One-Eyed Richmond Forum
Football => View from the Outer => Topic started by: one-eyed on January 29, 2014, 01:29:17 AM
-
Leigh way
Jon Pierik
The Age
January 29, 2014
AFL great Leigh Matthews has proposed the radical plan of forcing a handful of players from each team to be positioned inside the 50-metre arcs at all stoppages in a bid to help ease the game of its modern-day blight - congestion.
Matthews, recovering from a ruptured Achilles tendon while skiing, admits it would be difficult to police but says it would be football ''utopia'' if it worked.
The plan would mean as soon as an umpire blew his whistle three or four players from each team would have to dash to an attacking or defensive arc should, as is commonly the case these days, the forwards and defenders find themselves locked in a 15-metre radius of the ball, resembling something of a rolling maul.
With fewer bodies around the ball, the game's best midfielders would have more room to shine, giving the game greater fluency.
''The only restriction where players can be on our ground is at centre bounces,'' Matthews said on Tuesday. ''I am of the view I would like less congestion around the footy, so, therefore, pull three or four pairs out in the extremities [of a large pack] at least.
''I understand the practical problem - how long do you allow teams to get their players back inside those arcs? I would like to see it but I don't know how you practically implement it.''
The three field umpires would be able to police the system but waiting for players to retreat to inside an arc could be time-consuming, adding to the frustration of supporters and viewers. ''It's more players [that's the issue]. If you watch footy now, all of a sudden players are in half a field, so all of a sudden there is a stoppage and eight have to break out to get to the other end,'' Matthews said.
''But it would be a good look. The game would be better if that happened but I don't know you could make it happen. I understand the practical problem - it was a little bit of utopia that one.''
Matthews, the four-time premiership coach and 3AW commentator, said the plan could be trialled in the NAB Challenge if it had merit among league powerbrokers.
Read more at: http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/leigh-way-20140128-31l1y.html
-
Good idea. I'm all for it. But it would be much easier to implement if, instead of waiting ages for a random 4 players to run to the respective forward and back lines at every stoppage, the rules just make it illegal for the forwards and defenders to leave their respective forward/defensive 50 metre arcs at ANY time during the game.
-
Good idea. I'm all for it. But it would be much easier to implement if, instead of waiting ages for a random 4 players to run to the respective forward and back lines at every stoppage, the rules just make it illegal for the forwards and defenders to leave their respective forward/defensive 50 metre arcs at ANY time during the game.
well at least 4 from each side down back and 4 down forward.
:cheers
-
Give them bibs and skirts too
-
stupid silly
-
At least five men should be in catch...sorry,marking positions and only twelve fiel...sorry, players, are allowed outside the circle,...sorry, arc, for the first 15 ove.... sorry, minutes....
-
Give them bibs and skirts too
I fail to see how making the game less congested and ugly makes it any "softer" or like netball, as you're alluding to.
-
The damned thing chopped me off mid-sentence >:(
I was just about to add that the tackles, hits and shirt-fronts will be just as bone-crunching as ever, with the added bonus of genuine one on one contests, instead of the Freo-style, stacks on the mill, twister on ice, all in farce that the game has degenerated into.
-
so every single stoppage there is a delay while every fwd/back walks back to their positions? :lol
less game time, more ad breaks, :cheers :clapping
-
Royce
I could give you ten thousands words plus by why making players stick to the forward or back arc is not a good rule change.
I however agree the sport is very ugly these days and has been for some time.
Norf took it to a new level with all 18 in the back 50. Its very effective thou as highlight end by norf v Richmond 2013. Freo, too.
-
so every single stoppage there is a delay while every fwd/back walks back to their positions? :lol
less game time, more ad breaks, :cheers :clapping
No Gerks. As I said, if at least 4 forwards and their direct opponents are not allowed to venture out of their attacking 50 at any stage of the game there would be no delay for anybody to go anywhere.
-
Royce
I could give you ten thousands words plus by why making players stick to the forward or back arc is not a good rule change.
I however agree the sport is very ugly these days and has been for some time.
Norf took it to a new level with all 18 in the back 50. Its very effective thou as highlight end by norf v Richmond 2013. Freo, too.
Yeah, I was at that North game last year (you probably were too) and it was an absolute disgrace watching them clog up the cohesion of our forward line like that for four quarters. That, and watching Freo play that stacks on the mill garbage week in week out is why I'm happy to try something drastic to combat it. If you agree that the game is very ugly now, what would YOU suggest the AFL do to combat these abhorrent tactics?
-
what happens when there is a contested ball near the 50m line? if the ball spills outside the 50m arc, do the forwards and backs have to stop competing and stay within the 50m arc and wait for someone else to come and get it?
-
On this one I agree with KB, just tighten up the interchange and force players to stay on the ground longer and you will ease the congestion. Simple and we'll see a better game too
-
On this one I agree with KB, just tighten up the interchange and force players to stay on the ground longer and you will ease the congestion. Simple and we'll see a better game too
Yep.
The only other new rule I'd like to see is an indefinate moratorium on stuffing rule changes.
-
amen to that!
-
:sleep :banghead
-
The only other new rule I'd like to see is an indefinate moratorium on stuffing rule changes.
:bow :bow :bow
:clapping :clapping :clapping
-
The only other new rule I'd like to see is an indefinate moratorium on stuffing rule changes.
:bow :bow :bow
:clapping :clapping :clapping
Yes WP, but it's precisely this kind of attitude that ensures that we'll rock up to the Docklands to play North once again this year, and Brad Snott will park 18 players in our forward line all day long and make it impossible to score.
