Roast State of the modern game; Clarkson

wobblypunt

Team Captain
Jun 29, 2006
547
296
Brissy
AFL Club
Brisbane Lions
Other Teams
Ipswich Town,Ajax, FCTwente, L-pool
Geelong vs GC was excruciatingly bad. Players mark the ball in the middle of the park and INSTANTLY turn to the boundary for a sideways kick or a down the line kick.

I don't think the rules can fix much because the coaches have all the moneyball data and sports science to realise that turnovers are too risky and athletes are almost as useful as pure footballers because they can run around clogging up the ground.

Coaches and the moneyball sports analysis is to blame in my opinion.
 

St Plugger

Senior List
Feb 28, 2012
295
490
AFL Club
St Kilda
Do we go back to 18-a-side when we realise that 15-a-side doesn't actually solve the problem of players crowding the contest and creating ugly rolling mauls?

Or do we double down and remove another 3 players and play 12-a-side?

Or option C: none of the above, don't change the rules, but enforce the current laws, pay all the free kicks and watch the game open up that way.

There won't be a need, as we have already seen it work with the leagues that have introduced 16 and 15 aside. There's just not the personnel available to cover the extra space that's been created.
 
Last edited:
Nov 2, 2014
19,035
36,616
AFL Club
Tasmania
Other Teams
#TeamTurboChooks
There won't be a need, as we see have already seen it work with the leagues that have introduced 16 and 15 aside. There's just not the personnel available to cover the extra space that's been created.
36 players on the field is an embarrassingly bad idea.
 

Hawk_francais

Cancelled
Sep 20, 2015
3,509
7,036
AFL Club
Hawthorn
I find the interchange argument boring, and I find the 16-a-side argument pathetic. To assert that the problem is players being too fit, or the ground not big enough is not only untrue, but it offers oblique and half-arsed fixes for a straightforward problem.

The problem is this: teams crowd numbers around the ball, because it's the best way to influence the contest.

Scoring is besides the point. We want open, attacking play, where we see 1v1 contests and players have the space to show their speed, skill, strength and teamwork. If we get that, it doesn't really matter if the score stays 0-0, the game is already exciting.

So the problem is numbers around the ball, and we want to eradicate it effectively there are a two possible fixes.

1) Make it illegal eg. introduce zones. Essentially the same rule as a centre bounce but for the whole game every time there's a stoppage only rucks and rovers allowed to attend stoppage, forwards and backs inside their 50s etc. Not a terrible idea but is heavy-handed and gives the umps yet another task and another dinky rule to pay free kicks and penalties that are irrelevant to the play (along with interchange, protected area).

2) Get rid of the incentive to crowd around the ball. How about this: taking possession of the ball without disposing of it legally is a free-kick every time. Right now, stoppages are now the focus of our sport, but that wasn't always the case. A stoppage is, obviously, a stop in the game, and we have dozens of them every quarter. WHY? Because of prior opportunity - a rule (ironically enough) brought in to reward good tackling even when the ball is in dispute and to speed up the game. To say it's had the opposite effect is an understatement. It means effectively now that any player is within their rights to take possession at any time, because they'll either be tackled straight away (ball-up), the ball will be knocked out of their hands (play-on) or they'll get enough time to shoot off a kick or handpass. This was never the intention of the rule. If we get rid of prior opportunity, then not only will we see virtually no stoppages, and not only will the ball move on too quickly to attract a crowd, but crowding around the ball will be useless. Any successful tackle will always result in a free-kick one way or another, and leaving your man to attempt a gang-tackle is a huge risk if the game isn't going to stop.

I know it's hard to imagine our game without a stoppage every 30 seconds, but try. Stoppages in our game are manufactured strategically by teams to arrest the ball and restart the game with the set-up they want. We need to remove that power. A ball-up was always intended as a drop-ball type solution to a ball in dispute (such as out of bounds), not as a repeated accompaniment to a territory game. Stop stoppages. Tell your friends.
 

Bjo187

Premiership Player
Apr 30, 2020
3,067
3,976
AFL Club
Essendon
The geelong v gold coast game is proof there are too many people on the field, especially on a thinner ground there is no room and a s**t spectacle.
 

The mighty Hawks

Debutant
Mar 23, 2020
95
106
AFL Club
Hawthorn
I find the interchange argument boring, and I find the 16-a-side argument pathetic. To assert that the problem is players being too fit, or the ground not big enough is not only untrue, but it offers oblique and half-arsed fixes for a straightforward problem.

The problem is this: teams crowd numbers around the ball, because it's the best way to influence the contest.

Scoring is besides the point. We want open, attacking play, where we see 1v1 contests and players have the space to show their speed, skill, strength and teamwork. If we get that, it doesn't really matter if the score stays 0-0, the game is already exciting.

So the problem is numbers around the ball, and we want to eradicate it effectively there are a two possible fixes.

