A system that is broken

[GVGjr]

From SEN

A system that is broken Why the Bulldogs need an “offseason of change” to fix issues
(https://www.sen.com.au/news/2022/07/05/a-system-that-is-broken-why-the-bulldogs-need-an-offseason-of-change-to-fix/)


David King believes the Western Bulldogs have serious structural and game-style concerns that will need to be addressed by an “off-season of change” at the end of 2022.

The Bulldogs sit tenth on the ladder, only a game out of the top eight after winning five of their last seven matches.

However, they seemed to get exposed against Brisbane in Round 16 when the Lions went at a remarkable 64 per cent efficiency inside 50.

“In terms of pressure, I think the Western Bulldogs are under more pressure than anyone right now with their game,” King told SEN Mornings.

“I had a look at them on Thursday night and saw Brisbane walk the ball down the ground more often than not … I had a look at how often they actually intercept the opposition, they’re second last in the competition this year, the Kangaroos are the only team that are poorer at winning the ball back off the opposition.

“I look down back and see Alex Keath, he was brought to the Dogs to be an interceptor, that’s not happening.

“Tim O’Brien gets caught in no man's land more than any other player I’ve seen … he just gets leapfrogged consistently.

“I think they need drastic change.”

King floated the idea of one of the Bulldogs' tall forwards going back behind the ball, acknowledging Aaron Naughton and Jamarra Ugle-Hagan as potential suits for the role.

However, the former North Melbourne star also highlighted problems with the club’s midfield unit.

Outside of games against Melbourne, Geelong, Brisbane and Carlton, the Dogs average 45 points from clearance. However, against those sides, that number drops to just 29 points, King believing: “numbers against the rest mean nothing when you get to the pointy end”.

“This is why I think they’re struggling. their brand or mode of football is not working. They’re not winning the ball back, and even when they play against the best they’re not getting through at stoppage,” he added.

“Their whole system is geared around these mids. Is it good for them individually or is it good for them as a team? I think right now, you’d have to say it’s good for them individually.”

It left King thinking that changes need to be made at the end of 2023.

“They’ve won a lot of games over the last few years but we’re talking about 2022, so I think there’s an offseason of change (needed) at the Dogs,” the dual-premiership Kangaroo said.

“They need to have a look at the whole mechanics of how they play. No one’s saying anything about coaching or anything like that, this is just a system that is broken.”

Of their remaining seven games, the Bulldogs play five teams above them on the ladder in what is one of the toughest runs home of any finals contenders.

[GVGjr]

Where I believe King has it wrong is when he says Keath was brought in to be an interceptor, I think it's clear that we have asked that he become a 1 v 1 defender and he has most done a fine job at that.

[Grantysghost]

Where I believe King has it wrong is when he says Keath was brought in to be an interceptor, I think it's clear that we have asked that he become a 1 v 1 defender and he has most done a fine job at that.

Yes I think Keath was an interceptor but we wanted to use him as a one on one type.

I can't argue with much else in there. Brisbane waltzing through last week was Norf levels of resistance.

[bornadog]

Same article as the Foxfooty one.

Naughton must play forward

[Bulldog Joe]

From SEN

A system that is broken Why the Bulldogs need an “offseason of change” to fix issues
(https://www.sen.com.au/news/2022/07/05/a-system-that-is-broken-why-the-bulldogs-need-an-offseason-of-change-to-fix/)


David King believes the Western Bulldogs have serious structural and game-style concerns that will need to be addressed by an “off-season of change” at the end of 2022.

....

However, they seemed to get exposed against Brisbane in Round 16 when the Lions went at a remarkable 64 per cent efficiency inside 50.

...


“They need to have a look at the whole mechanics of how they play. No one’s saying anything about coaching or anything like that, this is just a system that is broken.”



King must be trying to avoid the Bevo sin bin.

If the system doesn't work it is on the coaching because it is their job to design the system.

[azabob]

King must be trying to avoid the Bevo sin bin.

