I think Gina Rinehart and Clive Palmer are in the "shouldn't be here at all category."

B)

I hate soft frees for very minor incidental contact, such as a hand brushing a shoulder, etc. and unfortunately the recent NAB games have been full of them. It makes my blood boil.

If only they umpired every game like they do Grand Finals, where they only pay blatant free kicks.

Note: I appreciate that it's the best umpires that officiate in the GF, but you get my drift.

Honestly I think it's gotten to the point where fans look forward to September for the lack of over-officiating as much as watching the top teams duke it out.

Every game should be umpired as though it were a final, going by today's standards. This business of blowing the whistle every 10 seconds is ruining the game, period.This current NAB Cup has been almost farcical in that regard. Just surgically attach the whistle to their lips and be done with it.

This is an area about which the majority of us know very little because it touches on areas of physical fitness that require specialised knowledge. The only thing I can comment on is the aesthetics of the game - how it looks and feels to me as a spectacle.

When I go to Etihad, I usually sit on the eastern (city) end of the ground but for the NAB Cup triple header, I sat on the western end near to the players' interchange area. I was amazed to see players running on and off the interchange within minutes of the start of the game. They were coming off three and four at a time and mainly, they were sprinting up to 50 to 75 metres to get off as quickly as possible. I sometimes wonder if these blokes aren't fatigued just in the act of completing the interchange let alone playing the game.

I used to subscribe to the theory that you don't flirt with form and if a player's hot then you shouldn't move him or take him off. That's gone out of the window these days and because you have physical beasts like Dane Swan who seem to defy nature and continue to perform at top gear despite (or because of) constantly being rotated. Today's game has developed into a far different spectacle to the one which we grew to love.

I want to see the better players lasting longer and doing their stuff but I have no idea whether capping rotations is going to do that or make the game watchable. I sense however, that we're going to get a cap on rotations to a number between 80 and 160 and we're just going to have to live with it and hope that our list matures a bit more and our football department comes up with the right plans to stay ahead of the game when that happens.

The stats prove that players go longer and harder when they play in bursts. The coaches naturally want that and have adjusted their game styles and recruitment accordingly

But we got by for about 140 years without the high level of rotations and IMO it was a better spectacle before we had the high rotations. I hate the basketball end to end stuff. The AFL yet again cannot admit they have stuffed up. They spent 13 years trying to speed up the game for TV and now they are trying to slow it down. The fans hated it and screamed every year about 36 players around the ball and the fact that players don't have an opponent but a 'zone' The AFL are monopolistic idiots.

I am waiting for the mea culpa. We were wrong on the interchange.

As well the rapid pace of the game made recruiting change. They wanted athletes not footballers. We as a club have fallen badly for that. Our game is unique in that we can have players of all shapes and sizes. That was being driven out of the game. I'll be happy of that comes back.

Now they are going full bore the other way. 80 interchanges. It will probably be about legal responsibility rather than asthetics but I like the idea of less.

The coaches will work there way around it like they always do,

So, what? Do you want to get rid of coaches? Either they're here for a good reason and we let them do their jobs, or they shouldn't be here at all and we get rid of them. Actually now that I think about it, that seems like a pretty good philosophy for life.

I'm not sure how you got from Macca's point to getting rid of the coaches. It's just about recognising that in this instance the coaches have a different driver to the AFL. In my work the rules and processes we have to work by change all the time and usually for the greater good of the company, but if it makes my job more difficult as a result, of course I have a grumble about it. Fortunately my boss has a lot more tact than Demetriou, but the gist of his message is the same: too bad, so sad, get on with it.

The stats prove that players go longer and harder when they play in bursts. The coaches naturally want that and have adjusted their game styles and recruitment accordingly

But we got by for about 140 years without the high level of rotations and IMO it was a better spectacle before we had the high rotations. I hate the basketball end to end stuff. The AFL yet again cannot admit they have stuffed up. They spent 13 years trying to speed up the game for TV and now they are trying to slow it down. The fans hated it and screamed every year about 36 players around the ball and the fact that players don't have an opponent but a 'zone' The AFL are monopolistic idiots.

