Why women play the rough/risky game of AF? How can we get more?/Improve the AFLW? Any barriers?

[owen87]

Er can I pose a question here to anyone - If the 2018 Injury Report is correct and is highlighting the increased running injuries which are listed does this imply that area of expertise in the Clubs needs looking at.
Or does it mean that some players have inherent physical builds that tend to increase their likely-hood of picking up certain injuries.
That report is useless unless it has more of a breakdown of who got injured when and where and were there any repeats of same injuries to individuals.
I suspect the knowledge is not there yet to counter these injuries.

Increased levels of running will bring with it increased levels of risk of injury. The players cover more ground at higher speeds than ever before.

There’s only a limited amount that can be done to limit or reduce the risk; part of the issue is that these players are all significantly heavier than ‘runners’ would be, due to the other requirements of the game. So it’s a balance between being heavy and strong enough, but light and flexible enough to limit impact and overuse type injuries.

 

[jatz14]

Increased levels of running will bring with it increased levels of risk of injury. The players cover more ground at higher speeds than ever before.

There’s only a limited amount that can be done to limit or reduce the risk; part of the issue is that these players are all significantly heavier than ‘runners’ would be, due to the other requirements of the game. So it’s a balance between being heavy and strong enough, but light and flexible enough to limit impact and overuse type injuries.

A significant proportion of AFL injuries occur during training, including a fairly high proportion of ACL injuries. I would be interested in comparing the number of games lost due to injuries caused by impact, and the number caused without impact, I suspect the non impact injuries are a higher proportion. Most ACLs do not involve impact, neither do most muscle sprains and tears. Even a lot of ankle and foot injuries are due to landing wrong, or having the foot roll while changing direction. Contrary to popular assertion, broken bones are a relatively infrequent injury (as opposed to stress fractures), though fairly significant when the occur.

The significant injury resulting from contact are concussions, however, I would think they can be broken down several ways. The result of deliberate or accidental contact (hip and shoulder on a player bending to pick up the ball verse a head clash between 2 players both going for the ball). You can have high velocity collisions, or low velocity events (like an open field bump, or a sling tackle where a players head hits the ground).

Collisions in open play are rarer, but tend to be higher velocity impacts, collisions and tackles inside contests tend to be low velocity. The low velocity tackles resulting in concussion generally relate to the technique of the tackler.

Given the way the modern game is played, I do not think opening up play will reduce the injury rate, in fact, I have no doubt some injuries will increase. Even with concussion, its not clear to me that decreasing congestion will decrease the rate, certainly, there must be doubt that it would decrease it more than focusing on tackle technique, and umpires calling out dangerous tackles.

In a sense, over focusing on opening up play may in fact make the issue worse. Congestion can look poor on a TV, with 20 players within 30m of the ball, but its only the 3 or 4 players closest to the ball at any one point that have the impact. The guy standing 15m away guarding space, or waiting for the outlet pass isnt causing an injury to anyone. Its the small number involved directly in the contest.

If you spread the congestion out, you are still going to have those 3 or 4 guys at the ball, and they still have the same risk of injury, its all those guys 15 - 20 m away that arent there. However, if the ball exits this contest, as the players are spread around more, you are inevitably going to have another contest with a handful of players. The number of congested situations with most of the players in one place goes down, but the number of contested ball situation may go up, as its going to be harder to find a truly open player. Congestion going down, but contests going up isnt going to reduce the injury rate imop.

 

[BringBackTorps]

A significant[?] proportion of AFL injuries occur during training, including a fairly high proportion of ACL injuries. I would be interested in comparing the number of games lost due to injuries caused by impact, and the number caused without impact, I suspect the non impact injuries are a higher proportion. [ The constant sprinting up and down the ground, or sprinting to the interchange, are causing many non-impact injuries!]

1. What is your definition of "significant"?
I think a clear majority of injuries occur during matches, not training.

And as the previous poster correctly said, "Increased levels of running will bring with it increased levels of injury. The players cover more ground at higher speeds than ever before".
We can also add that players are, on average, heavier & stronger, so the impacts are stronger, & more likely to cause an injury. Thus, the modern game styles (ie constant flooding & interchanges, more tackles & congestion) are causing more injuries.

Prof. K. Norton (the AFL's own expert) has said that the average no. of total tackles has gone from 40 total per game in the 1980's, to 140 total now in the AFL- & that collision injuries (ie tackles/bumps/pushes/collisions) are at record highs. He suggested the interchange should be reduced to 20-40 per game maximum.
Tackle rates in the AFLW are horrendous. For safety reasons, as well as game asthetics, they need to be reduced.

