Rules Changes for 2019

[hujsh]

From the AFL site:

Traditional playing positions at centre bounces


Clubs must have six players inside both 50m arcs, with one player inside the goalsquare.
Four midfield players must start inside the centre square with the two wingmen stationed along the wing.

Kick-ins


At kick-ins, a player will no longer need to kick to himself to play on from the goalsquare.
Following a behind, the man on the mark will be brought out to 10m from the top of the goalsquare, rather than the existing five metres.

Marks and free kicks in defence


When defenders mark or receive a free kick within nine metres of their own goal, the man on the mark will be brought in line with the top of the goalsquare.

Runners and water carriers


Team runners may only enter the playing surface after a goal has been kicked and must exit before play restarts.
Water carriers are not permitted to enter the playing surface during live play.

Umpire contact


Players will be prohibited from setting up behind the umpire at centre bounces.

50m penalties


The player with the ball:





Must be allowed to advance the mark by 50m without the infringing player delaying the game.
Will be able to play on while the 50m penalty is being measured out.


Kicking for goal after the siren


A player who has been awarded a mark or free kick once play has ended:





Will now be able to kick across their body using a snap or check-side kick
BUT must kick the ball directly in line with the man on the mark and the goal.


Marking contests


The 'hands in the back’ rule interpretation has been repealed so a player can now:





Place his hands on the back of his opponent to protect his position in a marking contest
PROVIDED he does not push his opponent in the back.


Ruck contests: prior opportunity


A ruckman who takes direct possession of the ball from a bounce, throw-up or boundary throw-in will no longer be regarded as having had prior opportunity.
Where there is uncertainty over who is the designated ruckman, the ruckman for each team will still be required to nominate to the field umpire.

[craigsahibee]

From the AFL site:

Traditional playing positions at centre bounces


Clubs must have six players inside both 50m arcs, with one player inside the goalsquare.
Four midfield players must start inside the centre square with the two wingmen stationed along the wing.

Not a fan of this


Kick-ins


At kick-ins, a player will no longer need to kick to himself to play on from the goalsquare.
Following a behind, the man on the mark will be brought out to 10m from the top of the goalsquare, rather than the existing five metres.

Marks and free kicks in defence


When defenders mark or receive a free kick within nine metres of their own goal, the man on the mark will be brought in line with the top of the goalsquare.

I don't understand this. It actually rewards the team that takes the short sideways option rather than progress the ball downfield. If you want to go lateral from the kick in, you should not have the benefit of having the mark set level with the top of the goal square.


Runners and water carriers


Team runners may only enter the playing surface after a goal has been kicked and must exit before play restarts.
Water carriers are not permitted to enter the playing surface during live play.

Happy with this. Great initiative.


Umpire contact


Players will be prohibited from setting up behind the umpire at centre bounces.

Umpires will be provided with reversing beepers next. This is going to be a nightmare to adjudicate on, if in fact it's an offense to do so.


50m penalties


The player with the ball:





Must be allowed to advance the mark by 50m without the infringing player delaying the game.
Will be able to play on while the 50m penalty is being measured out.

These seem like a good idea.



Kicking for goal after the siren


A player who has been awarded a mark or free kick once play has ended:





Will now be able to kick across their body using a snap or check-side kick
BUT must kick the ball directly in line with the man on the mark and the goal.

The ump's are going to need FIFA's shaving cream and a huge protractor to police this one.


Marking contests


The 'hands in the back’ rule interpretation has been repealed so a player can now:





Place his hands on the back of his opponent to protect his position in a marking contest
PROVIDED he does not push his opponent in the back.


Ruck contests: prior opportunity


A ruckman who takes direct possession of the ball from a bounce, throw-up or boundary throw-in will no longer be regarded as having had prior opportunity.
Where there is uncertainty over who is the designated ruckman, the ruckman for each team will still be required to nominate to the field umpire.

I thought the prior opportunity rule was working well. This is just regressive.














Some good ones.

[Mantis]

For player safety not keen on the water carrier rule when a player is injured. Would hate for a serious incident to occur on the far side of the ground and the 20-30 secs (or longer) that it takes to get medical assistance on the field being critical to the players well being.

[Rocket Science]

They've created several rods for their own backs with many of these. Can't wait to gauge how they're policed, particularly during the customary 'crack a walnut with a sledgehammer' phase in the early going.

[dog town]

Grundy will pull the ball out of the ruck 10 times a game.

[Axe Man]

Grundy will pull the ball out of the ruck 10 times a game.

Luke Darcy has announced he is coming out of retirement.

[Testekill]

That ruck prior opportunity rule is going to be abused so hard. Collingwood will just have Cox grab it out of the ruck every time

[Mofra]

Peter Street now a chance as a Delisted Free Agent

[jeemak]

Let's stop congestion by providing an incentive for ruckmen to take possession of the football......

