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

[Chadwiko]

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?

 

[Chadwiko]

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

1) Fix the schedule by reducing the number of games per season
At present, there are numerous issues with the schedule. Whether it be teams getting to play 'bad' teams multiple times a year, or the fact that smaller clubs struggle to get 'prime time' games. There can be no denying that the AFL schedule is not balanced, and this leads to issues like we saw in the GF yesterday where it was only the second time all year the Eagles played on the MCG.

To actually fix the schedule is quite difficult, however. And I believe that the only way to do it fairly would be to move to a simple "Each team plays against each other once per season" model.

The shorter season would have the added benefit of helping to keep players fresh, and improving the overall quality of the games.

2) Introduce an NFL style 'coaches challenge' on umpire decisions
There is nothing that infuriates and frustrates fans more than a bad umpire decision going against them. It severely tarnishes the product.

In the NFL, a coach can 'challenge' an umpires decision twice per half (maximum 4 times per game), with certain restrictions. For example, if a coach challenges a call and is unsuccessful, they lose a time out (which can be quite crucial in the NFL).

For such a system to work in the AFL, there would need to be sufficient risk involved, in order to ensure a coaches challenge is only used in legitimate circumstances.

My suggestion would be that up to 10 seconds after an umpires decision, a coach can challenge that call. If the challenge is unsuccessful, the opposition team gets the football and a 25m penalty from the spot of the call in question. A coach would have two challenges per game, total. If they successfully use both challenges, they could get a third.

There would be a video review umpire at every stadium, just like the goal review system.

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.

4) Get rid of runners altogether
Are there any other sports in the world where non-player/non-coach team members can run on to the field and relay messages? I can't think of any.

The 'runner' is a product of a bygone era, and really has no place in modern football.

 

[Bunk Moreland]

Reserved

 

[SwampCreature]

Reserved? Really? How ridiculous.

 

[Footy_Fan2007]

Omitting Hawthorn from the comp would pretty much solve it.

 

[AG]

Everyone plays each other once is my biggest wish for the comp. Obviously won't happen because of the tv deals but I can dream.

Agree on kicking backwards but maybe just start with a play on for kicking backwards into the defensive 50. Switches on the wing which go backwards I dont have an issue with.

Runners I never notice and aren't a huge issue imo.

Not sure on the umpire review system either and I would limit it to one review per game if ever implemented. Scott brothers would review the first free kick of the game probably.

 

[JT_the_Man]

2) Introduce an NFL style 'coaches challenge' on umpire decisions
There is nothing that infuriates and frustrates fans more than a bad umpire decision going against them. It severely tarnishes the product.

In the NFL, a coach can 'challenge' an umpires decision twice per half (maximum 4 times per game), with certain restrictions. For example, if a coach challenges a call and is unsuccessful, they lose a time out (which can be quite crucial in the NFL).

For such a system to work in the AFL, there would need to be sufficient risk involved, in order to ensure a coaches challenge is only used in legitimate circumstances.

My suggestion would be that up to 10 seconds after an umpires decision, a coach can challenge that call. If the challenge is unsuccessful, the opposition team gets the football and a 25m penalty from the spot of the call in question. A coach would have two challenges per game, total. If they successfully use both challenges, they could get a third.

There would be a video review umpire at every stadium, just like the goal review system.

Uh no. It would disrupt the flow of the game. Especially considering that at the same time u want backward kicks to be play on, it defeats the purpose. And regardless, as if we haven't American-ised everything enough already.

 

[strauchanie59]

Don't make rules up on the fly will be a good start.

 

[bugalugs213]

16 teams would help the standard of games. Less 30+ wins more close games.

 

[Andrew Mc]

1. Won't happen - they want a certain number of games (for TV) and there's a certain number of teams.
2. No - just doesn't fit with the flow of the game.
3. No - defence is part of the game - you don't want teams to kill the clock, man up and stop zoning. Not allowing backwards kicks would just cause more congestion forward of the ball.
4. Agree - no reason for runners with interchanges.

 

[Matt Stevic]

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.

 

[Arc1]

Agree with no mark for kicking backwards, that would get us back to more marking contests which is one of the sport's best things.

Reduce the number of teams and play everyone home and away. Can't take a sport seriously when the draw is imbalanced, and the talent pool is too thin.

AFL has failed to make the hard calls on culling or merging clubs, and at the same time, persisted in the strategy of expanding with franchises. Now we're paying the price.

 

[Matt Stevic]

Agree with no mark for kicking backwards, that would get us back to more marking contests which is one of the sport's best things.

Reduce the number of teams and play everyone home and away. Can't take a sport seriously when the draw is imbalanced, and the talent pool is too thin.

AFL has failed to make the hard calls on culling or merging clubs, and at the same time, persisted in the strategy of expanding with franchises. Now we're paying the price.

Killing clubs for a fair draw is throwing the baby out with the bath water.

Would you like to be supporting the Melbourne Hawks?

 

[Unique Name]

Professional callers. No more jobs for the boys.

 

[Arc1]

Killing clubs for a fair draw is throwing the baby out with the bath water.

Would you like to be supporting the Melbourne Hawks?

Not really, but at the time we had brought it on ourselves.

This issue is a bit like population control - simplest way to fix the environment is get rid of about 5 billion people. But nobody wants to volunteer.

 

[PoppedCorn]

How about we leave the on field stuff alone.
Draw should be done out of a hat.
You cop whatever chiefs fish picks maybe?

Seriously random is the only way to go.
Imo

 

[shintemaster]

Killing clubs for a fair draw is throwing the baby out with the bath water.

Would you like to be supporting the Melbourne Hawks?

The expansion was poorly thought out IMHO.

It was too soon. We had just seen the competition finally starting to consolidate and settle down from the last introductions and mergers in the late 90's. Finally all teams were starting to get towards a similar status, similar opportunity for father sons, draft changes had trickled down over many years - then the AFL goes and puts two new teams in and the whole thing gets thrown out for another decade.

 

[Roddy]

Keep ensuring that the game remains as distinct from soccer and the rugby codes as possible.

 

[dockshark]

Go to a full home and away season, where the fixtures are designed around being fair for all teams, to minimise travel, and breakdown the home ground advantages.

And...go to fully professional umpires.

 

[port_adelaide_1870]

Instead of 4 quarters we just play until a team reaches 100 points. They are then declared the winners

 

[Matt Stevic]

Instead of 4 quarters we just play until a team reaches 100 points. They are then declared the winners

 

[Tarkyn Lockyer]

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?

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?

 

[madmug]

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.

1) Yep, another team in Melbourne, that'll fix everything

3) Dont worry about the salary cap, how about fixing the mess the Draft 'system' has become. Its a dogs breakfast. Players at the end of their career will go where they might have success, not just grab the cash at a bottom club. The AFL haven't thought that out at all well. That combined with the two new clubs in two years has gutted the prospects of some clubs who needed to rebuild at the same time. The competition is a lop sided mess due the the AFL itself trying to control everything. What a major point of failure.

 

[quotemokc]

Fix umpiring and stupid rules

More list managent transparency

 

[Rustin Cohle]

Do away with the idea that we have to "keep the game moving." This notion has almost singlehandedly created the current problem of having 30 players around the ball with no clean disposals. Due to the fact that it is now legal to simply throw, drop and place the ball on the ground we now get situations where players become glorified rugby players moving the ball forwards in huge packs. The ridiculous rule about "making an effort" has contributed to this problem. As far as I'm concerned, if a player has enough time to gather the ball and take a step then they should have to get a clear kick or handpass away. None of these half kicks where the ball hits half a shoelace and non-handpasses that "came loose in the tackle." Additionally, players should be penalised for incorrect disposal if the ball is wrenched from their possession by their own teammate.

The other issue that adds to those I mentioned previously is when a player's own teammate will effectively tackle him to prevent the ball coming out in a ground contest. This tactic, which is especially prevalent in Sydney and Fremantle matches, should be immediately called as holding the ball. This would stop players from entering contests as the third man with the sole intention of locking the ball in to create congestion.