I disagree with much of your other commentary, where no supporting expert views have been offered as corroboration.


2. This link below confirms the greatly increased ratings, & broadcast $, that would be attained by the AFLW if games were played every Thursday evening.
Of course, AFLW players would better be able to demonstrate their AF skills by playing in cooler evenings in summer, cf. being roasted in the hot day time sun.

There is also interesting information provided by Perth Glory owner T. Sage, re the club costs of renting out stadia (such rental cost info. is often difficult to ascertain).

Sage said
"Most clubs have kept their commercial arrangements quiet...to play at HBF Park (capacity 20,500), it costs $100,000 for 3 hours. To play at 4000 capacity Dorrien Gardens (inner Perth), it costs $5000 for 3 hours".

This indicates it is much more prudent, financially, for AFLW matches to be played at smaller capacity, 2nd tier AF grounds, cf major AFL stadia (unless big crowds can be expected).

W-League scheduling isn't to blame for 'worryingly' low crowd numbers

With furore over stagnant W-League crowds, poor timeslots and difficult locations, we took a look at why FFA and W-League clubs make the choices they do.

thewomensgame.com

EDIT:

Furthermore, the W League game (Brisbane v. Melb. City) this Thursday evening had an excellent, unusually large crowd of 2693-at Dolphin Stadium in the far northern outskirts of Brisbane! The average W League crowd in 2019/20 is c. 1500, IIRC.

This is further evidence that the AFLW has made a major mistake of not scheduling a match every Thur. evening- to minimise games when AFLW players are likely to be roasted in the hot summer sun (which then attracts the inevitable unfair criticisms that AFLW players have inadequate skills, low scoring etc.).

3 Things We Learned: Brisbane Roar vs Melbourne City

Melbourne City get the upper hand over Brisbane Roar at Dolphin Stadium.

thewomensgame.com

 

[BringBackTorps]

Teresa Zampaglione has played several sports. She plays for Fitzroy-Aust. Catholic Uni, was 2nd in the 2019 VAFAW Premier B & F awards- & has said

"The ability to meet so many new people and the community aspect is something I haven't felt until this year".

Five (Razor) Quick Questions

null

www.fitzroyfc.com.au

It is my understanding this is a common sentiment why many females enjoy playing AF- because an AF team & squad is so large, it is much easier to find kindred spirits, & form friendships. Unlike netball & basketball squads, there are simply far more females to socialise with.

Female AF clubs, generally, train more together (including lengthy pre-seasons), cf other female sports.
Also, virtually all adult women's AF clubs (excluding the old pre-2016 VWFL female clubs) have strong connections with affiliated male AF clubs.

Furthermore, female AF matches usually attract many more spectators, cf other female sports.

 

[BringBackTorps]

1. SMH V. Rugari 7.1

Many are urging the A League to research and/or move the A League (& W League) to a winter comp.

The link states that the summer heat/additional summer fatigue is reducing skills, & makes the A League less attractive for fans: thus causing the significant ratings & crowds decline.

Similar observations apply to the AFLW, where the women are often being criticised for skill deficiencies. This is unfair to the AFLW, as these skill deficiencies are , often, directly caused by playing in strong heat/more sweaty hands/sweat & suntan lotion in eyes etc.
The AFLW should remain as a summer comp.- crucial clean air from the AFL/more MSM attention etc. Daytime games should be kept to a minimum with many more games starting at 6 pm & 8 pm; & Thurs. AFLW games every week, starting c. 7pm.

Open season: A-League urged to explore feasibility of winter switch

Thirty years after the idea of summer soccer was first raised, there is a growing belief within some sections of the game that the A-League may be better off in winter.

www.smh.com.au

2. B. Brownless' views on women playing AF.

He is foolish when he says " I still don't know if girls should play footy, I'm not sure".

He is correct, however, when he refers to the higher injury rates of female AF players, which would be a valid concern for many parents, players & potential female players. These injury rates must be reduced- which they should be with better training, learning how to roll & knee strengthening exercises.

Billy Brownless slammed for views on women's football

Former AFL star Billy Brownless has come under fire for his views on women’s football, after the media personality said he “still doesn’t know”…

www.theroar.com.au

Hawthorn President J. Kennett also expresses, in 2018, his concerns (which he states are held by others) at the higher injury rates in female AF.