[Rocket Science]

Let's stop congestion by providing an incentive for ruckmen to take possession of the football......

They might've considered countering this to a degree by re-allowing the 3rd man up, but nooo.

[divvydan]

I suspect removing the rule has come in due to teams not nominating a ruckman and having an extra mid, knowing the opposition ruck would never (or almost never) take it out of the ruck due to the likelihood of a holding the ball free.

[The Adelaide Connection]

The number of repeat stoppages is set to balloon with ruckman taking possession only to be tackled and the ball held in and balled up again.

This will be the go to “kill the clock” tactic late in games that are within a goal.

[bornadog]

Don't get me started on some of these changes. At least they turned the clock back on some rules, like hands in the ridiculous back.

[kruder]

I might be the only one but I like 666. I'm over us/teams playing a spare down back. Obviously still can happen but makes its harder.

[bornadog]

I might be the only one but I like 666. I'm over us/teams playing a spare down back. Obviously still can happen but makes its harder.

achieves nothing. They are only in that position at the start of quarters and after a goal, maybe 10 seconds

[Rocket Science]

Serious question: why have a goal square any more?

[bornadog]

Serious question: why have a goal square any more?

It is a joke. I can see some huge issues with this.

[The Adelaide Connection]

Serious question: why have a goal square any more?

I guess the only function it now serves is for putting someone straight in front when they mark in the square versus in Row Z when they mark 1cm out of the square.

[GVGjr]

Serious question: why have a goal square any more?

To help the umpires work out where to line up the free kicks from

[soupman]

Serious question: why have a goal square any more?

I imagine because it determines when it's play on. I assume that as soon as the player kicking out leaves the square the umpire will call play on, but not before. Otherwise you are pushing the man on the mark back 5 metres at the start only to delay his sprint at the player kicking out.

[Topdog]

So no more ball ups when your foot is on the line?

[GVGjr]

There one or two decent changes but the rest are overreactions

[Hotdog60]

Will the hands in the back be equal for defenders?
Can the fullback hold his ground and mark the ball or will it be bias towards the forward.

[bornadog]

Good discussion here (https://player.whooshkaa.com/episode?id=378182)on effects of rule changes

[boydogs]

Good discussion here on effects of rule changes

Link no good

[Rocket Science]

So now we're getting a 'Wildcard Round' too.

https://i.ibb.co/nzTg6XP/Screen-Shot-2019-05-31-at-6-47-03-PM.png (https://ibb.co/WgQxGrV)

Rad.

Just rename the product AFELX and be done with it.

[bornadog]

Link no good

Try this : https://player.whooshkaa.com/episode?id=378182

[jeemak]

Thanks for sharing that BAD. I think the data and discussion backs a lot of what many of us think.

What resonated with me was the acknowledgement that coaches are inherently defencive - which is what a lot of us already know - and that they'll stop scoring first. This is my issue with the interchange cap, and the intent to reduce it further and fatigue players more. If you fatigue players they just won't run forward, the default position or first priority will be defend, the secondary priority will be to get it going the other way.

The 666 as it sits is a soft introduction to permanent zoning of the field, which is something I think needs to be considered if we are hell bent on intervening with rule changes (and you can make an argument whether we should be either way but it's not really one I want to worry about given the AFL IS hell bent on rule changes so we're stuck with them), and outside of that you need to find a way to incentivise high scoring (I think Leigh Matthews has been reading all the positive opinions about him on WOOF recently, as he's now adopted this idea which is something I've been banging on about for a while).

You can say that an incentive to score more benefits teams at Docklands under the roof, but there's multiple tenants resulting in a lower home ground advantage, while the ground is smaller and more easily congested than other grounds. Other teams enjoy larger grounds and a home ground advantage, so I reckon it would probably balance out but you wouldn't know without trying it.

People say a reduction in on-field numbers would possibly help things, but I'm not entirely convinced it will on the smaller grounds in the competition, while teams will congest the defencive area with the same numbers they do anyway but will have less options when transitioning forward.

Well worth a listen and I think demonstrates why dedicated extended segments drilling down into issues have a lot of value compared to the three or four minutes football media usually spends on each topic in normal programming.

[bornadog]

Well worth a listen and I think demonstrates why dedicated extended segments drilling down into issues have a lot of value compared to the three or four minutes football media usually spends on each topic in normal programming.

I enjoyed the discussion and backs up what I have said all along. No rule changes will ever make the game look like what you want it to look like. We have a bunch of old farts who want to replicate footy from the 80s, but you know what you just cant do it.

We have to leave the game develop on it's own, as it continues to evolve with new strategy, with human beings becoming faster, taller, stronger.

The AFL just don't get it.