State of Umpiring [merged]

[Tiger_In_Sicily]

Umpires are not to blame tonight

[Diocletian]

Umpiring was no excuse but there was still no excuse for the umpiring.....

[Tiger Khosh]

https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/the-stats-that-show-why-the-afl-should-undo-hocking-s-rule-changes-20240515-p5jdti.html

 

[Andyy]

https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/the-stats-that-show-why-the-afl-should-undo-hocking-s-rule-changes-20240515-p5jdti.html

 

Can anyone share full article?

[Diocletian]

Opinion
The stats that show why the AFL should undo Hocking’s rule changes

Kane Cornes
AFL columnist
May 16, 2024 — 12.02pm



In 2019, the AFL’s newly formed competition committee, led by then league football boss Steve Hocking, introduced nine rule and interpretation changes.

Some of the biggest figures in football tried to turn back the clock by putting players in three zones at centre bounces to achieve a significant change in the look of the game.
The six-six-six model, as it is now known, forced players into dedicated starting positions, if only for a few seconds after the centre bounce.

Also, players were no longer required to kick to themselves to play on from the goal square during kick-ins. The man on the mark had to stay 10 metres back from the goal square; now it’s 15 metres.

Hocking’s think tank had a clear objective. To counter defensive coaches playing “not to lose”, the competition committee wanted an aggressive style of play with free-flowing football, and ease and speed of ball movement. It wanted more one-on-one contests.


In 2021, Hocking doubled down on this approach with the “stand” rule. The player on the mark could not move laterally, becoming a statue as soon as an umpire called “stand”. Any move before “play on” leads to a 50-metre penalty.

The aim was to speed up ball movement and generate easier scoring chances.

However, these rule changes have failed. Completely.

Not only has there been no significant lift in scoring from centre bounces or kick-ins, but umpiring is more complex and players are more challenged in what should be a simple game.

Most concerning is the reaction of the coaches. If it’s easier for the opposition to score, coaches think more defensively.

The six-six-six rule limits any coach’s ability to make strategic moves during games. It has stymied the advancement of coaching techniques to make the game better.

The AFL will say the rule changes are an overwhelming success. The statistics tell a different story.

In five seasons from 2014-18, teams scored an average of 10.2 points each game from centre bounces. Since 2019 (excluding the COVID-19-affected 2020 season), scoring from centre bounces has increased by only 0.5 points, reaching 10.7 points each game.

Before the rule change, teams scored from a centre bounce about 23 per cent. Today, it is 24 per cent.

The six-six-six rule has killed innovation and unique set-ups at centre bounces.

Tactics such as varying the wingmen’s starting positioning, the use of high forwards on the defensive side of the centre square line, deploying spare defenders to protect a lead or having attacking forwards surge through the centre square – as the late Phil Walsh, a brilliant coach at Adelaide, regularly did with Eddie Betts – are now lost to the game.



Even the ploy of a red-hot forward clearing out the forward 50 to create space for potential mismatches is gone.

All this sacrificed for just an average 0.5-point increase in scoring.

Meanwhile, the umpires are repeatedly stopping play to warn teams for breaching starting position protocols. It is a mess.

St Kilda coach Ross Lyon expressed his frustration after losing to Hawthorn at the weekend, citing restrictions on the use of the runner. He said it hindered his ability to make crucial game-day moves.

Lyon should instead take issue with those who changed the rule book to stifle the strategic creativity and effectiveness of the league’s best game-day coaches.

The new kick-in rule is a resounding failure. From 2014-18, teams scored an average of 3.9 points from kick-ins each game. Since 2019, this figure has fallen to 3.3 points. Furthermore, the percentage of kick-ins resulting in an inside-50 entry improved by just 1 percentage point from 20 to 21 per cent.



The kick-in to inside-50 conversion rate is up from 19 to 22 per cent from the AFL’s decision to push the man on the mark back an additional five metres in 2021. Despite this change, scoring is now marginally below pre-rule change levels.

