As a New Zealander who recently arrived in Australia, I switched on my TV one day and discovered the world’s most exciting game.
Frenetic action abounded, teams drove forward with constant momentum and few stoppages. There was passion, rugged contact and skill.
I was in sports fanatic heaven, until I discovered that this game is only played irregularly and a maximum of three games are ever played in a year.
It was the hybrid AFL/Gaelic Football match between Ireland and Australia. In a desperate effort to find this level of excitement again, I watched both Gaelic football and AFL and discovered that neither game was a patch on the hybrid.
Gaelic football seemed better, as in order to score in the soccer goal you couldn’t simply take a mark 50 metres out and boot it in. To get six points you needed to get in behind the opposition defence, therefore play often continued right into the goalmouth. But these goals were few and far between, bringing excitement levels back to those of soccer.
AFL had even fewer levels of excitement.
A lovely, flowing movement of passing, handballing and running would often sweep the length of the field and a kick would be centred to someone 50 metres out from goal. He would take a mark as the movement built to its climax… and all momentum died, all excitement fell away, as he turned around and trotted back 20 metres, blew his nose, threw grass in the air, wiped down the ball, did a little pre-kick ritual, before running in and kicking, only for it to fade right of the posts.
Even if it had been a goal, the excitement of the move was long gone, dissipated by the peculiar nature of the rules which reward a player for taking a great mark by allowing him to go backwards.
This is the one great problem of AFL (although don’t get me started on AFL refs running the ball back to the centre after a goal). The game which has so much going for it in general play has an often tedious way of scoring the major points.
The ability to kick goals from 50 metres, while skilful and meritorious, actually often stops exciting phases of play from continuing.
AFL needs to make one small rule change to increase the excitement levels, by allowing teams in possession to continue to advance the ball to a better position, rather than taking the option of stopping the game to take an unopposed kick at goal.
Currently the defender stands on the spot where the mark is taken and the mark taker must retreat from that spot to take his kick. But think how that might change if, when a mark is taken, the defenders all have to retreat 10 metres in a circle away from the mark taker. Suddenly the option is there for the mark taker to play on unopposed for 10 metres. He can continue the move, without being tackled or impeded for 10 metres, or he can stand his ground and instantly look to kick to someone in a better position while the defenders retreat away from him.
Currently he has to retreat before he can look for someone in a better position. How much better if the defenders have to retreat rather than the mark taker?
Taking a mark within 10 metres of the goalposts would in effect mean a goal would be instantly scored play. Instant gratification – great mark, then barely seconds later a goal.
This simple tweak to the rules would open the game up, encouraging teams to play on to get into a better position to kick goals rather than stopping moves on the 50-metre circle.
I know AFL is a traditional game which doesn’t take easily to rule changes, but this change would revolutionise the game, making it faster and far more appealing to an AFL philistine like me.
I might even become an AFL fan.
Bondy
Guest
Lindsay One player went before a tribunal for simulation or diving in the A League this season after 20 odd Rd's hardly an epidemic one would think .
Lindsay Amner
Roar Guru
I did love watching it when I was younger. I watched virtually nothing else until my mid twenties. As I got older and had played the game for 30 odd years I got a bit bored with watching it and couldn't stand the diving and faking that had crept in more and more. I looked for games to watch that offered more constant action and more evident passion on the field rather than just in the stands.
Perry Bridge
Guest
UJ - well, in soccer the penalty box foul can occur anywhere and yet the kick is always taken from a single 'spot'. Likewise in basketball from the free throw line. In each case you may be advantaged or disadvantaged depending upon where the infringement occurs. And in soccer you get to give the ball to your best kick (this can be seen as immensely logical to maximise the benefit or extremely limiting to have such 'specialists'). It is what it is. The 'mark' even in English 18th century football was to mark the spot where the fair catch was taken. That's not ridiculous - it's what you do next that counts. The Aust footy mark becomes more about the spot past which the marker can't progress without 'playing on' and forfeiting the right to a free kick. The freedom is that he isn't required to kick over the mark (when within the general field of play). The 'penalty' of 5-10 metres at least illustrates that some observers might understand that taking a mark anywhere from say 30-35 metres out and having a shot at goal isn't nearly as straight forward as the good kickers make it look. Sports require their idiosyncrasies otherwise there would be a sameness. There's sufficient ridiculousness in most sports. In AFL - the big value players are the ones capable of taking what we call 'contested' marks and more so those able to achieve this deep inside the attacking 50m's. We like it. A big kick to the top of the square - a pack flies - what happens next......
Perry Bridge
Guest
AFL was created in the latter part of the 20th century. Australian Football - or - in particular - Melbourne/Victorian football was not 'anti-England' at all - it was simply about getting a single set of rules that all could play by together in a far away land with space. The evolution of the divergence in footballs in England was more about opposition than anything. The rules of what became soccer and rugby were more similar in many respects around the time that Melb rules came up with a unifying compromise set. As time progressed though - Rugby became far less about kicking goals and more about running the ball and scoring tries. What became soccer - via the effective merging of the Sheffield and London FA's (sets of rules) - saw the limited handling outlawed (no fair catches in general play) and saw 'heading' - although not legislated as a part of the game; saw heading accepted (because it was not handling). These two codes took until the 1870s to start getting their act together - but, even then - from the mother country you still had two 'schools of though' on football arriving at the docks. Meanwhile - in Melbourne - they'd been happily evolving their single unified instance of football and feeling pretty good about it. Why would you dismantle that when the Brits had failed to unify? And - in the end - it was the Brits who rejected/opposed the colonials game.
