The AFL does a lot of things right. That much is obvious. It’s one of the best-run sporting leagues in the world, with a first-class product and attendance figures that have the other codes green with envy.
But there’s some things, largely because of history or tradition, that the AFL is behind on. They’re not massively important – they don’t have an impact on the game on a day-to-day basis.
It’s the little things, like the stance on clash jumpers. Things that other leagues cottoned onto a long time ago. Using that example, a clear clash jumper policy would work, it’d serve a purpose, there’d be tangible benefits. However, because of the AFL’s idiosyncrasies, it’s easier said than done.
The idea of a night grand final is another. In terms of commerce, it’s a much more attractive option than having a showpiece match in mid-afternoon. The NFL do it with the Superbowl, but the AFL won’t because it clings to its history, which by no means is a bad thing.
Fair enough. Organisations tend to develop their own personality and approach to business. But to resist change is to stagnate, and sometimes it makes sense to go with the flow and keep up with the times.
That’s why it was good to see the AFL introducing video technology in the NAB Cup. It’s certainly been a long time coming.
Now, the AFL is not alone in its tardiness on this particular issue. Association football, or soccer, also lags behind – and that’s largely because of FIFA’s stubborn approach to technology, a trait shared with the AFL.
But cricket, rugby and tennis show it can work, and work well. In each sport, video technology helps minimise human error in favour of fairness, and it adds another exciting level to the viewing experience.
Video reviews could have been introduced to the AFL a long time ago. The cameras, the concept – it’s all there. It’s fairly straightforward, but it’s not in place. There have been previous moves towards it, but they were all largely ignored by the league.
On the surface it doesn’t seem like an issue of incredible importance. How often is there a contentious goal or point that has been given that shouldn’t?
It doesn’t feel like many, but look back and there are some key examples.
Just last year, Gold Coast’s Matt Shaw hit the post against Brisbane in the inaugural Queensland derby, but he was awarded a goal – much to the dismay of pretty much everyone at the ‘Gabba that night except for the umpires, who somehow missed it.
In two of the last three grand finals, the same thing happened – although neither occasion was on a game-defining shot for goal. In 2009, Geelong’s Tom Hawkins hit the post but was given a goal. Last year it happened to Collingwood’s Sharrod Wellingham, much to his own surprise.
Such a moment of contention could easily happen later in a game or a grand final, and it’s lucky it hasn’t yet had an impact on a team’s season or success. But there’s a chance it might.
Does anyone want to take that chance? Can you imagine the headlines if a premiership was decided on something that could have easily been settled inside 30 seconds, with a quick replay?
Of course, video replays have already been used, as intended, a handful of times in the opening round of the NAB Cup. Still, there are those against it. Brisbane Lions coach Michael Voss is one of them.
Patrick Karnezis looked to have soccered through a goal in the second half of their three-point loss to Melbourne, but the decision was sent upstairs and the men in front of the monitors rightly pointed out that it shaved the post, and a behind was given.
It’s fair to point out that had a goal been handed to the Lions, it could have changed the game. Maybe Voss was grumpy.
He complained the use of the video replay was ‘clunky’ and didn’t feel right. Then he had the nerve to say: “I couldn’t say whether it was the right result or not.”
Of course it was, Vossy. It was a point, and a point was awarded. The correct decision was made. That is the definition of ‘right’. He didn’t like the way it felt, but he’d be singing a different tune if it cost his side four points, or worse, a flag.
Would that feel right? No. A break of no more than a minute is a reasonable price for justice. In the name of fairness, the AFL has to push forward with the use of replays to solve goal-line confusion.
There are questions about its use. Should there be a challenge system? Who should decide what gets reviewed and what doesn’t? What if footage is inconclusive?
But the right system will come eventually. The means are already there, or can be easily deployed.
The AFL is finally catching up. Let’s not stop them now.
Who’s in your ultimate team? Pick the best team and compete with other fans for daily prizes on Draftstars. For the best odds on the game try out Aussie bookmaker PlayUp. Think. Is this a bet you really want to place? Set a deposit limit.
David King believes the Lions cost themselves victory against Adelaide by being too selfish.
The Crows and Lions played out the second draw of the 2024 AFL season, with scores locked at 90-all at the final siren.
Nobody knew what to think!
A massive stage from Taylor Walker!
Not sure there was much of an argument to be made!
Tom Hawkins returns to familiar surroundings of Geelong - but is it the tonic he needs to regain some of his confidence back after a goalless four games.
