TRAINING: Wednesday 3rd February 2021

[DurriePirate 97]

Pre season Hype train departing the station, a bit of Max Gawn magic.

[spalding 1,119]

great - If May was wearing a Geelong jumper how would he go?

Probably called "play on" in a real game 

[Pipefitter 2,083]

Great goal. Famous victory for the dees.

[buck_nekkid 5,633]

4 minutes ago, spalding said:

great - If May was wearing a Geelong jumper how would he go?

Probably called "play on" in a real game 

Note the new rule: May has to ‘stand’ the mark with no lateral or advancing movements.

[Docs Demons 1,682]

4 minutes ago, buck_nekkid said:

Note the new rule: May has to ‘stand’ the mark with no lateral or advancing movements.

Yes but correct me if I'm wrong but didn't Big Maxy move off the line so therefore should it have been called play on and if after siren then goal doesn't count???

[Demonised 1,245]

18 minutes ago, Docs Demons said:

Yes but correct me if I'm wrong but didn't Big Maxy move off the line so therefore should it have been called play on and if after siren then goal doesn't count???

Just Buddy's 'natural arc'.

[Lord Travis 10,324]

New standing the mark rule is already a farce. Can’t move side to side, back or forward. Jump and you risk getting called because you land behind original spot etc.

Latest bat**** rule that will lead to flooding and reduce scoring. Clubs are already training to flood as a counter to not being able to force kicks to certain angles.

[Doug Reemer 1,024]

Just now, Lord Travis said:

New standing the mark rule is already a farce. Can’t move side to side, back or forward. Jump and you risk getting called because you land behind original spot etc.

Latest bat**** rule that will lead to flooding and reduce scoring. Clubs are already training to flood as a counter to not being able to force kicks to certain angles.

Another rule that didn't need changing!!

Like the 3rd man up!

They need ot make these minor infringements 25m penalties.

[La Dee-vina Comedia 16,534]

Just now, Lord Travis said:

New standing the mark rule is already a farce. Can’t move side to side, back or forward. Jump and you risk getting called because you land behind original spot etc.

Latest bat**** rule that will lead to flooding and reduce scoring. Clubs are already training to flood as a counter to not being able to force kicks to certain angles.

The media coverage to date suggests the opposite is happening at the moment.  Nevertheless, will be interesting to see if coaches succeed in finding a way around it.

[sue 8,596]

9 minutes ago, Lord Travis said:

New standing the mark rule is already a farce. Can’t move side to side, back or forward. Jump and you risk getting called because you land behind original spot etc.

Latest bat**** rule that will lead to flooding and reduce scoring. Clubs are already training to flood as a counter to not being able to force kicks to certain angles.

Sorry to be so slow, but what is this new rule meant to remedy?

[TRIGON 4,721]

2 minutes ago, sue said:

Sorry to be so slow, but what is this new rule meant to remedy?

Covid19 - It's a social distancing thing.

[daisycutter 28,723]

prepare yourselves for more contentious 50m penalties that will incense the crowd and be argued endlessly in all forms of media

with all the problems with the game the afl comes up with this doozey.....wtf

[Lord Travis 10,324]

10 minutes ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

The media coverage to date suggests the opposite is happening at the moment.  Nevertheless, will be interesting to see if coaches succeed in finding a way around it.

Yeah the AFL have brought in the rule to increase scoring, just like the other rule changes the past two season... which both lead to reduction in scoring.

2 minutes ago, sue said:

Sorry to be so slow, but what is this new rule meant to remedy?

It’s supposed to restricts a team ability to defend and thus make the game faster and higher scoring. Teams won’t be able to force the angle of kicks because the man on the mark must remain stationary. The protected zone around the mark has increased also. Team mates aren’t allowed within five meters of the mark now either. Players can’t swap out who is on the mark, so if Charlie Spargo is marked over in the defensive 50, he can’t swap with Gawn etc.

Word coming out of the clubs is they’re training their players to flood the defensive 50 as a way to combat not being able to control the angles of the field as much. It’s going to backfire for the AFL and lead to yet a further reduction in scoring.

The rule changes the past few years have been ineffectual and pathetic and actually harmed the sport further. The next stage for them is to anchor players to parts of the ground for the entirety of the match, not just centre bounces.

[sue 8,596]

1 minute ago, daisycutter said:

prepare yourselves for more contentious 50m penalties that will incense the crowd and be argued endlessly in all forms of media

with all the problems with the game the afl comes up with this doozey.....wtf

Very true.  I presume the player on the mark can't move until either the ball is kicked or the umpire calls play-on.  So we will see the player with the ball starting to play on, the player on the mark then reacting but the umpire is slow to call out 'play-on' and so a 50m penalty is applied - unfairly. 

