Read + Write + Report
Home | Start a blog | About Orble | FAQ | Blogs | Writers | Paid | My Orble | Login

Kicking for Touch- Punching not Enough

April 24th 2008 05:08
True, many of the commentators who espouse this mantra have a point about the game’s evolving nature assisting its longevity and accessibility. The West Coast success derived by being a mid field clearance machine has been replaced by Geelong’s long kicking dominance, is a relevant example of the evolving game plans resulting in flags for their teams. There are many noted example of a evolutionary game plan resulting in a flag.

Let’s go back to the 1970 Grand Final, and look again at the rules that had not yet been changed. In1970, a “Footy Traditionalist” would have wanted to keep in place rules that would make it capable for an English National Rugby side to win a match of AFL with ease. A player of the time could literally pick up the ball and kick it seventy metres down the field into the grand stand, and be granted a throw in for his trouble. A “No Questions Asked” policy if you will.


Modern international Rugby Union can teach the AFL something about the validity of rule change. The purists of Rugby Union squirm at the kicking and possession dominated manner in which the games is played today. A perfect example of a sport whose negative attitude towards rule change has caused nothing but damage to the flow of the game.

A punch to the face of your opponent in their backline of the 1970 Grand Final also resulted in him being rewarded a free kick, on the spot in the backline, nothing more, nothing less. Behind play free kicks, after goal free kicks, and fifty meter penalties all did not exist. Presumably a traditionalist would not have wanted these new rules added either. However, it is difficult to argue about the merits these rules have in our current game.

I will never be a great fan of changing rules in the AFL, but the one thing I’ll never ever call myself is a “Footy Traditionalist”, someone who says no to all changes. The simple reality is that AFL, like all codes, needs rule changes from time to time. It is indeed the changes made to the rules that have keep the AFL in such healthy shape as a code in modern times. In some such examples the changes made by the AFL could be partly some of the reason why the game has remained in such the healthy shape it is today.


115
Vote


   
subscribe to this blog 


   

   


Comments
1 Comments. [ Add A Comment ]

Comment by Harry

April 28th 2008 00:13
I think it's really hard to find the correct balance between rule changing and not over-reacting. People were arguing for rule changes to combat flooding but that seems to have sorted itself out now.

Add A Comment

To create a fully formatted comment please click here.


CLICK HERE TO LOGIN | CLICK HERE TO REGISTER

Name or Orble Tag
Home Page (optional)
Comments
Bold Italic Underline Strikethrough Separator Left Center Right Separator Quote Insert Link Insert Email
Notify me of replies
Notify extra people about this comment
Is this a private comment?
List the Email Addresses or Orble Tags of the people you would like to be notified about this comment


One per line max of 30

List the Email Addresses or Orble Tags of the people you would like to be notified about this private comment thread. Only the people in this list will be able to see or reply to your comment.


One per line max of 30

Your Name
(for the email going out to the above list, it can be different to your Orble Tag)
Your Email Address
(optional)
(required for reply notification)
Submit
More Posts
4 Posts
4 Posts dating from April 2008
Email Subscription
Receive e-mail notifications of new posts on this blog:
0

John Craven 1's Blogs

0 Vote(s)
0 Comment(s)
0 Post(s)
61 Vote(s)
0 Comment(s)
1 Post(s)
Moderated by John Craven 1
Copyright © 2006 2007 2008 On Topic Media PTY LTD. All Rights Reserved. Design by Vimu.com.
On Topic Media ZPages: Sydney |  Melbourne |  Brisbane |  London |  Birmingham |  Leeds     [ Advertise ] [ Contact Us ] [ Privacy Policy ]