Is the current brand of AFL football a bad advertisement for our indigenous code?
Former West Coast Eagles premiership coach John Worsfold tends to believe it is hence his suggestion to trial a radical new law.
Many bemoan the congested style of play that is now part and parcel of every coach’s game plan. It’s not uncommon to see all 36 players in one half of the ground these days.
Worsfold believes it is worth trialling a new law that would require each team to retain two or three players in each half of the ground.
Not surprisingly the reaction to his suggestion has not been met with great enthusiasm, with several coaches – Nathan Buckley, Paul Roos and Ross Lyon – slating the idea.
For many it would be akin to introducing a netball type structure to the game or, dare I say it, have the big boys playing the game under similar rules that govern boys and girls under ten years of age who play AusKick each weekend.
In support of Worsfold however are myriad fans who commonly express their dissatisfaction with the way the game is currently played.
But should that be the basis for such a dramatic change in the sport?
Like everything in life sport will always go through revolutionary change. Coaches will always be looking to devise new tactics with almost every one of them centred on one thing – winning.
At the end of the day a coach’s tenure in the job is pretty much determined by his win-loss ratio and not whether his side plays an attractive and aesthetically pleasing brand of football.
The sport of Australian Football has gone through many stylistic changes over the years. Many of them have caused great angst to the fans along the way too.
When I was a youngster – I am now 51, for the record – it was regarded as a cardinal sin to kick the ball across one’s defensive goal mouth.
The game back then was all about getting the ball and kicking it in the direction of your own goals.
Going backwards was seen as an equal no-no.
Yet look at the game nowadays. Often the ball seems to spend as much time going laterally and backwards as it does forward. And why shouldn’t it?
Almost every other team ball sport learned a long time before Australian Football cottoned on that often the best way to launch an attack is to go sideways or even backwards.
Sports like football, hockey, water polo and basketball had long recognised the benefits in lateral and backward movement and used it as a way to springboard attacking forays.
That did not stop many a fan becoming apoplectic though when their Australian Football team did likewise.
In days past the game was primarily all about kicking the ball. Handpassing was really only an option when the path to kick was blocked.
Nowadays the ratio of kicks to handballs in an AFL match would have old-timers turning over in their grave. What used to be seen as blights on the game have now simply become part and parcel of the way the code is played.
There is little doubt in the future we will see further radical changes to the way the sport is conducted.
Some may initially be anathema to the diehard fan. Some may even choose to vehemently disagree with the change for years.
But change the game will.
In the recent past those that play guardian to the laws of the game have tinkered with them incessantly.
In the 1980s there were seven law changes; in the 1990s it increased to 11; in the first decade of this century a further 19 alterations or new laws were imposed; and already this decade the rules committee – on which Worsfold now sits – has made seven amendments.
Can anyone tell me another sport which has been so eager to amend its laws at such breakneck speed?
Perhaps it is time that the legislators sat back, drew a deep breath, and let the game simply evolve without any more artificial injections.
For mine, I would not tamper with the sport by introducing a form of on-field zoning.
Time alone will tell whether I get my wish.
Beny Iniesta
Guest
Cultural Cringe writ large. I suppose you'd argue a place like Ukraine has no right to exist, or no right to stop Russia coming in an occupying it given it has only been a nation for a little over 20 years and is still in infant.
Beny Iniesta
Guest
+1 Yowie Power. MItch - rather than just saying "BS" - provide an argument with some FACTS. Bet you can't mate.
John
Guest
He's correct in alot of ways that the modern tactics of soccer are often essentially copied from soccer (just easier if you dont always write Associate football id have though). The controlling the ball along the back section, the moving of 'lines' from 442 to 244 depending o whether you have posession, creating triangles to create space and free possessio, even how they move the ball from in to out to back in again. These work in soccer becuase there is always space somewhere. With Football though their are too many players in the area so you get congestion. Even our flood was taken from the 'parking the bus' tactic in soccer. in that way its good to keep in mind that in soccer the player interchanges often create attacking football, not stymie it.
Beny Iniesta
Guest
Some people seem to be ignorant of many of the changes in Association Football (Soccer) over the last few years. Here are a few of the top of my head for that so-called 'paragon' of ‘never changing the rules’ – Soccer - which has had plenty of rule changes. Differing handling of dissent, diving/ simulation, tackling from behind, slide tackling, the never-ending interpretation of offside and who is active or not, passing back to the goalkeeper, time-wasting, introducing goal-line technology to determine whether a ball has crossed the line or not, awarding 3pts for a win rather than 2 – which changed the whole spirit of the contest – these are just some of the rule changes in Soccer over the last (mainly decade) that I have observed. There're more than half-a-dozen I can reel off without even thinking seriously about the question. How long have you been following Soccer Titus, it seems you must be very new to the sport.
Beny Iniesta
Guest
Ha Mitch. Seriously. You're embarrassing yourself mate. It has copied everything from Association Football (Soccer)? What - that's funny because I often hear advocates of Soccer telling me how Australian Football should not even call itself Football because of the preponderance of handling by the hands!!! So where, amongst many other things do spectacular marks and handballs come from? Don't see many of these in any Soccer games I've ever seen?
