Dr. Gonzo

Why do you say that? Aflx had fewer players on the ground yes, but there were a multitude of other rule changes/factors that meant that abortion of a publicity stunt was never going to succeed. There will still be bumps, tackles, ovals etc It's just that there will be more space for the players to play in instead of being suffocated by a scrum of players when they take possession of the ball

Fair enough, I don't necessarily disagree. More scoring isn't necessarily the aim for me it's more the aesthetic of the game. Opening up the play to remove the rolling scrums and providing some space for the game to breathe and players to be able to show off their talents instead of being suffocated by 25-30 players around the ball is the aim. Higher scoring is just a consequence of that. If you like the game as it is now that's fine. The best games are still great. But for me they're few and far between and I often find myself bored for large patches of games which never happened previously. Maybe I'm just getting older but I don't think so, the more open game of the 90s and early 00s is still great to look back on and watch

Defense generally wins championships and it's the same the world over. Look at the NFL. The Rams had an offense that was seen as so high powered and revolutionary that anyone who ever had a coffee with McVay was offered a head coach role. In the Superbowl their high octane offense was brought to a screeching halt by one of the best defensive minded coaches of all time, Bill Belichick and they only scored 3 points for the whole game! This year the high powered offense overcame the brutal defense when Mahomes turned the game around in the final 7 minutes scoring 3 Touchdowns. But up to that point the 49ers defense had them covered leading 20-10 and were only brought undone by a combination of conservative playcalling, laissez faire officiating and a generational player catching fire. Coaches will always want to build off a solid foundation of defense, it's in their nature.

It's on the decline. During the 80s and 90s you would frequently see triple figure scores and both teams topping the tonne. That is a rarity these days. Even as little as 5 years ago over/under lines for matches were generally set at around 190-192 points now it's usually around the 170 mark.

The increased interchange has certainly been a factor bit it's not the only factor. The change in coaching strategies that have evolved over the last 2 decades won't go away just because you cap the interchange though. Coaches did a lot of research in the 90s and 00s into other sports and realised there was nothing forcing them to keep players in their traditional positions on the ground. This led to total defense strategies such as the Flood, Clarkos Cluster, the Press the Eagles Web etc Coaches aren't going to abandon these strategies just because rotations are limited. In fact it would likely see them become even more defensive as they would want to preserve their players energy so would stack the defense/maintain possession soccer style and try and score on a fast break. Additionally they would revert to focusing on recruiting athletes over footballers again which would be a shame considering the pendulum seems to have swung back to getting genuine footy players over the last 3-5 years. Having said that I'm not opposed to capping interchange first and see if it works. I just don't think it will and eventually we'll end up still needing to reduce players on the field I would reduce player numbers (maximum 16 a side but maybe less) Cap rotations at 5 per quarter (or even revert back to substitutions instead of interchange such as with the old 19th man rule) Consider a "last touch" rule between the 50s, similar to what they had in the 1920s-40s. This would prevent teams reverting to defensive tactics of playing the boundary line Get rid of ruck nomination rule

Why is it a terrible idea?

Gameplans, fitness and coaching have evolved since the 60s. Going back to those rules won't reduce congestion because players don't hold their positions anymore (because they don't have to and we don't want them to) Reducing the number of players on the ground is not a rule change as such , not like changes to "holding the ball" or deliberate out of bounds are for example. It doesn't impact the way the players on the field play or the way the umpires adjudicate

Removing players from the field is the only logical solution to congestion and should have happened 10-15 years ago AFL grounds remain the same size as 120 years ago yet players are exponentially fitter not to mention the constant rotations Removing players from the field will break up defensive zones because the area each defender will need to cover between opponents will be too large and so will force teams into man on man game plans There will always be "loose defenders" but removing players from the field will limit their impact as there will be greater space for players to move into which they will not be able to cover It will have a dramatic impact on the flow of the game without changing any fundamental rules relating to how the game is actually played. 16 a side is the minimum, I would consider taking it down to 15 or 14 or perhaps even further. I would still keep the wings but remove one midfielder, one forward and one defender to start with (5-5-5) fewer midfielders at centre bounces will make it easier to clear the ball Or we can refuse to change this, keep implementing rules that alter the fundamental nature of the game which have unintended consequences and don't address the issues they were brought in for and watch the game continue to devolve into an unentertaining rolling scrum of players with little room for individual brilliance and skill

Bonafide AA key back you've gotta be having a laugh. Unaccountable, lazy and prone to turnovers. Refused to listen to instruction and play to team rules even under Roos and was sent packing.

Fixed for you

Wouldn't we already know if Viney was cited? I thought MRP results would be within 24 hours of each game this year

Good on ya mate, what are you doing today for an encore? Parting the Bass strait?

The umpiring was rubbish from quarter time on I thought. Head clash between Scully and Melksham and Scully gets the free?

Yep that and our structures seem better. Skills particularly going inside 50 are letting us down but I'm hoping it's just preseason rust. We need a genuine forward target to straighten us up, TMac didn't seem to provide that consistently

Hope everyone's on board now and starting to see why we targeted him. He'll be a great link man and will allow us to be less predictable coming out of defense (instead of kicking long to Gawn) Now if we could just fix our kicks inside 50. What a difference a guy like Hogan would've made in tonight's game....

4th question : why is this vague information bring relayed by a third rate muckraker instead of by the AFL in their media release?

Not just his own club. The club he was a key executive of at the time the salary cap discrepancies occurred!

Carlton and Essendon have been whacked just like we have been. Salary cap discrepancies usually have at least Draft Pick sanctions along with the fine it's unusual that Geelong got away with just a fine, especially such a minor one at that!

The Rolling Stone references on this site have been out of control recently

You'd be surprised ??

McGowan writes articles for AFL.com.au mainly centred around stats and data analysis from what I can gather. He also does a fantastic podcast called Trends that I can't recommend highly enough.

Exactly, it's not even about this year for me (although that's be great obviously). It's about returning to full fitness and setting himself up for another 5+ years as a Demon if he can get himself right. If that means only half a dozen games or so in 2020 so be it.

Extreme short-sightedness by the VFL / channel 7. The story goes that old film was either taped over and / or sent to the tip when channel 7 was trying to free up storage space in the late 80s. It's the reason why footage of the 63 and 64 Grand Finals is only available in a limited capacity. Look at the value organisations like the NFL and WWF placed on their video libraries even back then and what they've turned it into now and realise the opportunity lost and the history gone begging. I am one of those you refer to as hoarding games It began with my (or rather my dad's) VHS collection of Saturday night replays when I was a kid (late 80s-early 90s) and morphed into trading for any Melbourne (and some other) games I could get my hands on when I started out trying to find additional games I didn't have from the Northey era and anything with Jakovich in it. I've traded with Langers before and he has a ridiculous collection including many replays or parts of games going back to the early-mid 60s. Unfortunately I don't think I can help him with this query. I love chucking on some old games to have on in the background, eg the other night I chucked on an old replay of our round 22 win against Carlton in 1988 that secured our finals berth that year. I remember sitting on the second level behind the goals as a 6 year old with my dad uncle and cousin for that game because it was raining, we'd usually be in the old MFC members red seats otherwise. Anyway I digress.....

He runs in straight lines, no lateral movement which makes him predictable

You should of corrected them, I would of