I am waiting for the mea culpa. We were wrong on the interchange.

As well the rapid pace of the game made recruiting change. They wanted athletes not footballers. We as a club have fallen badly for that. Our game is unique in that we can have players of all shapes and sizes. That was being driven out of the game. I'll be happy of that comes back.

Now they are going full bore the other way. 80 interchanges. It will probably be about legal responsibility rather than asthetics but I like the idea of less.

The coaches will work there way around it like they always do,

Here here jnrmac.

Exactly my point + some I missed.

I say the AFL should set out this year, Mid season, the way forward, realigning the game over a 3 yr period.

To me the coaches have sought their projection of the game moving forward, & have recruited & trained their lists to suit the rotations.

The Coaches careers are on the line.

I'd like to see the AFL comeout this Year & say, set in stone, They will reduce the rotations & bench, over a 3 year period... progressively reducing rotations, finally down to a maximum of 80.

And the bench down to a 2 + 2 + 2 Emergencies {2 @ start of play, reduced to 1 @ start of 3rd Qtr} (Unavailable except thru serious injury)

* To me they have to cut down the conditions that help the players congest the play & play loose, instead of picking up an opponent.

The stats prove that players go longer and harder when they play in bursts. The coaches naturally want that and have adjusted their game styles and recruitment accordingly

But we got by for about 140 years without the high level of rotations and IMO it was a better spectacle before we had the high rotations. I hate the basketball end to end stuff. The AFL yet again cannot admit they have stuffed up. They spent 13 years trying to speed up the game for TV and now they are trying to slow it down. The fans hated it and screamed every year about 36 players around the ball and the fact that players don't have an opponent but a 'zone' The AFL are monopolistic idiots.

I am waiting for the mea culpa. We were wrong on the interchange.

As well the rapid pace of the game made recruiting change. They wanted athletes not footballers. We as a club have fallen badly for that. Our game is unique in that we can have players of all shapes and sizes. That was being driven out of the game. I'll be happy of that comes back.

Now they are going full bore the other way. 80 interchanges. It will probably be about legal responsibility rather than asthetics but I like the idea of less.

The coaches will work there way around it like they always do,

I am not sure that we have seen that of late. Well, I think we have seen that and the other extreme.

We have seen burst speed allow a 'flood of the ball' where the players are sprinting to position and having too many players around the ball to let it move quickly. How many players in a forward half have we seen? Then two minutes later and about 10 rotations later we see the other forward half flooded.

Tiring out the players will open up the game and we will see perhaps more end-to-end movement of the ball from that but we will see less massive congestion of the ball with players unable to get from one end to the other.

Just to throw some random thoughts out there.

I like the idea of caping rotations and wanted that instead of a substitute.

I think 120 is a perfect number for rotations but it should be broken down that it is a max of 25 a qtr so you can't take 10 one qtr and then 40 the next. Also I believe that they should scrap the substitute rule and go back to the 4 player interchange.

I would love to see the game go back to the way it was with more one on one contests and a greater emphasis on endurance fitness.

I think this rule would actually work in our favour as we will have some very good big forwards over the next few years and when the game gets near the end teams wil struggle to defend against us with the long kick to the forward line. The only aspect I think we may struggle at first would be the midfield as we are very young there but we struggle there now anyway so it doesn't make a huge difference.

I think 120 is a perfect number for rotations but it should be broken down that it is a max of 25 a qtr

haha yeah right I mean 30 my bad

Was it Woosher saying today that he has already noticed the game opening up from the capped rotations? Could be, but I'm not sure I'd call the coaches impartial on the topic.

Pretty passionate article by a (very) former Dee on this subject...

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/listen-to-the-players-andrew-20130310-2fu6j.html