AFL Gone Crazy with talk of Zones - Paul Roos lashes out

[bornadog]

MELBOURNE coach Paul Roos has launched a stinging satirical attack on the prospect of the AFL introducing on-field zones.Laws of the Game committee member John Worsfold floated the idea on Monday night as one way of combating congestion on the field.
Worsfold told the Seven Network the league could look at trialling a rule in pre-season that keeps two or three players from both sides in each half of the ground.
“If you want to play a different game, call it something else and we’ll play a different game,” Roos said.
“Or we can have two games — we can have Australian Rules footy and another game called zoneball.

Roos, who matched wits with Worsfold in classic 2005 and 2006 grand finals between Sydney and West Coast, opined the game had never been in better health and that coaches had a knack of fixing whatever ailed it.
“We were talking about the flood years ago, then that went away,” he said.
“We worried about the zones, then they went away.
“The game at the moment is as close to 18 one-on-one contests as you can possibly have and we’ve still got people complaining.”
Roos suggested the introduction of two new clubs, and the glut of expansion picks heading to GWS and Gold Coast, meant “the talent level is different” now.
“But the game itself has never been better,” he added.

Roos accused the league of being far too reactive in the way they picked at the game’s fabric.
“The problem is we put rules in. Now we say the rules we put in haven’t worked, so we’ll put some new rules in,” he said.

“We’ll do that and put some rules in to fix the rules that were supposed to fix the rules.
“Then we’ll put some rules in to fix the rules that were going to fix the rules that were going to fix the rules.

“We’ll keep doing that, that sounds like a great idea.”
Roos’ freewheeling series of sarcastic zingers came to an end when asked at Tuesday’s press conference what he would do if in control of the game.

“I wouldn’t have changed them (rules),” he said.
“I’m just a coach. We’re seen as ruining the game so we’ve got to keep our mouths shut.”

This is the crazies thing the AFL has thought of.

[bulldogtragic]

So what sport to follow next?

Seriously, if the state leagues adopted the game as it was a decade or more ago, just good footy without the fuss and over complication - They would grow massively, and I would only see Footscray play.

It's hard enough keeping the love for the dogs, let alone the code...

[Mantis]

In fairness the AFL have to do something... Having both teams in one half of the ground makes for a shocking spectacle.

And the game never better? (as per Roos's comments) - All the money he is getting paid must have rotted his brain.

[Ghost Dog]

I agree Mantis. Several times I've taken people new to AFL to the footy and been embarrassed. At one match, my guests wanted to leave before the first quarter, excused themselves and left, despite the fact the tickets were worth $50 each.

[chef]

I agree the AFL needs to do something, the game resembles under 12's footy at the moment with everyone just chasing the ball.

[LostDoggy]

I hate the way football is being played at the moment, but I'm also totally against the interference.

And no. The AFL do NOT have to do something. They CAN, however, stop running around like headless chickens throwing in knee-jerk rule change after knee-jerk rule change.

Perhaps if the draft wasn't compromised, the fixture was a draw, equalisation was more than lip-service, and the playing field was level coaches wouldn't be faced with opposition so outlandishly better that they have to develop said strategies to stop them in the first place.

Do this, sit back and allow every club to thrive on talent and merit and you'll see a game that thrives on talent and merit. Rocket science.

Just about every problem in the game always comes back to that — the 18 teams are not given an equally fair go — yet oxygen thieves like McGuire are dead against changing it. Might make less money, after all.

[Remi Moses]

There's poor games of footy, and there's good games of footy.
Been that way for an eyernity

[bornadog]

And no. The AFL do NOT have to do something. They CAN, however, stop running around like headless chickens throwing in knee-jerk rule change after knee-jerk rule change.

Exactly - have a look at the sliding rule for instance


In fairness the AFL have to do something... Having both teams in one half of the ground makes for a shocking spectacle.

And the game never better? (as per Roos's comments) - All the money he is getting paid must have rotted his brain.


I agree Mantis. Several times I've taken people new to AFL to the footy and been embarrassed. At one match, my guests wanted to leave before the first quarter, excused themselves and left, despite the fact the tickets were worth $50 each.


I agree the AFL needs to do something, the game resembles under 12's footy at the moment with everyone just chasing the ball.

You cannot change a game to make it look like what you want it to look like. No rules will ever do that.

Zones will come in and then coaches will figure something else out and then what do you do.

How about the zone comes in and one coach keeps 15 players in the back half and the rest of the ground with the other 3 in the forward line the whole match. What will happen then?

This is the biggest fundamental change in the history of the game. I have no respect for anyone sitting on the rules committee if this is what they are advocating.

You three don't like current games because we are losing more than winning, no other reason.

[chef]

You three don't like current games because we are losing more than winning, no other reason.

Not true at all, I don't enjoy it as much(neutral games that is, the Dogs games are still as exciting and intense as ever) as it's not the same game anymore.

