- Video
-
Club Roar
Captured a great grassroots sporting moment? We want to see it!Content Collections
The Roar Community
- Join
- Login
Chris Judd of Carlton clears the ball during the AFL Round 07 match between the St Kilda Saints and the Carlton Blues at Etihad Stadium, Melbourne. Slattery Images
We’ve known for some time that, with two new clubs entering the competition, changes to the structure of the season were inevitable. Now, in launching a website for supporters to give their feedback, the AFL have laid their cards on the table and presented all the different options under consideration.
Some of the ideas presented seem just plain crazy. Others seem quite intriguing.
But it’s good to see the league taking the transparent approach to changes, especially when among those potential changes are the idea of a final ten or, remarkably, a final twelve.
So let’s dissect some of the options.
The preseason is the first talking point, with three alternatives presented: practice matches, representative games alongside practice matches, and a “lightning” format similar to what we’ll see next year.
Obviously, the most interesting part of that list is the idea that representative football (as in, State of Origin) could return. It’s good to see it at least on the agenda – the reasons for its demise are mostly no longer relevant – and you’d have to think this will be the options most preferred by fans.
Another thing we can take from the selection is that the AFL is favouring a shorter pre-season to the present arrangement of four weeks, as most options seem likely to fall short of this time frame.
During the home and away season, a number of different scenarios have been presented. The first is the current, 22-round structure. Then there are two conference-based models, one with two conferences and one with three.
Then there’s the idea of a reset fixture, whereby after 17 rounds of each team playing each other once, teams are allocated in to three divisions based on their ladder position. This option seems as bizarre as it does unlikely.
Finally, there’s an idea many have (rightly) put forward over the years – the notion of a locked fixture.
Under this option, the fixture will be locked in for three years to ensure each team plays each other four times over three years, twice home and twice away. Over the three-year cycle, two seasons will be played over 23 rounds and one over 22 rounds.
The reason this makes sense is because it removes so many of the inequities in the present draw. All teams would be considered equal at the fixturing table, something you can’t really say at the moment, with some teams consistently given less interstate teams than others.
Needless to say, it’s hard to see Collingwood’s final seven games all being played at the MCG under a locked fixture.
After the home and away season, it’s the finals series up for discussion.
I’ve been quite critical of the signals emanating from AFL House on this subject, and while it’s comforting to see the final nine suggestion has been taken off the table, nothing put forward this week makes ditching the present set-up seem even remotely tempting.
The league has put out two final twelve formats, but those ideas are harmed by the sheer number of teams they allow to progress to finals action. Having two thirds of the competition play finals won’t add to the spectacle of the series.
The other option is the final ten, which isn’t as flawed but still seems unworthy of replacing the final eight. More than half of the competition will be represented. The top teams would get multiple weeks off. There will be twice the number of non-elimination finals. The system becomes even more complicated.
So the first option, keeping the final eight, gets my vote on this one.
But the beauty of what the AFL have done is that it’s not up to one person. The final say may rest with the league, but at least the fans are able to have their say.