If the system doesn't work it is on the coaching because it is their job to design the system.

To be fair to King he was referencing off season changes need to be made to the game plan. Not removal of the head coach.

[MrMahatma]

Same article as the Foxfooty one.

Naughton must play forward

Totally. The solution is to trade in a KPD, not move a generational KPF back.

[Mitcha]

Richmond's win v West Coast on the weekend was eerily similar to our win v GWS recently but the media narrative is stunningly different. We kicked 19 v GWS but all I heard was about our "flaky defence" yet Richmond allowed 27 scoring shots to the Eagles and allowed them clear passage from D50 to score effortlessly numerous times but all I heard was that Richmond are "coming again". Not saying we don't have issues defending but seriously the reason I don't watch most of the analytical shows is there is no mention of us at all when we win but a massive pile on when we get knocked over. Can utilize my time better.

[mjp]

Not saying we don't have issues defending but seriously the reason I don't watch most of the analytical shows is there is no mention of us at all when we win but a massive pile on when we get knocked over.

I don't like it when they state the bleeding obvious without solutions. I think King tries and whether you like the idea of moving Naughts back (I don't) or not when you are ranked #17 for intercept possessions and pretty much ALL of your defenders are poorly rated 1-v-1 by every statistic known to man (and yes, I know we don't really defend 1v1) then questions and criticisms are going to be levelled at us...Having played in a GF last year after spending 90% of the season in the top 4 coming off back to back finals appearances (disappointing performances but we did make it!) in 2019 and 2020, I think it's indisputable our season has been really, really, REALLY poor.

All of that said - the Brisbane game - an away game against a top side back to full-strength coming off a loss and their OWN share of media scrutiny? All of that on the back of 2x 6-day breaks with several key defenders missing? Ummm...yeah. I didn't think we would or could win last Thursday night and the game went much as expected (though I do wonder what might have happened had our early dominance been turned into, you know - actual GOALS).

I don't mind the analysis shows 'coming for us'. I mostly hate it when they ignore us as an irrelevence.

[bornadog]

I don't like it when they state the bleeding obvious without solutions.

We all know the bleeding obvious, what we do want are solutions.

A few weeks ago King was saying Naughton to the backline is the solution. Now this week he says it should be Bruce or Jamarra.

We have to stop the balls coming into our defence in the first place - that might help.

[azabob]

We all know the bleeding obvious, what we do want are solutions.

A few weeks ago King was saying Naughton to the backline is the solution. Now this week he says it should be Bruce or Jamarra.

We have to stop the balls coming into our defence in the first place - that might help.

Which King actually said...

however, the former North Melbourne star also highlighted problems with the club’s midfield unit.

Outside of games against Melbourne, Geelong, Brisbane and Carlton, the Dogs average 45 points from clearance. However, against those sides, that number drops to just 29 points, King believing: “numbers against the rest mean nothing when you get to the pointy end”.

“This is why I think they’re struggling. their brand or mode of football is not working. They’re not winning the ball back, and even when they play against the best they’re not getting through at stoppage,” he added.

“Their whole system is geared around these mids. Is it good for them individually or is it good for them as a team? I think right now, you’d have to say it’s good for them individually.”

[Yankee Hotel Foxtrot]

Which King actually said...

however, the former North Melbourne star also highlighted problems with the club’s midfield unit.

Outside of games against Melbourne, Geelong, Brisbane and Carlton, the Dogs average 45 points from clearance. However, against those sides, that number drops to just 29 points, King believing: “numbers against the rest mean nothing when you get to the pointy end”.

“This is why I think they’re struggling. their brand or mode of football is not working. They’re not winning the ball back, and even when they play against the best they’re not getting through at stoppage,” he added.

“Their whole system is geared around these mids. Is it good for them individually or is it good for them as a team? I think right now, you’d have to say it’s good for them individually.”

Bevo spoke a bit about this today, and he intimated that the full list of variables aren't necessarily being looked at when critiquing. For example he said in the first quarter we caused 11 turnovers inside our forward half, and yet for all that dominance, only had 0.1 to show for it on the scoreboard. So the connectivity and conversion is the main issue in that context, not our ability to defend or win the ball back.

