Strategy New rules for 2019. How will they affect the game?

Which of the changes do you think will make it a better game?

  • Change 1. Traditional playing positions at centre bounces

  • Change 2. Kick-ins

  • Change 3. Marks and free kicks in defence

  • Change 4. Runners and water carriers

  • Change 5. Umpire contact

  • Change 6. 50m penalties

  • Change 7. Kicking for goal after the siren

  • Change 8. Marking contests

  • Change 9. Ruck contests: prior opportunity

  • You cannot be serious!


Results are only viewable after voting.

Darkie

Vice Captain
Joined
12 Apr 2014
Messages
6,033
Likes
3,224
AFL Club
Collingwood
#43
This is based on no real evidence, but if kick ins are only classed as stats when a player plays on, it's possible that less players play on as a result of the increased kicking in area. They can just run further in before taking the kick, therefore there is less need to "kick to themselves" or play on.

Could mean slightly less stats for some of the back man if there are less play ons from a kick in.
Just to ensure we are on the same page, what are you referring to in terms of the increased kicking in area?

My understanding is that the goal square is unchanged, but the player on the mark will now be 10 (rather than 5) metres back from it. Players will be unable to really make use of that benefit without playing on though.

I'm anticipating there will be more playing on, because of this extra space and the time it affords.

I may be misunderstanding you, or missing your point? :unsure:
 

Bomber18

Moderator
Joined
11 Nov 2012
Messages
14,098
Likes
6,208
AFL Club
Essendon
#44
Just to ensure we are on the same page, what are you referring to in terms of the increased kicking in area?

My understanding is that the goal square is unchanged, but the player on the mark will now be 10 (rather than 5) metres back from it. Players will be unable to really make use of that benefit without playing on though.

I'm anticipating there will be more playing on, because of this extra space and the time it affords.

I may be misunderstanding you, or missing your point? :unsure:
It's possible that I might have misinterpreted what umpires would call as play on. I was thinking that if the players on the mark were standing 10 metres back, then a player could just step outside the box and it wouldn't be play on until they went off the line of the mark but that might not be right on second thought.

Your point that it might lead to more play ons as players run off side ways might be true as well.
 

Darkie

Vice Captain
Joined
12 Apr 2014
Messages
6,033
Likes
3,224
AFL Club
Collingwood
#45
It's possible that I might have misinterpreted what umpires would call as play on. I was thinking that if the players on the mark were standing 10 metres back, then a player could just step outside the box and it wouldn't be play on until they went off the line of the mark but that might not be right on second thought.

Your point that it might lead to more play ons as players run off side ways might be true as well.
I see what you mean. The discussion at the Barrett link (2:05 plus on the kick in change) indicates to me that it's only the square itself that affords protection (3:51 on this point), so if a player steps outside that I would suspect it is immediately play on.

I agree with @All is Wells that the JLT may be our clearestindication of how the rule changes are affecting both the game, and the SC scoring that flows from it.
 

Bomber18

Moderator
Joined
11 Nov 2012
Messages
14,098
Likes
6,208
AFL Club
Essendon
#46
I see what you mean. The discussion at the Barrett link (2:05 plus on the kick in change) indicates to me that it's only the square itself that affords protection (3:51 on this point), so if a player steps outside that I would suspect it is immediately play on.

I agree with @All is Wells that the JLT may be our clearestindication of how the rule changes are affecting both the game, and the SC scoring that flows from it.
That makes sense. In that case, I think the changes from this would be quite minimal.
 

Darkie

Vice Captain
Joined
12 Apr 2014
Messages
6,033
Likes
3,224
AFL Club
Collingwood
#47
That makes sense. In that case, I think the changes from this would be quite minimal.
I think that might be right from a direct standpoint. The "kick to self" is now unnecessary but on my understanding wasn't scored anyway.

I'm wondering whether there could be more indirect impacts though. With an extra five metres of space to work with, and no need for a dinky kick to begin, do players run out and then kick long more, and kick short to retain control less (likely more SC points for the kicker, less for the player in short who would have marked it and then kicked himself, maybe a few more points up the field?)? Does this mean that it's easier to clear the D50, reducing the amount of ball inside this area (less points for other defenders?) especially for teams who previously struggled with this?
 

freowho

Dual Best & Fairest
Joined
27 Jan 2014
Messages
3,703
Likes
1,099
AFL Club
Fremantle
#48
I think that might be right from a direct standpoint. The "kick to self" is now unnecessary but on my understanding wasn't scored anyway.

