Impact of rule changes

[Macca 16,173]

12 minutes ago, binman said:

Disagree that it will have no effect. It certainly won't be a huge impact as there are not that many clearances direct from the cenre. But in the event there is one it will not be possible for the winger to fill the 'hole' 30 meters out in front of goal (which the spare currently does), even if they start eg right on the 50 meter arc. A direct tap to a mid then kick will be at that spot in less than 5 seconds.no player is that quick.

And as macca notes team would be rolling the dice having one or both of their wingers starting on the 50 meter arc as the opposition will then have the option of having their winger stand by himself dead centre wing or just ahead of centre.

I must say I am excited at the prospect of what we'll see.  Even if the only change we see from the new rule brings back some wing play involving those wingmen taking a bounce or 2 (a la Robbie) 

But I strongly suspect we'll see other aspects that eventuate as well as the unintended consequences that could happen (as you've previously pointed out)

And then there's the pattern of play from all these 666 moments ... set plays,  designated receivers from outside the square etc etc.  It's only going to be 10% - 15% of the game (or thereabouts) but patterns could be set that teams might want to continue with.  'Whatever works' comes to the fore or could do.

Because it's brand new,  every team will have their own strategy and each of those strategies might be different.  As the season progresses the study of the tape will become of utmost importance. 

Aussie rules is fast becoming a game of absolute strategy much like soccer & NFL is.  Natural progression.  A lot don't like change but sometimes change is needed to improve things.  All sports tinker with their own rules. 

[sue 8,402]

48 minutes ago, binman said:

And as macca notes team would be rolling the dice having one or both of their wingers starting on the 50 meter arc as the opposition will then have the option of having their winger stand by himself dead centre wing or just ahead of centre.

But even without the new rule, if you stacked the backline you left one or two opponents free somewhere, so I suspect the main difference will be that the wingman won't be able to get as deep as before as a spare defender. 

It will be interesting to see how this plays out, especially in tight situations.  With 30 sec to go and your team 1 point ahead, under  the new ruckman "no-prior" rule maybe the ruckman will try to grab the ball rather than hit it.  Or maybe give away a deliberate free to give players time to flood back.

[DeezNuts 624]

Teams that have high levels of fitness and endurance will also benefit from the 666. Lots of running back into position!

i think key position players are also going to be more valued, particularly if they can take a mark, whether they’re a forward or a defender. 

[rjay 23,839]

8 hours ago, Macca said:

One thing I can almost guarantee -  the new rule is going to cause angst for the lack of consistency. 

One thing I can guarantee 'Macca' is that KB is absolutely going to lose it over this rule change.

He was a big fan of the previous rule and I think it was under his reign that it was brought in...

It's one thing I agree with him on.

[Dee Zephyr 17,294]

42 minutes ago, sue said:

It will be interesting to see how this plays out, especially in tight situations.  With 30 sec to go and your team 1 point ahead, under  the new ruckman "no-prior" rule maybe the ruckman will try to grab the ball rather than hit it.  Or maybe give away a deliberate free to give players time to flood back.

 It will be interesting to see in a tight finish as you say, whether teams alter their back 6 or  forward lines by throwing extra talls/smalls down there for the last 30 seconds or so after a go ahead goal.

Obviously you’d prefer to win the clearance or hold it up as you suggest above with ruckman grabbing the ball to allow some kind of time to get numbers back, but say you lose the clearance quickly. Clubs would be practising these situations and have plans in place. I don’t think there would be much time to react to how the opposition sets up forward of centre in the dying seconds. 

I’m picturing some mayhem and mismatches in tight finishes this season. 

[monoccular 15,985]

One concern to me is that some players will milk the 50 meter penalty bizarre new rule to try to get double or even triple 50s.   It is far too open to gaming, and to maggotorial interpretations, andofferes far too great a penalty for what are often minor technical breaches  The 50 (as opposed to 10 or 15) is already too harsh for many minor infractions  

The 666 set up will put huge emphasis on wingmen having sharp sprinting ability. Could be a savior for the somewhat out of favor Hunt. 

Edited January 28, 2019 by monoccular

[binman 37,715]

1 hour ago, sue said:

But even without the new rule, if you stacked the backline you left one or two opponents free somewhere, so I suspect the main difference will be that the wingman won't be able to get as deep as before as a spare defender. 

 

True. But often the other 'spare' is also a defensive 7th player- and sometimes and extra forward or mid. The 666 rule will give coaches far fewer options for where spares can start.

