Roar Rookie
Joined July 2010
10.3k
Views
5
Published
16
Comments
Published
Comments
We are in a right pickle, make no mistake. The suggested punishments for footballers implicated in betting ‘scandals' have escalated sharply in the last…
Let me sketch a slightly different end to the weekend’s St George-Wests cliff-hanger. Let’s imagine the game played with a slight rule change, to…
First, a couple of obvious but probably necessary caveats. I have never been an AFL coach. I do not know the pressure of coaching…
[caption id="attachment_16789" width="300" caption="Brendan Fevola of Carlton comforts Ben Cousins of Richmond as Cousins hobbles from the field during the AFL Round 01 match…
[caption id="attachment_10407" caption="Geelong and St Kilda players fight for the ball during the AFL 1st Qualifying Final between the Geelong Cats and the St…
Sure, but I’m not talking about keeping the players out there any longer. I agree that if we kept at 80 minutes with time out for everything the game would be too long. This is why the AFL reduced the official lengths of quarters down from 25 minutes (I think) to 20 minutes. I don’t necessarily want the game to go any longer. I just don’t want the players manipulating the length of the game. So let’s halves of 30 minutes or similar or 25. It’s not beyond us to work out the right length of time.
Saints’ win points to needed rule change
Thanks Bruce, I agree, the adding time business is still not really working in soccer. Don’t know if you saw David Moyes, the Everton coach in the English Premier League, explode when time was called. His point was that his team was on the attack looking for a winning goal in extra time when the referee blew for full time without adding any time at all for substitutions that were made during the extra-time period. He carried on like a ham sandwich but he had a point.
Saints’ win points to needed rule change
Interesting suggestion. Probably sensible. Doesn’t quite solve me wanting to throw something at the screen every time Soward does his dance. I guess I would probably want to ask why only the last 5 minutes.
Saints’ win points to needed rule change
Fair enough Ken. I am a sensitive soul. Um, not sure I follow you. The situation I’m talking about is exactly as it applies in AFL. If we’ve had 30 minutes of play then time is up… there is no more time to waste. At the heart of this is a point about the ability of teams – when it suits them – to take time off the clock.I can see the alternative point of view which is to say “ok, we now have 40 minutes per half and this gives us plenty of time for a fair amount of football plus all the other non-football stuff that happens. What’s the big deal?’ But the problem with this argument is that the time used up by certain non ball-in-play periods (referees talking to players, blokes with the different kicking routines etc etc etc) can be manipulated by the players. And the worst thing is that they do it just when the game is getting exciting. Players time waste in order to take the excitement out of the game. If you’re a player on a team leading by a point with a small amount of time to go, what you absolutely do not want is any more excitement. You want to kill the game. This is why soccer players dribble the ball into the corner and try to hold it there in the dying seconds. Boring as hell but it’s an easy out for them. Why should we make it easy for players to cop out like this? The AFL have a really nice system now and the important point is that it will always be in someone’s interest to keep playing, particularly if it’s tight. The fear of stretching the game to three hours like American football could, I think, be easily managed.
Saints’ win points to needed rule change
Why is is so difficult to get League fans to read a simple article and talk about the idea in the article? Rob C, champ, I’m not a tigers fan. Promise. Really. And yes, maybe in the situation on Saturday night Boyd might have run the ball instead of throwing it dead. Sure. No problem. But for the sake of the argument, couldn’t you just imagine that I’m not a disgruntled Tigers fan and that Boyd was trapped in the in-goal with 20 seconds to go? Couldn’t you just go with me on this one?. I’m glad Saints won, actually. They’ve been the best team all year. Fair dues to them. Hope they win. But actually, I don’t care all that much. What this article is about is the crazy, arbitrary and, sometimes, very unfair time management system league fans have to put up with. Does anyone here actually have an opinion about this??
Saints’ win points to needed rule change
Sorry friends, this has got nothing to do with St George of Wests, neither of whom I would cheer for if my life depended on it.
