Talking Footy

I like the suggestion of starting positions. Allows players to move freely but forces coaches to reconsider flooding as it will tire their players out quicker when they have to return to their area

AFLcrap1 wrote: Wed Jul 18, 2018 5:13 pm

Lol
Dock interchange .
That would be a factor if you only allow single figure ..say 8
But when there's 10 x that amount ..lol just lol

can you explain why a penalty such as a reduction of interchanges wouldnt matter? I'd love to hear your attempt

Are you fucking serious .
There's more interchanges in one game of fumbleball than a whole round of the NRL

Lol reducing a huge amount by some won't make any difference

AFLcrap1 wrote: Wed Jul 18, 2018 5:30 pm

Are you fucking serious .
There's more interchanges in one game of fumbleball than a whole round of the NRL

Lol reducing a huge amount by some won't make any difference

based on what? Your 'vibe'?

Coaches use rotations for a reason, not for shits and giggles. If they penalised a team by reducing their rotations by 1/4 it would significantly impact their ability to rest players. They would then struggle to maintain defensive structures towards the end of the game.

Lol
But we hear what supreme elite athletes these are
Yet each team needs 10 times the interchanges that's RL match has .
Maybe that's why people are turning off fumbleball on droves .
No war of attrition ..no getting tired
You can just jog off to the bench multiple times .
Lol

AFLcrap1 wrote: Wed Jul 18, 2018 8:21 pm

Lol
But we hear what supreme elite athletes these are
Yet each team needs 10 times the interchanges that's RL match has .
Maybe that's why people are turning off fumbleball on droves .
No war of attrition ..no getting tired
You can just jog off to the bench multiple times .
Lol

FMD you're clueless!

They could reduce the interchanges to 1 per game and still play effectively, just like they did for the last century. However, the coaches would need to change tactics drastically so players could reserve energy for the entire game. This would mean no more congestion and limited flooding.

Lol just lol

AFLcrap1 wrote: Wed Jul 18, 2018 5:30 pm

Are you fucking serious .
There's more interchanges in one game of fumbleball than a whole round of the NRL

Lol reducing a huge amount by some won't make any difference

NFI!

NlolRL wrote: Wed Jul 18, 2018 5:14 pm

I like the suggestion of starting positions. Allows players to move freely but forces coaches to reconsider flooding as it will tire their players out quicker when they have to return to their area

I'm up in the air with starting positions.
It could slow the game a bit at stoppages as players get back.
That's a move in the wrong direction. Imo
Kind of toward RL pace and lack of action.
Need to see it work first.

I think a rotation reduction is a good option.
It will effectively force coaches to stop flooding to conserve petrol tickets.
And it's very easy to implement, and it can be done incrementally.
It would also provide a heap more one on one contests for the ball.
Everyone can appreciate that!

SportCapital wrote: Wed Jul 18, 2018 11:30 pm

AFLcrap1 wrote: Wed Jul 18, 2018 5:30 pm

Are you fucking serious .
There's more interchanges in one game of fumbleball than a whole round of the NRL

Lol reducing a huge amount by some won't make any difference

NFI!

Defend defend defend .

SportCapital wrote: Wed Jul 18, 2018 11:46 pm

NlolRL wrote: Wed Jul 18, 2018 5:14 pm

I like the suggestion of starting positions. Allows players to move freely but forces coaches to reconsider flooding as it will tire their players out quicker when they have to return to their area

I'm up in the air with starting positions.
It could slow the game a bit at stoppages as players get back.
That's a move in the wrong direction. Imo
Kind of toward RL pace and lack of action.
Need to see it work first.

I think a rotation reduction is a good option.
It will effectively force coaches to stop flooding to conserve petrol tickets.
And it's very easy to implement, and it can be done incrementally.
It would also provide a heap more one on one contests for the ball.
Everyone can appreciate that!

Lol
No matter how much you sugar coat shit ..it's still shit .
That's why Rl in this country is the most watched sport ..& why AFL is going backwards in the ratings .

AFLcrap1 wrote: Thu Jul 19, 2018 7:47 am

SportCapital wrote: Wed Jul 18, 2018 11:46 pm

NlolRL wrote: Wed Jul 18, 2018 5:14 pm

I like the suggestion of starting positions. Allows players to move freely but forces coaches to reconsider flooding as it will tire their players out quicker when they have to return to their area

I'm up in the air with starting positions.
It could slow the game a bit at stoppages as players get back.
That's a move in the wrong direction. Imo
Kind of toward RL pace and lack of action.
Need to see it work first.

I think a rotation reduction is a good option.
It will effectively force coaches to stop flooding to conserve petrol tickets.
And it's very easy to implement, and it can be done incrementally.
It would also provide a heap more one on one contests for the ball.
Everyone can appreciate that!

Lol
No matter how much you sugar coat shit ..it's still shit .
That's why Rl in this country is the most watched sport ..& why AFL is going backwards in the ratings .

ratings are only one measure and are steadily going down for all programs overall. Another measure is crowds, and the AFL are heading for another record attendance year and may break 7mil for the first time ever.

This doesnt seem to support your claim

Take a piece of shit, dress it up, change the rules . It's still just a piece shit! A piece of shit that is nearly always over before the start of third quarter.

NlolRL wrote: Thu Jul 19, 2018 8:32 am

AFLcrap1 wrote: Thu Jul 19, 2018 7:47 am

SportCapital wrote: Wed Jul 18, 2018 11:46 pm

I'm up in the air with starting positions.
It could slow the game a bit at stoppages as players get back.
That's a move in the wrong direction. Imo
Kind of toward RL pace and lack of action.
Need to see it work first.

I think a rotation reduction is a good option.
It will effectively force coaches to stop flooding to conserve petrol tickets.
And it's very easy to implement, and it can be done incrementally.
It would also provide a heap more one on one contests for the ball.
Everyone can appreciate that!

Lol
No matter how much you sugar coat shit ..it's still shit .
That's why Rl in this country is the most watched sport ..& why AFL is going backwards in the ratings .

ratings are only one measure and are steadily going down for all programs overall. Another measure is crowds, and the AFL are heading for another record attendance year and may break 7mil for the first time ever.

This doesnt seem to support your claim

Lol don't lump RL in the ALL PROGRAMS ratings are going down basket .
We are holding steady .
You are down massively .

Lol try living in the real world for a change .

pussycat wrote: Thu Jul 19, 2018 10:21 am

Take a piece of shit, dress it up, change the rules . It's still just a piece shit! A piece of shit that is nearly always over before the start of third quarter.

talking about shit, dont you just love talking it pussycat

Last weeks results:
Geel v Adelaide - less than 1 goal difference at halftime, and just over 1 goal difference 2/3rds of the way through the last quarter

Car v Stk - 23 points the difference going into the 3rd quarter, so not even close to over

Haw v Lions - hawks lead by 20 points in the third and lost the game, so obviously not over

Demons v dogs - 3 points the difference at halftime, so wrong again

Suns v bombers - suns lead by 5 points at halftime then trailed by 3 goals at 3 quarter time, so again you're wrong

Giants v tigers - was decided by only 2 points, so wrong again

Coll v eagles - 4 points the difference at halftime, so wrong again

Nth v Syd - decided by 1 goal kicked within the last minute, so wrong again

Dockers v power - only 9 points the difference at fulltime, so wrong again

Well done pussycat, 0 for 9 last weekend