Modern rugby league is better than AFL
Roar Guru By Savvas Tzionis, 28 Mar 2008 The Crowd is a Roar Guru
230 Have your say
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.
Recommend this story.
- Explore:
March 28th 2008 @ 4:02pm
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.
March 28th 2008 @ 4:16pm
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.
March 28th 2008 @ 4:24pm
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!!!
March 28th 2008 @ 4:40pm
Millster said | March 28th 2008 @ 4:40pm | Report comment
Dude…. the ‘Roos already played. On Wednesday.
March 28th 2008 @ 7:30pm
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
March 28th 2008 @ 8:52pm
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.
March 28th 2008 @ 11:07pm
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
March 28th 2008 @ 11:28pm
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.
March 28th 2008 @ 11:43pm
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
March 28th 2008 @ 11:43pm
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.