Thanks Thanks:  0
Likes Likes:  0
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 28
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Essendon
    Posts
    2,287
    Post Thanks / Like

    Interchange doomsday prediction

    http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news...-1225937354671

    RODNEY Eade is a fine coach, has an inquiring football mind, sharp sense of humour and is not prone to talking nonsense.
    Up until halfway through this last season, Jason Akermanis did that for him and in what is a generous gesture continues to do that for gratis.

    Eade is regarded as one the AFL's more strategic and innovative coaches. So it is wise to consider carefully his observations about the game. On the weekend he said the new interchange rules would be the death of the second ruckman. Well, that's plain madness, stupid and an unsustainable argument. Crap.

    The Western Bulldogs coach said: "I've got no doubt it (the new rule) will change the game and I can see them (AFL) changing something in two years' time because it won't work out the way they think."

    From next season, teams will be allowed to still have four players on the interchange bench but one will be a substitute. The player the substitute replaces because of injury or tactics cannot return to the field. There is no limit on the number of interchanges a club can make but they can only utilise three players to make them.

    Eade said the rule had influenced the manner in which clubs addressed the trade period, which ended yesterday. As an example, Eade suggested that clubs would be reluctant to take two ruckmen into a game. "It's a terrible rule. Who do you put as your 22nd man?" he asked. "If you use it (the substitute) as a tactical ploy and change at half-time and you get an injury you're in the lap of the gods," Eade said.

    In truth, rule changes do not influence the game. But coaches do. There is a new interchange rule because the coaches had used the old one to utterly change the way AFL football was played. Forward lines are structured differently now with coaches seeking to get multiple scorers and more players capable of rotating through the midfield. The great Matthew Lloyd retired because the full-forward, best playing deep from the goal square, was not allowed to play that way under the game plan of his coach Matthew Knights.

    Because coaches want to move the ball with deadly speed, traditional types of footballers have been culled from the game. Not by rule modifications but coaching trends. Teams used to have tall back pocket players to counter the opposition's resting ruckman. The other back pocket would be a nuggety, close-marking player to shut down the resting rover. The warp speed AFL game can no longer indulge them.

    The relevance of the rule change to the trading period might be, not the end of the second ruckman, just the evolution of a better one. Hawthorn list management guru Chris Pelchen said yesterday that newly acquired ruckman David Hale was not on his shopping list for next season until the new interchange rule was confirmed last month.

    Hale would not have been on the to-get list of many clubs. In 2008 he booted eight goals against Geelong and finished fourth in the best and fairest. But the past two years have been rather grim. In 2009 he did not make the top 10 in the club award and kicked just 22 goals for the season. In the season just gone he played only 12 matches and kicked 17 goals. Obviously he was not in the best and fairest calculations.

    And for the next two years he has a contract stipulating that he be paid $800,000 all up. That is not a very enticing package, but Hawthorn chased him because of the new interchange ruling.

    Hale will prove a good back-up ruckman and rather than rest on the bench he can be a scoring option resting deep in the forward line. So rather than not play a second ruckman under the new system, Hawthorn has sought to find the best available.

    So one club says the interchange rule will be the death of the second ruckman, another has identified the role as one to improve so that it can be better utilised. The reality of this though is the certainty that if a coach has two good ruckmen then he will play them. Good players get games. The best example of this comes with the philosophy of recruiters at draft time. When it is their turn to pick, they invariably go for the best player available.

    Eade's concern about who to pick as the 22nd man or the substitute is easily solved. Work it out for yourself, Rodney. You are the coach.
    For those who were always the underdogs and wore it as a badge of honour.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Perth, WA
    Posts
    2,760
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Interchange doomsday prediction

    Patrick Smith ... you are a tool !!
    WOOF Member 422

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Kyabram
    Posts
    12,095
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Interchange doomsday prediction

    Quote Originally Posted by Scraggers View Post
    Patrick Smith ... you are a tool !!
    And he obviously hasn't seen Hale play lately as he's not a ruckmans a...hole.
    The curse is dead.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Behind the goals, Geelong Rd end
    Posts
    6,471
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Interchange doomsday prediction

    "In truth, rule changes do not influence the game. But coaches do. There is a new interchange rule because the coaches had used the old one to utterly change the way AFL football was played".

    But interchange is a new rule (well, rules, really). Originally we had 2 subs, then we had 2 interchange, then 3, then 4 (if you want to go back far enough, none, then 1).

    They changed the rules, coaches adapted to it, so their response is to change it again.


    Eade is wrong about one thing, the AFL will not change it back in 2 years time, that will be admitting they were wrong and that simply will not happen.



    From a personal POV, I agree with changing the rule. I want the game slowed down, I want players getting tired, I want it to be too difficult for players to flood back.

    I don't want to see 15 blokes in D50, I want to see one-on-ones. I want to see a defender beat his opponent on his merit rather than because he had 2 mates cover for him.