Kennett “happy” Hawks don’t have an AFLW team

Hawthorn President Jeff Kennett isn’t shy to express his feelings about the Hawks not having an AFLW team.

www.sen.com.au

"Leading Australian Sports Clinician and Researcher Dr Peter Brukner admits the number of ACL injuries in the AFLW is concerning".
Hopefully, when the ugly, heavily congested, very high tackle rates in female AF decline, the injury rates will be reduced.

Number of ACL injuries in AFLW a "major concern" says former Olympics doctor

It's an average of one per club a year.

www.sen.com.au

3. Richmond is moving its big games to Carlton's Princes Park, due to the capacity of Punt Rd being only c.5000.

The biggest crowds possible attending all AFLW matches should be a main KPI- as they will help promote/glamourise the AFLW, which is directly responsible for GR female AF boom.

https://www.richmondfc.com.au/news/551402/richmond-aflw-home-games-moved-to-ikon-park

 

[BringBackTorps]

The "Rise With Us" new AFLW ad is a very good slogan; & the ad visual is OK.





IMO, the Rise With Us slogan would have been far more effective & visually stimulating, with videos of AFLW players taking hangers eg one of T. Harris' or C. Scheer hangers.




Showing women taking hangers also would :-

. be very exciting for girls & women (& footy-loving dads of aforementioned!)

. encourage "disinterested" GR club officials to introduce and/or promote female AF in their clubs (ditto, school sports' masters).
(Only c. 1% of GR snr male players can take at least 1 hanger each season)

. highlight/reinforce AF's crucial, spectacular & "superior" point of difference with all other sports

. encourage more appeal for the AFLW amongst the neutral, disinterested and "anti female AF" AFL followers.


Also, having the Pointer Sisters' song "Jump" must be part of the background audio of any AFLW ad!







or would Eddie's song, also called "Jump", be better?

 

[Biggie]

The "Rise With Us" new AFLW ad is a very good slogan; & the ad visuals is OK.





IMO, the Rise With Us slogan would have been far more effective & visually stimulating, with video of an AFLW player taking a hanger eg one of T. Harris' hangers.
Showing women taking hangers also would :-

. be very exciting for girls & women (& footy-loving dads of aforementioned!)
. illustrate AF's crucial, spectacular & "superior" point of difference with all other sports
. encourage more appeal for the AFLW amongst the neutral, disinterested and "anti female AF" AFL followers.

AFLW ad or Special K ad?

 

[BringBackTorps]

AFLW ad or Special K ad?

1. Yes, you are correct. It's primarily a Special K ad- but using the AFLW as it's background theme.

2. This was the specific AFLW ad, used in early 2019 ("This Is Gen W"), to promote the AFLW & female GR AF. IMO, it was dull, & not particularly inspiring to get females to play GR AF, or watch the AFLW.

AFLW Latest Videos - AFL.com.au/aflw

Latest AFLW videos from the official website of the Australian Football League.

womens.afl

Show T. Harris etc hangers, with pumping "Jump" songs- attention grabber, & exciting!
"Rise With Us" is an excellent slogan for female GR & AFLW AF advertising, the best ever IMO.

 

[BringBackTorps]

Pursuit Uni. Melb. website P. Hanlon October 2017

Prof. P. Brukner gives a brief outline of the huge advances in sports' medicine & research over the last 4 decades. Also, far superior injury prevention training now.

Re serious knee injuries (which females have 5-6 times more propensity to experience), Dr Morris "...view(s) it as an 18 month to two year recovery process".

Dr. Schache said "Maybe the demands of the game have increased substantially (my emphasis). Yes, we might get better at preventing injury, but the game keeps asking more and more ".

These comments don't bode well for the AFLW & AFL (& GR AF, where flooding & high tackle rates are also becoming far more prevalent), where currently there are extremely high rates of tackling & sprinting.

Knee deep in footy injuries

Sports medicine has made huge advances into treating knee injuries; University of Melbourne experts discuss the prevention of injuries, especially in AFL.

pursuit.unimelb.edu.au

 

[jatz14]

Pursuit Uni. Melb. website P. Hanlon October 2017

Prof. P. Brukner gives a brief outline of the huge advances in sports' medicine & research over the last 4 decades. Also, far superior injury prevention training now.

Re serious knee injuries (which females have 5-6 times more propensity to experience), Dr Morris "...view(s) it as an 18 month to two year recovery process".

Dr. Schache said "Maybe the demands of the game have increased substantially (my emphasis). Yes, we might get better at preventing injury, but the game keeps asking more and more ".

These comments don't bode well for the AFLW & AFL (& GR AF, where flooding & high tackle rates are also becoming far more prevalent), where currently there are extremely high rates of tackling & sprinting.

