Analysis The state of our game

[Vdubs]

I'd be happy for everyone to play everyone just once. Would make even the boring games interesting.
And as you I'm Melb based. I actually don't really like going to KP though but I know we should play all our home games and finals there.

Ok.
Then, we should play each team once in a 2 year cycle, reverse the games the following year, and award the team that finishes on top more handsomely.
Then finals every 2 years after tallying up the 2 year results.
THAT would be fair , equitable, interesting.
At the end of Year 1, an elaborate State of Origin series
At the end of Year 2, a proper finals series based on each team having played each team twice. What a quaint yet fair system.

 

[catempire]

It might possibly be worse. Lets cut it back to 12..like the real old days... every side with the best athletes , covering ground much better , clogging it up even better than now. Its not the talent drain..its how they programmed to play.
If you want to spread the talent better and increase the chance of them being constructive and positive is to give the players room. Instead of 14 teams.. try 14 a side on the field. Thats would be too radical but its irrelevant the talent the players have when you play in a phone box

Yep, I see that side of it. It’s possible that a better overall quality will be more capable of deploying more of what we don’t like.

Maybe I’m glass half full but I think a better overall quality might help be a circuit breaker to what we see now. That is, the congestion is in part due to the burden of carrying players who are not capable of cutting through with their skills.

 

[Spazz Cat]

Ok.
Then, we should play each team once in a 2 year cycle, reverse the games the following year, and award the team that finishes on top more handsomely.
Then finals every 2 years after tallying up the 2 year results.
THAT would be fair , equitable, interesting.
At the end of Year 1, an elaborate State of Origin series
At the end of Year 2, a proper finals series based on each team having played each team twice. What a quaint yet fair system.

It's just playing everyone twice is unrealistic even though it's the only truly fair way.
Just once is at least possible.

 

[Turbocat]

It's just playing everyone twice is unrealistic even though it's the only truly fair way.
Just once is at least possible.

Is it financially possible .. ..it would solve a lot of issues ..but think about how many games that would not be played ..and the flow on to TV and and stadiums and SCap... It would be a very brave move

 

[Spazz Cat]

Is it financially possible .. ..it would solve a lot of issues ..but think about how many games that would not be played ..and the flow on to TV and and stadiums and SCap... It would be a very brave move

+ the players have a union. I can't see how they'd go for it.

 

[Partridge]

I wonder how much of it is a tug-o-war between coaches and Head Office?
Coach finds way to win premiership, AFL must equalize.

The problem is it shouldn’t be a tug of war in the first place.

Coaches must strive to win premierships. There’s no reason at all why the administrative body should try and equalise it. It’s the complete antithesis to what sport is.

 

[Turbocat]

The problem is it shouldn’t be a tug of war in the first place.

Coaches must strive to win premierships. There’s no reason at all why the administrative body should try and equalise it. It’s the complete antithesis to what sport is.

Most if not every sport adjusts for tactics employed that are not considered in the best interest of the game.

 

[iameviljez]

Iactually miss Channel 10 - i thought they were pretty good - liked Quartermaine thought he was a good caller - Tim Lane - Blight - Wallsie was allright

I agree. I really liked it. Just called the games without trying to be comedians.
So many good memories. I watched the 07 flag so much I can remember a lot of the commentary.
Haha, I remember the week before Blight totally cracking it about Port thrashing Norf. Was calling them pathetic and all sorts of stuff.

I agree too - 10 were really good. Hudson was a superb caller, I wasn't so crash-hot on Walls but could put up with him.

Anything better than this let's-invent-our-own-vocab crap. Poor Bruce must be screaming internally for Drew Morphett to return.

 

[iameviljez]

Most if not every sport adjusts for tactics employed that are not considered in the best interest of the game.

Leg-side defensive bowling, for example... or, of course, Bodyline, though that was a safety issue too.

I mean, out of bounds on the full was only introduced in 1969. It seems ludicrous nowadays that you could thump the footy into Row Z and cop a throw-in*.

*Lachie Henderson misses the Good Ole Days.

 

[Partridge]

I agree too - 10 were really good. Hudson was a superb caller, I wasn't so crash-hot on Walls but could put up with him.

Anything better than this let's-invent-our-own-vocab crap. Poor Bruce must be screaming internally for Drew Morphett to return.

Poor Bruce? He's one of the worst offenders and has been for decades.

Take out McAvaney, Russell, Taylor, and Brayshaw and you would improve commentary standards instantly.

 

[Spazz Cat]

Poor Bruce? He's one of the worst offenders and has been for decades.

Take out McAvaney, Russell, Taylor, and Brayshaw and you would improve commentary standards instantly.

Bruce treats it like a joke. Notice how when he does Olympic sports or the races he doesn't do he's camp schtick.

