Are You Sick Of The Afl Changing Rules Every Year

[Sedat]

Gerard The Oracle 2.4 Whateley is telling us all what a wonderful job Steve Hocking and the competition committee is doing. Surely that is sufficient enough for us mere mortals lol.

[jeemak]

Gerard The Oracle 2.4 Whateley is telling us all what a wonderful job Steve Hocking and the competition committee is doing. Surely that is sufficient enough for us mere mortals lol.

Hocking spoke of the high quality and convincing data that's been gathered from the small amount of games the changes have been trialed within to justify a switch in rules. I would like to see this data, because, as a relatively analytical person I think I'd be set at ease if I could.

Both Robbo and 2.4 were singing the praises of the process and suggested the AFL wouldn't do anything radical to the rules unless they'd done the work and there was a solid case. Cool, just share the data so we can all look at it and can give you permission to potentially *!*!*!*! the game up, because after all, it's our game and not theirs.

[bornadog]

Hocking spoke of the high quality and convincing data that's been gathered from the small amount of games the changes have been trialed within to justify a switch in rules. I would like to see this data, because, as a relatively analytical person I think I'd be set at ease if I could.

Both Robbo and 2.4 were singing the praises of the process and suggested the AFL wouldn't do anything radical to the rules unless they'd done the work and there was a solid case. Cool, just share the data so we can all look at it and can give you permission to potentially *!*!*!*! the game up, because after all, it's our game and not theirs.

Apparently Hocking went to a half of a VFL match - that convinced him

The other moron pushing these changes is Blight. Heard him with Whately this morning. Can't stand his opinions about the game.

[Sedat]

Hocking spoke of the high quality and convincing data that's been gathered from the small amount of games the changes have been trialed within to justify a switch in rules. I would like to see this data, because, as a relatively analytical person I think I'd be set at ease if I could.

Both Robbo and 2.4 were singing the praises of the process and suggested the AFL wouldn't do anything radical to the rules unless they'd done the work and there was a solid case. Cool, just share the data so we can all look at it and can give you permission to potentially *!*!*!*! the game up, because after all, it's our game and not theirs.

Hocking and his media fluffers have been trotting that party line for months now with no sign of this data anywhere. Maybe it is safely tucked away in crates in Roswell.

[jeemak]

Apparently Hocking went to a half of a VFL match - that convinced him

The other moron pushing these changes is Blight. Heard him with Whately this morning. Can't stand his opinions about the game.

I've always said Blight doesn't put enough tobacco in with his weed. He's out of control.

[hujsh]

Hocking and his media fluffers have been trotting that party line for months now with no sign of this data anywhere. Maybe it is safely tucked away in crates in Roswell.

They left it at the reception at ASADA's offices.

[Hotdog60]

If it wasn't for the Dogs I would not be following this sport. I think every paid up member of the football community should get to do a postal vote on rule changes. That would eliminate the casual flybuy supporters and if you want a say you pay up to do so.
The game is changing too much when there was nothing wrong with the rules 40 years ago.

[bornadog]

If it wasn't for the Dogs I would not be following this sport. I think every paid up member of the football community should get to do a postal vote on rule changes. That would eliminate the casual flybuy supporters and if you want a say you pay up to do so.
The game is changing too much when there was nothing wrong with the rules 40 years ago.

WE don't need a postal vote, simple, we don't need changes.

[mjp]

6-6-6 seems like a great rule to me.

[Sedat]

6-6-6 seems like a great rule to me.

I mentioned this elsewhere but I would have liked to see the natural levers in the game being pulled before considering a structural change like 6-6-6. The natural levers need to be simplified in any event because the game in its current form is almost impossible to umpire:

Much quicker ball-ups, boundary throw-ins
No prior opp - either it is HTB/incorrect disposal or it is incorrect tackle.
Drastically reduced interchange - 10 per qtr max.

6-6-6 will certainly make the last 2 minutes of a close game exciting. No more flooding back en masse.

[craigsahibee]

These proposed rule changes are doing nothing at all to get me back through the gates.

Head Office has really lost the plot.

[Mantis]

6-6-6 seems like a great rule to me.

But what happens if the ball isn't cleared and we get repeat stoppage/s? This rule isn't in play and players will swarm around the ball and behind the ball.

Personally I have more issue with the way the ground is set up after a point (18 man defensive zones hurt my eyes) and from stoppages around the ground where the field is condensed and feel starting points in these situations would be a better idea.

[bornadog]

6-6-6 seems like a great rule to me.

for 20 seconds after a goal and start of the quarter

[Topdog]

People realise they are talking to someone who watches 6-6-6 every week when they ask these "hypotheticals" yeah?

[mjp]

But what happens if the ball isn't cleared and we get repeat stoppage/s? This rule isn't in play and players will swarm around the ball and behind the ball.

Personally I have more issue with the way the ground is set up after a point (18 man defensive zones hurt my eyes) and from stoppages around the ground where the field is condensed and feel starting points in these situations would be a better idea.

No issue with what you are saying...but if the ball IS cleared then we have equal numbers ahead of/behind the ball.

I have had my say on kick-ins and 18-player zones and I still think the 3+ 2 rule (each team must have 3 players inside forward half + 2 inside 50) for every stoppage and kick-in...once play resumes, they go where they want and reset...

It turns an 18-man zone (aka 36 man zone) into a 13 man zone (26 man zone) in the blink of an eye. Been doing this at 18's level - including the champs - for 5 years. It is simple, easy to understand (for players and spectators) and it WORKS.

The goal-square idea doesn't make much sense to me BUT I have never seen it in action so it is hard to comment.