Is the game currently in crisis?

[stevie]

The solution is simple. All they have to do is umpire like they do in Grand finals....put the whistle away,and only pay what is there 100%,and not what is technically right!

When was the last time you can remember someone getting absolutely routed in a Grand Final? Sure there will always be a few dodgy one's,part and parcel of umpiring our game, but on the whole Grand Finals are umpired 10 times better than the season proper.

Fair dinkum it's common sense, but these control freaks,seriously,WTF are they doing to my game,our game!

The umps that get the GF gig aren't the fuckwits f****** up during the year. It seems to be the same idiots as some games are ok.

Just started watching the Shytney/Lions game. A minute in and I was bored shitless, switched off.

[Ghost Like]

The game is in trouble, especially to those who grew up with it and are now watching a shadow of the sport they grew to love. It was always a game with grey rules but instead of trying to make them black & white, they have added greyer rules. A "push in the back" should be exactly that, a "push", not a hand, not a touch! Now we are told, no pushing in the front or side??? We will never see a Plugger or Dunstall again. The "slide" rule should have been simple to introduce, it was brought in to stop a nasty habit that had crept in, Thomas & Goodes were the main culprits. I don't understand why a regime so intent on bringing in names and pseudo aspects of other sports, simply did not adopt the soccer slide rule, if you slide in with stops up or shins first, a free kick & a weeks suspension. It is that dangerous.

[snowdelisaint]

Is the game currently in crisis?

Pretty clear from the responses in this thread that the answer is YES.

If you add in the drug issue the answer becomes DEFINITELY.

[Jacks Back]

The solution is simple. All they have to do is umpire like they do in Grand finals....put the whistle away,and only pay what is there 100%,and not what is technically right!

When was the last time you can remember someone getting absolutely routed in a Grand Final? Sure there will always be a few dodgy one's,part and parcel of umpiring our game, but on the whole Grand Finals are umpired 10 times better than the season proper.

Fair dinkum it's common sense, but these control freaks,seriously,WTF are they doing to my game,our game!

OK, I'll take the p66 route - the grand final is umpired by the 3 best umpires of the season.

[3rd generation saint]

Being discussed on SEN - highlighted the idiotic free kick against Geary. Sliding rule and hands in the back (like against Kosi and the Adelaide forward last night) also getting an out and out caning.

Saying the umpiring is being directed by the AFl to officiate in this way.

Geischen needs to be sacked as do the idiots on the rules committee

Couldn't agree more with this, Geischen is destroying the game, should have been sacked 5 years ago.

All this talk about making the game more attractive for the overseas market, what a lot of crap. Personally don't think the NFL, EPL, MLB or NBA care less about the game outside their borders, product sells itself.

The greatest bit of irony is that for years the AFL tried to speed the game up, now are trying to slow it down so there are more contests, and yet, Geischen wants to take away any form of a contest in a marking situation, not allowed to touch the other player in anyway.

I'm just waiting to see the phony crap they put up as an excuse to get Essendon off the hook, because just like Barry Hall, I can see it coming, and on that day, the AFL will shoot itself in the foot so bad, it will take a new administration and years to recover the any form of respect.

[ozrulestrace]

The game is in trouble, especially to those who grew up with it and are now watching a shadow of the sport they grew to love. It was always a game with grey rules but instead of trying to make them black & white, they have added greyer rules. A "push in the back" should be exactly that, a "push", not a hand, not a touch! Now we are told, no pushing in the front or side??? We will never see a Plugger or Dunstall again. The "slide" rule should have been simple to introduce, it was brought in to stop a nasty habit that had crept in, Thomas & Goodes were the main culprits. I don't understand why a regime so intent on bringing in names and pseudo aspects of other sports, simply did not adopt the soccer slide rule, if you slide in with stops up or shins first, a free kick & a weeks suspension. It is that dangerous.

I agree, it's not the same game I watched form the mid 1960s and I don't think it is any better from all of the rule changes.

[Greg T]

Even when you watch some o; the games from only 10 years ago,it was a much better spectacle
and not so tiggy touch wood as it is now.
The umps have way to much say ,and it is certainly too technical and too many new rules which I reckon
Have taken a lot of the enjoyment out of watching the game.
The big bumps have gone,and the back line contests have all but ceased .
I reckon they have crated a game in crisis.

