Opinion Is the game dead?

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Macpotata

Norm Smith Medallist
Mar 22, 2017
7,234
8,259
AFL Club
Geelong
Have the combined efforts of overly defensive coaches & a meddling AFL killed the game as we know it? Boring as hell games for 3 quarters until the shackles are thrown off for a last quarter mad rush to victory is getting old real quick.

67, 63, 76, 66, 58, 44, 31, 71, 55 - the majority if scores kicked so far this weekend in mostly fine football weather. This nonsense cannot continue.
Good post.


Hawks-Pies - fu**en rubbish for 3 quarters

Dons vs Swans - Wasn't great

Dogs - Cats - Rubbish


the last quarters have been ok but what you said is accurate. On the weekend, again, I was thinking how easy it is to switch off while watching games and go off on another planet because footy is boring and not simulating. Nothing much happens at times, which is a lot of the time.


Footy - Free LSD
 

Engimal v3

Premium Gold
Sep 21, 2017
2,558
4,878
AFL Club
North Melbourne

harrythetiger

Summited Everest 30/9/17
Sep 13, 2015
10,990
27,942
Hillary Step
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
76ers
Here’s what I’d do to improve the game
1) Get rid of the sliding rule. Don’t punish players going hard at the ball.
2) Introduce score review bunker
3) Bring back runners, but employ someone to watch them at all games to ensure they aren’t taking the piss out there. Coaches can’t making changes if things go to s**t now so of course they opt for safer tactics.
4) Get rid of 6-6-6. Farcical rule. Similar to the runners, coaches can’t put numbers back when everything goes to s**t so they opt for safer tactics. And for every comeback it’s created, it’s also created an unassailable lead that’s ruined any chance of a close finish.
5) Get rid of ruck nomination rule. If a 2nd player from a team goes up, penalise it. Or, even better, allow the 3rd man up who can get better purchase on the tap and clear the area, forcing teams to set up around a wider area and increasing space at the contest
6) Return to old kick in rules. Wtf is the point of the goalsqure now? Looks stupid. Also, it only moves the ball closer to the middle of the ground, which is far less dangerous space.
7) leave it alone for 5 years and see what the coaches do
 

Cuzz09

Brownlow Medallist
Sep 21, 2004
19,422
5,449
Adel - SA - Aust - Earth
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Norwood & Liverpool.
They should trial the 16 on field in the pre season next season (official jlt but also any other practice games)
I really like this idea.

Not a huge change but could make a big difference.

Then you could put 6 on the bench maybe

On SM-G925I using BigFooty.com mobile app
 

Johnny Karate

All Australian
Apr 13, 2015
665
1,598
AFL Club
Melbourne
It is an ugly spectacle for sure. The rolling maul and poor skills make for unsightly viewing. Changing rules frequently hasn’t helped as for every rule created seems to alleviate one problem but create another two. Coaches are too smart for AFL and TV execs. The media and public are part of the problem too, yes we are a results based industry, but given its culturally acceptable to knife anybody anytime for perceived underperformance - is it any wonder that coaches are so risk averse?

I suppose the overriding issue I feel is that the game is less about the people and more about profiteering. Stadium rationalisation, experience economy ticketing, time slots to suit TV rather than supporters, wanding upon entry, not throwing the gates open at 3 quarter time, no after game kick to kick, no curtain raisers and saturation media coverage on every skerrick of football make me feel like the spirit of the game is dying. The only thing left in the game that is seemingly community based is the fans and the AFL continues to take more away and then wonder why fan engagement exercises such as AFLX and ‘match day experience’ are met with general scorn and disdain.
 

Sedat!

Norm Smith Medallist
Oct 3, 2003
5,515
3,126
Melbourne
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
If by getting rid of prior opp you mean paying a free kick every time someone is tackled, that will destroy the game. I don’t want to watch a game where players are too afraid to pick the ball up so they essentially turn it into a game of soccer. Also it would increase the free kicks ten fold. Not really something I want to watch. I think furthering of the zones could have a positive effect. Maybe a minimum of 2 players have to be in the forward/mid/back zones at every stoppage. Pay a free kick if they aren’t in the zones by the time the ball is balled up.
Players should be accountable to making a decision on whether or not to take possession if they are about to get tackled. If they decide to take possession and get legally tackled they have made a poor decision. Every player had to make a similar judgement call before prior opp came into being in the early 00's. The smart ones would tap ths ball forward and then win a free for holding the man - see, the tackler also has to make a judgement call on whether or not to tackle. Prior opp simply give both players an out to create yet another boring stoppage for no good reason.

