Get rid of NAB Cup, and give us a longer, fairer draw
By Adrian Musolino, 17 Mar 2010 Adrian Musolino is a Roar Expert

Western Bulldog's Barry Hall during the AFL NAB Cup Round 02 match between the Hawthorn Hawks and the Western Bulldogs at Etihad Stadium, Melbourne. Slattery Images
Finally, the real stuff is next up. The NAB Cup undoubtedly provides important preparation for AFL teams and allows the chance for the game to reach community centres, but it deprives us of a better and fairer season.
Without a NAB Cup, and with the expansion of the season on the horizon as the competition expands with the addition of Gold Coast FC and Greater Western Sydney, the AFL could not only strive to make its season more egalitarian but also crowd out other codes.
When discussing the possibility of an elongated season, a new finals format and the future of the NAB Cup, chief executive Andrew Demetriou said, “Not having a NAB Cup or Regional Challenge would provide four or five weeks of no football coverage. And as other codes elongate their seasons we actually want football to be talked about.”
He has, in my opinion, missed the point here.
By doing away with the NAB Cup, it would allow the AFL to elongate their season, meaning there’s no concern of no football coverage.
But also we need to ask, from an AFL perspective, if the NAB Cup really does help the AFL with awareness? For many fans it’s simply an unsatisfying entrée, which this year served up a surprisingly tasty grand final.
What’s interesting, in my opinion, is that the AFL under the current Demetriou administration has been so aggressive in its opinions of rival codes – think to last season’s advertising campaign which baited other codes and their stance on Australia’s World Cup bid – yet they persist with such a weak start to the AFL year with the NAB Cup at a time when the NRL gained significant traction with the Indigenous All Stars game, the Super 14 is well underway and the A-League is in its final series.
The NAB Cup and the NAB Challenge have some positives.
As Demetriou said, “We get to showcase the game, we allow people around the country to touch their players and connect to their teams that they wouldn’t normally see.”
But who is to say that preseason matches can’t still be played at suburban grounds? Teams, in association with the AFL, could still organise preseason matches to be held at these grounds over the course of, say, three weeks before the season proper. They won’t need the NAB Cup moniker and the tournament system to “connect” with fans.
The other argument for the NAB Cup, that it provides necessary preparation, needs to be examined.
Yes, it is crucial AFL teams build in to a season with the necessary training and preparation, but why do they need a whole tournament to do so? Could a handful of practice matches not achieve the same result? The tournament element is not the crucial ingredient in the preparation but merely playing competitive matches, which, for the teams who get knocked out of the NAB Cup in round one, seems to be sufficient enough anyway.
The NAB Cup doesn’t guarantee preparation without risk, and the injury toll from this season’s rendition, which includes Sam Fisher, Liam Jurrah, Ed Lower, Simon Taylor, Brad Sewell and Daniel Bell, robs their teams of these players when it matters most.
By elongating the season into the time the NAB Cup takes up, the AFL can not only counter rival codes but also increase fixtures so there can be more fairness in the draw. The more fixtures means the more teams playing each other twice and the more closer the AFL gets to an egalitarian season. It can also help build toward a more equal system in terms of how many times teams travel and how many leading contenders each team are forced to play twice.
Some will counter that a longer season is not possible due to fatigue and need for extended preparation.
But the AFL could simply allow for more rotations with bigger squads and perhaps bigger benches.
More rotation, with players rested if needed, will only add more intrigue to the season proper as clubs balance players’ longevity with putting their best team on the park.
The AFL needs to give the fans what they really want.
Let’s have less buildup and more of the real thing.
Enjoy sports? Enjoy a bargain? All Sports Online has your favourite sporting brands at up to 70% off. Online only, premium quality sporting goods and merchandise at discounted prices. Get a deal now.

sheek said | March 17th 2010 @ 7:28am | Report comment
The Americans have a well presented pre, regular & post seasons for the NFL, & I don’t see why it can’t work for AFL.
In the NFL, not every team gets to play each other, & I don’t see a problem with that. I believe you lose the ability to have everyone play each other twice in a season (home & away) once the number of teams goes beyond 12. I still believe the best team will win out in the end, irrespective of the quirks in the draw from one year to the next.
So even if the AFL goes to 18 teams, I would have a pre-season of 5-7 games, a regular season of 22 games, & a post season (finals) of 1-4. With pre-season, I would divide the 18 teams into 3 pools x 6.
In the regular season, everyone would play each other once, but their pool teams a second time. The 3 regular season pools would vary from the pre-season pools. The post season (finals) would involve 8 teams only.
Michael said | March 17th 2010 @ 10:02am | Report comment
However the NFL does have a rotating system in place in order to play teams outside of the divisions a regular number of times.
The AFL system is ad hoc and determined every year. As an Adelaide fan, I’m sick of having to play Port twice EVERY year!
I love the pools of 6 idea. It’s perfect and would negate many quirks in the draw. Best system I’ve heard. Unfortunately, many will say it’s very American and won’t stand for it. The Americans may have come up with it but it doesn’t make it bad.
