By Ben Somerford
October 17th 2009 @ 1:43am
Related coverage
AFL moves quickly to find a solution to staging
Alan Didak of Collingwood fends of Robert Murphy of the Western Bulldogs during the AFL Round 22 match between the Collingwood Magpies and the Western Bulldogs at the Docklands Stadium. Slattery Images
Earlier this week, the AFL opened up the discussion on staging for free-kicks. ‘Staging’ is a growing scourge on the sport, so the AFL’s course of action was correct. But as the round ball code shows, it’s a difficult problem to police and the issue may go unresolved.
AFL Football Operations Manager Adrian Anderson brought the issue to the fore on Tuesday, as well as several other topics he was seeking feedback on from the clubs as part of the annual Tribunal review.
In Tuesday’s press release from the AFL, the misconduct charge of staging was at the top of the list, with the question posed, “Should players face a financial sanction for obvious staging?”
Indeed, simply opening up the debate is an appropriate course of action from the AFL, because if left alone, the problem could potentially escalate to the point where it is a major blight on the sport.
And the example of football (or soccer) where diving has firmly become part of the game is something the AFL would want to avoid, so attacking the problem early is a wise move.
But again, using the example of the round ball game, it is an issue which has proved hard to define, and ultimately police with consistency.
Indeed, the recent case where Arsenal forward Eduardo was banned for two matches for diving before having his suspension overturned, emphasizes the grey areas with regard to the topic.
Anderson, though, insisted several AFL clubs had raised concerns about the staging issue and wanted the topic up for discussion, although he denied it was a result of the infamous Preliminary Final incident involving St Kilda’s Nick Riewoldt and the Western Bulldogs’ Brian Lake.
But that incident alone highlights the problems involved in policing staging, where it was obvious contact was made with Riewoldt but the Saints skipper exaggerated the impact to win the free-kick.
And players like 1993 Brownlow medalist Gavin Wanganeen or, more recently, Geelong premiership player Joel Selwood have mastered the art of exaggerating or ‘milking’ free-kicks, but there’s no way they should be punished for that, as frustrating as it is for any rival supporter.
Indeed, there must be a differentiation between exaggeration and simulation.
Referring to the Riewoldt-Lake incident, Anderson said, “We would be looking at more obvious examples of staging than that.”
But at this stage in the cycle of Aussie Rules footy there aren’t too many more obvious examples of staging than Riewoldt’s Academy Award winner.
Contact-less simulation seldom occurs in AFL footy, although as the game evolves, players will continue to push the boundaries and bend the rules and it is foreseeable staging is a problem which could escalate in the future.
The issue of rushed behinds is a good example of players exploiting a rule, before the AFL took action to good effect in 2009. A similar change of laws could potentially rid the game of staging.
But the sticking point is how to define staging and how to actually police it? And that’s what Anderson will hope to discuss with the AFL clubs, although it is hard to envisage a solution.
Interestingly, Anderson also commented on Tuesday, “They (the clubs) believed there had been some instances (of staging) that had not been good for the image of the game.”
Indeed, the image of the game is something the AFL is desperately trying to protect, see Lance Franklin’s Round 22 bump on Ben Cousins and his subsequent suspension.
But in the context of Australia, where our sport stars need to be seen as strong, tough and fair dinkum, the tactic of staging contradicts all of that as it is soft and basically cheating.
The two don’t go hand in hand. Therefore the AFL must be seen as though they are active in eliminating the problem.
But Anderson’s admission about the Riewoldt incident suggests such a rule would rarely, if ever, be put to use. It’s an interesting thought and it makes it all smell like PR hogwash.
Ultimately, though, as the round ball game shows, it is a difficult problem for administrators to handle.
Indeed, the players are the ones who will decide if staging comes into the game, but by raising the discussion the AFL have reiterated it isn’t in the spirit of the game and probably added that crucial little bit of extra scrutiny to such incidents ahead of 2010.
The discussion may not stop the problem, but it could stem the flow.
Get Australia's best AFL opinion emailed daily.
Like this content? Buzz it up!
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...
(21)
megatron said | October 17th 2009 @ 8:03am | Report comment
Glad to see they’ve acknowledged the problem. It was becoming very obvious and annoying
Redb said | October 17th 2009 @ 9:00pm | Report comment
I suspect half of it is to raise awareness, becuase policing it will be difficult.
Firestarter Bob said | October 17th 2009 @ 8:17am | Report comment
I never fail to be entertained by the language of Australian football. Seems that often they can’t stomach speaking the true words.
Why is an outright fake “dive” called a “stage”?
Why is the word “tranking” used when it the more accurate expression for it is “cheating”?