 

[Partridge]

Bruce treats it like a joke. Notice how when he does Olympic sports or the races he doesn't do he's camp schtick.

Pity the Olympics doesn't run year around, it would get rid of him.

 

[iameviljez]

Bruce treats it like a joke. Notice how when he does Olympic sports or the races he doesn't do he's camp schtick.

It's miles removed from Peak 1990s Bruce.

It's almost like he's been told to be More Fun and More Relatable by management. It's like telling the Beatles to write disco; it's not happening, let him do what he's good at.

 

[Pollywaffle]

Maybe if he just commentated the game as it unfolds, instead of dredging up past statistics or speculating what might happen.
I liked the channel ten guys too.Even Walls...

 

[SJ]

Well Max. I reckon the game is at least as good as ever, probably better .................and I have watched for many a year.

Its not perfect but the 2016 + iteration has lots to offer.

Work in packs is far better than the glory past. Modern mids tap/toe poke/push the ball around to get it to their own or team mates advantage. This was one thing GAJ was (and is) so good at. Kelly does it, Charlie is on the way. Hard to see at the ground but jaw dropping every now and again as you watch the replay at home.

Speed of ball movement. We often see across games on a week end the ball move quickly with players moving in waves to link up. TV is too much in love with itself to pan back and show it as you see it live from the stands but it is a dimension Rugby/League fans have loved and now we get to enjoy it too. It builds expectation. It results in rapture if the goal results or despair if a nicely engineered movement falls at the last hurdle.

Field kicking is better than ever. Players are having to struggle with the increased pressure which is the 2016+ hallmark but compared "to the wonderful 80s" it is two divisions ahead. I marvelled at the delivery of GWS in the third quarter last week as they put the ball just where their forward could possess it and our defenders had little hope.

Marking is as good as ever. Forwards have to contend with more personal attention, more blocking and having space ahead occupied by mids. But we still see the big ones and nearly big ones. Also players of all size and position now take big marks, not just the big men (as in the the big men fly). McCarthy (Lions) and a couple of smalls from West Coast come to mind immediately. Rohan, Esava (almost - watch this space) and even Clark have taken nice overhead grabs this year.

Goal kicking is still back in the 80s. Heaven knows why. Best bet is fatigue but easy goals are missed early in games (vGWS last week any one).

I reckon when people think of the 80s they remember the highlight reel - the "winners" - and forget the mud and slush, the lack of a left foot, the fumbles, the cinders with the sou wester, and the lack of competitiveness as 4 or 5 clubs dominated and 6 or 7 got scraps.

As for rules. I think the sliding rule needs go and fall under the heading of dangerous play (as with tackles). Most of these frees being paid now would not have been paid and players would not be looking to milk them.
666 is working, it opens a window 15-30 times a game for a good attacking team to punish the good defensive unit.
The kick in rules haven't changed anything yet but one bold coach will use it to turn games and then it will have its place.

It is still far and away the most interesting team game I have watched and I have lived with Rugby and Football while overseas and watched enough League/grid iron/Ice Hockey etc on TV.

Media do what media have to or they have no job. They have to fill air time and being negative just seems to ring the audience "bell" louder than status quo commentary.

Team defence is far far far better than ever. In fact it is off the chart good. As a result, the frequency of the spectacular stuff that the sport is known for (free-flowing play, spectacular marks, soaring drop punts, glorious goals) has definitely diminished.

 

[Turbocat]

Team defence is far far far better than ever. In fact it is off the chart good. As a result, the frequency of the spectacular stuff that the sport is known for (free-flowing play, spectacular marks, soaring drop punts, glorious goals) has definitely diminished.

It seems to me the influx of coaching means an influx of defence and tactics cause coaching defence is more achieveable. Its easier to drop a bomb on something than to build it... yet when the perennial highlights of games are shown its a rare thing that a zone def or tackle takes centre stage.
Coaches are a fire blanket , they exist to put out the fire in spite of the fact that fire can cook and heat and warm.. and sustain one
One listens to players talk ... I think it was Collingwood Adams on SEN and their intent was anything but to satisfy the audience ..it was to win and winning in a boring controlled manner was key.. as if winning is enough to satisfy all the needs ..

 

[Max Milburn]

It seems to me the influx of coaching means an influx of defence and tactics cause coaching defence is more achieveable. Its easy to drop a bomb on something that to build it... yet when the perennial highlights of games are shown its a rae thing that a zone def or tackle takes centre stage.
Coaches are a fire blanket , they exist to put out the fire in spite of the fact that fire can cook and heat and warm.. and sustain one
One listens to players talk ... I think it was Collingwood Adams on SEN and their intent was anything but to satisfy the audience ..it was to win and winning in a boring controlled manner was key.. as if winning is enough to satisfy all the needs ..