I'm wondering whether there could be more indirect impacts though. With an extra five metres of space to work with, and no need for a dinky kick to begin, do players run out and then kick long more, and kick short to retain control less (likely more SC points for the kicker, less for the player in short who would have marked it and then kicked himself, maybe a few more points up the field?)? Does this mean that it's easier to clear the D50, reducing the amount of ball inside this area (less points for other defenders?) especially for teams who previously struggled with this?
Not needing to kick to themselves and the man on the mark being 5 metres further away should see more playing on and longer kicks to the middle of the ground. Does a long kick to a pack earn more points than a short kick to a team mate?
 

Darkie

Vice Captain
Joined
12 Apr 2014
Messages
6,033
Likes
3,224
AFL Club
Collingwood
#49
Not needing to kick to themselves and the man on the mark being 5 metres further away should see more playing on and longer kicks to the middle of the ground. Does a long kick to a pack earn more points than a short kick to a team mate?
Unfortunately it again seems to depend on the source:

Erich @ post 47 - 2 for a contest, 3 for short effective (5 for long to advantage, ie effective)
https://supercoachscores.com/threads/who-are-your-locks.3961/page-3

SC website via Fanfooty (opening post) - 4 for all effective kicks
http://forum.fanfooty.com.au/index.php/topic,110692.0.html

CD (reply #4, also posted on this site)
http://forum.fanfooty.com.au/index.php/topic,110692.0.html
Long effective kicks averaged 2.0 for Bont and 3.3 for JPK
Short effective kicks averaged 3.2 for Bont and 3.4 forJPK (ie, short effective kicks averaged more points than long effective ones on a standalone basis, for these two player sets in this game ... presumably this isn't always the case!)
Long kick to advantage +1.6 for Bont, none recorded for JPK (a supplement that ultimately makes long kicks worth more??)

I recall reading previously that any kick over a certain distance (I think 40 metres) is considered effective. I previously took this to mean that all scores over this distance would receive the same score, but perhaps that is not the case. Delineating kick scores based on distance appears to be inconsistent with the SC website info, but the CD table clearly indicates that they do this. Perhaps a long kick to a contest is effective, and gets a minimum score to reflect that, with a topup if it was to advantage.

It's a little difficult to reach a definitive conclusion given different sources and the seemingly counterintuitive scoring in the Bont vs JPK game (based on very small samples), but I think the answer to your question is probably "no" ... albeit that it appears to me that if (1) any long kick is considered effective, and (2) a player gets additional points if that kick is to advantage, then a player who is decent by foot would likely score more kicking long than short (assuming they kick it longer than the distance threshold, eg 40 metres).
 
Last edited:

Bermi

Rising Star Winner
Joined
21 Jan 2016
Messages
1,439
Likes
1,722
AFL Club
Collingwood
#50
"An open letter to Campion Data".

If you are reading this forum, you will see that we need help!
So, could you please publish your 'official' 2019 Supercoach point scoring system, in a clear, precise format.
The sooner you do this, the sooner we can settle our Supercoach teams.

Yours sincerely,
Confused.
 

Bermi

Rising Star Winner
Joined
21 Jan 2016
Messages
1,439
Likes
1,722
AFL Club
Collingwood
#51
Hmmm, which ruckmen have big tanks?

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2019-01-...m=feed&utm_campaign=RSS+feed:+AFL+Latest+News

A MORE demanding running load for ruckmen is one potential impact of the new starting positions in place for 2019, according to Geelong big man Rhys Stanley...…….Stanley has identified more space between the arcs as a result of the 6-6-6 structure...……."It's just something I've been thinking about a little bit. In matchplay watching how it's unfolding and watching where the holes are opening up," Stanley told...…."It's going to be play it by ear, the JLT pre-season games are going to be telling to give us a look at it...….."We're going to possibly have to cover a bit more ground to get back and help our defenders out. And it's the same going forward, if we can lose our opponents we're going to have that outnumber."
 