Maybe it will evolve into something better, maybe it won't.

[bornadog]

Not true at all, I don't enjoy it as much(neutral games that is, the Dogs games are still as exciting and intense as ever) as it's not the same game anymore.

Maybe it will evolve into something better, maybe it won't.

Rule changes won't make the game look like the 80's.

[Maddog37]

What about a third man in type rule?

[Ghost Dog]

I didn't say I wanted the rules changed. But I can see where the concern is coming from and empathize with the AFL.
No BAD. I've been to games that we won, where I thought it was a horrible display of skills.
It doesn't bother me as much when I watch on the TV but when I pay to go or take friends, it leaves you flat.

[bornadog]

I didn't say I wanted the rules changed. But I can see where the concern is coming from and empathize with the AFL.
No BAD. I've been to games that we won, where I thought it was a horrible display of skills.
It doesn't bother me as much when I watch on the TV but when I pay to go or take friends, it leaves you flat.

Big difference between watching us and a quality side like a Port for example.

[jeemak]

I'd love to be a Hawks supporter watching team's superior skill level dismantling the negative tactics of the Fremantle's of this competition.

I'm concerned about the agendas at play here. Worsefold was cooked because he was an outdated coach, and has poo in his pants over this because couldn't evolve. Roos has poo in his pants because any such change is going to negatively affect his coaching outcome.

[Hotdog60]

The AFL are the makers of their own demise, all they need to do to get the game flowing and to open it up more is to pay a free kick for incorrect disposal.

If they are worried about slowing the game down with too many free kicks they can just reduce the time the player has to get rid of the ball once the player is back on his mark.

Players get rewarded for the effort they put in for a good tackle and the fans are happy because when they yell ball they can also get reward.

One of the worst elements I saw in the game last week was a group of players standing waiting for someone to get the ball and then dive on him. The one making the play was then penalised for holding the ball. Keep this up and we will have a stop in play with players standing in a circle watching the ball on the ground wait to pounce on who ever is stupid enough to go and get it.

[bornadog]

The AFL are the makers of their own demise, all they need to do to get the game flowing and to open it up more is to pay a free kick for incorrect disposal.

If they are worried about slowing the game down with too many free kicks they can just reduce the time the player has to get rid of the ball once the player is back on his mark.

Players get rewarded for the effort they put in for a good tackle and the fans are happy because when they yell ball they can also get reward.

One of the worst elements I saw in the game last week was a group of players standing waiting for someone to get the ball and then dive on him. The one making the play was then penalised for holding the ball. Keep this up and we will have a stop in play with players standing in a circle watching the ball on the ground wait to pounce on who ever is stupid enough to go and get it.

You pretty much hit the nail on the head. I was discussing this at the game last week with a woofer. Players take possession and also wait for the tackle and they just hold it in. This is then repeated over and over.

In the old days, especially on a muddy day, there would be 15 players on the ball. Umpires would pay a free to just break it up and keep the game flowing, now they are reluctant to pay a free.

Tell me, how can Freo only have 4 free kicks in three quarters of football.

[Bulldog Joe]

You pretty much hit the nail on the head. I was discussing this at the game last week with a woofer. Players take possession and also wait for the tackle and they just hold it in. This is then repeated over and over.

In the old days, especially on a muddy day, there would be 15 players on the ball. Umpires would pay a free to just break it up and keep the game flowing, now they are reluctant to pay a free.

Tell me, how can Freo only have 4 free kicks in three quarters of football.

This is the real problem and contributes most to the congestion.

Players standing up take possession, get tackled and just hang on to the ball until the ump calls a ball-up, yet someone makes an effort on the ground has multiple opponents jump on him with no regard to an old in-the-back rule and then gets pinged because he can't do anything.

If we simply had umpires reward good tackles, penalise incorrect disposal and pay in the back when it occurs for the one on the ground, we would soon reduce the congestion and have some flow.

Unfortunately players are happy to play for stoppages as it gives a breather and they are not seen as making an error.

All we need is some constructive umpiring. Reward and protect the ball player but also reward good tackling.

AND anybody leading with their head in ANY situation MUST stop being rewarded. Someone will get seriously hurt.

[bornadog]

AND anybody leading with their head in ANY situation MUST stop being rewarded. Someone will get seriously hurt.

On AFL360 they were discussing the bump and leading with one's head. I suddenly worked out why this has become a big issue, ie the bump to the head. When the rules committe brought the sliding rule in (another knee-jerk reaction to one incident) the effect is players now don't dive on the ball, like a Scotty West would. Players approaching the ball at the same time, keep their feet and if they arrive at the same time its inevitable they will clash heads, or one will turn their body and hit the other in the head. In the past, one player would dive on the ball, so there was no way there was going to be a bump on the head. of course just coming in and bumping to the head has always been a rule.