Knee deep in footy injuries

Sports medicine has made huge advances into treating knee injuries; University of Melbourne experts discuss the prevention of injuries, especially in AFL.

pursuit.unimelb.edu.au

Ban the game.

If injuries are the over riding concern, it's the only solution.

Changing the modern game so it looks more like the old fashioned slog fest doesn't fix anything, because old fashioned footy, had a high injury rate, especially things like broken jaws.

Look at vision of the players from the 80s, built like tanks, because you needed that physique to not get beat the * up every game.

Sent from my XT1068 using Tapatalk

 

[owen87]

Ban the game.

If injuries are the over riding concern, it's the only solution.

Changing the modern game so it looks more like the old fashioned slog fest doesn't fix anything, because old fashioned footy, had a high injury rate, especially things like broken jaws.

Look at vision of the players from the 80s, built like tanks, because you needed that physique to not get beat the fu** up every game.

Sent from my XT1068 using Tapatalk

Yep, if you want 0 rates of injury then ban the sport completely.

Every sport has risks, the more contact and movement required then the higher those risks will be.

The players willingly choose to participate, and aside from providing best practice injury pre-habilitiation to minimise risks along with suitable coaching regarding tackling techniques and such, there's little we can do.

Women are physically more predisposed to various injuries than men are, short of banning women competing, the public and participants will just have to accept it.

I don't buy in to this whole 'oh let's reduce the tackling to make more girls want to participate' - it's a full contact sport, having 20% less tackles isn't going to suddenly inspire girls with no interest in full contact sport to get involved.

 

[jatz14]

Yep, if you want 0 rates of injury then ban the sport completely.

Every sport has risks, the more contact and movement required then the higher those risks will be.

The players willingly choose to participate, and aside from providing best practice injury pre-habilitiation to minimise risks along with suitable coaching regarding tackling techniques and such, there's little we can do.

Women are physically more predisposed to various injuries than men are, short of banning women competing, the public and participants will just have to accept it.

I don't buy in to this whole 'oh let's reduce the tackling to make more girls want to participate' - it's a full contact sport, having 20% less tackles isn't going to suddenly inspire girls with no interest in full contact sport to get involved.

When asked what they like about the sport, the single biggest answer is, tackling.

Plenty of sports available for women who don't want contact, and those that are worried by it will not play

The sort of changes to the game required to have such an impact on the physical aspect of the game, that it reduces the perception of risk in the sport, will drive people away and reduce participation by both men and women imop.

The aspects of the sport that create the risk, create the appeal.

Indeed, for the women taking up the sport, the risk IS part of the appeal.

Men trying to control risk for women (in their own best interests of course) is one of the things women are rebelling against.


Sent from my XT1068 using Tapatalk

 

[owen87]

The sort of changes to the game required to have such an impact on the physical aspect of the game, that it reduces the perception of risk in the sport, will drive people away and reduce participation by both men and women imop.

I think the rule changes to make the game 'different' between men and women is only ever going to end up with less interest, the women's version will be seen as different-inferior and reduce public interest. Once every AFL team has an aligned Women's side i think there'll be more consistent engagement and interest. I know for me I have limited interest in the women's game because Essendon doesn't have a side, and since the people I knew who did play aren't involved any more, I have no particular team I'm engaged in seeing play each week.

 

[BringBackTorps]

Yep, if you want 0 rates of injury then ban the sport completely.[Weak- no one is suggesting this]
... the more contact and movement required [Good description of the current congested, scrappy tackleball crap] then the higher those risks will be.[Exactly!]

The players willingly choose to participate, and aside from providing best practice injury pre-habilitiation to minimise risks along with suitable coaching regarding tackling techniques and such, there's little we can do.[Prof. K. Norton, the AFL's own expert on game analysis, who said there are record nos. of "collision " injuries now in the AFL, wants the interchange reduced to 20 per team]

Women are physically more predisposed to various injuries than men are...[Exactly]

 

[BringBackTorps]

When asked what they like about the sport, the single biggest [?] answer is, tackling. [Evidence? Also, if this was true, then female AF has a very poor future- they will all eventually choose to play RL or RU, or wrestling]
Sent from my XT1068 using Tapatalk

 

[owen87]

things

Complete nonsense of a reply, if you can't have a discussion then don't even bother.

None of what you wrote in any way addresses that so long as AFL remains a full contact, 360 degree sport, there will be injuries.

