Last-Touch Rule implemented for AFLW

[Demonland 71,927]

[george_on_the_outer 7,590]

Sooner it is applied to the Mens competition the better. 

Will stop the ridiculous "interpretations" of deliberate that we currently enjoy and will genuinely force players to keep the ball in play.

[BAMF 4,344]

Booo!

Just leave the rules alone!

FFS!

[Lucifers Hero 39,717]

To me the reasons for the 'last touch' rule is a bit flimsy: to reduce congestion and increase scoring.  That may happen in the men's game but less likely in AFLW as its teams have only 16 players.  I watched most AFLW games last year and congestion was rarely an issue. 

And it is hard to see how the rule change will 'improve scoring'.  There are two reasons why scoring was 'low' last year:  1) they play 15 minute quarters (17 min in 2018) and 2) women can't kick as far as men and so it takes longer to reach the scoring zone.  It is hard to see an AFLW team kicking more that 60 points very often.   Scoring shouldn't be compared to AFL as they play an extra 30 to 40 minutes.

I have a H&S issue with the 3 changes (ie Last touch rule, extra 2 minutes for each quarter and one less person on the bench to reduce rotations).  They will exhaust players faster.  Players who are part time and don't have a lot of conditioning behind them. 

The AFL should give the game a few years to settle before making these sort of rule changes.

Edited December 13, 2017 by Lucifer's Hero

[Dee Zephyr 19,267]

3 minutes ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

To me the reasons for the 'last touch' rule is a bit flimsy: to reduce congestion and increase scoring.  That may happen in the men's game but less likely in AFLW as it teams have only 16 players.  I watched most AFLW games last year and congestion was rarely an issue. 

And it is hard to see how the rule change will 'improve scoring'.  There are two reasons why scoring was 'low' last year:  1) they play 15 minute quarters (17 min in 2018) and 2) women can't kick as far as men and so it takes longer to reach the scoring zone.  It is hard to see an AFLW team kicking more that 60 points very often.   Scoring shouldn't be compared to AFL as they play an extra 30 to 40 minutes.

I have a H&S issue with the 3 changes (ie Last touch rule, extra 2 minutes for each quarter and one less person on the bench to reduce rotations).  They will exhaust players faster.  Players who are part time and don't have a lot of conditioning behind them. 

The AFL should give the game a few years to settle before making these sort of rule changes.

Totally agree LH, I watched most of the games also and I hardly noticed any congestion throughout the games. 

I wasn't aware of the 3 rule changes, you make some great points about H&S especially when they are running around in one of the hottest months of the year.

[Lucifers Hero 39,717]

17 hours ago, Demon77 said:

Totally agree LH, I watched most of the games also and I hardly noticed any congestion throughout the games. 

I wasn't aware of the 3 rule changes, you make some great points about H&S especially when they are running around in one of the hottest months of the year.

Yes, the heat is another important factor causing fatigue.  It and other points are raised in this article.  https://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/three-new-rules-will-take-effect-in-the-aflw-in-2018-but-they-havent-all-been-received-well/news-story/642cc66607d637aca17250f3a1440a55

I have great respect for Nicole Livingston but her sporting experience is in a repetitive individual sport, played indoors and is a 'sprint' in comparison to an AFLW game.  Not sure how deeply she looked into the reasons behind stats (of only one season) and how widely she consulted. 

I wonder if she fully realises players are part time and have full time jobs scattered all over the state.

As a newcomer to the game to not give players and the AFLPA sufficient time to digest and input is awful.  It is one thing for each change to be ticked off in isolation but taking the 3 changes together hasn't been properly assessed especially for H&S issues.  Players will pay the price (fatigue and injury) and the spectacle will suffer.

 

Edited December 14, 2017 by Lucifer's Hero

[dl4e 5,851]

Okay so you can "accidently" kick the ball into an opponents backside so the balls trajectory sends it out over the boundry line in your forward pocket so there is a free shot at goal. 

[george_on_the_outer 7,590]

Would be better

28 minutes ago, dl4e said:

Okay so you can "accidently" kick the ball into an opponents backside so the balls trajectory sends it out over the boundry line in your forward pocket so there is a free shot at goal. 

If you are that good a kick, it would be easier to have a shot at the goal in the first place.

[Dees_In_October 3,380]

I was a bit on the fence about this but Lucifer's comments have raised some issues I hadn't thought about.

Aside from anything else though, it's ludicrous to be making rule changes based on improving the game style after one, 7-game season played by part-timers. There's enough natural development that will occur with experience, more game-time spent together, the inevitable progression of tactics and strategy. Teams will be reacting to what worked and didn't work in 2017. If a couple of seasons down the road, there is still a problem (and I'm not sure that there is one), then sure, tinker with the rules. 

And the higher scores thing doesn't make sense to me. Again, scores will get higher as professionalism increases (see: WBBL scores this year). The men's game isn't the benchmark for what a high score in the women's game should look like. A high score is relative to your opposition's ability to score. You better believed I was as happy with the 70 points we scored in the last round as I would be with 120 points in the men's game. Plus, as they say, a close game's a good game. I refuse to believe that most people go to an AFL game just to see lots of goals.

