The New Rule We Really Do need...

[Sir Why You Little 36,918]

The Football i have Watched over the Last 3 Weeks has really worried me. Not Just Melbourne But the Game in General. Mid Fielders Storming through the Center Bouncing the Ball about to kick the Ball Forward...But the 50 Metre Arc is empty!! No one there. So the ball is chipped. Crap Game. Totally not what i grew up with in all manner.

I believe there is only one way to fix this....3 Forwards & 3 Backman should remain in the 50 metre Arc at all times. No exceptions. There are more than enough umps to make sure this is adheared to.

If the game is played in the manner i have watched over the last few weeks, i doubt i will support it. I want to But i just find it dull to watch without Forwards.

3 on 3 in the 50 is all i ask.

Thoughts?

[Guest JACKtheRIPPER]

it still wont change the outcome, that means you will have the rest of the players in the middle of the ground,and will make it even more congested.

[Sir Why You Little 36,918]

it still wont change the outcome, that means you will have the rest of the players in the middle of the ground,and will make it even more congested.

3 is not the Maximum in the 50 but is the Minimum that should be allowed.

[Guest JACKtheRIPPER]

3 is not the Maximum in the 50 but is the Minimum that should be allowed.

i understand what your saying, but also if we starting having zones they will need more umpires to control the game,no one wants that, a good side will figure out clarksons game plan, after all he was only a rover.

[Sir Why You Little 36,918]

i understand what your saying, but also if we starting having zones they will need more umpires to control the game,no one wants that, a good side will figure out clarksons game plan, after all he was only a rover.

I Reckon That's the Problem. Too many people have too much time to work out strategies which has diluted the game. I know its only NAB cup at this stage but that Essendon Fitzroy game the other night was unwatchable. I Turned it off. It's a bad advertisement for the AFL to be having that on at prime time. It Totally Stunk. But i do know that Vlad would find it hard to admit that he & The AFL were "WRONG" about the game.

I worry that the Forward line as i know it has gone. The Art of Being a class CHF is no more.

[dee-luded 2,959]

The Football i have Watched over the Last 3 Weeks has really worried me. Not Just Melbourne But the Game in General. Mid Fielders Storming through the Center Bouncing the Ball about to kick the Ball Forward...But the 50 Metre Arc is empty!! No one there. So the ball is chipped. Crap Game. Totally not what i grew up with in all manner.

I believe there is only one way to fix this....3 Forwards & 3 Backman should remain in the 50 metre Arc at all times. No exceptions. There are more than enough umps to make sure this is adheared to.

If the game is played in the manner i have watched over the last few weeks, i doubt i will support it. I want to But i just find it dull to watch without Forwards.

3 on 3 in the 50 is all i ask.

Thoughts?

IMO the catalyst for all this flooding &/or zoning is the extra interchange numbers over the last few years coupled with improved medical/fitness regimes that allow the players to run harder back & forth in bursts prior to a bench rest.

This is all happening since we increased the No of interchange spots on the bench.

I've been saying for a couple of seasons now, reduce the interchange back to 3 + 2 emergencies.

[Sir Why You Little 36,918]

IMO the catalyst for all this flooding &/or zoning is the extra interchange numbers over the last few years coupled with improved medical/fitness regimes that allow the players to run harder back & forth in bursts prior to a bench rest.

This is all happening since we increased the No of interchange spots on the bench.

I've been saying for a couple of seasons now, reduce the interchange back to 3 + 2 emergencies.

Good one i totally agree with that one as well. In past years tired players would sit in the forward pockets to get a breather. It would be fascinating to watch the Game now with the 19 & 20th man rule in place. Once you were off that was your day done. Fresh man comes on. Maybe we need something close to this to slow the game down that 10 %. Hey Formula One are doing just that to save the sport.

[Chook 15,012]

I'm young. What about the forward line as I know it? I enjoy the way the game is played now, because that's pretty much what I grew up with. The game is constantly evolving, and the last thing we need to do is make it like netball with its zones and restrictions. Just leave the game alone and watch the smart people come up with good tactics. Why should the coaches be penalized for coming up with game-winning strategy?

