By Savvas Tzionis
March 28th 2008 @ 1:39am
Loading ...Roar tip: the most cheered 'Roar of the crowd' article each day goes to the top middle column of the homepage. So cheer articles you like and keep the best floating to the top.
---------------
Modern rugby league is better than AFL
I am a born and bred Aussie Rules fan. I once thought it was the greatest sport in the world. Not anymore.
To illustrate my point, I make the following comparison to the reigning sport north of Wagga Wagga, rugby league.
I have not attended an AFL match since 2000 for the simple reason that the game has become terribly boring.
I have actually been a critic of the game since 1994 when I first detected it was starting to deteriorate as a spectacle due to the clogging up of the play.
It has steadily become worse with “flooding” and various other defensive tactics now ever-present. You only have to look at the current scoring rates compared to the 80s and early 90s to see what I mean.
I have also noticed the virtual demise of our game’s greatest asset, the high mark (not to mention the complete demise of the Torpedo Punt).
Coincidental, or perhaps as a consequence, I started watching rugby league more often. In 2002 it dawned on me, whilst watching the relative final series of the two codes, that I was enjoying league more than AFL!
This was quite a shock as I was once a strong proponent of the term “Thugby” to describe league.
I draw the following comparisons in light of my “conversion” (pardon the pun!):
DURATION
The problem with AFL, is that the game is quite long (2 hours). In the old days, when the game had artistry and flair, it was simply a matter of getting more value for your dollar. Nowadays, the first quarter is like the first act of a long boring play, whereas in League, you know that each minute is quite important due to the short duration (80 minutes) of the game.
STYLE
One criticism that non-Aussie Rules people had of Aussie Rules was of its unorganised style. The critics probably didn’t appreciate that the flair, artistry and varied skills, depended, perhaps, on the unorganized nature of the sport. Unfortunately this disorganisation now just looks like “unorganised rugby union” with just as many packs but virtually no rules governing them!!! With Rugby League, the play (at least from a TV watchers perspective) is clearly defined. It is neat and crisp with very few grey areas.
UMPIRING
Free kicks reduced by between 30% and 70%, whereas ball-ups increased to a similar extent between 1994 until around 2005. Umpires became scared to pay free kicks. The AFL have made efforts to rectify this situation but the game has continued to adapt. The packs have to some extent dissipated recently but the coaches have flooded the backlines to an even greater extent and have perfected the art of chipping the ball around to each other. I never seem to hear the same angst from fans of league when it comes to umpiring. I think the fact that league appointed (Bill?) Harrigan every year over a period of time to the major games shows that there was consistency and relative satisfaction when it comes to refereeing in league.
ROMANTICISM
It helps that an “underdog” can occasionally win the premiership. In Rugby League we had Penrith in 2003 after a string of victories by the usual ‘top dogs’. And it has continued with the victory of the Western Tigers in 2005 (who also beat another lesser team in the Northern Queenslanders). Rugby League has also been assisted by the 7 different premiers over the last 7 years.
AFL, by contrast, has been dominated recently by the Interstate teams and, prior to that period, by the top dogs in Victoria.
Sydney’s win in 2005 was romantic in a very narrow sense. The team left South Melbourne 25 years ago and the manner they won the game left many of us less than enamoured with them. Conversely, that years NRL grand final brought together 2 Cinderella teams that played a very entertaining brand of League. Ok, Wests Tigers is a joint venture, but at least they are still in Sydney. And they still play at their old grounds (a point I will get to later).
Geelong’s win last year ended the drought for one of the perennial losers (finally!!). But even that only highlighted the comparison with the great Geelong teams of the Blight era from 1989-1995. Back then, playing offensive football, they lost 4 Grand Finals, 2 of them to the ultra defensive West Coast Eagles! Their modern equivalent did not display any of the flair evident back then. It just highlights how Australian Rules has changed.
VENUE’S
The use of the historical/traditional grounds is another major contrast:
* AFL in Melbourne uses 2 grounds
* NRL in Sydney uses at least 6 grounds
The use of different venues engenders and keeps the regional aspect of the teams and who they represent. Here in Melbourne we have lost that.
There are other comparisons (in rugby league’s favour) I could draw upon such as the State of Origin matches.
But as a starting point for discussion, perhaps this is enough.
Free Email updates:
Our daily emails are only sent if there is content for the sport or that author. You can subscribe to multiple daily emails; or get the daily Roar email with all our content in it. We value privacy. More...
(228)
Michael C said | March 28th 2008 @ 9:11am | Report comment
I’m struggling with some of your points.
Romance - I can see soccers FA Cup as about the only ‘romantic’ reality in sport. Most other romance is imagined. Maybe you’ve just grown up and it’s not like it used to be.
Romance - Geelong did NOT display flair?? Where are you coming from? Gary Ablett Junior is all flair, Paul Chapman is rugged flair, they played an aggresive play on style of game all year - it was known that they would almost always play on - stopping it was another thing altogether.
Romance - North and Collingwood making the top 4 - both expected to be bottom of the ladder. Winning the cup is the only measure. In fact, undeserved winners simply demean the competition. Does not the immediate success of Storm in ‘99 demean the NRL?
Btw - who do you barrack for? Not Richmond or Carlton per chance?
Are you a paid up member - I doubt it - if you haven’t attended since 2000. Which means you’re perhaps trapped to watching it on tele - which is the reality of your article then - that Rugby League is a better TV spectacle. And you’ve stated that. If you’re happy with the RL bogan commentators, the count of 6 tackles, the players gauging their performance NOT on possessions/disposals/goals but on tackles!!! If you’re happy with only one goal kicker and such a disrespect for kicking and goals that field goals have been reduced to 1 point and reserved only to avoid a drawn game……..if you happy with off-side and imaginary lines across the field and everybody facing each other all day in opposing lines rather than one on one match ups across the field etc, ……..then you’ve suitably ‘turned’.
AFL - the game evolves. I’m dirty on 4 on the bench and too many interchanges and less on ground rotation and the pace of the game being too great. However, the fact that teams have to try to congest the play is largely related to the fact they no longer play on grounds with a muddy cricket pitch in the middle - that was a ‘natural’ congester - take that away, and suddenly every game can be played like it’s March.
Sytle of Play -
this is a point of view one - surely. Rugby is a very, very structured ye olde battlefield style game - Union especially is all about what you can’t do. Where is the instinctive play? The make it up as you go play. My main gripe with AFL has been over coaching by coaches who coach the flair out of players - refreshing then to hear young Bachar Houli from Essendon stating that he’s actually being encouraged to be more daring. If you’re not excited watching Dale Thomas or Lance Franklin, Kosi and Jonathan Brown, Boomer Harvey or the Davey boys etc etc - then perhaps you are getting a little old and requiring the slow lane - so, please, keep left.
What to one person is ‘disorganised’ - such as the Rugby Union rolling mauls with bodies flayed and people seeming NOT concerned about possession of the ball - is quite something else to the ‘followers of the game’. The reality of Aust Footy is that the ‘live’ ball is contested - and with no knock on and no structure via off-side and tackle counts etc - well, gee, it’s a little unpredictable. Rugby League is quite predictable. Because of it’s ‘organisation’.
However - in AFL I’d love to see a rule brought in that no more than 2 tacklers will be rewarded with a free kick - I am sick of seeing 4 tacklers jump all over a fellow on the ground to hold the ball in. That is ugly and umpires perhaps need to place a greater requirement on a ‘legal’ tackle.
AFL (umpires) needs not to be afraid of ‘bouncing the ball’ - as, the neutral restart is a key feature as compared to turn sharing in other sports.
and - the ball up provides for the crucial skills and abilities of the ‘followers’ - the Ruckman, the rover and ruck-rover. Without which, there can be too great a sameness across the field. We must NOT devalue the roles of the variety of body types.