Yes, winning is everything to a coach naturally.
It is only the teams that are blessed with the top talent that can afford to go all out and attack, and even then they have to ensure defence is solid.
The "lesser" teams can only defend grimly.
It is the coaches who get the most out of both defence and attack that win.
Some coaches have the talent at their disposal, but only seem to be able to think one way.

 

[hamG]

I see most of it as self perpetuating news generated by the media. You know what would happen if every team kicked 25 goals every game? The media would be complaining about the lack of tackle pressure, how footy used to be a tough game, how the great players used to win hard balls instead of running forward of contests to get cheap over the top possessions, how coaches ruined the concept of great key defenders locking down great key forwards, how contested marking has disappeared, how intercept defenders no longer have a use, how footy now resembles basketball, how it used to be a unique, tough contested sport. You see?

 

[Max Milburn]

Interesting news regarding a new comp that will... "placate the likes of Mark Robinson, Gerard Whateley, Damien Barrett, Terry Wallace, David King and other members of the media who, by their own admission, no longer like football."

https://www.theroar.com.au/2019/04/18/plans-revealed-for-new-aflb-league-to-begin-in-2020/

 

[Partridge]

I reckon when people think of the 80s they remember the highlight reel - the "winners" - and forget the mud and slush, the lack of a left foot, the fumbles, the cinders with the sou wester, and the lack of competitiveness as 4 or 5 clubs dominated and 6 or 7 got scraps.

But that hasn’t changed. It’s what happens in professional sport. Do people seriously think there are more than 3-4 premiership chances every year? Instead of 6-7 teams getting scraps it’s now 10 or more.

 

[allrighty]

I miss Malcolm Blight on channel 10 back in the day.
He actually lasted a few years despite just not giving a f**k.
I've heard Eddie say no-one knows where all the money goes. Afl isn't required to tell anyone.

The AFL is a not for profit company limited by guarantee so they are absolutely (supposed to be) accountable. Legally. But like most of the big charities they are not to be questioned.

 

[Turbocat]

Seen this on youtube..it was the Lindner game in sydney... it really shows how the game has changed.. for good an bad. ..one thing is for certain..it was less structured ..and less people around the ball

 

[ATSAM]

It's miles removed from Peak 1990s Bruce.

It's almost like he's been told to be More Fun and More Relatable by management. It's like telling the Beatles to write disco; it's not happening, let him do what he's good at.

Poor Bruce just trying to be one of the boys. They of course played the game , he didn't. Poor Bruce so stupid to be even trying to be like Carey and his behaviours as a footballer, Taylor and his way out of date playing days or even Richardson with his snide remarks and bullying of Ling.
Poor Bruce can't even raise his excruciating 'look at me' standards high

 

[catswhiskers]

But that hasn’t changed. It’s what happens in professional sport. Do people seriously think there are more than 3-4 premiership chances every year? Instead of 6-7 teams getting scraps it’s now 10 or more.

In any given year there are (once things settle ) only a certain number of teams with the list and support needed to win a flag I agree .

I would argue tho that in this modern era 2010+ that the 3 or 4 has become 6 or 7 (each season round 8 say) and more varied.

Dogs and Tiges have won one (after many years of blah). Adelaide, Freo and St Kilda (early on) have been strong contenders. And that has been during the expansion period where clubs with existing strong lists should have been able to maintain the status quo as GCS and GWS gobbled up the best young talent.

In the 12 years from 1978 to 1989 Hawthorn and Carlton won 9 premierships between them. Add to that Hawthorn won in 76 and 91 as well. The only other club to disrupt the gorging was Essendon (84/85) and a waning Richmond (80). Richmond and Essendon were other members of the "establishment" and Collingwood the last member, was wandering in the wilderness.

And yes in an 18 team comp it is just life that 10 teams will be out of contention after 8-10 rounds in any year. Across the years though clubs (most) are finding it easier to contend in the modern set up.

 

[iameviljez]

But that hasn’t changed. It’s what happens in professional sport. Do people seriously think there are more than 3-4 premiership chances every year? Instead of 6-7 teams getting scraps it’s now 10 or more.

Who the premiership chances are has changed.

I mean, Hawthorn, Essendon, Collingwood, Carlton and Richmond (till they shot their own feet off) dominated that entire era from the moment Melbourne fell away right until the Weagles started winning flags. North Melbourne pulled off a minor miracle in winning what flags they did.

As for StKilda, Fitzroy, Footscray, South/Sydney... born losers, with no hope. Footscray and Fitzroy in the 80s were particularly sad, as they bled so much talent into other sides.

What we've at least started to see now, is every club member believing they are as good a chance as any other to win flags sufficiently far into the future. Plenty of fans of the above four clubs would have previously never thought it possible.