Analysis How the state of the game has evolved, is the increased rate of injuries a result of of the evolution

[Dazzler9]

Need to actually give players time to made a decision and dispose of the ball correctly after a mark or free kick. These days they are given about 3 seconds before he umpire starts blaring play on and waving their hands around. Give players a bit of time to compose themselves and correctly dispose of the ball and I think the quality of disposal will dramatically increase, reducing congestion due to quality disposal and reduce fatigue on players being required to constantly run up and down the ground

Reducing player fatigue will only lead to more congestion though - less fatigue means greater ability to get to the next contest.

 

[powerrrrrrrrrrrr]

Reducing player fatigue will only lead to more congestion though - less fatigue means greater ability to get to the next contest.

But will also allow for players to gut run and give an option to be kicked to in space if they are given the time to get into that space in the first place.

 

[barmy44]

that's the thing. Evidence shows many people are turning off. Is that what we want?

what evidence? im sure fans will drop off, and others will switch on. the massive amounts spent on broadcast rights suggest there are no concerns about ongoing viewership. arent attendances at all time highs?

but people switching off doesnt really impact me, to be totally honest.

im sure its not what the AFL/broadcasters want.

but the AFL also want a competition where all clubs strive for premierships. the AFL can make changes to try improve the spectacle, and they do.

but if a coach can win a flag with 'ugly football', good luck talking them out of doing just that. short of incentivising attractive play and dis-incentivising club success, its a losing battle.

pursuing success as a coach/club/player will as a consequence involve changing the game, in subjectively good and bad ways.

another way for people to look at it might be to ask yourself how youd feel if your club got to a GF and then put 'pretty football' before 'winning the game'. at a guess, id say you would be furious.

 

[NoobPie]

Need to actually give players time to made a decision and dispose of the ball correctly after a mark or free kick. These days they are given about 3 seconds before he umpire starts blaring play on and waving their hands around.....

Too often these days players have the ball and are instantly called to play on and just throw it on the boot down the line as they don’t have time to Correctly dispose of the ball to a teammate or just give it straight off to a team mate who’s under instant pressure

Actually I think this may well be a factor. There is clearly a greater policing of the "5 second" rule after a mark or free kick around the ground to dispose of the ball. Sometimes they are called to play on for no apparent reason.

That said, I wouldn't want to encourage "chippy catchy stoppy" game styles either

 

[Milanista28]

Make the goals 150% bigger, Higher scores will ensue and everyone will be happy.

 

[footyfan1978]

Fair enough, I forgot about the increase in interchanges. I also think the number of teams has progressed beyond the talent pool we have at our disposal, so at least a few players per club that are not up to AFL standard

Yes. When it went from 12 teams to 14 teams and then 15 teams in 1991 I could tell the standard had dropped off how good the best teams could be. Then 16, now 18. Our population has grown a bit but not in line with expansion of 6 new teams in league over 3 decades.

But the problems we have now are primarily flow on effects of the 4 interchanges that got brought to the game and instead of used for injuries and small amount of tactical positional switches, it has been used for rotations that were never part of game until coaches caught on to use it that way.

 

[Dazzler9]

what evidence? im sure fans will drop off, and others will switch on. the massive amounts spent on broadcast rights suggest there are no concerns about ongoing viewership. arent attendances at all time highs?

but people switching off doesnt really impact me, to be totally honest.

im sure its not what the AFL/broadcasters want.

but the AFL also want a competition where all clubs strive for premierships. the AFL can make changes to try improve the spectacle, and they do.

but if a coach can win a flag with 'ugly football', good luck talking them out of doing just that. short of incentivising attractive play and dis-incentivising club success, its a losing battle.

pursuing success as a coach/club/player will as a consequence involve changing the game, in subjectively good and bad ways.

another way for people to look at it might be to ask yourself how youd feel if your club got to a GF and then put 'pretty football' before 'winning the game'. at a guess, id say you would be furious.

No one is suggesting the coaches take it upon themselves to play pretty football, are they? This discussion is more around the rules of the game and umpiring being altered as a means of 'fixing' footy.