State of Origin - I went to the one recently at Telstra Dome - 75 mins of boredom before QLD suddenly came to life and almost justified the preceding 75 mins of people runnings 3 paces into a tackle……
remember, AFL/VFL HAD state of origin. But - when there’s more than just 2 states, and you have state based games each week - then, State of Origin died a natural death. I wouldn’t mind, now, in the full draft era and further removed from start up local concessions - I wouldn’t mind ever 4 years a SoO carnival - - but, the regular season competition IS DIMINISHED by SoO in RL. The players doubling up in a week or being unavailable - the regular season contest is compromised. Not enhanced. The reality is that AFL folk prioritised the club competition - for the premiership - ahead of the state bragging rights. RL SoO is just a reminder of a 2 state code.
Venues wise - the suburban grounds are fine for suburban comps - I’ll go down to Port Melbourne or Coburg and watch a ‘VFL’ game - but, thank god the AFL has out grown those and we can average 36K attendance per game. Have a bit of real rather than imagined atmosphere - have you tried taking kids to those old grounds with crap toilets, crap seating, crap roofing - - have you actually been to Telstra Dome and checked out the food court and the parents rooms???? Have you been to the further revamped MCG? I’m a NOrth Melbourne person and Arden St is a happy memory - by that, I’m happy it’s a memory - it was a dingy little inner suburban ground - yeah, history - not for me, I was from the country - it’s not the ground at the end of the street - to me, it was dirty, cramped, required a walk through industrial streets from the station…….
what I do love though, via local footy - people now get to play on grounds like Glenferrie Oval - and you realise just how bad it would be to still be playing top level footy there. Especially for vehicle access, but also the grounds were not always that big and you’d be complaining about the cramped congested play and muddy cricket pitches in the middle of the ground.
Which returns me to believe that you either just felt like a whinge and lament for your romantic notion of the good old days - or that your trying a bit of code vs code.
sledgeross said | March 28th 2008 @ 11:56am | Report comment
Michael C,
I think you are the biased whinger mate, because they are valid points!
It just comes down to opinions, doesnt it?
Obviously you are ignorant of Rugby League. The young Tigers won their premeiership based on flair and attack, while the unfancied Panthers were victorious over the latte sipping Roosters in wet conditions in 03. Thats fairytale stuff. Sattlers cover tackle of Todd Byrne to put him into touch, Benji Marshalls no look flick pass to Pat Richards. Comparable to Cinderella. The romance is there for sure. I agree that the Cats play a fantastic style of play. Rugged, mobile defenders, fast, skillfull midfielders and talented forwards. They are good to watch and are certainly a bright spark in the AFL.
As for your assertions about Rugby League in general, bah humbug! AFL has plenty of wanker commentators as well. Sam Newman is probably the biggest one going around! Players are not merely gauged on tackles, but many other facets as well. It is dependent on your position. The reason why kicking for goal has been so “undervalued” is because onus is placed more on attacking footy, and scoring tries. Look at the mundane nature of Rugby Union. The technical interpretation mean 3 points for a penalty kick, plus 3 for drop goals. No wonder teams dont back themselves to score “meat pies”. I cant comprehend your point on RL being predictable? Yes, you know that each team will have 6 tackles, that each half is 40 minutes, and the scrums are a non-event (dont get me started!), but the same could be said of AFL as well. Just because the game covers more area doesnt equate it to being any less predictable. Each team will play to their strengths. Thats professional sport. Besides the occasional glimmer from a Dale Thomas etc, AFL has become possession based more than ever.
“The reality is that AFL folk prioritised the club competition - for the premiership - ahead of the state bragging rights. RL SoO is just a reminder of a 2 state code”. No offence, but what else does AFL have besides its clubs. Its smart business sense when you have little prospect of a fair dinkum contest against another country, and noone actually gives a crap about an interstate contest. I wouldnt be too smug about your 2 state code quip either, especially when AFL is essentially a 3 state code, with its talent smeared around nationally.
I admit, suburban grounds can be dingy and antiquated. But there is something to be said about the cauldron atmosphere and the tribalism it evokes. Ok, walking a km back to your car isnt perfect, but you get to mix with other supporters, its part of “going to the footy”. I suppose it is different though, because as you point out, Aussie Rules is played on cricket grounds (mainly) while RL takes up less of an area.
Michael C said | March 28th 2008 @ 12:44pm | Report comment
sledgeross -
I was simply trying to illustrate that a negative slant taken to RL can portray a dull, tedious, predictable, flairless, skill-less game. HOW FAIR that is - that’s another story altogether and open to opinion. And - as you indicate - the romance and flair is there to be found.
I must say though that the problem with AFL on tele is it moves too fast and there’s not enough slow-mo replay opportunities. An awful lot of the ‘flair’ is lost on the average viewer - becuase the AFL has done all it can to create ‘continuous’ motion. THAT annoys me. Soccer is continuous motion to a degree - but, a lot of it is uncontested backwards and sideways stuff. Rugby is more ‘play by play’ or phase oriented (Grid Iron ‘downs’ oriented). I’m happy with enough delay after a behind to show a quick replay, or a few more bounces around the ground to show a replay - because on FTA - the best replay slot post goal - and that’s ads central. Perhaps the author of this article should get foxtel.
The odd ‘glimmer’ - - possession based it always has been - to a degree. Over use should be dangerous - but a roofed stadium at TD removes the impact of ‘rain’. Sadly. You may not like Sammy Newman, but, he is the ultimate advocator of just get it and kick it long down to the forwards one out - because, unlike soccer - they CAN use their hands and catch the ruddy thing.
Glimmer players though - (a lot of them are indigenous boys - there might be something in that!!)
Adelaide - Brett Burton (3 mark of the year contenders each week), Andrew McLeod
Brisbane - Jonathan Brown, Jarred Brennan
Carlton - Chris Judd, Eddie Betts?, Fev?
Coll - Thomas, Didak, L.Davis
Ess - Alwyn Davey, Jetta, Lovett
Freo - Pavlich, Farmer
Geel - G.Ablett, Chapman, S.Johnson, T.Hawkins, C.Mooney
Haw - L.Franklin, S.Crawford, L.Hodge
Melb - Aaron Davey, Russell Robertson
North - Boomer Harvey, Daniel Wells SHOULD BE!!, Corey Jones, Aaron Edwards
Port - Cornes x 2, Burgoyne x 2, Pearce, Tredrea
Rich - Richo, Nathan Brown
StK - Kosi, Riewoldt
Syd - that’s the hard one!!!!!
WBG - Brad Johnson, Giansiracusa, Cooney, Aker
WCE - Kerr, Lynch, Cox
—–
Just a quick list of the more obvious ‘X’ factor players at the clubs. Some more obvious than others.
Yes - each team will TRY to play to their strengths - and TRY to play the game on their terms, and TRY to sustain their preferred structures and TRY to dictate the matchups and TRY to sustain their rotations and TRY to efficiently convert when going forward. There’s a lot of ‘trys’ - and the result is hardly predictable and the number of ‘dead certainties’ are few.
Suburban grounds -
I DID love the old atmosphere around Flinders St station, and North Melb station and Spencer St station - as all the ‘colours’ would come in from which ever line (thus,grounds) and people would call out from over the platforms and there was a tremendous atmosphere - footy ‘owned’ the city on that Sat afternoon. However - those days have gone in all respects - even for the NRL with a team in Canberra, 3 in QLD, one in NZ and one in Melb and games spread over several days/nights including Monday and TV watching that much more prevalent than attending - - - the AFL retains a heap of the ‘romance’ by virtue that people go in larger numbers and ’sign up’ as members in larger numbers than ever before. It’s not a bad thing that my North Melb have MORE than 5000 members and one dingy old fire hazard grandstand. And Telstra Dome last Monday with 48K packed in was certainly cauldren enough and more so than old Arden St could offer - - alas, most of level 3 were Essendon folk (but, we’ll take their cash entry!!!). NRL - I guess is a bit different as the ‘neutral/big’ venues don’t seem to work as well as the MCG and TD do.
