Thia new ultra defensive/Zonal game is RUBBISH!

[mb64]

And yet more people are watching the game than ever before.

More teams,interstate team & spread out games over the weekend ensure high crowd figures.

 

[Tango]

hawks showed how a new style trend can pinch a flag if the side is good enough
they play numbers in the back half (like us and everyone else) BUT they only run to half back or just inside centre square then they have guys that kick accurately over 50 meters to get it inside 50 quickly to a couple of handy talls 1 out
we try and run the ball too far and too long, allowing the defenders to get back
thats why id love to see guys like newman and deledio at HBF and get the ball to them and allow them to run and deliver long (both long accurate kicks) into the 50... dont waste another possession

oh and by the way the new rule that stops rushed behinds will reward the team that kicks long and attacks the goalsquare

 

[TigerForce]

More teams,interstate team & spread out games over the weekend ensure high crowd figures.

and Australia's population has increased.

 

[GoodOne]

The stuffing of the game comes from crying whinging supporters constantly demanding rule changes to counter the various tactics coaches come up with to get an advantage.

Dont agree here. Most supporters I know wish the AFL would just leave the rules alone. It is clear that many of the rules in the last few years have ben designed to attract a different type of supporter and guarantee the growth of the competition.

Personally I didnt mind the old 12 team VFL competition. It was the strongest competition in Australia and the quality of player wasnt diulted across 16 teams )soon to be 17) like it is now. Realistically it couldnt go on like that because to attract quality players to the game in the future inevitable required much higher match payments over time. This couldn't have been supported by a Victorian-only competition and therefore the start of massive change. This was not triggered by the complaints of supporters.

 

[TigerMasochist]

The whinging from the coaches was the prime reason why the interchange bench was extended to 4 which is at the root of most of the problems the current game has.

Creating four interchange players hasn't caused the problems. It's part occupational health and safety, there's to much at stake to leave concussed or injured players hiding out in the pockets nowadays. Part increses in the speed / run of the game.
The VFL / AFL tried to cancel excess stoppages in the game caused by umpires adjudicating to the rules of the game by allowing lots of manipulation of the contact and insignificant interferance during the game.
Less frees supposedly kept the game flowing instead of stop start. I'm pretty sure there was a game at one stage where the maggot paid over a hundred frees for the game.
Coaches and players will take advantage of any situation they can and as the rules relaxed the game turned more and more into wrestlemania with rolling mauls a constant in the game.
Since then in an effort to re-open the game and make it faster and prettier they have put more and more effort into tinkering with the rules, adjusting and manipulating constantly to counter the effect of their fiddling. Coaches and players continue to take advantage of whatever loopholes and inconsistencies they can find.
If the *smile* administrators and head of the umpires coaching department would just simply and consistently make the umpires, umpire to the rules of the game as they are there would not be any need to constantly *smile* around with the rules of the game.
If you consider just the simple manipulation of the ruck rules you get some idea of what happens when you fiddle to change things that should have evolved naturally.
Players like Farmer, Nicholls, Dempsey, Newman, Moore and S.Madden etc used a combination of strength, timing and spring to outposition one another to try and win the hitout.
I think it was Dempsey and Moore staged a two man bout of Wrestlemania in a Scumwood Kangas grand final so the adminstrators decided the ruck was broken and needed fixing.
All of a sudden you have seven foot tall pelicans galumphing across the paddock at one another from a hundred metres away trying to smash the ball somewhere or their opponent into the ground.
No skill, no strength, no finesse. But a large increase in knee injuries to these players.
So then they have to hold seminars and indepth analysis of the problem for several years to figure out the bleeding obvious and then create yet another rule change to modify and minimise the problems created by the initial rule change.
All because the ruck contest wasn't pretty enough and the maggots didn't adjudicate to stop the players wrestling one another.

 

[IanG]

Creating four interchange players hasn't caused the problems. It's part occupational health and safety, there's to much at stake to leave concussed or injured players hiding out in the pockets nowadays.

So have an interchange and a reserve bench, that takes care of those problems. As for the increase in the bench not causing it, we've said before the game was at its height as a spectacle in the early to mid 90s. What changed since then, the increase in the interchange bench which allowed players to run further which led first to flooding then the chipping game in response to that, and now the heavily zonal game which requires players to constantly run to their allocated position.

 

[RemoteTiger]

As for the increase in the bench not causing it, we've said before the game was at its height as a spectacle in the early to mid 90s.

I cannot agree with the "game was at its height as a spectacle in the early to mid 90's" comment because -

Firstly - Essendon and Brisbane teams early this century are arguably up there with the best teams seen in AFL/VFL history

Secondly – North and the Hawks had some mighty games during the late 70's & early 80’s which IMO are up there with the highest quality games of all time

Thirdly – Haffey’s Tigers and Kennedy’s Hawks of the 60’s changed the game to a game of fitness and athleticism – plus they continued the 40’s & 50’s hardness at the opponent not necessarily the ball – it was great to watch

Lastly – Norm Smith’s Demons of the late 50’s introduced a style of football that is still apparent in many passages of play today.

