Is there anything more exciting than the AFL’s annual rule change extravaganza? The answer is yes. In fact, pretty much everything else on the calendar.
Most footy fans have come to dread the AFL’s yearly tinkering with the rules. But maybe, just maybe, they have started to get it right a little more often in recent times.
After all, the decision to ditch the sub rule this time last year is one I think we’re all very happy with, and increased tightness around the deliberate out of bounds rule, aside from some notable teething issues, was something of a success.
I’m optimistic that this latest set of changes, including most notably the outlawing of a third man up at ruck contests, will prove to be just as good.
Using a third man up essentially allowed teams with average or worse ruckmen to negate the opposition advantage.
Whether the third man is successful or not, having to go up against two bodies instead of one is limiting, especially if one of those opposition bodies manages to put their knee in the right place at the right time.
The ruck is arguably the most physically demanding role in the game and unsurprisingly, many ruckmen suffer careers riddled by injury – take a look at Matthew Leuenberger, Shane Mumford or Matthew Kreuzer’s spotty playing history for example.
Anything that can be done to lessen the physical load placed on a ruckman and allow them to have more influence in the game is a good call, in my view.
At the end of the day sport should be about letting talent shine, not coming up with new and inventive ways to negate it. Banning the third man up means a more legitimate contest between ruckmen, and a greater advantage to teams who have an elite player in the position – which is exactly how every position on the ground should work, in a perfect world.
Of course, there are those who disagree, and their names will not be unfamiliar to you.
Far be it from me to tell four premierships, a Brownlow and two Norm Smith Medals want to think about the game, but it’s probably not a coincidence that Hawthorn and Geelong are two teams that use the third man up tactic more than most.
What’s notable in the statistics above is that not a single player from North Melbourne, West Coast or Melbourne appears (although Jordan Lewis of course has since joined the Dees) – unsurprising, given those clubs boast the consensus three best ruckmen in the game.
Mark Blicavs, with more than twice as many third man up hit-outs in 2016 as any other player, is arguably the only real specialist third man up ruck in the league. So what’s he going to do?
Don’t worry Blitz, I’m sure Chris Scott can find a use for a 198cm bloke with your speed and athleticism.
It will be interesting to see how those clubs who make use of the tactic adapt – stoppages will have to be re-thought, and perhaps those teams with truly elite big men will do just a little better than expected in 2017.
It may also see more of a trend back towards clubs employing dominant Aaron Sandilands-style tap ruckmen, rather than simply looking to find a big midfielder who can make something of contest when the ball is bounced.
The AFL’s other rule change decisions could prove winners, but won’t be without a few headaches.
Clarifying the rule around high tackles is something fans have been crying out for, but I fail to see how changing the wording of the law is likely to make it any easier to enforce.
The simple reality is that high tackle decisions can be very subtle and easy to miss from an umpire’s eye view – until umpires stop being human, they are going to make mistakes, and this is one of the easier ones to make.
The decision to tighten up on deliberate rushed behinds might have a bit more impact, as did the deliberate out of bounds rule this year.
You can expect a few howlers along the way, but on the whole the rule will hopefully lead towards less stoppages and more goals. Who could complain about that?
Aransan
Guest
Dougie, the difficulty with identifying ruckmen and KPPs at draft age is that usually they haven't developed sufficiently at 18 to be able to make an accurate assessment. Tom Boyd has proven to be an exception. English is actually 19 and he could turn out to be the equivalent of pick 5 or pick 40, I hope he works well for you but great patience will be required. I get suspicious when these players get repeatedly injured in their early careers -- my suspicion is that they are being pushed too hard early.
paulywalnuts
Guest
Take that to it's logical conclusion and see where you end up. Bizarre.
Macca
Guest
PD - you said getting 12 or 13 possessions was pretty ordinary, if you reckon that is ordinary 11 possessions and less than half the hit outs must be terrible.
Pumping Dougie
Guest
Interesting view Aransan. I'm thrilled we picked him at 18 or 19. He looks like a future gun to me. Tall players take longer to develop and that certainly impacts their value when young, but a real good one is worth the investment. I think English fits that bracket.
Pumping Dougie
Guest
Yes Macca I do realise that. I'm not suggesting Roughead is a gun or better than Goldstein. I'm not sure what your point is.
Aransan
Guest
Recruiting English with a first round draft pick was highly speculative. Don't believe this nonsense that someone is the best ruckman in the draft unless they have played the equivalent of 50 games in the VFL. On what he has shown he should not have been selected in the first two rounds of the draft. Likewise "the best forward". Rate potential draftees on what they have shown making an allowance for their relative age in the draft and their size.
Macca
Guest
PD - you do realise Roughead averaged 11 possessions a game last year don't you? Goldstein averaged close to 37 hit outs and 14 possessions that is very important for his side.
