Round 4 discussion

Talk on the national game

Re: Round 4 discussion

Postby Corona Man » Tue Apr 19, 2016 9:02 am

So the support for Ross Lyon is overwhelming!
1961, 1971, 1976, 1978, 1983, 1986, 1988, 1989, 1991, 2008, 2013, 2014, 2015.... And don't you forget it!
User avatar
Corona Man
Coach
 
 
Posts: 12398
Joined: Thu Oct 02, 2014 2:28 pm
Location: Near the Beer Fridge
Has liked: 1275 times
Been liked: 3461 times
Grassroots Team: Echunga

Re: Round 4 discussion

Postby bennymacca » Tue Apr 19, 2016 10:32 am

Corona Man wrote:So the support for Ross Lyon is overwhelming!


Reckon most teams in the bottom 8 would want him
User avatar
bennymacca
Coach
 
 
Posts: 15028
Joined: Wed May 06, 2009 12:22 pm
Has liked: 2253 times
Been liked: 1803 times
Grassroots Team: Freeling

Re: Round 4 discussion

Postby helicopterking » Tue Apr 19, 2016 10:41 am

bennymacca wrote:
Corona Man wrote:So the support for Ross Lyon is overwhelming!


Reckon most teams in the bottom 8 would want him


Ross Lyon doesn't do teams in the bottom 8.
User avatar
helicopterking
Coach
 
Posts: 5694
Joined: Sun May 16, 2010 10:38 pm
Has liked: 298 times
Been liked: 666 times

Re: Round 4 discussion

Postby bennymacca » Tue Apr 19, 2016 11:03 am

He does at the moment ;)
User avatar
bennymacca
Coach
 
 
Posts: 15028
Joined: Wed May 06, 2009 12:22 pm
Has liked: 2253 times
Been liked: 1803 times
Grassroots Team: Freeling

Re: Round 4 discussion

Postby Feenix » Tue Apr 19, 2016 5:26 pm

No more grand final replays

THE AFL has scrapped the Grand Final replay, with extra time to decide this year's premiership in the case of a draw.

The League confirmed the historic decision on Tuesday following a meeting of the AFL Commission.

A Grand Final replay has taken place three times – in 1948, 1977 and most recently in 2010 when St Kilda lost to Collingwood.

Under the new rules in the case of a draw, two five-minute halves each way, plus time on, will be played to decide a winner.

If the scores are still tied at the end of the second period, the siren will not ring until the next score, which will decide the flag.



Whilst im glad they're getting rid of the replay, cant say I like the fact you could loose by a rushed behind
User avatar
Feenix
Reserves
 
 
Posts: 763
Joined: Mon Aug 11, 2014 11:02 am
Has liked: 68 times
Been liked: 66 times

Re: Round 4 discussion

Postby cracka » Tue Apr 19, 2016 5:33 pm

Feenix wrote:No more grand final replays

THE AFL has scrapped the Grand Final replay, with extra time to decide this year's premiership in the case of a draw.

The League confirmed the historic decision on Tuesday following a meeting of the AFL Commission.

A Grand Final replay has taken place three times – in 1948, 1977 and most recently in 2010 when St Kilda lost to Collingwood.

Under the new rules in the case of a draw, two five-minute halves each way, plus time on, will be played to decide a winner.

If the scores are still tied at the end of the second period, the siren will not ring until the next score, which will decide the flag.



Whilst im glad they're getting rid of the replay, cant say I like the fact you could loose by a rushed behind

Agree, maybe have a clause that it has to be a goal.
cracka
Veteran
 
 
Posts: 3650
Joined: Tue Mar 12, 2013 9:41 am
Has liked: 458 times
Been liked: 560 times
Grassroots Team: Onkaparinga Valley

Re: Round 4 discussion

Postby Spargo » Tue Apr 19, 2016 5:38 pm

I can guarantee you players won't be rushing any behinds late in the second half of extra time in a GF if scores are level.
2017 safooty NFL tipping champ

Don’t lose your grip on the dreams of the past
You must fight just to keep them alive...
Spargo
Coach
 
 
Posts: 15878
Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2012 4:42 pm
Location: Getting out of Dodge
Has liked: 5459 times
Been liked: 5089 times
Grassroots Team: Sacred Heart OC

Re: Round 4 discussion

Postby Grahaml » Tue Apr 19, 2016 5:56 pm

Reckon it's a shame. The fairest way to split two teams that are level after 120 minutes is to have another full 120 minutes. 5 each way makes it awfully flukey. Loads of benefits from that extra match. All the media must have loved it. The MCG and AFL would have gotten more money and loads of fans got to go to a game they wouldn't have been able to. Maybe a bit rough on St Kilda fans paying twice and not winning, but if you can't afford to go you can always stay home. In the future, the AFL could have taken the chance to play the grand final elsewhere the second week if there was a non Vic side playing.
Grahaml
Assistant Coach
 
 
Posts: 4812
Joined: Fri Feb 09, 2007 11:59 am
Has liked: 3 times
Been liked: 169 times

Re: Round 4 discussion

Postby DoublebluTiger » Tue Apr 19, 2016 6:09 pm

Like others it should be first goal wins if scores still level after both extra periods and not a behind.