 

[Coaster2012]

The problem is, the first 2 rounds we were raving about how open it was, how many goals forwards were scoring, and now we are saying the complete opposite. The game will readjust its self. Calm your shit down.

 

[Dazzler9]

The problem is, the first 2 rounds we were raving about how open it was, how many goals forwards were scoring, and now we are saying the complete opposite. The game will readjust its self. Calm your shit down.

It's been this way for a number of years now.

 

[mxett]

what evidence? im sure fans will drop off, and others will switch on. the massive amounts spent on broadcast rights suggest there are no concerns about ongoing viewership. arent attendances at all time highs?

but people switching off doesnt really impact me, to be totally honest.

im sure its not what the AFL/broadcasters want.

but the AFL also want a competition where all clubs strive for premierships. the AFL can make changes to try improve the spectacle, and they do.

but if a coach can win a flag with 'ugly football', good luck talking them out of doing just that. short of incentivising attractive play and dis-incentivising club success, its a losing battle.

pursuing success as a coach/club/player will as a consequence involve changing the game, in subjectively good and bad ways.

another way for people to look at it might be to ask yourself how youd feel if your club got to a GF and then put 'pretty football' before 'winning the game'. at a guess, id say you would be furious.

the evidence this year shows TV ratings are down by quite a bit. Crowds have also declined over the recent years but have been held steady by Perth and Adelaide stadium upgrades. So the game is not growing, it is slowly receding.

I think coaches are entitled to use strategies to win at the expense of an attractive spectacle. However, the evidence shows this is steadily reducing the public's interest in the game. The coaches dont need to change, the rules need to adapt with the changes in the game. Reduced players on the field and on the bench will not change the fabric of the game, so IMO it's worth trying

 

[demondavey]

No matter how hard people try an ignore it modern footy is ******. Players are being drafted for their defensive skills and being taught how play. Key forwards are almost all dead an the ones that do play have to be able to play midfield or they can't survive. CHF is played by a hybrid mifielder while the rest are small blokes who's sole focus is too tackle.

My question is how would YOU fix it. I hate rule changes more than anyone but even I concede now something has to change or there won't be another generation of footy fans.

Personally I'd remove the interchange and have subs. Would immediately stop blokes sprinting up an back for the first 3 quarters as they would tire too quickly. Players would hold positions.

2nd I'd give every team an under 21s side where you can select anyone who goes undrafted. Immediately that adds hundreds of players to professional systems.

There are a number of issues here, and i agree for the most part that footy has become very much a game that is at times unwatchable and over regulated. The issues i see really center around the following;
- Congestion at both ends of the ground
- Excessive pressure causing a plethora of skill errors
- No true positions on the field any longer
- The 'role player'
- Zoning and the emphasis that has been placed on zoning as a key strategy

The ways to fix this really focus upon interchange rotations being capped. This forces fatigue and allows players to play smarter with regards to field positioning and work rate. It will bring back the ‘one on one’ contests and stop the flooding occurring whereby the entire field plays a full zone as such.

As the game goes, you’ll see an initial focus on the traditional set up, then as the rotations are exercised to the cap, players will need to resort to more conventional set ups to conserve energy. That will result in true footy.

The focus upon recruiting basketballers and athletes needs to change, we need to move away from the anaerobic athletes and focus on real footballers. If kids are good at basketball, let them play that. The current set up allows anaerobic types to thrive in a game whereby zoning and continual rotations exist.

Can someone tell me what is the current interchange rotation number at the moment?

We’ve also got to look at some of the rules. Far too often the player first to the ball is not protected. I’ve got absolutely no issues with bumps that are too the body that result in head knocks. If the bump is legal and fair, then the result should not determine its legitimacy in our game.

Diving and hands in the back is a major issue for me, far too often players dive at the notion of any contact, in a word they know they’ll get a free. That’s got to stop. Legitimate contests between defenders and forwards is great. These days that’s gone. I want to see grappling, pushing and bumping to the sides, and body work as a true representation of strength.