[azabob]

Bevo spoke a bit about this today, and he intimated that the full list of variables aren't necessarily being looked at when critiquing. For example he said in the first quarter we caused 11 turnovers inside our forward half, and yet for all that dominance, only had 0.1 to show for it on the scoreboard. So the connectivity and conversion is the main issue in that context, not our ability to defend or win the ball back.

He did touch on it. I actually think our media person did their job and briefed him on the likely questions!

Why did we only score 0.1 behinds? Was it us or the opposition? Either way our forward connection has long been a source of discontent.

YHF do you honestly believe we defended well on the weekend or since the bye?

[Axe Man]

We have to stop the balls coming into our defence in the first place - that might help.

I'm not sure where to find inside 50s conceded stats but I think we would rank fairly well. We are number 1 for inside 50s ourselves which in itself is an outlier for the league with inside 50s largely in line with ladder position.

Clearly our forward efficiency is a major problem, we get it in there more that any other team but don't score enough from those entries. I think most would also agree that the better teams score too easily when they enter our defensive 50 as we rarely give up high inside 50 numbers to the opposition.

[Grantysghost]

I'm not sure where to find inside 50s conceded stats but I think we would rank fairly well. We are number 1 for inside 50s ourselves which in itself is an outlier for the league with inside 50s largely in line with ladder position.

Clearly our forward efficiency is a major problem, we get it in there more that any other team but don't score enough from those entries. I think most would also agree that the better teams score too easily when they enter our defensive 50 as we rarely give up high inside 50 numbers to the opposition.

It's all a territory game for us we want it in there a lot, then press up to keep it there.

Problem 1 as I see it is yes we get it in there a heap, but against the better sides with decent pressure our delivery from mid=>forward is very poor. That's not coaching, can't think of many guys outside of Libba who can kick to the forward's advantage.

Problem 2 we can't keep it in there. So we push up this high zone and don't get nearly as many repeat entries as we should, and when we do...see problem 1. This is more likely tactical for me.

The sides that are doing well presently from what I can tell don't push up as high and don't really care about trapping it deep (as much as we do) as they have the defenders to rely on if it gets out.

666 and stand have had a huge effect. 666 clearances against us exposes our inability to defend the air. 666 for Melbourne just means it's raining men..ahem I mean goals as their backs can absorb the clearance (Lever intercepting) and then they score from rebound 50's (if they lose clearance that is).

Stand, well how's your high zone going when they oppo can just run around it. Again you want that strong structure deeper as the ball is definitely moving further down the ground with these rules.

There's little surprise to me teams like the Dockers and Demons are relishing these changes (including the kickout rule where you can run miles).

Have we adjusted (other than the 5 metres back)?

[mjp]

I'm not sure where to find inside 50s conceded stats but I think we would rank fairly well. We are number 1 for inside 50s ourselves which in itself is an outlier for the league with inside 50s largely in line with ladder position.

Well....

I mean, inside 50's are obviously important (you can't score without them) but oils aint oils. WHERE is the inside 50, under what circumstances? We often play an extra at the stoppage between 55m and 90m from goal which tends to mean we are kicking into a -2 or -3 situation. Which the oppo know - so do they give us those so they can spit fat and head into their own forward line (they will most likely be -1) and take advantage of us with our poor 1v1 defending numbers?

Who knows? Who even knows?

[Bullies]

Darcy will be our intercept Defender next year. It is an easier role to play than the forward line and a good way to learn the trade. Naughton did the same in his first year. It will also relieve the pressure on Keath and Gardiner.

[bornadog]

Darcy will be our intercept Defender next year. It is an easier role to play than the forward line and a good way to learn the trade. Naughton did the same in his first year. It will also relieve the pressure on Keath and Gardiner.

