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

[Coaster2012]

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

So you want to bring in zones? Seriously, if this happens, it will ruin the game. It's not AFL anymore.

 

[KermitJagger]

I blame the type of football that led to a Western Bulldogs premiership in 2016. That year their 'get the ball forward at all costs' football led to this current strategy of everyone attending a stoppage, getting the ball and simply throwing it out and the tackler never being rewarded.

Start rewarding the tackler, penalize suspect disposal and the game will flow more freely.

 

[Bungeye]

I agree the game isn't great as a spectacle, but isn't the afl just doing what every other transition sport have done, just that they were late to the party? It doesn't help that its a winter sport with an unpredictable ball and weather conditions which leads to fumbles and invariably congestion. I don't think there is a transition sport in the world that quality of play due to weather is affected as much as Afl is.

 

[Coaster2012]

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.

I'm sure the players would love your idea. If anything, it would make it more congested because players would be ****ed.

 

[Coaster2012]

For me, the only cure is less players on the field and making the game shorter. This will allow for space, and less fatigue to run into open space.

 

[footyfan1978]

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.

Stunned you did not know this until today. I thought everyone knew it was 90.
From 1897 to 1977 it was basically ZERO except for famous substitutions like Ted Hopkins, the creator of Champion Data.
From 1978 to 1993 it was 2 players on interchange bench. My best guess is average was less than 10 bench movements a game for much of that time. 1994 went to 3 players on bench and 1998 it became 4 players on bench.
I look at it like anything above 20 moves from bench in a game are not for injuries or tactical switches but simply rotating fresher players on ground. That is what we did not have in game before and can remove. So in a way that change to game of 4 bench guys has led to the game being based of 22 v 22 players and not the pure 18 v 18 it is meant to be. I do not care if we kill the interchange entirely and just use subs as know it will be pure but even if just cap it at 30 interchanges in full game that will kill off the use of bench for rotating fresher players on. I think in 2020 we will be there as Steve Hocking gives me impression he will not piss fart around when it glaringly obvious that mistake of 4 interchanges has to fixed.

 

[mr bagcroft]

Just throw the damn ball up quicker at a stoppage. Go and watch ball ups from the 80's, thats how you do it. Less chance for more players to come into the area. Its a small thing but would help.

Now, we have umpires declaring which way they are moving backwards, picking their undies outta their arse, asking for a ruck nomination...its ****ing ridiculous. Its a number of very small things like this that might have an impact. OR you could just put zones on the ground which is what I fear will end up happening anyway. Unbelievable that Leigh Matthews is an advocate of zones, just boggles the mind anyone can think thats the way to go.

 

[mxett]

So you want to bring in zones? Seriously, if this happens, it will ruin the game. It's not AFL anymore.

where did I say zones? I have repeatedly said limiting the number of rotations drastically, and the number of players on the field and the bench, will naturally result in less player mobility and less congestion due to player fatigue. Coaches that continue to use their entire team as midfielders will have a very tired playing group by half time. I agree that zones would ruin the game.

 

[Rance2Mewtwo]

Richmond wins the premiership and dominates on top of the ladder...

...entire competition has a seizure and debates changing the rules of the game.

Beautiful, beautiful salt.

 

[Altum Volantes]

This whole ‘footy is stuffed’ agenda is a load of crap pushed by so called experts who look at the past with rose coloured glasses.

There has always been shit games. There was a time when a large amount of games were played on shitty suburban grounds with many players that had no were near the skill of the players of today. Long kicking to one on one contests sure...because a good chunk of the guys out there couldn’t cover the ground the players of today do.

It wasn’t all the 1989 GF for god’s sake.

 

[Furn2]

Im convinced getting rid go interchange is the answer, not reducing rotations though. You need most of players to play 100% of the game. This will also help with the not enough talent theory as the 72 worst players each week wont be playing most of the game. 20% more Tom Mitchell and 80% less Will Langford cant hurt skill levels.

The problem is there's no way to trial this theory. You cant do it pre season as players aren't going all out and coaches want to try things and you cant do it at the lower levels as players aren't as skilful or fit and tactics aren't they same.

 

[Coaster2012]

Richmond wins the premiership and dominates on top of the ladder...

...entire competition has a seizure and debates changing the rules of the game.

Beautiful, beautiful salt.

For good god man, not everything is about Richmond.

 

[frenchconnection]

I think that's what we've been doing over the last decade or so. 2000 was the first time I remember heavy flooding being introduced came into the comp. The Hawks took it further to the zone, then it's progressed to mauls and congestion since then. I cant think of many rule changes introduced to address this initial move away from the positional game the sport has always been. We've allowed the game style to change on it's own, but unfortunately it has got progressively more defensive to the point it's almost unrecognisable and boring

When flooding came in was the start of when the game started to deteriorate from a spectators point of view. Far too much congestion in today's game - know some overseas people who used to love watching our game and have asked the question why has the game changed so much - its become too much like Rugby!

