Jump to content

Sign in to follow this  
Lucifer's Hero

Has the 6-6-6 Rule Backfired?

Recommended Posts

I saw this article on the 6-6-6 Rule where Don Pyke:  "...believes the six-six-six rule, introduced at the beginning of 2019 with the intention of creating flow and boosting scoring, has had the opposite effect..."  He highlighted that there have not been many 100+ pt scores this year. 

So I put together a little Table showing the # of 100+ ptscores over recent years in rnds 1-8

image.png.f42f3963fca1576239ceb4e24084249a.png

Its no wonder games are harder to watch.

This year there has been only one game where both teams scored 100+ pts, coincidentally when we played Ess.

Given this (and other rules) came in because the AFL and ch7 thought 'not enough' goals were being scored and wanted to open up the game, the Table would not make them happy.  iirc the AFL wanted to outsmart coaches by taking away some of their defensive tactics at centre bounces and kick-ins.

Interestingly, Pyke also said:  "...Adelaide simply had to adapt to the new trend and cast aside their reputation...for attack before defence".  In 2018 we were proudly a fwd half team that relied on the weight of i50 entries to kick winning scores so we were about attack, attack at all costs.  Perhaps it is not only our lack of two-way running that caused Goodwin to change and go back to the earlier Paul Roos strategy of 'defence first'.  

Lower scores are unexpected outcomes of the new rules and as Pyke says:  "... I don’t know what the AFL is going to do about it.” 

I would say the rule changes have backfired!  Over to you, Gil!

 

  • Like 6
  • Thanks 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Certainly backfired for us. Can't get numbers behind the ball. Struggle to set up defensively 

And here we were over summer thinking it would help us because we had Max!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agree on your stats presented and have actually stated it in prior posts with very few +100pt games. 

Although on the other side of the coin. We wouldn’t have been able to score twice in 49 seconds if for not the 6-6-6 rule. 

Is it the rule or the coaches not allowing free flowing football?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Same as most rule changes over past (10?) or more years

Coaches and players adapt and find new tactics, unsurprisingly there are unintended/unforeseen consequences, inevitably compounded by poor interpretation by umpireS of increasingly confusing rules

I've said it before, if only they left the game alone and improved the umpiring of the original game the fans (including viewers/broadcasters) would be much happier and us folks on Demonland would get approximately 43% of our posting time back to use more effectively

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
25 minutes ago, Moonshadow said:

Certainly backfired for us. Can't get numbers behind the ball. Struggle to set up defensively 

And here we were over summer thinking it would help us because we had Max!

I wouldn't read to much into our ability to adjust or cope with 666 and the rest of the rule changes 'this season' Moon given the rediculous level of injuries etc so far.

Let's see how we go once we get most of our best players up and firing eh.

666 has definitely had the reverse effect that the AFL were hoping for though that's for sure.  Scrap all the other rubbish with kick ins etc and just have 666 with significant reductions in interchange.

They changed the game for the worse by taking it from a few interchange to allow for injuries to unlimited just to 'supposedly' keep the game as fast moving as possible.  It had the reverse effect by allowing coaches/fitness gurus to change the style of player to power runners in short bursts able to close down on ground balls and lock it in creating stoppage after stoppage and mad levels of congestion.  Add to this the umpires slacking off with the prior opp rule resulting in less free kicks vs the past and the AFL created a rolling scrum / rod for its (our) back.

Keep it simple.  Retain 666, reduce interchange significantly to reduce the effect of the burst power runners' ability to get to the contest/tackle, scrap the other new rules, then see how it plays out.

Edited by Rusty Nails
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

My favourite grand finals were the ones where 50-60 points were scored each. I want to see a good contest, not just a good shootout. Couldn't care less about the low scoring.

Edited by John Demonic
  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Ironically without 6-6-6, we would not have won Saturday’s game. A goal behind with 49 seconds left on the clock, previously Gold Coast could have just stacked their backline and made it virtually impossible for us to score twice in that time. 

