3 hours ago, Jjrogan said:

From a kick in or when the ball is in a forward pocket, you can have 36 players in one half of the field. Reducing the number of rotations is fine, but from that point you'll still have congestion again.  Paying tiggy touch wood holding the ball decisions constantly is just going to peev everyone off. The rule is random enough as it is.

If you have 1 or 2 players from each team (3 is too many imo) mandatory inside the arc at dead balls it stretches the field and allows open space.  I dont see how this changes the fabric of the game.  You can still run where you want but if the ball goes over the boundary line or a kick in... Spread out again.  

The vfl trial will tell us anyhow i guess. (The goal-square requirement is a bit silly)

doesn't have to be tiggy touch wood, just allow 3 seconds when prior opportunity. was essentially this years ago. 

The incorrect disposal rule would be easier to adjudicate if a ball being knocked out in a tackle was also considered to be an incorrect disposal. Why it is not judged to be so astounds me.

The discussion here could be condensed down to those who don't really have an issue with the modern game vs those that do

But those that do have an issue with the aesthetics can be lost to the sport ... and there are far too many complaining for it to be a non issue

But even a congested version of the sport is better to watch than many other sports

So why can't we have a great version that pleases everyone? (like it used to do)

I'm not holding my breath on a real fix but there are any number of things that could be implemented to open up the game

1.  Less players on the field (16 a side)

2.  Way less rotations or no rotations (soccer & union don't have rotations at all)

3.  Zones for forwards & backmen (attuned to stoppages)

4.  A shot clock

5.  Bonus point for an achieved score (80 points? 100 points?)

6.  No boundary throw-ins (last player to touch the ball etc)

7.  Backwards kicks can't be claimed as a mark

8.  Length of kick increased to 20 metres for a claimed mark

9.  More free kicks played ... throws outlawed more stringently and no prior is also an option.  Throw the ball up immediately regardless of nominated ruckmen.  Get on with it in other words

I am not advocating that we do all of the above but at least a few of the above measures wouldn't hurt

 

I now view the sport as a defensive sport only but not everyone will be able to make that switch.  Some who switch off may not come back

The sport needs to be grown,  not become a battle between those with different tastes

 

Edited November 24, 20204 yr by Macca

9 hours ago, Macca said:

The discussion here could be condensed down to those who don't really have an issue with the modern game vs those that do

But those that do have an issue with the aesthetics can be lost to the sport ... and there are far too many complaining for it to be a non issue

But even a congested version of the sport is better to watch than many other sports

So why can't we have a great version that pleases everyone? (like it used to do)

I'm not holding my breath on a real fix but there are any number of things that could be implemented to open up the game

1.  Less players on the field (16 a side)

2.  Way less rotations or no rotations (soccer & union don't have rotations at all)

3.  Zones for forwards & backmen (attuned to stoppages)

4.  A shot clock

5.  Bonus point for an achieved score (80 points? 100 points?)

6.  No boundary throw-ins (last player to touch the ball etc)

7.  Backwards kicks can't be claimed as a mark

8.  Length of kick increased to 20 metres for a claimed mark

9.  More free kicks played ... throws outlawed more stringently and no prior is also an option.  Throw the ball up immediately regardless of nominated ruckmen.  Get on with it in other words

I am not advocating that we do all of the above but at least a few of the above measures wouldn't hurt

 

I now view the sport as a defensive sport only but not everyone will be able to make that switch.  Some who switch off may not come back

The sport needs to be grown,  not become a battle between those with different tastes

 

I'm not convinced there is universal agreement on what the game should be like. Until there is a clear understanding of the desired end product, there's not a lot of point in tinkering with the rules. What I recommend the AFL does is to clearly articulate the desired game style it is looking for. High scoring? Close matches? One-on-one contests? A game for all shapes and sizes? 100 minutes? 120 minutes? Same game for men and women? Same game at the top level as at state leagues, amateurs and under-age? An exportable product? Best for TV? Or best seen in person?

Then we can debate what rules should be in place to try to meet those aims. Otherwise the AFL is just going to be fiddling around and we won't know what they're trying to achieve. 

1 minute ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

I'm not convinced there is universal agreement on what the game should be like. Until there is a clear understanding of the desired end product, there's not a lot of point in tinkering with the rules. What I recommend the AFL does is to clearly articulate the desired game style it is looking for. High scoring? Close matches? One-on-one contests? A game for all shapes and sizes? 100 minutes? 120 minutes? Same game for men and women? Same game at the top level as at state leagues, amateurs and under-age? An exportable product? Best for TV? Or best seen in person?

Then we can debate what rules should be in place to try to meet those aims. Otherwise the AFL is just going to be fiddling around and we won't know what they're trying to achieve. 

Most want positional football,  I'd say a large majority.  I reckon if we had that on a consistent basis most would be satisfied

That can be the goal but to get there is tricky.  To me they should trial & error new rules through the 2nd tier.  As they used to do

And they are doing that by the looks of it with regards the stoppages/players in the arc ruling

And the percentage of dissatisfied football goers & watchers is increasing year by year.  Those people need to be listened to. 

I can remember a time when the only people who moaned about footy were non footy fans.

 

20 hours ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

The incorrect disposal rule would be easier to adjudicate if a ball being knocked out in a tackle was also considered to be an incorrect disposal. Why it is not judged to be so astounds me.

No prior has also been talked about but that could create other issues such as who would want to take possession of the ball?

To my mind the game would be so much easier to umpire if there was less congestion

And that's the other issue with congestion - there is so much going on in and around the ball that those viewing get increasingly frustrated

But again,  we're getting conditioned with the congestion to a point where many don't mind it at all.  The lower scores sees less blowouts which keeps the viewers watching. 

Maybe that's why they aren't taking drastic action to opening the game up.  And there's a lot they could do but the changes seem cosmetic to me.  For a reason LDvC?

On 11/24/2020 at 2:19 PM, Jjrogan said:

From a kick in or when the ball is in a forward pocket, you can have 36 players in one half of the field. Reducing the number of rotations is fine, but from that point you'll still have congestion again.  Paying tiggy touch wood holding the ball decisions constantly is just going to peev everyone off. The rule is random enough as it is.

If you have 1 or 2 players from each team (3 is too many imo) mandatory inside the arc at dead balls it stretches the field and allows open space.  I dont see how this changes the fabric of the game.  You can still run where you want but if the ball goes over the boundary line or a kick in... Spread out again.  

The vfl trial will tell us anyhow i guess. (The goal-square requirement is a bit silly)

This will slow the game down though. Every stoppage we'll need to stop and have a few bloke's run 100 m to get back to position. Or we get penalties for being out of position. It just won't work.