Should the AFL condense its matches?
By Adrian Musolino, 21 Apr 2010 Adrian Musolino is a Roar Expert
- Tagged:
- AFL, football, Ross Lyon, St Kilda Saints

Melbourne's Michael Newton and Lynden Dunn look dejected at the finish of the AFL Round 02 match between the Collingwood Magpies and the Melbourne Demons at the MCG, Melbourne.
Is reducing AFL matches to two 45-minute halves, like its round ball compatriot, the answer to preserving players from the physical strain of modern footy? And does it herald Aussie Rules’ attempts to follow other sports in condensing their show?
That’s the suggestion made by St Kilda coach Ross Lyon as the game tries to grasp ways in which to slow the show, with the intensity and speed of the game, fuelled by the huge increase in rotations, being blamed for the number of injuries being tallied, particularly hamstrings, soft tissues and heavy impact knocks.
Of all the suggestions being floated in the media – such as interchange caps, a substitute system, etc – Lyon’s is undoubtedly the most extreme option.
While it’s debatable as to whether it would actually help, (it could just increase the intensity of the game and therefore its physicality, surely, while interchange usage, which is the cause of the problem in the first place, remains in place) Lyon also hinted that the game needed to condense its matches.
“Being a player and a coach you think ‘Geez, it goes for a long time’,” he said.
“It would be explosive and electric and it wouldn’t just become that war of attrition.
“Two hours is a long (time), 120 minutes it’s an enormous amount of time and the demands on the body, so maybe it is a shortened version.”
As Lyon stated, Aussie Rules lasts 120 minutes. In comparison, football is a 90-minute game. Rugby Union and League last 80 minutes.
Do AFL matches need to be cut, therefore?
There has been little suggestion or indicator from the fans that the show itself requires a change, with the current 30-minute quarters enabling a match to develop a flow and allowing the team who is down time to build their way back into the contest – even if some AFL matches do have the tendency to drag (as a Richmond fan, I wholeheartedly agree AFL matches can drag on way too long when your team is getting beat with no chance of clawing back).
Lyon’s suggestion would see a massive reduction in an AFL match: 25 per cent of the total game time would be cut out, the equivalent of a whole quarter.
Such a suggestion would see the AFL follow the development of so many other sports – see Twenty20 cricket, Rugby Sevens, World Series Netball, sprint races in motorsport, etc.
A shorter, condensed version of the game not only provides a more instantaneous spectacle – appealing to Gen Y with their non-existent attention spans – but also is more appealing to television as it allows for more schedule flexibility.
The AFL has previously acknowledged it would consider an abbreviated form of the game as one way of spicing up the pre-season NAB Cup competition, and Andrew Demetriou’s praise of Twenty20’s growth and the possibility of considering shortened matches in the AFL hints that Lyon’s suggestion may not be far off. Read his quotes closely and you sense this is already on the agenda.
As the AFL expands and deals with the dilemma that causes on scheduling options, shorter matches could well pave the way for more rounds per season, allowing for more flexibility in the draw while preserving player wellbeing.
But reducing game time would not be the most disappointing aspect if Lyon’s suggestion was implemented, rather the loss of quarters would prove unpopular.
Playing quarters is part of the AFL fabric, and that should not be done away with.
It’s unlikely, also, that the AFL would resort to simply replicating a system so well associated with a rival code.
Are 25-minute quarters the simple compromise? Why not? 100-minute matches while retaining quarters would work, or even 20-minute quarters if the AFL was keen to substantially reduce its game time – less drastic but equally as effective.
Lyon is on the right track, and while he was trying to solve one issue – injury toll – with this suggestion, he may have helped along the debate on another: scheduling.
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.
- Explore:
- AFL, football, Ross Lyon, St Kilda Saints

Forgetmenot said | April 21st 2010 @ 12:49am | Report comment
Interesting topic.
For new people to the game it may help. It will also make the game a lot faster and possibly even more exciting than it currently is.
I think that the quarters need to be kept. American Football actually started using quarters after Australias version of football did.
25 minutes without stoppages is an option.
mds1970 said | April 21st 2010 @ 7:38am | Report comment
Eliminate time-on and teams defending a narrow lead would resort to even more time-wasting tactics. Teams may sometimes chip the ball around among themselves now – which is their opponents’ fault for not manning up – but there are other ways players could cynically run down the clock.
Redb said | April 21st 2010 @ 8:29am | Report comment
I think the AFL will look at capping interchanges per quarter. Coaches won’t like the cap on their flexibility, but the medicos will. Strategicially it adds another element to the game as teams have to carefully plan their interchanges or run out with 5 mins to go,etc.