Yes AFL in the 90’s was up there but it was not the height as a spectacle as you say – unless of course you are a whipper snapper and did not live through the previous decades. But even then the football this decade has been as good as if not better than the 1990's footy......again my opinion and it is supported by a team Essendon playing magnificent football that they only were beaten once in a whole season - and - Brisbane, it takes a very special and talented team to win 3 premierships in a row. Further add the superior centre square of the West Coast Eagles which was electric to watch and the sheer teamwork of the Sydney Swans to the talent of Geelong and you have an excellent spectacle of AFL football this decade.

My opinion only.....cheers RT

 

[TigerMasochist]

So have an interchange and a reserve bench, that takes care of those problems. As for the increase in the bench not causing it, we've said before the game was at its height as a spectacle in the early to mid 90s. What changed since then, the increase in the interchange bench which allowed players to run further which led first to flooding then the chipping game in response to that, and now the heavily zonal game which requires players to constantly run to their allocated position.

So constantly changing the rules of the game has had nothing to do with the way the game is played?
The increased fitness, skills and professionalism of the players has had nothing to do with the way the game is played?
The improved tactics and variations of game plans and coaching styles has had nothing to do with the way the game is played?
Blame it all on Sheedy and his ever expanding interchange bench.
Perhaps we should also go back to ankle boots with nail in stops, no interchange or even 19th or 20th men?
Stuff it lets get rid of the maggots as well and let the captains adjudicate the rules while playing.
If none of the above suits then just blame Sheedy and his ever expanding interchange.

 

[IanG]

I cannot agree with the "game was at its height as a spectacle in the early to mid 90's" comment because -

Firstly - Essendon and Brisbane teams early this century are arguably up there with the best teams seen in AFL/VFL history

Agree with that but they were one offs, I'm talking about the competition in general. As for previous decades I'm not saying they were poor just that the game as a game was at its best in the early to mid 90s.

So constantly changing the rules of the game has had nothing to do with the way the game is played?
The increased fitness, skills and professionalism of the players has had nothing to do with the way the game is played?
The improved tactics and variations of game plans and coaching styles has had nothing to do with the way the game is played?

Yes yes yes, but at the root of it is the expansion of the interchange bench. IMHO the changes would not be nearly as great if we had 2 interchanges and 2-3 reserves.

 

[GoodOne]

Yes yes yes, but at the root of it is the expansion of the interchange bench. IMHO the changes would not be nearly as great if we had 2 interchanges and 2-3 reserves.

Don't think the increase from 2 to 4 has been a major reason (maybe a minor effect). Most teams end up with an injury or two anyway in a match. Professionalism as sportsmen and the immense fitness and strength of players in the modern era has been the predominant reason.

 

[IanG]

Don't think the increase from 2 to 4 has been a major reason (maybe a minor effect). Most teams end up with an injury or two anyway in a match. Professionalism as sportsmen and the immense fitness and strength of players in the modern era has been the predominant reason.

So why the increasing use of the bench which reached its height last year.

 

[GoodOne]

So why the increasing use of the bench which reached its height last year.

Because its there to use. The fact that they use the bench alot has nothing to do with the predominant reason the game has changed so much. Its the average fitness level of the player. Most players these days would be considered elite athletes.

 

[Baloo]

I doubt even elite athletes could keep the pace up if there wasn't a large usage of the bench. Running up and down is one thing. Running up and down while being in physical contests is another.

 

[IanG]

Because its there to use. The fact that they use the bench alot has nothing to do with the predominant reason the game has changed so much. Its the average fitness level of the player. Most players these days would be considered elite athletes.

The increased usage of the bench is coinciding with the increase in running requirements of the players.

 

[GoodOne]

I doubt even elite athletes could keep the pace up if there wasn't a large usage of the bench. Running up and down is one thing. Running up and down while being in physical contests is another.

So 4 players compared to 2 players has made the huge difference? I think we'd still have a very fast paced game even with 2 players on the bench, the difference being we'd have more injuries due to players being forced to be on the field injured. How often have you seen a game finish with 3 injured players on the bench? We've had a 4 man bench for quite a while, but every year the game seems to get faster.

I think the bench as the reason for the pace of the game is over-emphasised but certainly plays a part.

I think the following link is a good read in opinions from coaches and ex-coaches as to why they thinkthe game is so much fasternow:

http://www.afl.com.au/Season2007/News/NewsArticle/tabid/208/Default.aspx?newsId=31695

 

[IanG]

So 4 players compared to 2 players has made the huge difference? I think we'd still have a very fast paced game even with 2 players on the bench, the difference being we'd have more injuries due to players being forced to be on the field injured.

Once again having a reserves bench in conjunction with the interchange bench solves this problem.