SoO -
Reality is interest wained around the time of the new clubs being established, such that WA was 85% the Eagles, SA 85% the CRows. Now - the concept would have legs again - at very least 2 clubs each state - and via the draft greater mixing of players. Although Judd has now returned to Victoria, the obvious is for Jonathan Brown to wear the big V, and Pavlich to wear the SA jumpber, and Lance Franklin to wear the WA jumper. It’d have legs again now - it’s the format that needs to work.
AFLQ recently defeated Tassie in interstate footy. The reality is to go toe to toe with the Vics, it’s probably only WA and SA able to. However, the AFL lost the focus when they pushed the silly ‘Allies’ concept (although at the time the thought of having Carey, Kelly, Hird, Richardson, Buckley etc on the same paddock was a very enticing one).
The 2nd tier of NSW/ACT, QLD/NT and Tassie in at least the latter 2 cases demand stand alone representation.
All of that can’t be achieved in the format that NSW vs QLD in RL SoO does.
It needs to be a ‘carnival’/tournament - - that’s why I’d love to see it every 4 years - return the pride of wearing the big V and reclaim the big V as a Victorian Football icon (Melb Victory have done their best to nick it!!).
Rubelli Face said | March 28th 2008 @ 12:55pm | Report comment
Gee that’s a shock, reading an article on ‘The Roar’ where ‘Michael C’ contributes a umpteen-page thesis advocating the merits of Australian Rules whilst giving Rugby League a bagging. *Yawn* (And what’s even better is you don’t have to be reading an article that mentions Australian Rules to hear what Michael thinks about the state of the AFL - you can bet your bottom dollar if I were to read an opinion piece on the vagaries of table tennis Michael would be in the thick of the action deflecting debate towards Australia’s indigenous game).
Michael, give it a rest mate. You’re a one trick pony and your opinions are as predictable as the seasons.
Sawas, good on you for giving us your thoughts. It’s very interesting to read about the factors that make someone transfer their support from one sporting code to another, and I think you made some good points. But it’s important to remember that endorsing one code of football shouldn’t preclude you from enjoying all other sports. I could think of nothing worse then living the kind of tortured existence that must surely accompany a one-code zealot. Take a look at Michael C and ask yourself “Do I want to end up like that nuffy?” - meaning the kind of person who would begin viewing an NRL match by praying the rosary and pledging his first-born for sacrifice should the Gods grant him a paraplegic courtesy of a speak tackle. Sawas please don’t wind up as a similarly pathetic creature of hate and loathing.
Millster said | March 28th 2008 @ 1:24pm | Report comment
Savvas - I found your article interesting. I was brought up in Perth and on a heavy dose of East Freo and West Coast. I moved to the East Coast in 1999 and have lived in Sydney and Canberra since then.
Though predominantly a soccer fan, these days faced with a choice of AFL or NRL on the TV I would do just like you and watch the NRL all other things being equal. The structure of the game, the fact that the skills are displayed in conditions of far more physical intensity/duress, and the fact that there is less scoring are simply far more appealing to me these days.
And to you Rubelli Face - classic work!
Michael C said | March 28th 2008 @ 2:08pm | Report comment
excuse me dear people -
but - it was a thesis put forward in the guise of an article.
I can understand people’s passions ebbing and flowing -
but - many of the apparent ‘criticisms’ smell of sour grapes most likely from someone who lost interest since Richmond ceased to be regularly in the finals or since Carlton got thwarted from ‘buying’ premierships.
Blatant Falsehood number 1 :
“AFL, by contrast, has been dominated recently by the Interstate teams and, prior to that period, by the top dogs in Victoria.”
the ‘top dogs in Victoria’……hmm…so, North Melbourne - the archetypal under dog appear NOT TO COUNT?? They won it twice, on a shoe string, on recycling Fremantle players and requiring base payments and pay cuts from players such as Carey and McKernan. The 90s in fact provided 4 wins to interstate clubs, and 6 to Victorian clubs. There were 7 different premiership winning clubs. 5 different Victorian teams won the GF in the 90s. 3 other clubs managed to make GFs and so had their chances - including StKilda and Geelong - 3 times!! Previous Victorian powerhouse clubs Carlton, Rich, Coll and Essendon were NO LONGER walk up starters to the Top 4. All praise the dawning of the new age.
[and, by the war, Bris defeated Ess and Coll twice to win - true, 3 'all interstate' GFs followed. ]
Blatant falsehood number 2:
“Geelong’s win last year ended the drought for one of the perennial losers (finally!!). ”
as above, 1999 saw perennial losers North Melb win 2nd in 4 years for 4 GFs EVER. 2004 saw Port Adelaide win their maiden GF. 2005 saw Sydney (South Melb Swans) win first flag for 70 odd years. 2001 saw Brisbane (Fitzroy Lions) win first flag for eons too) perennial losers - SHOW ME THE PERENNIAL winners that have been dominating?? - hmm, Geelong contest 4 GFs between 89 and 95. Is coming 2nd deemed being a loser? We love that Collingwood therefore are perennial losers.
Blatant Falsehood number 3:
“But even that only highlighted the comparison with the great Geelong teams of the Blight era from 1989-1995. Back then, playing offensive football, they lost 4 Grand Finals, 2 of them to the ultra defensive West Coast Eagles! Their modern equivalent did not display any of the flair evident back then.”
I believe I’ve covered this one reasonably - although - in fairness: Do tell:
who is more extravagant and ‘flairy’??
Bairstow, Couch, Riccardi and G.Hocking vs Chapman, Bartel, Corey and G.Ablett jnr
with forward structure is more flamboyant?
G.Ablett snr, Brownless vs Mooney, S.Johnson and Tomahawk Hawkins or N.Ablett.
with backline is the more flamboyant (or the less dour)?
Tim Darcy, Mark Yeates, Tim McGrath, S.Hocking vs Maxy Rooke, Scarlett, Harley and Enright.
maybe it’s in the ruck - I’ll grant that,
John Barnes when at GEelong had more personality than Brad Ottens.
- - - -
I can respect that Sawas has changed allegiences - but - please - don’t try to justify it with rubbish.
I can grant you lamenting for the old days if you like those old grounds - so, I expect that you adore the spartan facilities at Olympic Park on those icey July evenings as you rock up week in week out irrespective of results.
Savvas Tzionis said | March 28th 2008 @ 2:42pm | Report comment
OK…..time to respond (maninly to you Michael C). I will treat each point as it popped up throughout the thread.
In regards to Romance, maybe I should have used the word ‘egalitarin’ to describe the sharing of premierships amongst all clubs. This used to be a hallmark of the old VFL.
(By the way, I can’t see why you think the FA Cup is still romantic when the leading clubs treat it with such contempt that they field second string teams. Oh yeah, this years final will be ‘romantic’ because lowerlevel clubs will be represented. How hollow!)
Yes, Geelong have flair. If you compare them to the deplorable Swans of recent years. In fact, any team in the AFL would look good comapred to the wretched football the Swans played. I find it ironic that the first name you mentioned was Gary Ablett Jnr. Do you remember watching his father play? Its like comparing Pele to Beckham.
As for the Storm winning it in 1999, a year after they joined, well, how different is that to West Coast, Adelaide and Port Adelaide winning premierships within 5, 6, and 7 years of each team joining the competition. Granted, its not as bad as the Storm, but your point is not as valid as you make out.