[Greg T]

Even when you watch some o; the games from only 10 years ago,it was a much better spectacle
and not so tiggy touch wood as it is now.
The umps have way to much say ,and it is certainly too technical and too many new rules which I reckon
Have taken a lot of the enjoyment out of watching the game.
The big bumps have gone,and the back line contests have all but ceased .
I reckon they have crated a game in crisis.

[3rd generation saint]

Imagine what would have happened to guys like Fraser, Plugger and Dunstall if they played today? Would be free kicked into oblivion, the 2 best full forwards in the history of the game, would have been murdered by the rules committee.

[jonesy]

Imagine what would have happened to guys like Fraser, Plugger and Dunstall if they played today? Would be free kicked into oblivion, the 2 best full forwards in the history of the game, would have been murdered by the rules committee.

Not sure about that...
What about the Frees the other way? No chopping the arms,etc. Lockett would kick 8-15 a week,yet give away 14 frees in the process. If Plugger didn't mark it in this era,then it would be a free to either him,or the fullback

I wonder if someone can dig up the stats on Plugger for frees for and against in his career,surely the biggest difference in league history,certainly whilst at the saints anyway

[plugger66]

Imagine what would have happened to guys like Fraser, Plugger and Dunstall if they played today? Would be free kicked into oblivion, the 2 best full forwards in the history of the game, would have been murdered by the rules committee.

Not sure about that...
What about the Frees the other way? No chopping the arms,etc. Lockett would kick 8-15 a week,yet give away 14 frees in the process. If Plugger didn't mark it in this era,then it would be a free to either him,or the fullback

I wonder if someone can dig up the stats on Plugger for frees for and against in his career,surely the biggest difference in league history,certainly whilst at the saints anyway

100% correct. So many more frees for forwards today than previously.

[BigMart]

Over exposed, over officiated and run by people so full of themselves it's ridiculous....

Luckily for the game, it is so great no matter how much people stuff with it.... Culturally it is so strong it will survive, even prosper and thrive...

It is the goose that lays the golden egg

Luckily grass roots footy and even VFL footy still looks like the game we used to love....

[whiskers3614]

Get rid of the umpires, let the crowd decide including those at home by pressing a button on their T Box thingy!
Hang on we only have half as many supporters as some of the other clubs, we may all have to get multiple remote controls!

[Saint_Ash]

Is the game in crisis? In my eyes yes.

Personally, I have become disillusioned with the game this year. I've been a Saints member since 2000 and an AFL member since 2007. Consistently since I got my AFL membership i have been to around 35-40 games throughout the season but this year after a big start in the first few rounds I have struggled to want to go and watch footy. I didn't go on Friday night or to any games over the weekend, not because I didn't want to support the Saints, not because it was an away game, not because i would have had to deal with Collingwood ferals, but simply because i preferred to stay home and spend time with the missus (oh dear lord I am in trouble...).

I don't blame the umpires, they only apply the rules that are put in place by the administrators. Yes sometimes umpires make mistakes, everybody makes them but the blame should rest squarely on the administrators who implement ridiculous rules and interpretations that make it almost impossible to umpire and make the game very frustrating and boring to watch.

You could make an argument that the saints results so far could have something to do with it and that could be part of it but I am really struggling to watch what is being turned into a non-contact sport.

[Dis Believer]

I am sure Vlad dreams of the first Black Muslim Gay Woman field umpire as part of his plan

Get around her.

You continue to raise the bar with an almost monotonous regularity - well played sir !!

[mullet]

Is the game in crisis? In my eyes yes.

Personally, I have become disillusioned with the game this year. I've been a Saints member since 2000 and an AFL member since 2007. Consistently since I got my AFL membership i have been to around 35-40 games throughout the season but this year after a big start in the first few rounds I have struggled to want to go and watch footy. I didn't go on Friday night or to any games over the weekend, not because I didn't want to support the Saints, not because it was an away game, not because i would have had to deal with Collingwood ferals, but simply because i preferred to stay home and spend time with the missus (oh dear lord I am in trouble...).

