1977- The amazing season that changed the way we saw the game

[RogersResults]

Average scoring shots by eras.
(Better comparison than points scores as accuracy has improved significantly.)

1897-1924: 17.77
1925-1938: 24.45 - (No boundary throw-ins - free kick against player who put it out.)
1939-1968: 23.90 - (Throw-ins back - out-of-bounds free only for 'deliberate'.)
1939-1953: 25.02
1954-1968 22.78 - (Coleman retires early and Norm Smith invents the 'decoy' full-forward.)
1969-1976: 26.95 - (Free kick for 'out on the full' introduced.)
1977-1995: 28.46 - (Interchange introduced.)
1996-2014: 25.54
2014 R1-3: 23.72

High: 31.15 in 1982 (Backmens' gap year.)
Low: 12.92 in 1899 (Much credit goes to St Kilda)
Top 20 - Are all between 1969 (27.64) and 2000 (27.53).
Highest since 2000: 26.61 in 2008.

(1977 - 28.27 ranks 13th out of 118.
2014 is currently equal 68th with 1958.)

Scoring tends for 2014 are here after each round

 

[The_Wookie]

The AFL Annual Reports until 1995 had a section called "growth" in the back of it that detailed league happenings in any given year. Im in the process of writing this all out properly but for 1977 it says

• Home and away matches - 22, Attendance - 2,773,007, reciepts - $2,9417,518
• 20 matches at VFL Park, Attendances - 501,391, reciepts - $603,822.70
  
• Total attendance for season - 3,304,080, reciepts - $5,607,203
• Finals Series - 7 match
• 3 Finals at VFL park - attendance 173,010, reciepts $833,040
• 4 Finals at the MCG - attendance 358,063, reciepts $1,793,636.25
• Grand Final attendance - 108,224, receipts $589,995.25
• Grand final replay attendance - 98,366, receipts $586,515
• Price of Admission - Adults - $2.00, Pensioners - $0.50, Childen under 15 - $0.25
• Club Membership tickets - Adults - $15.00, Pensioners & Full time students - $5.00, children under 15 - $1.50
• Surcharge of $0.25 per adult cash admission to Home and Away matches to Ground Improvement Fund.
• Finals prices same as last year
• Night Series at VFl park sponsored by Amco-Herald-Seven and under lights costing $1.5 million
• Night premiership won by Hawthorn from Carlton, attendance 27,407, reciepts $28,654
  
• Shield matches for schools as curtain raisers
• Both day Grand Finals - tie and replay - telecast direct throughout Victoria following sellout of tickets
• Extra Finals entertainment including massed Pipes and Services Band and singer Barry Crocker
• Beanie and Guernsey days when children under 15 admitted free to a league Home and Away match
• Two field umpires used in reserve grade matches for the first time
• Team changes announced over ground PA Systems
• Former North Melbourne Player Dr.Allen Aylett elected to VFL Presidency
• North Melbourne competes in fourth consecutive Grand Final, which was tied with Collingwood.
• North Melbourne wins second VFL Premiership in replay
• Record sponsorship of League Football by Marlboro of $165,000, plus $50,000 for promotion in season

 

[Adelaide Hawk]

Average scoring shots by eras.
1969-1976: 26.95 - (Free kick for 'out on the full' introduced.)

Also the time when Peter Hudson, Peter McKenna, Doug Wade and Alex Jesaulenko weaved their magic. I really miss those days, football was genuinely exciting for me whereas these days it's more of an academic interest. We will never see the likes of football in the 70s again, so many genuine greats of the game, not media manufactured 'greats' like we see today.

 

[Vekgib]

Also the time when Peter Hudson, Peter McKenna, Doug Wade and Alex Jesaulenko weaved their magic. I really miss those days, football was genuinely exciting for me whereas these days it's more of an academic interest. We will never see the likes of football in the 70s again, so many genuine greats of the game, not media manufactured 'greats' like we see today.

This post could've been written by me. I no longer take an interest in the "science" of the game. Back in the '70's, as a kid watching the game, it seemed more of a sport than it does now. Nowadays, it just appears, at times, to be athletes playing to scientific methods of getting the ball to the other end.Back then, I enjoyed the spectacle of the kicking, marking etc. The dour struggle on suburban fields in driving rain. The free-flowing play that saw goals galore.
To be honest, at the risk of sounding like an idiot, my intimate knowledge of the game has dwindled to the point where I have no idea whatsoever of what football-playing advantages Essendon (or Cronulla for that matter) may have gained from the peptides they're in trouble for.

