Macca

There are any number of set plays and strategies that can happen from a 666 set up. The variables are endless. Moves and counter moves and teams trying to figure out what the other team is doing. We need to see it play out but there will be an impact. As for the rest of the game, we may or may not see a flow-on effect.

Managenent create a major issue for its workers and then the masses blame the A-end of the problem

Like most sports cricket is money driven so the advantage we often have in Brisbane was passed up because they can't pull a crowd. India were miles too good anyway and we were no match. They are the Superpower of cricket and that won't be changing in a hurry.

With the recent addition to the racing calendar of the 'All Star Mile' & 'The Golden Eagle', we now have 18 Group 1's (or equivalent) worth between $1.5Million & $15Million in prizemoney. By World standards that is phenomenal for a country of our size & population. Here's the top 10 $15.0Million - The Everest $8.6Million - Melbourne Cup $7.5Million - Golden Eagle $5.0Million - Cox Plate $5.0Million - Caulfield Cup $5.0Million - All Star Mile $4.0Million - QEII Stakes $3.5Million - Golden Slipper $3.0Million - Doncaster Mile $2.5Million - TJ Smith Stakes Plus, we have another 3 x $2Million races that come under the Magic Millions & Inglis banners. As well as that there are 5 other Group 1's that are worth $2Million including the Sydney Cup. Speaking of which, 'Etymology' won the Australia Day Cup at Warwick Farm today and is now being set for the Sydney Cup. The horse has found a rich vein of form and is a Blackbooker. Read more here ... Etymology too strong in Australia Day Cup

What an odd scoreline in the Pro Bowl. Anyone watch it?

I reckon with this new-new 'hands in the back' interpretation we'll end up with the same issues that previously existed and they'll change it back again. Unless they stubbornly refuse to - and that's always a possibility. Do they want forwards to be able to take more marks? Thus creating more scoring opportunities and therefore more goal breaks and more advertisements? Pardon my cynicism.

The best value for each pick boosts up the odds ... it's good when what should happen, does happen. PSG have scored heavily all season and they nearly always win. So the +3.5 Goals paying $2.15 was a logical pick. So was DZ's pick with Roma ... but for some inexplicable reason they give up a 3 - 0 lead. Sheer bad luck as things like that very rarely happen. Man City, Barca & Juventus are 3 other teams that can be relied upon. Liverpool as well? Knowing we only have to come up with 1 pick does make one focus. It's my reckoning that the 1 pick can often jump out at you. I know you like the bigger multi's Wadda and than can still happen using the collective 3 picks as a base.

I must say I am excited at the prospect of what we'll see. Even if the only change we see from the new rule brings back some wing play involving those wingmen taking a bounce or 2 (a la Robbie) But I strongly suspect we'll see other aspects that eventuate as well as the unintended consequences that could happen (as you've previously pointed out) And then there's the pattern of play from all these 666 moments ... set plays, designated receivers from outside the square etc etc. It's only going to be 10% - 15% of the game (or thereabouts) but patterns could be set that teams might want to continue with. 'Whatever works' comes to the fore or could do. Because it's brand new, every team will have their own strategy and each of those strategies might be different. As the season progresses the study of the tape will become of utmost importance. Aussie rules is fast becoming a game of absolute strategy much like soccer & NFL is. Natural progression. A lot don't like change but sometimes change is needed to improve things. All sports tinker with their own rules.

And that could leave his wingman opponent standing on his own with a chance to receive the ball unopposed from a quick clearance from the bounce down. No effect on the game? There are far too many variables involved for that to be true. I would suggest there's more likely a 99% chance that the new 666 rule will have an effect on the game in some form or another. Whatever that is, is anyone's guess. The remaining 99.9% of the game is an incorrect number too ... more like 80% - 90% of the game as the 666 rule will be applied roughly 25 - 45 times per game depending on how many goals are scored. And each application of the 666 rule will take up a certain amount of game time. Applying the 666 rule for the whole game is problematic. There may be a way to do it but any solution I've seen put forward becomes impractical. If the goal is to reduce congestion on the ground then bringing the numbers down to 15 or 16 per team could be a viable alternative. But then we'd be messing with the very fabric of the game.

Brisbane as a venue is 5th in preference with a decent gap to 4th (Perth) Mainly because they can't pull a decent crowd up there for the test matches and haven't done so for quite some time.