I still prefer a replay. While not watching much of the 2010 replay the impression it was a rare opportunity for grass roots supporter of the respective finalists to get a chance to go to the game and it's happened 3 times in over 120 years of football.
Success is in trying
User avatar
DoublebluTiger
Under 16s
 
Posts: 337
Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2007 9:23 am
Location: Down south
Has liked: 0 time
Been liked: 50 times

Re: Round 4 discussion

Postby JK » Tue Apr 19, 2016 6:22 pm

DoublebluTiger wrote:Like others it should be first goal wins if scores still level after both extra periods and not a behind.


You could imagine the outcry though if one end was favoured by a 5 goal breeze.

I kinda get both arguments on it, but imho I'd keep it as is. As has been said the instances of drawn GF's show how uncommon it is
FUSC
User avatar
JK
Coach
 
 
Posts: 37369
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2005 10:11 am
Location: Coopers Hill
Has liked: 4440 times
Been liked: 2985 times
Grassroots Team: SMOSH West Lakes

Re: Round 4 discussion

Postby RB » Tue Apr 19, 2016 6:35 pm

Spargo wrote:I can guarantee you players won't be rushing any behinds late in the second half of extra time in a GF if scores are level.

Exactly, no issue with the 'golden point' rule.

Would prefer a replay though, I think there are numerous benefits, starting with the fact that there's another GF.

Will be interesting to see if the SANFL follows suit...
R.I.P. the SANFL 1877 - 2013
User avatar
RB
Coach
 
Posts: 5628
Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2011 3:45 pm
Has liked: 759 times
Been liked: 1073 times

Re: Round 4 discussion

Postby bennymacca » Tue Apr 19, 2016 6:37 pm

Grahaml wrote:Reckon it's a shame. The fairest way to split two teams that are level after 120 minutes is to have another full 120 minutes. 5 each way makes it awfully flukey. Loads of benefits from that extra match. All the media must have loved it. The MCG and AFL would have gotten more money and loads of fans got to go to a game they wouldn't have been able to. Maybe a bit rough on St Kilda fans paying twice and not winning, but if you can't afford to go you can always stay home. In the future, the AFL could have taken the chance to play the grand final elsewhere the second week if there was a non Vic side playing.


it was massively anticlimactic though, having to come back and do it all again for a full game.

Extra time in a grand final on the other hand will be as about as exciting as it gets
User avatar
bennymacca
Coach
 
 
Posts: 15028
Joined: Wed May 06, 2009 12:22 pm
Has liked: 2253 times
Been liked: 1803 times
Grassroots Team: Freeling

Re: Round 4 discussion

Postby JK » Tue Apr 19, 2016 6:52 pm

bennymacca wrote:
Grahaml wrote:Reckon it's a shame. The fairest way to split two teams that are level after 120 minutes is to have another full 120 minutes. 5 each way makes it awfully flukey. Loads of benefits from that extra match. All the media must have loved it. The MCG and AFL would have gotten more money and loads of fans got to go to a game they wouldn't have been able to. Maybe a bit rough on St Kilda fans paying twice and not winning, but if you can't afford to go you can always stay home. In the future, the AFL could have taken the chance to play the grand final elsewhere the second week if there was a non Vic side playing.


it was massively anticlimactic though, having to come back and do it all again for a full game.

Extra time in a grand final on the other hand will be as about as exciting as it gets


The replay was one-sided though - Should it be another cliffhanger it would achieve the climax* most people were after wouldn't it? (Granted extra time is the guaranteed nailbiter)
FUSC
User avatar
JK
Coach
 
 
Posts: 37369
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2005 10:11 am
Location: Coopers Hill
Has liked: 4440 times
Been liked: 2985 times
Grassroots Team: SMOSH West Lakes

Re: Round 4 discussion

Postby FlyingHigh » Tue Apr 19, 2016 6:55 pm

Grahaml wrote:Reckon it's a shame. The fairest way to split two teams that are level after 120 minutes is to have another full 120 minutes. 5 each way makes it awfully flukey. Loads of benefits from that extra match. All the media must have loved it. The MCG and AFL would have gotten more money and loads of fans got to go to a game they wouldn't have been able to. Maybe a bit rough on St Kilda fans paying twice and not winning, but if you can't afford to go you can always stay home. In the future, the AFL could have taken the chance to play the grand final elsewhere the second week if there was a non Vic side playing.