I honestly don’t care if there’s some chopping of the arms if a forward is allowed to bump hard and push to the side of a defender. Bring back the gorilla forwards and defenders. I want to see types like Mal Michael, Mick Martyn, Alastair Lynch and Barry Hall going toe to toe to try and out Mark one another.

Diving and ducking just has to stop, make it a reportable offence to bring back some hardness to our game.

As far as an under 21 side? Like it. A lot. It’s like a secondary draft for each club and they can literally play before a senior game.

 

[Lavender Bushranger]

It is except Richmond who are playing great footy.

It's awful. Ugly, boring.

It's the 'winningest' style of footy, but it's far from 'great' in terms of being entertaining to neutral observers of the sport (ie. me).

 

[mxett]

Yes. When it went from 12 teams to 14 teams and then 15 teams in 1991 I could tell the standard had dropped off how good the best teams could be. Then 16, now 18. Our population has grown a bit but not in line with expansion of 6 new teams in league over 3 decades.

But the problems we have now are primarily flow on effects of the 4 interchanges that got brought to the game and instead of used for injuries and small amount of tactical positional switches, it has been used for rotations that were never part of game until coaches caught on to use it that way.

spot on. The fix is pretty obvious. Coaches wont make their forward line cover the entire ground repeatedly when lack of breaks means they'll be cooked by half time. The only players that should be covering the entire ground are midfielders. We've basically progressed to 18 midfielders and very few dedicated positional players. The game has lost it's personality

 

[iluvparis]

Sorry this is nonsense.

There are 800 payers in the AFL, if it were true that the modern game was for athletes and not footballers, why is there only one non Australian (or irish) player who didn't grow up with the game getting a regular game? Why is the very limited success - despite decades of category B rookies - only one narrow range of positions - i.e. ruck or ruck/forward?

People can have their subjetive views of the qualities (or lack there of) of the modern game but this "any old athlete" baloney is demonstrable nonsense

Obviously that was an extreme scenario but there has definitely been an increasing trend in the athlete-to-skill ratio of players drafted over the last decade or more such that its got to a state that Richmond place a heavy premium on a players 'tackling' ability when they draft - do we really want that to be the prime skill that players are selected on?

 

[I Lost My Keays]

LEAVE THE GAME ALONE.

I'm sick of the AFL changing aspect. Then there's ridiculous suggestions of zones, it's not netball ffs.

 

[barmy44]

No one is suggesting the coaches take it upon themselves to play pretty football, are they? This discussion is more around the rules of the game and umpiring being altered as a means of 'fixing' footy.

coaches will then react to the fix, requiring more fixes and subsequent reaction that needs to be fixed...

never meant to suggest people were asking coaches to do that... i was trying to make the point that we expect our clubs and coaches to try win all the time, and that something dynamic requiring innovation like a sporting competition cannot be crystalised to a permanent and lasting aesthetic. if a club can win by shattering that aesthetic, they will. and we expect them to.

and then another 'fix' is required.

 

[mxett]

LEAVE THE GAME ALONE.

I'm sick of the AFL changing aspect. Then there's ridiculous suggestions of zones, it's not netball ffs.

so you have no issue watching 36 players wrestle for a ball within 50m? Add rain or dew and it's comical

 

[Dazzler9]

coaches will then react to the fix, requiring more fixes and subsequent reaction that needs to be fixed...

never meant to suggest people were asking coaches to do that... i was trying to make the point that we expect our clubs and coaches to try win all the time, and that something dynamic requiring innovation like a sporting competition cannot be crystalised to a permanent and lasting aesthetic. if a club can win by shattering that aesthetic, they will. and we expect them to.

and then another 'fix' is required.

It's about creating a fix that results in coaches reacting in a way that reduces the mass congestion. I think that's the point.

