Steve Hocking

[LeeToRainesToRoach]

The salty prick planted the seeds back when we won the 17 gf

Where are all the state of the game discussions now?

If Robbo was half a CFW's arse he'd be focusing on the rules furphy and the dreadful attendance figures. The AFL is going to take a massive hit if all games have to be moved to Melbourne. And if we get a bit of rain, the grounds may not be able to handle the traffic.

 

[Baloo]

Just remove the goal posts. It is 6 or nothing. Scoring will skyrocket.

Remove touched and hitting the post of the way in. If the ball makes it through the goals, by foot for now, it's a goal no matter how many fingertips it hits

 

[seven]

Standing on the mark rule must be bad.
Karen Cornes is asking it to be abolished end of season

 

[mrposhman]

Standing on the mark rule must be bad.
Karen Cornes is asking it to be abolished end of season

Did Port Adelaide lose out to that rule over the weekend or something?

 

[Harry]

Standing on the mark rule must be bad.
Karen Cornes is asking it to be abolished end of season

first time I've agreed with Cornes

#settheplayeronthemarkfree

 

[Nico]

first time I've agreed with Cornes

#settheplayeronthemarkfree

Ordering a professional sportsperson to STAND every time there is a mark or free is condescending and infantile. Adjudicate it and STFU

 

[The Mole]

Correct.

Please tell me where in these stats there has been an improvement in offence??

These are averages per team in each year (I've ignored 2020 for the reduced game times). All I see is no improvement in anything from what he's done, bar drop inside 50 numbers and remove the contest. More "free flowing" ball movement has not led to an improvement in scores per inside 50.

View attachment 12701

I suspect, without checking That uncontested forty is up substantially too

 

[Nico]

As has been mentioned previously, introducing so many rules recently makes it impossible to know which rule change "works" and which doesn't.

What does the AFL want to improve? More scoring, less ball ups, less tackles, more Dusty moments, I mean what KPI do they want to improve?

I'm all for improving or optimising the game, but the way this multi billion $ organisation called the AFL is going about it is absolutely childlike and totally lacks statistical credibility. It's embarrassing and cringeworthy.

I run a ecommerce business and of course I want to improve it and optimise it to get more sales. The key is to change one thing at a time and see if it improves the selected KPI.

For example, I want to test if a green or a red "Buy" button generates more sales. I will direct 50% of traffic to a page with green buttons, and 50% to a page with red buttons. After 100 sales, I will go with the button that produced the most sales. I will then test say 2 different headings and see which creates the most sales and go with that. And so on. It's time-consuming, but it's methodical and it works.

I really shake my head at incompetence of the custodians of our great game.

 

[acatman1]

Do i like S Hocking....NO.

The bigger concern is trying to fix one problem only creates another 'hole" in the game. Thats has become so obvious over the years. I men insufficient intent ( as an example). How on earth can an umpire judge insufficient intent when a player tries to kick it properly and it genuinely comes off the side of his boot.
Also why the heck to the umpires 'have" to TELL a bloke a kick for goal after the siren he cant veer off his line, i mean really, this is playschool stuff.
Now this is even before we get into the really contentious issues of holding the ball/incorrect disposal/ball up.
The game is more flawed THAN EVER.

 

[spook]

Remove touched and hitting the post of the way in. If the ball makes it through the goals, by foot for now, it's a goal no matter how many fingertips it hits

No.

 

[craig]

Standing on the mark rule must be bad.
Karen Cornes is asking it to be abolished end of season

Hes satisfied it can go now because we are ratshit.

 

[DavidSSS]

I suspect, without checking That uncontested forty is up substantially too

Hmm, I would have thought so too but the answer is: not really:




Contested possessions as a percentage of total possessions is slightly down but still above 2009 levels. Uncontested possessions similar - put these together and you see where the AFL wants to go - back to 2009!

But their rule changes are not doing this.

WHat is more interesting, since we have data going back a lot further, is disposals per game which has seen a long term rise over the decades and especially in the early 2000s:



A couple of questions arise:
Why the large increase in disposals? Maybe the increasing professionalisation, strategy changes, higher fitness levels and better skills.
Does this make for a more attractive game? Difficult this. Many disposals can be attractive when a team has overlap running but it can also reflect a rolling maul where players are attempting to get out of trouble and create space.

