-
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.
PUNT ROAD END | Richmond Tigers Forum
okay a thread about rule changes the reasons why they are bought in and the effects they have had on the game after being bought in.
imo in most cases of tinkering a fresh rule change has been forced because of the effects of the original rule change.
take the simple little piece of tinkering done by allowing players to play on straight away after a point has been scored.
introduced for no other reason than to try and speed up an already very quick game.also i believe part of the excuse was the amount of time the game is stopped.ie ball out of play ball ups etc. the latter is irrelevant in this case as the clock stops anyway and theres no time lost.
the flow on effect to this change is we now have a rule that goes against the fabric of the game the core principals of defence and is not seen in any other game in the world.
knocking the ball out of bounds or thru the behind posts has been a defenders perogative and is nearly always used as a last resort. it should remain as such.
because so much advantage can be gained from a point nowadays no waiting for the waving of the flags rushed behinds have become prevalent or its one major reason why they have increased.scoreing a behind has become an unfair attacking weapon because the bastards tinkered. its not only made for rushed behinds but it made for even less contests in the game the ball comes back in and is not touched by the opposition .
instead of saying hey wait a minute this is happening and instead of asking why is it happenening and instead of coming to the conclusion that makes them look bad and instead of saying hey when we tinkered with the flag rule we caused this other problem. instead of getting rid of the original change they have to bring in another rule that hits at the very heart and fabric of the game. thus creating even more problems.
this thread i hope will be used as a cause and effect thread by those discerning football supporters on this site. thats is new rule bought in for what reason and the effect that rule has had, what new rule did it precipitate to fix its effects. cmon people theres hundreds of rules out there.
finally mick malthouse waffling on about useing 6 on the bench 4 interchange and two permanent changes.
i can live with this but with a proviso, name the 6 on the bench but none are interchangeable one a player comes of thats it.
imo in most cases of tinkering a fresh rule change has been forced because of the effects of the original rule change.
take the simple little piece of tinkering done by allowing players to play on straight away after a point has been scored.
introduced for no other reason than to try and speed up an already very quick game.also i believe part of the excuse was the amount of time the game is stopped.ie ball out of play ball ups etc. the latter is irrelevant in this case as the clock stops anyway and theres no time lost.
the flow on effect to this change is we now have a rule that goes against the fabric of the game the core principals of defence and is not seen in any other game in the world.
knocking the ball out of bounds or thru the behind posts has been a defenders perogative and is nearly always used as a last resort. it should remain as such.
because so much advantage can be gained from a point nowadays no waiting for the waving of the flags rushed behinds have become prevalent or its one major reason why they have increased.scoreing a behind has become an unfair attacking weapon because the bastards tinkered. its not only made for rushed behinds but it made for even less contests in the game the ball comes back in and is not touched by the opposition .
instead of saying hey wait a minute this is happening and instead of asking why is it happenening and instead of coming to the conclusion that makes them look bad and instead of saying hey when we tinkered with the flag rule we caused this other problem. instead of getting rid of the original change they have to bring in another rule that hits at the very heart and fabric of the game. thus creating even more problems.
this thread i hope will be used as a cause and effect thread by those discerning football supporters on this site. thats is new rule bought in for what reason and the effect that rule has had, what new rule did it precipitate to fix its effects. cmon people theres hundreds of rules out there.
finally mick malthouse waffling on about useing 6 on the bench 4 interchange and two permanent changes.
i can live with this but with a proviso, name the 6 on the bench but none are interchangeable one a player comes of thats it.