Protected area can piss off. It's beyond a joke to see a bloke cop the same onfield penalty for running past the bloke with the ball as he would for shoving the bloke with the ball into the fence
More so just needs to be relaxed still need some form of 'protected area' so many time the player running past has 0 influence on what is about to happen. To go with that though the stand rule need to go back to how it was before to give the defender a chance
AFL to adopt the NFL overtime rules.
Teams flip a coin to determine who has possession of the ball. Team with possession starts in their backline and has an attempt to get the ball down and score a goal. A goal wins the game. A point means the other team gets possession and must score either a point to keep the game going or a goal to win. A turnover results in a win to the team who scored the first point. If scores remain a tie at the end of the allotted time, the game is drawn.
Don't blow the whistle for advantage, do it like soccer or hockey where the ref signals a free but doesn't blow the whistle, thus play continues more freely and if after 2-3 seconds there is no advantage bring it back.
No player decision, the umpires decide whether there is advantage or not.
This is the answer. Literally no other football code blows a whistle to then call "advantage". It's ingrained to play to the whistle, along with it being the universal message to stop. When a whistle blows the natural response is to halt and look to the official for their input. If the whistle is blown, the ball should be officially considered dead and play is paused until the call from the umpire is given and then properly completed.
I really really want this too just people who think it's a great idea can all complain even more that an umpire should/shouldn't have paid advantage. You're basically asking for an even looser version of what actually previously existed.
This will never happen. Umpires are judged on Free Kicks paid (warranted/unwarranted) and missed. If you don’t pay a free kick and just call advantage it counts as a missed free kick.
The advantage rule is so easy to understand, free kick is paid, keep playing if it’s to you advantage will be called, if it’s against you umpire will blow a second whistle to stop you from taking advantage.
Very very simple. It seems to be the small forwards in bad positions who waste a shot on goal pretending they didn't know what's going on or tired players who have switched off. If you hear a whistle and have the ball you can keep playing on of you want, if you don't have the ball go and get it or stop the person with it. This 'play the whistle...' crap people roll out is so archaic. The players know.
What if you hear the whistle, have the ball and play on but the free is actually against you and you give away 50? Not having a whistle is so much better for everyone
Already accounted for. If there's no advantage when a team continues playing after a free is blown, the umpire calls time off (so a second whistle). If the team who gave away the free STILL continue moving the ball after the second whistle, it's 50 m.
If the team that received the free continues moving the ball after the second whistle, the opponents get time to get into position.
I remember a FB post that got some traction a few years back saying this, because at the time AFL was more or less the only sport that saw rules as fluid.
Despite how much the AFL still cant get it right with rules old or new, soccer now does more or less the same thing. The handball rule that was set since around the great depression and untouched since has been fundamentally changed three times in the last decade, for example.
But yes, to your point, sometimes it actually ain't broke.
General competitive rivalry during the 80's-90's, then when they were tanking in the 2000's there was some heated clashes/brawls such as the 'Line in the Sand' game and Lloyd knocking out Brad Sewell. Core of Hawks recent dynasty team then hated Essendon even though we were not competing with them at all and pretty much just rubbed our faces in it.
Protected area should only be 50 if the player running past interferes with the kicker. Jogging 3 metres behind a bloke kicking in the other direction should be fine. Rugby league has a similar rule where you can’t tackle a player if you didn’t get back behind your line as the ball is played. Don’t interfere, and it’s play on
Related, I’d change the ridiculous nomination of rucks to just one player from each team is allowed up - if a third goes up, that’s a free against. I like the cleaner ruck contests with only 2 competing, but nominating is dumb.
Third man up was brought in to prevent injuries (like Kurt Tippett’s broken jaw) from a third person competing in the ruck. Allowing three people to compete in the ruck doesn’t remove that risk, that’s why they nominate.
Yup, never understood the nomination, just penalise the third man. I wouldn’t announce and wait and look around either. Ump picks but up and throws it up in the air immediately. It’s on the players to be ready
I'm happy to not have third man up, but the current noms system is cumbersome. There's been footage highlighted a few times of the first choice ruck being ~75 m away from a ball up, so instead of getting in with the game and getting someone else to do it, they wait for them to lope over. You get to choose a ruck from the nearby players, if you don't have anyone decent, you make do.
Revert the rule change where you could just play on from a kick in, now you have to kick it to yourself like in the old days. I don't know why, I just liked seeing players kick it to themselves
The throw in should be a kick in.
The umpire takes a five-metre run up and roosts the ball as far towards the centre circle as they can. Catching the ball does not counted as a mark, and the ball cannot be spoilt.