 

[mxett]

coaches will then react to the fix, requiring more fixes and subsequent reaction that needs to be fixed...

never meant to suggest people were asking coaches to do that... i was trying to make the point that we expect our clubs and coaches to try win all the time, and that something dynamic requiring innovation like a sporting competition cannot be crystalised to a permanent and lasting aesthetic. if a club can win by shattering that aesthetic, they will. and we expect them to.

and then another 'fix' is required.

but every sport faces this issue. Tactics are introduced to win but if they significantly affect the spectacle the rules need to be adjusted to ensure the game remains enjoyable to watch. leaving the game to evolve completely on it's own isnt the answer

 

[demondavey]

Seriously, the best thing to do is kill interchange rotations. I just had a quick google and as of 2016 it’s 90 per team per game? You want to open up the game? Instead of 22 per quarter make it 40 per game, 10 per quarter.

 

[barmy44]

It's about creating a fix that results in coaches reacting in a way that reduces the mass congestion. I think that's the point.

ideal, but i believe impossible. it might hold for a while, but sooner or later (id suggest sooner) an advantage would be found and pursued that changes the game we are all now used to and requires another 'fix'.

 

[Lavender Bushranger]

Its got nothing to do with Richmond. Modern footy is horrific as a spectacle, Richmond play the best version of it but it's ******* horrible.

Your second point is silly, the game used to be played by part time players who drank heaps and ran way less and they were far more skilled than the modern players. That was before rotations.

Aussie rules football was never ment to be a game who's focus was tackling and defence, it was supposed to be a 1 on 1 battle where players could express themselves all over. It sickens me hearing young players talk about getting games because of their defensive pressure meanwhile the next wayne carey is playing bush league because he can't lay a bunch of tackles in the midfield.

Nothing to do with Richmond. They have made the best of a shitty sport and won the flag, no one else is playing anything more attractive. In fact I'm the most footy obsessed person you could ever meet and I can't sit through neutral games anymore

Oh man, this is a great post.

I couldn't agree more.


Gerard Whateley stated on the radio earlier that ratings are down. And that's the big concern for the AFL. People aren't watching the game anymore.

Like me (and you by the sound of it), lots of people love the sport but aren't watching the game anymore. I love the drama, the spectacle, the scandal and the results - but I can't sit through a game of footy these days. I generally watch the start, then check the scores. If it's close in the last quarter, I'll watch it from then.

I think people misinterpret the problem. Richmond supporters defending the game, are missing the point. Enjoying seeing your team win, or even enjoying going to the footy and getting pissed with your mates or whatever - are different from the state of the game itself.

Guys like Buckley on the radio this morning were defending the game, based on loving the evolution of tactics to counter other tactics. Again, that's a different argument. That's loving an aspect of the sport - but it doesn't mean the game is good. While the coaches all get overpaid to outcoach each other and clog up the game, and evolve the tactics to win a flag - the rest of us have to sit there and watch it. And it's shit.

FWIW, I love that aspect of sport too. But Buckley, and others need to understand that whilst that side of sport is great - it's boring for viewers on a weekly basis. And unfortunately, the AFL sold the soul of the game and turned it into an entertainment product. That's what they're selling these days.

So they need to hurry up and make it entertaining to watch, or people aren't going to buy the product.

 

[Dazzler9]

ideal, but i believe impossible. it might hold for a while, but sooner or later (id suggest sooner) an advantage would be found and pursued that chanhes the game we are all now used to and requires another 'fix'.

I like your optimism.

 

[Oscarman]

There was a poster years back named Jeffrey who had some brilliant ideas on the Draft (it was one of the all time great threads - on the Supercoach board I think?). I think he should be on the Geelong/Eddie committee to push any ideas he has on how the game should be played, officiated etc.

 

[Ron The Bear]

Richmond supporters defending the game, are missing the point. Enjoying seeing your team win, or even enjoying going to the footy and getting pissed with your mates or whatever - are different from the state of the game itself.

Absolutely. The game's been in decline for years, so pardon me if I enjoy watching my team more than at any time in the last 35 years and couldn't give a **** about "the game".

The Richmond v Carlton, Adelaide, Hawthorn, Collingwood games have been decent enough spectacles. The other two were rain-affected/one-sided.