BlueNwhiteHoops

Well-known member
Joined
13 Dec 2018
Messages
487
Likes
712
AFL Club
Geelong
#52
^ This reminds me of a post I read on one of these forums (can't remember site or poster) regarding Westhoff and how not rucking will affect his scoring. The poster suggested that in the new 6-6-6 structure guys like Westhoff starting on a wing would instantly drop back behind the ball after the bounce in order to be that extra intercept player in case their mids didn't win the clearance which I feel ties in very closely with what Stanley is saying/has witnessed in match sims so far.
 

Bomber18

Moderator
Joined
11 Nov 2012
Messages
14,098
Likes
6,208
AFL Club
Essendon
#53
Came across a very interesting post on reddit where a poster detailed their take on the rule changes and how certain teams might be disadvantaged/advantaged. The comments on 6/6/6 suggested the pies would really benefit due to their strong ruck and midfield combination. Guys like Dusty also may benefit from the less strict hands in the back interpretation.

It's a long post but I've extracted a few of the more interesting observations in a few posts below (split up due to length).
 

Bomber18

Moderator
Joined
11 Nov 2012
Messages
14,098
Likes
6,208
AFL Club
Essendon
#54
Marking Contests:
• The ‘hands in the back’ rule interpretation has been repealed so a player can now:

• Place his hands on the back of his opponent to protect his position in a marking contest

• PROVIDED he does not push his opponent in the back.

Importance?

This rule allows players greater ability to hold space and protect their position behind an opposition player. Strong forwards that embrace body contact will likely make most use of this but marking midfielders may have more opportunities to utilise the new rule.

Advantages who?

Players ahead of the ball/their opponent. A ball that gets through a forward press will be harder to defend when the forwards are allowed to protect their space. Stay at home forwards are likely to benefit, as are defences that do not attempt to press as high up the ground.

Deep forwards/marking midfielders: Jenkins, Hawkins, Fyfe, Cripps

Disadvantages who?

It will increase the risk for teams that heavily press up the ground. Undersized defenders who cannot engage in battles of strength will also be more exposed. This should make defenders capable of dropping off their man to assist a marking contest even more important than they already are.

Undersized defences: Melbourne, Collingwood, Fremantle.

Ruck Contests:
• A ruckman who takes direct possession of the ball from a bounce, throw-up or boundary throw-in will no longer be regarded as having had prior opportunity.

• Where there is uncertainty over who is the designated ruckman, the ruckman for each team will still be required to nominate to the field umpire.

Importance?

Gives ruckmen more ability to control the state and speed of the game. It will be much easier to kill time with a dominant ruckman. Secondary rucks will also be more important, as dominating a weak second ruck will have larger consequences. It also increases the risk of playing only one ruckman as a mid-game injury could be devastating.

Advantages who?

Teams with two first class rucks. These rucks who are capable disposers of the ball and able to use the ball from the ruck will be able to slow the game right down if they get ahead, or speed it up if they need to make a comeback.

Teams with two top tier rucks: Melbourne, Port Adelaide, Collingwood, Hawthorn.

Disadvantages who?

Teams with undersized rucks/one non-elite ruckman. As being beaten in the ruck is now more significant there is likely to be an added focus on exhausting a single ruckman and putting this advantage to better use.

Teams with weak ruck stocks: Richmond, Adelaide, St Kilda, Bulldogs.

50m Penalties:
• The player with the ball:

• Must be allowed to advance the mark by 50m without the infringing player delaying the game.

• Will be able to play on while the 50m penalty is being measured out.

Importance?

50m penalties will now be much more fluid as play will not be forced to stop for a set period of time as the umpire sets up the new mark. Players will have the chance to play on before the mark is set, and those with significant speed are expected to run off and exploit it as a scoring opportunity. This could make 50m penalties more impactful as the ball will be able to be moved much faster than previously.

Advantages who?

Fast moving teams and teams with speedy players who like to play on will make best use of this adjustment to how 50m penalties are carried out. The chance to use this rule will be rare but very punishing if used appropriately.

Teams with fast offensive players: North Melbourne, Collingwood, West Coast

Disadvantages who?

Any players or teams that often argue with the umpires is going to find them getting hurt for it much more often. Teams that give away excessive 50m penalties are likely to feel the impact on the scoreboard more than before.

Teams that give away the most 50m penalties: Port Adelaide, Richmond, St Kilda

Increased Defensive Space from Mark:
• When defenders mark or receive a free kick within nine metres of their own goal, the man on the mark will be brought in line with the top of the goalsquare.