Lazza said | March 17th 2010 @ 10:39am | Report comment
“many will say it’s very American and won’t stand for it”
Erh, where did the draft come from again? Mongolia?
drewster said | March 17th 2010 @ 7:47am | Report comment
Definately not a fan of NAB Cup! Give us a few more games for premiership Points or revamp the the pre season.
Redb said | March 17th 2010 @ 7:50am | Report comment
Biggest strumbling block to the expansion of the ‘real’ season is the availaiblility of the MCG due to the cricket season. You simply can’t have Essendon, Carlton, Richmond and Collingwood playing each other at Etihad without dropping 20-30,000 in crowds. Also big games involving St Kilda, Geelong and Hawthorn.
Look at the first round for this season.
Carlton V Richmond – MCG- crowd 70-80K (last year was 87K)
Essendon V Geelong – MCG – crowd 70K
Lazza said | March 17th 2010 @ 10:41am | Report comment
The biggest ‘national’ competition in Australia is dependent on one cricket oval being available?
Redb said | March 17th 2010 @ 10:45am | Report comment
Several AFL clubs have the MCG as their home ground and have long had a agreement with the MCC on seasonal availability.
Marshall said | March 17th 2010 @ 8:56am | Report comment
Matthew Lloyd and Knights have come out against a pre season cup. If player an coaches are against it then I can’t see how people say it’s a necessity for preparation.
Hammer said | March 17th 2010 @ 9:04am | Report comment
For the life of me I don’t know why NAB continue to sponsor this …. everyone bags it … and then you get the players and host broadcasters continuely making degrading references such as “it only the NAB cup …” – why a company would want to be associated with something that is always refered to in the negative is baffling
Redb said | March 17th 2010 @ 9:19am | Report comment
I see your point, but not everyone does bag it.
NAB Cup Grand Final
Crowd – 42,380
TV ratings – 650,000
NAB challenge matches taken to all parts of OZ.
You’ll find in some cases those who bag it generally support the teams that got knocked out in the first week.
I like the NAB Cup for what is a pre season comp .
James said | March 17th 2010 @ 9:31am | Report comment
That’s because we had the teams many feel will play in the real thing in september. What if it had been the other two semi finalists – Freo and Port? Could have been the death knell of the comp!
Hammer said | March 17th 2010 @ 9:32am | Report comment
I’m not saying the fans don’t like it or the concept is crap .. I don’t mind it either … but what I find amazing is that the AFL, who are control freaks in almost everything they do, let the players and host broadcasters dump on it … surely they should be all over these guys trying to protect a main sponsor
Redb said | March 17th 2010 @ 9:38am | Report comment
NAB still get their brand mentioned every time on news reports without necessarily the baggage of poor comments.
James said | March 17th 2010 @ 9:54am | Report comment
Isn’t NAB’s deal over after this year? Is there a new sponsor coming on board?
I’m trying to remember who the sponsor was before NAB but can’t remember it…
Redb said | March 17th 2010 @ 9:57am | Report comment
Wasn’t it Wizard Home Loans?
Not sure on when NAB deal expires, I think its two years, would include Auskick,etc.
Does NAB also do the Rising Star?
James said | March 17th 2010 @ 9:58am | Report comment
There was someone before Wizard. Ansett? That’s going back a few years!
I def heard the NAB deal to sponsor the pre season comp expired this year.
Redb said | March 17th 2010 @ 10:07am | Report comment
Naming rights sponsors
Golden Fleece Night Premiership (1965–69)
Radiant Night Premiership (1970)
Heinz Night Premiership (1971)
Amco-Herald Cup (1977–78)
Escort Championships (1979–82)
Sterling Cup (1983-84)
Foster’s Football Cup (1985–86)
National Panasonic Cup (1987)
Panasonic Cup (1988-89)
Foster’s Cup (1990–94)
Ansett Australia Cup (1995–2001)
Wizard Home Loans Cup (2002–05)
NAB Cup (2006-)
From those I remember the Escort Cup, Fosters, Ansett.
James said | March 17th 2010 @ 10:12am | Report comment
Thanks for that! Some awesome names! Personal fav – Heinz Night Premiership! Classic.
Michael C said | March 17th 2010 @ 11:04am | Report comment
James -
I recall hearing something similar.
From NAB’s perspective though – - it’s a good tie in with their NAB-Auskick sponsorship,
and the NAB challenge as Redb points out goes regional all around Australia after week 1 of the NAB Cup.
I presume the NAB values this ‘grass roots’ exposure coupled with the top level national exposure……however, it DOES seem amateur hour within the AFL that too many clubs have disrespected the comp, the trophy, the sponsors via their displayed attitudes. At least the Doggies looked pleased to win it. I know North were happy to win a couple of Ansett Cup’s back in the ’90s.
All this modernistic pragmatism (Grant Thomas take a bow) takes a bit of the fun out of it.
