would have been in the back decisions in my day. I know I'm getting on but I'm sure stricter enforcement would alleviate some of the congestion in the game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, DaveyDee said:

People ebb and flow with the weather, the teams results, venues, times etc etc etc 

Sponsorship & TV stations have the $$$ and normally a single consistent voice - not saying you ignore the audience but audiences are fickle. 

The game is in very good shape - IMHO all is well on the AFL "homeland" front now to expand internationally must be the goal.

Wep, dragged kicking and screaming into International Court by WADA. That was a real good look. The AFL is the "you can Bank on footy"

Would it be fair to ask who's watching over it now? Money is not everything, not bigger than the Game.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Coaches will continue to push the rules and rules interpretations will continue to play catch up. Teams are already experimenting with ways to beat the press notice the increase in the number of torps . I'm a bit disappointed that Max seems to have stopped his but I'm sure they will return 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, willmoy said:

Wep, dragged kicking and screaming into International Court by WADA. That was a real good look. The AFL is the "you can Bank on footy"

Would it be fair to ask who's watching over it now? Money is not everything, not bigger than the Game.....

Where is all this “the game is in bad shape” coming from ? 

Sorry, I don’t read the media - is one of the big newspapers running with the game has a problem type articles?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, deesrule said:

Coaches will continue to push the rules and rules interpretations will continue to play catch up. Teams are already experimenting with ways to beat the press notice the increase in the number of torps . I'm a bit disappointed that Max seems to have stopped his but I'm sure they will return 

The “press” is only a fad, teams are already breaking it down , ironically Tigers are probably best at breaking it down. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, DaveyDee said:

Where is all this “the game is in bad shape” coming from ? 

Sorry, I don’t read the media - is one of the big newspapers running with the game has a problem type articles?

DD that has to be one of the strangest comments ever made for someone who claims to be an authority on public perception of the game.

Even the TV commentators are decrying the "squash". And it's their product !!

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Diamond_Jim said:

DD that has to be one of the strangest comments ever made for someone who claims to be an authority on public perception of the game.

Even the TV commentators are decrying the "squash". And it's their product !!

Not sure where you get that perception. But I stopped reading newspapers many, many years ago and I would be lucky to watch the news twice a year. 

Public perception on footy comes more from talking and listening to people. 

You don’t get your public perception on football by listening to the media - - do you? But I’m starting to form the opinion around here most are heavily influenced by the media due to living interstate or overseas. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×