Whole Game 666

[one_demon 826]

The AFL came very close to implementing starting positions for this year but chickened out in the end which I found very disappointing.  People really like 666.  Wouldn't it be nice if we could have 666 during the game, not just after a goal.

[Smokey 4,389]

Yeah, nah. That’s ridiculous. 

[Rodney (Balls) Grinter 10,925]

I don't know if it would be quite the same as 6-6-6 (I don't even fully understand the full technicalities of the rule), but I do see some potential for say requiring a certain number of player from each side to be behind the centre of the ground opposite the position of play at all stoppages such as kick in's, ball ups and boundary throw in's.

I hate the current congested look and feel of the game.  That said, I want a MFC premiership more than I care about the look of the game right now.  It's fairly clear that we have recruited and developed a game style that works reasonably well within the current rules.  To change those rules dramatically and suddenly now could be a huge and quite unfair disadvantage to us, so I'd want any new rules to be bought in slowly and within a reasonably distant timeline.

Further reducing the number of interchanges is another rule I believe the AFL could tinker with to good effect and it could be done realitively slowly, with small increments.

[one_demon 826]

It can stay as 666 after a goal.  Then there has to be three from each team in the fifty metre arcs at each stoppage.  

[Wiseblood 24,637]

We didn't need 666, so I have no idea why we need to take it any further.  Just leave the game alone.  It's fine.

[one_demon 826]

6 minutes ago, Wiseblood said:

Just leave the game alone.  It's fine.

You're enjoying the congestion?

Edited April 14, 2019 by one_demon

[Wiseblood 24,637]

Just now, one_demon said:

You're enjoying the congestion?

I don't think the game changed much with the implementation of 666.  It didn't need to change, either.

[Demonland 73,257]

It seems to me that scores are lower not higher under 666. Having said that I don't have any stats to back that up. If true is 666 a failure so far considering the goal was reducing congestion inorder to achieve more scoring. 

[Smokey 4,389]

Is it just me or is expecting a bunch of players to run back to their quadrant at every single stoppage in the time it takes the umpire to throw the ball up slightly unreasonable? All this would do is slow the game down. The game is over-officiated enough as it is. 

[one_demon 826]

14 minutes ago, Smokey said:

Is it just me or is expecting a bunch of players to run back to their quadrant at every single stoppage in the time it takes the umpire to throw the ball up slightly unreasonable? All this would do is slow the game down. 

That's the beauty of starting positions.  Those players will have to stay close to the arcs in order to make it back in time.  The umpires won't  be waiting for them.   If they don't make it back there's no whistle.  The team is docked a rotation for each breach.

 

Edited April 14, 2019 by one_demon

[biggestred 5,182]

The solution imho to "congestion" is completely reducing the interchange bench. 

18 players on the ground. Matched up.  Star mid needs a breather? Sit in the forward pocket. 2 rucks? Gotta be able to go forward and back.  Everyone would be too cooked to push up the ground the whole game. Would spread it all out. 

Tactics? Wow coach a has moved player b onto player c. I miss that.

10 interchanges a game. Max.

Edited April 14, 2019 by biggestred

[Whispering_Jack 30,866]

They play a form of 666 in modified rules for Junior Football (kids up to Under 10s) which is fine for those learning the game and for encouraging participation for all players.

However, in senior football, I can’t see it working for a whole game. Players would have to wear clothing differentiating them according to position and the restrictions would make it unplayable and unwatchable.

[one_demon 826]

2 minutes ago, biggestred said:

The solution imho to "congestion" is completely reducing the interchange bench. 

18 players on the ground. Matched up.  Star mid needs a breather? Sit in the forward pocket. 2 rucks? Gotta be able to go forward and back.  Everyone would be too cooked to push up the ground the whole game. Would spread it all out. 

Tactics? Wow coach a has moved player b onto player c. I miss that.

10 interchanges a game. Max.

I agree you could reduce interchanges, but the players are so fit these days.  Also it doesn't force the coaches to change their tactics.  They'll still want thirty six players in one quarter of the ground.

[one_demon 826]

2 minutes ago, Whispering_Jack said:

They play a form of 666 in modified rules for Junior Football (kids up to Under 10s) which is fine for those learning the game and for encouraging participation for all players.

However, in senior football, I can’t see it working for a whole game. Players would have to wear clothing differentiating them according to position and the restrictions would make it unplayable and unwatchable.

Yeah I guess I should of said 666 after a goal and three from each team in the fifty metre arcs at each stoppage.

[chookrat 4,268]

1 hour ago, one_demon said:

You're enjoying the congestion?

Congestion is fine, some games are a bit of a roaming maul while others are high scoring. Its not basketball. 