Uncle Junior
Guest
You love soccer, but you don't like watching it? How did you learn to improve yourself if you didn't like watching? Or did you just stay at the same technical and tactical level as when your dad gave you a soccer ball when you were 3 years old?
Uncle Junior
Guest
Totally agree, Lindsay Amner. I've never understood the ridiculous rule after a player has taken a mark, or been awarded a free kick, which puts the mark at the point of the incident. Given the basic physics of getting the ball over a bloke who is 6 foot tall, it means a mark or free kick disadvantages the attacking team by around 10m. Absolutely ridiculous. Is there any sport other than AFL that does this - ie after a foul the player who has the advantage is pushed further away from the scoring line? Does Gaelic football from which Aussie Rules was created have the same rule? I'd also like to see the AFL change the scoring so that a set-piece goal is 3 points and a goal on the run is 6 points (or keep it 6 points for set piece and 9 points on the run).
Bondy
Guest
I have to say the intent with the author has been genuine but when you lead yourself to frequent manipulation of the rules leads to this form of imagination ? ..
Rob
Guest
So... Someone who's national sport (rugby union) encourages you to THROW the ball to a player BEHIND the ball thinks the worst thing about AFL is the game stopping for a forward to have a shot at goal? LOL
Lindsay Amner
Roar Guru
thanks Clipper. Nobody has yet convinced me that my suggestion has no merit. A lot of people have told me that they disagree with the suggestion. The most common arguments so far have been that the game doesn't need changing or speeding up. That's hardly a persuasive argument designed to appeal to a non-AFL fan who feels that an aspect of the game is slow. The only real arguments against the suggestion have been that taking a mark gives the game necessary pauses and allows the mark taker time to choose his next option. Again, those arguments are valid if you believe the game doesn't need any further speeding up or continued momentum. I still tend to disagree.
Lindsay Amner
Roar Guru
Hitler made some of the most fabulous speeches of all time, The fact that I don't agree with most of what he said doesn't make them poor speeches. The fact that I have written an article you disagree with does not make it a poor article. In commenting on the article you don't actually have to address the merits of the article, you merely have to address the points being raised. This makes a debate. I am fully aware that AFL is not going to change because I made a suggestion, the article is there to raise issues which may not have been considered before and thereby create debate. A poor article would be poorly written and uninteresting. I don't think this is. The problem people have with this article is not that it is a poor article but that they feel the suggestion for change is poor, which has nothing to do with the quality of the article.
Floyd Calhoun
Guest
Huh? What's the alternative? To simply say ; 'It is indeed a very good article, but its complete bonkers'? Or, 'It's absolute rubbish but it has my full support.'
Emric
Guest
and you call yourself a kiwi
ChrisB
Guest
I'm sorry, you're talking rubbish. A few devotees in a few countries done equal international penetration. I'm a 30-year converted Aussie Rules fan who few up in NSW, played at school, loved it and have stuck wit it. My sons play it BUT it's not really penetrated into NSW and Qld beyond a smallish band of supporters plus people with a degree of interest on the Swans, Lions etc. there are no signs of it spreading internationally. Don't believe HeraldSun crap based on nothing more than a fed expats and a couple of locals.
clipper
Guest
I think you're being a bit harsh on Linsay, SportsFan GC. He, or she, has said they've been to a number of games and was a Swans member. But I think AFL takes awhile to fully comprehend, especially if you're from NZ - I think the same would be true if someone in Adelaide started following Rugby. So, now after this article, the points raised have been dismissed and explained why, maybe Lindsay will revisit watching the Swans. It would be interesting to know how soon after arriving from NZ he joined and shows how Sydney has become such a multi code city.
Lindsay Amner
Roar Guru
It's never going to be a big international sport simply because of the logistics of playing it on big ovals. As you say it does have a dedicated international following but this will only ever be small. The powers that be want it to expand in Australia in rugby states and I think my suggestion would probably help with that.
Lindsay Amner
Roar Guru
I totally agree there is no groundswell of support for such changes. The minor tweaks to the game which do take place do not go down well with the fan base already, so there's no chance that such a fundamental change as my suggestion would be made. The goal umpires flag twirling is a traditional part of the game and part of the goal celebration. I love that. I reckon they should bring back the white coats and hats. Taking the ball back to the centre is simply admin though and shouldnt be a performance, although others have pointed out that it does serve a purpose in rotating the umpires.
Lindsay Amner
Roar Guru
Useful point thanks
Lindsay Amner
Roar Guru
Thanks for that. That's a useful point. I'll watch for that.
Lindsay Amner
Roar Guru
So if I say something needs changing and someone else says it doesn't, surely that's a disagreement? The rights and wrongs of it are immaterial. You can't prove I'm wrong, you simply think so, ergo we disagree. That is the basis for debate. Saying it's a bad article simply because you disagree is not debating, it's simply being rude.
Lindsay Amner
Roar Guru
Happy to see any suggestions for improving rugby union. There are a number of things that could be improved. An outsider's eye is often useful. Why else do companies hire consultants to tell them how to do business better?