According to the presser today, Bevo said he wasn't sure where Darcy will play ie forward or back, but I suspect back

[jeemak]

According to the presser today, Bevo said he wasn't sure where Darcy will play ie forward or back, but I suspect back

Bullshit, you EXPECT ruck. You DEMAND it. It is your (his) DESTINY!

[jeemak]

I love the fact the talking heads on one network get a radio spot the next day, or their shit is regurgitated the next day without any scrutiny.

Week one, Carlton is going amazingly well with all their injuries by winning a few, week two, it's fair they lost due to their injuries. Week three, this club has serious resolve. Week four, you can't expect them to do any more with the personnel they're missing.

Not sure if anyone cared about it the last time I posted it, but here's the records for the top ten over the last ten:

Team Win Loss Differential
Melbourne 7 3 4
Geelong 8 2 6
Brisbane 7 3 4
Frermantle 7 3 4
Carlton 6 4 2
Collingwood 8 2 6
Richmond 7 3 4
Sydney 5 5 0
St Kilda 5 5 0
Bulldogs 6 4 2
Average Diff 3.2

Based on the above, you'd have to say the gushing over the Pies is warranted, but their last loss was to us a month ago by 50 points, when we doubled their score.

Sydney are the media darlings of the competition, but have put in some shitty football over the last month or three - I wonder how much they'll be pilloried when we do them by six goals this Friday?

Nothing gets mentioned in the commentary about how *!*!*!*!ing horrible our run for whatever reason or another our injuries have been this year. I know Aza said in the first part of the season they don't count, but as much as I kind of like him (a lot) they actually did make a difference, and still do.

Anyway, back to it, we're equal sixth in terms of performance over the last ten weeks. The way we get spoken about is as if we're in the last six. What will the pundits say about us if we turn our record into a 7-3 as it was last week and Sydney goes 4-6? I bet for all money it won't get a mention.

[Yankee Hotel Foxtrot]

He did touch on it. I actually think our media person did their job and briefed him on the likely questions!

Why did we only score 0.1 behinds? Was it us or the opposition? Either way our forward connection has long been a source of discontent.

YHF do you honestly believe we defended well on the weekend or since the bye?

It's clear our defense since the bye has been ordinary, I don't disagree.
But what I was trying to get across, that Bevo was trying to point out, its not just one or two variables that need to be taken into account when trying to dissect whether or not our game plan is wrong.

I don't think our coaching group are naive, and that they know very well our strategic weaknesses, and they'd be weighing up and trying to find an approach that minimises those weaknesses, or that amplifies a strength to counter their negative impact.
And I have no idea what they've come up with, but the snippet from Bevo might reveal that we're trying to focus on a particular side of our game that tries to limit the number of times the opposition get it in their 50, and therefore limit their ability to expose our strategic weakness there. It's clear that if that's the case, its not working particularly well right now!
Again I think Bevo sort of spoke about it when he mentioned something about new players coming in and the effect that can have when they don't get their positioning right and how that might leave us exposed up field.

But in the Brisbane game, I was absolutely shocked and frustrated by our lack of ability to capitalise on our territorial supremacy in the first quarter. Its the only game I've seen live this year and I was stunned at either what was a skill based deficiency or a lack of awareness by our ball carriers when coming forward. I couldn't believe the number of times in that first quarter where we had forwards open in really dangerous positions near goal and we either kicked it to an outnumbered Naughton, or we did go for the right target, but repeatedly either put the kick in the worst position for the guy to mark, or just completely fluffed the kick.

Whatever it was in that first quarter, it 100% wasn't the opposition that made us look bad. I was surprised because in recent weeks it looked as if we'd started to look very dangerous and more efficient in our forward half connectivity.

[azabob]

I love the fact the talking heads on one network get a radio spot the next day, or their shit is regurgitated the next day without any scrutiny.

Week one, Carlton is going amazingly well with all their injuries by winning a few, week two, it's fair they lost due to their injuries. Week three, this club has serious resolve. Week four, you can't expect them to do any more with the personnel they're missing.