[Sir Why You Little 36,918]

I'm young. What about the forward line as I know it? I enjoy the way the game is played now, because that's pretty much what I grew up with. The game is constantly evolving, and the last thing we need to do is make it like netball with its zones and restrictions. Just leave the game alone and watch the smart people come up with good tactics. Why should the coaches be penalized for coming up with game-winning strategy?

Fair enough i was waiting for a younger supporter to answer like that. Just one question though. Does a completely empty forward line not bother you?

[Lil_red_fire_engine 11,087]

I believe there is only one way to fix this....3 Forwards & 3 Backman should remain in the 50 metre Arc at all times. No exceptions. There are more than enough umps to make sure this is adheared to.

Thoughts?

And lets put bibs on them with letters signifying the position they are playing. The same thing happens every year. Something new is trialled by teams - people raise their arms as if the sky is falling in and by early in the season teams have worked it out and you are left with more or less the same game.

Leave the game alone it will sort itself out.

[gOLLy 401]

The game is doomed. I just wish we would win a flag so I can give the game away.

[Sir Why You Little 36,918]

And lets put bibs on them with letters signifying the position they are playing. The same thing happens every year. Something new is trialled by teams - people raise their arms as if the sky is falling in and by early in the season teams have worked it out and you are left with more or less the same game.

Leave the game alone it will sort itself out.

But that's the Problem it isn't being left alone. Ever since the interchange was bought in & then expanded from 2-4 The game has changed to something almost unrecognizable to what i grew up with. Soccer may be a bit dull at times but at least it is still soccer.

[Chook 15,012]

Fair enough i was waiting for a younger supporter to answer like that. Just one question though. Does a completely empty forward line not bother you?

Not philosophically. In game-terms, if the opposing team has players in their forward line when they go forward, but we don't when it's our turn to attack, then I have a problem. But I'd be annoyed if our forwards were standing inside fifty when the ball is in the opposition's attacking arc.

I don't have a problem with the aesthetics of a game played without a hard-and-fast forward-line like many of you are probably used to. So from that aspect I'm fine with it. But if it's a symptom of our team flooding back and then not rebounding into space like they should, then there's a problem.

If no forwards = lazy, then I'm [censored] off, but otherwise I don't mind. To be honest, I enjoy seeing somebody use the rules to their advantage, and wouldn't hold it against them if they win using their brains, no matter how ugly some people may view the game because of it.

And of course, the AFL will tell you that attendances and memberships are at an all-time high, so from that perspective, there's no evidence that the game will ever suffer because of a perception that it's forgetting its roots or becoming an ugly, negative game - not that I believe it is.

But to show that I know where you're coming from, I'll draw an analogy from my younger cousins who are from 7-13 years old. The Simpsons has been running now for 21 years. Whenever I watch the episodes from seasons 7-9 (widely regarded as the show's golden era), I have nostalgic memories of a witty, relevant cartoon that kept me in stitches every night. All that my cousins see is a boring (relatively - after all, it's still The Simpsons), poorly animated show. Likewise, when I watch the more gag-humour oriented episodes from the later seasons, I often feel embarrassed to think this is the same show that I used to love. But love it they (my cousins) do. This is what they think of when they think of The Simpsons.

In the same way, I don't think of one-on-one contests and muddy footy-grounds whenever I turn to memories of the Dees. The game has changed, but keep in mind that the way the game is now, is home for me and many that I know. Don't force a now round peg into a square hole. Let the game evolve naturally.

And please don't bring up the bump, because as much as I love it, the AFL is forced to legislate on it due to the inherent risks involved when two hundred-kilo objects slam into each other at 40 km/h.

[Sir Why You Little 36,918]

Not philosophically. In game-terms, if the opposing team has players in their forward line when they go forward, but we don't when it's our turn to attack, then I have a problem. But I'd be annoyed if our forwards were standing inside fifty when the ball is in the opposition's attacking arc.