All other suggestions are too extreme and won’t achieve the outcome of reducing injuries anyway. The game is great with 4 quarters no need to change and I very much doubt it will.
ac said | April 21st 2010 @ 9:00am | Report comment
Yes the suggestion by Forgetmenot has merit 25 minutes (4 quarters still) witout stoppages is a good one. The present system is far toooooo long. tooooooo Drawn out and the intensity would be more so if it was tightened somewhat. Mind you i dont like in NRL where they continue the clock when a scrum is packing down though – time is then wasted. The AFL is on a winner with the 4 quarters though good value for the $ both in attending the game and also for TV
James said | April 21st 2010 @ 9:42am | Report comment
The AFL looks to expand the season and move the GF to October: http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/sport/afl/afl-float-plan-to-shift-grand-final-to-october/story-e6freck3-1225856158699
Can’t fathom why they are keeping the faith with the NAB Cup and yet willing to lose the tradition of the last Saturday in September. I do agree that shorter games should make it possible for a much more longer season, if only the AFL would listen.
Michael C said | April 21st 2010 @ 9:56am | Report comment
The AFL sits nicely in venue sharing with cricket. Too much longer a season starts to disrupt other sports too much. It’s the AFL after all……..not the EPL!!
btw – shorter games would presumably lead to higher intensity and more injuries.
These bad hammy’s have been happening in the first half,……not the last 20 mins.
What we need is a less drawn out delayed coverage on a Friday night!!!!
for now, 4 qtrs seems fine with the massive crowds of the last 3 years and club memberships smashing past 600,000…….doesn’t seem a problem with the people who sustain the code: the fans that is.
JamesP said | April 21st 2010 @ 12:38pm | Report comment
And this is the one on 20 20 Footy: http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/208/newsid/92738/default.aspx
Pete said | April 21st 2010 @ 9:49am | Report comment
Maybe we just need a mercy rule for Richmond matches? For instance they can wrap it up after the first quarter if they want…
Marshall said | April 21st 2010 @ 9:54am | Report comment
I find AFL matches do drag on too long and it is more of an effort to watch matches than in other sports so I’d support the idea. 25 min quarters is perfect.
Tom said | April 21st 2010 @ 10:06am | Report comment
The problem of the week seems to be that the game is too fast.
Reducing the length of it would probably make it faster.
Maybe we should focus on one problem at a time.
Lofos said | April 21st 2010 @ 10:12am | Report comment
I don’t quite understand how interchange caps lessens the wear and tear on tired legs … maybe a 6 man bench would help?
As for the time of the game I’d be okay with 25 minute quarters but as a fan of AFL I’ve never found that a game has dragged even if my team is copping a flogging (and Carlton have copped a few in recent years). It’s a good thing to know that your game will last and that the money you spend will be for a full night’s entertainment. It’s a well made point, that if the fans don’t care why should the AFL Commission?
But then again, I’m a fan.
Redb said | April 21st 2010 @ 10:19am | Report comment
Lofos,
It does depend on what your trying to achieve, I admit its a bit hazy as to what the problem actually is. However, if you address soft tissue injuries, collisions, due to the speed of the game, then capping the intechange would slow down the game near the end of qaurters as players become more tired.
Of course there is a school of thought that fatigued players also leads to injury.
in the end, I think leave the game alone it will work itself out. Capping the interchange is the least drastic option compared to two 45 min halves IMO.
Kazama said | April 21st 2010 @ 12:11pm | Report comment
Agree with you here Redb, leave the game alone. I would suggest the reason for all of these injuries is the way teams are told to play. To put it simply, if the coaches got us into this mess, they can get us out of it.
Redb said | April 21st 2010 @ 1:53pm | Report comment
That’s right Kazama. The medicos will adjust the players programs to assist with soft tissue injury management.
I do like capping the interchange to add a strategic element. Any cap would still be higher than the game had even 3-4 years ago as an average number.
The tackle count per term per game has also increased 10% this year due to the increased defensive pressure. More injuries will result but they can be managed.
I watched a bit of 2003 game ebtween Port and Geelong last night and the space afforded players looked as though opposition players just conceded possession at the time. In today’s blitz game you are hunted. Love it.
Jay said | April 21st 2010 @ 10:33am | Report comment
As a non-AFL person, I find the games way too long to watch.
However, if you shorten a game to that extend, it may fundementally change the fabric of the game that so many people love.