All this rule has changed is the eagerness of players stepping out of the goal square during kick-ins, to secure cheap, junk possessions and distort the game’s statistical records.



The stand rule continues to be an embarrassment for the game, failing to generate any increase in scoring. The cry of “stand” from the umpires is annoying in the broadcast microphones.

And how farcical was it to have Brisbane Lions forward Charlie Cameron told to stand on the mark when he was in agony with an ankle injury earlier this season?

The AFL’s implementation of the six-six-six rule and other recent changes have failed to deliver on the promises of enhanced scoring and improving the game’s look. Instead, we have confusion, less creativity from coaches and no meaningful benefit.

The AFL should revisit these rule changes. It should encourage coaching innovation and creativity and making the job of the umpire easier.

Change is not always good.

 

[Knighter]

Now we are poo again watch them change it back

[WilliamPowell]

I'm no Kane Cornes fan but that is brilliant opinion piece. He is 100% spot on

[Tiger Khosh]

Didn’t even know it was a cornes written piece. Almost feel dirty for linking it.

Great to see statistics back up what we already knew. The stupid stand, 666 and kick in rules have done absolutely nothing to increase scoring. All they have done is create eye and ear sores having to watch players look like traffic cones while the opposition run 40m from goal to take their kick ins or run 10m off the mark before play on is called or hear ‘stand’ and ‘outside 5’ yelled out 100 times a game.

The AFL or any sporting body for that matter should never invent new laws to try to influence the style of play. AFL is by far the worst at it out of all the sports I watch none come close to the constant rule changes that footy goes through.

Leave the game alone and undo the blatantly stupid mistakes you’ve made.

[Andyy]

He is correct on all points.

Largely speaking the game is less interesting as a result.

[Hart4Jack]

He is correct on all points.

Largely speaking the game is less interesting as a result.

Very true Andyy, I find that the vast majority of games are unwatchable. I start to watch a game, get bored with the lack of contests & hearing umpires saying "stand, stand,  stand". I either change the channel or turn the TV off & go watch paint dry or grass grow, which is far more exciting.

[Andyy]

He is correct on all points.

Largely speaking the game is less interesting as a result.

Very true Andyy, I find that the vast majority of games are unwatchable. I start to watch a game, get bored with the lack of contests & hearing umpires saying "stand, stand,  stand". I either change the channel or turn the TV off & go watch paint dry or grass grow, which is far more exciting.

Yeah it's sad.

When I was a bachelor I would watch basically every game from Friday night, Sat PM, Sat night and Sunday.

Now sometimes I actually struggle to watch the Richmond games with much enthusiasm...

As a spectacle it's deteriorated significantly and I blame the rule changes.

[Andyy]

I also think the AFL is going too far with the head contact + suspensions.

Given the earning potential of an AFL player (particularly the ones that 'make it' long term) I think they should be asked to sign a waiver that prevents them from suing the AFL or clubs for damages later in life.

[Diocletian]

I also think the AFL is going too far with the head contact + suspensions.

Given the earning potential of an AFL player (particularly the ones that 'make it' long term) I think they should be asked to sign a waiver that prevents them from suing the AFL or clubs for damages later in life.

Waivers don't hold up in court more often then not with this sort of thing though if the players can prove gross negligence or a breach of duty of care....

[Andyy]

I also think the AFL is going too far with the head contact + suspensions.

Given the earning potential of an AFL player (particularly the ones that 'make it' long term) I think they should be asked to sign a waiver that prevents them from suing the AFL or clubs for damages later in life.

Waivers don't hold up in court more often then not with this sort of thing though if the players can prove gross negligence or a breach of duty of care....

It's a contact sport.

Other than concussion protocols I don't see what else the AFL can do.

Suspending players for 'football incidents' isn't going to reduce concussions IMO.

[Diocletian]

Yeah well it's the world we live in now I'm afraid.....they're even talking about about banning headers in soccer now ffs.....