TOPIC:

Nice analysis PH. So what your saying is what we already know, the coaches and players are and have always been streets ahead of the rules review panel. By mid season any improvement in scoring that may occur with this new rule will likely be negated by all teams mastering these smarter tactics.

I reckon things will tighten up each week SS as they get on top of it. Remember these guys have 40+ hours each week to chat about how to manipulate the rules
 

Agree, the rule that has more chance of opening up the game is the reduction of interchanges, which could be extended to a maximum number per qtr as well as the whole game so we might see it open up once we get into red time each qtr.

If more scoring is wanted, there is no need for a rule change.  All there needs to be done is for the umpires to be instructed that instead of yelling out "knock it (the ball) out, knock it out" and waiting for a quorum of 30 players to gather around the ball before they blow the whistle to throw the ball up, the umpires blow the whistle earlier and throw the ball up.  By doing that it will make it physically impossible for all the players to flood and thus reduce the congestion around the ball.

wrote:

If more scoring is wanted, there is no need for a rule change.  All there needs to be done is for the umpires to be instructed that instead of yelling out "knock it (the ball) out, knock it out" and waiting for a quorum of 30 players to gather around the ball before they blow the whistle to throw the ball up, the umpires blow the whistle earlier and throw the ball up.  By doing that it will make it physically impossible for all the players to flood and thus reduce the congestion around the ball.

Yes good point. What shits me with the new on the mark rule is that the player with the ball, when kicking for goal, is coming off their line whilst the guy on the mark, at the same time, is not allowed too. The umpires need to call play on when this happens surely.  Bad enough, as it was, with players playing on outside of the boundary line and being allowed to get away with it.

Yes good point Swan, simple but would be effective. I recall watching an early 70's GF replay where the single umpire did that, it moved the game on so much better. As soon as he thought the ball was "dead" not stopped moving, but dead, he bounced it.

It’s only round 1 and a very small sample size but every winner kicked 100+ points (lowest number of scoring shots by winner was 26). Losers had between 19-21 scoring shots with a score range 74-109 points. Quarters returning to “normal” length may have an impact but in my opinion the “ridiculous” rule is achieving its objective.
is anyone ready to embrace it as a good idea?

No way after we’re 5 minutes into the season.  Also, I’m not convinced the rule is the reasons you highlight.

wrote:

It’s only round 1 and a very small sample size but every winner kicked 100+ points (lowest number of scoring shots by winner was 26). Losers had between 19-21 scoring shots with a score range 74-109 points. Quarters returning to “normal” length may have an impact but in my opinion the “ridiculous” rule is achieving its objective.
is anyone ready to embrace it as a good idea?

I don't know how long the other matches were but the quarters in the Swans-Claremont game were extraordinarily long. Our match didn't finish to well after 5.00 pm.

The new rules are definitely having an impact on inside 50 entries with the Royals Lions and Swans Tigers matches drawing more than 100 fifties forward  entries where the the averages pre 2020 wouldv'e been around 80 and when was the last time an AFL forward pre the Bulldogs Josh  Bruce has 10 bagged goals in a match???