Not sure if anyone cared about it the last time I posted it, but here's the records for the top ten over the last ten:

Team Win Loss Differential
Melbourne 7 3 4
Geelong 8 2 6
Brisbane 7 3 4
Frermantle 7 3 4
Carlton 6 4 2
Collingwood 8 2 6
Richmond 7 3 4
Sydney 5 5 0
St Kilda 5 5 0
Bulldogs 6 4 2
Average Diff 3.2

Based on the above, you'd have to say the gushing over the Pies is warranted, but their last loss was to us a month ago by 50 points, when we doubled their score.

Sydney are the media darlings of the competition, but have put in some shitty football over the last month or three - I wonder how much they'll be pilloried when we do them by six goals this Friday?

Nothing gets mentioned in the commentary about how *!*!*!*!ing horrible our run for whatever reason or another our injuries have been this year. I know Aza said in the first part of the season they don't count, but as much as I kind of like him (a lot) they actually did make a difference, and still do.

Anyway, back to it, we're equal sixth in terms of performance over the last ten weeks. The way we get spoken about is as if we're in the last six. What will the pundits say about us if we turn our record into a 7-3 as it was last week and Sydney goes 4-6? I bet for all money it won't get a mention.

Prior to the Adelaide a number of talking heads and majority (if not all) of woof had us wining our last six of seven games prior to the bye and some even seven from seven. As it turned out we won four and lost three.

I will concede that injuries pre game and during the game hurt us against Port Adelaide.
But our games against Adelaide and Geelong were unacceptable and we bumbled and fumbled a win against the Gold Coast. The way we ended the game against the Lions last week was terrible. They were one man down and still managed to out run and out score us.

As it stands we have only beaten two teams currently in the top 8. Sydney when they were up and running and Collingwood just as they were about to get on their run.

Our last three weeks we have conceded 296 points which is not a brand of football that will stand up in the final two weekends in a given year.

[Grantysghost]

Bullshit, you EXPECT ruck. You DEMAND it. It is your (his) DESTINY!

He can't be wasted in defence! Plus I think he's probably not mobile enough.

[comrade]

He can't be wasted in defence! Plus I think he's probably not mobile enough.

I think he’d be ok in defence BUT that forward/ruck role is so specific and very difficult to fill and we basically have a perfect prospect for it. We should pump all of our resources into developing him in that role and find more key defensive talent ASAP.

[Grantysghost]

I think he’d be ok in defence BUT that forward/ruck role is so specific and very difficult to fill and we basically have a perfect prospect for it. We should pump all of our resources into developing him in that role and find more key defensive talent ASAP.

He's a bit giraffe like at full tilt that's why I don't think he'd make a great defender but totally agree re ruck/forward. He and English will be formidable.

[Bulldog4life]

He's a bit giraffe like at full tilt that's why I don't think he'd make a great defender but totally agree re ruck/forward. He and English will be formidable.

Formidable. Wash your mouth out Gg. SENSATIONAL is the word.

[bornadog]

Bullshit, you EXPECT ruck. You DEMAND it. It is your (his) DESTINY!

I still think he should end up as ruck.

Is that better :D:D:D

[jeemak]

Prior to the Adelaide a number of talking heads and majority (if not all) of woof had us wining our last six of seven games prior to the bye and some even seven from seven. As it turned out we won four and lost three.

I will concede that injuries pre game and during the game hurt us against Port Adelaide.
But our games against Adelaide and Geelong were unacceptable and we bumbled and fumbled a win against the Gold Coast. The way we ended the game against the Lions last week was terrible. They were one man down and still managed to out run and out score us.

As it stands we have only beaten two teams currently in the top 8. Sydney when they were up and running and Collingwood just as they were about to get on their run.

Our last three weeks we have conceded 296 points which is not a brand of football that will stand up in the final two weekends in a given year.

Thanks for your reply.

I agree the losses against Adelaide and Geelong were terrible performances, however, if it wasn't for some very shoddy use in the second against GC it would have been a much better win.