I don't have a problem with the aesthetics of a game played without a hard-and-fast forward-line like many of you are probably used to. So from that aspect I'm fine with it. But if it's a symptom of our team flooding back and then not rebounding into space like they should, then there's a problem.

If no forwards = lazy, then I'm [censored] off, but otherwise I don't mind. To be honest, I enjoy seeing somebody use the rules to their advantage, and wouldn't hold it against them if they win using their brains, no matter how ugly some people may view the game because of it.

And of course, the AFL will tell you that attendances and memberships are at an all-time high, so from that perspective, there's no evidence that the game will ever suffer because of a perception that it's forgetting its roots or becoming an ugly, negative game - not that I believe it is.

But to show that I know where you're coming from, I'll draw an analogy from my younger cousins who are from 7-13 years old. The Simpsons has been running now for 21 years. Whenever I watch the episodes from seasons 7-9 (widely regarded as the show's golden era), I have nostalgic memories of a witty, relevant cartoon that kept me in stitches every night. All that my cousins see is a boring (relatively - after all, it's still The Simpsons), poorly animated show. Likewise, when I watch the more gag-humour oriented episodes from the later seasons, I often feel embarrassed to think this is the same show that I used to love. But love it they (my cousins) do. This is what they think of when they think of The Simpsons.

In the same way, I don't think of one-on-one contests and muddy footy-grounds whenever I turn to memories of the Dees. The game has changed, but keep in mind that the way the game is now, is home for me and many that I know. Don't force a now round peg into a square hole. Let the game evolve naturally.

And please don't bring up the bump, because as much as I love it, the AFL is forced to legislate on it due to the inherent risks involved when two hundred-kilo objects slam into each other at 40 km/h.

That's all good & in most aspects i totally agree. (Series 1 & 2 of the Simpsons is pure Genius to me!!) So i get where you are coming from! My Biggest Problem of the Game now is that is So much more defensive than it was. I suppose the whole Tanking issue is somewhere in there too. If Teams are way of the pace by Round 12 they shut up shop & wait for the draft. It was once the ultimate shame to be given the spoon-now certain people look forward to it.

I still think the Team who finishes 9th should be given incentive. That arguement will start again in july!!

Australian Rules to me was (is) an attacking Game, yes defence was always important but only so your team could get the ball back & attack. Right Now it is a possession game, and i can see why i just don't find it that interesting! Wish i did, but i don't.

So i wait for an attacking coach i suppose that has success. Maybe i am over reacting but all the games i have seen this year have been Rubbish. Bring on Round 1 & lets see if the 50 metre stays empty!!

[Freak 100]

What's with the capital letters mid sentence? Capital letters are only used at the start of a sentence of if it's a name of a person or location. Not At The Start Of Every Damn Word. Sorry, but i hate that.

[Lil_red_fire_engine 11,087]

But that's the Problem it isn't being left alone. Ever since the interchange was bought in & then expanded from 2-4 The game has changed to something almost unrecognizable to what i grew up with. Soccer may be a bit dull at times but at least it is still soccer.

The rules have been left alone until recently now there are knee jerk reactions to every new tactic. Flooding, clusters, rushed behinds, kick out strategies all could have existed 10-20 years ago. Its just now they go rule changing as soon as something new is tried. Just leave the game alone and let tacticians sort it out.

[Trisul 664]

"To be honest, I enjoy seeing somebody use the rules to their advantage, and wouldn't hold it against them if they win using their brains, no matter how ugly some people may view the game because of it."

That to me is the kicker and frankly what football has been missing for too long. Play the game - all of it.

Saying that, anything beyond the 'necessary' does get me annoyed, and it is over-used by teams lacking offensive options or trialing tactics/plays.

It (zoning) also allows for/promotes breath-taking bursts from defense like Wonas.

I'd rather watch a dour, defensive, lost possension game of footy 48 to 52 than soccer. Ho-hum, no one scored? Even once? Yet given 2/3's of a win?!

