The Roar
The Roar

AFL
Advertisement

Congestion: Let's look back to move forward

Sydney Swans player James Rose (centre) competes for the ball during the Round 11 AFL match between the Gold Coast Suns and the Sydney Swans at Metricon Stadium in Carrara on the Gold Coast, Saturday, June 4, 2016. (AAP Image/Dave Hunt)
Roar Pro
23rd December, 2016
16

Congestion. It is perhaps the most unattractive part of the game.

And it’s one the AFL is determined to ‘improve’ by whatever means the rules committee thinks of each season.

Every year around this time, tweaks are made to the game – more often than not, to the displeasure of most football supporters.

2016 is no different, with the AFL announcing the abolition of the third man up in ruck contests. They’ve also declared that adjudications on head high tackles and rushed behinds will be tightened.

While none of these changes are as bad as many others of previous years, it seems the AFL has ignored the simplest way of solving the issue of congestion.

One that would not take any tinkering of the game out on the field.

Watch any game on any given weekend and no matter how congested the game may be for its majority, it will open up as players tire.

Accordingly, the AFL brought in a cap on interchanges.

Advertisement

Players would not be able to have as many rests on the bench and would therefore tire more quickly.

When that did not have quite the desired effect, the cap was brought down.

Of course, these changes added unnecessary complications to each club on game day, and required extra officials to police the number of interchanges in a match.

Perhaps it is too simple a solution, but rather than continuously tinkering with the rules, interpretations and interchange caps, why not just go back to having two players on the interchange bench, and add two emergencies to cover game-ending injuries?

No cap would be needed as clubs would only ever have half as many players on the bench at any one time, meaning the number of rotations would naturally come down.

If teams were continually rotating one player, they would be virtually playing with only 17 on the field for the entirety of the game.

The game could also open up if one or two players were continually uninvolved with play.

Advertisement

Therefore, we would see players ‘resting’ in the front or back halves more often, rather than leaving the field.

The current caps in place have partly led to this too, but with only two players allowed on the bench, it would become even more pronounced.

Additionally, by having two emergencies who could come onto the field only to replace a player who has suffered a game-ending injury – such as concussion – no team would be left with less players on its bench.

Like it was previously when the substitute was used, an emergency could come on while a suspected concussed player served his mandatory 20 minutes off the ground.

He could then either return to the emergency bench or stay on the field once a determination has been made.

Although this change could see clubs replace players with minor niggles with a fresh substitute, heavy sanctions could be handed out to clubs who have obviously flouted the rules.

There may be some very legitimate reasons why only two on the bench is unfeasible. Health concerns might be one.

Advertisement

Given the physical demands on AFL players nowadays, utter exhaustion could be an issue.

However, the game was played for a century or so with only two interchange players, and for the most part, coming off was considered a punishment rather than the rewarding rest it is now.

Occasionally, a look to the past is all that’s required to move forward.

Perhaps the issue of congestion in our games is one of those times.

close