Is the game too long?

Remove this Banner Ad

I mean, the tennis and baseball changes were done to reduce dead time in a game. No one enjoyed watching Djokovic bouncing the ball 48 times before serving, or a pitcher taking a minute to compose himself between every pitch. We're not talking about dead time in the AFL. It would be like having men play 3 setters in Grand Slams or changing baseball to 7 innings.
The suggestion I put forth removes about 13 minutes of dead time (including 8 from HT, for which the current length contributes to injuries as much as anything imo).

The other part of my suggestion (cutting 8 minutes of actual playing time) is not at all comparable to cutting a tennis match to 3 sets, or a baseball match to 7 innings. Unless you're really bad at maths. The difference would be more like the addition of a 5th set tiebreak, wherein a long match is made ever so slightly less long.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

If you want to reduce injuries maybe look at the ridiculous length of preseason. No other sport in the world has 4-5 month preseason trainings. Madness

Also, you have 44 (?) on a list, use them. A few injuries shouldn't matter or are they worried guys arent good enough. They're collecting a cheque, they can be used.

Shortening the game is duck as rocks

Long pre-seasons are necessary.

Otherwise players are playing catch-up from a conditioning and recovery perspective.

The standard of early season games (and i'm talking the first 5-6 weeks) would be VFL level at best if you shortened the off-season across the board.

The players will always play with the same ferocity and passion, but their bodies won't withstand the entire duration of a game without heavy fatigue setting in.
 
As I ponder all of the things wrong with the game, the duration of play is not amongst them.
Im not spending hundreds of $$ per year on memberships and merch for less gameday experience.
 
Apparently, Craig McRae and the AFLPA seem to think so.

The concerns about injuries are valid, I admit. I do worry that the AFL attempting to fatigue players has backfired. But I think what people forget was just how bad the game looked in 2020. Admittedly COVID and crowd restrictions didn't help but I felt like the average footy game back then was really hard to watch, it was just all a boring scrapfest. Going back to 16 minute quarters like the AFLPA wanted would be a horrible move and would go a long way to killing off the game as the #1 sport in much of Australia.

If they want to stop the recent spate of injuries then the best option would be to get rid of the interchange cap, or reduce the amount of 5/6 day breaks. Hell I'd even take a shorter season before cutting gametime.
Yes, way too long.

It was long because it was a game of physical duress where as a player you had to pace yourself for 120 minutes.

There were no rest breaks other than between quarters.


Now that players get rest all the time and there are 5 on the bench, they're still going full pelt at the end of the game - so what's the point in it being so long?

It's frankly really boring.
 
My question would be, why don't teams rotate their squads more to help with the fatigue? You have over 40 players to pick from every week, use them. One thing I have liked about Hardwick this year is his willingness to rotate the team when needed. Witts, Holman and Humphrey as an example recently.
 
Last edited:
John Candy No GIF by Laff
 
NO.

Piss off with this idea of shortening the game.

99% of footy fans hate the idea


I must be in the 1% then. I actually didn't mind the shortened games during COVID.

It is a very long game. We currently have games on a Friday night starting at 7:40-ish and not finishing until 10.20pm (or later) - it's ridiculous given the physical demands of the game but also for spectators.

I'd go with a re-jig to at least keep quarters to 25 mins max inc. time on - they are now 30 mins plus. That would cut 4 x 5 = 20 mins off the overall time which I doubt anyone would notice to be honest.
 
Here is a full round of games from 2020.

Highest winning score: 12.8.80
Lowest score: 2.7.19
Gold Coast with 7 scoring shots for the entire game.
6 games with 3 or less goals kicked in the first quarter.

If you want 16 minute quarters, this is what you want the game to look like.


Screenshot_20240522_145827_Chrome~2.jpg
 
I must be in the 1% then. I actually didn't mind the shortened games during COVID.

It is a very long game. We currently have games on a Friday night starting at 7:40-ish and not finishing until 10.20pm (or later) - it's ridiculous given the physical demands of the game but also for spectators.

I'd go with a re-jig to at least keep quarters to 25 mins max inc. time on - they are now 30 mins plus. That would cut 4 x 5 = 20 mins off the overall time which I doubt anyone would notice to be honest.

I've got nothing against you holding that opinion however you are seriously in the minority.
 
