Does the AFL administration do more to hinder the game than grow it

[Aussie in exile]

It's the way of the world, 21st century style, not just football. The only thing that can justify the bloated salaries of CEO and administrators is the number of zeros they put on the bottom of their spreadsheets. Nobody cares about the "proletariat" these days, and in this case it's the players.

Sadly your correct.
To quote the old Lionel Bart song "Fings ain't wot they use t'be"

 

[deltablues]

Sadly your correct.
To quote the old Lionel Bart song "Fings ain't wot they use t'be"

To which those of us of a certain age and with a more fatalistic mindset would hum along to Doris Day's anthem, Que Sera, Sera.

 

[raymond35]

To which those of us of a certain age and with a more fatalistic mindset would hum along to Doris Day's anthem, Que Sera, Sera.

Can i get down to Normie Rowes version instead?

 

[deltablues]

Can i get down to Normie Rowes version instead?

Absolutely.

 

[JoondalupJ]

The AFL are only ever concerned with making money and thats the bottom line.

There are so many issues that need to be addressed but the AFL won't touch them or make changes because they will lose money in doing so. They've created a situation where they can't change the fixture or season length (which would actually make the competition fair) because of broadcast deals for a 22 game 23 round season. Why do we play 22 games? Because 12 VFL teams played each other twice back in the day. It would make sense to change the season structure to suit the current 18 team competition, but that won't happen, because the AFL won't make as much money.

Clubs have lost their identity and soul by playing out of two Melbourne venues as well, and fans can't associate themselves or have a genuine connection with their teams any more. Deals with the MCC and Marvel ensure that the AFL maximise revenue from larger crowds. If they cared about the game and the fans, hosting matches at smaller venues with better atmospheres would occur. A packed house at Whitten Oval would be a better experience than 25,000 stretched around Marvel on a sunday afternoon. It's why Geelong never play Collingwood or Essendon at GMHBA, if we did you would get the most exciting atmosphere we've had down there in 20 years. But the AFL don't care about that, because they have contracts in place to play a certain amount of games at the MCG, so they need to fulfill those obligations.

The AFL is a business and they've taken the heart out of the game by doing so. Their decisions are not made on sense, they are made because it is beneficial to them.

Find a book called the Electrifying 80'S its a compilation of football journalists writings from the 80's and it has some interesting stuff.
Read Mike Sheahan's piece "What's wrong with Footy" 21st January 1983. Page 166.
Then read Peter McFarline's March 21st 1983 comments "Forget the HOO-HAA, the game's the thing". Page 168.
Then read Michael Gawenda's "The Big Men Fly into Trouble" March 26th 1983.

You can see when the rot and the forgetting about the real game began, but the absolute murder of AFL/VFL football really began when the corporates took the reigns and began in the early 2000's to change our sport into a whole different thing , with money and promotion and marketing , the football was forgotten.
The latest two clubs are a disaster, maybe not for themselves but for the elite game, and have a look at the over load of football teams in the new AFLW, that will be killed of by corporate idiots.
I would think that those three journo's from that past would be fainting, I reckon Mike Sheahan is, at the fact that we play football with two dumb teams going to China, for what , some corporates bright idea.

REMEMBER BF people .....this is our game this is Australian Rules, its getting unrecognisable and unfamiliar and its becoming something else.
We don't just need to go back to real footy , we have no choice.
While money makers destroy the reason of the game itself with nonsensical ideas, now what a less time out at half time, what rot.
Have a read, do yourself a favour, our good in AFL is the best, sport on earth , that sickness and disease entering it these last 15 years,
is the worst thing to ever happen to a sport I have ever seen.
Where is my game gone! Is it keepings off and real aerial ping pong now? Have a read the like of MClachlan should be removed and that rules clown too.

 

[RedV3x]

REMEMBER BF people .....this is our game this is Australian Rules.

No. Absolutely not. You are talking about the AFL and the AFL is a business.
If you are dissatisfied with the AFL or just enjoy Australian Football then support a different league. it's as simple as that.
I thoroughly enjoy going to the WAFL and I shouldn't have waited as long as I did.
I can just rock up to a WAFL game an enjoy good football, good umpiring, good facilities at a good price
without any hassles or pressures AND I don't feel the urge to complain.

