Can this be true? We are not going to see any rule changes next season....Whats going on? Are the rules committee and The AFL taking drugs? Are they playing games with us?
Too many changes each season, Why on earth, do they need to change the rules so often? Aussie rules is the only sport I know, where the rules change every season. Its riduclous.
2007-11-22 23:26:58 · 15 answers · asked by Anonymous in Sports ➔ Football (Australian) ➔ Australian Rules
Too true deedubya, Caraline Wilson.....What a joke?
2007-11-24 13:53:45 · update #1
Dont hold ya breathe Big Kev, the season hasn't started yet...anything is possible. In fact they are probably dreaming up a new bizzare rule as we speak :P
2007-11-24 22:50:26 · answer #1 · answered by PLANET ROGUE-POP: 1 6 · 2⤊ 5⤋
The only year that everyone wants a rule changed (hands in the back) and its the only year they decide not to change any rules.
The problem is that nobody overlooks the AFL commission. They can do what they want and nobody brings them into line because they are a lone body. The AFL is a supporter run organisation, and there should be a body of people representing the supporters to bring thoughts to the table, eg. how to scrap the hands in the back rule.
2007-11-26 20:20:53 · answer #2 · answered by heatedwirez 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
In the pre-season WAFL (I think also the AFL) a couple of years ago they tried the rule change of; the ball remaining in play if it hit the goal or point post & stayed in play. I personally found that a good change as the same rule applies in soccer, rugby, hockey, polo etc.....
Also if it was clear who had touched the ball last, prior to it going out of play, the opposing team had a free kick back into play. If disputed a throw-in tool place. It was amazing how that rule kept the flow of play going & no ugly scrums, & force outs, near the boundary.
I know - Aussie Rules is a unique code & the traditionalist don't want people fiddling constantly with the rules ( I am in that bracket).
2007-11-23 21:10:20 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
Big Kev could you please tell me if they reviewed the hands in the back rule or will it still stand for next season ?
Also, glad to see there wasn't too much tampering with the rules, that's the first time for a long time that that's happened. Sounds like great news for a change when it comes to rule changes for season ahead.
2007-11-25 19:00:01 · answer #4 · answered by Matt 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
It's the interpretations, not the rules, that need to be fixed.
Please can they come down from those drugs for just long enough to lose the 'hand in the back' interpretation and bring back the enforcement of 'kicking in danger'. Encourage players to actually go for the ball!
They have got the interpretation of handball right though. I did get sick of the ticky-touch, 'you didn't quite punch that properly', free kicks.
2007-11-23 08:01:30 · answer #5 · answered by Quandary 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Must be drugs they like to talk lots about them, but seriosly who woulda thought it possible the rules being the same for more than 1 season!
2007-11-24 09:16:53 · answer #6 · answered by whay i lost my ?s 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
But Kev, that may means the rules are so close to perfect that it is now very hard to find anything to improve on.
Wouldn't that be just the way to go for all you AFL disciples?
Perfection is what we all strive for afterall.
2007-11-23 08:34:47 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
The good thing is Caroline Wilson has had no influence on stuffing up '08 like she did '07 . Why she is on the rules committee is a no brainer for me ! It would have been hard, for the AFL to just dimiss her , she would have copped total blame for the, 'in the back mess' . I think the AFL know they have erred big time, and have just simply put a lid on it.
2007-11-24 21:25:33 · answer #8 · answered by deedubya 5 · 2⤊ 3⤋
Another year of paying hands in the back for me.....im gunna get nailed from players everytime :P
More send off's coming in 2008 form me! Watch out guys
2007-11-23 16:44:05 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
still have the hands in the back rule
2007-11-23 22:52:13 · answer #10 · answered by Ulimate_Hitman 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