Here is a full round of games from 2020.

Highest winning score: 12.8.80
Lowest score: 2.7.19
Gold Coast with 7 scoring shots for the entire game.
6 games with 3 or less goals kicked in the first quarter.

If you want 16 minute quarters, this is what you want the game to look like.


View attachment 1996814



On that logic we should have 60 minute quarters and have really high scoring games.

It's not total goals that are necessarily entertaining but 'goals per minute'.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

My question would be, why don't teams rotate their squads more to help with the fatigue? You have over 40 players to pick from every week, use them. One thing I have liked about Hardwick this year is his willingness to rotate the team when needed. Witts, Holman and Humphrey as an example recently.
Yeah, Richmond, why aren't you rotating through your 40 players each week? /sarcasm
 
I always thought the games were too long especially considering the amount of time other football codes games last. I didn't watch in the 2020 season though but I think there's plenty of other reasons besides the shorter quarters to blame for the poor games everyone seems to remember.
 
How many of these injuries are due to game length? Most of ours were preseason or impact injuries that happened well before the 4th quarter even begins

Also Sam Mitchell has said he is against shortening games
 
The revenue is almost exclusively dependent on the game time though.

So even though the club revenue will almost certainly be less (less tv time, less advertising, less game day revenue), do you think the players should still be paid the same because they work the same out of game?

Look at the revenue drop due to Covid and how that related to workloads. Coaches are working harder and earning less.
No, the revenue is dependent on advertising time and viewership. Shorter game time just means more ads in the same length broadcast. So, a possible revenue increase.
Especially on Fox/Kayo where they don't run ads between goals - longer pre-match means more ads, if they can get people on at the start.
 
Just leave it. They constantly tinker with things without thinking through the consequences.

If a team plays a style that wears the players down and causes injuries then they need to play a different style.

If a club has only 25 AFL standard players that's on them, they take the risk of injury.

That will only become apparent over time but they keep reacting, then reacting again to the first tactical/strategic reactions and so on it goes.

They could do without waiting for the clock to let them bounce the ball, and endless score reviews, and asking who the ruckman is before throwing it up if they really want to speed things up.

Probably could do with a concussion sub or two now though. Which means increasing list sizes.
 
Looking at Richmond's injury list. How many could you argue are game length related? 4 at the very most

Liam BakerSorenessTest
Sam BanksConcussionTest
Jacob BauerQuadTest
Seth CampbellKneeTest
Judson ClarkeACLSeason
Mate ColinaBackTBC - long term
Liam FawcettBackTBC - long term
Josh GibcusACLSeason
Jack GrahamHamstring1 week
Dylan GrimesBackTBC
Jacob HopperHamstring1-2 weeks
Tom LynchHamstring3-4 weeks
Rhyan MansellConcussion1 week
Sam NaismithACLSeason
Maurice Rioli jnrAnkle8-10 weeks
Jack RossFoot6-8 weeks
Tim TarantoWrist2-3 weeks
James TreziseConcussionTest

There are 4 knees, 3 concussions, 2 backs, 1 ankle foot and wrist. So there are 12 of the 18 you would argue have nothing to do with game length. Hopper's hamstring I would also argue has nothing to do with game length as well as Baker's soreness
 
If you want to permanently ruin the game then go for it.

We’ve already seen how it looks and it was awful. Defensive footy as the players won’t lose any of their general fitness if the games are shortened. The coaching staff would still make sure their players are pushed to their limits, just in a shortened time frame.
 
Others have touched on it, but the issue is not game length, but season length. As great as gather round is, it has made the season longer than ever. It probably would not be possible due to stadium and TV rights contracts, but the AFL should consider reducing the season to 21 regular season matches a club (ten home, ten away, one gather round) and have two byes in season (no pre-finals bye).
 
I love the length of our game. I love the slog it can be between match ups with in the game over a couple of hours.

I dont agree with the call to lessen it

I dont agree with the below but id rather see this than the game time reduced

Extend the benches , lower cap on interchanges?
Even out the rounds to play each other once . Add more byes in , im unsure how this would work either, plus the money the afl wouldnt be against losing by less rounds isnt a logical option either

Id rather see multi ball happen after every fifth goal than see 16 minute quarters
 

Is the game too long?

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top