Steve Hocking | PUNT ROAD END | Richmond Tigers Forum
  • If you are having trouble logging in to the forum please contact [email protected] // When reseting your password or awaiting confirmation please check that your email is correct and also your junk/spam emails.
  • IMPORTANT! Our inbox is full of email errors from members who have not updated their emails, please follow the instructions on how to update here
  • 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.

Steve Hocking

tiger76

Tiger Matchwinner
Mar 26, 2014
972
1,185
FMD. Just imagine trying to watch an entire game played like that. My brain hurts from looking at that one tiny clip.
If you can stomach watching it again, Taylor says that ‘Geelong are streaming down the middle’, just after they finished taking 12 kicks to get out of their defensive fifty.
 
  • Haha
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users

22nd Man

Tiger Legend
Aug 29, 2011
7,643
2,412
Essex Heights
Smith had about 7 possessions in that video. And most of them went 7 metres and were paid marks. But that’s okay other clubs are allowed to do that.
What about only two consecutive marks inside defensive 50 then it's auto play on ? Or even better the sthird kick (after the second mark) has to clear the D50 arc? Would encourage the return of the big Torp, defensive team forced to defend at the widest part of the ground. Would also make team defending the kick in decide whether to defend deep or mid. And could stop teams winding clock down in close games when they wax in the back 50.
I would also say if a team kicks back into its D50 and is marked it has to be kicked back out.
Possiblly same for a team in F50 - if they kick it back out has to be kicked straight back in?
 

Harry

Tiger Legend
Mar 2, 2003
22,915
8,108
What about only two consecutive marks inside defensive 50 then it's auto play on ? Or even better the sthird kick (after the second mark) has to clear the D50 arc? Would encourage the return of the big Torp, defensive team forced to defend at the widest part of the ground. Would also make team defending the kick in decide whether to defend deep or mid. And could stop teams winding clock down in close games when they wax in the back 50.
I would also say if a team kicks back into its D50 and is marked it has to be kicked back out.
Possiblly same for a team in F50 - if they kick it back out has to be kicked straight back in?
Just get rid of the stand on the mark rule and it'll be much harder for teams like geelong and collingwood to play ring around a rosie.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users

DavidSSS

Tiger Legend
Dec 11, 2017
6,705
8,669
Melbourne
Just get rid of the stand on the mark rule and it'll be much harder for teams like geelong and collingwood to play ring around a rosie.

Adding more restrictions to how players can move and where they can kick the ball moves us further away from Australian Rules Football.

The new rules haven't worked, doubling down with more fiddling just makes it worse, time to look at a lot of the new rules and wind them back.

If you try something and it doesn't work, surely you seriously consider reversing the changes?

DS
 
  • Like
  • Angry
Reactions: 10 users

AngryAnt

Tiger Legend
Nov 25, 2004
24,273
10,203
Adding more restrictions to how players can move and where they can kick the ball moves us further away from Australian Rules Football.

The new rules haven't worked, doubling down with more fiddling just makes it worse, time to look at a lot of the new rules and wind them back.

If you try something and it doesn't work, surely you seriously consider reversing the changes?

DS


Yeah, but are they prepared to admit that? I've seen the media pundits essentially double down on backing it, saying "well scoring isn't up but the game is more open".

I really hope this rule gets the flick next year but I'm not optimistic.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users

Baloo

Delisted Free Agent
Nov 8, 2005
40,435
11,321
Yeah, but are they prepared to admit that? I've seen the media pundits essentially double down on backing it, saying "well scoring isn't up but the game is more open".

I really hope this rule gets the flick next year but I'm not optimistic.

Yep, the early season declaration that Hocking found the magic formula to increase scoring and make the game more exiting has very quickly change to "open". The AFL and it's sycophants are really destroying the game. Historians will look back on the Hocking Period as the period Aussie Rules football lost it's way but the industry was too far up it's own arse to realise.

All we need now is for Gil to declare that he doesn't blow the whistle mate.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5 users

DavidSSS

Tiger Legend
Dec 11, 2017
6,705
8,669
Melbourne
Yeah, but are they prepared to admit that? I've seen the media pundits essentially double down on backing it, saying "well scoring isn't up but the game is more open".