 

[Adelaide Hawk]

This post could've been written by me. I no longer take an interest in the "science" of the game. Back in the '70's, as a kid watching the game, it seemed more of a sport than it does now. Nowadays, it just appears, at times, to be athletes playing to scientific methods of getting the ball to the other end.Back then, I enjoyed the spectacle of the kicking, marking etc. The dour struggle on suburban fields in driving rain. The free-flowing play that saw goals galore.
To be honest, at the risk of sounding like an idiot, my intimate knowledge of the game has dwindled to the point where I have no idea whatsoever of what football-playing advantages Essendon (or Cronulla for that matter) may have gained from the peptides they're in trouble for.

I think the beauty of the game in the 70s was its random nature. We had coaches, but they were ostensibly motivators rather than tacticians. Players took the field and played according to their natural ability and instinct. This amounted to players attempting freakish feats with no fear of being castigated by the coach or the media.

Statistics didn't matter, the only numbers that interested us were the number of goals and behinds. We knew who played well, we didn't need a mass of numbers to tell us. We'd never heard of the term "hard ball get", let alone see the need to record them.

We had 15 players in set positions and 3 on ballers, a ruckman, ruck-rover and a rover. We saw one-on-one contests all over the ground, sometimes two champions of the game pitted against each other in combat. To see Knights flying one-out against a Van Der Haar or a McKay was breath taking.

We saw key forwards take ownership of kicking goals for their team, not passing off to a team mate for fear they would stuff it up themselves. I grow so annoyed these days when I hear the term "unselfish" because a player won't accept responsibility. How great was it to see a champion forward boot 10 or more goals in an afternoon? I sometimes think the over-emphasis on teamwork detracts from the brilliant individual efforts that would bring crowds to their feet.

We had umpires who watched the game and paid free kicks as they happened. Sure, they would get the odd one wrong, but they didn't interpret the rules, they just adhered to them. And having only the one umpire meant more consistency with decisions.

We saw ruck contests that were a thing of beauty with two giant men flying against each other and guiding the ball to their rover. They were not permitted to place their hands on an opponent, all they could do was use their body to gain an advantage. These days, we see sumo-wrestling contests where ruckmen stand flat footed and grapple with each other, calling out a number of an area they are going to hit the ball to. Very, very , unattractive part of our game.

We saw players kick drop kicks, flat punts, torpedo punts, stab passes, etc. Sure, the kicks weren't always accurate but every now and then you would see someone launch into a monster that left the crowd gasping. In today's game, seeing nothing but drop punts is a little boring, not to mention, too predictable.

The game was about the players. We knew little about behind the scenes activities, we didn't want to know. The media consisted of former players who just wrote about the game. Reading a summary of the game back then, you felt you were at the game. Read a match report these days, and you wonder if the journalist was at the game.

I could go on, but I won't. There are some things about the contemporary game that have improved football. Trouble is, the game just isn't as exciting to watch.

 

[barmy44]

I could go on, but I won't. There are some things about the contemporary game that have improved football. Trouble is, the game just isn't as exciting to watch.

good post, but a lot of that is nostalgia for the game you grew up watching. we always remember things as better than they were.

ive checked out a few games from the 60s to 80s and i hate them. boring, amateurish, scrappy.

i love watching the game today, and i find it far more exciting to watch.

but each to their own!

 

[Adelaide Hawk]

good post, but a lot of that is nostalgia for the game you grew up watching. we always remember things as better than they were.

ive checked out a few games from the 60s to 80s and i hate them. boring, amateurish, scrappy.

i love watching the game today, and i find it far more exciting to watch.

but each to their own!

You obviously haven't seen some of the games I've seen this season.

 

[Hodgepodge]

Players took the field and played according to their natural ability and instinct..

This. Each player was an expression of his own innate skill, whereas these days you have players who are trained or drilled into something that they are not. The best current example of this might be Jack Riewoldt, who is unable to display his natural goalkicking prowess and has to run up and down the wings for some reason.

