SA Footy

Ok i am starting up a page to discuss possible rule changes/ why and also changes you think would help the game

I think a rule change to speed the game up is needed, if the ball rolls out over the line in a non contestant area or if a players runs it over I think it should be a free kick for oppestion, AFL is the only sport were if you take the ball out of play it's still a 50% you will get it back, stupid if you ask me, punish teams for it, unless it's a spoil or smother or a real solid contest in line. Speed the game up we won't need 50 throw ins a game, teams will attack the corridor.

That rule was a complete disaster in the NAB Cup. I also don't think we should be making rules based on what other sports do or dont do compared to Aussie Rules.

Id like to eliminate the hit the post rule. If it hits the post and still goes in for goal its a goal, if it bounces out play on

FootyWiz81 wrote:I think a rule change to speed the game up is needed, if the ball rolls out over the line in a non contestant area or if a players runs it over I think it should be a free kick for oppestion, AFL is the only sport were if you take the ball out of play it's still a 50% you will get it back, stupid if you ask me, punish teams for it, unless it's a spoil or smother or a real solid contest in line. Speed the game up we won't need 50 throw ins a game, teams will attack the corridor.

Haha let's just change everything that makes our game unique.

What about no rule changes for forty years at least? Keep it how it is instead of taking it so far away from what it once was

CoverKing wrote:
What about no rule changes for forty years at least? Keep it how it is instead of taking it so far away from what it once was

agree, changing the rules for the sake of it has got to stop, get rid of the rules committee so that they don't keep ******* with the game to justify their existence!!

Well given that there are no "rules" applicable to Australian Football, just Laws this thread is redundent.

Jim05 wrote:Id like to eliminate the hit the post rule. If it hits the post and still goes in for goal its a goal, if it bounces out play on

I've thought for years that this would be a sensible rule change. It's been suggested countless times and I can't understand why it's been resisted.

Many people use the argument that the way the rule currently is makes the game unique.
Why retain a stupid rule for that reason alone? There are plenty of other factors which make the game unique.

westozfalcon wrote:

Jim05 wrote:Id like to eliminate the hit the post rule. If it hits the post and still goes in for goal its a goal, if it bounces out play on

I've thought for years that this would be a sensible rule change. It's been suggested countless times and I can't understand why it's been resisted.

Many people use the argument that the way the rule currently is makes the game unique.
Why retain a stupid rule for that reason alone? There are plenty of other factors which make the game unique.

Stupid rule? How?

FootyWiz81 wrote:I think a rule change to speed the game up is needed, if the ball rolls out over the line in a non contestant area or if a players runs it over I think it should be a free kick for oppestion, AFL is the only sport were if you take the ball out of play it's still a 50% you will get it back, stupid if you ask me, punish teams for it, unless it's a spoil or smother or a real solid contest in line. Speed the game up we won't need 50 throw ins a game, teams will attack the corridor.

Speed the game up? Why? It's 'too fast' now. Players are spent. The introduction of meaningless rules means that players are playing "harder" more than ever (and I don't mean physical contests).

You watch, with the spate of knee injuries, diving on the ball will be disallowed soon.

FootyWiz81 wrote:AFL is the only sport

Grrrr

Constance_Perm wrote:

FootyWiz81 wrote:AFL is the only sport

Grrrr

I missed that CP. Agree...GGRRRR!

FootyWiz81 wrote: AFL is the only sport

AFL is NOT a sport, it is a competition that plays Australian Rules Football just as the SANFL, WAFL, SAAFL and many other competitions do!!

am Bays wrote:Well given that there are no "rules" applicable to Australian Football, just Laws this thread is redundent.

