AFL Rule Changes: Against tradition or a sign of progress?

argee · Post by **argee** » Tue Dec 17, 2002 3:12 pm

I think that the rule shake up is a great idea and if the trial period in the 2003 pre-season is successful- changes SHOULD happen to ensure a faster paced game.
In case you haven't heard the AFL is proposing: 9 points for goals scored from outside 50, 3 points for rushed behinds, a larger centre square, immediate play on if a mark is taken from a backwards kick, coloured uniforms for goal umpires and due to the different scoring system coloured flags to indicate types of goal.
This is a brave move, but one which is going to increase the sport's appeal Australia wide.

cam · Post by **cam** » Tue Dec 17, 2002 4:16 pm

I also am in favour of these changes for the pre-season comp. It has become tradition to try different things out in the pre-season, and it's good to see how it goes. The rule I really like is one where a mark isn't awarded when the ball is kicked backwards and also the play on after a behind rather than having to wait for the flags.

Jeffles · Post by **Jeffles** » Tue Dec 17, 2002 5:15 pm

I don't like the changing of the points scoring system. It's unnecesssary and it's a poor move from tradition. Plus it shows preferential treatment for long bombers over lots of handballs and quick running. I like watching both styles of play.

The other changes are great though. And if I could suggest one more. Play on after the ball hits the post like they do in Soccer and Rugby. So the ball can go in for a goal, a behind or out of bounds.

marcus · Post by **marcus** » Tue Dec 17, 2002 8:11 pm

Egan · Post by **Egan** » Wed Dec 18, 2002 4:51 pm

I think its fantastic it will reward long kicking goals and fasten up the game, will increase crowds to games and that is why i think the AFL has decided for drastic rule changes for the Pre Season, if you have a look at the knock out cup the first match in WA and SA is a Derby and the winner of the derbies take the DREADED trip to Stormy Darwin.

I don't think it should be put into the AFl as it will change the traditional aspect of the game, it is such a proud league and you look at sports like gridiron, soccer there a rules that could speed up games and make it more exciting ( eg soccer take out the offside rule) but the game has always has offside and rules such as 6 points for a goal in the reg season should stay and only minor rules changes should occur to keep it similar to when it was developed a century ago.

tailz · Post by **tailz** » Wed Dec 18, 2002 7:03 pm

like the kicking backwards rule, but it should only be applied to in the back pockets. i'm a bit like marcus, and don't like the idea of a new scoring system. it's hard enough now to explain people who have never watched the game. a suggestion my grandfather has made to curb flooding is adopting one of the old associations rule and drop the wings and put them on the bench. four less players would allow a more free flowing game.

argee · Post by **argee** » Thu Dec 19, 2002 12:48 am

In regards to people's objections to the proposed change in scoring, there is a simple solution. Drop the habit of saying the score is 10.7.67 like it has done for years. That is the reason for the confusion in those unfamiliar with the game. Just say that the score is 67. No one needs to know the number of goals and behinds. While it is a shame to throw away tradition, I think the point of the rule changes is to make the game more accessible to the uninitiated.

yob · Post by **yob** » Mon Dec 30, 2002 4:56 am

cam · Post by **cam** » Mon Dec 30, 2002 11:44 pm

The pre-season comp is needed as it gives the clubs a final tune-up before the real thing. Practice matches aren't enough. I am totally with the idea of bringing in new rules for the pre-season comp as it adds more interest to the preseason comp to see how successful they are. It's unlikely that one of these rules will ever be introduced to the home and away season.

argee · Post by **argee** » Tue Dec 31, 2002 4:58 pm

Don't forget that rule changes have helped many sports in the past. Tennis for instance, only introduced the 'tie-break' in 1980 after a long trial run at some tournaments. In the past some sets had reached well into double digit scores. Also, tennis balls were once white- changing them to yellow made the sport much more spectator friendly. And another thing - wooden racquets were phased out for steel then graphite & now titanium alloy designs which have also improved the game.
In Rugby League, tries & field goals were once both awarded 3 points, now they are awarded 4 & 1 respectively.
Even in AFL itself. Tight shorts were once regulation uniform. A push for change to allow comfort in less restrictive shorts was howled down at first by the purists but now it is fully accepted.
So, don't you see: rule changes are never necessarily a bad thing. If they are embraced by the fans rather than ridiculed, most will see their benefits.

yob · Post by **yob** » Thu Jan 09, 2003 1:58 am

argee · Post by **argee** » Tue Sep 02, 2003 11:12 am

I am getting sick of some games lately when the score and the siren are close and the leading team just keeps possession by kicking the ball backwards and across field and wasting time after marks. Actually, time wasting after marks happens right throughout the game. Bring in a time limit for kicking after a mark. That way the game would be fairer and would suit the better team instead of idiots who can't decide who they want to kick to. Also, bring in the rule that its not a mark if the ball is kicked backwards in your own half of the field and for that matter, make deliberate punched through rushed behinds a free kick right in front for the attacking team. That is a shameful and unsportsmanlike defensive tactic which should be stamped out of the game.
But wait there's more. Please could the umpires be more consistent with the 'Caught' and 'In the back' rules, because while more 'Caughts' are being picked up, there are some obvious instances which aren't being penalised. No wonder those who are uninitiated but know the basic rules like these are getting confused.

Misty Bee · Post by **Misty Bee** » Tue Sep 02, 2003 5:48 pm

Jeez, you already get a point for missing, now you want 3 because it was rushed? Hopw the hell is that going to make it more appealing to fans of sports where you have to work hard for points?

yob · Post by **yob** » Thu Sep 04, 2003 7:14 pm

cam · Post by **cam** » Fri Sep 05, 2003 2:48 pm

Misty Bee wrote:Jeez, you already get a point for missing, now you want 3 because it was rushed? Hopw the hell is that going to make it more appealing to fans of sports where you have to work hard for points?

You're not understanding the rule, this is what it actually is: If a player rushes the ball through the oppositions goals, the opposition gets 3 points. It worked a treat in the Wizard Cup this year, as did the rule where players couldn't kick the ball backwards outside of their 50 metre line.