1) Make it illegal eg. introduce zones. Essentially the same rule as a centre bounce but for the whole game every time there's a stoppage only rucks and rovers allowed to attend stoppage, forwards and backs inside their 50s etc. Not a terrible idea but is heavy-handed and gives the umps yet another task and another dinky rule to pay free kicks and penalties that are irrelevant to the play (along with interchange, protected area).

2) Get rid of the incentive to crowd around the ball. How about this: taking possession of the ball without disposing of it legally is a free-kick every time. Right now, stoppages are now the focus of our sport, but that wasn't always the case. A stoppage is, obviously, a stop in the game, and we have dozens of them every quarter. WHY? Because of prior opportunity - a rule (ironically enough) brought in to reward good tackling even when the ball is in dispute and to speed up the game. To say it's had the opposite effect is an understatement. It means effectively now that any player is within their rights to take possession at any time, because they'll either be tackled straight away (ball-up), the ball will be knocked out of their hands (play-on) or they'll get enough time to shoot off a kick or handpass. This was never the intention of the rule. If we get rid of prior opportunity, then not only will we see virtually no stoppages, and not only will the ball move on too quickly to attract a crowd, but crowding around the ball will be useless. Any successful tackle will always result in a free-kick one way or another, and leaving your man to attempt a gang-tackle is a huge risk if the game isn't going to stop.

I know it's hard to imagine our game without a stoppage every 30 seconds, but try. Stoppages in our game are manufactured strategically by teams to arrest the ball and restart the game with the set-up they want. We need to remove that power. A ball-up was always intended as a drop-ball type solution to a ball in dispute (such as out of bounds), not as a repeated accompaniment to a territory game. Stop stoppages. Tell your friends.
So basically don't take possession of the ball if you're about to be tackled , you must knock it on ......
 

Hawk_francais

Cancelled
Sep 20, 2015
3,509
7,036
AFL Club
Hawthorn
So basically don't take possession of the ball if you're about to be tackled , you must knock it on ......
Yes, in other words: caught holding the ball.

I'm watching the brisbane-port game now. Defender with Charlie Cameron right on his hammer picks up the ball, tackle, stoppage. That's a win-win for both sides, and that's what needs to change.
 

The mighty Hawks

Debutant
Mar 23, 2020
95
106
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Yes, in other words: caught holding the ball.

I'm watching the brisbane-port game now. Defender with Charlie Cameron right on his hammer picks up the ball, tackle, stoppage. That's a win-win for both sides, and that's what needs to change.
Agree, players will always get away with what they know they can get away with and it's not good for the game.....
 
Nov 2, 2014
19,035
36,616
AFL Club
Tasmania
Other Teams
#TeamTurboChooks
2) Get rid of the incentive to crowd around the ball. How about this: taking possession of the ball without disposing of it legally is a free-kick every time.
So everyone just waits for the one guy dumb enough to pick up the ball and they all tackle him. Sounds fun. There will be lots of kicks off the ground and people just tapping it around instead of picking it up.
 

Evolved1

Cancelled
10k Posts
Jun 14, 2013
13,076
15,680
AFL Club
Essendon
Geelong vs GC was excruciatingly bad. Players mark the ball in the middle of the park and INSTANTLY turn to the boundary for a sideways kick or a down the line kick.

I don't think the rules can fix much because the coaches have all the moneyball data and sports science to realise that turnovers are too risky and athletes are almost as useful as pure footballers because they can run around clogging up the ground.

Coaches and the moneyball sports analysis is to blame in my opinion.
Geelong vs GC was a high quality game, and the winner wasn't a forgone conclusion until well into the final quarter. Gaz closed it with a clutch goal from outside 50, so the game had its fairytale moment.

If you thought that game was bad, you should watch some 80's and 90's games.
 

Hawk_francais

Cancelled
Sep 20, 2015
3,509
7,036
AFL Club
Hawthorn
So everyone just waits for the one guy dumb enough to pick up the ball and they all tackle him. Sounds fun. There will be lots of kicks off the ground and people just tapping it around instead of picking it up.
Yep, that's exactly what will happen if everyone crowds around the ball. It won't take long for them to realise that extra numbers around the ball creates no advantage.

The 6-on-1 gang-tackle sounds like a good strategy too, until the ball gets knocked out to one of the five other blokes in space without an opponent. The only reason it works so often now is that the player being tackled would rather hold it in than let it spill out into 'risky' open space - a stoppage is a good result for everyone. I'm proposing that no player should ever want to be caught with the ball. It's not new, it's how the game used to be.

You're worried about a version of the game in which the ball bobbles around amongst a group of players who are falling all over the place, and where skills are underused and undervalued. If you open your eyes, you'll see that's already the modern game.
 

Accepted 04

Cancelled
Dec 10, 2007
1,334
1,290
AFL Club
Richmond
It’s so bad when you see people hoping to see the game return to the boring s**t game that it was in the 80’s/90’s. I hate watching games from then they are so dull.

I’m happy with the game mostly with how it is but I do support some changes.

