AFL XIV

[The Blue Baggers]

Cricket has T20
League has the Auckland 9s
Rugby has 7s

Why does the AFL not have a tournament with a shorten more open version of itself ??

 

[ferrisb]

Carlton was a pioneer with this last year.

We only played 14 afl players each round and the contests were much shorter than usual.

Wasn't very entertaining, though...

 

[Shane Hird]

I umpired in an afl 9s comp in November last year. It's great for fun and laughs but when you get the teams made up of senior experienced players it becomes too fast and goals come too quick.

The games stops every 30 seconds when dropped balls or spoils happen or goals are scored and someone has to retrieve the ball as it goes sailing 30 mtrs past the post.

Not a good game for tv.

 

[PAFC_1870]

Cricket has T20
League has the Auckland 9s
Rugby has 7s

Why does the AFL not have a tournament with a shorten more open version of itself ??

Remember the lightning cup....

If I'm correct coincided with the 100th year.

 

[The Blue Baggers]

Remember the lightning cup....

If I'm correct coincided with the 100th year.

That was still played with 18 on the ground

 

[PAFC_1870]

That was still played with 18 on the ground

But it was a fast short game. Like T20...

 

[Exe Gesis]

Cricket has T20
League has the Auckland 9s
Rugby has 7s

Why does the AFL not have a tournament with a shorten more open version of itself ??

To be honest, the AFL games is TOO wide open now. You guys play on a massive field already, and the 18 per side spread around it, or moving around in little platoons, means the majority of the action is just people running around freely, bouncing the ball, uncontested possessions, and with such space so easy to evade would-be tacklers, who often just end up zoning up instead causing the ball carrier to offload the ball before body contact ensues.

Which is incredibly boring to watch. So if you have a "shorter version" where it's on the same sized oval field with only like 9 players, it'd be even more boring. Like horrendously dull.

A T20 version of the AFL game imo would better be served if it were played on a smaller rectangle field, like NRL/NFL/Soccer/Union is played, with the same amount of players (18)....so there's far more body contact, congestion, tackling. Think Hockey -- free flowing but often body contact. Or think International Rules series with the Irish -- that's actually more entertaining to watch in that regard than AFL (in the sense of body contact, action between opposing players, contested possession).

If I were AFL boss, I'd actually change the official game to be played instead on a smaller rectangular field.

 

[Shane Hird]

To be honest, the AFL games is TOO wide open now. You guys play on a massive field already, and the 18 per side spread around it, or moving around in little platoons, means the majority of the action is just people running around freely, bouncing the ball, uncontested possessions, and with such space so easy to evade would-be tacklers, who often just end up zoning up instead causing the ball carrier to offload the ball before body contact ensues.

Which is incredibly boring to watch.

A T20 version of the AFL game imo would better be serves if it were played on a smaller rectangle field, like NRL/NFL/Soccer/Union is played, with the same amount of players (18)....so there's far more body contact, congestion, tackling. Think Hockey -- free flowing but often body contact. Or think International Rules series with the Irish -- that's actually more entertaining to watch in that regard than AFL (in the sense of body contact, action between opposing players, contested possession).

If I were AFL boss, I'd actually change the official game to be played instead on a smaller rectangular field.

Afl 9s is played on a small field gg. 80 mtrs long by about 30 wide.

 

[Lensen]

I umpired in an afl 9s comp in November last year. It's great for fun and laughs but when you get the teams made up of senior experienced players it becomes too fast and goals come too quick.

The games stops every 30 seconds when dropped balls or spoils happen or goals are scored and someone has to retrieve the ball as it goes sailing 30 mtrs past the post.

Not a good game for tv.

Well AFL 9s is effectively the touch footy version of the game. NRL 9s is a stripped down version of the real thing
I reckon a 12 a side carnival would be terrific. 6 groups of 3, 2 x 12 min halves, play the qualifiers day 1 with quarter finals and beyond day 2. Most clubs obviously wouldn't play their guns but would be a fun start to the year

 

[The Blue Baggers]

To be honest, the AFL games is TOO wide open now. You guys play on a massive field already, and the 18 per side spread around it, or moving around in little platoons, means the majority of the action is just people running around freely, bouncing the ball, uncontested possessions, and with such space so easy to evade would-be tacklers, who often just end up zoning up instead causing the ball carrier to offload the ball before body contact ensues.