[Lord Travis 10,763]

666 was intended to create space, increase goal scoring and therefore have more ads to make money from. Instead it has brought scoring down, with Round 1 being the lowest score round of football in nearly 40 years. 

666 is a blight on the game. This year has produced the worst quality football in my lifetime, with not a single memorable or high quality game so far.

Expanding 666 would essentially turn the game into soccer. They need to undo all the new rules they implemented this year. They [censored] up and it’s lead to [censored] football. Pathetic foresight by the AFL.

[Clintosaurus 7,891]

28 minutes ago, one_demon said:

Yeah I guess I should of said 666 after a goal and three from each team in the fifty metre arcs at each stoppage.

I think the 3 inside 50 at each stoppage is a possibility. Geelong seem to already be doing something like this, and they are benefiting from the new rules so watch it happen.

[Demonland 73,257]

The powers to be are too arrogant to admit they were wrong. This administration will never change back. 

[deanox 10,023]

1 hour ago, one_demon said:

You're enjoying the congestion?

666 doesn't lessen congestion. In fact it may make it worse as teams are forced to play with 6 forwards, so although the midfield is more open, the 50s are automatically more congested.

666 only stops 2 things: 1) extra numbers back to defend a lead late in the game, and 2) coaches experimenting with spatial tactics and game style. 

An example of 2: last year we played a 4 man forward line with 2 extras behind the ball.  But both of these extras ran in to compete in the square. In effect, we generated our run from behind the ball and kicked into open space forward off the ball. Now, all teams must play the same style and kick to 6 on 6 forward of the ball.

 

26 minutes ago, biggestred said:

The solution imho to "congestion" is completely reducing the interchange bench. 

18 players on the ground. Matched up.  Star mid needs a breather? Sit in the forward pocket. 2 rucks? Gotta be able to go forward and back.  Everyone would be too cooked to push up the ground the whole game. Would spread it all out. 

Tactics? Wow coach a has moved player b onto player c. I miss that.

10 interchanges a game. Max.

I agree with this (although might be happy with 20).

 

If you want to fix congestion around the ball you need to do the following:

- Strongly enforce holding the ball / illegal disposal. Don't let players gather/drop, gather/drop.

- Stop allowing a third player (ie a team mate of the player with the ball) to wrap up a tackler and keep the ball locked in. This stops holding the ball decions being paid. (It is just holding the man, so pay a free kick to the tackler)

These tactics are coached deliberately and are designed to ensure stoppages are win or draw only (not lose) by creating a secondary stoppage if you cannot win clean possession and dispose outside to a team mate.

 

 

If you want more one on one contests then play for "sheparding the making contest" free kicks against 3rd players who try to block or screen. At least 10 per game occur. 

[one_demon 826]

7 minutes ago, chookrat said:

Congestion is fine, some games are a bit of a roaming maul while others are high scoring. Its not basketball. 

You don't want less congestion?

[John Crow Batty 8,879]

666 for the entire match would make a mockery of the game. Impossible for the players to maintain positions and also for umpires to enforce. Can only work as it is now due to a long break in play to reset after a goal. Cannot work at normal stoppages. Will just slow the game down waiting for players to get to their positions. And it is debatable if it actually works to enhance scoring. If anything it appears to hinder sides clearing easily from defence more so. 

Edited April 14, 2019 by america de cali

[one_demon 826]

1 minute ago, america de cali said:

666 for the entire match would make a mockery of the game. Impossible for the players to maintain positions and also for umpires to enforce. Can only work as it is now due to a break in play to reset after a goal. And it is debatable if it really works to enhance scoring. 

I actually don't care about more scoring.  I just want the players to have more space so they can showcase their skills more.

[John Crow Batty 8,879]

1 minute ago, one_demon said:

I actually don't care about more scoring.  I just want the players to have more space so they can showcase their skills more.

You are trying to invent a different sport. 

[one_demon 826]

6 minutes ago, america de cali said:

You are trying to invent a different sport. 

Well the game has been played for one hundred years with players spread throughout the ground.  Curently the game is being played with thirty six players in one quarter of the ground.  So which is the different sport?

[John Demonic 5,870]

It's lower risk to chip it around holding a lead taking time off the clock, than to kick a goal and run the higher risk of the 6/6/6 reset giving the other team momentum and repeated 6/6/6 bounces. That is why I think low scores and possession footy. Its a mockery.

Just wait until a team gives away a zone free kick deliberately against momentum, to avoid a deep inside 50 entry from great tap work and streaming forward clearances. Because a ruckman taking a free kick from the centre and bombing it into 50 even with 6/6/6 zones is a preferable entry/result.

Edited April 14, 2019 by John Demonic