1eyedog
21-09-2015, 10:33 AM
I was chatting about this to a mate at the Collingwood game and the various merits of introducing a timeout for each team per game. This came about when my mate went to the toilet 3 times during a quarter and lamented missing sections of a great game. I suggested that the game needed a time out for him and it went from there. Most of the discussion focused on the loss of identity or Americanisation of our National game, which I think is a major hurdle. I'm not avocating this is anyway but I can see the AFL considering it one day in the future.
We discussed when and how a timeout could be called and we thought it could be called on a ball up, throw in, kick in, goal review or an injury. Only a coach or a captain can call a time out and it can only be done if one team is within six points of the other and potentially only in the last quarter.
A timeout would be a strategic call to halt momentum (say you are 4 goals up in the last and the opposition kick the last 3 goals), it would provide an opportuntiy to restructure and to hear the coaches directives face to face without the need for a runner to get around to the leadership group.
Can it ever work? Would the players benefit from a 5 minute time out during a match? Would spectators suffer it?
We discussed when and how a timeout could be called and we thought it could be called on a ball up, throw in, kick in, goal review or an injury. Only a coach or a captain can call a time out and it can only be done if one team is within six points of the other and potentially only in the last quarter.
A timeout would be a strategic call to halt momentum (say you are 4 goals up in the last and the opposition kick the last 3 goals), it would provide an opportuntiy to restructure and to hear the coaches directives face to face without the need for a runner to get around to the leadership group.
Can it ever work? Would the players benefit from a 5 minute time out during a match? Would spectators suffer it?