How would you improve the overall quality of the AFL? [Serious responses only]

[DrEvil_]

Should introduce an offside rule too.

My example for how I would improve the overall quality of the AFL is as follows:


3) Backwards kicks do not result in a mark.
We have already seen this rule trialed in preseason competition in recent years, and I personally feel that it helps to keep the game free flowing and attacking. It totally removes the 'killing clock' aspect from games that are common at the end of quarters/end of games, and also rewards teams who play an exciting and fast paced brand of football.

 

[Golumless]

How about this.

Do nothing. Let the game evolve naturally.

 

[Fossey]

Hey folks,

The offseason is here, and it's time to take stock of another year of the product that is the Australian Football League.

A precursory glance at the BigFooty mainboard at any period throughout the season has consistently shown a growing disconnect between footy fans and the AFL, and there are numerous issues causing it.

Therefore, the question I would like to see serious discussion about is this:

How would you improve the overall quality of the AFL moving forward?

Biggest issues are:
1. Free agency is killing comp. I like idea of banning top 4 sides.
2. Equalisation in general doesn't work. The draft essentially provides the bottom team with one 18 year old player addition compared to the Premiers (pick 1 vs pick 18). This is totally inadequate. Bottom 6 should get 2 x draft picks before the rest, the mid 6 picks an additional pick at beginning of second round (which would be picks 13 to 18 & 19 to 24, & top 6 picks 25 to 30. After this all picks in reverse order of finishing.
3. Consideration for longer contracts to 4 x years for draft picks, to reduce the Go home factor & stop sides such as Brisbane being a feeder club to other sides.
4. Better apply deliberate out of bounds & rushd behinds.

 

[Chadwiko]

Biggest issues are:
1. Free agency is killing comp. I like idea of banning top 4 sides.

In a modern competition there simply cannot be any barriers to players 'choosing their employer'. If anything, free agency needs to be more deregulated, with salary caps more stringent.

 

[Blue and Silver]

National Reserves competition

Each AFL Club has its own seconds side.

Club lists move out to 50, and if the LTI grows to a certain number players who are signed to play for the Reserves side can be given provisional contracts on AFL lists. These contracts cannot extend past the season and these players must enter the draft to obtain a permenant spot. This means we get a greater chance of "cinderella stories" of mid-age players getting an unlikely shot and proving themselves.

Reserves play curtain openers pre-AFL games. Gets crowds in.

This also means local footy becomes local footy again

 

[Ocha905]

1. Reinstate Fitzroy

2. Go from a reverse ladder order draft to a wheel model, as described here: http://grantland.com/the-triangle/t...g-good-bye-to-the-lottery-hello-to-the-wheel/

3. Equal salary cap for all, no ifs or buts

4. Teams play each other once each season, alternating home and away every season

But really, I wouldn't say there's a growing disconnect. Compared to the horror of Oakley and Jackson, the AFL is doing a decent job at the moment.

Like the Zach Lowe source.

Also agree with 3 but for 4 I would make every team play each other twice home and away over 4 years for more randomisation.

 

[onthemoney]

Biggest issues are:
1. Free agency is killing comp. I like idea of banning top 4 sides.
2. Equalisation in general doesn't work. The draft essentially provides the bottom team with one 18 year old player addition compared to the Premiers (pick 1 vs pick 18). This is totally inadequate. Bottom 6 should get 2 x draft picks before the rest, the mid 6 picks an additional pick at beginning of second round (which would be picks 13 to 18 & 19 to 24, & top 6 picks 25 to 30. After this all picks in reverse order of finishing.
3. Consideration for longer contracts to 4 x years for draft picks, to reduce the Go home factor & stop sides such as Brisbane being a feeder club to other sides.
4. Better apply deliberate out of bounds & rushd behinds.

You're not getting caught up in the Hawthorn FA myth are you?

In via FA: Frawley, Simpkin (delisted by Geelong)
Out via FA: Buddy, Young, Murphy, Ellis

 

[Fossey]

In a modern competition there simply cannot be any barriers to players 'choosing their employer'. If anything, free agency needs to be more deregulated, with salary caps more stringent.

This would kill smaller clubs and teams in the northern states (other than maybe Sydney with its huge population). Can't see how this helps the comp.

 

[pazza]

There is plenty that can be done.

1. Increase total player lists to 52 and ensuring a national reserves competition.
2. National recruiting zones, with the elite clubs funding the local competitions to them for player development.
3. Remove free agency completely.
4. Bring back State-Of-Origin. The players and supporters want it. Use it to pick the All-Australian team, therefore eliminating some of the debate.
5. Make the Grand Final as accessible as possible to the fans, restricting the corporate flooding of the stands. Corporates can watch the game in their marquees, as they do with the Spring Racing Carnival.
6. 22 team competition with everyone playing once. Return Fitzroy and introduce Tasmania, Darwin and Canberra.
7. AFL to have it's own drugs policy settings, not have them set from Canberra.

