What I don't get about people who complain about "low scores" in AFL

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Joined
Oct 13, 2017
Posts
1,759
Likes
1,573
AFL Club
Geelong
Thread starter #52
Yup. As long as the game is engrossing I couldn’t care how many goals are kicked. There’s nothing quite like two highly skilful teams just nullifying each other. Eagles vs Swans mid 2000s was an example of that.

I think the 2005 and 2006 GFs were engrossing games.

I remember in 2005, which was one of the lowest scoring GFs in fifty years, no-one talked about it being boring because of low scores. They were happy that there was a close GF for once, which came down to the last kick of the game.

People were also talking about the Leo Barry "saving" mark. That's what people remember.

A lot of other GFs were higher scoring, yet were blowouts, and the flag was decided before the last quarter, and people complained about that. In 2005 and 2006 (3 point margin and 1 point margin respectively) people were glad to get a close Grand Final for once.

Conversly, the 1989 GF was also a close margin, and was high scoring. But people also remember that for other reasons as well, such as the toughness in the game, Dermie's recovery, Ablett's nine goals, rather than the fact that both teams kicked over 20 goals against each other, and defense was non-existent.
 

Dipper

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Oct 28, 2000
Posts
7,437
Likes
2,120
Location
London,England
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
Allies FCC
#53
Soccer implemented rule changes in the 90s to try to improve the game. The 90 world cup and 92 Euro Championships were turgid low scoring affairs. Goal scoring was down accross the board in that era.

They got rid of the back pass to the goalie, made the tackle from behind a red card offence and liberalised offside. They also followed the English example and made everyone give 3 points for a win, before that it was 2 points everywhere except England.





On SM-J330G using BigFooty.com mobile app
 

Topkent

Premium Platinum
Joined
Aug 29, 2010
Posts
33,121
Likes
40,069
Location
Canada
AFL Club
Melbourne
Other Teams
Winnipeg Jets
#54
Higher technicalities? It's a free shot with no goalkeeper to execute the most basic of fundamentals to kick the ball which a junior footballer should be executing - yet we're talking about full time professionals? You're being very generous.

I don't have the stats in front of me but I'd argue a soccer midfielder runs 12km-13km per game on average at the highest level - which wouldn't be far behind AFL. I think you're clutching at straws if I'm being honest - I love both sports with a passion but you're kidding yourself if you think AFL requires more skill than soccer. There's a reason why people like Blicavs, Keath, Cox aren't playing professional soccer after a couple years of training. There's a reason why there are no "code hoppers" playing in the Champions League.

Anyway, this thread is now hijacked and I won't make it worse.
I don't think you understand why either. The reason is because the more people on the field the more specialised your skills can be.
 
Joined
Apr 13, 2015
Posts
571
Likes
1,350
AFL Club
Melbourne
#55
I get the OP’s point. High scoring doesn’t mean quality football. The 05 & 06 grand finals were far better games than Essendon v Melbourne round 3 2019.

However, there is a lot of **** footy on at the moment and the lack of scoring is the low hanging fruit to grab at. In isolation low scoring is not the issue but add it to rolling mauls, horrible skills and the refusal to adjudicate obvious free kicks builds into a football fan’s ire.
 

its free real estate

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Jul 30, 2018
Posts
6,589
Likes
8,111
AFL Club
Fremantle
#57
That is you are more likely to get a low scoring-high skilled soccer game than a low scoring-high skilled AFL game
This.

I'm no soccer fan, but the skill level in the very elite form of the game is insane. The sport itself is nothing special, but I can see why you're put up with 1-0 scoreline given the skills on display.

Whereas a low scoring AFL game is absolutely dire.
 
Joined
Oct 19, 2018
Posts
92
Likes
36
Location
Australind WA
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Tottenham Hotspur.
#58
Soccer implemented rule changes in the 90s to try to improve the game. The 90 world cup and 92 Euro Championships were turgid low scoring affairs. Goal scoring was down accross the board in that era.