Importance?

More space will be provided to defenders when taking kicks deep in defence. This is likely to cut down on the need for short kicks to a pocket as well as completely eliminate the comical scenario of players kicking back through the wrong part of their own goals (effectively scoring an own-point). It should result in less pressure on defenders and allows more room for precision kicks coming out of defence.

Advantages who?

Players playing on the last line of defence. There will be both less pressure on them, and greater opportunity to use good skills if they’re capable of hitting precision kicks. Expect slightly fewer short chip-kicks to a non-threatening player and fewer long kicks down the line in these circumstances.

Teams that defend deep in their back half: Sydney, Adelaide, Carlton

Disadvantages who?

Whilst unlikely to have any major disadvantages, this rule will hinder teams that take very few marks on the last line of defence/defend much higher up the ground relative to those that do.

Teams that depend on the forward press: Richmond, Collingwood, Melbourne
 

Bomber18

Moderator
Joined
11 Nov 2012
Messages
14,098
Likes
6,208
AFL Club
Essendon
#55
Kick Ins:
• At kick-ins, a player will no longer need to kick to himself to play on from the goalsquare.

• Following a behind, the man on the mark will be brought out to 10m from the top of the goalsquare, rather than the existing five metres.

Importance?

The biggest change for 2019, this rule opens up the options for defenders massively. Being able to play on freely plus an extra 5m of space from the man on the mark should provide more capacity to bring the ball back deep into the field of play. Forward presses will also have to cover a larger area as players kicking in will have a greater region they can feasibly deliver the ball to. Expect significant changes to how teams set up after a point has been scored.

Advantages who?

Players capable of running a significant distance with the ball or even outrunning the man on the mark completely before kicking it. Those players who relish playing on from defence should now have less risk and greater reward for doing so. Less pressure on the kicker is also expected to allow for better kicks out of defence and the greater spread of players should result in less pressure even once the ball comes into play.

Teams with defensive ball carriers: Essendon, Western Bulldogs, Adelaide.

Teams with stronger midfield/offence than defence: Melbourne, Gold Coast, Essendon

Disadvantages who?

Teams that prefer to play slow and methodically with precision kicking out of defence will find it less rewarding. Slow defenders that don’t like playing on will also be worse off relative to others. It’s anticipated to force teams to rely on more than forward pressure to create inside 50s and improve transition football. It may be more impactful when points are more common than goals such as games held in smaller stadiums and those not protected from the weather.

Teams with slow defensive play: Hawthorn, Carlton, Port Adelaide

Teams that are inefficient offensively: St Kilda, GWS, Fremantle

The 6/6/6 Rule:
• Clubs must have six players inside both 50m arcs, with one player inside the goalsquare [before each centre bounce].

• Four midfield players must start inside the centre square with the two wingmen stationed along the wing [before each centre bounce].

Importance?

The most publicised rule change for the 2019 season, the starting zones for players ended up being mostly a change to the dynamic of the centre bounce. With limited players behind and ahead of the ball fast and clean centre clearances will be more damaging than ever. Defending with an extra number will also be harder and it is likely to impact teams’ ability to defend a lead late in the game.

Advantages who?

Teams that are capable of dominating centre bounces and scoring from them. Also assists sides who are capable of winning 1-on-1’s in their forward 50 or enjoy an open forward structure.

Midfield dominant teams with quality rucks: Melbourne, Collingwood, North Melbourne

Disadvantages who?

Teams that rely on a sweeper or an extra player behind the ball and are weak in the midfield. Sides that are unable to force a secondary stoppage are likely to become particularly vulnerable to teams kicking a run of goals against them if they lose the midfield battle with this new rule.

Teams with weak ruck/midfields: Adelaide, Bulldogs, Gold Coast.

Umpire Contact:
• Players will be prohibited from setting up behind the umpire at centre bounces.

Importance?

Players often used the umpire as a tool at centre bounces to try separate themselves from their opponent – with one going on one side of the ump, their opponent forced on the other side. This gave midfielders a method to try get some separation (especially from taggers) at centre bounces. This change means that they will no longer be able to use the umpire in this way and that one side of the contest will always be free of players.

Advantages who?