 

[ItsAllAboutMe]

The idea that the AFL must 'grow' the game is the problem.. It was great 10 years ago before they felt the need to grow it, its bigger now but is definitely an inferior product. The obsession with growth which is what has ruined the passion for the game that most supporters used to have. it started with removing suburban grounds for the plastic giant stadiums.

 

[Les Malone]

The idea that the AFL must 'grow' the game is the problem.. It was great 10 years ago before they felt the need to grow it, its bigger now but is definitely an inferior product. The obsession with growth which is what has ruined the passion for the game that most supporters used to have. it started with removing suburban grounds for the plastic giant stadiums.

I sort of agree with you, but what exactly was the alternative, i could be wrong here but from memory docklands was going to be purpose built for soccer, why would you give your opposition a leg up and then still be playing your home games on muddy quagmires in the Suburbs that may or may not be hard to get to and limit your ability for sponsorship and bigger crowds.

 

[ItsAllAboutMe]

I sort of agree with you, but what exactly was the alternative, i could be wrong here but from memory docklands was going to be purpose built for soccer, why would you give your opposition a leg up and then still be playing your home games on muddy quagmires in the Suburbs that may or may not be hard to get to and limit your ability for sponsorship and bigger crowds.

Your opposition... please the A league was not even in existence and was the floundering NSL they were never going to 'take over'

There used to be a tribal feel to AFL, the reason you barracked for the blues was because you grew up in Preston or Coburg or the Bombers in Airport West or Ascot Vale. Your 'local' club was your club and anyone who came into 'your' territory was the enemy.. It actually mattered. Now a kid grows up and picks the team they go for based on who has the prettiest mascot and then like sheep people turn up to the giant stadiums, sit in heir plastic seats and cheer on politely. If AFL was ever to lose the battle to soccer it would be this very essence which soccer captures well all over the world that would be the reason.

 

[Les Malone]

Your opposition... please the A league was not even in existence and was the floundering NSL they were never going to 'take over'

There used to be a tribal feel to AFL, the reason you barracked for the blues was because you grew up in Preston or Coburg or the Bombers in Airport West or Ascot Vale. Your 'local' club was your club and anyone who came into 'your' territory was the enemy.. It actually mattered. Now a kid grows up and picks the team they go for based on who has the prettiest mascot and then like sheep people turn up to the giant stadiums, sit in heir plastic seats and cheer on politely. If AFL was ever to lose the battle to soccer it would be this very essence which soccer captures well all over the world that would be the reason.

No, i think initially before the AFL got involved Docklands was going to be a rectangle stadium, considering it was going to have a roof, they would have been stupid to not get involved.

As far as tribal feel, the WAFL used to have it as well, which was destroyed by the Victorian VFL.

Unfortunately you cant go backwards in time, on the other hand people may be saying the same things you say in 30 years about today.

I agree with you about local clubs, but demographics change and many are not really interested in footy like previous generations.

I also think the AFL have destroyed at times the game as a spectacle with the multiple and yearly rule changes, in their bid to keep the game open they have actually produced the opposite.

 

[Cuzz09]

Play each other twice home and away.

On SM-G925I using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Hallstrom]

Take a look in a mirror and you will see the problem with Aussie Rules, we the fans have loved the game to death.
We have given the game too much of our disposable income which has allowed the game to go from amateur to semi-pro to professional in a very short space of time.
If the rules remain untouched we will see that they advantage athleticism over skill everyday of the week. Before professionalism the size of the field and lack of time to dedicate solely to playing football kept athleticism in check. In other sports an offside rule keeps the advantage of pure athleticism in check by preventing players from simply running end to end all day.
If you want the game to look the same as it did around the cusp of the move into the professional era rule changes to advantage to use of skill over athleticism will be required.
In my opinion with the increased athleticism of players today the number of players to field size ratio is out of whack, start removing players so they have to run harder to fill up space on the ground. It will take some trial and error but losing either the pockets OR the flanks would seem about right (so 14 players per team).

 

[RedV3x]

The idea that the AFL must 'grow' the game is the problem.. It was great 10 years ago before they felt the need to grow it, its bigger now but is definitely an inferior product.