The rule should in theory create much less situationalns from centre bounces where spares are possible. But what might happen is some players might start well away from their direct opponent and in strange spots and/or formations eg the intersection of the 50 meter arc and the boundary or all forwards in the corridor.

All that said as George from the outer the 666 rule is onltly relevant at centre clearances and teams will still flood back and create out numbers as a matter of course. 

[Macca 16,173]

42 minutes ago, rjay said:

One thing I can guarantee 'Macca' is that KB is absolutely going to lose it over this rule change.

He was a big fan of the previous rule and I think it was under his reign that it was brought in...

It's one thing I agree with him on.

I reckon with this new-new 'hands in the back' interpretation we'll end up with the same issues that previously existed and they'll change it back again.  Unless they stubbornly refuse to - and that's always a possibility. 

Do they want forwards to be able to take more marks?  Thus creating more scoring opportunities and therefore more goal breaks and more advertisements?  Pardon my cynicism.

[binman 37,715]

10 hours ago, Macca said:

I reckon with this new-new 'hands in the back' interpretation we'll end up with the same issues that previously existed and they'll change it back again.  Unless they stubbornly refuse to - and that's always a possibility. 

Do they want forwards to be able to take more marks?  Thus creating more scoring opportunities and therefore more goal breaks and more advertisements?  Pardon my cynicism.

I agree this rule will the one most likely pen to variability in interpretation and will have implementation issues.

But rather than more goals, perhaps they operate from any news is good news principle  and wanted another contraversial rule that has lots of grey.

You don't have to be einstein  to predict all the rabbiting on in print, on radio and TV there will be about marks, frees, non frees related to this rule.

Did he bend the arm, did he shove, no he was just holding his ground, Hawkins is just using his strength and that is why the defender was propelled forward, love this rule, hate this rule, just going back to how footy has always been played, l ed ta slow down the video blah,  blah, blah

[Brownie 5,107]

13 hours ago, monoccular said:

One concern to me is that some players will milk the 50 meter penalty bizarre new rule to try to get double or even triple 50s.   It is far too open to gaming, and to maggotorial interpretations, andofferes far too great a penalty for what are often minor technical breaches  The 50 (as opposed to 10 or 15) is already too harsh for many minor infractions  

The 666 set up will put huge emphasis on wingmen having sharp sprinting ability. Could be a savior for the somewhat out of favor Hunt. 

That's a really good point. If the player receiving the 50 can fend the opposition player off and knock them over or behind them, then they've got a huge advantage to take off.

[george_on_the_outer 6,940]

When 666 is used the "wingman" only has to be at the intersection of the square and the 50m arc. On most grounds that is less than 20 metres away from the CHB position, so it will take about 2 seconds to reach that point. 

The opposition will be doing the same thing, so it is unlikely to have a spare opposition player on the wing..if they do, then he will be covered by the player coming off the HFF line...it is the same distance to cover. 

The rule only applies to centre bounces from the time the ball is bounced to when the ruckman taps it.  ....2 seconds?  That is why it will NOT apply for 99.9% of the game.

[binman 37,715]

32 minutes ago, george_on_the_outer said:

When 666 is used the "wingman" only has to be at the intersection of the square and the 50m arc. On most grounds that is less than 20 metres away from the CHB position, so it will take about 2 seconds to reach that point. 

The opposition will be doing the same thing, so it is unlikely to have a spare opposition player on the wing..if they do, then he will be covered by the player coming off the HFF line...it is the same distance to cover. 

The rule only applies to centre bounces from the time the ball is bounced to when the ruckman taps it.  ....2 seconds?  That is why it will NOT apply for 99.9% of the game.

I agree that where the winger will often start. But he will need to get to about 20- 30 metres out straight in front of goal or pocket (not CHF), which is where a kick from a center clearance will get to. No way that winger gets to that spot before a tap to a mid then quick kick. And that player will be running with the flight of the ball (albeit at an angle) which makes intercepting very hard - not to mention dangerous. 

I said that would take 5 seconds but that is too long. It would barely take 2 seconds. Tap, mid, handball and kick might take 5 seconds.  

But really how often in a game do either of the scenarios actually happen? Maybe 10-15 times?

So i agree the rule will have very little impact on congestion in the back half - or for that matter scoring. So very little impact at all. hard to see how the rule change is anything more than about aesthetics. 