Taggers and teams who regularly use a player to employ a close tag on a centre midfielder. It should also be advantageous to good tap ruckmen as there will also be one angle that players cannot approach from creating space for the midfielders to use.

Teams that often use taggers: North Melbourne, Fremantle, Melbourne.

Disadvantages who?

Players who struggle with a close tag. It also impacts teams with a weak centre midfield or those who struggle to limit good ruckmen as the difference in quality is likely to be more impactful.

Players weak to a tag: Sloane, Zorko, Zach Merrett.

CONCLUSION
The running theme through the majority of the rule changes appears to be a focus on devaluing a successful forward press and making transition football more likely. The AFL clearly wants to see more movement of the ball but at the same time are trying to keep players from all following the ball. It’s unclear at this stage if the rule changes will achieve what is desired but there’s enough change here to expect a significant shake up of the game
 

Bermi

Rising Star Winner
Joined
21 Jan 2016
Messages
1,439
Likes
1,722
AFL Club
Collingwood
#56
CONCLUSION
The running theme ……….and making transition football more likely. The AFL clearly wants to see more movement of the ball ……….
Umpire Contact:……….Importance? Players often used the umpire as a tool at centre bounces to try separate themselves from their opponent...….. (especially from taggers) at centre bounces....……..Disadvantages who?...…..Players who struggle with a close tag...……..Players weak to a tag: ……....Zach Merrett.
Very good info B18 (y)

Looks like an advantage to outside midfielders to score more SC pts and for inside Midfielders to get less SC pts. Not sure?:unsure:

Regarding: Z Merrett may struggle with a tag because the new rules favours taggers.
Any thoughts that Shiel will cop the tag more then Merrett?
 

Bomber18

Moderator
Joined
11 Nov 2012
Messages
14,098
Likes
6,208
AFL Club
Essendon
#57
Very good info B18 (y)

Looks like an advantage to outside midfielders to score more SC pts and for inside Midfielders to get less SC pts. Not sure?:unsure:

Regarding: Z Merrett may struggle with a tag because the new rules favours taggers.
Any thoughts that Shiel will cop the tag more then Merrett?
Yeah, I reckon Shiel will get more tags than Zerrett (not too say that Zerrett won’t get tagged but another target definitely is beneficial for him).

I’m not too convinced that the umpire contact rule will have that much effect on tagging but it’s an interesting suggestion.
 

freowho

Dual Best & Fairest
Joined
27 Jan 2014
Messages
3,703
Likes
1,099
AFL Club
Fremantle
#59
I don't think that tweet clears up anything in regards to supercoach. The stat sheet might not show a disposal but I am sure points were still awarded for the qaulity of the disposal. In general play a player gets points for the possession, i.e. contested, uncontested, near goals or on the wing etc, and they then gets points for the disposal, effective, ineffective, short, long etc. The player taking a kick in has no points for a possession as there is techinically no possession earnt and therefore no stat for having the ball, but they still get awarded supercoach points for the quality of the disposal, i.e effective, ineffective, short, long etc.
What I am still unclear on is did the player receive points for a disposal or possession by kicking to themselves? If they did then they would be losing a lot of points this year because there is no longer a requirement to kick to themselves.
Am I wrong or am I wrong? o_O
 

stephen

400 Games Club
Joined
20 May 2014
Messages
2,394
Likes
1,915
AFL Club
St Kilda
#60
I don't think that tweet clears up anything in regards to supercoach. The stat sheet might not show a disposal but I am sure points were still awarded for the qaulity of the disposal. In general play a player gets points for the possession, i.e. contested, uncontested, near goals or on the wing etc, and they then gets points for the disposal, effective, ineffective, short, long etc. The player taking a kick in has no points for a possession as there is techinically no possession earnt and therefore no stat for having the ball, but they still get awarded supercoach points for the quality of the disposal, i.e effective, ineffective, short, long etc.
What I am still unclear on is did the player receive points for a disposal or possession by kicking to themselves? If they did then they would be losing a lot of points this year because there is no longer a requirement to kick to themselves.
Am I wrong or am I wrong? o_O
You're not wrong!
I read this as meaning that the 'disposal' attributed to those kicking to themselves was not the kick to themselves but the subsequent one, so no one will be worse off on the disposals count.
But did they get a point for receiving the ball from themselves that they now won't? Not sure.
 
Top