But it’s a tad frustrating that one coach can sook about the ‘state of the game’ and then the AFL change the interpretation to suit..
 

Dr Awkward

Norm Smith Medallist
Mar 23, 2009
5,296
4,946
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
San Antonio Spurs
This has been by far the best round of the season so far. Games have been much more watchable, more goals, a few forwards have kicked bags.

I think a lot of the players were rusty in the early weeks.
 

Topkent

Confirmed ITK Drafting King
Aug 29, 2010
61,043
84,952
Canada
AFL Club
Melbourne
Other Teams
Winnipeg Jets
It’s so bad when you see people hoping to see the game return to the boring sh*t game that it was in the 80’s/90’s. I hate watching games from then they are so dull.

I’m happy with the game mostly with how it is but I do support some changes.

But it’s a tad frustrating that one coach can sook about the ‘state of the game’ and then the AFL change the interpretation to suit..
If it was a boring s**t game how are you even a fan
 

JP2

Club Legend
Apr 7, 2003
1,331
5,320
Prague
AFL Club
Melbourne
Two things on this issue.

1) Every couple of years someone starts a thread like this about how footy is in the worst state it's ever been. If you go back 15 years (yes, I've been here that long) people were complaining because the game was too open and uncontested, now they're complaining for the opposite reason. I think sometimes people miss the fact that their interests can shift, and that maybe their lack of interest in the game today has more to do with changes in their own preferences rather than the game itself. It's pretty difficult to maintain a passionate interest in any pursuit over several decades, let alone a sporting one.

2) I find football more unwatchable than It's ever been and It's difficult to know whether that says more about me or the game itself. Having said that, I think a big problem is that all the games every week are so similar in the way that they're played that it's really difficult to get motivated to watch any two given teams play because I know more or less what to expect (even if the results themselves, this season especially, are unredictable).

I don't know if anyone's already mentioned this because I can't be arsed going through 30 pages of posts, but my theory is that this is related to the changes relating to trading and free agency brought in over the past few years. This makes it much easier for teams to rapidly plug holes in their list over the course of one or two years, rather than having to figure out a way to win with the team they have.

In the past, it was often the imbalances between teams (and individual players) which made the matches interesting to watch. Nowadays, all teams are adopting basically the same approach to the game (high pressure and closing the game down while the other team has the ball, hoping to turn it over, and then quickly run the ball up the other end before the other team has the chance to close the game down themselves) which results in games with completely predictable and indistinguishable styles. No team is really required to innovate, because it's easier than ever to adapt the list to desired game style rather than the other way around. In the past I could have told you the strengths and weakness of most teams in the competition; these days teams could get the players to swap jumpers at half time in most games and I wouldn't even notice.

This applies to the way players are drafted and developed as well. Every player seems to be well-rounded with few standout strengths or weaknesses. Any attributes that a player might have to set them apart (for better or worse) are quickly coached out of them. A good example of this is Harley Bennell - one of the most uniquely talented players of his generation, and a great comeback story to boot - not getting a game back the coach wants him to work on his contested ball skills. Now Goodwin might well be right that a player needs to be good at getting contested ball to succeed at this level on the modern game, but It's nonetheless an indication that the current game favours balance and conformity to any sense of individuality in game style.

This is also why I don't think rule changes will make any difference. Coaches have probably correctly noted that winning requires doing exactly what the other team is doing, only better: teams who tried to play a loose and free-flowing style in the current system would almost certainly get crushed. This is a testament to the unprecedendent level of skill and discipline required of players in the modern game (the worst team of today would absolutely cream the best team of 30 years ago, regardless of what the purists might say) but it makes for a dull spectacle.
 

Lsta062

Brownlow Medallist
Jul 15, 2014
21,580
41,426
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
Chelsea, LA Lakers, Western United
I know that the quarters have been reduced, but no one has even threatened the 100-point mark since round 2 so far. In the past, teams used to get a score line of 100 points easily given that they’d go up to 180 or 190 points.

One thing that I think the umpires need to do to improve scoring is crack down on the holding that defenders do. For example, Riewoldt and Lynch are held so much in a marking contest that they can’t even move towards marking the ball sometimes. On the other end, Grimes and Astbury are doing the same thing to other KPFs and largely get away with it. It seems that marking contests and rule interpretation limit forwards more than defenders given how far defenders can push the limits to defend.

Let defenders out-mark and spoil the ball with their talents, but get rid of this excessive blocking and holding that the defenders of this game seem to get away with in my opinion. That’ll force the coaches to re-think how they defend and focus on attacking more given that attacking would have become easier to do.
 
Jul 22, 2013
18,776
27,426
AFL Club
Carlton
No.

We aspire to a game where players try to win the ball in traffic and dispose of it cleanly rather than just dropping the ball and creating ugly rolling mauls.

The game is already heavily weighted in favour of the tackler. And we are going to achieve a cleaner more open game, and highlight the skills of the "non hack" inside player by giving the tackler a leg up.

Good luck with that.
 
Back