On SM-G930F using BigFooty.com mobile app
 

Sedat!

Norm Smith Medallist
Oct 3, 2003
5,515
3,126
Melbourne
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
3. WILL not happen. Many players have said one of the rules they dislike is the interchange cap. And you do realize that when the game was "more open and high scoring there was no cap on interchanges? Since the caps have come in the game has become less free flowing? 10 per quarter is to little. Tired heavy legs will lead to even worse kicking skills, thus more turnovers and having the opposite effect of what you hope for

4. Would be one of the rules that everyone hates. May reduce stoppages. But with the amount of over the top sooking fans do about umpires these days, but its not an easy black and white rule. With congestion on the sideline there will be confusion many times to who touched it last because the umpire could be blocked from view to see whos body it touched during a contest on the sideline
In relation to your last point - last possession, not last touch. If there is no definitive last possession and the ball goes out of bounds, a throw-in is fine in those circumstances.

On SM-G930F using BigFooty.com mobile app
 

rumply

Brownlow Medallist
Apr 11, 2002
17,812
17,500
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Iggles, 76ers
I don’t see what the problem with that is. Defence-less games are boring and one dimensional, the only competitive part of the game is the centre clearance.
Variety is the spice of life. 3 100 point games so far is a clear indication the game has become too defensive.

I don't mind defensive games. What I do mind is knowing that at the moment any given game I sit down to watch is probably going to be a grind.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

harrythetiger

Summited Everest 30/9/17
Sep 13, 2015
10,990
27,942
Hillary Step
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
76ers
Variety is the spice of life. 3 100 point games so far is a clear indication the game has become too defensive.

I don't mind defensive games. What I do mind is knowing that at the moment any given game I sit down to watch is probably going to be a grind.
Nothing wrong with in game variety too my friend.
Last year’s grand final was one of the most enjoyable games to watch all year because of it. It includes periods where scoring couldn’t be stopped, and periods where it was nearly impossible. It was gripping viewing because of that variety.

Any game where both teams end between 70-110 are pretty good and show some variety. A couple of games outside of that are good too but lower than that and it’s often just a slog which everyone carries on about, anything above that and it’s either a huge blowout that’s over early, or scoring just couldn’t be stopped and goals are devalued. Boring, one dimensional, just as bad, if not worse than slogs. At least slogs often open up late, shootouts often don’t have any slow periods.
Games with scores between 70-110 happen around a quarter of the time. Open that up to 60-110 and you’ve got about half of all games. So really if scoring increased by about a goal per game we’re looking at 4 or 5 games per week that are quality viewing. Far from a broken game.
 

rumply

Brownlow Medallist
Apr 11, 2002
17,812
17,500
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Iggles, 76ers
Nothing wrong with in game variety too my friend.
Last year’s grand final was one of the most enjoyable games to watch all year because of it. It includes periods where scoring couldn’t be stopped, and periods where it was nearly impossible. It was gripping viewing because of that variety.

Any game where both teams end between 70-110 are pretty good and show some variety. A couple of games outside of that are good too but lower than that and it’s often just a slog which everyone carries on about, anything above that and it’s either a huge blowout that’s over early, or scoring just couldn’t be stopped and goals are devalued. Boring, one dimensional, just as bad, if not worse than slogs. At least slogs often open up late, shootouts often don’t have any slow periods.
Games with scores between 70-110 happen around a quarter of the time. Open that up to 60-110 and you’ve got about half of all games. So really if scoring increased by about a goal per game we’re looking at 4 or 5 games per week that are quality viewing. Far from a broken game.
Problem is that scoring is not increasing, the opposite in fact & showing no signs of increasing any time soon.

GF's are never good games to use in comparison to anything, they are a different beast altogether. Regular season is where we spend our time and money & at the moment the game isn't delivering value for either.
 