Dalgety Carrington
Roar Guru
Ruckmen's value generally is best assessed within the mid-field "team" I reckon. Thery're part of a systemic whole and their value is maximised with a good midfield and they also allow you to use your midfielders to their maximum value. Sandi to Fyfe is a pretty lethal combination and went a long way to powering Freo to their blitzing start to 2015. Sure you get more or less multi-pronged ruckmen, but their main gig is to drive the mid-field power.
Pumping Dougie
Guest
Haha, is that right? I'm just stirring. I'm very happy with recruiting Tim English because he understands Ruckman need to get their hands on the footy to be influential. He is a super-tall onballer who is highly mobile, flexible and good below his knees. I was also very impressed with his intellect and humility in the interview I saw of him. Guys like Goldstein are useful but if you spend all day onball and only get 12 or 13 touches like he does then I think you're pretty ordinary. He gets some important touches which boost his impact, but he won't be remembered very strongly after he's retired. Sandilands hardly gets any possessions but his value is in his ability to totally dominate the hitouts to the point he can tap it 20m clear in the direction of his choice and he's also good at clearing a path for teammates with his hulking body. Yet he is still only average value. Gawn stood out in 2016 as providing genuine high class value to his team.
Vocans
Guest
As long as you hit the ball off of the palm of one hand with the fist of the other it's a legal handball. Through your legs, under your armpit, it doesn't matter. Count yourself lucky the days of the flick pass are long gone. But I agree re incorrect disposals, and would add countless examples of holding and push in the back. All of which encourage congestion which still is the real blight on the game.
jim
Guest
Im pretty comfortable with the removal of 3rd man up - i love the uniqueness of the ruck role in our game and this should place greater importance on it again. Sadly the afl has again ignored some of the more obvious elephants in the corner- in particular the blight on our game that the current interpretation of 'incorrect disposal' (ie you basically get away with anything) and the increasing ridiculousness of what passes as a handball. I fear the gridiron style through the legs move that was deemed legal in the grand final will be more than just a one off screw up by the umpire....
Dalgety Carrington
Roar Guru
Sooooo...English must've been recruited as a rover then? :D And I'm not so sure about you're "ruckman are dumb" stereotype, there has been research to show that taller people are smarter than shorter people on average. ;)
Dalgety Carrington
Roar Guru
I really love this amendment and (not surprisingly given I've pushed for it way back) actually think it will be an easy interpretation. I reckon you would in most cases get a pretty good split second gut feel on whether a tackle started out okay. You see it countless times where the tackle was absolutely fine and then a few plentiful seconds later the tacklee has wriggled his way to a high contact free. The original intent is really about player safety you'd think and generally either no ones imperilled by that soft level of high contact we're talking about here or if they were it's due to the actions of the tacklee.
Dalgety Carrington
Roar Guru
They've shown no stomach to go after "stagers" short of the ones that come under the experimental-Freo penalties clause of the rule book.
Cat
Roar Guru
Stat can be manipulated to show whatever you want the to show. Notice how the AFL has not provided the actual increase in third mn ups, they constantly only refer to the percentage increase. If there are 1000 3rd man ups a year an increase of 12% is 120 more or less than 0.5 more per game per year. If the AFL wrote the story and used 0.5 per game increase, no one would care and would rightly ask why bother. However at 12% increase people automatically think it's 'big'.
InvisiblePJs
Roar Rookie
I have to say I was on the fence with the 3rd man up situation - until (and I am certainly no Dockers fan) Aaron Sandilands copped a one week suspension for rough conduct against third man Ben Griffiths early in 2016. Two up in a ruck contest is an AFL tradition & it should stay that way. Sorry Danger & Hodgey, but you're going to have to get easy kicks some other way next year!
Perry Bridge
Guest
Part of the reasoning is that the collected stats over the last couple of years have shown that there's no real difference in clearance rates either way.
Perry Bridge
Guest
#Josh What strikes me too - is that Australian football became the game we know and love to a large degree due to the benefit of isolation, allowing the domestic spectators to help drive the evolution of a game that is fairly free flowing, still tough, skillful, gets results etc. Those negative aspects of Rugby in particular, the clustering of the scrimmage; dubious tactics such as hacking and tripping; and restrictive field rules (off-side, no forward passing etc) - things like that haven't either been introduce or haven't lasted in the game. To me - those wanting 3rd man up seem to me to be advocating an increase in congestion of a contest, because, clearly 3rd man means there can be a 4th, and a 5th etc - without drawing the line somewhere then where would it go? We now have a contest where the 2 rucks a clearly identified, stand a metre apart initially and then engage in a tactical aspect of the game that is one of the few potential set play situations.
Josh
Expert
Not implying that ruckmen are the best players, I mean the elite players at any position.
Aransan
Guest
Ruckmen need strength and endurance and they take longer to mature than other players. There is skill in good tap work which takes years to develop and they still have to play a role around the ground. Goldstein is a good example.