SA Footy

HH3 wrote:Just f**kin belt it forward if people aren't ready.

And if you're one of the people that isn't ready, you know it's gonna be belted forward.

Easy.

HH3 wrote:Just f**kin belt it forward if people aren't ready.

And if you're one of the people that isn't ready, you know it's gonna be belted forward.

Easy.

amber_fluid wrote:

HH3 wrote:Just f**kin belt it forward if people aren't ready.

And if you're one of the people that isn't ready, you know it's gonna be belted forward.

Easy.

What the **** would you know, you don’t even watch footy

HH3 wrote:

amber_fluid wrote:

HH3 wrote:Just f**kin belt it forward if people aren't ready.

And if you're one of the people that isn't ready, you know it's gonna be belted forward.

Easy.

What the **** would you know, you don’t even watch footy

Well I played over 200 games....soooo..

Got 4th best once.....

Life Member too.

Sorry I don't want to watch the shit being put on TV.

woodublieve12 wrote:

HH3 wrote:

amber_fluid wrote:

HH3 wrote:Just f**kin belt it forward if people aren't ready.

And if you're one of the people that isn't ready, you know it's gonna be belted forward.

Easy.

What the **** would you know, you don’t even watch footy

Well I played over 200 games....soooo..

Got 4th best once.....

Life Member too.

Sorry I don't want to watch the shit being put on TV.

Makes sense being a North fan

tigerpie wrote:How many times does the player know he's had no prior opportunity so just absorbs the tackle without really trying to dispose of it?
Maybe if you are caught with the ball regardless of prior opportunity its holding the ball.
That'll do 2 things...reward a solid tackle and, the players will tend to tap it into space releasing a runner. Ala Cyril.
Just a thought.

woodublieve12 wrote:

HH3 wrote:

amber_fluid wrote:

HH3 wrote:Just f**kin belt it forward if people aren't ready.

And if you're one of the people that isn't ready, you know it's gonna be belted forward.

Easy.

What the **** would you know, you don’t even watch footy

Well I played over 200 games....soooo..

Got 4th best once.....

Life Member too.

Sorry I don't want to watch the shit being put on TV.

Makes sense being a North fan

Zelezny Chucks wrote:

tigerpie wrote:How many times does the player know he's had no prior opportunity so just absorbs the tackle without really trying to dispose of it?
Maybe if you are caught with the ball regardless of prior opportunity its holding the ball.
That'll do 2 things...reward a solid tackle and, the players will tend to tap it into space releasing a runner. Ala Cyril.
Just a thought.

No.

The only thing this achieves is rewarding the second person to the ball even more than they already are now.

Just no.

tigerpie wrote:

Zelezny Chucks wrote:

tigerpie wrote:How many times does the player know he's had no prior opportunity so just absorbs the tackle without really trying to dispose of it?
Maybe if you are caught with the ball regardless of prior opportunity its holding the ball.
That'll do 2 things...reward a solid tackle and, the players will tend to tap it into space releasing a runner. Ala Cyril.
Just a thought.

No.

The only thing this achieves is rewarding the second person to the ball even more than they already are now.

Just no.

That's what the game is about. Reward a solid tackle. The first to the ball has to make the decision as to whether he takes possession or taps it to a team mates advantage.
Smart footballers are brilliant at this. Ala Cyril, diesel, a and d Jarman and many others.

tigerpie wrote:

Zelezny Chucks wrote:

tigerpie wrote:How many times does the player know he's had no prior opportunity so just absorbs the tackle without really trying to dispose of it?
Maybe if you are caught with the ball regardless of prior opportunity its holding the ball.
That'll do 2 things...reward a solid tackle and, the players will tend to tap it into space releasing a runner. Ala Cyril.
Just a thought.

No.

The only thing this achieves is rewarding the second person to the ball even more than they already are now.

Just no.

That's what the game is about. Reward a solid tackle. The first to the ball has to make the decision as to whether he takes possession or taps it to a team mates advantage.
Smart footballers are brilliant at this. Ala Cyril, diesel, a and d Jarman and many others.

Zelezny Chucks wrote:

tigerpie wrote:

Zelezny Chucks wrote:

tigerpie wrote:How many times does the player know he's had no prior opportunity so just absorbs the tackle without really trying to dispose of it?
Maybe if you are caught with the ball regardless of prior opportunity its holding the ball.
That'll do 2 things...reward a solid tackle and, the players will tend to tap it into space releasing a runner. Ala Cyril.
Just a thought.

No.

The only thing this achieves is rewarding the second person to the ball even more than they already are now.

Just no.

That's what the game is about. Reward a solid tackle. The first to the ball has to make the decision as to whether he takes possession or taps it to a team mates advantage.
Smart footballers are brilliant at this. Ala Cyril, diesel, a and d Jarman and many others.

So the handful of players that would be "brilliant" at it will mean it will be a more entertaining game? What about the bottom 10 in each team, are they just tapping it around to each other too scared to pick it up as they'll give away a free in their defensive 50?

At no point should rules be encouraging people to wait for someone else to pick the ball up. The game is about rewarding first to the ball, if they then don't get rid of it then it is about rewarding the tackler. We aren't playing British Bulldog FFS.

I bet you enjoyed Dangerfield "winning" a free kick for a ruck infringement didn't you.

beef wrote:http://www.afl.com.au/news/2018-07-31/vfl-teams-to-trial-new-rules-this-weekend

FlyingHigh wrote:Couple more:
Regarding holding the ball when players are on the ground, would it help if it was only paid this if there is one tackler and as soon as a second one gets in there and the ball stops, ball up straight away, don't wait for two more blokes to pile on top and another five players to mill around?

Get rid of this idea of the second umpire miles away paying in-play frees. That one against McGovern on Hogan in the third quarter, the umpire wouldn't have had any idea so far away as to how much it did or didn't impact the contest.

And, this might be one for Psyber, do we still need the blood rule? Heard recently that with education and treatment the prevalence of it in Australia is now virtually nil. Is there a reason we still need it other than it might not look good?