Note: 2020 is omitted.

DS

 

[King Kong]

Standing on the mark rule must be bad.
Karen Cornes is asking it to be abolished end of season

Hinkley obviously doesn't like it. Exposes their leaky defense.

 

[zippadeee]

The rule that fks me is over is the kick in rule.
The player can virtually run to the 50 without bouncing it and the opposition have to stand there and watch.
Like others have said if we aren't playing im not watching.
Did i mention Hocking has only introduced new rules to *smile* us over.

 

[Harry]

The rule that fks me is over is the kick in rule.
The player can virtually run to the 50 without bouncing it and the opposition have to stand there and watch.

why do the commentators not call this out?

 

[The Mole]

Hmm, I would have thought so too but the answer is: not really:

View attachment 12706


Contested possessions as a percentage of total possessions is slightly down but still above 2009 levels. Uncontested possessions similar - put these together and you see where the AFL wants to go - back to 2009!

But their rule changes are not doing this.

WHat is more interesting, since we have data going back a lot further, is disposals per game which has seen a long term rise over the decades and especially in the early 2000s:

View attachment 12707

A couple of questions arise:
Why the large increase in disposals? Maybe the increasing professionalisation, strategy changes, higher fitness levels and better skills.
Does this make for a more attractive game? Difficult this. Many disposals can be attractive when a team has overlap running but it can also reflect a rolling maul where players are attempting to get out of trouble and create space.

Note: 2020 is omitted.

DS

Well that is interesting DS. Ball control is now very important. I can also hazard a guess that metres gained per kick is down (to it seems <10 metres ).

 

[mrposhman]

As has been mentioned previously, introducing so many rules recently makes it impossible to know which rule change "works" and which doesn't.

What does the AFL want to improve? More scoring, less ball ups, less tackles, more Dusty moments, I mean what KPI do they want to improve?

I'm all for improving or optimising the game, but the way this multi billion $ organisation called the AFL is going about it is absolutely childlike and totally lacks statistical credibility. It's embarrassing and cringeworthy.

I run a ecommerce business and of course I want to improve it and optimise it to get more sales. The key is to change one thing at a time and see if it improves the selected KPI.

For example, I want to test if a green or a red "Buy" button generates more sales. I will direct 50% of traffic to a page with green buttons, and 50% to a page with red buttons. After 100 sales, I will go with the button that produced the most sales. I will then test say 2 different headings and see which creates the most sales and go with that. And so on. It's time-consuming, but it's methodical and it works.

I really shake my head at incompetence of the custodians of our great game.

Do you think its incompetence or by design? I suspect its by design.

These are the changes they want, and they want to make it hard to remove those changes, so implement several rules at the same time, then as you say its impossible to know which one caused whatever output, so its hard to revert back.

I suspect this is it. They have a plan for what the game looks like and they will make the changes regardless of impact to KPI.

For me is not incompetence, its arrogance that they can treat the game as their own plaything and change just what they want regardless of what the public want.

 

[Baloo]

No.

What, so you are ok to making the goals wider, ever removing the two goals posts, leaving just the point posts so everything is 6 or 0, but we have to keep the fingertip touch? KB, is that you ?

 

[Baloo]

Do you think its incompetence or by design? I suspect its by design.

No, Shocking isn't that clever. It started with the express aim to increase scoring again to keep 7 happy. They failed so badly in their changes that it wasn't funny. While they will never state it again, their aim is to get more goals per game in the name of more "entertaining" footy, but really it's get the ad break numbers up again before they renegotiate the next broadcast deal.

And they will keep doing it because they can. The media won't turn the heat up on them. They'll tow the party line. Maybe Roco and Finey will point out the obvious, but that's about it.

The AFL would be even more emboldened that they can do what they want without so much of a whimper after the complete radio silence The Boys CLub received.

 

[spook]

What, so you are ok to making the goals wider, ever removing the two goals posts, leaving just the point posts so everything is 6 or 0, but we have to keep the fingertip touch? KB, is that you ?

What? I'm not ok with any of that stuff.