You know what gay porn sounds like?
Not that there's anything wrong with that, Maso.
-
IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.
Footy media , love’m or hate’ m ?
- Thread starter Mr Brightside
- Start date
Not that there's anything wrong with that, Maso.
Ssssssshhhh. You weren't supposed to notice that bit.You know what gay porn sounds like?
Not that there's anything wrong with that, Maso.
From what i have seen he's too busy bemoaning carlton, which is keeping him occupied
But, but.......weren't all the pundits raving on about how great the footy is this year with the new rules???
What are the actual stats for scoring?
Aside from some blowouts, most games seem to be very low scores.....even with the extra minutes.
Scoring is slightly up on 2019, but remains lower than 2018, the big rise in scores never happened as there are a fair number of low scoring and very defensive games happening. It looks like this:
As the game has become more professional it has become more defensive, note 2020 is excluded above as it skews the data. Short quarters are one thing but there were other impacts of lockdown etc so I leave it out. Average score in 2020 was 60.6 and less blowouts with closer games.
In terms of blowouts, this really is just an impression. If you go back to 2015 and 2016 over 20% of games had a margin of 60 points or more, in 2019 and 2021 it is around 10-11%. I need to go back further to really see the trend but we're not getting more blowouts. However, the proportion of games decided by less than 5 points is also down.
What we're seeing, of course, is that changing the rules has not had the impacts the AFL was hoping for and it is having impacts well beyond what they could predict. They need to stop fiddling with the rules every year, and the interpretations every week, and let the game settle.
When the game becomes very defensive a team who can work out a way to score highly will succeed and you can bet every club is looking for ways. That is what might increase scores, but it is also worth asking what is a reasonable rate of scoring in Australian Rules? Do we want to go back to the days when the best teams would kick 30 goals against weak opposition and the margin blew out to 100 points? At the moment the average for 2021 is 82 points per team per game which seems reasonable to me. If they do get higher scoring, add in the ridiculous time between goals to cater for TV ads and the games will go to midnight!
DS
The problem with changing rules is that clubs look to defensively negate the potential impact of the rule change first and then look to apply tactics to increase scoring. With the amount of rule changes we've seen lately, it doesn't allow the game to settle and then evolve into a more attacking game.
Nice analysis, D. It confirms what most of us know regarding rule changes. The AFL can introduce five tweaks to the rules each yer for the next 20 years, but unless they tackle the real issues, it will all be in vain.
I think that there are two main factors at play that are reducing scoring.
The first is the defensive nature of the coaching fraternity. Defence first coaches are everywhere. Clarkson. Hardwick. Scott. Longmire. Simpson. They basically all come from the same tradition and they are all concerned with denying opportunities to their opponents. Strategies are employed to prevent scoring. The possession game is about denying the opposition by keeping the ball away from them and reducing their time with the ball. Flooding is about denying space in other team's forward line. Zone defence is about shutting down attacking moves by denying both space and time. This is a natural progression for coaches. They can't all have a team of superstars so they make do with negative tactics designed to kill flair.
In Soccer, we have seen denial go unchecked and it has led us to the World game that we see now. At the highest levels, most teams park the bus. They deny all scoring opportunities through the use of an impenetrable defensive line, usually coupled with a tall, athletic, rangy goalkeeper who lets nothing in. In the World game, players such as Christiano Ronaldo or Lionel Messi are gold. They have the flair to break through the defence a few times every game. One or two scores is usually enough. Their team-mates are all defensive robots.
In Basketball, zone defence has been banned. Every coach knows that if you are playing a team that is more talented, more athletic, taller and bigger, you will lose. Unless you employ a zone defence. It is incredible how often denial of opportunity, if executed well, changes the outcome of a game.
Not hard to see why AFL coaches are going down the same path.
But there is a second issue that is reducing scoring. This is the issue that the AFL has no interest in addressing. Scoring would be restored to the heights of the early 70s and 80s IF ALL FREE KICKS WERE GIVEN.
Holding the ball. Free kick. Incorrect disposal. Free kick. Fall on the ball to force a stoppage. Free kick. Interfere in the marking contest. Free Kick. Illegal block when the ball is more than 10 metres away. Free Kick. Tackle an opponent without the ball. Free kick. Shepherding when he ball is more than 10 metres away. Free kick.
You get the picture. There would be more than 100 free kicks every game. There would be lots of scoring too. It is undeniable that free kicks influence the outcome of games now, when only about 25% are actually paid. Imagine what scoring would be like if every free kick was paid? That is what happens in Basketball. Fingertip contact is penalised.
I think that there are two main factors at play that are reducing scoring.
The first is the defensive nature of the coaching fraternity. Defence first coaches are everywhere. Clarkson. Hardwick. Scott. Longmire. Simpson. They basically all come from the same tradition and they are all concerned with denying opportunities to their opponents. Strategies are employed to prevent scoring. The possession game is about denying the opposition by keeping the ball away from them and reducing their time with the ball. Flooding is about denying space in other team's forward line. Zone defence is about shutting down attacking moves by denying both space and time. This is a natural progression for coaches. They can't all have a team of superstars so they make do with negative tactics designed to kill flair.
