2021 pre-season training

[dimelb]

Is there an explanation anywhere that covers this rule. While it makes sense that a defender can run too his mark from behind his mark I don't know that this rule has any sense to it at all. As I said, a sideways motion to hand pass should be now play on, mind you it should always have been play on.

Here's a discussion on the positive side of the new rule:

https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/standing-room-only-the-small-afl-rule-tweak-changing-the-game-20210129-p56xv0.html

[crackedactor 01]

Yes, I'm looking forward to him being a chief component of our fast moving attacking game. Along with Stephens, McInerney, Florent, Rowbottom, and possibly Ling, Bell, Gould, Gulden and Campbell. With the possible cherry on top, of a fully fit Buddy charging out of the forward line. (And probably a few other players that I've neglected to mention).

I noticed that a report on Buddy's progress said he doing well but we cannot give a timeline on his return. I hate it when they said that, it generally means they have serious doubts on him coming back anytime soon.

[graemed]

... and draft dodgers lol

Sent from my JAT-L29 using Tapatalk

Does that mean Trump is a likely candidate????

[gloveski]

I noticed that a report on Buddy's progress said he doing well but we cannot give a timeline on his return. I hate it when they said that, it generally means they have serious doubts on him coming back anytime soon.

Just reported on 7 news that he has had a set back , there was no other details


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[gloveski]

Just reported on 7 news that he has had a set back , there was no other details


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

But more digging calf soreness


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[sharp9]

Is there an explanation anywhere that covers this rule. While it makes sense that a defender can run too his mark from behind his mark I don't know that this rule has any sense to it at all. As I said, a sideways motion to hand pass should be now play on, mind you it should always have been play on.

According to (I think) the Age article they are actually doing the opposite ie really clamping down on players moving off the mark at all before “play on” call.
On related. It’s I’m pleased that they are stopping players running up from behind the mark during kick for goal. Also stopping swapping of man on the mark for a taller player is good for the team with ball. This is also going to be interesting as player manning the mark won’t be able to go to his man or position (if he happens to be out of position). I guess they can abandon the mark though.

[Rod_]

According to (I think) the Age article they are actually doing the opposite ie really clamping down on players moving off the mark at all before “play on” call.
On related. It’s I’m pleased that they are stopping players running up from behind the mark during kick for goal. Also stopping swapping of man on the mark for a taller player is good for the team with ball. This is also going to be interesting as player manning the mark won’t be able to go to his man or position (if he happens to be out of position). I guess they can abandon the mark though.

I believe that they will not man the mark in some instances in preference giving away a penalty.

My reasoning is that in general play the attacking team want to hand off quickly. Therefore a defending team will want to stop the attacking player on the edges of the mark. By extending the defensive zone outside the 5m area either side of the mark may be more defensive than having a player on the mark.

Will be interesting how big the 5m away from the mark is when the umpires adjudicate. Or if any teams use this option.

It has been a long off season. Need live footy soon!

Rod_

[Meg]

Just reported on 7 news that he has had a set back , there was no other details


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Groan!

But it was Buddy’s birthday this week and Jesinta had a photo on Instagram of a celebratory lunch with friends. There was a disgustingly calorie-laden birthday cake in front of Buddy. So perhaps he is still recovering from that? [emoji1693]

[jono2707]

Without the long contract Buddy would have retired by now, so I guess if he gets on the park at all this year it could be considered a bonus? A very expensive bonus....

[gloveski]

Groan!

But it was Buddy’s birthday this week and Jesinta had a photo on Instagram of a celebratory lunch with friends. There was a disgustingly calorie-laden birthday cake in front of Buddy. So perhaps he is still recovering from that? [emoji1693]

Lol I reckon this is where the talk come from a Sen interview with Horse

https://player.whooshkaa.com/episode?id=785222

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[MightyBloods]

I believe that they will not man the mark in some instances in preference giving away a penalty.

My reasoning is that in general play the attacking team want to hand off quickly. Therefore a defending team will want to stop the attacking player on the edges of the mark. By extending the defensive zone outside the 5m area either side of the mark may be more defensive than having a player on the mark.

Will be interesting how big the 5m away from the mark is when the umpires adjudicate. Or if any teams use this option.

It has been a long off season. Need live footy soon!

Rod_

100% agree. I'd be instructing my players to stand back from the mark except for any player within kicking distance from goal. Again, it will be interesting to see how the umpires adjudicate this rule throughout the year. I'm assuming that if a player stands back from the mark that they can then move laterally....we shall see.

[MightyBloods]

Without the long contract Buddy would have retired by now, so I guess if he gets on the park at all this year it could be considered a bonus? A very expensive bonus....

Agree. My real worry is for Heeney as he is an important cog in our future. He suffered an extremely bad ankle injury so I'm hoping that he can come back from it in reasonable shape. Similar injuries have cost sporting careers.

[dejavoodoo44]

Agree. My real worry is for Heeney as he is an important cog in our future. He suffered an extremely bad ankle injury so I'm hoping that he can come back from it in reasonable shape. Similar injuries have cost sporting careers.

This is a reasonably interesting article on Heeney, from the AFL site.

Heeney in race for R1 after 'pain in the arse' surgery ... literally

It says that he's a pretty good chance for round one.

[barry]

Put a line through Buddy. He is cooked and will only make a few cameo appearances for the remainder of his contract.

It seems the Giants 6 year contract term offer was about right. We're paying 3 years with no return 2020,2021,2022.

On reflection, I am turning toward thinking the franklin deal was an overall negative for the swans.

[Syd76]

Totally disagree with the idea that Buddy was not worth it. He was (I realise it is in the past tense) the best (perhaps most exciting, freakish and consistent player combined into one) player for the last 20 years. Whilst he maybe injured and lets all hope he gets back on the park, I would still do the deal. We were very close in 2016 and if not for other injuries and questionable calls we would have another had a premiership.

Not to mention the positive effect it had on other players around him. Not to mention the effect on memberships.

The deal that I would have questioned rather is the Tippett one. That is in hindsight the one that shouldn't have been made.

But you have to be in it to win it