 

[Tulip]

Full time umpires simply have to be employed.

Aside from that, I like the suggestion about not awarding marks for backwards kicking. Would be an especially good rule when kicking backwards outside of the back 50: the only time it should be allowed is when the player kicking backwards is in either arc when it drops off the boot.

Would also be glad if they would stop having to make players wait to kick out until the goal umpire has waved his flag, and maybe even do away with the post rule altogether. I know they trialled it in the Wizard Cup (?) with moderate success, but it would be so much better if hitting the post didn't automatically make the score a behind and would absolutely not be missed by anybody but the staunchest traditionalists within a year or two.

Three or four year draftee contracts would be great as well. Want to play AFL and have freedom of trade for more than half of your career as the AFLPA is insistent upon? Toughen up, and spend a few years in a different city without running away and screwing the club that has put time into you. Can't stay away from home? Look after your club by explicitly stating you won't go, or better yet go and get a real job.

 

[Grave Danger]

All draftees to have played two years in state leagues before they can play for their AFL team. There would be a genuine 'rookie list' of players who have been drafted, but are waiting to complete their two years in state leagues, separate from a 'supplementary list' that operates the same way as the current so-called rookie list.

When these players graduate to the AFL they will be more mature and experienced against older players. It will also give the AFL clubs more time to see if they have the right stuff. Would probably be a good thing for the state leagues as well.

 

[Fossey]

You're not getting caught up in the Hawthorn FA myth are you?

In via FA: Frawley, Simpkin (delisted by Geelong)
Out via FA: Buddy, Young, Murphy, Ellis

First up... Congrats to Hawthorn. Well deserved winners. best team, best players. However re Free Agency, What about players such as Brian Lake .... Who were traded year before being eligible for Free Agency... so club they are leaving gets something in return. Is no myth. Free agency is great for big Vicorian based clubs (& probably Adelaide & Perth clubs), but terrible for rest.

 

[onthemoney]

First up... Congrats to Hawthorn. Well deserved winners. best team, best players. However re Free Agency, What about players such as Brian Lake .... Who were traded year before being eligible for Free Agency... so club they are leaving gets something in return. Is no myth. Free agency is great for big Vicorian based clubs (& probably Adelaide & Perth clubs), but terrible for rest.

We traded for Lake in what was at the time described as a win win for both clubs. Brian offered Hawthorn a lot more at the time than he did the Bulldogs and the dogs wanted picks as they were rebuilding. The early signs seem to suggest the dogs have done a good job of it.

Are there any other players we've brought in that you're dubious about the fairness of?

 

[deltablues]

[QUOTE="mightymouse75, post: 41306513, member: 119286"]Move a struggling Melbourne team to Tasmania.
All teams to be allowed to play thrice at the mcg.
Top 4 teams can't participate in free agency recruitment[/QUOTE]
So why should Tas be some kind of last-chance saloon/dumping ground for a struggling Melb team?

 

[Lester Burnham]

Hey folks,

The offseason is here, and it's time to take stock of another year of the product that is the Australian Football League.

A precursory glance at the BigFooty mainboard at any period throughout the season has consistently shown a growing disconnect between footy fans and the AFL, and there are numerous issues causing it.

Therefore, the question I would like to see serious discussion about is this:

How would you improve the overall quality of the AFL moving forward?

As the Irish say when you ask them directions, I wouldn't start from here. In order to answer the question "how do you improve the quality of the AFL" first you need to define what you mean by quality.

If quality means an even and fair sporting competition then the AFL needs to take a huge step back. Currently it invents and abolishes teams. There is no mechanism for a successful club outside the league to replace a crap team inside it. The AFL rigs the draw for financial reasons. It imposes a salary cap on the clubs - then rigs it. It imposes a structure for which players play for which club even when they are not contracted - then rigs it.

I've seen a couple of people say that the home and away season needs to have an even draw. I would not class that as a priority when a 200 game season is determined by a 9 game knock-out at the end of that.

If quality means more entertaining games that could mean many things. The AFL rigging the competition to have more close games, or further penalising successful clubs and giving advantage to poor ones, tinkering with the rules to make the game faster/slower, more/less congested, more/less physical. Reducing the number of teams so each has better quality players.

But these discussions are moot. The AFL does not care about the growing disconnect between footy fans and the AFL. It is clearly geared to maximising revenue and it will compromise on any other principle to achieve that.

