To be fair, one of their rule changes has been tested in the SANFL for the last decade. The ruck and interchange changes closely resemble reversions to previous rules.Its obvious they operate on a "throw shit at the wall and see what sticks" type attitude to running the league. As long as the gambling dollars continue to roll in they done give much of a shit about the stability or integrity of the game itself.
It also reeks of indecisiveness and short term planning. A big issue with growing the game overseas, which they have attempted countless times now, is that the rule set of the game are baffling to outsiders. We put up with it as weve grown with it and "get the vibe" so to speak but its unmarketable with so many grey areas.
But instead of spending a proper amount of time actually clarifying and adjusting rules to make the game easier to umpire and understand and then actually testing it in the VFL properly they just again, throw shit at the wall in the hopes of it making some sort of positive change.
Imagine the outrage if the AFL, this time next year, announced they were initiating a five-year study into the future of the game. Most of the commentary would be "this is so they can ruin the game further!!!". It's the nature of modern PR, which directly relates to how the public behaves. Considering a change is wanting it. Doing things confidentially is keeping them secret.
The case for the two new finals is really bloody simple: more footy. That's it, that's the case.
No one complains about the death of pre-season games, but that has done more harm to the product (at least in the first month of the season) than any other recent change. Round 0-3 games can be very scrappy due to lack of match practice in the pre-season.