Why is an elbow aimed directly to the head called “striking”?
AFL is a politically correct sport.
gazz said | October 17th 2009 @ 12:43pm | Report comment
yeah i dont know about a PC sport, as all sports have their own peculiar vernacular. whats your background Firestarter Bob? i mean, whats your sport of choice?
but anyway, with the footy jargon, my favourite is ‘leg speed’! why not just say ’speed’ or ‘pace’?!
Firestarter Bob said | October 17th 2009 @ 3:36pm | Report comment
I prefer poker. A real man’s game.
gazz said | October 17th 2009 @ 12:45pm | Report comment
but onto the topic of staging.
it does seem a bit of a public relations stunt, cos not much can be done. also prob good timing for the recently retired Matty Lloyd who loved a ‘dive’.
Pippinu said | October 17th 2009 @ 1:10pm | Report comment
Re the language, let’s not forget that “simulation” is also used in the World game, so I can’t see a problem with the word “staging”, especially when traditionally, players have been accused of putting it on, play acting, etc – but the word “diving” has never entered the Australian football vocabulary.
The word may have entered the soccer vocab because the staging takes the appearance of a dive (often complete with multiple rolls – who could ever forget Klinsman in the 1990 WC final?).
The difference is understandable – in soccer, one is trying to simulate a trip, applied to the lower reaches of the body, and that simulation will indeed take on the appearance of a dive.
In Aussie rules, the simulation will be the form of exaggerating contact to the upper back, shoulder or head – which might not necessarily mean going to ground.
It’s only a minor difference – but it’s a real difference.
But back to the topic of the thread, just like in soccer, it’s very difficult to ping people. Note that the article uses the expression “obvious staging” – and the Riewoldt/Lake incident is a classic case of just how difficult it is.
Was the punishment harsh? (a goal scored before the 3rd quarter had even started) – undoubtedly.
But could Riewoldt be accused of “obvious staging” when Lake clearly headed towards him and dropped the shoulder as he Riewoldt was running by? Who can truly judge whether that was sufficient contact? The point is – there was definite contact and Lake didn’t have to what he did (and I say that as a bullies supporter).
Just like in soccer, if there is to be a punishment, it must only be directed at players who have staged when there has been no obvious contact – we can’t be in a position where we are trying to judge whether the contact was severe enough or not – far too difficult, and people shouldn’t be punished for things that hav a degree of ambiguity about it.
BigAl said | October 17th 2009 @ 11:44pm | Report comment
I’m absolutely flabergasted that the Riewoldt GF incident could be given as an example of ’staging’.
To me it was a clear example of interfering with a player not involved in the play.
Isn’t there a 5 metre rule ? – well Riewoldt wasn’t within 50 metres of the play ! – and it was obvious to all there was definate & hefty contact to a player totally unexpecting it.
This is a far bigger problem in AFL than . . . ’staging’ !
All this barging and bumping before the bounce is another related issue – I just can’t see the point – to me it just looks oafishly childish and plain un-professional.
NFL is a far more ‘violent’ sport than Aussie rules – but they just don’t tolerate any of that sort of thing.
davelee said | October 18th 2009 @ 6:22pm | Report comment
it is a scourge on the game and i support taking action to get rid of it. but its a tough one.
perhaps fine repeat offenders?
Republican said | October 19th 2009 @ 10:56am | Report comment
Ah yes, the ‘dying swan’ that typifies the soccer prima donna is indeed creeping into our game but lets face it, so too are many other undesirable elements which should be nipped in the bud as well.
Other noxious scourges on our game include kicking the ball backwards and across the oval, hanballing ad nauseaum and being penalised for attempting to take a speccy, which although still used in the marketing of our game, is very rarely witnessed throughout a season of footy these days.
I believe footy needs to revisit some of the old skills set which could mean slowing the game down a bit. One way to do this would be to have less players coming off the bench.
What do others think?
Michael C said | October 19th 2009 @ 11:38am | Report comment
To me the infinite interchange is the main problem. Absolutely.
I’ve long suggested a 2 + 3 subs or 3 + 2 subs.
However – at least, the modern local coach is more open to USING the interchange as a tool rather than back 25 years ago when I started playing and the coaches I think were still stuck in their 19th/20th man era of the bench being a Substitute rather than interchange.
You’d sit there almost willing someone to get hurt or to muck up just so you could get on…..before half time…..before 3/4 time….get on at all…..
Redb said | October 19th 2009 @ 12:29pm | Report comment
no more rule changes.
The game keeps evolving anyway and soon there will be other factors some people dont like.
We are heading towards tighter contests on the scoreboard with better defensive pressure all over ther ground.