Nothing you can do besides stopping people participating completely will ever eliminate the risk of injury, no matter how much you despise tackling, or how many experts you try to quote to defend your position regarding tackling.

Tackling does not suddenly make the AFL in to Rugby, they're completely different games, with different styles of play, and suggesting that because we tackle more in AFL than we used to, that suddenly players will take up Rugby - or Wrestling - is disingenuous as best.

Short of so radically changing the rules of the sport that participants are forced to play like it's the 70s, there will never be a return to the game of 30 - 40 years ago.

Also, for the love of god, can you learn to reply properly since it's impossible to have any form of discussion with how you format your posts.

 

[jatz14]

Evidence is all the interviews I have watched (most of them). Especially the code hoppers asked about the physicality. You want to review the evidence, look at the interviews.

Sent from my XT1068 using Tapatalk

 

[jatz14]

I think the rule changes to make the game 'different' between men and women is only ever going to end up with less interest, the women's version will be seen as different-inferior and reduce public interest. Once every AFL team has an aligned Women's side i think there'll be more consistent engagement and interest. I know for me I have limited interest in the women's game because Essendon doesn't have a side, and since the people I knew who did play aren't involved any more, I have no particular team I'm engaged in seeing play each week.

This has been my main concern with different rules. People will interpret any difference from men's footy as inferiority.

Even rules adapted to women's strengths will be seen through the prism of an adaptation made to compensate for interiority.

Sent from my XT1068 using Tapatalk

 

[Cdog71]

This has been my main concern with different rules. People will interpret any difference from men's footy as inferiority.

Even rules adapted to women's strengths will be seen through the prism of an adaptation made to compensate for interiority.

Sent from my XT1068 using Tapatalk

Exactly
If women’s participation is showing as the fastest growing sport in Aus, obviously theyre wanting to play the game as they know it.

 

[Cdog71]

When asked what they like about the sport, the single biggest [?] answer is, tackling. [Evidence? Also, if this was true, then female AF has a very poor future- they will all eventually choose to play RL or RU, or wrestling]
[/QUOTE]
That is probably the worst arguement you’ve put forward

 

[owen87]

This has been my main concern with different rules. People will interpret any difference from men's footy as inferiority.

Even rules adapted to women's strengths will be seen through the prism of an adaptation made to compensate for interiority.

Sent from my XT1068 using Tapatalk

The other thing is that I've seen a few of the AFLW players comment that they play football because they want to play the same game the men play, not a highly modified version. There's some room or allowance for difference, but not significantly so.

Using the AFLW as a testing ground for rule changes that may or may not make it to the main AFL season isn't a good look, as it's painting the women's comp as just another sideshow to the main game, effectively on-par with the preseason games for the men.

We know the game has changed over time, and likely will continue to do so even without meddling with the rules. Particularly for the women as new players come in with continuous playtime through juniors allowing for better skills, and as the comp gets more professional, a higher level of fitness.

They just need to give it time, I think all 18 AFL sides having a women's team will lead to generally increased interest since people will have a peripheral investment in how 'their' team goes against their nemesis, whether it's men or women playing.

 

[Teen Wolf]

The 2019 AFLW Injury Report states ACLs and concussions decreased (and the latter was managed more conservatively) last season. Further, even to the naked eye there's been a dramatic improvement league-wide since 2017 in tackling techniques and the execution of ground-ball and aerial contests--anybody who doesn't know that has simply not been watching/paying attention.

Digging up articles from 3 years ago just to say "boo!" is rather flimsy and unnecessary.

 

[jatz14]

The 2019 AFLW Injury Report states ACLs and concussions decreased (and the latter was managed more conservatively) last season. Further, even to the naked eye there's been a dramatic improvement league-wide since 2017 in tackling techniques and the execution of ground-ball and aerial contests--anybody who doesn't know that has simply not been watching/paying attention.

Digging up articles from 3 years ago just to say "boo!" is rather flimsy and unnecessary.

Already, 3 of the ACLs this year are in training, and a bunch of them last year as well. A large part of how much more likely it is to see an ACL in a footy club, is the number of players involved. AFL clubs have more players, and train more.

Sent from my XT1068 using Tapatalk

 

[BringBackTorps]

because old fashioned footy, had a high injury rate, especially things like broken jaws.

Prof. K. Norton has said that collision injuries (tackling/bumping/pushing/colliding) are at record highs in the modern era.
There are fewer broken jaws now, because the bumping laws/duty of care have been considerably tightened; & all games are televised, with more cameras.

