Rule Discussion Regulation

The HFFL continues to benefit from innovation and resultant rule changes. If they are properly constructed and vetted they provide improved strategy, promote equalisation and generally increase enjoyment. As testament to this, only 1 rule change has ever been reversed (Veteran’s rule).

However constant rule discussion and votes is tiresome for many coaches and detracts from the business of playing the game. Some coaches very much enjoy innovation related banter while others do not. So we need to be able to progress innovation and cater to both those who enjoy it and don’t enjoy it. Additionally we need to have separate forums for different discussions (e.g messenger apps, email) so that only the interested/necessary parties are involved and the weekly HFFL Banter is not diluted/distracted by these discussions. With this in mind, the following are suggested new regulations regarding rule changes:

Rule Change Windows

  • Create defined Rule Change Windows for the HFFL when proposals can be put forward to the group and voted on. 2 suggested windows are:
    • MSD Window: 1 week preceding and up to MSD
    • Finals Window: during finals or the bye week.
  • Rule Change Window discussion will occur in a different forum to the HFFL Banter messaging app group (e.g. email)

Rules of the Game Committee

  • Like the AFL, create a “Rules of the Game Committee” (RGC) where interested parties can suggest and debate prospective innovations in the HFFL and rule changes. Only coaches who choose to be part of the committee will be.
  • Only the fruits of the Rules of the Game Committee discussions will be put forward i.e if a proposal has been worked through properly by the the Rules of the Game committee and has sufficient support within it, it will be put forward officially during one of the above Rule Change Windows
  • The forum for RGC discussion will be decided by the RGC (e.g. messaging app or email) but will be separate from the HFFL Banter group.
  • Any coach, who is not part of the RGC can put forward ideas for the RGC to discuss (aka “thought bubbles”). However it will be at the discretion of the RGC if they wish to discuss and progress it, based on whether they see merit at face value.

3 thoughts on “Rule Discussion Regulation”

  1. So here is a rough outline of what I was thinking, some overlap with your proposal Logistix:
    1) There is one “Rules Convenor” or similar
    2) At any time during the season coaches can propose rules to the convenor – consider it like a suggestion box
    3) The Rules Convenor collates these during the year
    4) Proposers can withdraw or update their ideas during the year
    5) Before issue for general discussion the convenor reviews the rules with a rules committee (say two other people, three in total)
    6) (If some ideas look unfeasible or inappropriate, the convenor can discuss it with the proposer of the rule, to withdraw or defer consideration of the rule)
    7) All proposed rules are issued for discussion/potential adoption once a year
    a) I’d suggest after the HFFL GF (the season is fresh in our mind, and we aren’t rushing to prepare for the draft).
    b) This allows for combined or cumulative impact to be considered
    c) These are issued by email to make for better discussion of individual aspects of rules, nuance etc
    d) Suggest they are issued in an easy to understand structure – e.g. numbered or in a table (maybe if there is only two or three
    8) Proposers of rules can advocate or even lead discussion on their rules but it is up to the rules convenor to keep discussion on track
    9) A firm deadline is set to decide on rules – silence is taken as abstention, e.g. if three people abstain a rule can be passed 4-3
    10) A few weeks before the new season, the rules convenor is to send an email around reminding coaches or rule changes

    (I will post on WhatsApp too)

Comments are closed.