Nope, they haven’t tried this. Like most rule change experiments, the league only tried this in a half hearted way. The way to avoid the American football situation is simply to penalise dawdling. AFL does not have this problem. Nothing wrong with time management?? So you’re happy for the clock to run while referees lecture players? You’re happy to see 90 seconds go down the drain while some bloke prepares for penalty goal? You’re happy that, when it suits them, teams can run 30-40 seconds off the clock just walking back to half to kick off? It’s ok for the clock to run while players hug and kiss each other? Sorry bro, but we can do better than this. No risk.
Saints’ win points to needed rule change
If you want consistency, employ robots. What is all this nonsense about umpires having “credibility”? They are human for goodness sake. Humans aren’t consistent. How many seasons will go by with umpires proving over and over again that they are human not machines, before anyone realises that consistency is not something we can hope for. The last thing I want from umpires is consistency. And who decides if they have “credibility”. Come on!! In heaven umpires are consistent and always make the right call. This is planet earth!
Who made Mark Thompson king?
Couldn’t agree more. That press conference was, for me, a real skin crawler.
Who made Mark Thompson king?
Correct on all counts. Thompson is not boring and yes, he’s been annoying for a looong time. All this is true. This doesn’t alter the central point though; he and Malthouse in particular look and speak to the press like some kind of deranged dictator, daring anyone to contradict them. I guess I just have a problem with people, who push semi-educated naive young men around for a living, acting like complete they invented football. Time for therapy.
Who made Mark Thompson king?
Simple question: do you know one single person who has taken up drugs because of Ben Cousins? Just one? In fact, can you name one person in the world who has taken up drugs because of the behaviour ‘modeled’ by footballers. I’m not talking about people who became professional athletes and then ‘fell in the with the crowd’. That’s a different matter. What I’m talking about here is this strange idea you seem to have about how and why children behave in particular ways. I’m not asking you to name names but can you even think of a person who became a drug taker because of Ben Cousins or any other footballer?
Ben Cousins and an inconvenient truth
Thanks Richard for reading and for your response. Still, sorry mate but I’ve got to say it: what IS naive is believing in the idea of role models. You might as well believe in the easter bunny. Footballers do not make children take drugs. It’s just a fantasy. What kids want is to be famous and rich like footballers. The do not want to BE THEM. Brett Kirk being a Buddhist is extremely unlikely to turn kids into buddhists. You may wish for or dream about a world where children are inspired into leading wholesome lives by the brave deeds of footballers . It’s just that this isn’t the world we live in.
Ben Cousins and an inconvenient truth
You said a whole lot there Penguin. With you on that one. There should be a law against the pre-match poetry and slomo, no risk.
Is AFL really all about heart and courage?
I think it is just obvious that, in terms of skill, they are a middle of the road team. I just don’t accept that Carlton’s players have any less ‘pride’ than the players in other teams. More importantly, though, I’m have no idea how you would know.
Is AFL really all about heart and courage?
Couldn’t agree more. I actually can’t think of many prominent sporting nation that doesn’t pride itself on its fighting spirit; the ‘Bulldog spirit’ of the English, the ‘determined’ Germans, the New Zealanders (plucky little country playing above its size etc etc). Even the French, who are often derided by outsiders as ‘flamboyant’, pride themselves on their fighting sports men and women; think all their Tour de France champions, their heroic (soccer football team) and their brave rugby world cup victories over New Zealand. The idea of ‘Aussie spirit’ is a serious silly and self-serving stereotype.
Is AFL really all about heart and courage?
Fair point. As sometimes happens, the Roar chooses its own title for these articles, which is their right. I didn’t mention hypocrisy in my original article. But I guess you could say that on the one hand the AFL are pushing gambling while punishing people for being involved. That seems pretty hypocritical to me.
AFL stinks of hypocrisy over Bock's footy gambling