Right Place at the Right Time? AFL Rule Changes Imminent....

[rodgerfox]

Seems that next year, we will see a form of zones introduced.

Word is that it may look more like the U18 comp, where each team must have 3 forward in their F50 at each centre bounce, or something like that.


Historically, some rule changes and interpretations have helped certain teams, and stitched up others. The Bulldogs benefited from the change in 'incorrect disposal' interpretation in 2016 due to their existing game style for example. The ruck rules helped and hindered certain clubs too depending on who their ruckmen were at the time.

So would this type of zone help us? Would having the 'bomb it in to the talls' game plan as pretty much our only plan - become more effective if the forward line only had 6 players in it most of the time? Would having McCartin, Bruce, Battle and Membrey all as 'mark and kick' forwards be a good thing?

Or would that be cancelled out by having a slow midfield when the game is opened up?

[Life Long Saint]

We are seriously one step away from wearing bibs with positions on them.
Our game is slipping away from the fans at a great rate of knots.

[bigcarl]

Keep it simple FFS. Want to open the game up, just have two on the bench.

[The_Dud]

Seems that next year, we will see a form of zones introduced.

Word is that it may look more like the U18 comp, where each team must have 3 forward in their F50 at each centre bounce, or something like that.

If that’s all it is then I don’t see how it will make any difference at all, I’m pretty sure you’d find that setup currently at most centre bounces.

[saynta]

Keep it simple FFS. Want to open the game up, just have two on the bench.

There is a fair bit of merit, and sense, in that suggestion.

[rodgerfox]

It's the coaching that has stuffed the game.

I don't blame them though, they're just doing their job within the rules. No matter what rule changes are made, a team of 10-12 highly paid coaches will sit around and work out ways to ruin the game again.

I blame the AFL for facilitating them doing it.


No runners.
No quarter and three quarter time address.
Each player can have one rest per half only.

If that happened, the coach would basically have to spend all week teaching the players how to play footy. Because if he spends all week focusing on game plans and tactics to clog up the game - when the players get out there on their own on the weekend it'll fall apart very quickly.

Senior players will get their careers extended and true, smart footballers will become invaluable again.

[Saintmatt]

This absolutely helps us and in particular - a certain No 1 draft pick. According to the reports - due to the 6 at each end rule - Brisbane's forwards (in particular - Hipwood) ran riot as there was no congestion to stuff their leads / 3rd man up to spoil.

Now all we need to do is get the ball into the hands of the few players in our team that can kick to the advantage of our forwards.

[degruch]

Keep it simple FFS. Want to open the game up, just have two on the bench.

There is a fair bit of merit, and sense, in that suggestion.

Absolutely, AFL HQ have obviously been staring at the 1978 VFL season results and wondering how they can get those scorelines again...keep it simple! They've been so busy trying to speed the game up over the last 2 decades it's become a complete mess.

[Linton Lodger]

I think they may trial the zones in the JLT, but I doubt that they'll ever really be introduced.

Getting rid of the interchange and returning to reserves 19th, 20th man etc, will make fatigue a bigger factor, slow down the game and make it difficult for huge numbers to get to stoppages. Then they should get rid of that stupid two man up Rule (good for Hickey) and just make umpires pick the ball up and throw it up no matter who's ready. They could also play with the holding the ball Rule.

Those adjustments alone will improve things dramatically and I reckon suit our List better.

[rodgerfox]

One thing that will happen with a reduced interchange, will be the uber defensive flood.

Teams will stack their D50 when they get tired.

[St Plugger]

Simple, Change to 16 a side. Less players = Less congestion!
Less players needed = smaller playing list = less player payments = better financial situation for the club!!!!

[Munga]

Yeah I'm for 16 a side over everything else

[degruch]

Lookin' good...2 on the bench, zones to prevent flooding, 16 a side to make doubly sure, square oval, round ball, triangular goals, armour, hover blades, holographic umpires, immersive 3D supporter experiences, entry into Eurovision...the future of the game is right on Saintsational!!!

