The Sham Cup

[bornadog]

I don't like the gimmicky rules but I suppose they need a point of difference between that and the home and away season. It's also a chance to see if the proposed rules could be carried over into the home and away season.

Why do we need point of difference? Why do we need to see rule changes?

[bornadog]

I would keep it the same without the stupid format of Rd 1. No need to have the mini-games, just go straight into two teams playing a full 4 quarters against each other.

and the normal rules, not the made up trial BS

[LostDoggy]

NAB's have a far better intensity than practice games against other clubs ever did. It's also great that it's on TV for the members that can't get there. Players have to abide by the rules or they can get rubbed out and when compared to games I used to see at the old Skinner reserve we are light years ahead of that. It's not perfect in fact it's far from it but it's also far from the sham you are indicating.

It definetely a sham cos no fault of their own saints can't win it now and the bombers after 2 losses don't really give a stuff.

[Ghost Dog]

and the normal rules, not the made up trial BS

It must be hard for players to adjust at such high speed

[GVGjr]

Why do we need point of difference? Why do we need to see rule changes?

So is it the rules or the fact that it's an organised pre-season competition that you are rejecting?

To me I'd rather they trial some rules in the NAB cup game than the H&A season.
I don't think the scoring should be changed at all and that is why I objected to the super goal when it was first introduced. Other than that though what is the problem from your perspective and why do you think it's a sham?

[GVGjr]

It definetely a sham cos no fault of their own saints can't win it now and the bombers after 2 losses don't really give a stuff.

No different to one day or limited over cricket games being cancelled due to the weather leaving one team SOL.

[bornadog]

why do you think it's a sham?

1. Different rules - confuses everyone - eg 9 point goals, the ruck, interchange, deliberate out of bounce etc etc The only rule I like is you can change up to 7 players at half time which is what a practise match is all about.

2. Experimenting rules - Why do we need to change this great game? What is the point after 100 years of playing the game? Can't we settle and say for once and for all this is the game? It truly is farcical especially when you tell people from overseas and they just scratch their head and say is this a real game. AFL has no credibility outside of AFL.

It was like the kicking backwards rule that was experimented with in the NAB Cup and the VFL, what a joke. I even saw a free paid in an AFL match at the MCG for a player kicking backwards and being told to play on and getting caught. Umpire was confused as was the player who didn't know what happened.

3. The first round - what is the point?

I prefer to have some lead up practise matches up the bush or wherever for players to start getting match fit. I don't agree to extend the season beyond 22 rounds and I hate the top eight for finals, although now there are 18 teams I can live with it.

[LostDoggy]

No different to one day or limited over cricket games being cancelled due to the weather leaving one team SOL.

Saints chances of winning weren't sabotaged by the weather more by the opposition not giving a stuff.

[bornadog]

It definetely a sham cos no fault of their own saints can't win it now and the bombers after 2 losses don't really give a stuff.

Saints should get the full 4 points as Essendon didn't show up.

[bornadog]

No different to one day or limited over cricket games being cancelled due to the weather leaving one team SOL.

Wasn't cancelled due to bad weather. Essendon didn't show up as they chose to fly there instead of getting on a bus. Saints still played an intra club as many locals showed up.

[LostDoggy]

Saints should get the full 4 points as Essendon didn't show up.

It's not like the Saints give a stuff either. So they aren't complaining. Making more of a sham.

[GVGjr]

Saints should get the full 4 points as Essendon didn't show up.

And I wouldn't have a problem with that.

[GVGjr]

It's not like the Saints give a stuff either. So they aren't complaining. Making more of a sham.

Are you sure about that? Watters wants the 4 points.

[AndrewP6]

Are you sure about that? Watters wants the 4 points.

But the club aren't pursuing it:

http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsartic...8/default.aspx

[chef]

and the normal rules, not the made up trial BS

They need to trial things somewhere.