While the jury is still out on a number of fronts, it at least gives a team a chance in this last gasp situation. 

Edited by Key Deefender
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, John Demonic said:

My favourite grand finals were the ones where 50-60 points were scored each. I want to see a good contest, not just a good shootout. Couldn't care less about the low scoring.

Agree.

The OP says games are "harder to watch" because there are fewer instances of a team scoring 100 points.

The Melbourne v Essendon game had lots of goals but no skill, turnovers galore, and no defence from either side. I don't accept that made the game enjoyable. 

The scoring debate is taking over from the real debate, which should be about what we are actually watching. Goals do not make the game enjoyable in all circumstances.

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it has backfired in terms of lower scoring. It has also hurt our game and we haven't adjusted. Having said that we would not have won the game this week if we were in the same position a goal down and 54 seconds to go. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Slight side track, but I like the idea of team prior opportunity. If a player is under pressure and dishes off a handball to a teammate he shouldn't get the benifit of 'no prior.

Also, rules such as the 5m protected zone and obstruction of the 50m penalty are ridiculous and harsh and draw unnecessary negative attention to the umpires.

Edited by Moonshadow
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, John Demonic said:

My favourite grand finals were the ones where 50-60 points were scored each. I want to see a good contest, not just a good shootout. Couldn't care less about the low scoring.

For every game that is close or low scoring and a good contest there are many more such games that aren't a good contest.  eg our game vs GCS: one point on the siren win but both teams played rubbish.  Or our win vs Hawks; played by two middle of the road teams.  Low scoring, close but awful to watch.

A close game does not mean a good game any more than a high scoring game means a good game. 

I didn't check the stats but I would guess the i50 count this year is well down across the board, so games are being played between the 50m arcs or with lots of shallow i50's so it is like watching ping-pong.  The contests stifle player skills.

Personally, I would rather watch a skillful game with few contests eg the excitement of a player running, bouncing the ball toward toward goal is the best part of our game ala Hannan in the Geelong final last year.

Edited by Lucifer's Hero
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

I saw this article on the 6-6-6 Rule where Don Pyke:  "...believes the six-six-six rule, introduced at the beginning of 2019 with the intention of creating flow and boosting scoring, has had the opposite effect..."  He highlighted that there have not been many 100+ pt scores this year. 

So I put together a little Table showing the # of 100+ ptscores over recent years in rnds 1-8

image.png.f42f3963fca1576239ceb4e24084249a.png

Its no wonder games are harder to watch.

This year there has been only one game where both teams scored 100+ pts, coincidentally when we played Ess.

Given this (and other rules) came in because the AFL and ch7 thought 'not enough' goals were being scored and wanted to open up the game, the Table would not make them happy.  iirc the AFL wanted to outsmart coaches by taking away some of their defensive tactics at centre bounces and kick-ins.

Interestingly, Pyke also said:  "...Adelaide simply had to adapt to the new trend and cast aside their reputation...for attack before defence".  In 2018 we were proudly a fwd half team that relied on the weight of i50 entries to kick winning scores so we were about attack, attack at all costs.  Perhaps it is not only our lack of two-way running that caused Goodwin to change and go back to the earlier Paul Roos strategy of 'defence first'.  

Lower scores are unexpected outcomes of the new rules and as Pyke says:  "... I don’t know what the AFL is going to do about it.” 

I would say the rule changes have backfired!  Over to you, Gil!

 

Agree

Opening the game up has exposed teams for lack of speed.

We tried early in the season to go head to head for speed and ball movement and failed miserably.

Now teams have clued on to how to play expect it to be more defensive.

Teams will adapt and I think scoring will increase, good teams will find a way to score.  But have the rules worked or improved the game overall??? I say no.... what was the point of changing it at all

Im looking forward to the AFL changing the rules again and fing it up even more. Another massive fail

Edited by Unleash Hell
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
36 minutes ago, Moonshadow said:

Slight side track, but I like the idea of team prior opportunity. If a player is under pressure and dishes off a handball to a teammate he shouldn't get the benifit of 'no prior.