While we've only beaten two teams in the top eight, we've also got two teams ahead of us as it stands in Saints and Fremantle who we haven't played and have a chance to get the Cats, Swans and Demons again.

Our form over the past ten suggests we're a chance to compete in all of those, though I'm not confident we'll win any of them. All I was trying to say is that when we look at the season on balance we have actual reasons as to why we haven't performed as we may have liked and nobody is really being honest about them - instead looking at systems and structures which they don't really have insight into anyway.

At no point in time have we had any sense of continuity in our team, we've also got issues off field in coaching given who we lost at the end of last year. Additionally some players just aren't playing well for different reason (i.e. Keath, Duryea and Williams).

Our playing group absolutely shat the sheets against Carlton, Geelong and Richmond by either not being prepared, kicking poorly or not committing themselves to the contest. Clearly they're capable of doing all of those things if and when they want to, so I get frustrated by the narrative around systems and game style and selections and all of that stuff when really most of the time we're either lacking personnel or not executing as well as we should/ could with the personnel we have available.

[azabob]

Thanks for your reply.

I agree the losses against Adelaide and Geelong were terrible performances, however, if it wasn't for some very shoddy use in the second against GC it would have been a much better win.

While we've only beaten two teams in the top eight, we've also got two teams ahead of us as it stands in Saints and Fremantle who we haven't played and have a chance to get the Cats, Swans and Demons again.

Our form over the past ten suggests we're a chance to compete in all of those, though I'm not confident we'll win any of them. All I was trying to say is that when we look at the season on balance we have actual reasons as to why we haven't performed as we may have liked and nobody is really being honest about them - instead looking at systems and structures which they don't really have insight into anyway.

At no point in time have we had any sense of continuity in our team, we've also got issues off field in coaching given who we lost at the end of last year. Additionally some players just aren't playing well for different reason (i.e. Keath, Duryea and Williams).

Our playing group absolutely shat the sheets against Carlton, Geelong and Richmond by either not being prepared, kicking poorly or not committing themselves to the contest. Clearly they're capable of doing all of those things if and when they want to, so I get frustrated by the narrative around systems and game style and selections and all of that stuff when really most of the time we're either lacking personnel or not executing as well as we should/ could with the personnel we have available.

I get where you are coming from.

It is clear the entire supporter base is frustrated with where we sit on the ladder regardless of the actual reasons or perceived reasons from the supporters point of view.

[Grantysghost]

I get where you are coming from.

It is clear the entire supporter base is frustrated with where we sit on the ladder regardless of the actual reasons or perceived reasons from the supporters point of view.

By the club's own admission pre-season we believe our window of sustained success has arrived.

[MrMahatma]

By the club's own admission pre-season we believe our window of sustained success has arrived.

It's small margins.

1 pt v Crows.
Poor kicking v Carl & Rich
Poor qtr vs Geel

In an alternative universe where not much different happened, we'd be top 4, and our form wouldn't REALLY be much different.

I still have hope... some faith but mostly HOPE at this stage... that we can tick off a few wins over the next 3 weeks and be right back in the conversation where we should be. If we get a good run at it from an injury perspective we're every chance still.

[Boots]

666 and stand have had a huge effect. 666 clearances against us exposes our inability to defend the air. 666 for Melbourne just means it's raining men..ahem I mean goals as their backs can absorb the clearance (Lever intercepting) and then they score from rebound 50's (if they lose clearance that is).

Stand, well how's your high zone going when they oppo can just run around it. Again you want that strong structure deeper as the ball is definitely moving further down the ground with these rules.

There's little surprise to me teams like the Dockers and Demons are relishing these changes (including the kickout rule where you can run miles).

Have we adjusted (other than the 5 metres back)?

This feels really important to me. It's clear as a relative newbie to watching the game (only since 2015) that the AFL have been obsessed with trying to turn back the clock on the ruck (3rd man up) and the key forward (666). They seem to want the game to be a series of 1:1 marking contests. Given there aren't actually enough power forwards (or intercept defenders) to go around, this seems counter to the idea of equalisation, but whatever.