Watching the game now is different than before because of the focus on defensive strategies and has NOTHING to do with growing the game.
If you use the premise that the skills of the game have been diluted then the champions should stand out more but they don't.
It's the closeness of the competition that has largely removed the flowing football.

The obsession with growth which is what has ruined the passion for the game that most supporters used to have. it started with removing suburban grounds for the plastic giant stadiums.

Well, you must be talking about Victoria because I love the nice new stadiums.
Remember it was the VFL that demanded growth by contracting interstate players.
Remember it was the VFL that wasn't content with just Victorian players and thus caused the formation of the AFL.

 

[Cuzz09]

Yeah 16 on the field. 6 (or 8) bench seems ideal.

Get rid of the wing starting position

On SM-G925I using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[RedV3x]

As far as tribal feel, the WAFL used to have it as well, which was destroyed by the Victorian VFL.

I agree with you about local clubs, but demographics change and many are not really interested in footy like previous generations.

Whilst some tribalism was lost it has been replaced by in the interstate clubs and also includes an element of interstate tribalism
which it never had in pre-AFL competitions.

I also think the AFL have destroyed at times the game as a spectacle with the multiple and yearly rule changes, in their bid to keep the game open they have actually produced the opposite.

Think a little more deeply. The AFL law makers have only reacted to changes in the game made by coaches.
Get it right - AFL coaches have destroyed the game. It was the coaches that insisted that the drop kick be no more,
that players kick along the boundary, that players get numbers to the ball, that players camp one kick behind play,
that players slow down play, that players hold other players and try and circumvent the laws of the game.

If you want to watch a good game of football, then just watch any game of football outside of the AFL
where the laws of the game are exactly the same but the attitudes are different.
You only have to look at the S.O.O. on Friday night where players were obviously given a free reign.
It was a shootout with some very fast and attractive passages of play and with most players not bothering
to stop and go back for their free kick.

 

[RedV3x]

If the rules remain untouched we will see that they advantage athleticism over skill everyday of the week.

Yes, AFL coaches have focussed on pure athletic ability but that is not the only issue. AFL coaches have also focussed on defensive strategies.
This has led to quite a reduction in flowing football. It has led to an increase in intensity and a contraction in differences
which makes things more interesting but also makes games less attractive. A bit like a final's game every week.

To reverse the contraction in the flow of the game you have suggested some other people - fewer players.
IMO this only makes the situation worse where 2/3 of the field looks empty. It also leads to more slingshot scores.
What people want to see is an evenly populated field with goals as the reward for good play and not so much from turnovers.
Zoning is one obvious way to achieve this. Unfortunately, zoning goes against the spirit of the game.
Let's clear one misconception. Australian Football is full of zones and off-sides - just not in general play.
We have the centre circle, centre square, the 6-6-6 and the kick off zones. We have offside at boundary/bouncedowns and every free kick.
Do we want to extend the 6-6-6 to general play? It would certainly help the game immensely.
Though it would certainly help the game immensely we are not ready to go that far at this point in time.

The one and only saving grace is that coaches know that winning games comes from attacking rather than not losing.
Winning teams attack. Losing teams try to emulate the tactics of winning teams.
As long as coaches are reminded of this fact then Australian Football will remain attractive.

 

[Hallstrom]

You can't blame the coaches though, its their job to win games within the rules of play. Now they game is professional they have more athletic players at their disposal which allows them to be more defensive. As they say "don't hate the player, hate the game".

 

[RedV3x]

You can't blame the coaches though.

Most definitely you can blame the coaches. They changed the game and nobody else.

its their job to win games within the rules of play.

It's their job to win at football not their interpretation of football.
Elite soccer is dead because of the defensive tactics employed.
The NFL change their rules to void innovative tactics so the game always plays out the same.
The AFL has taken some steps to counter the negative defensive tactics employed by coaches.
Luckily, Australian Football still revolves around offensive play.