Look at vision of the players from the 80s, built like tanks

Players, on average, are heavier now than the 80's- & because they are fitter & running faster (due to 4 on the bench=more rests; & more interchange=more rests), & more players getting to many more contests (congestion), collisions etc more frequent & are heavier, causing more injuries.
Also, it is usually sprinting that causes hamstring injuries (ie not jogging or slower running). The current style of constant flooding the length of the ground causes much more sprinting.

The players willingly choose to participate, and aside from providing best practice injury pre-habilitiation to minimise risks along with suitable coaching regarding tackling techniques and such, there's little we can do

The AFL, medical experts etc. disagree "there's little we can do". Multiple rule changes have been introduced to make the game safer.

No one is claiming the only option is to ban the game, or make it unrecognisable to the traditional game of AF- such absurd comments indicate you (& others) are unwilling to address the issues with reasoned & valid arguments (supported by expert opinion). There's "a lot we can do"- & should do to make the game safer.

Are you aware of a current class action against the AFL? And its implications?

I think the rule changes to make the game 'different' between men and women is only ever going to end up with less interest

I disagree. Men and women have very different bodies & capabilities- this is why we have smaller footballs, & some different rules in the AFLW.
There is plenty of interest in the AFLW, it has the 2nd highest crowd average in the world for a stand-alone, non-international, seasonal women's team comp.

Nothing you can do besides stopping people participating completely will ever eliminate the risk of injury, no matter how much you despise tackling, or how many experts you try to quote to defend your position regarding tackling.

I have never said, nor implied, the AFL should attempt to eliminate the risk of injury. I have never said, nor implied, I "despise" tackling.
I have said (citing the AFL's own Charter Of The Game, & many AF experts) that I want to see more free flowing play & less stoppages/less tackling.

Tackling does not suddenly make the AFL in to Rugby, they're completely different games, with different styles of play, and suggesting that because we tackle more in AFL than we used to, that suddenly players will take up Rugby - or Wrestling - is disingenuous as best.

Obviously, this was a literary flourish on my part. The AFL & many AF experts have said they dislike the current scrappy, increased tackling/constant stoppages style. AF was traditionally a much more free flowing game, cf RU & RL.
The AFL Charter Of The Game requires that AF should, to maximise fan & player appeal, be played in an attacking, free flowing style, reasonably high scoring, with much high marking, long kicking and one-on-one contests. The AFL has said it wants the AFL & AFLW game-styles to reflect The Charter.

The vast majority of AF experts agree with the Charter- I am not aware of ANY independent AF expert who DISAGREES with it.

Evidence is all the interviews I have watched (most of them). Especially the code hoppers asked about the physicality. You want to review the evidence, look at the interviews.

I am aware that many females, in interviews etc., have specifically mentioned they enjoy the tackling or physicality aspect of AF- I have referred myself on BF that tackling etc. is a very big part of the appeal of AF for many females.
I have never, however, heard a female say the "biggest" (to use your words) reason they enjoy playing AF is simply because of tackling. AF's requirement to master kicking, marking, handballing, running with the ball & bouncing it are the unique skills of AF, which provide most appeal for players & fans.

When AF fans discuss the appeal of AF to a person not exposed to AF, AF fans usually highlight the long kicking, high marking, running with the ball & bouncing it etc. These fans don't highlight the tackling, although it will, of course, be mentioned.

The issues being debated are:-

. the extent & frequency of tackling/bumping/pushing & collisions. These are related to the very heavy congestion & stoppages, much more frequent ball-ups we have had in the last 15 years approx.

. the tackling/bumping/pushing/collision consequences

. the current game style is the antithesis of the AFL's own Charter Of The Game.

. how to maximise the fan & broadcaster appeal of the AFLW.

When I have raised the Charter with you before, you (& others) have either ignored it, or deflected from the aims of The Charter.

Very worryingly for the AFL & the AFLW comp., the AFLW ratings are in decline (despite average skill levels & scoring rising each year).
The Channel 7 broadcasters publicly criticised, in 2019, the AFLW game styles & ratings- & removed the AFLW, after a few weeks, from their main channel.
The AFL, many AFLW players & fans, & I hope, eventually, that the AFLW will become a full time comp. You (& others) also ignore, or deflect, from Ch.7's adverse AFLW comments & the very serious implications of the AFLW ratings' decline.

We know that the female Melb. V. Footscray exhibition games, prior to 2017, rated extremely highly (up to c. 1,000,000). They were played in a much more free flowing style, with much less congestion & stoppages.. The gamestyle received much praise from the AFL, AF experts, fans & broadcasters. You (& others) also ignore, or deflect from this.
AFLW players do have good skills-allow them the time & space to display their football skills. Crowds & ratings will rise!

