Three things you've learned-round 16 v Adelaide.

[Twodogs]

You vill tell us ze three things or else it's the comfy chair for you...

[GVGjr]

Bump

[bulldogtragic]

1. We are probably not the destination club we thought we were going to be this trade season.
2. I'd happily take Lever off their hands, just to allow them Gibbs. That's just how kind I am.
3. There needs to be a full review of the club at every level. We climbed Everest and then fell horribly down it.

[westbulldog]

1. There are no goalposts at the Whitten oval, only point posts.
2. It is time to bring the kids in for the rest of the year.
3. We need two KPD's.

[hlnbidoffer]

1. Our coach is starting to look like Macca. Completely lost at sea with no plan B.

2. Our players don't give a shit

3. Numb the pain, a bottle of red wine does not....

[Yankee Hotel Foxtrot]

1. Our coach is starting to look like Macca. Completely lost at sea with no plan B.

2. Our players don't give a shit

3. Numb the pain, a bottle of red wine does not....

I'm also a bottle down and just as disheartened..but c'mon. as much work as there clearly is to do it's the easy route to go points 1 & 2..some intellectual dishonesty at play to denounce coach and group right now. We've had more highly touted teams come up short where Bevo and Co have found a way to give us what we never thought possible.
As much as I hurt that 2017 is looking beyond us we need only look at Hawthorn to see how we can recover our mojo.
Let's be critical and angry, as we should, but let's not reach for pitchforks and torches.

[westdog54]

1. Jake Lever would be worth every cent.
2. The amount of players that have gone backwards this year is alarming.
3. Jake Stringer needs a massive kick in the arse. Work rate was non-existent for most of the game.

[G-Mo77]

1. Jake Lever would be worth every cent.
2. The amount of players that have gone backwards this year is alarming.
3. Jake Stringer needs a massive kick in the arse. Work rate was non-existent for most of the game.

I thought he was excellent in the first half. Played high and sometimes rotated through the midfield. 2nd half deep forward?

[Sedat]

1. Our best is still clearly good enough.
2. Our worst is the worst in the comp.
3. Careers will be determined for many players in the next 7 weeks - there is still a massive amount to play for

[macca]

1.Mcclean and dale did some good things tonight. Dale has nice balance and keeps his feet very well. MacClean tackling sticks
2.redpath for at least providing a lead ip forward
3. Zaine tried hard all night just outmuscled by Jenkins who is a Monster
4. Bonts was very clean with the ball for 3 quarters

Anchors:
1. We look slow, easily pushed off the ball and lose our feet. Also are we unfit ?
2. Our forward line is dysfunctional. no offence to HC but he is not performing role as of small forward , fumbly, not quick , lost his footing and out marked all night. Clay is strong in contest but his got a massive turning circle. We cannot kick a goal from 40-50'm out
letting Koby go was a big loss as he was the depth we really need

3. Are players like Kelly ,ottens and even laird that good a mark? They seems to be eating them marks up all the tonight
4. Tex for pushing JJ into tha goal posts and pathetic umps for not reportering , disallowING the goal and no free
5 we kicked 1'goal after half time just so painful to watch. Just pathetic , given how serious head injuries are taken.AFL
, it was a deliberate, negligent dog act.

[G-Mo77]

Webb didn't play macca. :)

[macca]

Oh I meant McLean , typo will update post now . Thanks

[bornadog]

Oh I meant McLean , typo will update post now . Thanks

Also this isn't the Bankers and Anchors thread. :D

[Flamethrower]

1. Can't see us winning another game this year.

2. The standard of AFL football this year is at an all time low, and it is boring to watch. I tried to watch the GWS v Geelong "match of the round" last week, and was laughing at how pathetic the skills of many players are these days.

3. As bad as the standard of the game is, it is miles ahead of the standard of umpiring. Embarrassing.

[bornadog]

1. Can't see us winning another game this year.

2. The standard of AFL football this year is at an all time low, and it is boring to watch. I tried to watch the GWS v Geelong "match of the round" last week, and was laughing at how pathetic the skills of many players are these days.

3. As bad as the standard of the game is, it is miles ahead of the standard of umpiring. Embarrassing.

Currently a shoot out at the SCG, the ball is pinging around like a squash ball.

[Twodogs]

Also this isn't the Bankers and Anchors thread. :D


Or the Marmo/James medal thread.