I don't blame the umpires, they only apply the rules that are put in place by the administrators. Yes sometimes umpires make mistakes, everybody makes them but the blame should rest squarely on the administrators who implement ridiculous rules and interpretations that make it almost impossible to umpire and make the game very frustrating and boring to watch.

You could make an argument that the saints results so far could have something to do with it and that could be part of it but I am really struggling to watch what is being turned into a non-contact sport.

Couldnt of put it better saint ash. And I have been a member for a lot longer (not that it really matters). People I talk to are of the same opinion, No one can follow the rules, even the umpires which results in a lot of anger and angst. Its hard enough watching it on TV, but to be there and put up with the angst and anger that supporters feel, well it just doesnt make for a great time. As I have said previously, it isnt the losing, could always find something to laugh about in the eighties standing in the terraces. And listening to talk back radio (SEN) fans of all teams are confused. And just quietly, I think fans are annoyed with the whole Essendon thing as well. Most seem to think the AFL will sweep it under the carpet, which only shows that a lot of fans believe the AFL to sweep under the carpet alot.

[stevie]

Just saw the Scott Thompson free. You have to be kidding me.

[ljpoyz]

After hearing Gieschen explain what is/isn't a free kick, Chamberlain made the right call on that. Purely on how he is instructed, he didn't make a mistake. The instructions on the other hand are utterly f****** ridiculous.

Just saw the Scott Thompson free. You have to be kidding me.

[Life Long Saint]

You have to ask yourself why has the oldest ball on the planet with codified rules has made so many changes in the last 10 years?

How long have we had a rules committee?
How long would said rules committee last as an entity if every season they said "The game is OK, we recommend no rules changes."?
We all know that answer to this.

Let the game evolve naturally as it has for over a century. Make rule changes only when the game can't evolve and the existing rules are holding up its development.

The are taking the advertising company approach. Invent a problem and then sell the solution.

Some of the worst decisions out the body include:
1. Hands in the back in a marking contest.
Firstly, why only a marking contest? Surely hands in the back is hands in the back regardless of where it is!
Secondly, the rule is pushing in the back. This is a rule because it has always been illegal to "push" your opponent in the back. They are unsuspecting, unprotected and usually moving forward, therefore an easy target to knock over. A set of hands resting on the back of an opponent violates none of these and should never be a free kick.
The rule should just be the simple "two actions" rule (forgetting the Chamberlain decision as that was just wrong).

2. Deliberate OOB. This one is bizarre now that we have the deliberate rushed behind with a totally separate set of criteria.
This is one of the most contentious rules. We are asking the umpire to determine the thoughts of the player. Impossible.
The stupidity of this rule is highlighted in the scenario where a player, under pressure, is attempting to handball the ball through the points (as he is entitled). As he tries that, his arm is bumped by an opponent and the ball hits the behind post instead. The decision? Deliberate out of bounds. STUPID!

I could go on as there are heaps (rolling into the legs of an opponent) but these are the two that annoy me the most.

[plugger66]

You have to ask yourself why has the oldest ball on the planet with codified rules has made so many changes in the last 10 years?

How long have we had a rules committee?
How long would said rules committee last as an entity if every season they said "The game is OK, we recommend no rules changes."?
We all know that answer to this.

Let the game evolve naturally as it has for over a century. Make rule changes only when the game can't evolve and the existing rules are holding up its development.

The are taking the advertising company approach. Invent a problem and then sell the solution.

Some of the worst decisions out the body include:
1. Hands in the back in a marking contest.
Firstly, why only a marking contest? Surely hands in the back is hands in the back regardless of where it is!
Secondly, the rule is pushing in the back. This is a rule because it has always been illegal to "push" your opponent in the back. They are unsuspecting, unprotected and usually moving forward, therefore an easy target to knock over. A set of hands resting on the back of an opponent violates none of these and should never be a free kick.
The rule should just be the simple "two actions" rule (forgetting the Chamberlain decision as that was just wrong).