You must want a few more top 5 picks Moony! Our game style would be utterly negated with team prior!

Would like to see how this looks though, has it been trialed before?

 

Edited by John Demonic

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Protected species at the AFL tribunal,  'Marvel' stadium and superhero guernseys,  the disastrous 666 rule....

 

Great job Gillon McLachlan and co.  Keep running the game into the ground!

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For me, it seems to have merely taken some of a coaches tactical options right away and replaced those with an awful, game changing he-who-must-be-obeyed type law. I fail to see how it has improved the game and from my perspective, has made the game less interesting. 

This seems to be a classic case of changing something because those that have the power to do so, can. It hasn’t improved the game one iota.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dil and Shocking must be worried about what they've done. footys never been so boring imo.

also while we are talking about it, I've come around to the way of thinking that they should just do away with prior opportunity altogether. if you don't want possession for fear of getting caught holding the ball, just tap it on until you do want to take possession. like they used to do before they brought in the prior rule. at the very least they should bring in team prior opportunity like Moonshadow says.

it might help clear some of these scrums that end up repeat stoppages and would be more exciting to watch, keeping the ball in constant motion. ruckman will bring back the big smash to clear the ball out of the ruck as well. a feature of the game that has all but disappeared these days.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the OED there is a picture of the AFL logo next to "unintended consequences".

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

I saw this article on the 6-6-6 Rule where Don Pyke:  "...believes the six-six-six rule, introduced at the beginning of 2019 with the intention of creating flow and boosting scoring, has had the opposite effect..."  He highlighted that there have not been many 100+ pt scores this year. 

So I put together a little Table showing the # of 100+ ptscores over recent years in rnds 1-8

image.png.f42f3963fca1576239ceb4e24084249a.png

Its no wonder games are harder to watch.

This year there has been only one game where both teams scored 100+ pts, coincidentally when we played Ess.

Given this (and other rules) came in because the AFL and ch7 thought 'not enough' goals were being scored and wanted to open up the game, the Table would not make them happy.  iirc the AFL wanted to outsmart coaches by taking away some of their defensive tactics at centre bounces and kick-ins.

Interestingly, Pyke also said:  "...Adelaide simply had to adapt to the new trend and cast aside their reputation...for attack before defence".  In 2018 we were proudly a fwd half team that relied on the weight of i50 entries to kick winning scores so we were about attack, attack at all costs.  Perhaps it is not only our lack of two-way running that caused Goodwin to change and go back to the earlier Paul Roos strategy of 'defence first'.  

Lower scores are unexpected outcomes of the new rules and as Pyke says:  "... I don’t know what the AFL is going to do about it.” 

I would say the rule changes have backfired!  Over to you, Gil!

 

I like the 6-6-6... there is more space and wingers can run occasionally.

I don't care about high scores...  i want to see ball transition and spontaneous footy.    Not some sort of chess game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure the 6-6-6 is responsible for anything that happens after 15 seconds from a centre bounce.

It's made the centre bounce more valuable which in turn means teams have to defend it cleverly and not risk too much.

Otherwise any other chances come from some of the other rules and the evolution of the game.

I think a big impact on scoring has been the comp being very even with a lot of teams being competitive. Just look at us - for most of last year we steam rolled bad teams and struggle to score against the good sides. It doesn't take much for those bad sides to get a bit more experience and structure in and therefore restrict our scoring. 

My prediction is no small rule changes will impact scoring. We can either live with it and wait until a team discovers some attacking secrets/skills or go for a drastic rule change. The most obvious one to me is 16 on the field.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, DeeSpencer said:

I'm not sure the 6-6-6 is responsible for anything that happens after 15 seconds from a centre bounce.

It's made the centre bounce more valuable which in turn means teams have to defend it cleverly and not risk too much.