Pessimistic

TheBrownDog
Sep 13, 2000
68,085
27,631
Melbourne cricket ground. Australia
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
Horks
‘Hit the boundary line’

Teams/coaches have always chosen to neutralise significant potions of games.

Rules comittees have attempted to legislate each tactic away, and the teams/coaches have employed motre and more complex ways to neutralise. Hence fans have turned off

Maybe the game is just too long and or the season is too long. If each minute is precious, the coaches will make more of each one
 

josephine666

Debutant
Aug 7, 2009
142
286
Melbourne
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
Arsenal
Not dead but dying. Rule changes over the past decade are like the introduction of the cane toad. Reactionary without any thought of the consequences. What was once an exciting sport has become bland. All the little idiosyncrities that collectively made our game great and unique are being eroded and we are now seeing the result. The AFL Administrators are to blame as are the sycophants in the media who are too full of self-interest to question these decisions. Rather than admit the rule changes are a mistake, more are brought in to counteract the cause and effect of the earlier changes. Unlike the cane toad, we have the ability to eradicate the blandness that is taking over our game, but the big fat ego's of the administrators will never admit their mistakes. Get rid of every rule change introduced in the past 12 years, reduce the interchange to a couple per quarter to assess injuries and we will see a pretty quick recovery.
 

carloss

Club Legend
Sep 4, 2007
1,976
1,641
around
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Sheffield Wednesday
I've heard this sort of conversation many times, but my query on the future of the game lies on the lack of growth. Our game might be popular but where is it growing?

1990-1999 was justified due to the game going national but since then we've seen very little growth.

View attachment 705563
Would be interesting to see that compared to the population growth of Melbourne.
 

Demonic Ascent

Brownlow Medallist
Feb 21, 2006
14,384
9,886
Muckertal
AFL Club
Melbourne
Other Teams
Eltham Turtles, NY Jets, Celtics
I’ve always been a fan of needing to have at least 3 on 3 inside the arcs at all times. I don’t see what is wrong with enforcing that rule. As well as retaining the standard 6-6-6 for centre bounces.
I actually don't mind 6-6-6 although it stifles coaching strategies some what. It's not a solution though. I was thinking I wouldn't mind if they took it further, have a 25m arc as well (like you would see on the old WA grounds in the 80s) and make 3 players from each team be inside the 25m arc and 3 players between 25m-50m arcs at each centre bounce.
 

Demonic Ascent

Brownlow Medallist
Feb 21, 2006
14,384
9,886
Muckertal
AFL Club
Melbourne
Other Teams
Eltham Turtles, NY Jets, Celtics
I don't mind that. Almost like they're taking the responsibility of "prior opportunity" off the individual, and onto the team or the play.
I hate it. It does nothing to solve congestion and players crowding the ball. If anything it will create more if a rolling scrum as players won't want to take possession, just keep moving the ball forward by tapping it or kicking off the ground.
 

Demonic Ascent

Brownlow Medallist
Feb 21, 2006
14,384
9,886
Muckertal
AFL Club
Melbourne
Other Teams
Eltham Turtles, NY Jets, Celtics
I really like this idea.

Not a huge change but could make a big difference.

Then you could put 6 on the bench maybe

On SM-G925I using BigFooty.com mobile app
The best part about it is it doesn't actually alter the rules of the game at all. It just impacts coaching strategies as they now have to less pieces on the chessboard to work with.
 

Demonic Ascent

Brownlow Medallist
Feb 21, 2006
14,384
9,886
Muckertal
AFL Club
Melbourne
Other Teams
Eltham Turtles, NY Jets, Celtics
Players should be accountable to making a decision on whether or not to take possession if they are about to get tackled. If they decide to take possession and get legally tackled they have made a poor decision. Every player had to make a similar judgement call before prior opp came into being in the early 00's. The smart ones would tap ths ball forward and then win a free for holding the man - see, the tackler also has to make a judgement call on whether or not to tackle. Prior opp simply give both players an out to create yet another boring stoppage for no good reason.

On SM-G930F using BigFooty.com mobile app
Prior opportunity existed before the mid-00s. Are you saying there were never ballups for a player being tackled in the 90s?
 
Top Bottom