One thing that bothers me about this is that it rewards conservative thinking and stifles innovation (to a degree). All the teams that do well now are just full of tall 1:1 experts - Tom Hawkins, Steven May, Tom Lynch, etc. It's so boring.

When I started watching the sport there seemed to be two viable game styles - clean chip-and-mark requiring a lot of tall blokes, and hard contested ball with explosive run, requiring a lot of nuggets. The two were really interesting just because of a noted difference between tall and short bodies - tall bodies accelerate slower but have higher top speeds, small bodies accelerate faster - and the way your game plan could build on them. They were also fun to watch playing against each other, because of the weird matchups they'd produce. Us vs. the Swans is an arm wrestle because we're both contested ball. Us vs the Saints is always a weird crapshoot because they use their leg speed to pressure the receiver to offset their lack of contested ball, and it's always a question of whether our morale breaks before their fatigue sets in.

This stuff is where the actual game is. 3rd man up and asymmetric setups were ways to offset the disadvantages of a run and gun style, just like manic pressure based off leg speed offsets a lack of contested mettle. What absolutely stinks about the garbage conservatism of 666 and 3rd Man Up is that it's sucking the oxygen out of the game. Clean chip and mark play isn't actually all that fun to watch, and if run and gun can't compete, what's the point? The fun is in the interface between styles, not in one team just getting to do what they like.

[azabob]

Nice post Boots and some valid observations. Only 40 posts in a couple of years; not nearly enough. Keep posting.

[Boots]

Nice post Boots and some valid observations. Only 40 posts in a couple of years; not nearly enough. Keep posting.

Thanks Az :D

I do love the vibe here at WOOF. Best footy forum on the web, hands down.

[bornadog]

not in one team just getting to do what they like.

Totally agree with your post.

The other rule change, "Stand", is just another rule made up by old footballers from the 80's who are trying to change the game thinking they are helping scoring and ball movement. I heard a player on radio yesterday saying the Stand rule helps him as he can just run around the man on the mark and do what he likes without being tackled. Is this what we want?

No rule change will make the game look like what you think it should look like.

[Boots]

Totally agree with your post.

The other rule change, "Stand", is just another rule made up by old footballers from the 80's who are trying to change the game thinking they are helping scoring and ball movement. I heard a player on radio yesterday saying the Stand rule helps him as he can just run around the man on the mark and do what he likes without being tackled. Is this what we want?

No rule change will make the game look like what you think it should look like.

Bang on - and for every rule change you'll have a Chris Scott, who looks for the player that fits the rule best, and a Bevo, who looks for the cheekiest way around the rule.

I think Bevo's increasing frustration might have something to do with the fact they keep closing him down with rule changes.

[bornadog]

Bang on - and for every rule change you'll have a Chris Scott, who looks for the player that fits the rule best, and a Bevo, who looks for the cheekiest way around the rule.

I think Bevo's increasing frustration might have something to do with the fact they keep closing him down with rule changes.

40 rule changes since 1996 when prior opportunity was brought in. What has it achieved - nothing, just changed the game, made it harder to umpire and frustrated supporters.

[Flamethrower]

40 rule changes since 1996 when prior opportunity was brought in. What has it achieved - nothing, just changed the game, made it harder to umpire and frustrated supporters.

Want to know what it has achieved? Along with all the fan interaction garbage that you have to endure at games, it has pretty much destroyed my love of football at AFL level.

Thank goodness for community football...that is where I spend my time and money to enjoy Aussie Rules now.

[Grantysghost]

This feels really important to me. It's clear as a relative newbie to watching the game (only since 2015) that the AFL have been obsessed with trying to turn back the clock on the ruck (3rd man up) and the key forward (666). They seem to want the game to be a series of 1:1 marking contests. Given there aren't actually enough power forwards (or intercept defenders) to go around, this seems counter to the idea of equalisation, but whatever.

