If they do this and don't open more bloody toilets on game day, it's a disgrace.

Have you ever seen the line for the women's toilets anywhere? ever? let alone at the football? at half time? during a big game?!

Why  can't the AFL just leave stuff be? 

I see Pendlebury supports it. no doubt if Dangerfield does it will happen straight away.

Goody is a fan:

https://www.afl.com.au/news/2019-11-28/our-game-is-incredibly-long-coach-support-for-halftime-slash

47 minutes ago, Mel Bourne said:

NO!

The half time break is the right amount of time  for both players and the rest of the humans involved in the game to take stock, regroup, converse, make something to eat, be social with people at your house who aren’t as interested in the game as you, and the list goes on. Plus why would sponsors want less available airtime? Who is asking for this, and who would it benefit?

Ch7 don’t want people turning off at Half Time and going to sleep. 
This has got zero to do with anyone at the ground. The money is made from the idiot box. 

Interesting to consider historically why we have four quarters rather than two halves.

European games including those peculiar to the UK such as rugby are two halves. American games however are in the main four quarters.

The real problem as many have identified are the AFL rule changes themselves.. each is arguably good for the game blood rule, concussion stoppages, score reviews etc etc but cumulatively they add up.

In reality it is however TV... they just lose too may viewers during half time.

Bet you I am not alone into switching to a netflix or similar at half time and coming back 40 minutes later to see if the game is worth watching score wise.

Edited November 28, 20195 yr by Diamond_Jim

18 minutes ago, Diamond_Jim said:

Interesting to consider historically why we have four quarters rather than two halves.

European games including those peculiar to the UK such as rugby are two halves. American games however are in the main four quarters.

The real problem as many have identified are the AFL rule changes themselves.. each is arguably good for the game blood rule, concussion stoppages, score reviews etc etc but cumulatively they add up.

In reality it is however TV... they just lose too may viewers during half time.

Bet you I am not alone into switching to a netflix or similar at half time and coming back 40 minutes later to see if the game is worth watching score wise.

In rugby they play two 40 minute half’s. About a third of the game appears to be time wasting and dead play time. Like it takes about 5 minutes to set up for a place kick and the clock still runs.  

Edited November 28, 20195 yr by america de cali

i'd be happy with 15min

1 minute ago, daisycutter said:

i'd be happy with 15min

Agree. And start all night games at the same time, preferably 7.20 pm for Melbourne games. The constant chopping and changing of start times drives me nuts.

1 minute ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

Agree. And start all night games at the same time, preferably 7.20 pm for Melbourne games. The constant chopping and changing of start times drives me nuts.

agree on that too. 

wouldn't be surprised if afl wanted 15min breaks anyway and the 20 min was just a ruse. I also makes sense to start with a more manageable 15min break and if that works ok then it could be reviewed. 10 seems too short, allowing 3mins off the ground then 3 mins back to ground and there is only 4min left in the changerooms. may as well stay on the ground like at the other breaks.

AFL logic. 
Keep TV viewers tuned in so that they can watch more adds hence make more money for AFL and media partners. 

Place more ads to replace talking heads hence make more money.

Less taking heads that need to be paid hence saving more money.

Less half time activities and entertainment hence saves more money.

Ancillary staff work up to an hour less thus saving more money.

Less resources used at stadiums like lighting, etc hence saving even more money. 

AFL and media bean counters must love it.

46 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

Ch7 don’t want people turning off at Half Time and going to sleep. 
This has got zero to do with anyone at the ground. The money is made from the idiot box. 

If they came up with something better than nuffies talking [censored] about meaningless rubbish, and non-stop ads, people might not tune out. The problem is the value add at the TV side of things, not the actual product. It won't matter if it's 10 minutes, or 5 minutes, if the first thing they do is go to an ad break, the first thing viewers do is tune out.

3 minutes ago, america de cali said:

AFL logic. 
Keep TV viewers tuned in so that they can watch more adds hence make more money for AFL and media partners. 

Place more ads to replace talking heads hence make more money.

Less taking heads that need to be paid hence saving more money.

Less half time activities and entertainment hence saves more money.

Ancillary staff work up to an hour less thus saving more money.

Less resources used at stadiums like lighting, etc hence saving even more money. 

AFL and media bean counters must love it.

Unfortunately it will probably have the reverse effect. Place more ads means more people will tune out.

1 minute ago, FireInTheBelly said:

Unfortunately it will probably have the reverse effect. Place more ads means more people will tune out.

They don’t see consequences. Only dollars.

6 minutes ago, america de cali said:

AFL logic. 
Keep TV viewers tuned in so that they can watch more adds hence make more money for AFL and media partners. 

Place more ads to replace talking heads hence make more money.

Less taking heads that need to be paid hence saving more money.

Less half time activities and entertainment hence saves more money.

Ancillary staff work up to an hour less thus saving more money.

Less resources used at stadiums like lighting, etc hence saving even more money. 

AFL and media bean counters must love it.

adc.  You have hit all the nails on the head.   And Gil will be able, in his mind anyway, to justify a pay rise and or a bigger bonus. 

