2006 to 2007 rules changes?

[LostDoggy]

This time last year Eade had the team working hard on the new rule with the kick outs trying to turn it into an advantage for the team. He even talked the rule up at various functions saying that it something that we could exploit other teams with given our pace and kicking skills.
Based on our ability to move the ball from defence to attack throughout the season I'd have to say he read it 100% right.
This year teams will be better prepared which will reduce our advantage somewhat.

The new rule this year is one that on paper appears to favor forwards and might be one to test and exploit out key defenders. Harris for one appear to like to hold his ground and this might be a very difficult rule for him to adjust to.

I am concerned that this rule might really test our teams key position depth and probably be one of the most frustrating rules going around giving a lot of free kicks to forward in front of goal.

Is this a fair assessment?

Does this rule help our smaller and skillful forwards at all like Johnson, Robbins and Murphy?

[whythelongface]

What exactly is the new rule?

[mjp]

Does this rule help our smaller and skillful forwards at all like Johnson, Robbins and Murphy?

Not sure it helps Johnson - he is one of the main offenders of the 'push-out, step-back, mark' that the rule is designed to stop. It wont favor forwards or backs - it will favor players who:

1/.Are brave enough to put it on the line and play in front.
2/.Players who are strong/clever enough to play from behind, using their body and not their hands to control the space.

I know people are saying this is a forwards rule (calling it the 'Clement Rule') but to me the most glaring examples of the kind of play they are trying to stop has been forwards, not backs. Backs are generally reluctant to go the push-out...if the umpire sees it/penalises them, the result will be a goal to the opposition.

I am in the minority I know, but I think this is a good rule. I am sick to death of watching the likes of Lloyd and Gehrig put both hands in a defenders back, little shove, take the mark. The umpires should always have been paying these as free kicks - now (hopefully) the rule is clear enough that they will.

[Raw Toast]

I know people are saying this is a forwards rule (calling it the 'Clement Rule') but to me the most glaring examples of the kind of play they are trying to stop has been forwards, not backs. Backs are generally reluctant to go the push-out...if the umpire sees it/penalises them, the result will be a goal to the opposition.

I am in the minority I know, but I think this is a good rule. I am sick to death of watching the likes of Lloyd and Gehrig put both hands in a defenders back, little shove, take the mark. The umpires should always have been paying these as free kicks - now (hopefully) the rule is clear enough that they will.

I agree with this. Initially I was against the rule and we still have to wait and see how it's implemented, but I hate in particular seeing Hall blatantly push his opponent in the back and get awarded the mark. Forwards like him have gotten away with infringments that backs have been consistently penalised for.

[Sockeye Salmon]

It's not a new rule at all, they are just going to implement it the way it always was.

20 years ago you couldn't use your hands to push someone out of a marking contest. Somewhere along the line it became OK if you called it 'holding your ground'.

Bollocks. You shouldn't be allowed to push.

Watch some old footage of Malcolm Blight or Doug Wade and see how they used their bum.

[westdog54]

It's not a new rule at all, they are just going to implement it the way it always was.

20 years ago you couldn't use your hands to push someone out of a marking contest. Somewhere along the line it became OK if you called it 'holding your ground'.

Bollocks. You shouldn't be allowed to push.

Watch some old footage of Malcolm Blight or Doug Wade and see how they used their bum.

Better still, watch Knights and Van Der Haar battle it out. Just two blokes jumping for the ball, whoever was in front generally won, occasionally one would leap so high he pinched it from the back. One of the things that was great to watch of old time football

[Sockeye Salmon]

Better still, watch Knights and Van Der Haar battle it out. Just two blokes jumping for the ball, whoever was in front generally won, occasionally one would leap so high he pinched it from the back. One of the things that was great to watch of old time football

Sheedy and Yabby Jeans should get the credit for this match. Both coaches were prepared to back their bloke in.

It helped that the game was fairly meaningless as they were going to meet in finals a few weeks later, but still, we will never see the likes of it again. We are all the poorer for it.

Dry Rot, had you been watching AFL in 1983 you wouldn't have cared one iota for Manly and would have been on the bandwagon years earlier. You probably would have barracked for Essendon or Hawthorn, though, and that would have been bad.

[Dry Rot]

Sheedy and Yabby Jeans should get the credit for this match. Both coaches were prepared to back their bloke in.

It helped that the game was fairly meaningless as they were going to meet in finals a few weeks later, but still, we will never see the likes of it again. We are all the poorer for it.

Dry Rot, had you been watching AFL in 1983 you wouldn't have cared one iota for Manly and would have been on the bandwagon years earlier. You probably would have barracked for Essendon or Hawthorn, though, and that would have been bad.

Agreed about the earlier start date but why one of them?

I saw a smattering of footy between 1970 and 1997 but had no real interest or knowledge. Saw the 1970 GF (father made me watch it) and decided to go for the guys in navy blue because they were so far behind. If I saw them playing over the years (which was rare), I went for them but I much preferred rugby league. I didn't even know who won the premieship in any year.

It all could have been much, much worse. I grew up in Canberra and IIRC there were a lot of Richmond supporters at school.....

[Sockeye Salmon]

Agreed about the earlier start date but why one of them?

I saw a smattering of footy between 1970 and 1997 but had no real interest or knowledge. Saw the 1970 GF (father made me watch it) and decided to go for the guys in navy blue because they were so far behind. If I saw them playing over the years (which was rare), I went for them but I much preferred rugby league. I didn't even know who won the premieship in any year.

It all could have been much, much worse. I grew up in Canberra and IIRC there were a lot of Richmond supporters at school.....

Nobody who saw Knights and Van Der Haar go at it that day in 83 could not have left totally in love with the game.

I'll try and find some stats but it was something like 18 marks for Knights and 14 for Van Der Haar and just about all of them were contested.

Spoils = 0 between them.

[Dry Rot]

Nobody who saw Knights and Van Der Haar go at it that day in 83 could not have left totally in love with the game.

I'll try and find some stats but it was something like 18 marks for Knights and 14 for Van Der Haar and just about all of them were contested.

Spoils = 0 between them.

Presume one played for the Hawks and one the Dons? What position(s)?

I love watching contested marks, but they seem few and far between. Also like some serious rough stuff eg Guido on Kosi.

[bulldogtragic]

Presume one played for the Hawks and one the Dons? What position(s)?

I love watching contested marks, but they seem few and far between. Also like some serious rough stuff eg Guido on Kosi.

Like it before its gone!!! Gia would be out for some time under the new rules for the tribunal/match review panel. How rediculous!

[GVGjr]

Presume one played for the Hawks and one the Dons? What position(s)?

I love watching contested marks, but they seem few and far between. Also like some serious rough stuff eg Guido on Kosi.

Knights a jumping jack CHB and Van der Haar a talented but erratic CHF

[Twodogs]

Anyone else remember Knights getting carried of the ground on a stretcher at Whitten Oval in the '70s?. He'd swallowed his mouth guard and was convulsing so much he actually bounced off the stretcher in the players race.

[bornadog]

Anyone else remember Knights getting carried of the ground on a stretcher at Whitten Oval in the '70s?. He'd swallowed his mouth guard and was convulsing so much he actually bounced off the stretcher in the players race.

Was that when he went up for a speckie and landed flat on his back? If it was I was there.