-
Why don't we play 18 defenders/ norf rugby. , too
Not much more ugly than the hard wick 'kick to the forward pocket and win a throw in' philosophy
-
The only other new rule I'd like to see is an indefinate moratorium on stuffing rule changes.
:bow :bow :bow
:clapping :clapping :clapping
Yes WP, but it's precisely this kind of attitude that ensures that we'll rock up to the Docklands to play North once again this year, and Brad Snott will park 18 players in our forward line all day long and make it impossible to score.
can't have been that effective as a tactic, norf didn't even make the finals.
the side that scored the most during the season went on to win the premiership, while north had more points against than any team in the final 8.
this endless tinkering with the rules just to force the game into some individual's, or group of individuals', vision of how the game should be is a scourge
-
It is effective
Norf can and have beat everyone
If they were 10% more fit they d have won the flag by miles
The fad outs are not a coincidence. It must be a ver taxing way of playing
-
The only other new rule I'd like to see is an indefinate moratorium on stuffing rule changes.
:bow :bow :bow
:clapping :clapping :clapping
Yes WP, but it's precisely this kind of attitude that ensures that we'll rock up to the Docklands to play North once again this year, and Brad Snott will park 18 players in our forward line all day long and make it impossible to score.
Disagree. Because we have seen the AFL change the rules and Coaches find a way to expoilt it or change their tatics to gain an advantage. That's what happens and it will continue to happen
The sub rule is a perfect example. They got rid of 4 interchange players to try and slow the game down and replaced it with 3 Interchange and a Sub. But it then created another problem and that was this idea that there's too many rotations. So what do they do for 2014? They cap the number of rotations. And once clubs work out a way to exploit it to thier advantage what will the AFL do? They'll implement another change or course.
IMV if they were to impose a moratorium on rules changes for say 2 season alot of these supposed "issues" with the game would sort themselves out. It's worked in the past. And if they don't then, yes they should do something but making wholesale changes year after year because they jumped at nother shadow and panicked isn't the way to do it
And just on the N0rt game in 2013, don't lose sight of the fact that despite the game plan the opposition implemented on the day our team played insipid football. N0rt had little trouble scoring despite having everyone going back. The bottled up the our fwd 50 but when they got the thing they spread and cleared the ball easily because we applied very little or no pressure. Lack of pressure on the opposition when we don't have the ball has absolutely nothing to do with N0rt having 18 people in our forward line.
-
Wp
Its very hard to apply pressure
When you lose the ball on the HFF
And 18 blokes run the other way simultaneously
-
Wp
Its very hard to apply pressure
When you lose the ball on the HFF
And 18 blokes run the other way simultaneously
Perhaps/maybe = debatable
Because one's cause isn't helped when the opposition take off with the ball and your players refuse to chase after them, let alone put any defensive pressure at the stoppage/contest. That was the N0rt game
-
It is effective
Norf can and have beat everyone
If they were 10% more fit they d have won the flag by miles
The fad outs are not a coincidence. It must be a ver taxing way of playing
it is a very taxing way of playing. It took malthouse 4 years or so to get his players toa stage where they could implement his "legionaries box formation" game plan, and then it was not substainable.
Nor will you get another 10% increase in fitness from AFL footballers, and no matter how good or effective a game plan may be in theory, if the players cannot physically implement it week in week out for 25 weeks, it is not effective.
-
Is Ross Lyon football effective?
In would of said yes
-
ross lyon football 0-4 in grand finals
just sayin
-
Is Ross Lyon football effective?
In would of said yes
not as effective as clarkeson's, one would say.
ross lyon's is a rolling zone, more akin to what malthouse had going at collingwood.
What north employed against us in the day in question was more like an 18 man flood at times, they were squeezed into a smaller zone, further up the ground, which is even more taxing in the long term.
-
R Lyon four grand finals
Just sayin'
-
WP, I have said all along that the AFL got it wrong with the 3 interchange and a sub rule. Instead they needed to put a cap on the number of rotations from the beginning, now that they have here's hoping that it works. It should in theory, because as many here have noted, that endless running to defence, then spreading forward style of game is very taxing, and may explain why North tended to repeatedly cough up big leads as they tired late in games. Hopefully with the interchange cap this will become even more pronounced if they persist with this style of negative footy.
Also you're right that we didn't help matters by not running hard to chase them when they spread out of our forward line. We have always played poorly against North in recent years, because they know that tactic works and consistently exploits our unwillingness to gut run. Nevertheless, I long for the day when footy returns to being free-flowing and high scoring. All this war of attrition bullplop just leaves me cold.
And yes Gerks, It makes me happy to see that Ross Lyon is 0 and4 in Grand Finals. Long may that continue.
-
Nevertheless, I long for the day when footy returns to being free-flowing and high scoring.
Believe it or not I would be rapt to see that too but this yearly ritual/need of bringing in rule changes isn't the way to do it. All it seems to do is create another problem.
Leave the rules alone and see what happens, HQ may actually be surprised in the results
-
Leave the rules alone and see what happens, HQ may actually be surprised in the results
Clearly we are just going to go round and round in circles on this one WP, with neither of us convincing the other of our point of view. However, I will say that if we leave the rules alone and see what happens, then nothing will happen. The idea, as proposed by those who don't want to change the rules, that the game will somehow "evolve" past these problems, is a fallacy IMO.
Instead the game will continue to "devolve" into the ugly mess that it has, due to the short-sightedness and greed of certain coaches, whose win at all costs mentality, cares nothing for the aesthetics of the game. I look forward to the cap on the number of interchanges, and hope that it has the desired effect of de-congesting the game.
-
Id like to see a stricter interchange cap, drop it to 15-20 a qtr and you'll see the game slowdown a touch and open up as players are forced to stay on the ground longer.