SA Footy

North couldn't play any more shit or have any more injuries than the last season! We can only win!

Why am I getting the feeling that these rules will be watered down or dumped completely during the trial games next season.......

Why weren't the AFL teams that practice in the comp consulted?

One if the rules I find strange is the interchange limit of 50. The professional teams will likely benifit from this as genuinely they will be fitter due to there additional training. Hence the SANFL sides would be the ones to feel this.

Q. wrote:Rotation cap = fatigue

Fatigue = turnovers

Turnovers = shit footy

And then more likely to skew a kick out of bounds.

heater31 wrote:Why am I getting the feeling that these rules will be watered down or dumped completely during the trial games next season.......

I think that is a very good chance of happening...

Heard that one of the Laws of the Game Comittee Members resigned as a result of some issues arising from these rule changes...

Will be interesting to see how defenders play and umpires umpire to this new out-of-bounds rule in one-on-one marking contets.

Another example where it will be a farce will be to the leading forward and the ball goes just over his head and bounces another 10 metres and goes out of bounds in the forward pocket. Can't always lead down the middle, and the players don't have the skill of the AFL to centre across their bodies.

One rule I've often thought of, but not sure of it's pros and cons, would be at centre bounce downs, no other players into the centre square until the ball has left. Could it help as midfielders know they have to get the ball out and no other players would create congestion at repeat ball-ups?

Big Phil wrote:

heater31 wrote:Why am I getting the feeling that these rules will be watered down or dumped completely during the trial games next season.......

I think that is a very good chance of happening...

Heard that one of the Laws of the Game Comittee Members resigned as a result of some issues arising from these rule changes...

If you are a forward or defender you have no hope of getting a spell anymore.


Also heard blood rule substitutions are not included. Could we see water carriers armed with fake blood capsules to distribute on the sly or teammates giving each other blood noses to get a rest?

SANFL's AFL funding is probably reliant on testing out these rules for them...

Wedgie wrote:North couldn't play any more shit or have any more injuries than the last season! We can only win!

Can somehow you see an improvement in 2016?

Was it one win in 2015..?

Where will the improvement come from my good friend?

Hey, we are not going that good either.

When will we share a "Grand Final" again...

Go our Neighbours of the North.

Something needs to change at the top if only one win...

FFS!

Slight change on the eve of the season......60 Rotations per game

http://sanfl.com.au/news/sanfl_news/3372/

Hooray,
they kept the kick out rule,
as I suggested it has improved the look of the game,less stoppages with more direct play.

CLUB STATEMENT REGARDING
SANFL RULE CHANGES

The SANFL have implemented rule changes for Season 2016 that will come into full effect this weekend.

In recent weeks, members, players and supporters have spoken to me about these rule changes and therefore I feel it necessary to make a statement on behalf of the Club.

The Central District Football Club is fully supportive of the capping of rotations in season 2016. We were reasonably happy with the cap at 50 rotations, but have accepted the late change to 60 rotations.

The Central District Football Club however, is strongly opposed to the ‘last possession out of bounds rule’ and we believe that the capping of rotations should have been allowed to do its job before any other significant rule changes were made.

This rule changes the very fabric of our game and we have fought hard to have it reconsidered, unfortunately to no avail.

The SANFL are in no doubt aware of our Club’s position and I have certainly made my objections well known, as has our Senior Coach Roy Laird. Chief Executive Kris Grant resigned in protest from the Laws of the Game Committee upon implementation of the rule prior to the commencement of the trial game period.

Unfortunately we do not get to make the rules, only to abide by them. Like the nine other Clubs, what we now have to do is move on and play to the new rules.

I have made this statement so that there is no confusion on where we sit, but also, that there is no further need for dialogue on this matter.

Now get pumped and ready for Good Friday Football at My Money House Oval as we start our 2016 campaign. We hope to see a big crown Friday and at all of our home games in 2016.



David Cavenett

PRESIDENT
Central District Football Club

I imagine Roy only called it "garbage" as he couldn't call it bullshit at the season launch.

It's a rubbish rule, absolutely rubbish.

I thought this rule is BETTER than the interchange rule capping.
It is great because it helps to reduces so many meaningless BORING boundary throw ins,and less defensive play.
Elizabeth is such a big ground they do not see it the same way as supporters at small ovals like Unley and Norwood etc.
I may be wrong but this rule was in during the 30's,it did not change the fabric of the game then.
The league boomed a la Farmer and Schultz etc with attacking footy with great goal scoring.
The spectical of the game here must improve or the SANFL will die.

VALE PARK wrote:I thought this rule is BETTER than the interchange rule capping.
It is great because it helps to reduces so many meaningless BORING boundary throw ins,and less defensive play.
Elizabeth is such a big ground they do not see it the same way as supporters at small ovals like Unley and Norwood etc.
I may be wrong but this rule was in during the 30's,it did not change the fabric of the game then.
The league boomed a la Farmer and Schultz etc with attacking footy with great goal scoring.
The spectical of the game here must improve or the SANFL will die.

I'll take the word of the most successful coach of the last 20 years, it's garbage.

IMHO the future game is bigger than any coach or club.
Having said that it is a pity to see Port Magpies virtually extinct.

VALE PARK wrote:IMHO the future game is bigger than any coach or club.
Having said that it is a pity to see Port Magpies virtually extinct.

1 - It's isn't the future of the game, it's changing rules for the sake of changing rules. And if it is to stop the boring as bat shit Norwood winning another GF then it's two years too late!

2 - Reindeer, mushrooms, motor bikes. All as relevant as your comment there.

Roy's opinion might have been applicable last decade but he can't even coach the Dogs to a win over North in finals this decade.
Perhaps he could me more proactive and paint new lines at Elizabeth so there weren't so many straight line boundaries, when he's done that he can start on Woodville, Norwood, Glenelg, etc too.