 

[Furn2]

Richmond wins the premiership and dominates on top of the ladder...

...entire competition has a seizure and debates changing the rules of the game.

Beautiful, beautiful salt.

Could you guys be any more insecure about your flag ? seriously ?

This debate has been going on since at least 2009.

 

[Lindsay_Gilbee]

I actually like the 16/6 idea.

I’ve always thought that players shouldn’t be able to enter the centre square until the four players from each side get it out of there.

 

[barmy44]

I like your optimism.

im not sure im being pessimistic... teams will continue to innovate within the new framework, and eventually innovations perceived as going against the spectacle will occur.

i just dont believe there is a magic formula of 'fixes' that can turn anything into a permanent and lasting aesthetically pleasing spectacle. eventually via tactcial innovation or even just changing tastes, what people want to see will change.

 

[Dazzler9]

Richmond wins the premiership and dominates on top of the ladder...

...entire competition has a seizure and debates changing the rules of the game.

Beautiful, beautiful salt.

It's not all about the Tigers buddy.

 

[Dazzler9]

I'm sure the players would love your idea. If anything, it would make it more congested because players would be ******.

More fatigue means reduced capacity to get from contest to contest. Ergo less congestion

 

[Coaster2012]

More fatigue means reduced capacity to get from contest to contest. Ergo less congestion

Also means less energy to run and instead will just jump on the ball.

 

[Rance2Mewtwo]

For good god man, not everything is about Richmond.

This one is - the whole defensive pressure argument is because of Richmond.

Who else has made this game style famous in the past 9 months?

 

[mxett]

I'm sure the players would love your idea. If anything, it would make it more congested because players would be ******.

Really? The play usually frees up towards the end of the game because players are fatigued, not the other way. Tired players are less likely to get to every contest to congest play

 

[demondavey]

Stunned you did not know this until today. I thought everyone knew it was 90.
From 1897 to 1977 it was basically ZERO except for famous substitutions like Ted Hopkins, the creator of Champion Data.
From 1978 to 1993 it was 2 players on interchange bench. My best guess is average was less than 10 bench movements a game for much of that time. 1994 went to 3 players on bench and 1998 it became 4 players on bench.
I look at it like anything above 20 moves from bench in a game are not for injuries or tactical switches but simply rotating fresher players on ground. That is what we did not have in game before and can remove. So in a way that change to game of 4 bench guys has led to the game being based of 22 v 22 players and not the pure 18 v 18 it is meant to be. I do not care if we kill the interchange entirely and just use subs as know it will be pure but even if just cap it at 30 interchanges in full game that will kill off the use of bench for rotating fresher players on. I think in 2020 we will be there as Steve Hocking gives me impression he will not piss fart around when it glaringly obvious that mistake of 4 interchanges has to fixed.

Sorry my knowledge or lack of offended you.

Hence my point re dropping it back.

 

[mxett]

This one is - the whole defensive pressure argument is because of Richmond.

Who else has made this game style famous in the past 9 months?

This issue has been developing from yr 2000 when the bulldogs decided to put their entire team behind the ball against Essendon. It won them the game and was the beginning of the flood, then the zone, then the maul, and now the congestion. Richmond have just developed a new way to do it more effectively

 

[Dazzler9]

This one is - the whole defensive pressure argument is because of Richmond.

Who else has made this game style famous in the past 9 months?

Don't be a flog.

 

[frenchconnection]

but it is what the game is supposed to be about, because it is what the game is now about.

my point was that times/things/sport change. if someone honestly believes the modern iteration is rubbish, you have one option - turn it off.

nothing stands still... the argument appears to be 'i loved '60s/'70s/'80s/'90s football, why cant it stay like that forever?'

absolutely people can prefer older football. but trying to 'freeze the game' is crazy... 2018 tactics would annihilate 1985 tactics. if all coaches agreed to coach to 1985 tactics, the smart coach amongst them would say 'screw that, i want to win the flag' and introduce tactics to smash the agreed style. and the game moves on.

so why would clubs tasked with relentless pursuit of success not prioritise that apparent goal over the aesthetic sensibilities of people who preferred football from their youth?

Which is what my Brother has done - he used to play and loved his football but can't stand the way it's played today so has just stopped watching. The thing is though from when Aussie Rules was first introduced it hardly changed for many years up until the 90's so for the life of me don't know why it had to even change like it has in today's game? Don't think either Soccer or Rugby have changed their rules like AFL has!