As for the team I support. Well, to be honest, I really don’t anymore for a variety of reasons. I used to support Carlton but my egalitarianismt bent (you may want to call it Socialist) was so strong that I never felt any real attachment after the mid 80’s. Occasionally I would get excited like in the 1999 Preliminary Final but that was the last game i think I ever saw Carlton play. Now, before you get all excited about how it looks like I just jumped off the bandwagon, remember Carlton’s season the nest year was even better than 1999. And they still made the finals in 2001. No, the game was too far gone for Carlton;s form to have any efect on my passion.
As for League being a tv sport, I agree. But I do not go to watch the Storm (yes, I live in Melbourne) for reasons that I actually included in my original article, which did not make it on to the Roar website. It read as follows….
“Footnote: Ironically, I do not support the Melbourne Storm. They represent many of the aspects I am against in sport today. They are supported by a big Multi-National (News Ltd), they are a manufactured club, and they play a style of football that is defensive and not particularly attractive. Plus they play at a poor venue without a soul (Olympic Park).”
As for clogging up the play and March type weather. Well, this is another irony. And thanks for bringing it up. The grounds are in a much bestter state than in the old days where wet weather football was quite common. So, why has the scoring rate fallen so dramatically? It truly is a slight on the game that it has, expecially in light of this fact.
As for nominating players that show flair…the exceptions prove the rule!!!! Name some others!! In the old days, every team possessed numerous players of individual brillance. The ONLY thing that AFL football has progressed with over the last 15 years has been the increased presence of Aboriginal footballers.
As for the style of play, you have not really countered my argument. Read my point again.
I note that there are many aspects of the game you are unhappy with. So maybe you do not disagree with me as much as the tone of your response indicates. As for rule changes, I think there are some that can be considered but thats for another article. (But briefly, I think the key however is allowing the ball to be taken out of the centre at centre square ball ups after goals with more ease. I would reduce the amount of players from 18 to 17 and the one player dropped off would be the ruck-rover or centreman.)
Your criticisms of League have been well countered, in my opinion, by the other commentators here.
As far as State of Origin is concerned, Telstra Dome with many non-believers in attendance doesn’t really assist your argument. And it was only one game you saw. League has 2 highlights a year. The SoO and it’s Club Grand Final. Both are approached by the protagonists with total passion. Of course, one major reason for the SoO being such a great spectacle is that Interantional honours are also at stake. Not just state bragging rights.
As for the local grounds argument, I wasn’t trying to ask that we go back to the old days, but surely 1 or 2 grounds could have been kept. Especially Princes Park!! It had all the facilities of an MCG or Docklands Dome but retained its sense of an old style oval.
Now even the MCG has lost its aura now that the last remnant of the olds days has been demolished!!
Lastly, calling League commentators bogans comapred to AFL types is quite silly. Just look at te 2 Footy Shows and you can see that difference is that the League guys are not a bunch of egotistical fakes.
Newman is no fake, but his ego and his disdain for the everyday man is shocking. An intelligent man who’s warped views of the world have made him a fool. We all know the fakeness of McGuire. The ‘Broady’ boy!!! Ba-humbug.
The likes of Peter Sterling and the others to lesser extents are far more pleasing.
AFL players/commentators might dress nicely these days, but they are all robots who sing from the same tune (except maybe for Akermanis!!). Having seen them out on the town, they all still sound like bogans to me.
Now, I will state one reason I chose to write this piece. I am was sick and tired of everyone saying how great AFL is. It isn’t and it is time the Emperor was shown not to have those clothes on!!
To Rubelli Face: I watch much sport still but obviously most of it on tv. But I do not have Foxtel (Murdoh!!!). Soccer is probably what I watch most of all. And when I get home late on Friday or Saturday Nights I watch League.
But the complete commodification of sport means that perhaps only Internationals are the only time I will watch sport with any real interest. Players can’t be sold, fans cannot be won over (like Euro clubs do in Asia etc with theirmarketing).
sledgeross said | March 28th 2008 @ 3:04pm | Report comment
Why dont we all just agree that Rugby Union is the worst game of all three and be done with it lol
Im with everyone else here. AFL is a fantastic game to see live, when you can take in the whole panorama. I was never a real fan until I went to the SCG and saw the likes of Roos, Plugger, Dunkley, Schwass etc play. I was a fan ever since, and try to get out to at least one live game a year.
Sav, I loved your view on the Storm. They represent everything that is wrong with sport these days. Well done mate.
Savvas Tzionis said | March 28th 2008 @ 3:10pm | Report comment
Ok….looks like I need to put forward some more counter-counter arguments since Michael C’s latest response coincided with my follow up.
Your argument about Egalitariansim does not wash. North maybe a lower level club, but they won 2 premierships as recently as the 1970’s. The likes of St Kilda Melbourne Footscray and Gelogn have waited over 40 years!! Finally, Geelong were able to break that drought. Poor old Fitzroy and South supporters have to be satisfied with a mutation of their club winning premierships. And using the argument that Geelong losing 4 grandfinals and winning NONE is a sign of success shows that you are warping this argument. And to even compare the current Geelong team with the Blight era only invokes ridicule. As a neutral in this argument (seeing that you are a North supporter), surely you are not that blind as to the merits of both teams from a purely entertainment poin of view? But it appears you are.
As for me talking rubbish, they are the words of a desperate debater.
Michael C said | March 28th 2008 @ 3:33pm | Report comment
Savvas -
the old VFL pre salary cap and draft was confined to Carl, Coll, Rich and Ess. If anything - the NORMAL criticism these days is about the socialist dictatorship running the game and making it too even. That’s why your comment surprised me.
FA Cup - the notion at least is romantic, the structure is romantic. And I can see the allure for soccer fans for Australia’s own version.
Swans - they offer the ‘variety’ of styles - and playing to their strengths. The finals win over Geelong a couple of years ago was a classic. Conflicting styles - who would win.
Gary Ablett snr - I had finals series tickets in ‘89, and attended all the Geel finals as a neutral and marvelled at G.Ablett Snr. It was great, but, to expect another G.Ablett snr to pop up regularly is a bit of a stretch. G.Ablett Jnr is a different player and marvellous to watch, exceptionally quick, composed, balanced and compact - his kicking technique at pace under pressure is almost text book. He’s a brilliant player to watch but quite distinct to his old man.
Storm - main issue is that it was a ‘created’ team in a non-RL state - actually, truth be known, most of us just loved the angst in the voices of the Sydney folk - as we knew that Storm was a post SL compromise at the expense of traditional Syd clubs - and people still now lament that Storm are Melbourne and not Gosford. To AFL eyes though, to through a team together in foreign territory like that and win 2-3 years in - amazing! The examples in the AFL were all established in strong AFL states and with that they had certain draft concessions around locals etc. And as you point out - a ‘created’ team - similar to the AFL farce with the BRisbane Bears - is a bit dodgey. The 2 new teams - should they happen - might be a tale of 2 methods.
Look - the AFL administration aren’t perfect, the league is not perfect, the game is not perfect etc.
Eddie McGuire at least got off his butt and had a go and turned around Collingwoods fortunes - as, James Brayshaw is attempting at North Melb - - I think it’s a bit disengenous to call them fakes. You don’t have to like them - but, it’s easy to just be a ‘commentator’ stand alone - and, like Denis Commetti, just practice the ad lib 1 liners in advance…..
For me though - too many rule tweaks (being re-active), has seemingly led to a domino theory in rule tweaks. The rules of the game committee should be shot.