On a related note, thuggery has held back football for too long. A thinking young athelete like Morton would've been hospitalised by now.

I recall (I believe) a young Grgic almost having his neck snapped by Michael #$&*ing Long in the 2000 GF, who ran a 30m straight line to hip and shoulder the top of his head as he got up from a gather. I'd much rather see defensive floods.

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

On a related note, thuggery has held back football for too long. A thinking young athelete like Morton would've been hospitalised by now.

I recall (I believe) a young Grgic almost having his neck snapped by Michael #$&*ing Long in the 2000 GF, who ran a 30m straight line to hip and shoulder the top of his head as he got up from a gather. I'd much rather see defensive floods.

It was Troy Simmonds. Michael Long was reckless not a thug. But I agree with the punishment of violent or reckless acts.

I hate the floods but understand why they are being done.

[AzzKikA 2,371]

I really dislike the flood too, but when the ball is moved quickly, then it does not happen, remember the Freo game? Evertime we went forward in the first half, we did it too slow and Freo countered us quickly and scored, then when we started to move the ball fast and efficiently they couldn't get numbers back, thats how flooding/zoning is defeated.

[Vipercrunch 2,820]

I am a little over 30, so probably have less knowledge about how the game used to be played as some of you. From what I have seen (a copy of one of the Grand Finals from the mid 70's), I much, much prefer todays game than what i saw then. I may have seen a bad game, but what i saw was mindless kick-to-kick. It was horrible. Team A got the ball and blindly bombed it to their Half forawd line. Team B one the ball and bombed it back. So brainless.

The game is evolving, and I am enjoying the journey.

[Deestroy All 14,262]

This rule could never work, too many things can happen that would make trying to police it a farce.

What if you were one of the final 3 and your lead and mark ends 2 metres outside the 50? Or the ball was bouncing around just outside the arch, you'd have to wait there until someone fetched it for you.

I suppose you could be allowed to leave the arch once the ball is kicked, kind've like the offside rule, but again, too hard to do, umpires get enough [censored] wrong, imagine them trying to get that right.

There are also injuries and interchanges that happen, you'd have the AFL's little post-it notes on the field saying who is allowed to exit the forward 50 because they need to get off the ground.

Impossible.

When teams start losing matches because they're streaming down the ground but there's no one to kick to, the game will fix itself.

[Guest JACKtheRIPPER]

It was Troy Simmonds. Michael Long was reckless not a thug. But I agree with the punishment of violent or reckless acts.

I hate the floods but understand why they are being done.

Long was reckless and he refused to admit that he done the wrong thing,i never thought much of him after that incident.

[Sir Why You Little 36,918]

What's with the capital letters mid sentence? Capital letters are only used at the start of a sentence of if it's a name of a person or location. Not At The Start Of Every Damn Word. Sorry, but i hate that.

You will live! Get out & smell the Flowers a bit more...

[Sir Why You Little 36,918]

It was Troy Simmonds. Michael Long was reckless not a thug. But I agree with the punishment of violent or reckless acts.

I hate the floods but understand why they are being done.

Michael Long was indeed a Thug on that Day. He knew exactly what he was doing & had time to change his mind. His apology was an open letter to "the Age" as i recall. Despicable man. Don't think he played against us again (always had a sore hammy i think) I know why too!

[Guest Rojik of the Arctic]

I believe there is only one way to fix this....3 Forwards & 3 Backman should remain in the 50 metre Arc at all times. No exceptions. There are more than enough umps to make sure this is adheared to.

Thoughts?

I think you are just falling into the trap that the AFL wants us to be in - change the game every 15 minutes so we can justify the Rules Committees existence. The game has gone along just fine for 150 years with minimal tweaking but in the last 10-15 there seems to be a new rule every season. I'm not having a go at you but I'd really like to see a 5 year moratorium on rules and let's just see the game work itself out. A good coach, with a good team, will always beat any plan that can be conceived.