[macca]

Sorry for getting it wrong , doing this from my iphone so get disoriented at times on which thread is which . Doggies losing like that really must have made me upset to lose orientation

Pardon my ignorance what is Marmo/ james medal thread ? If there is a wiki or something funny on YouTube would be great to referemce

[westdog54]

Sorry for getting it wrong , doing this from my iphone so get disoriented at times on which thread is which . Doggies losing like that really must have made me upset to lose orientation

Pardon my ignorance what is Marmo/ james medal thread ? If there is a wiki or something funny on YouTube would be great to referemce
The WOOF Player awards aka the Joe Marmo (http://australianfootball.com/players/player/joe%2Bmarmo/17448) Award and the Ron James (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ron_James_%28footballer,_born_1970%29) award

[Yankee Hotel Foxtrot]

1. Can't see us winning another game this year.

2. The standard of AFL football this year is at an all time low, and it is boring to watch. I tried to watch the GWS v Geelong "match of the round" last week, and was laughing at how pathetic the skills of many players are these days.

3. As bad as the standard of the game is, it is miles ahead of the standard of umpiring. Embarrassing.

Wow. Apart from any of our games this year..even our wins I've been impressed by the footy played. Maybe more influenced by the even state of the comp.

[1eyedog]

Wow. Apart from any of our games this year..even our wins I've been impressed by the footy played. Maybe more influenced by the even state of the comp.

I think there are too many players around the ball. Its usually only late in a game where it opens up a bit.

[Twodogs]

I think there are too many players around the ball. Its usually only late in a game where it opens up a bit.

Yep, almost al 36 players spread around the ball in a huge pack gets a little boring.

I hope to god they don't bring zones in though.

[1eyedog]

The AFL seem set on 4 on the bench so I'm not adverse to drawing a line across CHF and CHB and making it mandatory to have at least 4 players there the whole game.

[Twodogs]

The AFL seem set on 4 on the bench so I'm not adverse to drawing a line across CHF and CHB and making it mandatory to have at least 4 players there the whole game.


I'd rather poke myself to death with a knitting needle. To see a player get a fee kick against him because he's gone in a forbidden part of the ground would destroy footy for me.

I know the problem is congestion and that's the simplest solution but I don't like simple solutions. They tend to cause even more complicated problems for whatever it is you were trying to fix in the first place.

[always right]

The only thing wrong with footy this year is we are playing shithouse.

[Sedat]

The AFL seem set on 4 on the bench so I'm not adverse to drawing a line across CHF and CHB and making it mandatory to have at least 4 players there the whole game.
Doesn't need to be so drastic to fix up the congestion mess. Only need to do two things:

1. Get rid of prior opportunity. If you're in possession and are tackled legitimately, get rid of it or you're gone. Black and white, no grey area.
2. Max 10 interchange rotations a quarter and only after a stop play situation.

[always right]

Doesn't need to be so drastic to fix up the congestion mess. Only need to do two things:

1. Get rid of prior opportunity. If you're in possession and are tackled legitimately, get rid of it or you're gone. Black and white, no grey area.
2. Max 10 interchange rotations a quarter and only after a stop play situation.

Not a fan. Reckon we will se an increase in blokes letting their opponent win the ball first so they can lay a tackle. Why be first to the ball?

[hujsh]

Doesn't need to be so drastic to fix up the congestion mess. Only need to do two things:

1. Get rid of prior opportunity. If you're in possession and are tackled legitimately, get rid of it or you're gone. Black and white, no grey area.
2. Max 10 interchange rotations a quarter and only after a stop play situation.


Not a fan. Reckon we will se an increase in blokes letting their opponent win the ball first so they can lay a tackle. Why be first to the ball?

Exactly. Why try to win the ball and probably get pinged when you can sit back and get clear possession with a gang tackle?

[Sedat]

Prior opportunity is a myth that never existed until 20 years ago. It is the main reason we have players now hatching it in a tackle, which quickly turns 1-2 players into 20 players and endless rolling mauls.

Player smarts have gone out the window - in the past if you were about to take possession and knew you were about to get tackled, you would tap on and not take possession. Now because there is no fear of being penalised players simply take possession and go to sleep. I hate it.

[Twodogs]

Prior opportunity is a myth that never existed until 20 years ago. It is the main reason we have players now hatching it in a tackle, which quickly turns 1-2 players into 20 players and endless rolling mauls.

Player smarts have gone out the window - in the past if you were about to take possession and knew you were about to get tackled, you would tap on and not take possession. Now because there is no fear of being penalised players simply take possession and go to sleep. I hate it.

Good assessment. Especially about prior opportunity being a myth, I never heard if it before the mid '90s.

[bornadog]

Prior opportunity is a myth that never existed until 20 years ago. It is the main reason we have players now hatching it in a tackle, which quickly turns 1-2 players into 20 players and endless rolling mauls.

Player smarts have gone out the window - in the past if you were about to take possession and knew you were about to get tackled, you would tap on and not take possession. Now because there is no fear of being penalised players simply take possession and go to sleep. I hate it.

Yep another rule, that changed the game for the worse.