I agree Princes Park should be retained as a boutique venue - I’ve stated that before on theRoar. The MCG - it is sad the old (3rd was it) members stand is no more - but, for the requirements of it - it was out dated - all the museum aspects were far too valuable to be retained in the dingy inner sanctums. The new development really is amazing. Although, the ‘void’ section is a bit too open - as seen with the poor british fellow who fell from the escalators. Take that up with the architects.
Style of play and flair players - I support North Melb - we haven’t been well endowed with flair players. At one point Blight and the 2 Krakouer boys - then, the doldrums in the late 80s - Matty Larkin did the odd nice bit of play - but flair - totally devoid. At any given time, there’s normally about 4 teams that I’d pay to go and watch as a neutral supporter. Mainly where they are playing each other. Style of play - changes within a match for a given team let alone across a season. My Rooboys last week were 27 pts up and had more handballs than kicks (were running in numbers and support) - suddenly, style of play changes - they end up with about a 3-2 kicks to handball ratio. Style of play is such a ‘fluid’ thing. I think the main thing though - the old days - and I still yearn for this - was more about the ‘fatigue/endurance’ element - of 2 centremen playing all day, those duels on the wing Greig vs Flower, Turner vs Hawkins. The 4 free interchange players still irks me and is in my mind the source of many of the ills - and you’re right - that is probably worth an article.
Savvas Tzionis said | March 28th 2008 @ 4:02pm | Report comment
Michael C,
How can it be considered too even when one team wins 18 game in a season and another 3? Without the Salary Cap and the Draft there would be at least 4 teams that would have gone down the gurgler. Lets thank the then VFL for introducing those initiatives in the mid 80’s.
The Swans victory over Geelong in that semi-final in 2005 was one of the worst games of football (of any code!!) I have ever seen. It was only ’saved’ and made memorable because of the finish and the fact the Swans went on to win the flag. You are using very poor examples. Conflicting styles? They both played the same style…dull and defensive.
Lets face it, the game has gone backwards as a spectacle since the golden age of the late 60’s to the early 90’s. Many people know it (Parkin and Jezza amongst others have had the guts to state it), but are too scared to admit it because it would mean their involvement in the sport is hypocritical. ESPECIALLY commentators (who are always YELLING and SCREAMING. In the old days, they did not need to…the game provided the entertainment.) and people who make a living out of it in the media in general.
Michael C said | March 28th 2008 @ 4:16pm | Report comment
Savvas -
North Melb were hardly a traditional powerhouse on the basis of the 70s. Ron Joseph and ALbert Mantello etc had to mortgage their homes to lure Ron Barassi to coach - North were the ultimate battler - even Footscray and Hawthorn had already won flags (of the 1925 joining clubs). StKilda had won and lost premierships in the previous few years. And so - the 90s, 20 years on - became the 2nd only era of success. The simple fact that North managed to present - year after year - to make the prelim finals from 1994 to 2000 - 3 GFs & 2 flags was suitable reward. In a 16 team competition - job number 1 is to make the top 4 - beyond that - it may just come down to luck regarding who has had the least injuries all year and is most able to field their best squad of 25 to pick from.
And regards to making the top 4 - well, everyone has had a crack at that in recent times - and St.Kilda can only blame themselves thus far - and alas the poor old Bulldogs circa 1997 - Adelaide should’ve never got there and it should have been StKilda vs Footscray for a classic underdog showdown………but…..when it does happen…….it’ll be worth it.
Mutation of a club - along with those RL supporters who suffered the Superleague era - when clubs get relocated and merged it forces you to define just WHAT IT IS YOU support. (a good idea for an article me thinks - anyway, we North Melb supporters faced that in ‘96 with a possible Fitzroy merger, and again last year with a possible Gold Coast move). Sometimes - the jumper is enough. ANd maybe the song too.
The Blight era - I followed very closely - given he was a former North champion - the shoot out games vs Essendon and Hawthorn were astounding - the demolitions of Richmond, I also made my way to a regular Carl vs Geel game at the ‘G as a neutral. It was a pretty good era - but, remove G.Ablett snr and much of the Geelong side was ‘workmanlike’. Couch and Bairstow were solid. Hinkley could do good things. Robert Scott - workmanlike, and later a North Melb premiership player. Actually Geelong also had a number of North MElb ‘discards’ in Leigh Tudor, Darren Steele and more importantly Tim McGrath and Liam Pickering. I followed them quite closely - they were a good team - but, so often - weren’t the best, and in ‘94 were very, very lucky to get there ahead of my Rooboys - and were never going to be a match for the EAgles.
It’s a bit harsh to call the Eagles dull and dour - via Karl Langdon and Chris Lewis, Peter Matera, Chris Mainwaring, even JOhn Worsfold as a love to hate player - - they had plenty going for them in the entertainment stakes. Dean Kemp too, a skinny winger a bit like a Robbie Flower. They were a damn fine football team.
Anyway - that’s all subjective argument - I do though believe, that take G.Ablett Snr out of that team and they were a good ordinary side. Insert G.Ablett Snr into any other side, and they suddenly became a great team to watch. Simple as that - like the old days when the fans would move from end to end depending on which way Essendon were kicking i.e. which end John Coleman was playing at.
Michael C said | March 28th 2008 @ 4:24pm | Report comment
I’ve got the VAFA members, pres’s and secretaries dinner in a couple of weeks, David Parkin will be speaking - I’ll let you know what he says.
The draft and salary cap and priority picks etc - it can be a mine field - aimed at protecting clubs from themselves - as in the mid 80s the whole lot were in debt and the competition about to fold. The solutions may not be perfect - but, without them, the game was gone.
At any given time there are teams at different phases of list development - just as in a horse race there may only be 4 real contenders, a couple just coming back from a spell, a couple about to be spelled and a couple about 2 weeks away from the glue factory. Same with any ‘league competition’ were teams need to develop ‘lists’ - develop playing talent.
However - WHAT I LAMENT THE MOST - no proper REserves - and thus a lack of senior match ready depth. Geelong - I reckon, was no accident last year that they have a distinct home ground advantage, a full reserves team and they won both VFL and AFL flags - - and look how quick Collingwood decided that’s the way to go.
Anyway - I’ve personally lamented not the lose of local grounds - but the lose of reserves and under 19s and THAT sense of ‘club’.
cheers, have a good weekend. Go Roos!!!
Millster said | March 28th 2008 @ 4:40pm | Report comment
Dude…. the ‘Roos already played. On Wednesday.
Redb said | March 28th 2008 @ 7:30pm | Report comment
Troll article that should be in the rugby league section.. an opinion piece well maybe? Notice the ‘we’ in the Perntih 2003 comment - yeah Aussie Rules fan my aaaarse.
everyone is entitled to their opinion, but please don’t pretend your an Aussis Rules fan, as if youve been converted to the ‘modern’ rugby league. But let’s look at the facts. Let’s look at who has been converted from Aussie Rules to modern rugby league in say the heartland of AFL - Melbourne. They don’t have RL teams in Adelaide or Perth.
a few comments, just saying it is a troll article is not enough:
1. Melbourne Storm would represent modern rugby league. Yes or No? I’ll go with yes.
2. To make a real distinction between the appeal of the respective codes you need to judge the sport live at the ground. Because if its based on TV appeal you are heading into who has better TV coverage, more cameras, better angles,etc,etc. If you haven’t been to a AFL game in 8 years then i think you have no idea how the code has developed from your lounge chair.
3. You are not just referring to the Sydney Swans as representative of ‘modern’ AFL. They are not. It was Rodney Eade head coach of the Sydney Swans who is widely credited with introducing flooding and Paul Roos has taken it to another level by encouraging stop start cramp it up type play.