One thing that bothers me about this is that it rewards conservative thinking and stifles innovation (to a degree). All the teams that do well now are just full of tall 1:1 experts - Tom Hawkins, Steven May, Tom Lynch, etc. It's so boring.

When I started watching the sport there seemed to be two viable game styles - clean chip-and-mark requiring a lot of tall blokes, and hard contested ball with explosive run, requiring a lot of nuggets. The two were really interesting just because of a noted difference between tall and short bodies - tall bodies accelerate slower but have higher top speeds, small bodies accelerate faster - and the way your game plan could build on them. They were also fun to watch playing against each other, because of the weird matchups they'd produce. Us vs. the Swans is an arm wrestle because we're both contested ball. Us vs the Saints is always a weird crapshoot because they use their leg speed to pressure the receiver to offset their lack of contested ball, and it's always a question of whether our morale breaks before their fatigue sets in.

This stuff is where the actual game is. 3rd man up and asymmetric setups were ways to offset the disadvantages of a run and gun style, just like manic pressure based off leg speed offsets a lack of contested mettle. What absolutely stinks about the garbage conservatism of 666 and 3rd Man Up is that it's sucking the oxygen out of the game. Clean chip and mark play isn't actually all that fun to watch, and if run and gun can't compete, what's the point? The fun is in the interface between styles, not in one team just getting to do what they like.

So true Boots - it reduces the game to the base product for mass consumption by nostalgia addicts.

I'm a big world game fan and one of the reasons why are the strategic and tactical battles. It's a real game of chess and the management teams are super intelligent proponents of this part of the game. (which actually includes defence)

Each backwards looking rule change we make, whilst it appeals to the base, takes away the ability for coaches to innovate outside of and during match day.

They just want a hanger to share on twitter for likes folded into ad dollars.

[The Bulldogs Bite]

Totally agree with your post.

The other rule change, "Stand", is just another rule made up by old footballers from the 80's who are trying to change the game thinking they are helping scoring and ball movement. I heard a player on radio yesterday saying the Stand rule helps him as he can just run around the man on the mark and do what he likes without being tackled. Is this what we want?

No rule change will make the game look like what you think it should look like.

The stand rule I know irks you BAD.

It's a 'weird' look when the player is glued to the mark, while his opponent casually waltzes on an arc right past him.

[bornadog]

The stand rule I know irks you BAD.

It's a 'weird' look when the player is glued to the mark, while his opponent casually waltzes on an arc right past him.

Sorry to continually mention it.

Kicking over the mark is just another one of the unique things that are now taken out and changing the game

[Grantysghost]

Sorry to continually mention it.

Kicking over the mark is just another one of the unique things that are now taken out and changing the game

It's all geared to reduce the ability to defend.

I think one that is majorly overlooked is the change to the kick in rule allowing teams to go over the narrow part of the ground.
It's a fundemental change.

[bornadog]

It's all geared to reduce the ability to defend.

I think one that is majorly overlooked is the change to the kick in rule allowing teams to go over the narrow part of the ground.
It's a fundemental change.

don't worry, I hate that too. Another unique part of our game, kicking out of the goal square.

[azabob]

System is FUBAR.

[jeemak]

System is FUBAR.

Players are FUBAR.

That could actually be because of a few things. Poor system they can't grasp, poor players and a lack of capability/ intelligence/ fitness/ form, or poor leadership. It's no secret I favour the latter two.

[jeemak]

There just isn't a coach at the professional level who would agree with the way players allow their opponents to get forward of the contest like we do.*

It's an impossibility.

*Unless they're rebuilding and building a game plan - which are definitely beyond doing.

[azabob]

There just isn't a coach at the professional level who would agree with the way players allow their opponents to get forward of the contest like we do.*

It's an impossibility.

*Unless they're rebuilding and building a game plan - which are definitely beyond doing.

So why are we not making decisions at the selection table?

[jeemak]

So why are we not making decisions at the selection table?

We are playing our best cattle.

They just suck at doing what they're told, most likely.