Pedantic much?

am Bays wrote:Well given that there are no "rules" applicable to Australian Football, just Laws this thread is redundent.

law    

–noun
1.
the principles and regulations established in a community by some authority and applicable to its people, whether in the form of legislation or of custom and policies recognized and enforced by judicial decision.
2.
any written or positive rule or collection of rules prescribed under the authority of the state or nation, as by the people in its constitution. Compare bylaw, statute law.
3.
the controlling influence of such rules; the condition of society brought about by their observance: maintaining law and order.

westozfalcon wrote:

Jim05 wrote:Id like to eliminate the hit the post rule. If it hits the post and still goes in for goal its a goal, if it bounces out play on

I've thought for years that this would be a sensible rule change. It's been suggested countless times and I can't understand why it's been resisted.

Many people use the argument that the way the rule currently is makes the game unique.
Why retain a stupid rule for that reason alone? There are plenty of other factors which make the game unique.

trialled in the nab cup a few years ago- i'm a fan.

westozfalcon wrote:

Jim05 wrote:Id like to eliminate the hit the post rule. If it hits the post and still goes in for goal its a goal, if it bounces out play on

I've thought for years that this would be a sensible rule change. It's been suggested countless times and I can't understand why it's been resisted.

Many people use the argument that the way the rule currently is makes the game unique.
Why retain a stupid rule for that reason alone? There are plenty of other factors which make the game unique.

Kick after the siren, scores are level, you hit the goal post and the ball bounces out. So you draw a game when you are clearly kick a shot for goal that is worthy of a point and a win...rule has to stay as is.

Here is another one, maybe more a reportable offence...deliberately attacking an injury when the injured player is not actively partaking in the game is reportable. Montayna's act tonight was disgusting.

scoob wrote:

westozfalcon wrote:

Jim05 wrote:Id like to eliminate the hit the post rule. If it hits the post and still goes in for goal its a goal, if it bounces out play on

I've thought for years that this would be a sensible rule change. It's been suggested countless times and I can't understand why it's been resisted.

Many people use the argument that the way the rule currently is makes the game unique.
Why retain a stupid rule for that reason alone? There are plenty of other factors which make the game unique.

Kick after the siren, scores are level, you hit the goal post and the ball bounces out. So you draw a game when you are clearly kick a shot for goal that is worthy of a point and a win...rule has to stay as is.

A score should only be registered if the ball actually crosses the goal or point line. If it does so off the post all well and good. If it doesn't cross the line it's no score and play on or in the case you have mentioned, no score and end of game.

westozfalcon wrote:
A score should only be registered if the ball actually crosses the goal or point line. If it does so off the post all well and good. If it doesn't cross the line it's no score and play on or in the case you have mentioned, no score and end of game.

That is all well and good for every other sport that has one set of posts, one net etc, Australian Rules you can score a behind each side of the goals.
The posts must count for something as they are in the middle of an area that gives you a score, the only way a change should ever be considered is if it hits the post and goes through the goals it is a goal, any other time it hits the goal post (goes through the behinds or bounceces into play) it is a behind.
IMHO, leave it alone.

The current rules/interpretations of:
Holding the Ball - disgrace
Out of Bounds Deliberate - so what if the ball goes out of bounds for a few seconds?
Interchange Rule - ridiculous.
High contact when the player deliberately ducks.
When the non-controlling umpire picks out a free in the course of the play that the controlling umpire misses. Fair enough if it is off the ball, but if it is in play, then stay out of it.
Calling play-on when a player dares to bend his knees sidewards. But then the defending player anticipates this and is penalised 50 metres for the most ridiculously small infringements. The AFL wants to keep the game moving, but by paying these decisions actually holds it up for longer.
Ball has to travel 15 metres for a mark. Do not see how the point of this or how it has enhanced the games at all, and even after 10 years it still confuses umpires and players, not occasionally, but in every game.
Suspending players for the Buddy Franklin-Ben Cousins type of bump a couple of years ago.

Apart from cracking down on the bump when the player has his head over the ball, I can't think of one rule change in the past 15 years that has not been needless.

FlyingHigh wrote:Apart from cracking down on the bump when the player has his head over the ball, I can't think of one rule change in the past 15 years that has not been needless.

'Chopping the arms' and 'hands in the back' have both been good rule changes as before they were an infringement they encouraged lazy football.