Agree with all this Graham. Re taking it to the other states, simply the replay could be played at the highest-ranking team's ground.
The amount of scoring, more than rugby's, soccer, Gridiron, and the difference between the scores (unlike basketball) and that the opposition doesn't automatically get the ball back as part of the structure of the game, mean draws are a rare, but valid part of the game.

I didn't find the replay anti-climactic at all, it had a far better atmosphere than many other GF's. St Kilda had plenty of chances to win the drawn GF.

What I did find anti-climactic was the Golden-Point in last year's NRL Grand Final. That it all came down to that one score which is rarely a part of a Rugby League game (unlike field goals and PAT's in Gridiron or behinds in Aussie Rules) didn't feel right to me.
FlyingHigh
Assistant Coach
 
Posts: 4832
Joined: Wed Jun 14, 2006 11:12 am
Has liked: 81 times
Been liked: 173 times

Re: Round 4 discussion

Postby Grahaml » Tue Apr 19, 2016 7:15 pm

The replay was no more anti climactic than any other GF with that kind of margin. Nothing to do with it being a replay.
Grahaml
Assistant Coach
 
 
Posts: 4812
Joined: Fri Feb 09, 2007 11:59 am
Has liked: 3 times
Been liked: 169 times

Re: Round 4 discussion

Postby Grahaml » Tue Apr 19, 2016 7:16 pm

So 5 weeks for May. Pathetic.
Grahaml
Assistant Coach
 
 
Posts: 4812
Joined: Fri Feb 09, 2007 11:59 am
Has liked: 3 times
Been liked: 169 times

Re: Round 4 discussion

Postby LaughingKookaburra » Tue Apr 19, 2016 7:31 pm

JK wrote:
DoublebluTiger wrote:Like others it should be first goal wins if scores still level after both extra periods and not a behind.


You could imagine the outcry though if one end was favoured by a 5 goal breeze.

I kinda get both arguments on it, but imho I'd keep it as is. As has been said the instances of drawn GF's show how uncommon it is


In the last 10 years has there ever been a game at the MCG where 1 end is truly favoured by wind, let alone one that is worth 5 goal?

It's a paddock surrounded entirely with massive grand stands and there is no space for the wind to get through. It sure does swirl, but I can't remember it truly favouring 1 end recently.
Can you bring a man to his feet when defeat is on repeat?
LaughingKookaburra
Coach
 
 
Posts: 6056
Joined: Fri Apr 20, 2007 11:22 am
Has liked: 72 times
Been liked: 739 times
Grassroots Team: Kenilworth

Re: Round 4 discussion

Postby bennymacca » Tue Apr 19, 2016 7:38 pm

Grahaml wrote:So 5 weeks for May. Pathetic.


That's about right imo
User avatar
bennymacca
Coach
 
 
Posts: 15028
Joined: Wed May 06, 2009 12:22 pm
Has liked: 2253 times
Been liked: 1803 times
Grassroots Team: Freeling

Re: Round 4 discussion

Postby Grahaml » Tue Apr 19, 2016 8:10 pm

bennymacca wrote:
Grahaml wrote:So 5 weeks for May. Pathetic.


That's about right imo


I expect the majority to agree with you and clearly the experts don't agree with me. Just think perhaps we aren't treating head injuries and the risk of doing serious and permanent damage with the alarm that perhaps we should.
Grahaml
Assistant Coach
 
 
Posts: 4812
Joined: Fri Feb 09, 2007 11:59 am
Has liked: 3 times
Been liked: 169 times

Re: Round 4 discussion

Postby bennymacca » Tue Apr 19, 2016 8:14 pm

Robbo said he thought 5 and Gerard said 6 FWIW
User avatar
bennymacca
Coach
 
 
Posts: 15028
Joined: Wed May 06, 2009 12:22 pm
Has liked: 2253 times
Been liked: 1803 times
Grassroots Team: Freeling

PreviousNext

Board index   Football  AFL

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: am Bays, Bing [Bot], gossipgirl, whufc and 16 guests

Around the place

Competitions   SANFL Official Site | Country Footy SA | Southern Football League | VFL Footy
Club Forums   Snouts Louts | The Roost | Redlegs Forum |