[DJ Higgins]

Yeah I'm for 16 a side over everything else

All for tweaks for making the game better but I am not a fan of 16 a side as it will cause more soft tissue injuries and players will need more weeks off to recover
I think zoning has its merits but has flaws as well. Say 3 players from each team must stay in the 50 m arc at all timesand aball is kicked forward and stops 51 meters from goal
No one can leave the 50 due to the new rules or give away a free so they stand on the edge of the fifty waiting for a mid to get the ball rather than taking a step forward and picking up the ball?
I'd like to see kicking the ball backwards is play on. Couldn't hurt and would encourage attacking footy

[saynta]

16 a side didn't work in the old VFA.

[Life Long Saint]

Want to reduce congestion?
A few things to try:

• Allow players to play on immediately from a 50m penalty. They used to be able to to do this when it was a 15m penalty. This will prevent teams from being able to run back and clog up the back-line.

• Umpires should call for a ball up quicker than they do...And when a ball up is called, throw the ball up quickly. Don't worry about your exit or who is nominating...Just throw the ball up.

• Anyone can take the free kick - Don't call the player nearest the ball back to take the free just let anyone do it. The only caveat is that a shot at goal must be taken by the player infringed.

• Get rid of the rushed behind rule. Want non-congested footy? Allow the team to rush a behind and bring the ball in immediately after the signal.

I'd prefer any of these to having zones and giving the umpires something else do other than watch the play.

[cwrcyn]

25m goal arc. This will allow kick outs to hit the. centre. Increase the size of the centre square.

[Moods]

This absolutely helps us and in particular - a certain No 1 draft pick. According to the reports - due to the 6 at each end rule - Brisbane's forwards (in particular - Hipwood) ran riot as there was no congestion to stuff their leads / 3rd man up to spoil.

Now all we need to do is get the ball into the hands of the few players in our team that can kick to the advantage of our forwards.

Agree completely.

[Life Long Saint]

Increase the size of the centre square.

The issue is around the ground, not at the re-starts.

[desertsaint]

this zone idea scares the crap out of me. will lead to the ruination of the game. no thank you.

simply get rid of the interchange. have a bench of four subs. allow two per game. you could maybe allow an extra sub if a player gets ruled out injured before a certain time.
simple. will mean players can't rest and come back on leading to the current congestion. there will be a lot more man on man footy.
as for the other issue causing congestion simply use the rules. if caught with the ball blow a free kick. if dropping the ball blow a free kick. no prior - it was the players choice to grab the ball, and if caught from a teammates poor pass then again, it was the teammates choice to pass.

[St Plugger]

16 a side didn't work in the old VFA.

Wrong, it most definitely did work. In the 60's/70's the VFA was big. It was on Sundays, when VFL was only on Saturdays. Got good crowds. The game was free wheeling and the Full Forwards dominated with the extra space. Names like "Frosty" Millar, Bob Johnson and Fred Cook come to mind. VFA folded when VFL/AFL was played on any old day of the week. Do your research......!

[saynta]

16 a side didn't work in the old VFA.

Wrong, it most definitely did work. In the 60's/70's the VFA was big. It was on Sundays, when VFL was only on Saturdays. Got good crowds. The game was free wheeling and the Full Forwards dominated with the extra space. Names like "Frosty" Millar, Bob Johnson and Fred Cook come to mind. VFA folded when VFL/AFL was played on any old day of the week. Do your research......!

Don't need to do any research as I well remember those days. I used to go to them. Follewed Port actually. 16 games a side was a failure.

You are right about Sundays though.

The VFL was banned from playing games in Victoria on Sundays so they sent a team to Sydney.

The start of the AFL.

[St Plugger]

I'd like you to respond as to how you think 16 a side was a failure, as I think the fact that the forwards dominated refutes your argument. As a Port supporter, you would have enjoyed Fred Cooks "Plugger" like efforts, heading the VFA goal kicking over several seasons.

[saynta]

I'd like you to respond as to how you think 16 a side was a failure, as I think the fact that the forwards dominated refutes your argument. As a Port supporter, you would have enjoyed Fred Cooks "Plugger" like efforts, heading the VFA goal kicking over several seasons.

I certainly did. Not keen on his drug habit though.

[Yorkeys]

New rules:
- when playing west of 141 degrees east and north of the Murray River umpires are to apply all rules the same for both teams if one is the Saints. Particularly HTB, arm chops, 50m penalties and forwards being held.
- Sydney cannot beat us more than 10 times consecutively.
- we can trade in draft picks after 3 seasons and retrieve the pick for use in the next draft.