Just another example of change one rule and effects the game.

[LostDoggy]

Tell me, how can Freo only have 4 free kicks in three quarters of football.

Was quite staggering. But I think the fact we had more numbers around the contest and were first to the ball pretty much all game was a fair reflection of this.

[Mantis]

You three don't like current games because we are losing more than winning, no other reason.

How can you judge what I do and don't like?

We are playing a shocking brand of football which is terrible to watch regardless of the results... It's that bad that I have absolutely no interest in going on Saturday night to game which we will probably win.

[bornadog]

How can you judge what I do and don't like?

We are playing a shocking brand of football which is terrible to watch regardless of the results... It's that bad that I have absolutely no interest in going on Saturday night to game which we will probably win.

Fine, but will changing rules help you enjoy the game?

[Greystache]

You three don't like current games because we are losing more than winning, no other reason.

I used to watch a lot of neutral games where I didn't care who won, now I don't watch any, is that because we're losing?

I haven't been to an Essendon game with the in-laws this season, whereas I would go to 10+ in previous years.

[Mantis]

Fine, but will changing rules help you enjoy the game?

If the rule change/s stops teams having all players in one half of the ground (for extended periods) or a scrum of 26 around a contest then I would say yes.

[bornadog]

If the rule change/s stops teams having all players in one half of the ground (for extended periods) or a scrum of 26 around a contest then I would say yes.

But it won't work as the coaches will come up with something else. Its the nature of our game. This is not basketball or soccer.

[bornadog]

I used to watch a lot of neutral games where I didn't care who won, now I don't watch any, is that because we're losing?

I haven't been to an Essendon game with the in-laws this season, whereas I would go to 10+ in previous years.

We play crap football, because we are crap. Go watch Port and see how exciting they are.

When we were playing free flowing football, kicking lots of goals, many posters said this can't win a final. Now we have gone the other way and posters don't like it.

[chef]

Rule changes won't make the game look like the 80's.

Not sure what it's got to do with the 80's:confused:, I just want to watch something that resembles footy.

[bornadog]

Not sure what it's got to do with the 80's:confused:, I just want to watch something that resembles footy.

Rules committee all made up of players from 80's and think that is what footy should look like.

[Greystache]

We play crap football, because we are crap. Go watch Port and see how exciting they are.

When we were playing free flowing football, kicking lots of goals, many posters said this can't win a final. Now we have gone the other way and posters don't like it.

We play crap football in part because we have no attacking strategy, just as previously we had no defensive strategy.

All out attack won't win finals, but that doesn't mean the answer is to have no attack. Success will be balancing the two effectively.

None of that accounts for my lack of interest in watching neutral teams.

[bornadog]

We play crap football in part because we have no attacking strategy, just as previously we had no defensive strategy.

All out attack won't win finals, but that doesn't mean the answer is to have no attack. Success will be balancing the two effectively.

None of that accounts for my lack of interest in watching neutral teams.

All I am saying is rule changes won't stop ugly football.

I am only guessing, but If we were winning games and playing ugly, fans would come to games.

[chef]

All I am saying is rule changes won't stop ugly football.

I am only guessing, but If we were winning games and playing ugly, fans would come to games.

We are taking about neutral games and the lack of interest in them aren't we?.

[bornadog]

We are taking about neutral games and the lack of interest in them aren't we?.

I thought we were talking about bringing in Zones and changing the game for ever.

[chef]

I thought we were talking about bringing in Zones and changing the game for ever.

True, but then again they've been constantly changing the game forever from day dot.

[bornadog]

True, but then again they've been constantly changing the game forever from day dot.

Zones is very radical. How would it be administered? Add another two umpires to check each end?

This is the most over officiated game in the world.

[chef]

Zones is very radical. How would it be administered? Add another two umpires to check each end?

This is the most over officiated game in the world.

Yep, it has the most grey area's which makes it a very frustrating game to watch.

[Greystache]

Zones is very radical. How would it be administered? Add another two umpires to check each end?

This is the most over officiated game in the world.

I would've thought the boundaries umpires would just be linesmen.

[Hotdog60]

I had a thought today, the two coaches need to get together and instruct their players if the ball rolls free on the ground that no one should go in and pick it up. Just form a circle around the ball and look at it.

When the umpire says what are you doing they should all say, " I don't want to go in because I'll get pinged for holding the ball".

I would loved to see what the AFL would think of that.:)

[bornadog]

I had a thought today, the two coaches need to get together and instruct their players if the ball rolls free on the ground that no one should go in and pick it up. Just form a circle around the ball and look at it.

When the umpire says what are you doing they should all say, " I don't want to go in because I'll get pinged for holding the ball".

I would loved to see what the AFL would think of that.:)

Its becoming more and more like Gaelic Footy where you are only allowed to pick up the ball if you are on your feet.