We also previously saw a lot of forwards playing from behind using their hands. I see it as cheating and don't like it at all. But you're spot on rjay, they cleaned up the rule and now they've opened up the rule to be exploited again. What are the chances that they un-repeal the new new rule? ? Use your body, use your forearm, use your knees - but not your hands. One thing I can almost guarantee - the new rule is going to cause angst for the lack of consistency. And with grey areas such as these, you will never get consistency. The sport is difficult enough to officiate now. The other changes I'm ok with although the ruckman having to nominate themselves seems a bit overly officious.

I still believe the 3pick will deliver collects ... and where it's different to the horses is that the contests are 2 horse races (pardon the pun!) Finding 1 winner each shouldn't be too difficult and the collective odds can still be quite good. And we can add-on as we see fit. And it's not like it costs much ... it's more opportunity lost rather than opportunity cost. But winning is winning DZ and no likes losing.

I had 'Anderlecht' as my back-up choice and they duly saluted as well. So went very close but no cigar

The contentious one could well be the new 'Hands in the Back' interpretation. A player playing from from behind can currently use his body or forearm to hold his ground but the use of the hands could easily open up a can of worms What's a push and what isn't a push? Another grey area created to add to the long list of grey areas. And what's to stop the player in front lurching forward once he feels the hands on his back? Don't like that new rule. The great unknown is the 'Traditional playing positions at Centre bounces' ... I like the new rule because it at least could reduce congestion (in part) We don't see true wingmen anymore so that position could be resurrected somewhat. The forward forays from the centre bounces might become more direct therefore bringing the high marking KPF's into the game more. The policing of the rule will be easy enough but we'll see infractions from forgetful players. The rest of the rule changes seem quite logical though ... we have a sport without offside so the coaches can and have redesigned the game. That's their right as they are charged with winning at the sport. So the AFL trying to bring about some order to the sport should be applauded. Whether it works or not is anyone's guess.

Time to reload as the Neo's dipped out

As for the over-the-top injury concerns ... AFLX is virtually tackle-free. And it is all over in 3 hours. I drove past Gosch's earlier last week and we were conducting simulated match practice of sorts. I saw numerous bodies around the ball, packs flying for marks and various players contesting the ball (the traffic was heavy) My first thought was - someone could easily do an ACL here or at least incur a soft tissue injury. But we are going to play 2 practice matches in the pre-season and the risk of injury then reaches the same levels as they do in the season proper games.

And you might be right too ... but you might be wrong. What happens then? My opinion is the same for a lot of these unknowns - wait and see what happens. I'm the same with judging new or young footballers. I've yet to come across anyone who gets it mostly right with these sorts of things. The truth is that most who judge too early are prone to getting it wrong. As for the format - whether I like it or not is immaterial. What matters is whether the format has a big enough appeal amongst others to gain an audience. And that may or may not happen. My personal opinion on whether I like it or not amounts to zilch. It's not about me.

50 over cricket has waned in the last 10 years because of the advent of t20 cricket. Again, driven by India and it's millions of people who fell in love with t20. Lots of Australians fell in love with t20 too. Many now probably see 50 over cricket as an overly long version of the 3 hour version. Not sure where Test cricket fits in but whilst that version remains strong in India, England & Australia, it will keep going. But progress happens and often that progress is an unstoppable force. If AFLX gains an audience separate to AFL, what's wrong with that? Doesn't it grow the overall sport?

Those aged over 18 up to 35 is also the target audience in my opinion. With possibly a number of add-ons from those aged older. That may or may not happen later. And then there is the completely untapped overseas audience. And why the call for people to 'Relax'? What on earth is there to worry about?

AFLX is not necessarily a positive change ... it is more so a completely different version of footy targeting a completely different type of audience. The new names for the teams may or may not be part of that potential appeal. Again, you and I aren't the target audience so we really don't count nor do we matter. AFLX is being structured for a different demographic. And t20 cricket is not going anywhere ... India and it's hundreds of millions of people will drive the success of t20 much like the Americans drive the support of baseball & the NFL. Those underestimating India do so at their peril. The money generated from India is enormous. We pale into insignificance by comparison. The Big Bash could completely fall over (and it won't) and t20 would still flourish & thrive from a world-wide perspective. Australia plays a very small part. But in relation to most sports in Australia, the Big Bash still gets a very big audience both at the venues and on TV. The A League, NBL, ARL & Super Rugby, ABL, Sheffield Shield and a few other sports would love to have the 60 free-to-air prime-time slots that the Big Bash occupies. It's not really my cup of tea but again, that matters not. CA doesn't need my eyes nor my attention.

