Why?
Ground sizes are now fixed. Players wont become less fit.
Its not rocket science.
Opinion Is the game dead?
- Thread starter rumply
- Start date
- Tagged users None
Why?
Ground sizes are now fixed. Players wont become less fit.
Its not rocket science.
Do the AFL want high scoring and close games. Go for one and the other will suffer, you cant permamantly keep both. Its one or the other.
- Sep 21, 2004
- 37,161
- 25,991
- AFL Club
- West Coast
- Other Teams
- Norwood & Liverpool.
If we win the GF again the game is in the greatest state its ever been.
If we dont. Its dead and s**t.
On SM-G925I using BigFooty.com mobile app
If we dont. Its dead and s**t.
On SM-G925I using BigFooty.com mobile app
The King!
Chosen One
ditch the stupid 6 6 6 rule it doesnt work
He's dead, Jim
simba_
sucking a lemon
lmao
Geelong is on top of the ladder - and i reckon AFL at present is absolute garbage - a load of mostly unwatchable boring junk
A good contrast would be when the Crows 1st came into the comp - those Sunday twilight games - when Modra was up and about - i use to never miss watching those games - they were great - exciting
His overhead marking - have we had just one of those types of marks in the whole competition this year ? - he use to do it every 2nd or 3rd week . And that bloke from Melb - Shaun Smith - that type of exciting stuff has just totally dissappeared from the game
At the end of the day it doesn’t matter what we the fans think, it’s what so called experts like wankley and floggo think, and then the rule makers putting in unnecessary rules to fix the state of the game which have little to no effect.
It's the most boring season I can remember. There are so many games I stopped following simply because I couldn't handle it anymore. Just watch the scores at the end to see who won. The simple skill errors and defence first crap is ruining football
in 2017, only 2 teams averaged less than 80 points after round 16.
This year, 9 teams (half the competition!) average less than 80 points!
Only 4 teams average more than 85 points with none averaging more than 94 points. In 2017, 13 teams averaged more than 85 points a game, with 6 averaging more than 95 points and 4 averaging more than 100 points a game. Adelaide were averaging 113!
Richmond beating Adelaide changed the whole dynamic of the game. It was attack vs defence and defence comfortably beat attack. AFL can't do much when every coach wants to put in a defensive game plan to limit scoring for either side.
in 2017, only 2 teams averaged less than 80 points after round 16.
This year, 9 teams (half the competition!) average less than 80 points!
Only 4 teams average more than 85 points with none averaging more than 94 points. In 2017, 13 teams averaged more than 85 points a game, with 6 averaging more than 95 points and 4 averaging more than 100 points a game. Adelaide were averaging 113!
Richmond beating Adelaide changed the whole dynamic of the game. It was attack vs defence and defence comfortably beat attack. AFL can't do much when every coach wants to put in a defensive game plan to limit scoring for either side.
i hate these over reactions to low scores. It just means the defences atm are working well, trends are more common and less long lived in the AFL than in teenage fashion, Im sure ultra attacking styles will come back into fashion soon enough. If you wanted to watch a sport with just constant non stop scoring watch basketball.
Plenty of good games and sports are played without it just being constant shootout.
Plenty of good games and sports are played without it just being constant shootout.
Idk I thought GWS v Brisbane today was a pretty good game 
It also means players today can't kick to save themselves.
Forwards are simply putrid.
When you have someone like Ben Brown (sorry Ben) pushing for the Coleman medal, a bloke who would struggle to snag 2 goals a game in the 90's with arm chopping allowed, you know there's a glaring issue there.
Defenders are standing out because their direct opponents are B grade.
gavaniacono
Cancelled
I have thought this for a while but 1st they need to fix up in the back tackling. If they focused on incorrect disposal without fixing up the tackling then players will be discouraged from getting the ball.
WC kicked only one goal for most of the 1st quarter vs Freo and took about 10 minutes to do that.
Then steadily kicked 110+ in the wet.
Goes against your/OPs narrative, but would you call it a good game? Been some great spectacles in the last two weeks.
raskolnikov
Cancelled
10k Posts
30k Posts
Wordler
Werewolf Player
Essendon Player Sponsor 2021 - Anthony McDonald-Tipungwuti and Archie Perkins
Essendon Player Sponsor 2020 - Orazio Fantasia, Anthony McDonald Tipungwuti, Shaun McKernan
Essendon Player Sponsor 2019 - Orazio Fantasia, Anthony McDonald Tipungwuti, Shaun McKernan
Song Contest Winner - 5+ Rounds
It's not my narrative. I was just making an observation. In a way any close game is a good game so yes. Skill wise no.