In Soccer, we have seen denial go unchecked and it has led us to the World game that we see now. At the highest levels, most teams park the bus. They deny all scoring opportunities through the use of an impenetrable defensive line, usually coupled with a tall, athletic, rangy goalkeeper who lets nothing in. In the World game, players such as Christiano Ronaldo or Lionel Messi are gold. They have the flair to break through the defence a few times every game. One or two scores is usually enough. Their team-mates are all defensive robots.
In Basketball, zone defence has been banned. Every coach knows that if you are playing a team that is more talented, more athletic, taller and bigger, you will lose. Unless you employ a zone defence. It is incredible how often denial of opportunity, if executed well, changes the outcome of a game.
Not hard to see why AFL coaches are going down the same path.
But there is a second issue that is reducing scoring. This is the issue that the AFL has no interest in addressing. Scoring would be restored to the heights of the early 70s and 80s IF ALL FREE KICKS WERE GIVEN.
Holding the ball. Free kick. Incorrect disposal. Free kick. Fall on the ball to force a stoppage. Free kick. Interfere in the marking contest. Free Kick. Illegal block when the ball is more than 10 metres away. Free Kick. Tackle an opponent without the ball. Free kick. Shepherding when he ball is more than 10 metres away. Free kick.
You get the picture. There would be more than 100 free kicks every game. There would be lots of scoring too. It is undeniable that free kicks influence the outcome of games now, when only about 25% are actually paid. Imagine what scoring would be like if every free kick was paid? That is what happens in Basketball. Fingertip contact is penalised.
I tend to agree TOT. I would also add that if they paid all the free kicks the players would not offend so often - they do it now because they know that the odds are with them and they will only get penalised maybe 25% of the time.
The thing about defensive coaching is that defence works, especially in finals. Why wouldn't you coach like that - it wins!
I don't watch any basketball, although the way SHocking is trying to change the game that might change as Aussie Rules is getting closer every time that moron gets his hands on the rules, but how do they ban zone defence?
I think flooding is limited as a tactic as you need to get some scores the other way and flooding makes that hard. Zone defence is another matter - look at the way teams defend their zones, force a turnover and rebound very quickly. If you have a very fit team this is effective, Richmond have certainly exploited this for a few years.
But I will also return to an earlier point - yes scores have reduced, but only from an historic high in the 80s and 90s. Expecting there to be an average team score of around 100 per game is expecting the game to be like it was for a small part of its history. 80-90 per team per game seems reasonable. I don't know what the fuss is all about. Scores rose through the 1970s and averaged around 100 per team in the 1980s and 1990s and then they fell again. As a coach looking at the situation back then you would have been silly not to try and limit opposition scoring, the scoring was historically high so there was an obvious place to focus on gaining a competitive edge.
DS
The thing about defensive coaching is that defence works, especially in finals. Why wouldn't you coach like that - it wins!
I don't watch any basketball, although the way SHocking is trying to change the game that might change as Aussie Rules is getting closer every time that moron gets his hands on the rules, but how do they ban zone defence?
I think flooding is limited as a tactic as you need to get some scores the other way and flooding makes that hard. Zone defence is another matter - look at the way teams defend their zones, force a turnover and rebound very quickly. If you have a very fit team this is effective, Richmond have certainly exploited this for a few years.
But I will also return to an earlier point - yes scores have reduced, but only from an historic high in the 80s and 90s. Expecting there to be an average team score of around 100 per game is expecting the game to be like it was for a small part of its history. 80-90 per team per game seems reasonable. I don't know what the fuss is all about. Scores rose through the 1970s and averaged around 100 per team in the 1980s and 1990s and then they fell again. As a coach looking at the situation back then you would have been silly not to try and limit opposition scoring, the scoring was historically high so there was an obvious place to focus on gaining a competitive edge.
DS
Caught the first 5 seconds of Cornes this morning, couldn’t get to the dial quick enough, he opened with words to the effect of “ Connor Rozze kicks 5 , 4 in a quarter “ they lost Kaneo, and a bloke from the other team kicked 5 , yes it was probably just bait for the Cats fans but ffs
There has been a bit of a talk in the media about how defenders are pushing opponents under the ball, and how potentially dangerous this is, especially if you have numerous players involved in the contest. I only watched bits and pieces of the game last night, but a couple of people called SEN this morning saying Geelong defenders did this on numerous occasional last night.
Does anyone remember how Ivan Soldo did his ACL? Hawkins blatantly pushed Balta out of the contest, Balta crashed into Soldo, who landed awkwardly and did his ACL.
How come the media never talks about this?
Does anyone remember how Ivan Soldo did his ACL? Hawkins blatantly pushed Balta out of the contest, Balta crashed into Soldo, who landed awkwardly and did his ACL.
How come the media never talks about this?
Karen Cornes has a shot a Carlton for not taking him first. Thinks Walsh was a mistake.
If you can, find the footage of David King saying that in the matches between top 8 teams the number of wins is 18 and amazingly the number of losses is 18 and that is how even the season is. Robbo then chimes in with a "wow that's amazing when you hear that".