 

[barmy44]

You obviously haven't seen some of the games I've seen this season.

yeah, probably not... i dont have the time (or even really the inclination) to watch every game, every week.

i catch the cats without fail, and a couple of others that catch my interest if i have the time (hawks, tigers, port and freo i like to watch if i can).

every season has shocking games between shocking teams though. im sure 1977 had some total snoozers as well.

i just personally like modern football far more than previous generations.

 

[Vekgib]

I think the beauty of the game in the 70s was its random nature. We had coaches, but they were ostensibly motivators rather than tacticians. Players took the field and played according to their natural ability and instinct. This amounted to players attempting freakish feats with no fear of being castigated by the coach or the media.

Statistics didn't matter, the only numbers that interested us were the number of goals and behinds. We knew who played well, we didn't need a mass of numbers to tell us. We'd never heard of the term "hard ball get", let alone see the need to record them.

We had 15 players in set positions and 3 on ballers, a ruckman, ruck-rover and a rover. We saw one-on-one contests all over the ground, sometimes two champions of the game pitted against each other in combat. To see Knights flying one-out against a Van Der Haar or a McKay was breath taking.

We saw key forwards take ownership of kicking goals for their team, not passing off to a team mate for fear they would stuff it up themselves. I grow so annoyed these days when I hear the term "unselfish" because a player won't accept responsibility. How great was it to see a champion forward boot 10 or more goals in an afternoon? I sometimes think the over-emphasis on teamwork detracts from the brilliant individual efforts that would bring crowds to their feet.

We had umpires who watched the game and paid free kicks as they happened. Sure, they would get the odd one wrong, but they didn't interpret the rules, they just adhered to them. And having only the one umpire meant more consistency with decisions.

We saw ruck contests that were a thing of beauty with two giant men flying against each other and guiding the ball to their rover. They were not permitted to place their hands on an opponent, all they could do was use their body to gain an advantage. These days, we see sumo-wrestling contests where ruckmen stand flat footed and grapple with each other, calling out a number of an area they are going to hit the ball to. Very, very , unattractive part of our game.

We saw players kick drop kicks, flat punts, torpedo punts, stab passes, etc. Sure, the kicks weren't always accurate but every now and then you would see someone launch into a monster that left the crowd gasping. In today's game, seeing nothing but drop punts is a little boring, not to mention, too predictable.

The game was about the players. We knew little about behind the scenes activities, we didn't want to know. The media consisted of former players who just wrote about the game. Reading a summary of the game back then, you felt you were at the game. Read a match report these days, and you wonder if the journalist was at the game.

I could go on, but I won't. There are some things about the contemporary game that have improved football. Trouble is, the game just isn't as exciting to watch.

Next time I'm in Adelaide, I'm having a beer with you to discuss the good old days. Which really WERE good.

 

[Minka Beaver]

High: 31.15 in 1982 (Backmens' gap year.)

A year of awful drought in Victoria too. At no point did VFL grounds become particularly 'heavy', while I think Round 10 remains the only incidence in VFL/AFL history in which every side has scored at least 100 points.

 

[sherbrook]

1977 was the year in which Hawthorn's Hudson and Matthews kicked 200 goals between them - yet the Hawks were unable to make the GF

Quite extraordinary

 

[sherbrook]

1977 was the year in which Hawthorn's Hudson and Matthews kicked 200 goals between them - yet the Hawks were unable to make the GF

Quite extraordinary

 

[Adelaide Hawk]

Next time I'm in Adelaide, I'm having a beer with you to discuss the good old days. Which really WERE good.

Yes, I just smile when I read the comment, "I've seen dvds of games in that era and today's footy is much better". No allowance made for the vastly superior quality of TV these days. We're actually talking about being there, not watching it on TV.

 

[The Speaker]

Interesting that you should claim that the interchange rule increased the scoring rate in the VFL. The 1977 WANFL season also had the highest average score per game on record (109.57), breaking the previous season's record (108.05). However, the interchange rule was not introduced until the following year in round eight, which ended with an average score for the season of 113.92. So, at least in WA, something else was increasing the scoring rate initially.

(Western Australia also destroyed Victoria in the State of Origin in 77.)

 

[Bosk]

I've been telling people for years that everything was better back in the 80s, finally there's some evidence to back me up!