Yet two of the more attacking teams played off in the 2018 grandfinal.
GWS, Brisbane, WC and Geelong are all skillful teams.
- Aug 30, 2014
- 581
- 1,020
- AFL Club
- Port Adelaide
I have an interesting observation.
There are many people who seek the game to remain the same in the name of tradition. However, the game ends up evolving on it's own and that tradition will inevitably die out. Therefore, the only way in which we can bring the game back to its traditional format, say the 80s with free flowing high scoring football is to force that style of play. These people who are up in arms about changing the game because they seek tradition are actually bringing about the downfall of what they seek. You want to get back to that style of football, you need to force at least 3 forwards to play in 1/3 of the ground like it always was.
There are many people who seek the game to remain the same in the name of tradition. However, the game ends up evolving on it's own and that tradition will inevitably die out. Therefore, the only way in which we can bring the game back to its traditional format, say the 80s with free flowing high scoring football is to force that style of play. These people who are up in arms about changing the game because they seek tradition are actually bringing about the downfall of what they seek. You want to get back to that style of football, you need to force at least 3 forwards to play in 1/3 of the ground like it always was.
Nah give me the 130-80 anyway, from a spectacle POV. Last year we best Richmond 130-83, Darling kicked six, the Eagles kicked 7.4 in the third quarter and 6.4 in the fourth. I'd rather that than 80-30
I think you are right about this, and I think there's a good chance this one change would fix a lot of problems, but it's interesting to try and figure out how coaches would game this rule change.
My guess is you would find sides absolutely hugging the boundary lines, to ensure they always have an easy get out of jail card if they go to collect the ball under pressure.
I think you would find congestion around the ball might actually get worse- people are going to be extremely reluctant to pick the ball up if there are numbers around, and so the typical first touch out of a pack is likely to be a punch or a soccer which is unlikely to clear it. If the ball doesn't come out quick, more and more players will get sucked in to packs.
Interestingly, basketball has never been more popular here.
Talent pool is a problem. Extra couple teams, and the depth of talent on lists is thinner, a few top end players get injured and the standard of the comp really feels it. Too many players drafted because they're athletes, and a lot players getting games, who in a smaller league, wouldn't be anywhere near what's supposed to be an 'elite level'.
Need to find ways to increase the talent pool. The possession 'chip, chip' game-styles most sides are playing will eventually pass when the next trend comes along.
Need to find ways to increase the talent pool. The possession 'chip, chip' game-styles most sides are playing will eventually pass when the next trend comes along.
- Sep 7, 2015
- 15,713
- 36,244
- AFL Club
- Tasmania
I don't get why people think that high score = good to watch. I love watching the low scoring scaps as long as it's a good battle. I mean a score of 2.19 is absolutely pathetic to watch and a blight on the game but I'm fine with low scores if it's a good game. It makes each goal more exciting when they are hard to come by. If higher scoring was inherently better then we'd just switch to AFLX for the full season.
_M_16_
Premiership Player
- Nov 26, 2009
- 3,248
- 3,989
- AFL Club
- Western Bulldogs
- Other Teams
- Liv FC, LA Rams, Pitt Pen, Michigan
You're seriously saying/thinking that coaches don't want to score goals? Silliest thing I've heard. I think what you're intending to say is coaches WANT to score highly, but the OPPOSITION coaching tactics and poor skills these days makes it harder.
There is nothing wrong with chipping around. Almost every team sport involving a ball, Rugby, AFL, Hockey, Soccer etc, you're coaching to go sideways and sideways until you find an opening or loose player that has gotten open from the defenders caught out by a switched play. Nothing wrong with that tactic, in fact its the best way to deal with flooded backlines. If there is a bigger issue, its teams not moving the ball fast enough, not having anyone inside 50 when they do get a turnover, or hesitating when kicking inside 50 allowing teams time to flood back. If teams didn't switch and just bombed it inside 50 all the time to nobody, it will just be a bigger turnover fest and people will be screaming louder about lack of skills.
Similar threads
