Hawthorn players Cyril Rioli (33) and Lance Franklin celebrate a goal during the AFL Round 22 match between the Hawthorn Hawks and Collingwood Magpies at the MCG, Melbourne. Slattery Images
My personal footy background was in football, rugby league (at high school and local grade and group one rep) and in rugby (SU Intercollegiate, uni lower grades), so I have no background whatsoever in Aussie Rules.
When we moved to Victoria we switched allegiance from the Sydney Swans to the Geelong Cats, primarily to ensure service in local shops (not really). I watch a game each week and, therefore, feel qualified to make comment as an armchair critic.
Aussie Rules needs a sin bin.
Nothing focuses the mind of player, coach and fans than an enforced spell on the sideline. The game also needs a send-off rule for acts of extreme violence.
Why should a team keep its full complement of players on the field while one of the opposition has been given a trip to Disneyland, thereby rendering him less effective or necessitating his replacement?
Maybe the answer lies in a yellow card and red card system.
The message would be loud and clear if a team found itself with 17 players against 18. It might need to happen only once in a season.
League, rugby and football seem to have sorted this out. The AFL continues to have players only put on report for a trip to the tribunal, suits and lawyers and all. Thugs need to be put out of a game, immediately subsequent to their acts of thuggery.
I’d love to see a quarterback type pass, to complement handballing. I doubt it would account for more than five per cent of passes in a game but I think it would be spectacular.
I realise that the American ball is smaller and more amenable to such passes, but I can also recall rugby training on SU No 1 in the early ’60s when players mucking about would throw torpedo passes 20-30 metres with a rugby ball without any difficulty.
Imagine a Lance Franklin at full belt taking a 20-metre quarterback pass bang on his chest.
I can’t see any logical reason for arm wrestling at a throw-in. I have no problem with incidental body contact, but when players lock arms, they serve only to restrict free access to the ball and that can only be a bad thing.
Some of it is downright juvenile (as are most of their ‘blues’).
SL
Guest
If the umpires were instructed to penalise (every time) any player who did not legally dispose of the ball, the game may move away from the boring, stop-start ritual it's developed into (although the fact that umpires need to be instructed to follow the rules properly is indicative of a deeper problem). And why oh why are the umpires so blokey-blokey that they have to refer to the players by their names (sometimes even their press-allocated nicknames), and tell the players to not do so-and-so action otherwise it will be a free kick? If cricket umpires did the same they'd be telling batsmen, mid-shot, not to hit the ball to a fielder on the full or they'll be given out.
Aware
Guest
.>>The reason all of the them have fallen out favour is because the modern player can replicate the objective and strength of those kicks with a variety of drop kicks [sic], what’s more can do it at pace and under severe physical pressure – the game is played at triple the speed it was played at back in 1956 – players are running triple the distance.<< {If the game were played at "triple" speed, they'd be breaking Usain Bolt's world record every day!} Moreover, what you are really saying is the skills are too hard for the players to take forward over time. You're logic is inverted: you're blaming the skills themselves rather than the lack of development of the players to master those skills. How is it most players can't kick a goal from 50 metres out now?
MyLeftFoot
Roar Guru
The reason all of the them have fallen out favour is because the modern player can replicate the objective and strength of those kicks with a variety of drop kicks, what's more can do it at pace and under severe physical pressure - the game is played at triple the speed it was played at back in 1956 - players are running triple the distance. You neglect to mention that an array of different kicks have since been introduced that were not used back in 1956. The one thing that has remained relatively static for at least 40 years are set shots at goal.
Aware
Guest
In 1956 there were 6 styles to kick a football in Aussie Rules: *drop kick *stab kick *torpedo punt *drop punt *flat punt *place kick All but the drop punt have virutally disappeared. The torpedo punt is only rarely seen and most players can't master it. I don't miss the place kick but there is room for the other skills. Furthermore, today's game resembles a basketball and soccer hybrid. There is almost no position play and the players just run up and down the ground in packs. High marks are rare and long kicking even rarer. As an old-timer, I can't stand today's game. But maybe I'm fading into memory like the game I grew up with?