2. Deliberate OOB. This one is bizarre now that we have the deliberate rushed behind with a totally separate set of criteria.
This is one of the most contentious rules. We are asking the umpire to determine the thoughts of the player. Impossible.
The stupidity of this rule is highlighted in the scenario where a player, under pressure, is attempting to handball the ball through the points (as he is entitled). As he tries that, his arm is bumped by an opponent and the ball hits the behind post instead. The decision? Deliberate out of bounds. STUPID!

I could go on as there are heaps (rolling into the legs of an opponent) but these are the two that annoy me the most.

Could you imagine the game without deliberate OOB. It would be played even further along the boundary line and there would triple the throw ins. We may not like one bad decision a game with that rule but I would take it every time compared to guys just heading to the boundary all the time when there isnt any other option.

[Life Long Saint]

2. Deliberate OOB. This one is bizarre now that we have the deliberate rushed behind with a totally separate set of criteria.
This is one of the most contentious rules. We are asking the umpire to determine the thoughts of the player. Impossible.
The stupidity of this rule is highlighted in the scenario where a player, under pressure, is attempting to handball the ball through the points (as he is entitled). As he tries that, his arm is bumped by an opponent and the ball hits the behind post instead. The decision? Deliberate out of bounds. STUPID!

Could you imagine the game without deliberate OOB. It would be played even further along the boundary line and there would triple the throw ins. We may not like one bad decision a game with that rule but I would take it every time compared to guys just heading to the boundary all the time when there isnt any other option.

I could but I could live with it if they were consistent in their adjudication. Make the criteria the same as they have for a rushed behind.
Don't pay deliberate if the ball travels over 40m up the ground and trickles OOB after half a dozen bounces. In that situation the sole intent of the player is not to put the ball OOB, it is to gain metres for his team and force a stoppage.

Can you explain why the adjudication is different in the example I have highlighted above in my original post?

[plugger66]

2. Deliberate OOB. This one is bizarre now that we have the deliberate rushed behind with a totally separate set of criteria.
This is one of the most contentious rules. We are asking the umpire to determine the thoughts of the player. Impossible.
The stupidity of this rule is highlighted in the scenario where a player, under pressure, is attempting to handball the ball through the points (as he is entitled). As he tries that, his arm is bumped by an opponent and the ball hits the behind post instead. The decision? Deliberate out of bounds. STUPID!

Could you imagine the game without deliberate OOB. It would be played even further along the boundary line and there would triple the throw ins. We may not like one bad decision a game with that rule but I would take it every time compared to guys just heading to the boundary all the time when there isnt any other option.

I could but I could live with it if they were consistent in their adjudication. Make the criteria the same as they have for a rushed behind.
Don't pay deliberate if the ball travels over 40m up the ground and trickles OOB after half a dozen bounces. In that situation the sole intent of the player is not to put the ball OOB, it is to gain metres for his team and force a stoppage.

Can you explain why the adjudication is different in the example I have highlighted above in my original post?

Because they are different just as hands in the back for a mark is paid differently to hands in the back when just running for the ball.

[Life Long Saint]

Because they are different just as hands in the back for a mark is paid differently to hands in the back when just running for the ball.

But they are not different.
The player is deliberately trying to put the ball out of play.
Did he mean for it go OOB? No! So his intent wasn't to put the ball OOB. So the act is not deliberate.
No wonder fans get frustrated.

[gringo]

Drugs, gambling, poor administration, unclear rules, people getting out before the ship sinks. Nah it's all good. Andy has made lots of money to spend on the new clubs that are super popular while the bleating pie scoffing idiots whine away their lives in the background. The game has never been better and no tanking or drug use ever has or ever will occur in the game.

The main problem is the pleb supporters think they matter. Get it through your heads it's a corporate game now. Pay your membership and shut the hell up you have no relevance to the AFL anymore.

[plugger66]

Because they are different just as hands in the back for a mark is paid differently to hands in the back when just running for the ball.

But they are not different.
The player is deliberately trying to put the ball out of play.
Did he mean for it go OOB? No! So his intent wasn't to put the ball OOB. So the act is not deliberate.
No wonder fans get frustrated.

If he missed the behind than it is bad luck. They are different. You may not like it but that has been happening for years even before the free for a deliberate behind.