Beny Iniesta
Guest
Another ignorant soul. Ever heard of the NFL Mitch? I can only assume with your statement that you haven't. Hint - it is the richest and most attended professional sports league in the world. Just this year the NFL has changed 5 rules. That is on target for 50 during this decade. 50!!! http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2014/03/26/five-rules-changes-pass-as-nfl-owners-vote-at-league-meeting/ It always amazes me how ignorant Australians, and even Australian sports journalists are about how often other sports change rules. Even that paragon of 'never changing rules' - Association Football has had plenty of rule changes. Dissent, diving, tackling from behind, slide tackling, the never-ending interpretation of offside and who is active or not, passing back to the goalkeeper, time-wasting, introducing goal-line technology to determine whether a ball has crossed the line or not, awarding 3pts for a win rather than 2 - which changed the whole spirit of the contest - these are just some of the rule changes in Soccer over the last (mainly decade) that I have observed. Its an absolute furphy that other sports don't change their rules.
Beny Iniesta
Guest
Agreed. Just this year the NFL has changed 5 rules. That is on target for 50 during this decade. http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2014/03/26/five-rules-changes-pass-as-nfl-owners-vote-at-league-meeting/ It always amazes me how ignorant Australians, and even Australian sports journalists are about how often other sports change rules. Even that paragon of 'never changing rules' - Association Football has had plenty of rule changes. Dissent, diving, tackling from behind, slide tackling, the never-ending interpretation of offside and who is active or not, passing back to the goalkeeper, time-wasting, introducing goal-line technology to determine whether a ball has crossed the line or not, awarding 3pts for a win rather than 2 - which changed the whole spirit of the contest - these are just some of the rule changes in Soccer over the last (mainly decade) that I have observed. Its an absolute furphy that other sports don't change their rules.
John
Guest
Could not agree more! Tired players will lead to teams wanting to control posession, or to have multiple stoppages to allow their players to rest. Also means less spread because players are too tired to create space on the rebound. So we just kick it down the line to another stoppage. Will also mean the Sam Mitchels of this world wont get drafted... Beep test more important than kicking?
John
Guest
The days of players staying in position are well and trully gone, and changing the interchange will have Zero effect on it. They are gone because its a dumb way to play football. Leaving defenders in position means you leave space for the ball coming out of the defensive end. The problem is that 18 blokes on the field is too many. The former Liverpool manager used to say that in soccer a side only had a small blanket to cover the whole field and with 11 players the blanket was never big enough. With AFL though, the blanket is plenty big enough to cover all the necessary ground defensively. Its the inability to clear the defensive end thats causing the issue. Not interchange...
Mitch
Guest
BS
Mitch
Guest
It is just a cheap perverted copy of Football's tactics. Aussie Rules has NEVER thought of anything original for itself - EVERYTHING it has copied and adapted directly from Football!
Mitch
Guest
"Is there any other professional sport in the world that changes the rules of the sport as often as the Australian Football League?" Short answer - NO The real reason is the rise AND rise of Football over the past decade which is terrifying the Aussie Rules administration into making farcical rule change after farcical rule change in both a desperate and ultimately futile effort to stop Football from assuming it's rightful and pre-ordained place as multi-cultural Australia's natural sport of choice.
mattatooski
Guest
The one rule that really irks me, is the diving on the ball rule. It used to be the football was the most prized possession in footy, and teams would throw everything at the contest to get first dibs on that prize. Nowadays, players are to scared to get the ball at all costs because they will be penalised for diving on the ball. The ball should be the priority for every player no matter what. If it is clear the ball is not going to come out, then throw the bloody thing up. Too many times I have seen players not contest and play the player and not the ball for this stupid rule. Please bring back the hard fought contest where the ball is the most prized possession. And start paying the 'in the back' rule when a player does go hard and gets there first.
YowiePower
Guest
It's an indigenous code in the sense that it's indigenous to this country. I don't think the author is drawing a link to Marn Grook.
YowiePower
Guest
Try and find a single scrap of archival evidence that links Australian football with Gaelic/Irish football. You won't be able to, because there is none. It's a myth that has been obliterated by decades of research. Australian football was codified in 1859. Gaelic football was codified in 1887. It took the Irish code another two decades for it to evolve to a point where it resembled the Australian code. Australian football was incredibly advanced and innovative, and was drawing world record crowds before Gaelic football was even invented, but people who suffer from cultural cringe such as yourself are happily ignorant of that fact.
Storm Boy
Guest
There was no Australian nation until the 20th century.
Paul
Guest
The spectacle of AFL has been compromised by the congestion for a long time now. If this rule helps, just a little bit so we see Full Forwards thrive once more with lots of specky marks and goals,then I'm all for it. I don't share the view that this is not thought through. Its worth trialling isn't it??
Tad
Roar Rookie
Considering the laws were written by an Australian born in Australia and a native of his native land it is a pretty good case to be called the indigenous code, not to mention the fact he grew up speaking a Aboriginal language, playing with Aboriginal kids, as the only white child in his district. To say Tom Wills was not influenced by Abroiginal children and their games growing up would be wrong, your early years can influence your views, beliefs and behavious for a lifetime, both consiously and sub-consiously.
Storm Boy
Guest
our indigenous code? Please not the Marn grook thing again.
vocans
Guest
Actually apply the rules as literally as possible and the game will get less congested yet still retain all the good qualities we've come to appreciate in the new era. A lot of it has had to do with much improved coaching, fitness, professionalism at a club level, and skills. Interchange and balls at kickins have really helped. But the refusal to give free kicks has seen the erosion of some skills and a congested game. The rules should always foster skills and deter the erosion of skills. I really think it's obvious but the 'image-makers' took over the running of the rules and interpretations and we've got ad hockery all the way to buggery.