The game wouldn't seem so long on the tele if they got rid of Brian Taylor.

31 minutes ago, FireInTheBelly said:

If they came up with something better than nuffies talking [censored] about meaningless rubbish, and non-stop ads, people might not tune out. The problem is the value add at the TV side of things, not the actual product. It won't matter if it's 10 minutes, or 5 minutes, if the first thing they do is go to an ad break, the first thing viewers do is tune out.

Agreed. But the difference in retentions between 10-20 minutes would be significant 

Ch7 want all those viewers to watch all the ads. Not half of them. 
the Football content is secondary, once you have coughed up a cool $Billion

38 minutes ago, america de cali said:

AFL logic. 
Keep TV viewers tuned in so that they can watch more adds hence make more money for AFL and media partners. 

Place more ads to replace talking heads hence make more money.

Less taking heads that need to be paid hence saving more money.

Less half time activities and entertainment hence saves more money.

Ancillary staff work up to an hour less thus saving more money.

Less resources used at stadiums like lighting, etc hence saving even more money. 

AFL and media bean counters must love it.

That pretty much sums it up. 
Ads are increased and stadium wages are cut

All the Executives are happy. 
The Fans will grumble but get used to it after about 3 weeks

21 hours ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

A bit late given that all the pre-season fitness and conditioning programs were designed eons ago for a 20min break.

The AFLPA and the AFL want to shorten games but this seems more a back door way of fatiguing players so that the last quarter opens up.

Lots of other ways to shorten games:  umpries bounce the ball rather than wait for ruckmen to nominate, speed up score review, not wait for broadcasters to run their ads after goals, change the 'time-on' rule etc etc.

I think the AFL have put this one out there as a smoke and mirrors exercise.

They will get people up in arms and as a compromise (lol) push through their real agenda which is in fact to shorten actual game time.

They've got good old dial a quote Jeff out there stirring the pot.

Watch this space.

The AFPLA will be right in it with them don't worry about that.

Good old "Paddy work less/pay more" will be smiling all the way to the bank.

1 hour ago, TRIGON said:

The game wouldn't seem so long on the tele if they got rid of Brian Taylor.

You could just say: "The game wouldn't seem so long on the tele if they got rid of [insert name here]". I expect that every caller and commentator would get a mention from someone on Demonland. For example, I'd say:

The game wouldn't seem so long on the tele if they got rid of Wayne Carey. 

Who's next?

19 hours ago, JakovichScissorKick said:

That clown GIllon McLachlan has got to go

 

And take Hocking with him.

Who would've thought we'd be longing for  for Demetriou/Anderson again!

19 hours ago, Fork 'em said:

Maybe less cool down time will be beneficial injury wise.
Gotta be better than playing matches in Darwin.
 

It seems that one critical thing about half-time is being overlooked: 20 minutes is just enough time to get off your bum in the stands, walk down the stairs to the gate, get a pass-out card from the 'gate-keeper', stroll into the parkland beyond the gate and smoke four or five full-strength Rothmans (so as to last through the 2nd-half of the game without too much trauma) and then, get back to your seat via the bar armed with four beers and two meat pies. Less than 20 minutes is cutting it too fine! 

R

18 minutes ago, Deemania since 56 said:

It seems that one critical thing about half-time is being overlooked: 20 minutes is just enough time to get off your bum in the stands, walk down the stairs to the gate, get a pass-out card from the 'gate-keeper', stroll into the parkland beyond the gate and smoke four or five full-strength Rothmans (so as to last through the 2nd-half of the game without too much trauma) and then, get back to your seat via the bar armed with four beers and two meat pies. Less than 20 minutes is cutting it too fine! 

Rothmans haven’t been around for a long long time. You wouldn’t have to leave your seat to smoke one or a whole pack last time they were sold.

Edited November 28, 20195 yr by america de cali

13 minutes ago, Deemania since 56 said:

It seems that one critical thing about half-time is being overlooked: 20 minutes is just enough time to get off your bum in the stands, walk down the stairs to the gate, get a pass-out card from the 'gate-keeper', stroll into the parkland beyond the gate and smoke four or five full-strength Rothmans (so as to last through the 2nd-half of the game without too much trauma) and then, get back to your seat via the bar armed with four beers and two meat pies. Less than 20 minutes is cutting it too fine! 

Sounds like Gil is just looking after your health then.

3 hours ago, america de cali said:

They don’t see consequences. Only dollars.

Nor do they care about consequences.

*unless the consequences cost them dollars.

"Growing the game" is corporate speak for "maximise the income".

13 minutes ago, ding said:

Nor do they care about consequences.

*unless the consequences cost them dollars.

"Growing the game" is corporate speak for "maximise the income".

Incorrect.

"Growing the game" means "growing my bonus"

 

We really can't whinge about Gil too much. The big nerd saved us from the tanking thingy.

1 minute ago, faultydet said:

Incorrect.

"Growing the game" means "growing my bonus"

 

We really can't whinge about Gil too much. The big nerd saved us from the tanking thingy.

I will find a way.