Digging up articles from 3 years ago just to say "boo!" is rather flimsy and unnecessary.

It is good you are citing expert opinion- there should be more of it on BF.

The facts are that female GR & AFLW players are, still, about 5-6 more times (some say more) likely to suffer the terrible effects of a serious knee injury; and have about double the rate of concussions.
Are you suggesting the expert medical opinions on AF, from Oct. 2017, I provided are no longer relevant? if so, why?

Dennis Cometti, one of Australia's most respected & experienced commentators, is another of the many (see post #239 above) AFL experts who have publicy expressed their dislike over the current ugly congested, scrappy, stoppages-infested game style.
The AFL Commission Chairman, R. Goyder, also has concerns. In a late August, 2018 game, an amazing 154 AFL players were unavailable due to injury- & a further 45 had to pass a fitness test! This is an indictment on the game, & imperils its future.

PressReader.com - Digital Newspaper & Magazine Subscriptions

Digital newsstand featuring 7000+ of the world’s most popular newspapers & magazines. Enjoy unlimited reading on up to 5 devices with 7-day free trial.

www.pressreader.com

No Cookies | Herald Sun

No Cookies

www.heraldsun.com.au

Here, under the heading "Reflecting On The Past Will Help Save The Game", D. Cometti sets out, on 27.7.18, his very detailed set of rule changes that are necessary to rid the game of its very ugly congestion & stoppages. AFL average game ratings are also in a long term decline (on raw & per capita nos.)- ominous for the AFL: we are losing many casual TV sports' fans with the low-scoring, scrappy game style.

No Cookies | Herald Sun

No Cookies

www.heraldsun.com.au

(behind a paywall -can anyone open it? Article also in The West Australian)

 

[owen87]

Prof. K. Norton has said that collision injuries (tackling/bumping/pushing/colliding) are at record highs in the modern era.
There are fewer broken jaws now, because the bumping laws/duty of care have been considerably tightened; & all games are televised, with more cameras.


Players, on average, are heavier now than the 80's- & because they are fitter & running faster (due to 4 on the bench=more rests; & more interchange=more rests), collisions etc are heavier, causing more injuries.
Also, it is usually sprinting that causes hamstring injuries (ie not jogging or slower running). The current style of constant flooding the length of the ground causes much more sprinting.


The AFL, medical experts etc. disagree "there's little we can do". Multiple rule changes have been introduced to make the game safer.

No one is claiming the only option is to ban the game, or make it unrecognisable to the traditional game of AF- such absurd comments indicate you (& others) are unwilling to address the issues with reasoned & valid arguments (supported by expert opinion). There's "a lot we can do"- & should do to make the game safer.

Are you aware of a current class action against the AFL? And its implications?


I disagree. Men and women have very different bodies & capabilities- this is why we have smaller footballs, & some different rules in the AFLW.
There is plenty of interest in the AFLW, it has the 2nd highest crowd average in the world for a stand-alone, non-international, seasonal women's team comp.


I have never said, or implied, the AFL should attempt to eliminate the risk of injury.
I have never said, nor implied, I "despise" tackling. I have said (supporting the AFL's own Charter Of The Game) that I want to see more free flowing play & less stoppages/less tackling.


Obviously, this was a literary flourish on my part. Many AF experts have said they dislike the heavy tackling & constant stoppages, AF was traditionally a much more free flowing game, cf RU & RL.
The AFL Charter Of The Game requires that AF should, to maximise fan & player appeal, be played in an attacking, free flowing style, reasonably high scoring, with much high marking, long kicking and one-on-one contacts. The AFL has said it wants the AFL & AFLW game-styles to reflect The Charter.

The vast majority of AF experts agree with the Charter- I am not aware of ANY independent AF expert who DISAGREES with it.


I am aware that many females, in interviews etc., have specifically mentioned they enjoy the tackling aspect of AF- I have referred myself on BF that tackling is a very big part of the appeal of AF for many females.
I have never, however, heard a female say the "biggest" (to use your words) reason they enjoy playing AF is simply because of tackling. AF's requirement to master kicking, marking, handballing, running with the ball & bouncing it are the unique skills of AF, which provide most appeal for players & fans.

When AF fans discuss the appeal of AF to a person not exposed to AF, AF fans usually highlight the long kicking, high marking, running with the ball & bouncing it etc. These fans don't highlight the tackling, although it will, of course, be mentioned.