As I've long argued, the AFL has the play-on rule back to front.  Rather than wait for the umps call, let the player on the mark make the decision.  If he gets it wrong and goes too early, then pay the penalty.  Seems blindingly obvious to me - am I missing something?

[daisycutter 28,723]

26 minutes ago, sue said:

Very true.  I presume the player on the mark can't move until either the ball is kicked or the umpire calls play-on.  So we will see the player with the ball starting to play on, the player on the mark then reacting but the umpire is slow to call out 'play-on' and so a 50m penalty is applied - unfairly. 

As I've long argued, the AFL has the play-on rule back to front.  Rather than wait for the umps call, let the player on the mark make the decision.  If he gets it wrong and goes too early, then pay the penalty.  Seems blindingly obvious to me - am I missing something?

it's just common sense umpiring, but the afl don't allow it

[Caligula's cohort 1,014]

This is a training thread gents... not a new rule changes thread. Let's keep on track yea? 

[nosoupforme 3,085]

3 hours ago, Docs Demons said:

Yes but correct me if I'm wrong but didn't Big Maxy move off the line so therefore should it have been called play on and if after siren then goal doesn't count???

Ask Buddy Franklin he knows that rule better than anyone. 

[Pates 9,555]

3 hours ago, Doug Reemer said:

Another rule that didn't need changing!!

Like the 3rd man up!

They need ot make these minor infringements 25m penalties.

100% agree, rather than having these touchy difficult rules to enforce result in such a massive advantage make it a 25m penalty that at least doesn't put a player from on the centre square to basically point blank range.

Cool head from Maxy, hopefully if he finds himself in a match winning situation again in the real thing he'll call this up for some confidence.

Edited February 3, 2021 by Pates

[In Harmes Way 7,620]

1 hour ago, Caligula's cohort said:

This is a training thread gents... not a new rule changes thread. Let's keep on track yea? 

Given they’re analysing Steven May manning the mark in the video, it’s not too far off topic (compared to other threads)

[Roost it far 6,437]

The rule has been bought in to try to increase scoring thus allowing advertisers more slots to sell us [censored] we don’t need to justify the huge amount they dole out to the AFL

[DurriePirate 97]

just watching how May has to stand his ground while gawn essentially runs past him to kick the goal looks terribly awkward.

From a entertainment point of view looks like auskick or netball, going to be a long year.

[Gawndy the Great 7,993]

I want to see the drone footage of that goal!

[Tarax Club 3,308]

16 hours ago, DurriePirate said:

Pre season Hype train departing the station, a bit of Max Gawn magic.

Was that the DL ‘drone’ mysteriously hovering high above the goal mouth?

If so we await the release of some bird’s eye downfield covert footage!

Strictly ? of course...

 

Edited February 3, 2021 by Tarax Club
alternate word selection

[The Jackson FIX 2,308]

14 hours ago, Demonised said:

Just Buddy's 'natural arc'.

you could technically end up with a perfectly legal scenario where a player kicking for goal doesn’t even have to kick over the man on the mark because they are on their ‘natural arc’ but the man on the mark is stuck in his spot.

how long before there is debate about the man on the Mark’s natural arc? What a mouthful.

[Dr. Gonzo 22,786]

14 hours ago, Lord Travis said:

Yeah the AFL have brought in the rule to increase scoring, just like the other rule changes the past two season... which both lead to reduction in scoring.

It’s supposed to restricts a team ability to defend and thus make the game faster and higher scoring. Teams won’t be able to force the angle of kicks because the man on the mark must remain stationary. The protected zone around the mark has increased also. Team mates aren’t allowed within five meters of the mark now either. Players can’t swap out who is on the mark, so if Charlie Spargo is marked over in the defensive 50, he can’t swap with Gawn etc.

Word coming out of the clubs is they’re training their players to flood the defensive 50 as a way to combat not being able to control the angles of the field as much. It’s going to backfire for the AFL and lead to yet a further reduction in scoring.

The rule changes the past few years have been ineffectual and pathetic and actually harmed the sport further. The next stage for them is to anchor players to parts of the ground for the entirety of the match, not just centre bounces.

The one rule change they need to introduce but refuse to consider is reducing the number of players on the ground. All these others are just tinkering around the edges and making the game harder for the umpires and more frustrating for the supporters.