4. The Grand Final is not in isolation the only game in which to judge the appeal of th code. Whilst it should be the pinnacle of the sport, often it is the final series, in particular the preliminary finals that produce the best games of the year. If you look at the soccer model in England and other parts of Europe, the minor premier is judged as the best team because overall they have produced the best performances throughout the season by finishing on top of the ladder. Finals alone do not determine the appeal of a game, that’s a very narrow and naive view.
So in Melbourne the heartland of Aussie Rules we have had 10 years of the Melbourne Storm, they have won the premiership twice, a good ratio. RL fans will tell you that the Storm have some of the brightest stars in RL, yet only 10,700 went to their game in Melbourne last week! Over 230,000 went to AFL games in Melbourne last week. Such is the appeal of modern rugby league and the number of converts to this game. If the author is one of them good luck to you.
cheers
Redb
Michael C said | March 28th 2008 @ 8:52pm | Report comment
Hey Redb -
notice how - for a piece in the AFL section - how, apparently - I was out of place ‘defending’ the game or at least questioning some of the very loose statements made.
Given that we know the rugby and soccer folk dominate theRoar - - it’s amazing how defensive they can get.
Savvas - you said
“It was only ’saved’ and made memorable because of the finish and the fact the Swans went on to win the flag. You are using very poor examples. “
2006 FIFA world Cup - Australia vs Japan - about 80 mins of tedium, boredom, 0-0 - NOTHING of consequence has happened (because - the only consequence is a goal) - - and, oh, 3 late goals turns it into a ‘classic’ Socceroos win???
The SoO match I attended - packed TD - with a group of lads from Newcastle - a sea at least of maroon in the stadium - and boredom - sheer tedium as teams seemed NOT to want to win - and - at least the scores were relatively close and the last 5 mins seemed to justify the rest.
Well - duh!!!! That’s sport. That’s the fatigue element. Sadly, more and more with defensive mindsets - we have to put up with teams seemingly NOT trying to win - just trying NOT to lose. Thank god for the good games.
the golden era of the 60s - pre dates me. However, remember - even as I grew up the best we got was highlights on tele on the Winners and the Big League. Live footy was limited to the GF ‘77 onwards. To the odd exhibition match in Syd and Bris - until the Swans went north for the winter. With all games covered - it means that the potential ‘crap’ games each round get more coverage than they warrant. In the past - we wouldn’t have seen them, just the ‘big games’. The good old days at least provided more mud - and to me, I prefer mud/wet conditions to just wet/slippery conditions. Ah the mud……and the wet weather specialists - Leigh Carlson for Collingwood - like the Derek Underwood of footy…..
btw - interested to hear about the Power commenting that the cricket pitch had better not be too hard. A definite reminder that the MCG is no longer a cricket oval first - with the drop in pitches - it’s now a football oval at which cricket CAN be played. Or - at least - that’s how it occurred to me as I was listening.
Glen said | March 28th 2008 @ 11:07pm | Report comment
Hmm… if Aussie Rules is such a spectacular sport and more exciting than either of the rugby codes, why, after more than 120 years it is still relegated to the virtual sporting international backwater that is Australia. Rugby is played on every continent on the planet. AFL is played on, lets count them…..1
Any truly great game will import: cricket, swimming, tennis, golf, even mind-numbingly boring soccer, are played around the globe. It’s not like AFL is a developing sport, it’s been around for more than a century.
Re-count
Rugby…every continent
AFL….1
It’s just an odd little provincial game that perpetuates it’s own importance only by proclaiming it’s own importance and nothing else. And then usually by ex-players desperate to hang onto their only chance of “stardom”. Let’s face it some-one like Dipper is HUGE in Scandinavia and Los Angeles aren’t they????.
Let’s do a re-count shall we?
Rugby…every continent
AFL… 1
Just something about that count makes me question the attractiveness of AFL.
Hmmmmm
The Link said | March 28th 2008 @ 11:28pm | Report comment
Egads Glen, old son, you have really asked for it here. Que the 1000 line dissertation on AFL in PNG and Canada to disprove your premise. However perhaps relating your comments back to the topic may render it more plausible, i.e. the article is about AFL and Rugby League, not Union. For the record I enjoy AFL live at the ground, a very unique game, with plenty going for it. However, League is bigger internationally than AFL so that may be the point you are trying to prove, despite what you may read on this site.
BTW I actually think we should concentrate on what we agree on here at the Roar, rather than bicker around the edges. Here’s my take;
Ranking of Popularity in Winter Sports Australia
1. AFL
2. Rugby League
3. Football / Rugby Union (can’t spilt them)
Internationally (the 4 above ranked only)
1. Football
2. Rugby Union
3. Rugby League
4. Daylight
5. AFL
Now, that wasn’t too hard was it??!! Lets get on with it and enjoy what the relative codes have to offer.
Dave said | March 28th 2008 @ 11:43pm | Report comment
Glenn
I’m certainly no MC apologist but cant let you get away with some of your comments. Firstly l thought this thread was about Rugby League, you refer to Union? Rugby League has a very limited profile around the world, slightly ahead of AFL.
Secondly the comment “any truly great game will import: cricket, swimming, tennis, golf, even mind numingly boring soccer…”?? The mind numbingly boring soccer is played by 270 million people world wide (not including spectators) and is easily the most poular code of football on the planet. I don’t need to denigrate your code of union to make a point other than to say it is only seriously played in 3-4 relatively small regions of the world; UK (way behind mind numbing boring soccer)and France (probably 50-50 with mind numbingly boring soccer), White Sth Afica (the game played by the majority of Sth Africans is…yep mind numbingly boring soccer), parts of Oceania (not Vic, Sth Aus or Tas) and is so far behind MNBS in Argentina almost not worth mentioning.
IMO opinion AFL is a better spectacle than either of the rugbys. Hey that what the Roar is for to express opinions
Glen said | March 28th 2008 @ 11:43pm | Report comment
The Link..
I replied only because of this comment.
sledgeross said | Today
Why dont we all just agree that Rugby Union is the worst game of all three and be done with it lol
I didn’t introduce rugby to the argument… but since it was introduced I feel duty bound to state the facts. And I do stand by them. Apart from my Import/Export faux pas.
Further.. PNG and Canada…PLEASE!!!! Neither country can actually field a regular competition because they have no refs!! Nobody outside Oz understands the rules.
Mate,don’t you get it??? Tthe whole point of this site is to bicker around the edges… no-one can ever win.
Midfielder said | March 29th 2008 @ 12:04am | Report comment
Slightly off topic but tomorrow I am going to play my first game of AFL at 55 years of age mind you never to late to learn.
Well sort of…………….a trial football we had planned has been cancelled as the other team had doubled booked……….we need a run. By chance ran into some rugby old boys mates also looking for a run.
A match was agreed but what, one half football other rugby, touch………..well we decided to play AFL ………….local rules but.
The match will be played on a football field using a rugby ball with 15 players a side. No fist passing, no knock ons, no offsides, to score the ball has to go into the soccer net, with 1 goal awarded. The team having the goal scored against them will get to kick off.
We are having an arguement about how many steps you can take before you have to bounce the ball some say 6 others 10 what is the answer.
The looser must shout the first two rounds of drinks……………we are feeling pumped and will run the rugger boys off there feet. We have also agreed no tackeling, from the rugger boys and we have agreed no diving,
There will be no ref the honour system will apply to our rules.
As to the topic of the thread…………………….. I have no idea……………and don’t care
Michael C said | March 29th 2008 @ 12:37am | Report comment
Midfielder -
sounds like you effectively need to play International Rules hybrid - or close to.
or, even more gaelic than anything,
I do recommend the neutral restart in the middle of the ground - it allows people a chance for a breather and to clear the congestion after the balls been contested for a ‘goal’. For AFL sentiment - the goal must have to be kicked - but, for gaelic/int rules - scored will do.
How many steps - 15 little ones!!, 6 big ones.