On both teams setting their wingers on the 50 metre arc and so therefore not on their direct oppnt, i'm not convinced that will happen. Some coaches will use their wingers (one or both) as an attacking option and ensure their is no outnumber in the back half. A quick player like Hunt could sprint to a deep pocket and make his direct opponent decide whether to go to the hot spot or with Hunt. If he chooses not to follow Hunt, he is free.

Edited January 29, 2019 by binman

[Damo 2,968]

I think that the rules committee is "overruled" by the Networks who aggresively push in these rules before a new year.

Then the Rules committee have to adapt after the coaching departments react to the new laws and try to bend them to their will. The  Rules committee in turn, then adapt by extremely small adjustments. This means that I too see KB blowing a gasket. It seems that the rules wont drastically change the game, but lets see what Hawthorn, Sydney and Geelong coaches come up with.

[Macca 16,173]

4 hours ago, binman said:

I agree this rule will the one most likely pen to variability in interpretation and will have implementation issues.

But rather than more goals, perhaps they operate from any news is good news principle  and wanted another contraversial rule that has lots of grey.

You don't have to be einstein  to predict all the rabbiting on in print, on radio and TV there will be about marks, frees, non frees related to this rule.

Did he bend the arm, did he shove, no he was just holding his ground, Hawkins is just using his strength and that is why the defender was propelled forward, love this rule, hate this rule, just going back to how footy has always been played, l ed ta slow down the video blah,  blah, blah

Managenent create a major issue for its workers and then the masses blame the A-end of the problem

[ManDee 7,073]

I think the wing situation could easily be fixed by the "wingmen" needing to be adjacent to the centre at the ball up.

[Demon Dude 425]

i think the rule where you don't have to kick it to yourself from points and playing on will make a bigger difference to the game than 666. I can see situations where fast players charge from the back of the goal square and find it much easier to baulk the opponent manning the mark at speed to get past him, where as before you had to kick to yourself from pretty much a standing start and run 5m before getting the kick away as your opponent could get a better read on which way you were going. I can now see the huddle coming back into favour again to allow plenty of space to run into, in this situation.

therefore you'd think faster defensive players like Hunt and Frost will come into greater consideration now, because they can cover ground better when playing on from 'kick outs', or make position from these fast play on situations, or in Hunts case dropping back into D50 from the starting wing position as well. plus both have booming kicks. I think they'll become more versatile, while I think guys like O.Mac and Lewis might find it harder to get a game due to being slow.

same goes in the fwd line. i'd expect we bring in a genuine speedster like Garlett or Bedford, to stand the 10m mark at the top of the goal square and try and chase down the oppo player when he plays on.

 

[La Dee-vina Comedia 16,380]

On 1/27/2019 at 6:15 PM, Pates said:

The zones at restarts I think could see a return of more resting ruckman, with tall timbre forward and no extra man you would think the ability for there to be direct scores from the restart will increase. 

I didn't know about the prior opportunity change from the ruck for me that's a huge error, what's to stop a player just grabbing it immediately to be tackled just to eat away the clock. Also feel like the nomination part should've been removed. If you have one from each team then why do they need to nominate?

Could a team try to grab the ball from the ruck at a centre bounce when the 666 rule is in effect to deliberately cause a secondary ball up? That would then remove the 666 rule when the second bounce occurs.  Is that a correct interpretation?

[Macca 16,173]

There are any number of set plays and strategies that can happen from a 666 set up.  The variables are endless. Moves and counter moves and teams trying to figure out what the other team is doing.

We need to see it play out but there will be an impact.  As for the rest of the game,  we may or may not see a flow-on effect.

[binman 37,715]

1 hour ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

Could a team try to grab the ball from the ruck at a centre bounce when the 666 rule is in effect to deliberately cause a secondary ball up? That would then remove the 666 rule when the second bounce occurs.  Is that a correct interpretation?

Yes, they could. The question is why?  Perhaps to set up rheie extras in defense and flood back I guess.

[La Dee-vina Comedia 16,380]

15 minutes ago, binman said:

Yes, they could. The question is why?  Perhaps to set up rheie extras in defense and flood back I guess.

I agree that the question becomes "Why?" But first I wanted to see if my interpretation is correct. One potential reason would be to slow the game down by deliberately creating the opportunity for more congestion. Having said that, I'm not sure if it would be a strategy that a team would wish to adopt.

[Diamond_Jim 11,670]

On 1/29/2019 at 8:25 AM, binman said:

Yes, they could. The question is why?  Perhaps to set up rheie extras in defense and flood back I guess.

