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

seven

Super Tiger
Apr 20, 2004
23,804
7,343
There's been around 50 rule changes / new rules added to the game since 2000.
Be intresting to see if any other professional sport in the world has had this many changes since the turn of the century.
 
  • Like
  • Wow
Reactions: 2 users

Bernie

Tiger Superstar
Aug 19, 2008
1,474
643
Canberra
666 was a good idea, and took footy back to where it was meant to be.
Just curious why you say that , General.

Footy is a competitive sport and strategic thought about game plan should not be inhibited or thwarted by rule changes or manipulation in my view.

That’s not to criticise your opinion, but rather to query?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

Harry

Tiger Legend
Mar 2, 2003
22,915
8,108
This is the reasoning behind the 6-6-6 rule. It really can't be any clearer. Hocking's team was working with these CD guys to formulate new rules.

https://sportsdayradio.com.au/2019/01/30/which-team-will-be-impacted-most-by-6-6-6-setup/
When they did that, they didn’t concede a score for the entire season.

“You can see why the AFL has had to bring in these rules. Using those guys off the back of the square is incredibly effective

So we devise a plan within the rules that was incredibly effective then the AFL change the rules.

3 rules clearly aimed at bringing us down

we need to issue the AFL a please explain and pursue legal action for loss of revenue. They are here to govern the game not manipulate the results.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 6 users

jb03

Tiger Legend
Jan 28, 2004
30,207
5,793
Melbourne
Local teams have been running guys off the back.of the square for ever. Other clubs could (and did) do it as well. Tony Shaw once started 14 players off the back of the square. It's mind boggling that the AFL changed a rule to stop a club doing something that it did better than else. Hocking would have banned Pagan's paddock and contested marking in the 90s to stop North.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5 users

TigerMasochist

Walks softly carries a big stick.
Jul 13, 2003
21,258
4,675
Thats not that bad.
It only lasts 4-5 seconds after the ball is bounced.
That rule helps us
Not if there's a clean clearance from the centre bounce. Dees slaughtered the Woofers in the third qtr from this rule. 4 to 5 seconds is all that's needed to set up an easy goal.
 

The_General

It's been a very hard working from home
Staff member
May 4, 2004
9,145
2,527
Just curious why you say that , General.

Footy is a competitive sport and strategic thought about game plan should not be inhibited or thwarted by rule changes or manipulation in my view.

That’s not to criticise your opinion, but rather to query?
I've always hated flooding, ever since the 90s when blokes like Wallace started doing it because their teams were crap without it.
I think about how great our forwards could be, if they weren't double or triple teams as easily. Can you imagine Richo in the days of 666?
I like the idea of the field being opened up. I'm not a favour of turning individuals into netball defenders in the process though (stand!)
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

zippadeee

Tiger Legend
Oct 8, 2004
39,017
14,483
Not if there's a clean clearance from the centre bounce. Dees slaughtered the Woofers in the third qtr from this rule. 4 to 5 seconds is all that's needed to set up an easy goal.
You weren't allowed into the square before.
Beveridge got ripped.
He took Bomtmytelly off.
Footscary didn't play a midfielder defensive side of the centre and all there defenders stood too deep ij the forward 50.
Libba, McCrea, Treloar were spectators.
Do you think Cotchin Lambert or Martin would've let them stroll out so easily?
 

Mac

Tiger Champion
Sep 16, 2003
2,551
496
Too many reactionists with egos trying to be faux intellectuals unfortunately in manufactured positions of impact/power.

These people are supposed to be the caretakers of the integrity of the game, instead they all feel entitled to leave their mark and have this vainglorious attitude that they somehow have the right to a ‘legacy’ on the game, which they in fact don’t. They should be ashamed of themselves, but they are caught up in their desperate scramble for relevance and some sad version of immortality.

Rule changes used to be carefully considered, consulted and trialled.Now it’s just a free for all knee jerk reaction fest by a self appointed small group who have hijacked the game.

The beauty of the game was the freedom and space which opened itself to a variety of possible tactics and counter tactics. Now tactics are all rule change driven and rule interpretation driven instead of working within a consistent and predictable set of of rules that should be applied the same way for all, all the time, for extended periods/eras.

So now all the teams essentially have to play the same way with the same team dynamics and profiles and skillsets. Very little differentiates team characteristics and they all need to model themselves the same way. There are some nuances, but they don‘t vary too much. They can’t because of the changes. They are reactive to rule changes rather than creative within known rules.

Let the coaches and players naturally evolve the game with new and creative tactics, rather than force-shaping it with new rules that are pretty much bat sh!t crazy, or motivated by some isolated opinions of what someone thinks the game should ‘look like’.

If leaving the rules alone means the scoring goes up and down, then so be it. It’s not a perfect game, that’s what makes it great. Stop trying to make it perfect because it will ruin that beautiful element of it.
 
