Norm Smith Medallist
- Aug 25, 2005
- AFL Club
- Gold Coast
I'm not saying that it's a better system than %.Shortened quarters really need to be considered here.
And that still doesn't address the point that points difference is far too dependent on conditions, and it still doesn't address how a team controls a match relatively.
Essendon 8.9(57) def. Adelaide 6.3(39)
is more of a complete and impressive victory(and a complete victory takes into consideration your ability to limit the other teams scoring as well as your own ability to score) than....
St.Kilda 12.8(80) def. Geelong 9.6(60)
Essendon won by 2 points less, but had a much higher percentage of the total match score which indicates their victory was a superior performance, particularly if that match occured in bad weather conditions which made it more difficult to score.
Its harder to score in wet conditions, thats just fact, so teams who play in these conditions more often....which is merely down to luck of scheduling will be punished through no fault of their own.
Don't get me wrong - I'm not anti-percentage. And I'm not suggesting it be canned just for a laugh.
But I'd happily sacrifice something like % if it means it forces the coach's hands, or at least encourages them, to stop dragging the game down into a defensive shitshow. I'd far prefer subtle changes to things like the OP suggested, than rip the heart out of the game itself by introducing a myriad of rule changes every year that end up being futile in the end anyway - cause the root cause isn't ever addressed - the coaches.
The end would comfortably justify the means, in my opinion.