I have said it many times :D change a rule or interpretation and the consequences are always dramatic. (not talking about rules that protect players from injury)

[Bulldog Joe]

Doesn't need to be so drastic to fix up the congestion mess. Only need to do two things:

1. Get rid of prior opportunity. If you're in possession and are tackled legitimately, get rid of it or you're gone. Black and white, no grey area.
2. Max 10 interchange rotations a quarter and only after a stop play situation.

The prior opportunity one would be immense to reduce congestion.
There is way too much hanging on to the ball to get a ball up.

[Sedat]

The prior opportunity one would be immense to reduce congestion.
There is way too much hanging on to the ball to get a ball up.
Yep, and it removes any confusion and grey areas with regard to HTB, which is a complete and utter mess. Anything that can simplify the rules for the umpires and remove widely varying interpretations can only be a good thing for the game.

Paul Roos will hate it because he loves seeing 200 stoppages a game.

[comrade]

Prior opportunity is a myth that never existed until 20 years ago. It is the main reason we have players now hatching it in a tackle, which quickly turns 1-2 players into 20 players and endless rolling mauls.

Player smarts have gone out the window - in the past if you were about to take possession and knew you were about to get tackled, you would tap on and not take possession. Now because there is no fear of being penalised players simply take possession and go to sleep. I hate it.

Yeah, just about the most frustrating part of the game. That and random ruck free kicks.

[Twodogs]

Yeah, just about the most frustrating part of the game. That and random ruck free kicks.

Now that deliberate OOB isn't a thing anymore.

[westdog54]

Prior opportunity is a myth that never existed until 20 years ago. It is the main reason we have players now hatching it in a tackle, which quickly turns 1-2 players into 20 players and endless rolling mauls.

Player smarts have gone out the window - in the past if you were about to take possession and knew you were about to get tackled, you would tap on and not take possession. Now because there is no fear of being penalised players simply take possession and go to sleep. I hate it.

No its not if you actually read the rules, which read as follows:

15.2.3
Holding the Football – Prior Opportunity/No Prior Opportunity
(a)
Where the field Umpire is satisfied that a Player in possession of the football:
(i
has had a prior opportunity to dispose of the football, the field Umpire shall award a Free Kick against that Player if the Player does not Correctly Dispose of the football immediately when they are Correctly Tackled;
(ii)
has not had a prior opportunity to dispose of the football, the field Umpire shall award a Free Kick against that Player if, upon being Correctly Tackled, the Player does not Correctly Dispose or genuinely attempt to Correctly Dispose of the football after being given a reasonable opportunity to do so; or
(iii)
has driven their head into a stationary or near stationary opponent, the Player shall be regarded as having had prior opportunity.
(b)
Except in the instance of a poor bounce or throw up by the field Umpire or a throw in by the boundary Umpire, a Player who takes possession of the football while contesting a bounce or throw up by a field Umpire or a boundary throw in by a boundary Umpire, shall be regarded as having had prior opportunity

The Rule isn't the problem. Its simply not being enforced correctly.

Here (http://www.aflcommunityclub.com.au/fileadmin/user_upload/Coach_AFL/2017_Laws_of_Australian_Football.pdf)is a link to the rules that everyone can bookmark for future reference.

[bornadog]

No its not if you actually read the rules, which read as follows:

The Rule isn't the problem. Its simply not being enforced correctly.

Here (http://www.aflcommunityclub.com.au/fileadmin/user_upload/Coach_AFL/2017_Laws_of_Australian_Football.pdf)is a link to the rules that everyone can bookmark for future reference.

You are missing the point. Prior opportunity is contributing to congestion on the ground packs forming, rolling mauls etc. Players don't try and get rid of the ball in the middle of a large pack, because they don't want to lose possession and would prefer a stoppage, so they hold it in and no prior is deemed by the umpire. If you got rid of the rule, then the ball would clear quicker, umpires would pay a free kick and the pack would disperse, and there would be a reduction of 36 players around the ball.

[bulldogsthru&thru]

Prior opportunity has always been there. Like westdog said it's how it's being umpired which is the problem. If there was no prior opportunity you would see players avoid taking possession and we'd see tunnel ball everywhere.

Removing 3rd man up has created a lot more stoppages.

[Twodogs]

Here (http://www.aflcommunityclub.com.au/fileadmin/user_upload/Coach_AFL/2017_Laws_of_Australian_Football.pdf)is a link to the rules that everyone can bookmark for future reference.


On the radio the other day Gerard Whatley said he had a document that was a timeline of all the rule changes made through history. I don't suppose you have a link to that?

[westdog54]

You are missing the point. Prior opportunity is contributing to congestion on the ground packs forming, rolling mauls etc. Players don't try and get rid of the ball in the middle of a large pack, because they don't want to lose possession and would prefer a stoppage, so they hold it in and no prior is deemed by the umpire. If you got rid of the rule, then the ball would clear quicker, umpires would pay a free kick and the pack would disperse, and there would be a reduction of 36 players around the ball.