IMO there are some changes that would reduce the number of laws of the game, add uniformity to the game and also open the game.
Currently we have starting positions in the centre circle, centre square and the 6-6-6.
Why not make all bouncedowns and throw-ins the same, i.e. only two opposing ruckman within 5m of the umpire.
That one change would open up the game immensely and revert rucking to what it used to be and not what should be penalised for shepherding.
The AFL for some reason has immense trouble with the kick-in. The "square" has almost no relevance now except for a mark within it.
Remove a multitude of laws and simply pay a free kick 15m out - that's a better equivalent to what they're doing now.

 

[Hallstrom]

Let me re-word that slightly as it seems I'm dealing with a pedant.
You can't hold it against the coaches for doing their job which is to win games of football.
I think we both agree that to keep the game following as it used to will take rule changes. We can't just ask the coaches nicely to please be a bit less defensive.

 

[Dazzler9]

How can the AFL possibly be accused of hindering the game when they're making such crucial changes as this -

Gooaallll! But why are the goal umpires next to the post?

For the first time since 1994, umpires will no longer be forced to return to the centre of the goals to signal a major

www.afl.com.au

There's no info in the article, but I'm guessing Hocking had a hand in this initiative.

 

[Les Malone]

Whilst some tribalism was lost it has been replaced by in the interstate clubs and also includes an element of interstate tribalism
which it never had in pre-AFL competitions.




Think a little more deeply. The AFL law makers have only reacted to changes in the game made by coaches.
Get it right - AFL coaches have destroyed the game. It was the coaches that insisted that the drop kick be no more,
that players kick along the boundary, that players get numbers to the ball, that players camp one kick behind play,
that players slow down play, that players hold other players and try and circumvent the laws of the game.

If you want to watch a good game of football, then just watch any game of football outside of the AFL
where the laws of the game are exactly the same but the attitudes are different.
You only have to look at the S.O.O. on Friday night where players were obviously given a free reign.
It was a shootout with some very fast and attractive passages of play and with most players not bothering
to stop and go back for their free kick.

I think a lot of tribalism has been lost, tribalism gets lost when standing room areas go, when suburban grounds go and when you attract the not so diehards and cater for them, i also think the AFL has reacted to quickly with changing rules, i also think that they got conned with the unlimited I/C rule of years ago and have regretted it ever since and that was Sheedy.

SOO was not SOO on friday night, it was kick and giggle, but yes it was open and free.

 

[RunningBounce]

Let me re-word that slightly as it seems I'm dealing with a pedant.
You can't hold it against the coaches for doing their job which is to win games of football.
I think we both agree that to keep the game following as it used to will take rule changes. We can't just ask the coaches nicely to please be a bit less defensive.

Have faith. The wheel always turns.

Winning games ten years ago was about coaching the defensive structures that could stop Hawthorn's / Geelong's ball movement. Now, the competitive advantage comes from a game style that scores against Richmond / West Coast / Collingwood / Geelong. There is a reason that Curnow (and not Ed) is the most talked up player at your club, amongst an impressive array of young talent, where any of them would rightly excite a fanbase.

Bolton is gone. Lyon is gone. Richardson is gone. None were sacked for playing a game style that was too easily scored against.

And besides, any rule changes have to come from AFL House. Have they ever had a rule change that achieved the stated objective? Better just to wait for the wheel to turn, IMO.

 

[RedV3x]

I think a lot of tribalism has been lost, tribalism gets lost when standing room areas go, when suburban grounds go and when you attract the not so diehards and cater for them,

I'm not sure how you measure tribalism but people really appreciate improved conditions rather than tolerate "tribal" conditions.
The NRL still functions largely with suburban grounds and it simply doesn't work.

 

[JoondalupJ]

No. Absolutely not. You are talking about the AFL and the AFL is a business.
If you are dissatisfied with the AFL or just enjoy Australian Football then support a different league. it's as simple as that.
I thoroughly enjoy going to the WAFL and I shouldn't have waited as long as I did.
I can just rock up to a WAFL game an enjoy good football, good umpiring, good facilities at a good price
without any hassles or pressures AND I don't feel the urge to complain.

Good for you. I do feel the urge to complain! But if your satisfied, and easily pleased, well done!

 

[Father Jack]

I think the AFL by and large do a good job. I still think the worst rule change was the interchange bench expansion in the 90s, but to be fair to the AFL on that one, it took a decade or so before it got exploited so it wasn't readily obvious what the outcome would be.