They got rid of the back pass to the goalie, made the tackle from behind a red card offence and liberalised offside. They also followed the English example and made everyone give 3 points for a win, before that it was 2 points everywhere except England.





On SM-J330G using BigFooty.com mobile app
They should have put point posts in.
 

biggiemediums

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Jul 20, 2010
Posts
5,393
Likes
5,429
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
Chelsea, Storm, Heart.
#59
Same type of idiot that inherently hates all judges decisions in combat sport - even though most ATG fights are decisions!
 

ManUtd

Team Captain
Joined
Jul 29, 2008
Posts
321
Likes
9
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
North Melbourne
#60
Definitely agree that if you've grown up with soccer and follow it, you're likelier to prefer tight, low-scoring games. My best memories are still of the Swans Eagles GFs, despite being a fan of neither team. That to me represented the peak of the game, in which skill levels were high and both teams had to do everything in their power to score goals.

It just comes down to personal preference I guess. I dislike back and forth trading of goals. I like goals to be earned the hard way, and scarcity makes every goal that much more special.

But for people that genuinely like to see goals being scored, then I suppose lower scoring is a bummer.

Where I do find it amusing is that the instant reaction to a change in scoring patterns is to alter the rules. Rather than letting teams work it out over time through coaching, new strategies and so on, they want to change the rules to accommodate scoring.
 

Ishikawa

All Australian
Joined
Jul 18, 2018
Posts
629
Likes
657
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
#61
05 and 06 were absolutely two of the worst games of football you were ever see. 2005 especially was only good because it was close at the death - there first 115 minutes were absolutely atrocious football
You should rewatch 2006 rather than basing your opinion off popular perspective.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Aramis

Premiership Player
Joined
Jul 31, 2016
Posts
3,617
Likes
7,374
AFL Club
Hawthorn
#65
...you cannot compare soccer and footy. It's simply delusional, especially the scoring.

Soccer playing style and rules completely contrast footy.
Well one is primarily a sport and the other one is entertainment (trying to be atleast)... so I agree that you cant compare them. Maybe one needs to pull its head in and get back to being a bloody sport....
 

frenchconnection

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Aug 16, 2009
Posts
5,433
Likes
3,100
Location
Wembley downs
AFL Club
West Coast
#66
...you cannot compare soccer and footy. It's simply delusional, especially the scoring.

Soccer playing style and rules completely contrast footy.
It's the reason why I can't watch a game of soccer - to have a game of soccer finish on 0-0 after playing for a whole game just destroys the soul. God knows how anyone can get enjoyment out of that but I know dye-hard soccer fans do!

Historically speaking Aussie rules style football was always fairly high scoring unless weather conditions were woeful then it became a slog. Can remember going to the football with my Grandfather as a kid and watching high scoring and high marking style football - not too much handball in those days - such skill back then and a pleasure to watch in contrast to today's football which can be a bit of a yawn and in some cases the skills are deplorable.
 

Viceregal

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Aug 11, 2006
Posts
5,224
Likes
3,843
Location
Brisbane
AFL Club
Brisbane Lions
#67
I have been to some soccer games and my soccer mad friend has come to some AFL ones. They do have some similarities in terms of whole-of-field strategy and how you can look at the field away from where the ball is and predict where the next kick is likely to go etc. We have more in common that either of us do with say rugby league.

What I find interesting is that that feeling you get in the last few minutes of a really close game of AFL and every kick for goal (from either side) is a heart in mouth moment on which the fate of the entire game might hang … that is the same feeling that happens every time the ball goes near the goals in a soccer field for the whole game! Mind you there is a *lot* of passing the ball back and forth no where near the goals which will be exciting for the aficionado and dull for the not - which is precisely the same for us where a tough hard fought struggle between two teams (with a corresponding low score).

low score because:
- tough hard fought struggle between two teams (good)
- two teams with no defense kicking at 30% efficiency (bad)
- there is a cyclonic rain storm going (totally different game and we put on different filters to judge it)
- two teams which awesome defenders but comparatively sad mids/forwards where the ball ping pongs into the 50 and out again (not so good either)

Low score as a concept means nothing without context
 

calyam

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
May 9, 2011
Posts
5,351
Likes
5,843
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Essendon
#68
The share of AFL fans who are also regular soccer fans would be relatively small. So it is tough to argue that there is some sort of hypocrisy going on.