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: 15 users

The Mole

Tiger Superstar
Apr 1, 2003
2,291
870
I've always hated flooding, ever since the 90s when blokes like Wallace started doing it because their teams were crap without it.
I think about how great our forwards could be, if they weren't double or triple teams as easily. Can you imagine Richo in the days of 666?
I like the idea of the field being opened up. I'm not a favour of turning individuals into netball defenders in the process though (stand!)
I hate flooding too, but the 90’s flooding evolved out of the game in the 2000’s but since the “stand” rule it is back big time. The rule changes have bought it back.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users

ceehook2

Tiger Rookie
Feb 11, 2021
190
249
61
As much as some (probably most) people want to see stand rule eliminated I don't see it happening. The football media deemed it a success in the first 2 weeks and haven't changed their tune since. AFL won't change it when there is literally no pressure from the media to do so.
I see both NRL & AFL games on tv being north of the Murray
Was a time when the commentators would quite happily rubbish the league , the umps and who ever if they thought they deserved it
But things have got highly commercial and protecting and promoting the brand became a real thing
The NRL commentators seemed to be the first to fall and become puppets , I see two or three absolute howlers from the refs , not a peep from the commentators
Switch over to the afl and whoa what a difference
But it has changed and any criticism wound right back
After our round 1 grand final with Carlton , the commentators where doing their stand up summary of the game and it starts with each one being gushing over how good the new rules were . It was so scripted , so staged a couple struggled to get words out . Pretty sure that AFL house will have made it known the media have to support the new rules or else

of recent times Richo has broken ranks and drops the comments , it’s not a good look and how ridiculous does the man on the mark look
It might take all of 2022 to gain some momentum
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users

Ghost of 29

Handball - its just a fad!!
Aug 16, 2008
2,749
913
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

JimJessTorp

Barrels it!
May 20, 2009
3,008
2,248
An armchair in Sydney
I'd say theres a fair chance of that.

Chris Scott is probably working on the dimensions of a goal net today.

*smile*
Through a mate who works at AFL House I got a sneak peek at the new goal design... It was drawn in green crayon and had a number of spelling mistakes ("gole" instead of "goal") so I've tidied it up a bit.

Goalposts_no_heading-768x618.jpg
 
  • Haha
Reactions: 2 users

123cups

Tiger Champion
May 1, 2016
2,535
2,355
Too many reactionists with egos trying to be faux intellectuals unfortunately in manufactured positions of impact/power.

These people are supposed to be the caretakers of the integrity of the game, instead they all feel entitled to leave their mark and have this vainglorious attitude that they somehow have the right to a ‘legacy’ on the game, which they in fact don’t. They should be ashamed of themselves, but they are caught up in their desperate scramble for relevance and some sad version of immortality.

Rule changes used to be carefully considered, consulted and trialled.Now it’s just a free for all knee jerk reaction fest by a self appointed small group who have hijacked the game.

The beauty of the game was the freedom and space which opened itself to a variety of possible tactics and counter tactics. Now tactics are all rule change driven and rule interpretation driven instead of working within a consistent and predictable set of of rules that should be applied the same way for all, all the time, for extended periods/eras.

So now all the teams essentially have to play the same way with the same team dynamics and profiles and skillsets. Very little differentiates team characteristics and they all need to model themselves the same way. There are some nuances, but they don‘t vary too much. They can’t because of the changes. They are reactive to rule changes rather than creative within known rules.

Let the coaches and players naturally evolve the game with new and creative tactics, rather than force-shaping it with new rules that are pretty much bat sh!t crazy, or motivated by some isolated opinions of what someone thinks the game should ‘look like’.

If leaving the rules alone means the scoring goes up and down, then so be it. It’s not a perfect game, that’s what makes it great. Stop trying to make it perfect because it will ruin that beautiful element of it.

Spot.

On.
 

Harry

Tiger Legend
Mar 2, 2003
22,915
8,108
Last touch rule works okay at SANFL. The players all know what’s last touch and what’s a genuine OOB. It sure speeds the game up.
Last touch rule is rubbish. Big part of footy is ruck work and contested footy in congestion. Why do we want to artificially speed up the game anyway?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users

123cups

Tiger Champion
May 1, 2016
2,535
2,355
Last touch rule is rubbish. Big part of footy is ruck work and contested footy in congestion. Why do we want to artificially speed up the game anyway?

‘He disguised it well’

The issue I have is most OOBs are fake acts that clearly intend to stop the play and cause a throw-in. Should players be rewarded for giving up and taking a safety stoppage?

Players are artificially slowing the game down.

Maybe that’s fine, I’m not sold on more rule changes, but it was created by players taking the easy way out and that was never intended in the spirit of the rules.
 

TT33

GO TIGES!!!
Feb 17, 2004
5,055
2,029
Melbourne

This was just below the other article. I almost don’t mind the first 4, although not sure on last touch out. The last one is crazy blight at his moronic best.

Frankly whatever Blight says should be ignored. The guy is away with the fairies most of the time. Those 5 rule changes he nominates would make the game even more unwatchable than it currently is.
Last touch out of bounds, spare me.

As for the "tackle the ball not the body" what sort of idiocy is that!!!!!!

BLIGHT :bash :bash :bash
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user