 

[Gollo]

I think the AFL has taken a good initiative by removing the sub and bringing down interchange rotations. It's obvious the game is much more slow paced and defensive than even ten years ago. It is clear that the fixtures are uneven (think Adelaide 2012 and how easy their draw was and propelled them to a prelim). This proposal has been floated around circles before, called the 17-5 system. Under the proposal, each team plays each other once and alternates the venue year-by-year. After round 17, the teams break up into three brackets; Top 6, Middle 6 and Bottom 6. The Top Six playoff against each other once each, and Premiership points reset. Therefore, the top four after the playoff get the "double chance", and the bottom two finish fifth and sixth respectively. Then, the middle six also reset Premiership points, and the top two after the playoff earn the right to make up seventh and eighth, earning a spot in the finals. The bottom six reset Premiership points and make up the draft order, therefore the highest placed teams in the bottom six get the higher picks. This incentivises the lower teams and gives them something to play for. The draft order after the bottom six takes its regular shape as it would under the current system. I believe this means that every team always has an incentive to win games, whether it be contesting for the double chance, vying for the last two finals positions or fighting for draft picks. What do you guys reckon?

The idea is very viable and could be very well implemented, however allocating draft picks depending on success for the bottom 6 teams would be unfair. While the idea does, like you said, incentivise lower teams to do well, teams that are clearly struggling to win games the most will have a tough time getting the highest draft picks, something which they will need to regain competitiveness.

 

[The_Big_FUNK!!!]

every club should have an academy side, made up of players from their state only. Clubs are allowed to recruit one player from said academy to the AFL outside of the draft. If a club wants to recruit more than player from their academy they must use draft picks. Academy sides play against each other, during the season, so all clubs are allowed to look at them. Players who are not recruited to their clubs senior list, then enter the AFL draft and can be picked up by anyone.

Will probably be the death of the TAC cup and under 18 national championships.
SANFL/WAFL/VFL clubs can pick up players who are not drafted so there will be no talent drain on their leagues.
Academy players have access to AFL coaches so would be better quality when entering the AFL. (although having said that, melbourne would have an academy).

 

[baldandbroke]

The idea is very viable and could be very well implemented, however allocating draft picks depending on success for the bottom 6 teams would be unfair. While the idea does, like you said, incentivise lower teams to do well, teams that are clearly struggling to win games the most will have a tough time getting the highest draft picks, something which they will need to regain competitiveness.

If the bottom 6 draft picks were done with a lottery system - winning that bottom 6 mini season last 5 games might give you a bonus ticket in the lottery / end of round 1 pick?

 

[Lana]

Have umpires blow the whistle faster after a tackle.
A player has 2 seconds to legally dispose of the ball before the whistle is blown. This doesn't include having a teammate pull the ball out of your hands. Which should be illegal disposal.

Then the umpire goes through these questions

Was it a legal tackle? If no award free against the tackler, if yes continue to next question
Was there prior opportunity? if no the bounce the ball, if yes free kick to the tackler.

What constitutes prior opportunity?
1) The player has had the ball for more than 2 seconds
or within those 2 seconds
2) The player has attempted to break a tackle by fending off a tackler before attempting to dispose of the ball legally and fails to legally dispose of the ball.

If at any point, with or without prior opportunity a player incorrectly disposes the ball then a free kick is awarded against the player.

This would get rid of any "rolling mauls" there simply wouldn't be time for them to develop. Also it would punish players who just drop the ball when they've been tackled

 

[Mningasimisonda]

Have umpires blow the whistle faster after a tackle.
A player has 2 seconds to legally dispose of the ball before the whistle is blown. This doesn't include having a teammate pull the ball out of your hands. Which should be illegal disposal.

Then the umpire goes through these questions

Was it a legal tackle? If no award free against the tackler, if yes continue to next question
Was there prior opportunity? if no the bounce the ball, if yes free kick to the tackler.

What constitutes prior opportunity?
1) The player has had the ball for more than 2 seconds
or within those 2 seconds
2) The player has attempted to break a tackle by fending off a tackler before attempting to dispose of the ball legally and fails to legally dispose of the ball.

If at any point, with or without prior opportunity a player incorrectly disposes the ball then a free kick is awarded against the player.

This would get rid of any "rolling mauls" there simply wouldn't be time for them to develop. Also it would punish players who just drop the ball when they've been tackled

IMO, prior opportunity is best judged using common sense about whether the player has actually had a prior opportunity. Set rules like time limits or breaking tackles won't work. For example, getting the ball on the wing in space is completely different to guy getting the ball from a stoppage or in the middle of a pack. In a pack you could easily break two or three tackles or have the ball for two seconds but have had no reasonable opportunity to dispose of the ball. Stricter holding the ball rules in packs would actually be detrimental to the game, because it prevents properly won clearances and could even discourage players from going for the ball by rewarding the tacklers more than the ball winner.