Simplest rules are the basics. No pushing in the back, nothing above the shoulders and nothing below the knees.
and at 55, learn to control the centre!!!! The ball either will come thru there, or, if not, then you’re defending a crucial area.
cheers.
westy said | March 29th 2008 @ 9:48am | Report comment
Michael C…Redb…..these threads are okay to read and respond to once . But that is the point their aim is to provoke endless responses. To be fair the first reactionary and mindless attempt at this was by Clubman and ” Rugby League I do not Get It” .You did join in a little to enthusiastically on there although not viciously. These other articles are just a response . This thread at least came with some understanding of both games and some valid points for discussion. Best Clubman’s was pure ridicule. One point of difference was Sawas did not have a go at the people who support each game.
Savvas Jonis said | March 29th 2008 @ 11:19am | Report comment
Michael C,
You are again making nonsenical points. “Remove Gary Ablett snr from the Blight era team and it ws workmanlike”. It was their approach to the game that was so fantstic to witness. All out offense. This is the point I am making. The totality of what was being offered. You can have all the flair in the world but if you are instructed to kick sideways your natural abilities will never be realised.
And if you think the Aust v Japan game was dull, then you show (again) that you are looking at things through rose (or should I say AFL) coloured glasses. That was a classic game where Australia dominated play and finally received their reward (although the Japanese should haev received a penalty in that frenetic fincish).
RedB…don’t you dare assume you think you know who I am.
Let me perhaps finish off by stating that if you want to see how the 2 sports have changed over the years I ask you to hire the respective 2 Drawn Grand Finals from 1977 (Collingwood v North Melbourne & St George v Parramatta?) nad the replays.
Compare them and tell me which of the two codes has gone forward’s insofar as entertainment value is concerned.
Michael C said | March 29th 2008 @ 11:54am | Report comment
agreed - best clubmans post that time was a bit trite - - and note at the time I provided the alternate on ‘other sports’ about what people don’t get about other sports (or even their own)…..funny how it was the best clubmans silly thread that grew legs - - although, in fairness -some of the discussion WAS able to effectively ignore the initial sentiments of the article!!
Redb said | March 29th 2008 @ 4:41pm | Report comment
Sav said:
“don’t you dare assume you think you know who I am” You leave me with no alternative than to judge you on your comments thus far. Perhaps if the argument content improves I’ll have another go.
Westy, your right these posts can go in endless loops, I did only reply once, Oh damn It.
look i’m just a bit nervous, the Bombers take on Geelong tommorow - gimme a break.
cheers
Redb
Michael C said | March 29th 2008 @ 8:36pm | Report comment
Savvas -
obviously if you judge soccer games as ‘classic’ you ought have no problem with sides ways kicking to ‘open up’ space. VFL was doing it for years - called the ’switch’ to the ‘fat side’. At it’s most simple AFL is glorified circle work, it’s ALL ABOUT switching to the least congested area. The main variables being the weather, wind and rain and ability in the past to actually attempt to switch across the muddy centre wicket area.
Being a North fan, I have the 77 GF’s (both tied and replay) - and, when I compared to my Rooboys of circa ‘96 - ‘99 - the modern version won out. The likes of Carey, McKernan, Abraham, Pickett, Bell etc.
The thing that stands out in the modern era is just how good the players are at a far more frenetic pace at hitting targets by foot - but, most of that is ‘lost’ by the lack of ’stoppages’ which provides replay ops and commentator gushing time.
In all sport - I have a problem with ‘dominating’ play and yet not having the score to show for it. The Aust vs Japan game, 0-0 up until the last few minutes - was a frustrating waste of possession. And, only arrogant people believe that because you dominated the last 10 mins therefore you will dominate the next 10 minutes. And so, the end, 3 goals to nil - justified the previous 80 odd minutes. That game should have been done and dusted half way through the 2nd half, not leave it ’til the last 5 mins when anything, such as an Italy style penalty can sink all the good work (with or against the trend of play).
so - give me reward for effort anyday - - - I learned that after my first season of cricket when batting Chris Tavare style meant that I really needn’t bother counting runs - more balls faced. The next year I learned the art of not just defense - but, the allied and far harded skill of picking the right ball and putting it away…..not contenting myself solely with neat defense, well picked leaves and perfect combination of ducking and weaving the short balls…..no, I learned that a little bit of risk taking was required and suddenly, the score board ticks over………although I did still bore some folk prior to tea and unleash after tea…….
…re Geelong - well, Sammy Newman had urged them for 10 years via the footy show to just get on with it - and, last year they did, he was pleased…they won the flag via outright attack ….. as a North supporter I suffered their demolition of North in round 19 or 20, and then in week one of the finals they did an even better job - - don’t tell me that wasn’t outright attack. You obviously haven’t been taking very close notice.
There’s only ever 1 or 2 teams in a generation able to have the right mix across the field to sustain outright attack…..and to take it all the way - - what Geelong did last year, and Essendon in 2000 - - were special - - - alas, it appears you were turning your attention away in a deliberate attempt to justify your moving to the dark side.
John Ryan said | March 30th 2008 @ 1:55am | Report comment
Christ Michael C you and little Sir Echo must spend your entire week scanning this place for articles that say anything about AFL that might dissent from you and your mates view of AFL as the greatest game on the planet,which I,m afraid I have to inform you aint true,this may come as a dreadfull supprise to you and the back up singer but there are other games and they in my humble opinoin are better than AFL, Aussie Rules reminds my of 40 odd people looking for something to do.
You were on about the FOOTball in AFL, the local AFL sycophants radio station were on about how hand ball has equaled kicks in some games,and may pass it.I have no idea who wrote the article but for the back up singer to come along and accuse him of not being truthful about what he thinks of AFL Vs NRL is going overboard.
I posted at an AFL Article, and you came along and said I was not welcome and bugger off,funny how this only applied to others aint it son,Michael C posted 10 replys to this, your Echo 2 most of them you repeated yourself endlessly and came to the same point from 27 different angles,your Echo just spouts his usual rubbish,maybe the AFL pay you by the line Michael C.
Maybe you should sent Sir Echo back to Big Footy from wence I think both of you came,and he can resume being the gullible fool that about 90% on Big Footy are,
Greg said | March 30th 2008 @ 6:33am | Report comment
One of the issues that AFL faces is that, due to it’s unique, non predictive pattern of play, it requires a bit of innovation in the TV directorship department. The cameras, just as with cricket, are static. The large size of field, compared to most other games, provides an opportunity to increase the dynamism of the cameras by sweeping them over the play. Although TV provides a representation of 3D environments, it is what I’d call ‘weak 3D’. That is, TV flattens the playing arena. One of the brilliant aspects of watching AFL live at a game is the scope of play. TV should ‘hyper-real’ this element via floating/moving cameras. I’m positive it would bring about further interest in the game. For reference, who can forget the excitement of watching State of Origin from the view of a camera speeding down the sideline on rails - it gives a real sense of the sheer speed and physicality of the game.
Overall, innovation in television coverage remains pretty poor…for instance, my friends and I have often discussed the lack of different angles in cricket. As a result of the typical viewpoint, you can’t tell the speed of the ball.
Greg.
Redb said | March 30th 2008 @ 1:08pm | Report comment
Greg,
I agree TV coverage of AFL could be consideraly better and realisitic. A few years back Ch 9 trialled an overhead camera used in the NFL. It did add to some views, but generally it just could’t keep up with the speed of ball movement and it was still basicially just following the ball trail rather than detecting what is often happening down field with players leading,etc.