First of all, I most certainly did not 'miss the point'. I rebutted Sedat's assertion that 'Prior opportunity is a myth'. The rules show it is clearly not a 'myth'.

Secondly, if you got rid of the rule in the modern game, you'd still have the 36 players standing around the ball, they'd just be waiting for one player to take possession so that he could be monstered. Prior opportunity is there to reward players trying to actually play positively and advance the football.

Read my post again and I've made it clear that the rule isn't broken, the enforcement of it is.

The part that needs to be tightened up is the requirement to 'immediately dispose of the football'. Any player that takes any more than a second or two should be deemed to have not immediately disposed of the football (if they are physically able to do so, see rule 15.2.4) and penalised. A player that unsuccessfully tries to break a tackle should be penalised.

The rule is not the problem.

[westdog54]

On the radio the other day Gerard Whatley said he had a document that was a timeline of all the rule changes made through history. I don't suppose you have a link to that?

Sadly, no I don't.

[Sedat]

I've been watching footy since the late 70's and prior opportunity was never part of the game at any time until approx 20 years ago (give or take 5 years). Watch a replay of games from the 80's and 90's and tell me if it existed - it was certainly not part of the vernacular with the commentators of the day. If a player had possession of the ball and was tackled correctly they were gone, every single time.

I suspect the rules would have been altered inside the last 20 years and the 'prior opportunity' wording has been added in. For mine that has been a grave mistake, as it has allowed ultra-defensive coaches (led by Roos) to control the game by way of creating mass stoppages and then working on specific stoppage set-ups. It also allows for interpretation of a rule, and when this happens you get mass confusion, inconsistency and a lack of clarity. If prior opportunity is removed it creates a simple black & white rule that is no longer prone to interpretation inconsistency.

Reducing interchange rotations is also a no-brainer. It slows down players on the ground and significantly increases space around the ball. It is also downright dangerous to have players strategically running onto the ground mid-play and picking off unsuspecting players with the ball in hand. Interchanges should only ever be made at a stop-play situation (after a goal has been scored).

One other thing that grates me is the ridiculous length of time it takes an umpire to set up and bounce/throw the ball up at any stoppage around the ground. They should immediately throw it up so as to prevent mass bodies around the stoppage.

These 3 things will drastically improve the aesthetic quality of the game and promote far more one-on-one contests and should increase scoring. Umpires were red-hot on HTB in the first 2 weeks this season and scoring went through the roof - enter John Longmire having a whinge after R2 and the game has gone back to endless rolling mauls.

[NoseBleed]

http://www.afl.com.au/afl-hq/the-afl-explained/rule-changes-18582013

Changed in 1996

[westdog54]

I've been watching footy since the late 70's and prior opportunity was never part of the game at any time until approx 20 years ago (give or take 5 years). Watch a replay of games from the 80's and 90's and tell me if it existed - it was certainly not part of the vernacular with the commentators of the day. If a player had possession of the ball and was tackled correctly they were gone, every single time.

I suspect the rules would have been altered inside the last 20 years and the 'prior opportunity' wording has been added in. For mine that has been a grave mistake, as it has allowed ultra-defensive coaches (led by Roos) to control the game by way of creating mass stoppages and then working on specific stoppage set-ups. It also allows for interpretation of a rule, and when this happens you get mass confusion, inconsistency and a lack of clarity. If prior opportunity is removed it creates a simple black & white rule that is no longer prone to interpretation inconsistency.

Reducing interchange rotations is also a no-brainer. It slows down players on the ground and significantly increases space around the ball. It is also downright dangerous to have players strategically running onto the ground mid-play and picking off unsuspecting players with the ball in hand. Interchanges should only ever be made at a stop-play situation (after a goal has been scored).

One other thing that grates me is the ridiculous length of time it takes an umpire to set up and bounce/throw the ball up at any stoppage around the ground. They should immediately throw it up so as to prevent mass bodies around the stoppage.

These 3 things will drastically improve the aesthetic quality of the game and promote far more one-on-one contests and should increase scoring. Umpires were red-hot on HTB in the first 2 weeks this season and scoring went through the roof - enter John Longmire having a whinge after R2 and the game has gone back to endless rolling mauls.

It would be interesting to do an analysis of the ratio of interchanges made during of after a stoppage. Every time a goal is scored it seems like at least two or three interchanges are made by both teams. When you've only got 100 up your sleeve for a game I'd imagine this would take up most of them. I agree that the random interchange times are an issue but I don't know how best to fairly restrict it.

Again, The 'prior opportunity' part isn't what is being stuffed up most of the time, its the 'immediately dispose of the football' part. Players are given an eternity to dispose of the football and they shouldn't.

[westdog54]

http://www.afl.com.au/afl-hq/the-afl-explained/rule-changes-18582013

Changed in 1996

Twodogs, Nosebleed has come through for you.