Which is incredibly boring to watch. So if you have a "shorter version" where it's on the same sized oval field with only like 9 players, it'd be even more boring. Like horrendously dull.

A T20 version of the AFL game imo would better be served if it were played on a smaller rectangle field, like NRL/NFL/Soccer/Union is played, with the same amount of players (18)....so there's far more body contact, congestion, tackling. Think Hockey -- free flowing but often body contact. Or think International Rules series with the Irish -- that's actually more entertaining to watch in that regard than AFL (in the sense of body contact, action between opposing players, contested possession).

If I were AFL boss, I'd actually change the official game to be played instead on a smaller rectangular field.

Agree a tournament @ the Melbourne rectangular stadium would be good , less players smaller field

Why not take it to Croke Park Dublin !!

 

[Shane Hird]

Well AFL 9s is effectively the touch footy version of the game. NRL 9s is a stripped down version of the real thing
I reckon a 12 a side carnival would be terrific. 6 groups of 3, 2 x 12 min halves, play the qualifiers day 1 with quarter finals and beyond day 2. Most clubs obviously wouldn't play their guns but would be a fun start to the year

Nah..all everyone would do is spoil in marks and you'd have stop-start all the time. Great for recreational fun but on a pro level it would be frustrating to watch.

 

[Lensen]

Nah..all everyone would do is spoil in marks and you'd have stop-start all the time. Great for recreational fun but on a pro level it would be frustrating to watch.

You misinterpreted my post. I was talking about a 12 a side version of the 18 man game, with obviously opportunity to try/modify rules

The AFL 9s is equivalent to NRL's touch footy, which I completely agree wouldn't work professionally

 

[SBD Gonzalez]

To be honest, the AFL games is TOO wide open now. You guys play on a massive field already, and the 18 per side spread around it, or moving around in little platoons, means the majority of the action is just people running around freely, bouncing the ball, uncontested possessions, and with such space so easy to evade would-be tacklers, who often just end up zoning up instead causing the ball carrier to offload the ball before body contact ensues.

Which is incredibly boring to watch. So if you have a "shorter version" where it's on the same sized oval field with only like 9 players, it'd be even more boring. Like horrendously dull.

A T20 version of the AFL game imo would better be served if it were played on a smaller rectangle field, like NRL/NFL/Soccer/Union is played, with the same amount of players (18)....so there's far more body contact, congestion, tackling. Think Hockey -- free flowing but often body contact. Or think International Rules series with the Irish -- that's actually more entertaining to watch in that regard than AFL (in the sense of body contact, action between opposing players, contested possession).

If I were AFL boss, I'd actually change the official game to be played instead on a smaller rectangular field.

Respectfully disagree. Having followed nothing but Aussie Rules for 40 years, I just find ice hockey (and basketball, for what its worth) claustrophobic.

I love the grand landscape of Aussie Rules.

For example, I think rugby league needs to drop a couple of players from each side to open it out more and get some running speed into the game. The only time I leap to my feet watching a game of league is when someone finally makes a breakthrough. But it's far too rare for my taste.

 

[Shane Hird]

You misinterpreted my post. I was talking about a 12 a side version of the 18 man game, with obviously opportunity to try/modify rules

The AFL 9s is equivalent to NRL's touch footy, which I completely agree wouldn't work professionally

Ok then. The more space there is the more lead up marks there is. Which leads to a boring game off keepings off with hardly any turnovers.
That's what makes the normal 9s game so unique. A small confined area where everyone can man up easily and the skill of the game is drilling low, hard fast passes by foot to your leading teammate who is in front position against his opponent.

 

[Exe Gesis]

Afl 9s is played on a small field gg. 80 mtrs long by about 30 wide.

But with 9 players!

 

[Shane Hird]

But with 9 players!

