666

[tdy]

so has 666 changed footy for the better? Scores are down scragging elite midfielders is back in. What do people think?

[mightytiges]

The 666 rule has lead to a few more centre clearance goals. Especially the kicks out of the centre that clear the marking pack and go over the back for a small to run onto. It's favouring clubs with strong ballwinners in the midfield who can burst out of traffic (eg: Dangerfield & Neale)

However, I think scores are remaining down due to the new kick-in rule. Sides are being reluctant to go for risky goals if it results in a behind and they aren't defensively set to counter a quick kick-in. We're definitely getting sliced open on the counter in recent weeks but that's a combo of our poor goalkicking, our forward structure breaking down and our general butchering of the ball and poor decision making going forward.

[Diocletian]

https://twitter.com/Thomo_Grant/status/1040179040437526528?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1040179040437526528&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fs9e.github.io%2Fiframe%2F2%2Ftwitter.min.html%231040179040437526528


 

[mightytiges]

Well we're still struggling with the 666 rule. Even our ressies stuffed it up a couple of times today.

[one-eyed]

Source: 7sport twitter.

[YellowandBlackBlood]

I think the kick out rule may have also decreased scoring. Sure, there are more goals kicked now by the side kicking out but there a quite a few less goals kicked by the side that could keep the ball in their front half and have a chance to score again.

[tdy]

So what would take coaches to take risks? Rewards. But what rewards?  A contested mark gets a 20m free? A goal from a speccy is 12 points? A specy gets a 30m free?  Any good ideas, anyone?

[mightytiges]

So what would take coaches to take risks? Rewards. But what rewards?  A contested mark gets a 20m free? A goal from a speccy is 12 points? A specy gets a 30m free?  Any good ideas, anyone?

Personally not fan of supergoals and that sort of thing in the real stuff.

Coaches will always try to minimize risk no matter what rules are in place. Modern footy tactics are based around the turnover: Attacking while preserving a defensive structure; defending while preserving an offensive structure.
 
Scoring becomes easier when there is more space due to fewer numbers. So the simplest thing to do would be to reduce the number of players per team. However, doing that would risk destroying the tight contested aspects of the game which is what happens in AFLX when numbers per team are reduced dramatically.

[lamington]

AFLW has 16 a side right? And their scoring is not exactly massive. My thought has always been that with the extra dead space the ball ends up in no mans land so the ball just pings between the arcs for a bit longer. I think the no interchange rule would be the most effective  Because defensive structures get looser with fatigue so you have less flooding of a D50

[Diocletian]

The minmum distance for a kick to be marked should be 20 metres not 15, even if umpires underestimate  by by 5  meters it'll at least go the old 15 and not look like some ridiculous tiggy touchwood playground game and will also open up the game.

Likewise increase the distance players are allowed to run with the football befure bouncing to 20 metres

If players have enough time to take one step then they have enough time to dispose of the football. 

Likewise call HTB when players are spun 360 degrees everytime, not just occasionally- infat make it 270 degrees and then they would be....

12 interchanges per quarter is more than enough.

Ball up at the top of the goal square for deliberate rushed behinds not free kick shots  for goals...despite what the flog commentators say- the goal line is not the same as the boundary line , they're live scoring zones...

Zero tolerance for deliberate OOB

Be stricter on calling play on after marks instead of letting players baulk, feign a disposal, swivel around looking for options and taking multiple steps...

Bring back third man up - just allow blocking and ball it up straight away 

If the umps bounce incorrectly, bad luck, that's the nature of the game, play on....teams benefit from the ball bouncing the wrong way during general play all the time...the don't stop the game...

Make the umpires fulltime professionals.

After these rules are implemented - declare a  moratorium on all further rule changes.

[Dougeytherichmondfan]

If players have enough time to take one step then they have enough time to dispose of the football. 

Likewise call HTB when players are spun 360 degrees everytime, not just occasionally- infat make it 270 degrees and then they would be....

My focus would be on this. If you forgo your first option and are then tackled you must dispose of the ball in correct and proper fashion. Anything less than a clean kick or handball should be deemed improper disposal and free awarded.

I agree, I would deem taking a step with the footy as first option (ie to run with it). If you are wrapped up as you take possession then you should make every effort to get rid of it. If you're spun around, as you said, you should be able to dispose of the ball.

Too many guys in congestion sling the ball around, barely handpassing, and its deemed as a legitimate disposal. Crack down on this.

[one-eyed]

AFL scoring at alarming 52-year low, prompting suggestions rule changes have ‘backfired’.

...

Scoring issues (VFL/AFL scoring average)
Year   Points average
1965   73.6
1969   97: Scoring spikes after introduction of out of bounds on full rule
1982   112.1: High-water mark of VFL/AFL scoring
2008   97.7: Hawks win premiership deploying “Clarko’s Cluster”
2010   90.1: Interchange rotations surge to 117.4 per team as Mick Malthouse’s Collingwood claim flag
2018   83.1
2019   80.8: AFL introduces nine new rule changes, including six-six-six starting positions at centre bounces

...

A still frame shot from the opening bounce of the 2017 Grand Final captures Richmond with just four forwards and two extra players charging off the back of the square as “offensive weapons” — no longer an option under the six-six-six system.

...

Footy analyst David King believes it’s coaching, not the rules, suffocating scoring.

https://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/teams/afl-scoring-at-alarming-52year-low-prompting-suggestions-rule-changes-have-backfired/news-story/e8764382d8527ddfc3170e77a31722e9

[lamington]

Someone here mentioned the new kick in rule probably helps defenders clear the D50 so it’s harder for teams to lock the ball in for repeat entries. I think that’s a major cause of drop in scoring also

[mightytiges]

Someone here mentioned the new kick in rule probably helps defenders clear the D50 so it’s harder for teams to lock the ball in for repeat entries. I think that’s a major cause of drop in scoring also

And as a result, teams don't press high up the ground as much as they did and keep numbers back (leading to the ball often bouncing between respective HB lines). They are also reluctant to shoot for goal from positions on the ground that will more likely than not result in a behind.

[JP Tiger]

So, its official then.  The downturn in scoring is due to two "Negative Nelly's" in Clarkson & Malthouse being allowed to coach ... the solution is obvious isn't it?  Attack the goals, go forwards or go away!