I went to the Ess V Nth melb game last week and reflected on the visual epxerience provided by the game, it was difficult at times to watch everything that’s going on live at the ground, so what hope has TV got. That was at Telstra Dome, the MCG is even more larger than life. I’d like to see the footy televised in wide vision or in panorama. as the ground is so big it is impossible for the camera to take it all in. It’s a little like taking a photo of a landscape, only get the box like field of view 4:3 ratio.
The boundary cams used in the rugby codes and athletics do provide excellent coverage of those sports. In AFL this would help, but the ball is often in the middle of the ground, so they would need a super zoom feature that retains the wide field of view. A greater use of super slow motion replays of marks would also enhance the experience.
cheers
Redb
The Boar said | March 30th 2008 @ 5:26pm | Report comment
A good opinion article that ought to have generated a lively debate. Instead we find (again) Redb and Michael C going on ad nauseum about the merits of AFL over the other football codes. I wonder what I’ll find in the comments section under the next Roar article I read. Do I dare to guess?
Redb said | March 30th 2008 @ 6:01pm | Report comment
Boar,
Where are ‘your’ points in dispute? As usual you’ve said nothing constructive apart from you think it is a good article. Some RL bores are just hypocritical.
Don’t agree with the article - got a problem? go to a rugby league ”only’ website where your senses wont get offended by alternative views and you can agree all day long. Bye.
Redb
John Ryan said | March 30th 2008 @ 6:40pm | Report comment
Well Well Sir echo your rather thin AFL skin is showing,you and your mate can bag hell out of everyone else but let anyone say anything about you a off you go in a hissy fit,I now await the 30 page reasons why AFL people are such tolerant chaps,as for your remark about people leaving and going to Rugby League Sites one could make the same suggestion about your goodself.
Try Big Footy I think they know you there
Redb said | March 30th 2008 @ 6:54pm | Report comment
John Ryan.
Big Footy?
C’mon there there its Ok, just google ‘rugby league only’ and find a site where they only allow rugby league folks inhabit - that way you won’t get upsetwhen a different view comes your way.
Again, where are your points? - you give us nothing - pointless myopic drivel.
Your not David Gallop by any chance?
John Ryan said | March 30th 2008 @ 7:03pm | Report comment
Good lord Sir Echo your trying hard to be sarcastic,don,t your hopeless,
Michael C said | March 30th 2008 @ 7:42pm | Report comment
Dear dear,
’tis traditional on a weekend to be watching your own codes of primary interest. What the ‘f…’ are you blokes doing going on here!?!?!?!
Now - for our potentially fake or feeble converted former AFL author of this article - - - did you watch Geelong demolish Essendon today?? Do you care to call the ‘exhibition of attacking and flair put on by Geelong today as anything other than comparable to the Geelong of the Blight era…….and, as a perfect lead in, the ‘footy flashback’ showed the corky (although sad memory for me) of the ‘94 prelim final, Geel vs North…..and, that game reminded me…..off the 2007 Geel vs Coll prelim final……..because, y’know what - - - the good games are still good, the great games are still great.
Greg -
fully agreed - the directorship is often left lacking - and way, way too much focus on close ups that we don’t want or need. And they take too long to get the replays on - and, sometimes a full screen replay and PIP ‘live action’ might work. The digitial game via Foxtel - (the main reason I would consider getting Foxtel) is brilliant.
John Ryan -
Dopey comment of the week award goes to John Ryan :
“must spend your entire week scanning this place for articles that say anything about AFL that might dissent from you and your mates view ”
Well - - - THIS IS THE AFL TAB!!!!!
and, Mr.Ryan - if someone states absolutely falsehoods or even opinions that really are either not supported or pretty, pretty feeble subjective judgements - - - then, off course I’ll take that person to task.
Mr. Ryan - all you seem to do is put forward negative rhetoric,
and, I’ve certainly learned that the gulf between Rugby League and Union is a chasm best left as a no mans land for the Rugby zealots to hurl barbed retorts at each other……..
Boar -
in case you didn’t notice - the author and I had a little measured debate of counter and counter-counter - - - better than much of what has been put forward. Certainly I agree in part with some points, but, find other points a bit weak.
Let me stress - during the ’90s as a rabid North supporter - I loved that we ’stuck it up ‘em’ at AFL HQ - - back then, I only cared that the AFL hierarchy was the ‘enemy’. I lamented Mike Sheehan as an apparent AFL apologist. I still get annoyed as heck by bad umpiring from seeminly poorly ‘instructed’ umpires, I get sick of club self interest, I get sick of certain rule amendments made by the laws of the game committee, I get sick of crap directorship of televised footy, I love a choice of commentary styles though - - - and remember the old days of tuning in on crackly radio (especially towards the end of the match), from East Gippsland tuning into 3KZ, 3DB, 3GL, 3LO and worst of all 3UZ with all the ruddy nags running in Morphetville or correct weight from Rosehill…..
Things are in so many ways better today - but, somethings aren’t. Simple as that.
back to the ‘lively debate’ from the original article :
‘Duration’
funny thing I used to find, travelling 3-4 hours on the train from Stratford to flinders st, then metro train out to North Melbourne, seeing most of the reserves - - and, somehow, by the time the seniors started - it was over in the blink of an eye - - 2 hours of play had just vanished as the greater intensity and action and the like…….
I’d like to compare that a soccer match plus extra time equates to 120 mins of ‘game time’, but, play time wise from the FIFA WC 2006 website at the time showed that ‘actual play time’ was around the 75mins mark. An AFL game provides 80 mins of actual play time in 2 hours. Now…….if we were to work out which was the greater drag, level of tedium, boring defense and apparent lack of desire to go forward and score……….but, if it’s your team - it doesn’t seem to matter so much. Winning ‘ugly’ only matters to the neutrals.
Perhaps the main point that should be made, is, should the AFL follow the NRL a little in having greater intra season flex on the scheduling of the Friday night ‘prime time slot’.
W Warambeal said | March 30th 2008 @ 9:00pm | Report comment
Dave
RU in France is nowhere Soccer in popularity in that country. Union is mainly confined to the southern regions with one team in Paris.
Union’s first division gets (through the gate) less than 2 million spectators. It is a minor sport there.
In fact union is a minor sport in every country it is played except for a handful of Pacific Island nations.
Dave said | March 30th 2008 @ 9:33pm | Report comment
W Warambeal
Thanks for the correction
It seems the only comeback some supporters of the other codes have is ‘boring soccer’…ain’t as boring as listening to some of the drivel they come out with to promote their code.
Savvas Tzionis said | March 31st 2008 @ 11:17am | Report comment
Michael C,
I asked you to compare the 2 Grand Finals (and replays) from 1977. You decide to compare the 1977 VFL Grand Final with…the 1990’s North team!!! Huh? In any case, the North team of the 1990’s was one of the few shining lights of football during the downward spiral of a once great game. The great games of that era involved North. Especially the 2 Essendon games from 2000 & 2001. But you are not dealing with the issue.
Let me add my observations of the Rugby League Grand Final from that year…
- The commentator claimed that a certain ruling by the referee, whilst correct, would not be known by most players!!
- The football was very slow but bloodthirsty. I thought someone had brought out the razor blades like in the Wrestling and cut the forehead!
- At one stage the coach of the eventual winners flashed a pack of cigarettes at the tv camera!!!!
- The linesman was knocked out by an object thrown by the spectators! The commentator said “Thrown by some buffoon, a criminal!!!”…hilarious
- The replacement linesman did not have a uniform…he was wearing a cardigan!!
- Some players did not have numbers on their back
- One player threw the ball at an opposition players head!!
It truly was ‘Amateur hour’ and I could see why the NRL were so strenuous in changing the culture of the sport. The VFL was miles ahead of the NRL as a product.
As for criticising Soccer. Guess what, I agree with you!! It is often a dull game. But to single out the Japan game as a ‘boring’ game shows you badly.