Michael DiFabrizio said | March 17th 2010 @ 3:11pm | Report comment
NAB’s partnership with the AFL (including NAB Cup, Rising Star, Auskick, etc.) runs until 2010. That’s not to say they won’t renew, of course, which is not uncommon. I haven’t heard anything from NAB or the AFL either way.
Tom said | March 17th 2010 @ 9:19am | Report comment
Crazy. I made a similar point on DiFabrizio’s article yesterday. If the AFL truly sees itself in a battle with the other codes it should bring the regular season forward two weeks. In the mainstream AFL states the enthusiasm certainly seems to be there.
As an A-league and AFL fan I’d prefer them not to, of course. The current arrangement works perfectly for me.
Damo said | March 17th 2010 @ 10:17am | Report comment
They can’t bring it forward as the MCG is still being used for cricket. Or can we send the Sheffield Shield to the Junction Oval or something?
James said | March 17th 2010 @ 10:22am | Report comment
Yes, they should. Sheffield Shield only gets fifty people to their games anyway.
Michael C said | March 17th 2010 @ 11:11am | Report comment
Problem is the MCG is run by the MCC on behalf of the STate Govt MCC Trust – - – and the STate Govts have a 30 year history of screwing the VFL-AFL.
Logic would suggest that cricket be forced to vacate the MCG a tad early – - – but, then, logic would suggest that MCC members have no ffff’ing right to attend the AFL grand final either!!!!!
It’d be nice for the STate Govt to actually allow the AFL to run the biggest game in town properly – - and we might have to wait another 15 years for the AFL to get full hold of Etihad to have the bargaining chip they need…….although, a 125,000 capacity VFL park if they’d been permitted would’ve screwed the MCC and STate Govt years ago.
btw Vics 5-62!?!?!!?!?!?!?!!?
BigAl said | March 17th 2010 @ 9:54am | Report comment
I’m all for a pre-season comp.- a great forum to trial new rules.
For instance, the SUPER goal ! – I think its great, and apart from anything else provides a purpose for drawing the 50 m arc on the ground. Is there any purpose for the 50m arc currently ? Why are they delaying impementing it into the regular season?
Also re. the point of everyone bagging the NAB cup, I guess in advertising, there is no such thing as bad publicity.
Dogz R Barkn said | March 17th 2010 @ 10:27am | Report comment
The 50m arc was originally drawn up for the spectators and TV viewers, so that we would know from how far out goals were being kicked.
But it very quickly became used for planning purposes by coaches, positioning of defenders, forming walls, clusters, etc.
It becomes pretty important because the defensive part of the game plan is centred around making sure the opposition doesn’t penetrate into the 50m zone, especially by taking a mark. It’s generally accepted that except for a handful of players, it’s pretty hard to kick a footy 60 to 65 metres (the distance you need to kick from around the 55m mark to get over the pack on the goal line).
I reckon spectators, coaches and players would be lost without it now.
Greeney said | June 7th 2010 @ 10:30pm | Report comment
The 50m arc is currently used as a boundary for the runners and water carriers – much like the center square is used during the center bounces. Current rules at the moment state that if a runner or a water carrier is inside the 50m arc when a player kick the ball in after a behind is scored, it’s a free kick + 50m penalty from the top of the arc.
B.C Queenslander said | March 17th 2010 @ 5:03pm | Report comment
Personally not a big fan of the 9 pointer from outside the 50m arc, but one thing I would be keen on seeing, that is a reduction in numbers allowed inside the 50m arc to nullify the effects of the biggest blight on the game (no not Malcolm), flooding.
It is so disappointing to see teams flood back and then have nearly everyone in the attacking sides forward line. It can become boring and a real mess and is not a good look from an outsiders view.
Some teams can “break” the flood by running the ball out of the backline, which is one of the most exhilerating things to see in modern footy, but if they get held up, “lookout here comes the flood”. It has got to go.
I know people don’t like chopping and changing the rules all the time but in my opinion the flood is a bit like the old rushed behind, everyone did it because they could, supporters even willed their team to do it in close games to prevent a goal being scored against them. Now, you would be hard pressed to find anyone who is disappointed the deliberate rushed behind is gone from the game.
Maybe by limiting the number of players allowed inside the 50m arc to forwards / backs and onballers, heck thats enough anyway, it would re-open the forward line and allow there to be freer movement of the ball in and out. I’m not sure who would keep an eye on how many are inside the arc, maybe boundary umpires.
It might be difficult to umpire this but really the “flood” is ugly and should go.
Sven man said | March 18th 2010 @ 10:47am | Report comment
All good points and I would be suprised if it doesnt eventuate soon. I have no problems with the Nab cup, as I enjoy watching the young kids that I’m unlikely to see for the season proper, but with that said I’d be more than happy to see the nab cup step aside should a longer season be introduced.
EvertonAndAustralia said | October 3rd 2010 @ 2:25pm | Report comment
I think that when there is 18 teams, they should just have 17 rounds and every team play every team once. Which means Victorian teams all have one trip to Qld, NSW, SA and WA and Non Victorians have one trip to the non-Victorian states mentioned before plus four to five trips to Victoria