The protected area and the new rules.

[Before I Die]

Re: The protected area and the new rules.

What happens with the Stevie Johnson checkside technique? They only recently modified the rules to allow players to start off the line and move perpendicular to the goals without being called play on as long as they didn’t cross the line of the man on the mark. They could even do this after the siren without being called play on. Is this now play on?

Banning it would cost goals so I’m predicting the AFL will find a way to finagle their way into making an exception.

[jeemak]

Re: The protected area and the new rules.

What happens with the Stevie Johnson checkside technique? They only recently modified the rules to allow players to start off the line and move perpendicular to the goals without being called play on as long as they didn’t cross the line of the man on the mark. They could even do this after the siren without being called play on. Is this now play on?

Banning it would cost goals so I’m predicting the AFL will find a way to finagle their way into making an exception.

So wouldn't Buddy just say he's doing that? Start off his line and finish on it? Can you do it from anywhere on the ground?

[Before I Die]

Re: The protected area and the new rules.

So wouldn't Buddy just say he's doing that? Start off his line and finish on it? Can you do it from anywhere on the ground?

This is what is going to bring things unstuck. Shades of grey upon shades of grey. I'll be surprised if there are no checkside shots on goals from marks or free kicks during the AAMI practice matches, so the answer may be soon apparent.

I still believe the underlying principle is more goals to generate more ads to generate more revenue, so every time the AFL is required to make a clarification/tweak, it will choose the option that creates more goals.

I'm predicting by mid season that the Lance Franklin 'natural arc' gets the green light and the Stevie Johnson checkside technique gets the green light. You read it here first.

[SquirrelGrip]

Re: The protected area and the new rules.

"Low scoring games are really killing the game of soccer, we really should double the width of the goals" - Steven Hocking in his next role with the A League.

Nah, get rid of off-side.

[comrade]

Re: The protected area and the new rules.

The new rule is leading to huge metres gained numbers for certain players. Short almost had 1km in metres last night. JJ should be licking his lips, Bailey Williams too.

[comrade]

Re: The protected area and the new rules.

Duplicate

[GVGjr]

Re: The protected area and the new rules.

Granted it's a small sample size but have some of the rules opened the game up?

[comrade]

Re: The protected area and the new rules.

I don’t like the protected area inside 50 for kick outs. Reckon it’s going to cause havoc for our high defensive press and we’ll leak lots of goals because of it.

[Grantysghost]

Re: The protected area and the new rules.

I don’t like the protected area inside 50 for kick outs. Reckon it’s going to cause havoc for our high defensive press and we’ll leak lots of goals because of it.

Yes it was evident especially in the first half that Melbourne were using that to their advantage.

Nearly every kick out made it to the wing, and they got out the back a couple of times.

Not sure the rule makes a lot of sense, and really puts a premium on goals v behinds now as locking it in much more difficult. That sounds odd but in terms of now not being able to miss and get the second bite of the cherry with forward pressure.

Rewards mediocrity in a way. Just take the point and get it immediately in your half.

[1eyedog]

Re: The protected area and the new rules.

Total and utter madness by the AFL.

If they introduce the rules they are experimenting with in the VFL, ie 3 players staying in their zone, I am out of here.

I already am. Tbh this is the last straw for me.

[1eyedog]

Re: The protected area and the new rules.

I already am. Tbh this is the last straw for me.

I mean I have a membership but I'm not going to any games this year.

[comrade]

Re: The protected area and the new rules.

I mean I have a membership but I'm not going to any games this year.

I'm heading that way too. I'll give it a few rounds to see how the rules wash out under proper game intensity, but it's feeling like we're moving to AFLX type goal scoring fests by any means necessary and I don't like it.

[bulldogsthru&thru]

Re: The protected area and the new rules.

I’ve been basically one foot out since 2018 such is my level of interest in the game now. Didn’t watch a single game of footy in 2019. 2020 I watched some dogs games due to covid. This year who knows. I’ll tune into some dogs games but outside of our club I have no interest in watching the game anymore. Zoning rules would have me switch off permanently, no question.

[Bulldog Joe]

Re: The protected area and the new rules.

I am looking forward to going to games again, despite the rule changes.

Players adapt and I am a passionate sports fan and the Dogs are my team whenever they play anywhere!

[bulldogsthru&thru]

Re: The protected area and the new rules.

I am looking forward to going to games again, despite the rule changes.

Players adapt and I am a passionate sports fan and the Dogs are my team whenever they play anywhere!

I am similar Bulldog Joe. I love my sports and follow multiple leagues and the one thing that gets me passionately involved is having a team to get behind. I could never be one of those casual observer people who follow the game rather than a team.

The passion I have for the dogs remains. For the sport, less and less with each passing year. I am still interested in our progress but admittedly it's getting harder to watch games given a wide variety of factors. I haven't attended a game since 2018 so maybe this is what's missing for me.