Otherwise any other chances come from some of the other rules and the evolution of the game.

I think a big impact on scoring has been the comp being very even with a lot of teams being competitive. Just look at us - for most of last year we steam rolled bad teams and struggle to score against the good sides. It doesn't take much for those bad sides to get a bit more experience and structure in and therefore restrict our scoring. 

My prediction is no small rule changes will impact scoring. We can either live with it and wait until a team discovers some attacking secrets/skills or go for a drastic rule change. The most obvious one to me is 16 on the field.

Or try bringing the interchange numbers back to what they were in the 80s/90s.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Love 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Moonshadow said:

Certainly backfired for us. Can't get numbers behind the ball. Struggle to set up defensively 

And here we were over summer thinking it would help us because we had Max!

Actually, we wouldn’t have won on Saturday without the 666 rule.

  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, DeeSpencer said:

I'm not sure the 6-6-6 is responsible for anything that happens after 15 seconds from a centre bounce.

It's made the centre bounce more valuable which in turn means teams have to defend it cleverly and not risk too much.

Otherwise any other chances come from some of the other rules and the evolution of the game.

I think a big impact on scoring has been the comp being very even with a lot of teams being competitive. Just look at us - for most of last year we steam rolled bad teams and struggle to score against the good sides. It doesn't take much for those bad sides to get a bit more experience and structure in and therefore restrict our scoring. 

My prediction is no small rule changes will impact scoring. We can either live with it and wait until a team discovers some attacking secrets/skills or go for a drastic rule change. The most obvious one to me is 16 on the field.

16 on the field,  'DS' ???

 Meaning we go into the games, with a team of 20 players.?   WHY ?

 

Surely its better to have only 2,  or 3...  on the bench, rather than reducing the players to 16 on-field.?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

6-6-6 is rubbish, footy in general this year is rubbish to the point I have stopped watching it, I liked that we could be innovative at a centre bounce having players coming off the back of the square last year, the rule changes are crap, the umpiring is diabolical the AFL Has stuffed the game completely, what more can I say the game is completely [censored] 

  • Like 5
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Social Media

  • Match Previews, Reports & Articles

    TRECIMATED by George on the Outer

    A little more than two months have passed since Melbourne met and came close to beating the reigning premier West Coast in the preliminary final replay over in the West. At the time, the Demons had three wins on the board and now, nine rounds later and going into this week’s match, they have managed to add a paltry two more wins to the ledger.  The Eagles, in contrast, have moved to within percentage of second spot on the ladder despite their loss at home this week against Collingwood. Whil

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    Match Previews

    SAME STORY, DIFFERENT SONG by George on the Outer

    Melbourne was still suffering from the same old story - a lack of AFL capable players from which to choose at the selection table - and the Western Bulldogs got to sing their song again. But wait, that wasn’t the Doggie’s song we’ve been hearing for the last 30 years, it was some other concoction and no-one knew the words to it but whatever it was, they got to mumble it with gusto after a huge 8 point win! The sad thing is that the Bulldogs (or Footscray or whatever they choose to call

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    Match Reports

    DOGGED by KC from Casey

    On Sunday, the Casey Demons met the Footscray VFL under the roof at the same venue where their nemesis took them down in the 2017 grand final and the result left them with the same feeling of disappointment - this time with a seven point defeat that ended the club’s four game winning streak and made things a lot harder in terms of playing in this year’s final series.   And, as has so often happened this year, the Demons let the game get away from them with but failing to take advantage of th

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    Casey Articles

    BARKING MAD by The Oracle

    There was so much hype proliferating about Melbourne’s prospects for season 2019 a mere four months ago, that one could be forgiven for thinking anyone contemplating the prospect of a bottom four finish for the Demons at the time was barking mad. That however, is the prospect that they face at the moment and a loss to the Bulldogs on Sunday would make it a virtual certainty.  The club’s downward spiral after several years of moving steadily on an upward trajectory has been well documented i

