SA Footy

Posted: **Wed Aug 11, 2010 6:09 pm**

Anderson and Demetriou can't help themselves.
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/afl-looks-at-change-to-goal-post-rules/story-e6frfjf-1225903913942
:evil:

I feel like Peter Finch in 'Network'

Posted: **Wed Aug 11, 2010 6:14 pm**

Effing peanuts. F'off and leave the game alone....

Posted: **Wed Aug 11, 2010 6:22 pm**

Other rules they are considering:

1. Restricting interchange by one of the following methods:
(a) Three interchange players and one substitute player
(b) Two interchange players and two substitute players
(c) Cap of 80 interchanges per match (including changes at breaks)

2. Length of game: adjust the timing of quarters to keep the average length between 29-30 minutes

3. Advantage rule: player not umpire decides if there is an advantage (as per 2010 NAB Cup trial)

4. Boundary umpires pay free kicks for holding and high contact at stoppages (as per 2010 NAB Cup trial)

5. Free kick against player who drags ball under opponent (as per 2010 NAB Cup trial)

6. Rough conduct (shepherd): make consistent with head down over the ball rule so that a player who shepherds is guilty of a reportable offence if he makes forceful contact to the head or neck, unless the contact was caused by circumstances outside the control of the shepherding player

7. Scoring system: If a ball hits the posts inside the goal-scoring area and goes through, it remains a goal. If a ball hits the posts inside the point-scoring area and goes through, it remains a point

Should we all just give up on the AFL??

http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/ ... fault.aspx

Posted: **Wed Aug 11, 2010 6:29 pm**

The amazing thing is how many people think this is a good idea!

The old argument "It works in other sports" is the lamest response people can come up with. THIS ISNT ANOTHER SPORT!

Leave it alone! Breeding a game for people who have never followed it.

Posted: **Wed Aug 11, 2010 7:06 pm**

hearts on fire wrote:2. Length of game: adjust the timing of quarters to keep the average length between 29-30 minutes

As I've said, all they need to do is go back to the pre 1994 time-on method and you have got it.

Posted: **Wed Aug 11, 2010 9:04 pm**

They're trying very hard to force us to only follow soccer totally

Posted: **Wed Aug 11, 2010 9:09 pm**

I thought there was a "rules of the game" committee?

I cant understand the interchange one, why do you need to touch it?

Posted: **Wed Aug 11, 2010 9:32 pm**

SJABC wrote:Effing peanuts.......spot on

F'off and leave the game alone....unfortuneately it's too late brother

Posted: **Wed Aug 11, 2010 10:31 pm**

I haven't read the attached link but I heard about the goalpost rule change. So what they're saying is, rather than get it right (technology, 4 umpires) we'll admit defeat and change the rule.

FFS, these guys should be lynched!

Posted: **Wed Aug 11, 2010 11:22 pm**

hearts on fire wrote:
3. Advantage rule: player not umpire decides if there is an advantage (as per 2010 NAB Cup trial)

5. Free kick against player who drags ball under opponent (as per 2010 NAB Cup trial)

7. Scoring system: If a ball hits the posts inside the goal-scoring area and goes through, it remains a goal. If a ball hits the posts inside the point-scoring area and goes through, it remains a point

I like 3 and 5

Don't like 7. I don't think you should be able to "bounce" goals in. Get it clearly through the posts or it's a point IMO.

What's the issue people have with (3)? If the player thinks he is clear he should go for it. If not, don't. If he gets caught and stuffs it up well he gets caught and stuffs it up. Never understood why the umpire had to make the call for the players here. It looks silly when the play has moved on 50m and the umpire is back at the mark trying to call everything back.

Posted: **Wed Aug 11, 2010 11:44 pm**

Would have thought it would be harder as a goal umpire to tell if the ball had hit the post and gone through for a goal or a point than it is to see whether the ball has just hit the post. Surely this would make it more difficult!

Posted: **Wed Aug 11, 2010 11:46 pm**

Aerie wrote:Would have thought it would be harder as a goal umpire to tell if the ball had hit the post and gone through for a goal or a point than it is to see whether the ball has just hit the post. Surely this would make it more difficult!

Might even breed a bit of complacency too.

Posted: **Thu Aug 12, 2010 1:35 am**

hearts on fire wrote:Other rules they are considering:

1. Restricting interchange by one of the following methods:
(a) Three interchange players and one substitute player
(b) Two interchange players and two substitute players
(c) Cap of 80 interchanges per match (including changes at breaks)

2. Length of game: adjust the timing of quarters to keep the average length between 29-30 minutes

3. Advantage rule: player not umpire decides if there is an advantage (as per 2010 NAB Cup trial)

4. Boundary umpires pay free kicks for holding and high contact at stoppages (as per 2010 NAB Cup trial)

5. Free kick against player who drags ball under opponent (as per 2010 NAB Cup trial)

6. Rough conduct (shepherd): make consistent with head down over the ball rule so that a player who shepherds is guilty of a reportable offence if he makes forceful contact to the head or neck, unless the contact was caused by circumstances outside the control of the shepherding player

7. Scoring system: If a ball hits the posts inside the goal-scoring area and goes through, it remains a goal. If a ball hits the posts inside the point-scoring area and goes through, it remains a point

Should we all just give up on the AFL??
http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/ ... fault.aspx

I'm close.

Posted: **Thu Aug 12, 2010 8:45 am**

SJABC wrote:Effing peanuts. F'off and leave the game alone....