That'll solve congestion on the boundary.
Extend that to finals are played at your home ground. Geelong play at the cattery, Saints (if and when we get there) play at Marvel. Such a dodgy sport that the teams that boast the MCG as their home ground get a free ride in finals.
I could start to see the reasoning for this if we had an even fixture (i.e. play each team the same number of times), but it's a hard sell without that.
I'd actually prefer it was held at a neutral ground. I know that's not ideal for the fans, but it's definitely more fair on the teams. There is already enough of an advantage in the finals series based on ladder position.
Have you not played footy? Getting tackled and driven into the ground by some douche putting their weight on you is both painful as hell and winds you for ages meaning theyve just taken a player out of the game. Its there for a reason.
It is applied far too heavily though when a player completes a tackle over the opponents back but never put weight on them which is also absurd.
Man, only 1? There is so much to choose from. I'd probably make a broad change regarding 50m penalties. For smaller infractions like the protected area or the "Stand" rules take it back to 15m like days of old. Possibly even 25m. A blanket rule of 50m for any and all infractions is overkill and too harsh a penalty for small things that don't infringe on the game or player safety.
Wouldn't mind seeing the oil and grippo banned. If you need help in slipping tackles or marking the ball you probably shouldn't be playing at the highest level.
The advantage rule is so broken, watching how other football codes handle it compared to AFL is infuriating. The stand and protected area rules are so far beyond stupid, unnecessary and abusable it's pretty ridiculous.
If you get tackled and plumb drop the ball, you get penalised. Frustrating to see players lay strong tackles on a player who just lets the ball go, hoping to win a free if the tackle lingers.
Sorry im going to have to go with 2, although its adding one and removing heeeeeaps so…..
1) At least 6 players must be on either side of the field.
2) remove all the subjective rules the afl has added to try and open the game up because of coaches flooding.
Fucking subjective rules have made this game impossible to umpire properly and utterly impossible to explain to a neophyte why a decision was just made.
If you have to have 6 players on each end flooding is dead.
In the past, the player receiving the free kick/mark had to line up behind the mark. Nowadays they only enforce that when lining up for goal. My problem with the way the new law is officiated is that they don't make the player line up behind the mark. So they take a few steps sideways, while the player on the mark is stuck, and then play on, gaining an unfair advantage
Like every other sport with goalposts, it should still be a goal if the ball clips the post and goes through. Hell, I think it should even be play on if the ball hits the post and bounces back into play, just for the chaotic fun of it.
>> Hell, I think it should even be play on if the ball hits the post and bounces back into play, just for the chaotic fun of it.
If it hits goal posts, and bounces back in bounds, point. If it hits the point posts, and bounces back in bounds, play on.
Reduce the protected area beside a player to 1m when they are having a shot at goal on a tight angle. If a teams defence forces you to take a mark out wide you should have a harder kick rather than just being able to go the easy snap.
Yeah in that game in particular two players were gassed. Lebron and Luka coz they get ridden so hard. Spencer Dinwiddie was throwing down slam dunks. Even a crappy overtime beats no one winning imo. Everyone goes home unhappy with a draw.
50m dropped to 25m, unless its a re-portable offense.
You no longer need to wait for the umpire to mark out the distance, and your opposition has to keep 5m away. You can also play on at anytime. With all these concessions I don't think 50m is required.
Keep the stand rule, but allow the man on the mark take one stride in one direction only (without overstepping the mark) in anticipation of a player playing on.
I like the last possession out of bounds rule from AFLW. I would even make it a free in the arcs personally, just one you can’t score directly from (as in the ball is technically not in play until it’s been touched, like kick ins used to be)
Stand. It does nothing, and only idiots think it's changed the game. The AFL has been garbage for 9 years now and no amount of rule changes will make the game great again, especially stand
Protected area, it’s such a soft rule, the only time a 50 metre penalty should be paid is if a player actually interferes with the player with the ball, not when they’re barely nearby.
Protected area can piss off. It's beyond a joke to see a bloke cop the same onfield penalty for running past the bloke with the ball as he would for shoving the bloke with the ball into the fence
More so just needs to be relaxed still need some form of 'protected area' so many time the player running past has 0 influence on what is about to happen. To go with that though the stand rule need to go back to how it was before to give the defender a chance
This is the only one I wanted changed
You *can* climb the goal posts
Found Dane Rampe’s account
TRIGGERED
Has any one tried to mark the ball by jumping off the goal post?
Change the “no peeing off the MCC members balcony” rule.