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    Match Previews

    THE MELBOURNE WAY by George on the Outer

    Much has been made by the coaching staff of playing a “Melbourne way” style of play. The nail-biting finish by the Demons in the dying minute of the game could not have been any more the case in point.   Leading by a game-high 38 points late in the third quarter, and by five goals at the final change, this should have been the catalyst for a romp home to an easy win.   But that is not the “Melbourne way” and the supporters, especially those with a severe case of MFCSS (aka intense inse

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    Match Reports

    PINK AND BLUE CAN’T KICK TRUE by KC from Casey

    The Casey Demons took on the Northern Blues at home on Saturday  in a game that was crucial in terms of their hopes for September and they took away the valuable four points on offer after some worrying moments. Most of those worries were self-inflicted as a result of some shocking inaccuracy in front of goal, sloppiness in play and a little bit of indiscipline that all combined to make the game a lot closer than it should have been. The final scoreboard showed the Demons winning the P

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    Casey Articles

    GO FIGURE by Sam the Stats Man

    In May last year, a rampant Melbourne side demolished Carlton by 109 points at the MCG. The Demons did as they pleased and ran rings against a young, abysmal Blues combination. The Dees led in virtually every key performance indicator, notably entering the inside 50 metre mark 63 times to 33 and the superiority of their attack was highlighted by a 74% shooting accuracy rate (to 47%).  A little more than a year later the two sides face each other for the first time since that rout and the ta

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    Match Previews 1

    GORN AT THE GABBA by George on The Outer

    With Melbourne leading the Brisbane Lions in the second term, and the game in the balance, a Max Gawn ankle injury signalled that the Demons were as good as gorrnnn for the match. Without a suitable 2nd ruck and (once again) forced to use either Tom McDonald, Tim Smith or Sam Weidemann in the ruck the Demons found themselves without a forward line that could kick a winning score. Not that anything really changed, as the forward line has been completely dysfunctional all season and one

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    Match Reports

    GAMBIT by KC from Casey

    The opening gambit of Saturday afternoon’s game told us everything about who would be its main players and who would come out on top. The Casey Demons were eager to turn the tables on the Box Hill Hawks who beat them in last year’s grand final and then gave them a first up mauling at City Oval, Box Hill. Kicking with the aid of a strong breeze in the opening term, Braydon Preuss’ first hit out went straight to the diminutive Jay Kennedy Harris who pounced with a 70 metre shot at goal that sailed

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    Casey Articles

    MURDER BY NUMBERS by Sam the Stats Man

    The respective ladder positions of this week’s combatants tell the story of one side on the rise and the other in steep decline. Since their most recent meeting which took place early last year, the Dees and the Lions have changed positions. They are opposed to each again on the former’s home turf with the locals in fine fettle after blowing St Kilda off the park at Marvel Stadium.  The Lions’ home ground advantage has been a major consideration so far this year. They have won five out of s

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    Match Previews

    MUD HEAP by KC from Casey

    In the opening round of the 2018 VFL season, the Casey Demons enjoyed an emphatic 107 point victory over Coburg at Piranha Park. The team was loaded with Melbourne listed players (half a dozen of them were in the team that beat Fremantle on Saturday) and the side was in its way to a grand final appearance. A season and a half later, the club returned to the same venue in the hope of kick starting a season that had gone somewhat awry under new coach Sam Radford and while they tasted victory (as y

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    Casey Articles

    PRETENDERS SENT PACKING by George on the Outer

    Fremantle, the Perth pretenders at sixth on the premiership table should have easily accounted for the Demons, sitting barely a game off the bottom of the ladder.   And for the majority of the game, it certainly looked that would be the case, until the final quarter, when the Demons stopped giving the Dockers easy chances, or making plain, dumb decisions. Not that their situation was helped by some simply appalling umpiring during the match, that kept gifting Fremantle easy scores.  Th

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    Match Reports

×
×
  • Create New...