-
IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.
It's official, Hocking and the AFL are dumb-arsed, half-baked clowns who are trying to stuff the game
- Thread starter jb03
- Start date
How do we do something about it??
Can we as members put pressure on the clubs to provide our feedback to the AFL?
We want a contest, not a boring scorefest. More scoring does not equal a better game. When I was a season ticket holder watching soccer in the UK, some of the best games I saw were 0-0 draws. They were und to end but defence / goalkeepers may well just be very good. Some of the most boring were high scoring one sided games.
Fans that watch AFL love the intensity of the contest, we don't want to watch AFLX with their keepings off crap. Thats not footy and not interesting to watch.
Steve Hocking - We want a vote of no confidence in you and if Gill supports it, that wanker can go too.
How new rules since 2017?
*6-6-6
*Man on the mark
*Kicking distance increase
*Interchange capped
*Moving off the mark
That's more in 3 years then in the last 20 years.
The opppstion might not match us but the AFL are trying there very best to see us fall back in the pack.
*6-6-6
*Man on the mark
*Kicking distance increase
*Interchange capped
*Moving off the mark
That's more in 3 years then in the last 20 years.
The opppstion might not match us but the AFL are trying there very best to see us fall back in the pack.
That, and leaning on Michael Christian when he wants a certain MRO verdict, like Lynch being sent to the Tribunal or the failed staging charges against Vlastuin and Grimes.
The last thing he got right was punching Matthews on the nose.
One is left wondering who was agitating for these modifications to the game.
Are they, in fact, answers in search of questions?
The man on the mark thing, in particular, has me stumped.
Surely it has to be matched by an equally rigid determination of what constitutes 'play on' for the player with the ball?
If not, it renders the man on the mark as little more than an onlooker.
Are they, in fact, answers in search of questions?
The man on the mark thing, in particular, has me stumped.
Surely it has to be matched by an equally rigid determination of what constitutes 'play on' for the player with the ball?
If not, it renders the man on the mark as little more than an onlooker.
So the man on the mark can't move to follow the free kick taker if he deviates from the mark? What about buddy's "natural arc"? I can see the umps getting sucked in and paying 50's all over the place early on before the AFL instructs them to ease off a bit. Like the stupid protected zone rule
It's all about creating space on the ground, and all theoretical. They're reluctant to go the nuclear option - 16 a side - so they fritter about the edges with things that have little or no impact.
Massive grey area that needs to be addressed. I can see a few players developing natural arcs over the pre-season.
A reminder Steve Hocking's last raft of rule changes lead to the lowest scoring for 50 years. 50 years!
That alone should have seen him sacked. It's an absolute blight on Gil that he kept his job.
That alone should have seen him sacked. It's an absolute blight on Gil that he kept his job.
Great point N8. And even harder for the umps to adjudicate too. Watch Richmond get pulled up constantly for this whilst Geelong and Collingwood dont. The more rules for free kicks, the greater our negative free kick differential will be.
Scratching my head now about manning the mark. Hocking says they will be permitted "limited lateral movement", i.e. side to side. Players were never allowed forward of the mark anyway, so perhaps the only effect this will have is to stop defenders marking a patch of ground and running up to the mark as the player kicks. Otherwise it is simply an instruction for umpires to police 'play on' situations more strictly. Have I got this wrong somehow?
Exactly. He is an absolute tool. And the AFL contemptuous, it annoys me because we are all treated like idiots. And for what genuine reason do we need more changes? The quicker Gil and his inflated group of highly paid execs depart the building, the better for us all. Gee the AFL is as bad a bully as you can get.
maybe just dont have anyone on the mark, but a defender 1mt behind it.
KB bobbed up yesterday on the subject so obviously he had the mail it was happening.
Not personally against it, but a majority of players will hate it. I think Hocking has managed to upset nearly everyone.
Will be a disaster if it leads to more injuries and they assume a mandate to shorten quarters.
Jack Hamilton and three staff somehow managed to get a whole season organised. Luckily that kept them busy enough they didn't have time to stuff around with rules. ( reminds me of work associates who always had time to work out How to do things "better" as they didn't actually deliver on their core role)
You do realise this rule will screw Geelong up with all the old wrinkled prunes they have in the team?
Why. Simplest thing in the world to understand what an incompetent bunch of *smile* the flogs in suits at AFLHQ are.
AFL rule changes reveal: Rotations slashed, 'man on mark' on notice
AFL slashes interchange rotations for 2021, and is tightening 'man on the mark' movementwww.afl.com.au
Can't believe how stupid they are.
So the interchange rule is to reduce the high pressure game and bring in a little more fatigue. Does the AFL really thing that will stop our game plan style evolving one step ahead of the rest?
As others have noted, more fatigue equals more injury risk but time will tell
As others have noted, more fatigue equals more injury risk but time will tell
<
Leppitsch
|
Smaller list sizes
>