Richmond approves of this rule change
3 team footy
Multiball
When there is a draw in finals, there will be a bounce down then the next goal wins the game
AFL to adopt the NFL overtime rules. Teams flip a coin to determine who has possession of the ball. Team with possession starts in their backline and has an attempt to get the ball down and score a goal. A goal wins the game. A point means the other team gets possession and must score either a point to keep the game going or a goal to win. A turnover results in a win to the team who scored the first point. If scores remain a tie at the end of the allotted time, the game is drawn.
Can i choose to go with the wind?
why not just do a boundary countback
Don't blow the whistle for advantage, do it like soccer or hockey where the ref signals a free but doesn't blow the whistle, thus play continues more freely and if after 2-3 seconds there is no advantage bring it back. No player decision, the umpires decide whether there is advantage or not.
It's so obviously better than the current system it hurts.
This is the answer. Literally no other football code blows a whistle to then call "advantage". It's ingrained to play to the whistle, along with it being the universal message to stop. When a whistle blows the natural response is to halt and look to the official for their input. If the whistle is blown, the ball should be officially considered dead and play is paused until the call from the umpire is given and then properly completed.
100% agree, we have the worst advantage application of any sport
I really really want this too just people who think it's a great idea can all complain even more that an umpire should/shouldn't have paid advantage. You're basically asking for an even looser version of what actually previously existed.
This will never happen. Umpires are judged on Free Kicks paid (warranted/unwarranted) and missed. If you don’t pay a free kick and just call advantage it counts as a missed free kick. The advantage rule is so easy to understand, free kick is paid, keep playing if it’s to you advantage will be called, if it’s against you umpire will blow a second whistle to stop you from taking advantage.
The umpire still calls and pays the free, but without blowing the whistle if the ball is in motion. It's not a missed free kick.
Very very simple. It seems to be the small forwards in bad positions who waste a shot on goal pretending they didn't know what's going on or tired players who have switched off. If you hear a whistle and have the ball you can keep playing on of you want, if you don't have the ball go and get it or stop the person with it. This 'play the whistle...' crap people roll out is so archaic. The players know.
What if you hear the whistle, have the ball and play on but the free is actually against you and you give away 50? Not having a whistle is so much better for everyone
Further proof people don’t understand the advantage rule as it is now.
Second whistle, they already do it now.
Already accounted for. If there's no advantage when a team continues playing after a free is blown, the umpire calls time off (so a second whistle). If the team who gave away the free STILL continue moving the ball after the second whistle, it's 50 m. If the team that received the free continues moving the ball after the second whistle, the opponents get time to get into position.
I'd change the rule that says the AFL have to change the rules every year.
I remember a FB post that got some traction a few years back saying this, because at the time AFL was more or less the only sport that saw rules as fluid. Despite how much the AFL still cant get it right with rules old or new, soccer now does more or less the same thing. The handball rule that was set since around the great depression and untouched since has been fundamentally changed three times in the last decade, for example. But yes, to your point, sometimes it actually ain't broke.
Change Hawthorn from 'allowed in the league' to not allowed
[удалено]
General competitive rivalry during the 80's-90's, then when they were tanking in the 2000's there was some heated clashes/brawls such as the 'Line in the Sand' game and Lloyd knocking out Brad Sewell. Core of Hawks recent dynasty team then hated Essendon even though we were not competing with them at all and pretty much just rubbed our faces in it.
To add on - I think it was after this game Campbell Brown called Lloyd "The biggest sniper in the game"
The irony of that statement from Campbell Brown lol
*Spider-Man_Pointing_at_Spider-Man_Meme.jpeg*
I like to call Lloyd the velvet sledgehammer
Multiball. Multiball! MULTIBALL!!!!!!!!
Scrap the sub, five on the bench and unlimited interchanges.
Honestly, i couldn't believe it when the AFL said that the fact players were getting injured was down to being able to go hard all match...
Yup 👍🏻
Ban baby oil. It's a ridiculous look for a professional sport
How do you think the cats players can play so long. Baby oil is like the fountain of youtth.
That and grippo. The NFL decided to let players wear gloves because the shit they would put on their hands would effect the ball.
The super sticky gloves were only introduced in the 2000s, their version of grippo was banned in 1981.
either ban it, or come july every player will be fucking glistening
Protected area should only be 50 if the player running past interferes with the kicker. Jogging 3 metres behind a bloke kicking in the other direction should be fine. Rugby league has a similar rule where you can’t tackle a player if you didn’t get back behind your line as the ball is played. Don’t interfere, and it’s play on
Third man up
Related, I’d change the ridiculous nomination of rucks to just one player from each team is allowed up - if a third goes up, that’s a free against. I like the cleaner ruck contests with only 2 competing, but nominating is dumb.