9 players each. 18 players on field. There's no room for mistakes.

 

[Exe Gesis]

Respectfully disagree. Having followed nothing but Aussie Rules for 40 years, I just find ice hockey (and basketball, for what its worth) claustrophobic.

I love the grand landscape of Aussie Rules.

For example, I think rugby league needs to drop a couple of player from each side to open it out more and get some running speed into the game. The only time I leap to my feet watching a game of league is when someone finally makes a breakthrough. But it's far too rare for my taste.

NRL is TOO closed. Just one player hitting the ball up, getting tackled, while his 12 other teammates stand around doing nothing watching. Rinse-repeat a million times over. It's like that not because of the size of the field or the number of players on the field, but because of the inanity of the rules of that game.

What RL needs is the ability to be allowed to block people like NFL. Then the game would be more open. And other little tweaks to the rules like that.

AFL in contrast is too much wide open space and just people running around uncontested. We DON'T WANT the "rolling maul" tho either. But I think like the International Rules, that was more fun to watch. The rules of that hybrid game just worked well in that regard. No rolling maul, but enough player congestion to make possessions contested. But AFL on a rectangular field shouldn't adopt a "no mark" policy like the Gaelic have. Instead, on that rectangular field, marks only can be taken inside the forward or back 20 meters. The rest of the middle of the field no marks allowed, so it's free flowing thrills and spills.

 

[Exe Gesis]

9 players each. 18 players on field. There's no room for mistakes.

Ok tbh i havent seen an AFL 9's game.
But if it's on a soccer-sized field, 9 per side, maybe 11 per side better?, but if it's like you described the post before this, like how i would want to see the official AFL game become, but modified with marks only in the forward/back 50, then

Ok, i'll go see if there's an AFL 9's game on youtube, and post and comment on. It could be JUST the right balance to what I want. Or I could find a few areas to tweak.

 

[Exe Gesis]

Ok, no. Well, it's an improvement, but no.

I think the video below is far better -- the dimensions of the field, but add an extra player or two per side, and use an oval AFL ball, AFL goal posts, you're allowed to shepherd/tackle/etc, but marks only allowed forward/back 20.

But even "as is" international rules > AFL in terms of enjoyable to watch as a sport per se (action).

 

[Lensen]

Ok then. The more space there is the more lead up marks there is. Which leads to a boring game off keepings off with hardly any turnovers.
That's what makes the normal 9s game so unique. A small confined area where everyone can man up easily and the skill of the game is drilling low, hard fast passes by foot to your leading teammate who is in front position against his opponent.

In no way would I advocate this becoming the norm, just like most league fans would not advocate 9s being the norm

But as a season opening carnival type arrangement with shorter games I think it could be fun

 

[HalAlaric]

Was talking to a few old boys at the pub last week in which one made the suggestion of the EJ Witten game being turned into a mini tournament based on state of origin.
Each state team is made up of past players, minor celebrities and possibly current women players. Each play for a charity and games can be played in each state.
Thoughts?

 

[d33my]

I actually think we should make a longer game. 16 quarters, forty players on each team. A war of attrition.

Screw the TV ratings, screw the players. It's what the fans want.

 

[Exe Gesis]

Respectfully disagree. ....

Btw, people don't have to respectfully disagree. I welcome all forms! People can disrespectfully disagree with me, even disrespectfully agree!

 

[Exe Gesis]

I actually think we should make a longer game. 16 quarters, forty players on each team. A war of attrition.

Screw the TV ratings, screw the players. It's what the fans want.

Like the original version of the game. A whole town vs a whole town. Moving the ball across towns, streets, parks, trees, other obstacles, until finally someone puts the ball in the destination goal. Game could last days or a week. People tuning in all times of the day/night, an on-going live Reality TV like thing.

 

[Sherrinator]

Like the original version of the game. A whole town vs a whole town. Moving the ball across towns, streets, parks, trees, other obstacles, until finally someone puts the ball in the destination goal. Game could last days or a week. People tuning in all times of the day/night, an on-going live Reality TV like thing.

I disrespectfully agree with this post