MyLeftFoot
Roar Guru
Yes, in all these sports, include hockey and others, you put the ball out on purpose? And? Do you really want to itemise little anomalies in each game? It's a very long list!!
st penguin
Guest
Sorry, I should have said. Are there any sports where you pretend to lose control of the ball to make it go out. In Union, soccer, league etc there are times when you want the ball to go out. So you just kick/run the fricking thing out!
punter
Guest
MLF Cold hard facts can be interpreted in different ways to suit your argument, come in NSW for a day or before the election & hear how they interpreting cold hard facts to suit themselves. Football is the played sport in Australia by so far it isn't funny, does that make it the most popular sport, well you have a case there. AFL is most spectator sport in Australia by so far it isn't funny, does that make it the most popular sport, I think you have a good argument there. Rugby League has the highest TV ratings (yes I know this is debatable), but it's the sport that dominates the front, back & middle pages in 2 of the biggest cities in Australia, does that make it the most popular sport, think you have a case there. Rugby is a bigger world sport than Football because the Rugby world cup has been won by 3 continents while the World Cup in football has only been won by 2. You can interpret facts & figures to suit your needs, I think this is how we got into the Great financial crisis. It's as ambiguous as discussing whether a sport is devoid of tactics or not.
Magpie Flag
Guest
People getting narky? where?
Magpie Flag
Guest
Australian football has no tactics and strategy. WOW!
Magpie Flag
Guest
Rugby Union and Soccer.
Magpie Flag
Guest
Sorry dude, blatant Vic bias in my post!
MyLeftFoot
Roar Guru
All games require some effort on the part of the uninitiated. What I can tell you, if, on any given AFL matchday, you asked an AFL team to just go out there with zero direction from the sidelines, to just organise themselves for the whole two hours, even if it were Collingwood, they would be soundly defeated every single time. But if you send Manchester Utd out onto the field, leaving Fergie at home to chew gum in front of the TV, you would hardly notice the difference.
pike64
Guest
the goalie can run the full length of the field with the ball. he just can't hold it in his hands.
MyLeftFoot
Roar Guru
With the PNG FA it's a case of finding 11 blokes who know the rules of the game.
UK Steve
Guest
Serious question - can you explain what the different football philosophies are between the top and bottom ranked FIFA nations (Spain and Papua New Guinea) are?
Andrew
Guest
Maybe some of the contributors are correct , if you are not a true AFL fan it looks like it is tactically a immature game, and madness is occurring all over the place. There is nothing wrong with that, it adds to the excitement, the game is fast and exciting no doubt , but I suspect that as someone said above devised in the 1800's , it has barely spread to cover one country. Like it or not anyone new to the game isn't going to understand it without a fair amount of effort. I am sure several of the AFL regulars will consider that ludicrous and me just a fool. How dare I.
MyLeftFoot
Roar Guru
True, it has remained remarkably civil, considering the silly things that were suggested in the article. Changing a rule that has existed for 152 years, that's one of the central identifiers of the game. Why not allow kicking and tackling in basketball and volleyball? Why not allow the soccer goalkeeper to run the full length of the field with the ball? In fact, that ain't too bad....
Fake ex-AFL fan
Guest
It's even funnier that no one has gotten really narky - not like the tidal wave of sobbing and wailing that meets any non-soccer person who dares comment on a soccer thread. The discussion has stayed completely civil and no-one has demanded that people stop posting, which is in stark contrast to any thread where soccer fans feel threatened. So nice try but fail.
MyLeftFoot
Roar Guru
Republican don't talk about "true believers" - you're starting to sound like fussball!!
MyLeftFoot
Roar Guru
when the tiggers are involved, that can never be guaranteed