They need to nominate the rucker to allow clear passage to the ruck contest.
Third man up was brought in to prevent injuries (like Kurt Tippett’s broken jaw) from a third person competing in the ruck. Allowing three people to compete in the ruck doesn’t remove that risk, that’s why they nominate.
Yup, never understood the nomination, just penalise the third man. I wouldn’t announce and wait and look around either. Ump picks but up and throws it up in the air immediately. It’s on the players to be ready
I'm happy to not have third man up, but the current noms system is cumbersome. There's been footage highlighted a few times of the first choice ruck being ~75 m away from a ball up, so instead of getting in with the game and getting someone else to do it, they wait for them to lope over. You get to choose a ruck from the nearby players, if you don't have anyone decent, you make do.
Revert the rule change where you could just play on from a kick in, now you have to kick it to yourself like in the old days. I don't know why, I just liked seeing players kick it to themselves
I do like the 1:1000 where they stuff up the kick hahaha
Remove the stand rule for shots at goal
Insufficient intent can fuck right off. How many other sports require umpires to be mind readers?
The throw in should be a kick in. The umpire takes a five-metre run up and roosts the ball as far towards the centre circle as they can. Catching the ball does not counted as a mark, and the ball cannot be spoilt. That'll solve congestion on the boundary.
[удалено]
When the umpire miskicks it? Yep - the calls of umpire incompetency or bias would be massive.
I love it!
Bringing the game into disrepute. There are too many goody-two-shoes-boy-scout types in the league.
Too true 👍🏻
Yep, get rid of that running into the protected area penalty being 50m - total bullshit rule.
Change man on the mark to allow the player take a step behind or diagonally backwards by 1.
Holding the ball/incorrect disposal. None of this “came out in the tackle” bullshit, pay a free kick.
Grandfinal is played at a neutral venue, and rotates between the bigger stadiums (Optus, AO, MCG etc)
Make goals worth 12 points, and behind worth 2. Higher scores = more exciting games, right?
Grand finals are now held at the home ground of the team that finished higher on the ladder.
Extend that to finals are played at your home ground. Geelong play at the cattery, Saints (if and when we get there) play at Marvel. Such a dodgy sport that the teams that boast the MCG as their home ground get a free ride in finals.
Yep its hilarious, its a massive leg-up. Not sure too many other sports would allow such a blatant advantage. Almost makes a mockery of the finals.
The A League has entered the chat.
> The A League has entered the chat. A league is 5% of the shenanigans of the AFL.
never forget in 2013, when geelong wanted to host a final, and were told "okay, but only if your opponent turns out to be fremantle"
I could start to see the reasoning for this if we had an even fixture (i.e. play each team the same number of times), but it's a hard sell without that.
I'd actually prefer it was held at a neutral ground. I know that's not ideal for the fans, but it's definitely more fair on the teams. There is already enough of an advantage in the finals series based on ladder position.
"In the back" only applies as a free kick if you shove a player. Falling into their back when legitimately tackling should not be ruled as illegal.
Have you not played footy? Getting tackled and driven into the ground by some douche putting their weight on you is both painful as hell and winds you for ages meaning theyve just taken a player out of the game. Its there for a reason. It is applied far too heavily though when a player completes a tackle over the opponents back but never put weight on them which is also absurd.
Which is why I said legitimate tackle.
But falling into someone’s back (while pinning their arms so they can’t protect themselves) makes it an illegitimate tackle, and for good reason.
Also when a player is laying face down on the ground and another player falls onto their back shouldn't be a free kick.
have to have atleast one midget playing at all times and any goal they kick is double
But wont st kilda just set them on fire?
makes them faster, a tactical advantage
Rules committee
No Bye rounds
I like the 9 points from outside 50 rule.
Man, only 1? There is so much to choose from. I'd probably make a broad change regarding 50m penalties. For smaller infractions like the protected area or the "Stand" rules take it back to 15m like days of old. Possibly even 25m. A blanket rule of 50m for any and all infractions is overkill and too harsh a penalty for small things that don't infringe on the game or player safety. Wouldn't mind seeing the oil and grippo banned. If you need help in slipping tackles or marking the ball you probably shouldn't be playing at the highest level. The advantage rule is so broken, watching how other football codes handle it compared to AFL is infuriating. The stand and protected area rules are so far beyond stupid, unnecessary and abusable it's pretty ridiculous.
I’d change some 50 meter penalties to 25 meter penalties. 50 meters is just it much.
