Reading the latest stupid idea from the current idiots running our game and I just have to shake my head with disbelief…
The interchange has been a hot debate with the yellow flag waving and now the AFL wanting to cap the interchange rotations
Now correct me if I am wrong but has not the AFL been trying to speed up the game in the last 5-10 years? I mean look at these rules and tell me if you also see it:
- Limited time to kick for goals (called the Matthew Loyd rule)
- Limit the time before they have to play on in general play
- Penalise the person at the bottom of the pack with free kicks in an attempt to limit the amount of packs.
- Increased the distance of a kick (10m to 15m)
- Not having to wait for the flags to be waved after a behind
- The on purpose rushed behind rule (called the Bowden Rule)
So if the AFL is serous about slowing the game down, why do we not just get rid of these stupid rules that have been changed and added into our game in the last 5-10 years.
Let us know what you think of the proposed rule change and or my comments about the AFL?
Loading ...
August 12th, 2010 at 8:32 am
I beleive the avove rules mentioned were designed to stop time wasting & not to increase the speed.
Haven’t read the reasoning behind the interchange rule, but have heard some figures. On only that basis, can’t complain so far, but will read it from somewhere.
craig eyles´s last [type]: 7th August Flemington Quaddie Picks
August 12th, 2010 at 12:36 pm
@craig eyles, True but why do you waste time on the clock? To slow the game down right? And what do these forementioned rules do? It speeds the game up…
August 13th, 2010 at 10:28 am
It would seem the AFL has thrown up some BS changes in the hope that the coaches agree to one of the Interchange limiters. Really, how can we accept the “hit the post” rule as it still wouldn’t have affected the 3 mistakes from last weekend. The ump still needs to be in position to see which side of the post it goes through.
2 goal umpires is the best way for now, it’s been tried in the NAB cup and thought it went ok. Technology will catch up soon and then it should be used. If we can survive with hawk-eye in cricket and tennis then why not AFL in he future.
The AFL has no real data connecting injuries and interchange numbers. You know what else has happened in the last 10 years, teams a scoring less than they used too, Why? Is that because of interchange rotations as well? It was only 5 years ago we were trying to stop flooding, teams have figured that out over time, so why make more changes for no benefit? Let the game evolve.
Clubs have said that they could de-list older players if this rule came in, Could a player sue the AFL for premature retirement as clubs cull the over 30′s?
Sorry, rambling on a bit there….
August 15th, 2010 at 7:09 am
Of course reducing interchanges is just one of the proposals released for comment, and is the only one which might slow the game down, so your post is mainly breathless hyperbole. That notwithstanding, the notion of rolling back some recent changes does have its attractions.
It’s also worth noting that we fans have an opportunity to comment on these proposals, during August, via the AFL website.
AussieRulesBlog’s position on the proposals is:
InterchangeCap at 80
Reducing length of quarters to 18 minutesRoll back 2006 changes to time-on
Advantage ruleProposed change does not deal with the problems
Boundary umps paying free kicksToo many separate interpretations on the field already — we don’t need another 4
Player dragging ball underneath an opponent to be free kickedTick
Shepherding players responsible for high contactTick
Scoring changesComplete nonsense
aussierulesblog´s last [type]: Gieschen a dim bulb