 

[LordLucifer]

1. Get rid of Free Agency or make it that clubs can trade a player where they want & when they want to, can't have both.
2. Reduce the number of players on the bench to two (20 in a team overall).
3. Kicking backwards is play-on.
4. Umpire to reward/protect players who genuinely go after the ball as opposed to rewarding the seagull who is too timid to get it and only wants to tackle.
5. Penalise the third man in to a tackle.
6. Playing on from out of bounds is immediately a ball-in.
7. A hip & shoulder is a fair and legitimate part of the game again.
8. Player has to wait till the Goal Umpires have waved their flags after a behind has been scored.
9. Reduce the number of runners per team to one only.
10. Remove the 95% minimum salary cap payment for each club.
11. The same salary cap per club, no differences per state etc.
12. No matter where you take a mark, the line you have to follow is a direct line to the centre of the gaol (get rid of this bullshit about taking a mark in the square).
13. A tackle has to be an actual tackle to be awarded a free kick, not a lazy slap across the arms.

 

[Fossey]

We traded for Lake in what was at the time described as a win win for both clubs. Brian offered Hawthorn a lot more at the time than he did the Bulldogs and the dogs wanted picks as they were rebuilding. The early signs seem to suggest the dogs have done a good job of it.

Are there any other players we've brought in that you're dubious about the fairness of?

Only win win because alternative for next year wasn't good. Obviously as a supporter of big Melbourne club, you would be a fan of FA. Just have a look at the clubs who don't like it ... Melbourne (listen to Paul Roos), Suns, Brisbane, GWS, Saints, Dogs etched. Etc. Not exactly the power-house clubs are they ?

 

[giggler99]

Reduce the number of teams from 18 back to 14.

if the AFL ain't ballsy enough to do this (which I'm sure they won't be) then we need to head toward a conference system like in the US to disguise the unevenness.

Create a national second tier (reserves league) and possibly even a under18's comp, so that clubs can setup structures and philosophy's for their teams all they why through to seniors, it will make it much easier to recruit the players they want and set up academies in future.

No restricted free agent, its pointless if a player wants to leave and clubs be hold to ransoms.

No more grey areas on rule interpretations either it is or it isn't. i.e deliberate out of bounce holding the ball

Stop sanitizing the game and bring back the tribalism between fans. I want to ses the days of the big Cheers squads back!!

 

[onthemoney]

Only win win because alternative for next year wasn't good. Obviously as a supporter of big Melbourne club, you would be a fan of FA. Just have a look at the clubs who don't like it ... Melbourne (listen to Paul Roos), Suns, Brisbane, GWS, Saints, Dogs etched. Etc. Not exactly the power-house clubs are they ?

I don't actually like it from a fan perspective. It was responsible for taking my favourite player to another club. I'm just highlighting that Hawthorn haven't been winners out of FA, and it's poor journalism that seems to be fuelling this myth that you've jumped on board with.

 

[greatwhiteshark]

Full time umpires simply have to be employed.

Aside from that, I like the suggestion about not awarding marks for backwards kicking. Would be an especially good rule when kicking backwards outside of the back 50: the only time it should be allowed is when the player kicking backwards is in either arc when it drops off the boot.

Would also be glad if they would stop having to make players wait to kick out until the goal umpire has waved his flag, and maybe even do away with the post rule altogether. I know they trialled it in the Wizard Cup (?) with moderate success, but it would be so much better if hitting the post didn't automatically make the score a behind and would absolutely not be missed by anybody but the staunchest traditionalists within a year or two.

Three or four year draftee contracts would be great as well. Want to play AFL and have freedom of trade for more than half of your career as the AFLPA is insistent upon? Toughen up, and spend a few years in a different city without running away and screwing the club that has put time into you. Can't stay away from home? Look after your club by explicitly stating you won't go, or better yet go and get a real job.

Full time umpires will not fix them making mistakes, they will always make mistakes and always will. I am not opposed to making them full time but it won't change that they will make mistakes.
Umpires make mistakes because all the rules are not simply anymore, they all have sub rules to the main rule with a bunch of what ifs next to them. This is why umpires struggle.
The rules are the issue not the umpires.

Players don't have to wait for the flag to be waived, been like that for 10 years or more now, they can play on immediately.
The scoring system is fine. If it hits the post it's a behind and no reason at all to change it.
Why can't people just accept our sport for what it is.

I am sure soccer supporters Te world over think of things that they might think may make the game better, fortunately the people who run soccer just say the game is the game.