Going fast is good

Tamsin Greenway ponders the merit in implementing any of the Fast5 rules into netball

In the second portion of this weeks column, Tamsin Greenway ponders about the merits (or not) of implementing a number of the Fast5 rules into the entire arrangement of netball…
Recently, there was a survey in Australia on what principles people would like to see changed in the seven-a-side match.
As the game continues to drive forward, rule changes to make itTV friendly, more commercial or bring into a wider audience will be considered
With this in mind, and following the epic British Fast5 All-Stars Championships at the Copper Box last weekend, I wanted to have a take a look at some of the principles that were thrown around and that could be thought about or implemented at the seven-a-side match.
I think that the shooting one is very interesting… and probably gets the maximum amount of uproar when suggesting a shift.
I would not need to observe long-bombs in terms of shooting outside of the circle in a 60-minute match. But, I am intrigued about how to divide the circle into locations that were two-point along with one-point.
Im not stating that it needs to alter in the league at this time, but we have created a game where weve got tall shooters and it is becoming more difficult to play in the ring unless youre close to becoming 6ft.
There are still a few [shorter] GAs what selectors are currently considering, and what children know although floating around, is that you have to have shooters that are tall to pole proportions that are shooting to create it. We went through the years of altering every GA that was short to a WA!
I believe that I believe were making that a problem with youngsters than embracing the fact that if you can shoot extended and because of this we also have made a fear of shooting from long distance , then you need to.
As soon as I put it out a number of those Australian fans were saying that they would trialled it and that people just passed it out and in and making a mockery of the match.
But, I believe that only backs up my point. Most gamers dont shoot from distance and Australia, alongside others, have been a leader in this shift in the sport. New Zealand just won a World Cup on shooting from distance whereas we can not forget that.
The question is would it help be in a position to play 60 minutes there and to get additional time on court? Can tactics and group selection alter?
Splitting the ring to two and one points will certainly change the dynamic of the defence because if shooters are going out of distance, how you win ball unexpectedly becomes quite different. The roles of the shooting circle would change.
Particularly with a few of those blowout matches in Superleague, with one and two stage shots, would it assist? Look at a group like Storm who finished eighth last year – could Sophie Hankin shooting distance and Karyn Bailey being able to rally have shifted results and matches if these things were made to two, maybe?
That is why I dont think that we should completely take it off the table. I know there are a lot of traditionalists out there and I get because its also I really like our sport, but I think that the game has changed in the last couple of decades. I dont see that there is any reason why it couldnt be viewed at or explored some more to see if its a location.
Im not a fan of subs. A great deal of people will say it attracts impact and that it is the one to change and they dont mind it.
Firstly I am not entirely against it, as I do think we do need to eliminate the dodgy timeouts – because honestly the imitation injuries are extremely simple to see, but I cant get my mind around unlimited rolling subs. If there was a limit to them or there has been a move towards the tactical timeout which Suncorp has introduced afterward I would be more keen.
My issues come from players point of view and both a trainers. As a player, in certain places its not always so simple to go make a direct effect in five or six minutes in a quarter. Therefore, unless you are with a complete shocker, as a player you need to be able to work out things and be given moment to do so.
I think it could become an excuse for a lack of coaching. Its a very easy cop-out when a player is not quite doing what you only want to roll on another sub, try something new. There will be occasions this needs to happen but then this would not be a constant, if youve completed your prep.
I liked also to trust that participant and to give players the opportunity in quarter-time to attempt to change things. I think we must check at just this filters from elite degree and if the only answer ever is to keep trying out new players we might eliminate the very essence of what coaching and playing is about.
I dont think that it has a place at the game, although I like the Power Play it is amazing. Its that easy in my own book.
With Centre Passes as well, I dont feel you ought to be provided an extra lifeline. Shooting from space takes implementation and skill, being awarded the ball or points to help get closer games or excitement takes it a lot.
Your defensive Centre Pass should be as strong as the Centre Pass that is attacking. You should have strategic elements that imply you could win ball off teams regardless and arrangements, so I really dont feel that you should be provided a lifeline because you are losing. Thats a part of game – you lose or you win.
A key portion of netball is that you have the chunk 50 percent of their time and it is what you decide to do with it. I think that there are ways to get games that are nearer and I certainly dont feel this is only one of these.

Read more here: http://post.ms-lhokseumawe.go.id/post/2019/10/21/adam-beard-to-join-wales-rugby-world-cup-squad-after-having-appendix-removed/

Comments are closed.