The issues being debated are:-

. the extent & frequency of tackling/bumping/pushing & collisions. These are related to the very heavy congestion & stoppages, much more frequent ball-ups we have had in the last 15 years approx.

. the tackling/bumping/pushing/collision consequences

. the current game style is the antithesis of the AFL's own Charter Of The Game.

. how to maximise the fan appeal of the AFLW.

When I have raised the Charter with you before, you (& others) have either ignored it, or deflected from the aims of The Charter.

Very worryingly for the AFL & the AFLW comp., the AFLW ratings are in decline (despite average skill levels rising each year).
The Channel 7 broadcasters publicly criticised, in 2019, the AFLW game styles & ratings- & removed the AFLW, after a few weeks, from their main channel.
The AFL, many AFLW players & fans & myself hope, eventually, that the AFLW will become a full time comp. You also ignore, or deflect, from the very serious implications of the AFLW ratings' decline.

We know that the female Melb. V. Footscray exhibition games, prior to 2017, rated extremely highly (up to c. 1,000,000). They were played in a much more free flowing style, with much less congestion. The gamestyle received much praise from the AFL, AF experts, fans & broadcasters. You (& others) also ignore, or deflect from this.
AFLW players do have good skills-allow them the time & space to display their AF skills. The fans & broadcasters will be very appreciative!



It is good you are citing expert opinion- there should be more of it on BF.

The facts are that female GR & AFLW players are, still, about 5-6 more times likely to suffer the terrible effects of a serious knee injury; and have about double the rate of concussions.
Are you suggesting the expert medical opinions, from Oct. 2017, I provided are no longer relevant? if so, why?

I have a particular hatred for people that post the way you do; trying to dissect a post line by line is nothing but trolling. You wouldn't do it in a normal conversation and it's a peculiarity to the online forum style of discussion. But I appreciate you quoting in such a way that allows follow-up.

Players, on average, are heavier now than the 80's

They're also significantly taller, perhaps that has something to do with it. Taller and leaner due to the athletic requirements and being full-time athletes, compared to the more stocky or solid builds of the past.

The AFL, medical experts etc. disagree "there's little we can do". Multiple rule changes have been introduced to make the game safer.

Where on earth did you get the idea that when I specifically mention coaching correct techniques for tackling and being tackled, and using best practice pre-habilitation, that I said there was nothing we could do. I disagree with so completely changing the rules of the game to force a 70s style look (that you seem to be idealising), or that there's ever going to be an injury rate of 0.

Are you aware of a current class action against the AFL? And its implications?

You mean the class action for when the game looked less like the modern one, with less duty of care for players? Aside from forcing the AFL (and basically every sporting league on earth) to keep up with best-practice for concussion management, given it's still a very unknown area of medicine, what other implications are you going to propose it has?

I disagree. Men and women have very different bodies & capabilities- this is why we have smaller footballs, & some different rules in the AFLW.

The women want to play football, not modified-for-girls-football, but real football like the men they watch on TV.

Are you suggesting we ban lateral movement and jumping since those are far more likely to cause an ACL injury than running in straight lines. Sprinting should also be banned because that increases risks of hamstring injuries. Also tackling, since that risks concussion.

So sure, let's have a game where players can only run in straight lines at low - moderate speed, without jumping, or tackling. Low risk enough?

There is plenty of interest in the AFLW, it has the 2nd highest crowd average in the world for a stand-alone, non-international, seasonal women's team comp.

AFL is also one of, if not, the highest attending sports on earth given our population. It stands to reason that would flow on to the women's games. In anything it shows the AFL has done a reasonable job in translating interest from traditional AFL supporters in to support for the women's team.

I have never said, nor implied, I "despise" tackling. I have said (supporting the AFL's own Charter Of The Game) that I want to see more free flowing play & less stoppages/less tackling.

You consistently refer to the sport as 'tackleball' if you don't despise it you have a very peculiar way of expressing that.

The AFL Charter Of The Game requires that AF should, to maximise fan & player appeal, be played in an attacking, free flowing style, reasonably high scoring, with much high marking, long kicking and one-on-one contacts. The AFL has said it wants the AFL & AFLW game-styles to reflect The Charter.

The Charter you so love to refer to has exactly 0 relationship to teams playing to win games, and short of introducing a set of rules that so completely limit the coaches ability to, well, coach. The game will never be what you obsess over. It certainly won't be a competitive competition, it'll be a series of psuedo-competitive exhibition games.

You have a specific dislike for the current 'look' of AFL and AFLW games, that shows through in almost every post you make on the topic.