The game evolved again in July 2009 Round 14 – nothing wrong with that game, only the terrible weather conditions spoiled a repeat in the Grand Final of the all out attack on the ball and pressure on the man.
Redb
p.s. I should add that the added focus on kicking skills at this years draft camp is welcomed.
Pippinu said | October 19th 2009 @ 12:37pm | Report comment
A thought has come to me after seeing blokes miss out on premiership medals every year – why not make the the three emergencies part of the game day squad, able to be permanently substituted into the 22 to replace an injured player (at a quarter time break) – and all three receiving medals.
Michael C said | October 19th 2009 @ 1:02pm | Report comment
Compared to many other sports, where there’s a far higher proportion of players (vs those on the field) standing in reserve off it – the AFL irony is that with more players on the paddock – there’s only 4 available to be subbed in (but, in an unlimited fashion).
4 vs 18.
How many subs players can sit on the bench for a 5 man run on basketball side have?
How many subs roll up to a top flight soccer match vs the 11 blokes on the paddock?
Could you imagine basketball with only one sub player, or soccer with only 2?
Perhaps we need a 3/3 set up.
3 guys are freely interchangeable. The other 3 emergencies CAN be used in the true ’substitute’ manner. 6 off and 18 on. But, the emergencies only get credited a game should they get on the paddock. That’d stuff up the stats, as, it’s easy presently, all 22 get counted…but, then, who was the StKilda 20th man in the 1966 GF who got a medal but never got to go on??? Kevin Billing. Actually, I assume he got a medal….or whatever they got in those days??
Republican said | October 19th 2009 @ 12:19pm | Report comment
Yes Michael, I remember this era well. i would not suggest a return to the good old days entirely, just some balance in this respect because the game seems to be evolving such that some of the skills that define our great game are little more than a cliched marketing tooll
Art Sapphire said | October 19th 2009 @ 12:46pm | Report comment
Where were the Aussie Rules commentators when we needed them to launch a crusade against this contemptible ‘un-Australian’ practice. The answer – Nowhere. Everyone who watches the game knows this has been going on for years.
The media did not want to out it. It has got so bad that the AFL and the clubs had to admit to the problem themselves.
As the Herald Sun article reports –
THE AFL’s proposed crackdown on players who stage for free kicks has gained strong club support, with the league determined to stamp out “divers”. Blatant examples involving Hawthorn’s Lance Franklin and Collingwood’s Alan Didak this year have been highlighted by rival clubs, who have told the AFL the issue is well worth addressing.
Adrian Anderson said – “There are a couple from this year we used as examples where (players) have grabbed their heads when they were not even touched.”
Imagine if they were soccer players, we would not be hearing the end of it.
Rivaldo was playing the wrong sport. He should have taken up AFL
Intersting poll results from the Hun website
Who is the worst diver in the AFL?
Brent Harvey 23.58% (1960 votes)
Stephen Milne 38.11% (3168 votes)
Brad Johnson 14.91% (1239 votes)
Lance Franklin 8.66% (720 votes)
Alan Didak 14.74% (1225 votes)
Total votes: 8312
Redb said | October 19th 2009 @ 12:50pm | Report comment
Art,
I know your loyalties wheres Lloydy in that poll?
Not that I think he was a diver but you’ll never get a non Essendon fan to agree, they’re convinced of it. Which is why I’m wondering where he is in that poll?.
Kirk Tippett showed some simulation form in the final against the Pies I beleive, throwing his head up when tackled.
Redb
Art Sapphire said | October 19th 2009 @ 12:57pm | Report comment
Lloyd became inelligibe as he has retired last season. Also, all he ever did was dive forward ala Thorpie. The new generation of players are way more advanced. I have seen Lance do a few things which would make South American football players blush.
Redb said | October 19th 2009 @ 1:12pm | Report comment
The main problem is the lack of protection for forwards by the umpires.
Defenders are allowed to tangle them into a game of twister. The forwards don’t get a lot of frees they obviously deserve and thus this leads to them into making it a bit more obvious at times.
That is the root cause, the effect is playing for a free kick.
The AFL has announced both as issues for the umpires to be aware of going forward.
Redb.
Redb said | October 19th 2009 @ 2:05pm | Report comment
I think Brent Harvey is probably the worst IMO.
Michael C said | October 19th 2009 @ 2:21pm | Report comment
Brad Johnson apparently has super weak knees.
Boomer….he’s also the smallest guy out there, so, I reckon deserves a little leeway…..and anyway – he was ‘outed’ about 3 years ago, got nothing from the umps for 12 months after that and now it’s pretty well back to he being super courageous and just getting ignored in the normal North Melbourne way with the umps.