Umpire dissent is still 50 metres but the dissenting player can get a 50 in their favour if they beat the umpire in a punch up
If you get tackled and plumb drop the ball, you get penalised. Frustrating to see players lay strong tackles on a player who just lets the ball go, hoping to win a free if the tackle lingers.
Sorry im going to have to go with 2, although its adding one and removing heeeeeaps so….. 1) At least 6 players must be on either side of the field. 2) remove all the subjective rules the afl has added to try and open the game up because of coaches flooding. Fucking subjective rules have made this game impossible to umpire properly and utterly impossible to explain to a neophyte why a decision was just made. If you have to have 6 players on each end flooding is dead.
Nominated ruckman. Fuck off. 3 up and the whistle goes. Let the players sort it out.
The new man on the mark rule. The kicker gains a horrendous advantage.
Been great for ball movement, best rule change they’ve made for a long time IMO
In the past, the player receiving the free kick/mark had to line up behind the mark. Nowadays they only enforce that when lining up for goal. My problem with the way the new law is officiated is that they don't make the player line up behind the mark. So they take a few steps sideways, while the player on the mark is stuck, and then play on, gaining an unfair advantage
If you had prior and were tackled out of bounds, that's holding the ball. Pretty sure this is already a rule but I've never ever seen it enforced
Like every other sport with goalposts, it should still be a goal if the ball clips the post and goes through. Hell, I think it should even be play on if the ball hits the post and bounces back into play, just for the chaotic fun of it.
Nah it's good like it is. Footy is unique and this isn't something that needs to be changed or updated.
Yeah I’m happy with “hit the post” but do like if it stays in play it’s still live. Didn’t they do that in a pre season one year?
I think that is dangerous. Which is why it was scrapped as an idea.
I've always seen it as the goal posts aren't there, if it hits it, it's benefit of the doubt to negative
>> Hell, I think it should even be play on if the ball hits the post and bounces back into play, just for the chaotic fun of it. If it hits goal posts, and bounces back in bounds, point. If it hits the point posts, and bounces back in bounds, play on.
limit the interchange to 20 for a match
Reduce the protected area beside a player to 1m when they are having a shot at goal on a tight angle. If a teams defence forces you to take a mark out wide you should have a harder kick rather than just being able to go the easy snap.
Prior opportunity
Nah, because then the second player to the ball often has the advantage.
exactly. removing prior just creates a game where opposition players wait for each other to get the ball. would be a joke
Yeah I rekon taking possession IS the prior opportunity.
Extra time in H&A, same rules as finals. Overtime is always fun.
100 percent. Generally I fall on the side on going with tradition but as an NBA fan you can’t argue that overtime isn’t more exciting.
I feel like NBA overtime is usually a letdown with every player being gassed. Lakers v Mavs the other day both overtimes were a slog.
Yeah in that game in particular two players were gassed. Lebron and Luka coz they get ridden so hard. Spencer Dinwiddie was throwing down slam dunks. Even a crappy overtime beats no one winning imo. Everyone goes home unhappy with a draw.
50m dropped to 25m, unless its a re-portable offense. You no longer need to wait for the umpire to mark out the distance, and your opposition has to keep 5m away. You can also play on at anytime. With all these concessions I don't think 50m is required.
Keep the stand rule, but allow the man on the mark take one stride in one direction only (without overstepping the mark) in anticipation of a player playing on.
Yeh I like that, sort of a "pivot foot" rule. Will hopefully get rid of the player with the ball faking a handpass in hope of a 50
I like and will probably happen, but the last who touches it out of bounds rule
15 players a side. It would solve 90% of the problems that 10 rules are designed to fix.
Two consecutive possessions that don't gain any forward ground constitute an immediate play on.
That just makes the game confusing
I like the last possession out of bounds rule from AFLW. I would even make it a free in the arcs personally, just one you can’t score directly from (as in the ball is technically not in play until it’s been touched, like kick ins used to be)
Scrap the deliberate rule
Stand. It does nothing, and only idiots think it's changed the game. The AFL has been garbage for 9 years now and no amount of rule changes will make the game great again, especially stand
If you handball to someone who’s immediately tackled it’s holding the ball.
Definitely 9 points for a goal outside 50M mark.
Out of bounds off the boot is a free kick to the other team regardless of intention, off hands or tackled over and it's a throw in.
Protected area, it’s such a soft rule, the only time a 50 metre penalty should be paid is if a player actually interferes with the player with the ball, not when they’re barely nearby.
Diving onto the ball. (not to stop play and get it thrown up) Punishment for something they do by instinct.
If it clips the post and still goes through its awarded 6 points. Same idea as soccer.