Most I've spoken to are indifferent and may or may not take a look to see the potential. People don't like going against the grain either so your lot might be telling you stuff that you want to hear. We won't know much until the whole thing is played out over a 5 - 10 year period. Unless it's an abject failure which would end things quite quickly. I fancy that it might gain an audience large enough to be a going concern. The TV numbers will be interesting as there's not a great deal of sport going on that weekend. By the way, I am making no grandiose predictions about the idea nor am I a cheerleader for the concept. The AFL are going ahead with the idea regardless of our opinions. And a good percentage of footy fans are going to be tempted to have a look-see. You going to have a look? And have you read the reactions on this thread? Lots of anger and hate as I see it. Go back and have a re-read dc. State based is old hat and has no real appeal to a younger audience. As an example the Big Bash ditched the State thing and went to City based teams. And it worked despite those who opposed the concept. By the way, many of those who hate t20 keep comparing t20 to Test cricket. Comparing AFLX to footy is where people are getting it wrong. I see the differences and judge things separately. AFLX is not a threat to footy same as t20 is not a threat to Test cricket. However, one could argue that Test cricket is a threat to itself.

Hey @binman - great thread but I thought I'd condense all the rule changes into a block. Many are unaware of the changes (at least in detail) so here's the overview. Traditional playing positions at centre bounces Clubs must have six players inside both 50m arcs, with one player inside the goalsquare. Four midfield players must start inside the centre square with the two wingmen stationed along the wing. Kick-ins At kick-ins, a player will no longer need to kick to himself to play on from the goal square. Following a behind, the man on the mark will be brought out to 10m from the top of the goal square, rather than the existing five metres. Marks and free kicks in defence When defenders mark or receive a free kick within nine metres of their own goal, the man on the mark will be brought in line with the top of the goalsquare. Runners and Water carriers Team runners may only enter the playing surface after a goal has been kicked and must exit before play restarts. Umpire contact Players will be prohibited from setting up behind the umpire at centre bounces. 50m penalties The player with the ball: Must be allowed to advance the mark by 50m without the infringing player delaying the game. Will be able to play on while the 50m penalty is being measured out. Kicking for goal after the siren A player who has been awarded a mark or free kick once play has ended: Will now be able to kick across their body using a snap or check-side kick But must kick the ball directly in line with the man on the mark and the goal. Marking contests The 'hands in the back’ rule interpretation has been repealed so a player can now: Place his hands on the back of his opponent to protect his position in a marking contest Provided he does not push his opponent in the back. Ruck contests: prior opportunity A ruckman who takes direct possession of the ball from a bounce, throw-up or boundary throw-in will no longer be regarded as having had prior opportunity. Where there is uncertainty over who is the designated ruckman, the ruckman for each team will still be required to nominate to the field umpire.

The concept is aimed at a younger audience and/or a potential overseas audience (long term) Whether you like it or even believe it can work is an entirely different discussion. By the way, the whole thing lasts one evening for 3 hours. A mere blip in the whole scheme of things. The concept is definitely not aimed at the over 35's ... the league has already got that money stitched up. And the AFL has been in the business of making money since the sport became professional. Much like all the other sporting leagues around the world. We are no different - people are the same all over. The rest of the world has close to zero interest in the traditional game played on an oval - and that isn't changing in a hurry either. I see the whole thing as a bit of tackle-free harmless fun that might just gain an audience. The sky isn't falling.

We're trialing the 3pick only so 1 best bet is enough Wadda. As individuals, we can add-on as we see fit to make it a 4pick or bigger. Just for a while to see if it works. The thinking is that we as individuals will often have a standout pick for the weekend ... I tried it with mates but they kept putting up 2 or 3 picks each so it didn't work. Multiple options just confuses things. So it is 1 pick only with no optional picks. Exactly the same as the racing best bet. Again, it's just a trial mate - we can go back to having 2 choices each whenever we like. Anyway, I'm on the 'NEREOCA' (the Neo's?) with the other 2 picks and got 21-1 (enhanced)

Over to you @Wadda We Sing for the clincher! n.b. The 2 other picks quoted above are for games to be played on Monday morning