I really hope this rule gets the flick next year but I'm not optimistic.

The AFL is incapable of admitting mistakes.

The only solution is a clean out of the boys' club running the show.

DS
 
  • Like
Reactions: 11 users

Nico

You psychopathological reactionary!
Jul 1, 2004
1,763
581
Melbourne
Adding more restrictions to how players can move and where they can kick the ball moves us further away from Australian Rules Football.

The new rules haven't worked, doubling down with more fiddling just makes it worse, time to look at a lot of the new rules and wind them back.

If you try something and it doesn't work, surely you seriously consider reversing the changes?

DS
If they had introduced one rule at a time to improve a designated KPI, trialled if for say a season, and then made an evaluation based on the data at season's end, then it would be easy to reverse. "We thought it would work, but it didn't, so we're removing it".

As they have introduced a suite of changes at once, they haven't got a clue which rule is causing what issue. Furthermore, what KPI are they trying to improve, more Dusty moments?

The AFL have shot themselves in the foot due to their incompetence. Add to the incompetence the massive boy's club ego, then there's not a chance in hell they will be reversed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 9 users

Harry

Tiger Legend
Mar 2, 2003
22,915
8,108
They got rid of the hands in the back rule, and the possession from a ruck contest rule. they can get rid of the statue rule.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users

22nd Man

Tiger Legend
Aug 29, 2011
7,643
2,412
Essex Heights
Just get rid of the stand on the mark rule and it'll be much harder for teams like geelong and collingwood to play ring around a rosie.
Maybe but the keepings off didn't just emerge this year. The whole concept of backward kicking and ball retention is entrenched in footy now. And the ground size makes it pretty easy to execute.
 

22nd Man

Tiger Legend
Aug 29, 2011
7,643
2,412
Essex Heights
Just about every column I have read since he quit have eulogised Hocking as a visionary. "Unfairly maligned" is a common theme (well the maligning has not been from any prominent voice in media that's for sure)
 

DavidSSS

Tiger Legend
Dec 11, 2017
6,705
8,669
Melbourne
Just about every column I have read since he quit have eulogised Hocking as a visionary. "Unfairly maligned" is a common theme (well the maligning has not been from any prominent voice in media that's for sure)

The maligning comes from the fans (ie: the league's customers).

The defence comes from the media.

Out of touch maybe??

DS
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 users

HR

Tiger Superstar
Mar 20, 2013
2,078
840
They got rid of the hands in the back rule, and the possession from a ruck contest rule. they can get rid of the statue rule.
They have also got rid of holding the ball and incorrect disposal.........
 

snags

Tiger Superstar
Oct 28, 2005
1,033
785
If they had introduced one rule at a time to improve a designated KPI, trialled if for say a season, and then made an evaluation based on the data at season's end, then it would be easy to reverse. "We thought it would work, but it didn't, so we're removing it".

As they have introduced a suite of changes at once, they haven't got a clue which rule is causing what issue. Furthermore, what KPI are they trying to improve, more Dusty moments?

The AFL have shot themselves in the foot due to their incompetence. Add to the incompetence the massive boy's club ego, then there's not a chance in hell they will be reversed.
They haven’t shot themselves in the foot. This is deliberate. Shocking said this was the last chance to improve scoring. Failing, zones will need to be considered. I reckon he’s sabotaged the game on purpose.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

berwick boy

Tiger Superstar
Apr 27, 2004
1,580
413
I’m putting in an official complaint to Mr T to remove that *smile* photo above of that *smile* sucking/*smile* grinning ball licking Geelong flog !
Its making me sick.
 
  • Like
  • Haha
  • Love
Reactions: 3 users

eZyT

Tiger Legend
Jun 28, 2019
17,391
15,344
They haven’t shot themselves in the foot. This is deliberate. Shocking said this was the last chance to improve scoring. Failing, zones will need to be considered. I reckon he’s sabotaged the game on purpose.


quite possible sausages