Low scoring football games tend to, on average, be poor spectacles. That isn't to say there haven't been truly great low scoring games but for the most part that isn't the case. Aussies Rules is at its best when the game is free flowing and fast moving; when players have some space to apply their skills; when players are kicking goals.

A comparison with basketball is more apt. There was a period through the 1990s and 2000s where scoring was relatively difficult. Fans were driven away or became less passionate about their teams. The past decade has seen a change in philosophy that has led to much higher scores and fan engagement.
 

TheGreatBarryB

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Mar 20, 2007
Posts
19,077
Likes
18,325
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Texans, Astros, Leeds
#69
The days of the 70s to 90s are gone re high scores. It will never go back to 120 v 110 on regular basis and in the old days that was on worse grounds/conditions.

Defensive strategy of today is far superior with full time coaching staff. People just need to get used to average score being lower.
 

cb16

Club Legend
Joined
Sep 23, 2008
Posts
1,753
Likes
3,596
Location
melbourne
AFL Club
Hawthorn
#72
The problem is people watch neutral games these days. Media watches every single game, blokes I know do too. 20 years ago, the only neutral games you'd watch were the finals and maybe a bit of the match of the week.

There have always been absolute stinker games with the scores, but with the AFL and tv trying to squeeze every last dollar out of supporters, they want eyeballs watching and an ad every 2 minutes which means goals, and lots of them.
 
Joined
Dec 17, 2006
Posts
2,480
Likes
1,573
Location
The Southern Hemisphere
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
South Fremantle, Sturt
#73
The problem is that there are so many low scoring and drab matches in recent years that follow the same script. Team A and Team B have 36 players chasing the ball around the field, stifling scoring and the chance for players to show some skills. Team A always looks likely to win but never does anything special just the bare minimum required of it; Team B is always close enough to potentially win the match if it is good enough, but never looks likely to do this. Siren sounds, teams leave field, Team A sings song in change room. Rinse and repeat next week.

A high scoring game is usually entertaining even if one sided. For example, if I was given the choice of watching these two hypothetical games, I would go for Q vs. Z rather than X vs. Y.

X 1.1 2.6 4.10 6.16-52 d. Y 0.4 3.5 4.8 6.9-45

Q 7.5 12.12 19.19 30.30-210 d. Z 5.1 11.3 14.4 17.5-107
 

iameviljez

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Oct 20, 2004
Posts
11,500
Likes
11,423
Location
Dili, Timor-Leste
AFL Club
Geelong
Other Teams
Pompey
#74
I think the 2005 and 2006 GFs were engrossing games.
They were engrossing - partially because Sydney had not won since 1933 - but they weren't great spectacles, especially not for a dry day.

Let's face it, they weren't as good as '89 or 2012 as a game.
 

Richo83

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Oct 2, 2005
Posts
19,106
Likes
6,546
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Richmond
#75
The difference between soccer and football is that often the difference between a low scoring result and a high scoring result is due to finishing, as there are plenty of matches with lots of shots on goal leading to low scoring. Sure, there are boring defensive 0-0 draws and 1-0 wins, but they're not always the case.

The difference between a high and low scoring result in football is tactics. High scoring games often involve long kicking, contested marks, open space, and low scoring games are congested, involve lots of uncontested marks and chipping of the ball. Sure, sometimes, teams struggle to score but still nevertheless try, but that's rare outside of wet weather games. It's the same as basketball; 70-90 point games are boring because they often involve defensive grinding tactics.

This is why people see low scoring games in both sports differently.
 
Top Bottom