[TeamPlayedFine39 8,495]

Big no from me I think.

- I like the boundary throw-in; I enjoy the combative one-on-one nature of a ruck contest and the 50/50 nature of the set up.

- Players will very much be in two minds about whether to go for the ball when it's near the boundary.  If they do, even without prior opportunity, then are tackled over the line by their opponents, is it then a free kick to the opposition??

- Players shouldn't be rewarded for slapping the ball onto an opponent so it touches them before it crosses the line, ala basketball and netball.

- When it was trialled in the preseason comp a few years back, players didn't know if they should stop the ball as it goes over the line.  There was a farcical incident where a player shepherded the ball as it slowly rolled over the line so he'd get a free and not have to contest.

- And, above all this, I need a break.  It's a tense, action back game.  I need a moment every now and then to pull myself together, check the scoreboard, check a players' numbers, pour myself a drink, etc.  

 

[dl4e 5,851]

21 hours ago, george_on_the_outer said:

Would be better

If you are that good a kick, it would be easier to have a shot at the goal in the first place.

Did not think of this but is the touch rule by hand only or the entire body.

[Diamond_Jim 12,567]

good idea but the reward for OOB may be too high ...

It works in soccer and basket ball because the reward is a free throw which is very rarely a scoring opportunity.

Soccer player are experts at playing the ball onto their opponent's body to achieve the throw in. Not sure I want to see that skill developed in AFL.

[RalphiusMaximus 6,046]

They just can't help themselves.  There are a bunch of petty nobodies in AFL house who feel the need to justify their employment by constantly messing with rules that don't need changing.  The sooner they have a cleanout of unnecessary personnel the better off the game will be.  Maybe they could use the extra cash to employ a real tribunal or train the umpires better. 

[Deemania since 56 6,628]

Cannot get myself to watch or read about the AFWL or whatever - women are not suited to playing football and my conscience says that we should protect the fairer gender from the ravages of competitive, physical trauma in its many forms. Call me 'old fashioned, sexist, biased or again, whatever' but it is a fact, for me. I hope that the current overload of girlie football ends soon, allowing interested football followers of old and many of 'new' to not have their footy browsing, news editions and reports interrupted by what my mates and I regard as 'tripe'. Just an opinion so slice me up as a misogynist or a whatever, whereas I really enjoy watching the competitive outcomes of netball, hockey, gymnastics and bake-offs. I think it has much to do with 'domain' but don't quote me, or whatever.

[RalphiusMaximus 6,046]

3 hours ago, Deemania since 56 said:

Cannot get myself to watch or read about the AFWL or whatever - women are not suited to playing football and my conscience says that we should protect the fairer gender from the ravages of competitive, physical trauma in its many forms. Call me 'old fashioned, sexist, biased or again, whatever' but it is a fact, for me. I hope that the current overload of girlie football ends soon, allowing interested football followers of old and many of 'new' to not have their footy browsing, news editions and reports interrupted by what my mates and I regard as 'tripe'. Just an opinion so slice me up as a misogynist or a whatever, whereas I really enjoy watching the competitive outcomes of netball, hockey, gymnastics and bake-offs. I think it has much to do with 'domain' but don't quote me, or whatever.

I have no intention of attacking you, but I do suggest watching a few games. It's a pretty good standard and improving.

[Forest Demon 4,681]

On 12/14/2017 at 1:28 PM, dl4e said:

Okay so you can "accidently" kick the ball into an opponents backside so the balls trajectory sends it out over the boundry line in your forward pocket so there is a free shot at goal. 

I haven't been bothered to read the article, but surely it would be last disposal, rather than last touch? I.e. a kick or a handball, as opposed to the ball just spilling over, or hitting someone and going over the boundary. I don't really support this rule in general, but if it is coming in, that's what it has to be, to ensure it isn't open to these sort of manipulations.

[Lucifers Hero 39,717]

14 minutes ago, Forest Demon said:

I haven't been bothered to read the article, but surely it would be last disposal, rather than last touch? I.e. a kick or a handball, as opposed to the ball just spilling over, or hitting someone and going over the boundary. I don't really support this rule in general, but if it is coming in, that's what it has to be, to ensure it isn't open to these sort of manipulations.

Correct FD.  The rule is 'last disposal' ie kick or handball, whether deliberate or not.

[The Chazz 4,077]

I was expecting this "Last Touch" thread to be riddled with Simon Lethlean puns, and to a lesser extent, have a hint of Harvey Weinstein about it.

Not sure if I'm relieved or disappointed...

[RalphiusMaximus 6,046]

7 hours ago, The Chazz said:

I was expecting this "Last Touch" thread to be riddled with Simon Lethlean puns, and to a lesser extent, have a hint of Harvey Weinstein about it.

Not sure if I'm relieved or disappointed...

I'm ashamed to admit that it hadn't occurred to me.