    Most of all, I want anyone who uses Ross Lyon's game plan to get right royally smashed.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Wherever the dogs are playing
    Posts
    45,037
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Interchange doomsday prediction

    Quote Originally Posted by Sockeye Salmon View Post
    [B][I]"From a personal POV, I agree with changing the rule. I want the game slowed down, I want players getting tired, I want it to be too difficult for players to flood back.

    I don't want to see 15 blokes in D50, I want to see one-on-ones. I want to see a defender beat his opponent on his merit rather than because he had 2 mates cover for him.

    Most of all, I want anyone who uses Ross Lyon's game plan to get right royally smashed.
    No amount of changing rules will take the game back to the 1980's.
    Premierships: AFL 1954, 2016 VFA - 1898,99,1900, 1908, 1913, 1919-20, 1923-24, VFL: 2014, 2016 . Champions of Victoria 1924. AFLW - 2018.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Behind the goals, Geelong Rd end
    Posts
    6,471
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Interchange doomsday prediction

    Quote Originally Posted by bornadog View Post
    No amount of changing rules will take the game back to the 1980's.
    I don't want to go back to the 80's, I just want it to be somewhat recognisable as the game we've played for over 100 years.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    6,565
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Interchange doomsday prediction

    Quote Originally Posted by Sockeye Salmon View Post
    I don't want to go back to the 80's, I just want it to be somewhat recognisable as the game we've played for over 100 years.
    If you can get anyone in the AFL to make it 14 players a side than you will have it.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Browns Plains, Brisbane.
    Posts
    2,730
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Interchange doomsday prediction

    Quote Originally Posted by Topdog View Post
    If you can get anyone in the AFL to make it 14 players a side than you will have it.
    If we went the old VFA rules of 16 on the field [clipping off the wings] as well as that no kicking backwards rule, things would improve imo.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Adelaide
    Posts
    1,415
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Interchange doomsday prediction

    "In truth, rule changes do not influence the game"

    Then why make changes?

    Get back on the valium like the old days at fine leg, Patrick

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Splitting time between Melbourne, Singapore, Johannesburg and Geneva
    Posts
    3,805
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Interchange doomsday prediction

    Quote Originally Posted by EJ Smith View Post
    "In truth, rule changes do not influence the game"

    Then why make changes?

    Get back on the valium like the old days at fine leg, Patrick
    ^^This -- how the heck is he justifying that statement?

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    6,988
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Interchange doomsday prediction

    Quote Originally Posted by Lantern View Post
    ^^This -- how the heck is he justifying that statement?
    The fact he said it is evidence enough for Patrick that it's true

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Splitting time between Melbourne, Singapore, Johannesburg and Geneva
    Posts
    3,805
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Interchange doomsday prediction

    Quote Originally Posted by hujsh View Post
    The fact he said it is evidence enough for Patrick that it's true
    Haha

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    4,741
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Interchange doomsday prediction

    Coaches influence the game rule changes or not.
    Instead of letting the game evolve, the afl jump at shadows and continually add new rules without seeing the real consequences. Coaches/coaching/tactics got us to the brand of football that is played today and it staggers me that the afl have no faith that they(c/c/t) will influence it will into a new style.

    Essentially this continually rule changing is because the rules/game of football(afl) is flawed. The game can't grow with so many grey areas in its rules. Its happening to rugby(union) to a lesser extent. You hardly see any rule changes in soccer.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Doglands
    Posts
    28,579
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Interchange doomsday prediction

    Quote Originally Posted by Sockeye Salmon View Post

    From a personal POV, I agree with changing the rule. I want the game slowed down, I want players getting tired, I want it to be too difficult for players to flood back.

    I don't want to see 15 blokes in D50, I want to see one-on-ones. I want to see a defender beat his opponent on his merit rather than because he had 2 mates cover for him.

    Most of all, I want anyone who uses Ross Lyon's game plan to get right royally smashed.

    There is a lot of merit in what you have written but I wonder how it might have been better achieved without putting that particular limit on the bench.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Ballarat
    Posts
    3,295
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Interchange doomsday prediction

    I'm happy with limiting interchanges as I want to see teams win on merit and hard work rather than just athleticism you can watch a track and field sport if that's your thing.

    I do wonder though, whether coaches will have the nerve to use the substitute player well. E.g. Barry Hall comes down from a marking contest and rolls his ankle. He comes off. The substitute steps in for Baz, then 10 minutes later it's decided Barry's fit and fine and it was just a scare.

    So at what time does the coach use it? The very first sign of a maybe-injured player? Or when said player is in the showers?

    See an opposition player go off injured and it's time to turn the heat up, force the energy out of your opponent's legs by running them stupid knowing you've got a fresh player still up your sleeve. Could this have the opposite-to-intended effect in some games?

    And who the f**k is Patrick Smith, anyway? Who is he to say that Rodney Eade is full of shit? A bit harsh, I thought, coming from a journalist who most likely doesn't know a Sherrin from a ****.
    I love this club with all my heart, Im truly proud to be a part of it and I can guarantee you, going forward, Ill absolutely get every ounce of myself to go further into the journey.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •