AFL Rule tampering nonsense

[Gaborone]

For 2019 the AFL introduced new rules for football to remove congestion and prompt higher scoring. We have now had four rounds of football and the impact of those rules can now be seen.

The following table compares AFL scores for the first four rounds from 2012-2018.

Year Points scored rounds 1-4

2013 - 7127
2017 - 6818
2016 - 6679
2012 - 6635
2018 - 6325
2014- 6239
2015 - 6227
Av. - 6484

2019 - 5824

What the evidence shows is that scoring is down from 2018 during the same period by 501 points or 27.8 points per team. Over the period 2012-2018 the scoring is down on the average by 36.7 points or over 6 goals per team for the same period

But that not the end of it. Commentators may say how exciting the close games and upsets have been, but the truth is that most games have been dominated by scrappy, short-passing football, turnovers, inconsistent, confusing umpiring and lots of injuries.

What was Steven Hocking, Gillon McLachlan and the AFL Board thinking when they decided to tamper with the rules? I can understand rule changes to protect players from head injuries, but changes which create an artificial footballing environment or favour one style of play over another have only served to downgrade the offensive and defensive team skills of our game.

 

[jwikked]

What was Steven Hocking, Gillon McLachlan and the AGL Board thinking when they decided to tamper with the rules?

I'll have you know they stress tested these rule changes over a grueling 2 VFL matches, and a few clubs training match sims which showed them all they needed to see in regards to the benefits. Plus the AFLW trialled them, too.

Crazy, right?
Truth be told I'm glad it's blowing up in their ******* fatcat faces. I'm sick and tired of rule changes every year.

 

[GCNavyBlue]

For 2019 the AFL introduced new rules for football to remove congestion and prompt higher scoring. We have now had four rounds of football and the impact of those rules can now be seen.

The following table compares AFL scores for the first four rounds from 2012-2018.

Year Points scored rounds 1-4

2013 - 7127
2017 - 6818
2016 - 6679
2012 - 6635
2018 - 6325
2014- 6239
2015 - 6227
Av. - 6484

2019 - 5824

What the evidence shows is that scoring is down from 2018 during the same period by 501 points or 27.8 points per team. Over the period 2012-2018 the scoring is down on the average by 36.7 points or over 6 goals per team per game.

But that not the end of it. Commentators may say how exciting the close games and upsets have been, but the truth is that most games have been dominated by scrappy, short-passing football, turnovers, inconsistent, confusing umpiring and lots of injuries.

What was Steven Hocking, Gillon McLachlan and the AGL Board thinking when they decided to tamper with the rules? I can understand rule changes to protect players from head injuries, but changes which create an artificial footballing environment or favour one style of play over another have only served to downgrade the offensive and defensive team skills of our game.

An absolute joke, and don't get me started on the standard of umpiring this year - the game is barely Aussie Rules football anymore. Sad.

 

[Milanista28]

Not sure why we needed to change the rules to create higher scores in the 1st place, were they losing crowds and money? And fwiw I personally enjoy lower scoring games as the goals mean more when they come.

 

[jwikked]

Not sure why we needed to change the rules to create higher scores in the 1st place, were they losing crowds and money? And fwiw I personally enjoy lower scoring games as the goals mean more when they come.

More goals means more Channel 7 ad breaks.

 

[Milanista28]

More goals means more Channel 7 ad breaks.

Ahh well there you go.

 

[Dazzler9]

If scoring remains low all year, I expect Hocking will review the "data" at the end of the season and reverse the rule changes.

Lol, just kidding.

 

[benneth]

Where's William Wallace when you need him.

Who wants to be our William Wallace?

I'll even take a Rob Roy at this stage, any Rob Roys?

 

[Topkent]

I reckon there's gonna be a huge drop off in crowds within 20 years. The game is a shell of what it used to be when i was young and I'm not even 30 yet.

 

[Cotchins Hair Piece]

Their egos are too big to scrap 666, they’ll just shorten the grounds.

 

[Mitchell54]

Who would have thought something that the AFL created is absolute s***

 

[Underarm]

Average score is an awful predictor for whether games would be better.

In 2012, 34% of all matches had a margin over 50 points. 38% of matches had margins under 12 points.
In 2019, 11% of matches have had a margin over 50 points. 27% of matches had margins under 12 points.

The big difference between scoring in 2019 and 2012 is that margins aren't blowing out like they used to, and I would much rather the have more close games than more blowouts.

 

[smasha]

SEN bringing it up again lolz.

Richmond must have won another game.

 

[Dazzler9]

The persecution complex continues.

 

[Johnny Karate]

More goals means more Channel 7 ad breaks.

Even with fewer goals, 45 seconds to reset the 666 gives channel 7 a crack at two ads between goals. Priorities as order in usual, has their AFL.

 

[Freshwater]

SEN are full of AFL sycophants. They’ll just keep trying to change the rules. Now David no idea King wants to change some more. This didn’t just start last year. Third man up was changed a few years back, it was fine, it cleared congestion and then the no sliding crap seemed to start this nonsense.
One of the best things about AFL was it had few rules and evolved in its own way.

 

[Frank Bunn]

For 2019 the AFL introduced new rules for football to remove congestion and prompt higher scoring. We have now had four rounds of football and the impact of those rules can now be seen.

The following table compares AFL scores for the first four rounds from 2012-2018.

Year Points scored rounds 1-4

2013 - 7127
2017 - 6818
2016 - 6679
2012 - 6635
2018 - 6325
2014- 6239
2015 - 6227
Av. - 6484

2019 - 5824

What the evidence shows is that scoring is down from 2018 during the same period by 501 points or 27.8 points per team. Over the period 2012-2018 the scoring is down on the average by 36.7 points or over 6 goals per team per game.

But that not the end of it. Commentators may say how exciting the close games and upsets have been, but the truth is that most games have been dominated by scrappy, short-passing football, turnovers, inconsistent, confusing umpiring and lots of injuries.

What was Steven Hocking, Gillon McLachlan and the AFL Board thinking when they decided to tamper with the rules? I can understand rule changes to protect players from head injuries, but changes which create an artificial footballing environment or favour one style of play over another have only served to downgrade the offensive and defensive team skills of our game.

Check your maths.

The 27.8 points per team difference is over 4 games, so the difference per team per game is about 7 points.

The difference on the average score from 2012-2018 rounds 1- 4 per team per game is about 9 points.

 

[citizen-erased]

More goals means more Channel 7 ad breaks.

and more chances for Carey to repeat the comments he made 15 seconds ago.

Maybe the clubs are trolling Hocking.
Or perhaps this is a changing of the guard season. Its still early, but we usually see the scores higher in the early rounds.

Could be coincidence, but this has been one of the more lacklustre starts to an AFL season i can recall.
A mate mentioned to me this weekend that AFLW is a better sport to watch. Went to a couple of games this season and, whilst i don't fully agree and its a little OTT to compare a well embedded league to an upstart one, there is some merit in his sentiment.

AFL is feeling a little off in 2019.

 

[Johnny Karate]

One of the problems with changing the rules is that the people doing it are trying to outsmart the coaches. Coaches don’t give a s**t about aesthetics, their job depends on winning. Despite some outliers they are often pretty smart tactically.

For example, if I were in charge, I would lean towards severely restricting the interchange as I believe players would have to play more positionally to conserve energy. However, this would probably lead to club strategists recruiting endurance athletes, teaching them basic skills and we get the same congested crap only played with less skill and intensity.

The problem with AFL rule changes is that they are often implemented in a culture of corporate ignorance where key stakeholders such as fans, and those directly affected by changes like players, coaches and umpires are ignored. Rather than recognising this, when the new rules basically have the counter effect, the AFL introduces more changes to try and undo their own mistakes. It’s like they base their attitude to rule changes on the old lady who swallowed a fly.

 

[sprockets]

For 2019 the AFL introduced new rules for football to remove congestion and prompt higher scoring. We have now had four rounds of football and the impact of those rules can now be seen.

The following table compares AFL scores for the first four rounds from 2012-2018.

Year Points scored rounds 1-4

2013 - 7127
2017 - 6818
2016 - 6679
2012 - 6635
2018 - 6325
2014- 6239
2015 - 6227
Av. - 6484

2019 - 5824

What the evidence shows is that scoring is down from 2018 during the same period by 501 points or 27.8 points per team. Over the period 2012-2018 the scoring is down on the average by 36.7 points or over 6 goals per team per game.

But that not the end of it. Commentators may say how exciting the close games and upsets have been, but the truth is that most games have been dominated by scrappy, short-passing football, turnovers, inconsistent, confusing umpiring and lots of injuries.

What was Steven Hocking, Gillon McLachlan and the AFL Board thinking when they decided to tamper with the rules? I can understand rule changes to protect players from head injuries, but changes which create an artificial footballing environment or favour one style of play over another have only served to downgrade the offensive and defensive team skills of our game.

Were the new rules brought in to raise scoring or to make game scores closer? Currently we're getting 2 points per minute (just out of bed so maths may be off). How is more than that required?

 

[rjslcM]

The 6-6-6 isn't even an issue compared to the rest of our ill-thought out rules that encourage opposite behaviours

For example

Protecting the legs free kick = discourages getting lower

Protecting the head free kick = encourages getting lower


Now we have this shitshow where multiple players go after the ball, keeping their feet with their torso bent parallel to the ground to
a) avoid giving away a free below the knees
b) drawing a head high free kick

Its dreadful to watch. Players need to be able to get down low and grab the ball if their opponent is haunched over it and trying to pick it up.

We praise players for 'keeping their feet' so often, but sometimes the right thing to do is not to do that. The Cyril Rioli effort on the wing in the 2008 Grand Final would have been a free kick to Max Rooke under the current 'protecting the legs' free kick arrangement.

 

[kozi]

6/6/6 was a rule that was designed to have more media impact than actual impact on the game.

Boggles the mind how many were fooled into believing a rule that’s in place for 1% of the game will have a large impact.

 

[Gaborone]

Check your maths.

The 27.8 points per team difference is over 4 games, so the difference per team per game is about 7 points.

The difference on the average score from 2012-2018 rounds 1- 4 per team per game is about 9 points.

Apologies - only -7 points per team per game from 2018 and -9 (have corrected the original post) from the average but having said that what the dickens were Hocking and AFL inc. thinking when they decided to meddle with the rules to create 'a more high scoring game'. What needed changing? Your correction of the maths actually highlights the fact that the decision didn't make sense in the off season and makes even less sense now.

Was the decision ideological - ie. a preference for one type of football over another, for example, the Geelong/Essendon style c.f the Hawthorn/ West Coast style?

 

[blitzer]

The AFL keep rushing in these ideas without sufficient testing and then they hire a bunch of sycophants to support them because we all know none of them would have the courage to say "hey maybe the game is OK as it is". The AFL needs to understand that games played in trial match conditions are not reflective of what real season games are like. They had an opportunity to actually trial 6-6-6 in real H&A games last year with bottom sides that wouldn't impact finals but they elected not to. They could have also trialed it in previous years of JLT in preparation for this major change and of course they elected not to. Instead they rush it in and it doesn't bloody work and then you get even more sycophants going "well maybe the rule changes didn't go far enough". What a circlejerk!

In hindsight:

The removal of the 3rd man up in ruck contests and the ruck nomination has been a failure and has made congestion worse. Also took away an interesting counter to teams with dominant rucks and an alternate list building strategy that was entertaining to audiences.
6-6-6 - Seems like a failure and has made it harder to take the ball from the backline to the forward line due to lack of an extra number.
Larger kick-in area has been a slight success but unfortunately its overshadowed by the 6-6-6 which has resulted in a net fail.

 

[D-N-R]

They had an opportunity to actually trial 6-6-6 in real H&A games last year with bottom sides that wouldn't impact finals but they elected not to. They could have also trialed it in previous years of JLT in preparation for this major change and of course they elected not to.
.

We've just watched 36 proper games with the new rules and I'm not sure if you could draw any conclusions about the new rules. They idea of changing the rules mid competition for games that 'didn't matter' is abhorrent.

666 seems to have changed little with regards to opening up the game.
The kick out rules have moved the pack from just outside 50 to a little bit further out and hasn't done much, IMO.
The 9m rule for marks and frees in the pockets seems to have done little apart from seeing players creep the mark by pretending they don't know where to stand.

Perhaps the new rules have pushed the ball further from goal resulting in fewer scoring opportunities. Without real technical data like repeat 50 entries or the like it's hard to say.