Do the survey and tell them exactly that. In every comments field I put in 'Leave the Game alone'. If everyone does the same perhaps those peanuts will get the idea. Here is my one proposed change for AFL Football.

1. Get rid of the rules committee and instead have a rules conference that happens every four years. No annual rule changes.

Comments

regards,

REB

Posted: **Thu Aug 12, 2010 10:23 am**

hearts on fire wrote:Other rules they are considering:

1. Restricting interchange by one of the following methods:
(a) Three interchange players and one substitute player
(b) Two interchange players and two substitute players
(c) Cap of 80 interchanges per match (including changes at breaks)

2. Length of game: adjust the timing of quarters to keep the average length between 29-30 minutes

3. Advantage rule: player not umpire decides if there is an advantage (as per 2010 NAB Cup trial)

4. Boundary umpires pay free kicks for holding and high contact at stoppages (as per 2010 NAB Cup trial)

5. Free kick against player who drags ball under opponent (as per 2010 NAB Cup trial)

6. Rough conduct (shepherd): make consistent with head down over the ball rule so that a player who shepherds is guilty of a reportable offence if he makes forceful contact to the head or neck, unless the contact was caused by circumstances outside the control of the shepherding player

7. Scoring system: If a ball hits the posts inside the goal-scoring area and goes through, it remains a goal. If a ball hits the posts inside the point-scoring area and goes through, it remains a point

Should we all just give up on the AFL??

http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/ ... fault.aspx

i will give my answers rule change by rule change
1. 4 players on the bench they can be used however the coaching staff want to.
2. the game should be 20 plus time on! simple inst it.
3. umpires to remain in control of game not the player! players play the game.
4. we have enough umpires making decisions leave it to the central umpires to adjudicate.
5. blow the whistle before it becomes a "scrum" if the player has had prior opportunity ping him if not ball it up.
6. bring back the hip and shoulder that has been apart of footy for a long time (after all it is a contact sport)
7. you have 7 meters to aim through. human error is to blame not the rule a goal is a goal a point is a point.

Posted: **Thu Aug 12, 2010 11:47 am**

I reckon all they have to do is go back to one runner per team - it is since 2 runners have come in the interchanges have gone through the roof.

OR, cap changes at 80, it's getting ridiculous - how often do we see the star player interviewed instantly after the final siren, and how many of them are puffing? Very very few............

Hitting the post and still a goal, not sure on that one, but I think I could live with it.

Posted: **Thu Aug 12, 2010 1:40 pm**

Why do they keep trying to homogenise the game?

Keep the current scoring system, keep the bounce, keep the umpires 3-2-1 Brownlow votes and anything else they want to tinker with.

Most importantly, KEEP OUT video umpires!

Posted: **Thu Aug 12, 2010 2:41 pm**

NFC wrote:
hearts on fire wrote:Other rules they are considering:

1. Restricting interchange by one of the following methods:
(a) Three interchange players and one substitute player
(b) Two interchange players and two substitute players
(c) Cap of 80 interchanges per match (including changes at breaks)

2. Length of game: adjust the timing of quarters to keep the average length between 29-30 minutes

3. Advantage rule: player not umpire decides if there is an advantage (as per 2010 NAB Cup trial)

4. Boundary umpires pay free kicks for holding and high contact at stoppages (as per 2010 NAB Cup trial)

5. Free kick against player who drags ball under opponent (as per 2010 NAB Cup trial)

6. Rough conduct (shepherd): make consistent with head down over the ball rule so that a player who shepherds is guilty of a reportable offence if he makes forceful contact to the head or neck, unless the contact was caused by circumstances outside the control of the shepherding player

7. Scoring system: If a ball hits the posts inside the goal-scoring area and goes through, it remains a goal. If a ball hits the posts inside the point-scoring area and goes through, it remains a point

Should we all just give up on the AFL??
http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/ ... fault.aspx

I'm close.

Damn straight.

Posted: **Thu Aug 12, 2010 2:44 pm**

They want to cap interchange to reduce injuries, surely this wont work?

If you have fatigued players on the ground when they could have been rested previously surely this creates more opportunity for hammys and soft tissue injuries?

Posted: **Thu Aug 12, 2010 2:56 pm**

An AFL game at it's best is an amazing spectacle (for instance, Collingwood vs Geelong last week). Fast and furious, highly skilled and truly exciting.

A cap on interchanges will rob us of these spectacles. With a cap, coaches will employ negative, game slowing tactics in order to conserve players' energy. Also, having tired players on the ground will lead to sub-standard execution of possessions.

The game doesn't need any changes to the interchange structure.

SA Footy

Oh no!!!...they're at it again..

Oh no!!!...they're at it again..

Re: Oh no!!!...they're at it again..

Re: Oh no!!!...they're at it again..

Re: Oh no!!!...they're at it again..

Re: Oh no!!!...they're at it again..

Re: Oh no!!!...they're at it again..

Re: Oh no!!!...they're at it again..

Re: Oh no!!!...they're at it again..

Re: Oh no!!!...they're at it again..

Re: Oh no!!!...they're at it again..

Re: Oh no!!!...they're at it again..

Re: Oh no!!!...they're at it again..

Re: Oh no!!!...they're at it again..

Re: Oh no!!!...they're at it again..

Re: Oh no!!!...they're at it again..

Re: Oh no!!!...they're at it again..

Re: Oh no!!!...they're at it again..

Re: Oh no!!!...they're at it again..

Re: Oh no!!!...they're at it again..

Re: Oh no!!!...they're at it again..