It will happen but one has to remember I suppose that the ruckman still only gets the benefit of prior opportunity. He can still be penalised for holding the ball.

Fascinating

[sue 8,402]

17 hours ago, Diamond_Jim said:

It will happen but one has to remember I suppose that the ruckman still only gets the benefit of prior opportunity. He can still be penalised for holding the ball.

Fascinating

True, but if the aim is to hold up play, then as long as the ruckman is careful not to give away a 50m penalty he can ensure there is time for the rest of the team to run into defence.   All the ruckman has to do is handball it to his feet while his teammates swarm to the ball and it is likely there will be a second ball up.  But even if he is penalised the odds may still favour just grabbing the ball. 

Let's say 50% of the time he cause a secondary ball up and 50% of the time he gives away a free.   The aim in both cases is to allow his team to flood back.  It sounds counter-intuitive, but I wonder if an analysis of centre ball-up stats indicates there is less chance of the opposition scoring a goal from a slow free-kick at the ball up than other outcomes of a ball-up when you take into account they only get the free 50% of the time.  Since the situation will be different from past situations because of the 6 6 6 rule, coaches may have to assemble the odds by experiment.

[Demonland 64,361]

 

[Roger Mellie 3,481]

On 1/29/2019 at 12:10 PM, Demon Dude said:

i think the rule where you don't have to kick it to yourself from points and playing on will make a bigger difference to the game than 666. I can see situations where fast players charge from the back of the goal square and find it much easier to baulk the opponent manning the mark at speed to get past him, where as before you had to kick to yourself from pretty much a standing start and run 5m before getting the kick away as your opponent could get a better read on which way you were going. I can now see the huddle coming back into favour again to allow plenty of space to run into, in this situation.

therefore you'd think faster defensive players like Hunt and Frost will come into greater consideration now, because they can cover ground better when playing on from 'kick outs', or make position from these fast play on situations, or in Hunts case dropping back into D50 from the starting wing position as well. plus both have booming kicks. I think they'll become more versatile, while I think guys like O.Mac and Lewis might find it harder to get a game due to being slow.

same goes in the fwd line. i'd expect we bring in a genuine speedster like Garlett or Bedford, to stand the 10m mark at the top of the goal square and try and chase down the oppo player when he plays on.

 

Agree with that and particularly the role for the fast small forward - to try and limit the run from the kick-ins. It makes Garlett's return to the side (and form) all the more important.

The kick ins for us will be interesting. I could see Hunt and Frost utilised although their kicking is fraught with danger. May is the most likely for me. He's fast, a good kick and took the kick ins for GC. Salem and K2 should also feature. Not lightening fast but good enough to run away with it and hit a target. It'll be interesting to see where clubs set up their defence.

[binman 37,715]

Marks and free kicks in defence  

• When defenders mark or receive a free kick within nine metres of their own goal, the man on the mark will be brought in line with the top of the goal square.

Impact on competition: can't imagine it will have a huge impact, but will mean it is less tricky clearing the ball from the last line as defenders won't be hemmed in against the boundary or goal line. 

Impact on dees: none

Potential implementation and interpretation issues: might create some confusion early doors but after that pretty easy to work out - assuming the umpires can work out how far 9 metres is and how to draw an imhgainary straight line from the top of the square

Runners and water carriers

• Team runners may only enter the playing surface after a goal has been kicked and must exit before play restarts.
• Water carriers are not permitted to enter the playing surface during live play.

Impact on competition: it will be really interesting to see what impact the runner rule change has. In theory it will mean players will have to make more decisions. But the runner will still get plenty of chances to relay messages in most matches and no doubt players coming on and off the filed will be given instructions to pass on and act as de facto runners. Will negatively clubs with young lists and those clubs who use the runner to stand in zones (something i hate).

Can't see the water carrier rule change making any difference.

Impact on dees: We are a pretty mature group now, with improving on field leadership and a good understanding of the game plan and team rules. The rule should work in our favour. Will suit smart players like big maxy who can make on field calls (like the one he made against the hawks to push forward) and direct teammates.

Potential implementation and interpretation issues: not sure what the penalty is for a runner or water carrier coming onto the filed when they shouldn't or who is responsible for policing these rules. How will the central umpire know when the runner is off. Do they need to come of through the interchange? So those issues might cause problems.

Also play will not restart until a runner comes off. How will that work. What if they stroll off? Might be a ploy to hold up play eg to stop momentum.