Effective end of week.
Can’t stand the arrogant prick and all is rule changes. Not one has made the game better.
Printable View
Effective end of week.
Can’t stand the arrogant prick and all is rule changes. Not one has made the game better.
Yeah.......
While I don't rate him he's got a lot of things right this year.
The 666 set-up is working, after a slow start the stand on the mark rule is also working, the new rules around the kick in's are also working, the medical sub is working and I like the IC changes being capped at 75.
I base a lot of these views on the fact I have watched more 'other' AFL games this year than I have for many years.
I'm glad he is off to Geelong but he got a few things right this year.
Can someone explain why is this zone rule put in for the man on the mark rule ? Everytime I see a 50m penalty awarded because I player walked into the zone ( unintentionally ) they get penalized and I don't see why its an issue.
The interchange number is too low, as I think the intensity and the speed of the game has gone up quite a lot. It leads to lots of injuries. I don't understand why they just don't extend the bench to 1 more player, and still retain the medical sub.
It pains me a little to admit that I am ok with this rule.Quote:
Originally Posted by GVGjr
We all have our opinion on what a game should look like, but those changes, all they have done is make umpiring harder and more inconsistent.Quote:
Originally Posted by GVGjr
AFL has stuffed the holding the ball rule, there are more and more injuries, and without stats, in my opinion, due to capped interchange, allowing players longer to get rid of the ball. A player is tackled and twisted and turned for a longer period and risks injury.
We can change the game any way we want, but you know what, that is all we are doing, changing the game, not actually improving anything.
There are certain things that were unique to footy, like kicking out from the square, kicking over the man on the mark, no last touch free kicks (effectively deliberate is coming to that).
After all the changes with the aim to get more scoring well You know what, scoring on average has hardly improved 80.2 to 80.7.
All I keep coming back to is that I'm watching a lot more football than I have in years and some colleagues at work are doing the same.Quote:
Originally Posted by bornadog
Once players start nailing their set shots the scoring will improve but that is not the main aim for me. The ball is moving a lot better and it's a far better spectacle.
I'm not hearing in the media how amazing the game is, and how much scoring has improved anymore. Is that because I'm not following enough media or is it because it's not being said in the media?
That's a genuine question.
If it's the latter I wonder why. Could be there's other things to worry about, could be media outlets are satisfied that everything's dandy, or it could be they're just not supposed to discuss it anymore.
Hocking's made the game more inconsistent, difficult to interpret and frustrating to watch. I agree BAD, good riddance.
I think Hocking's role is needed as coaches develop better strategies and players become fitter and more coachable. He has been given a lot of leash to make multiple changes each year, as opposed to the old trial one in the preseason and maybe give it a go the following year, and I think everyone has learnt a lot from that
I think the stand rule has not been as strict as proposed, but the umpires also need to ensure they are calling play on at the right times (hard because they have 20 different things to watch). So many times players are called play on too quickly, or they play on but the umpire is watching the next contest without calling anything out so the man is stuck on the mark.
I don't have much time for Hocking and his changes. I don't find it any more enjoyable to watch (Bulldogs playing well definitely has me interested in the season, but the bad games are still bad), and it has made the game more frustrating to play at a local level as well.
There was praise for the rule changes on the Monday night shows including the radio, Healy was quite complimentary of the changes.Quote:
Originally Posted by jeemak
The stand on the mark rule is still a disaster for me, way too much advantage to the attacking team and it just looks awful seeing a player stand completely still and be uninvolved in the game.
Not sure we can attribute the medical sub rule to him but i do like the kick out changes.