Attack is back! High-scoring footy is (hopefully) the way of the future

By Josh / Expert

There’s a new craze sweeping the nation – or more accurately, an old craze revived – and its name is attacking footy. After years of sitting through Paul Roos and Ross Lyon-engineered snoozefests, attacking, high-scoring football is back! Well, I hope.

Maybe I’m being a little bit premature – after all, we’re only ten games into the season – but the signs so far have been very strong that coaches and teams across the league are once again starting to embrace high-scoring football.

Last season across the entire year we had just eight games where both teams hit the triple figure mark (this being so rare, by the way, is why that ‘first to 100′ rule the commentators prattle on about makes no sense). In Round 1 this season we’ve already had two.

Last year, on average, the eighteen teams scored a combined 1483 points per round. That takes a very slight hit from having one game cancelled during the season but it’s negligible. In Round 1 of 2016, the competition put together 1748 points – an improvement of a little over 44 goals for the week.

Maybe it was just an outlier, a red herring that will give us all a bit of hope before we return to low-scoring grinds in a few weeks time. No doubt there will be a few of those this season either way, but there’s some good reason to believe that attack really is back.

One thing that is helping the revival of high-scoring footy is the AFL’s new interpretation for the deliberate out of bounds rule. You will see footy fans with fairly divisive opinions of it – I’m pretty sure Tigers fans are not too keen on it after last night – but in my view it has proven a brilliant innovation.

For far too long teams have been able to take easy kicks along the boundary line going nowhere with the aim of dribbling the ball out of bounds and setting up a stoppage situation further up the ground. This allows teams to reset their structure and flood players to where they think the ball is going to go. In short, it slows the game down.

These disposals that wind up out of bounds have always been deliberate choices by the player, but haven’t been classified as such by umpires before this year. Generally speaking in the past if the player disposing of the ball has had anything resembling pressure on his disposal, then the umpires have been willing to extend the benefit of the doubt.

That has come to an end this season and umpires are now asking players to show a desire to keep the ball in play – you need to send it towards a teammate, and you can’t jog it over the line either, even if there is an opposition player nearby.

The result is that players have been forced to try and keep the game moving, or give away a free kick to the opposition. And in this modern day game of hard running, endurance, and getting numbers to the contest, that has led to more situations where teams have a chance to break past the opposition’s structure and set up a scoring opportunity.

While that new rule has no doubt contributed to the increase in scoring, I also think that in a wider sense, AFL coaches are beginning to embrace the fact attacking footy is what wins you games.

The Hawks after all have built a triple-premiership era on offence. That’s not to say their defence has been poor by any means, but it’s their versatile, multi-faceted forward line that has delivered the scores needed for three consecutive premiership cups.

Last year the highly-restrictive Fremantle managed to finish on top of the ladder but couldn’t get things done in the heat of finals. Meanwhile, the two highest scoring teams in the league; Hawthorn and West Coast contested the grand final. Adelaide and North Melbourne, the third and fifth highest scoring teams in the league, won three finals between them.

Although many will tell you that the most important thing in the game is winning the ball, it’s seeming more and more that what you do with the ball once you’ve got a hold of it is just as if not more important.

It’s no use winning a clearance if you just boot it straight into the welcoming arms of the oppositions’s spare defender.

Instead it seems that the game is increasingly becoming focused around three areas in particular: speed, ball-use, and finishing ability. And unlike contested ball – which any blue-collar team can find enough big bodies to do well in – these traits are in short supply.

The player with speed or the player who can use the ball well – or ideally, the player who can do both – is the player best placed to upset the opposition’s defensive structure and set up a scoring opportunity. After that it’s just a matter of converting the score, which sounds so simple, but basic skill errors in front of goal still cost teams games week after week.

It’s not hard to understand why defence used to reign supreme because It’s much easier to defend than it is to attack. If you want to attack you have to correctly execute all the relevant skills, while if you want to defend all you have to do is stop another bloke from doing that.

Ordinary players can become high-quality defenders but ordinary players don’t become high-quality attackers, it’s as simple as that. Ross Lyon’s St Kilda and Fremantle sides have been built on this theory in many ways, and in the age of defensive footy it came close to delivering flags for both sides.

Now defence-minded teams are getting cut up by the speed, superior ball movement and finishing ability of those sides that have embraced high-scoring footy and have the talent to pull it off. You need go no further than the Western Bulldogs’ demolition of Fremantle last week to see the proof of this.

So what does it all mean? At this stage, it looks like it means more watchable footy, and it suggests that those teams with the ability to put up high scores will be the ones contending for the flag this year.

Hawthorn and West Coast are given, but also Adelaide, the Bulldogs, North Melbourne, Sydney and Port Adelaide could be in the mix based on their scoring power. Geelong too if they keep up the improvement they showed in Round 1.

In the mean time if your team has more than a few players who can’t use the ball well, is slow, or doesn’t have a lot of options in the forward line, they probably aren’t a contender. This is a big worry for Fremantle, and also for Richmond.

We saw in last night’s thriller that the Tigers’ side is loaded with players who can’t be relied upon to get the ball where it needs to go – ask a Richmond fan this morning what they think of Taylor Hunt and you will get a crash course in this problem.

The Tigers also lack a really reliable forward option outside of Jack Riewoldt, especially at this time while Brett Deledio and Shane Edwards are sitting on the sidelines. Jayden Short’s three goals on debut were impressive, but they really need to find some more dangerous forward options if they’re going to compete with the best.

Although Collingwood have similar problems with a number of poor ball-users in their side and a forward mix not known for its consistency, we saw last night that the ability to put a few quick goals together is what will win matches for teams this year.

Offensive footy versus defensive footy will get a great test next weekend when the Tigers host the Crows at Etihad Stadium on Saturday afternoon. Will it be old-fashioned defence or new-fangled offence that wins the day?

Only time will tell, but based on everything we’ve seen so far this year, I’ll be tipping the latter.

The Crowd Says:

2016-04-04T00:01:17+00:00

Don Freo

Guest


I'm always ok. If they lose games I always enjoy the performances of the emerging players and those that played well.

2016-04-03T14:24:23+00:00

Dalgety Carrington

Roar Guru


A bit basketbally perhaps?

AUTHOR

2016-04-03T14:18:21+00:00

Josh

Expert


To each their own, I'm definitely finding this much better viewing than watching the rolling maul.

AUTHOR

2016-04-03T14:16:52+00:00

Josh

Expert


Bingo - you need to attack and you need to do it well. Outside players are often maligned for being "soft" but I think as time goes on we are going to see inside players becoming more and more maligned for their poor kicking. I reckon in five years time it's going to be very hard to survive in the AFL if you're not a reliable kick.

AUTHOR

2016-04-03T14:15:27+00:00

Josh

Expert


I can't remember the last time a rule change was so well received. Well, aside from the removal of the sub rule, which is not so much a rule change as the reversal of a rule change.

AUTHOR

2016-04-03T14:14:23+00:00

Josh

Expert


It's definitely the result of a pattern that's been developing over the course of a few years RD, but it's taken a significant step forward this year I think, as indicated by the significant increase in points per week. Of course, we'll need to wait and see if that trend evens out across the season or not.

AUTHOR

2016-04-03T14:12:58+00:00

Josh

Expert


So far that march seems to be headed right off a cliff... but I hope the Dockers get on the right track for your sake Don!

AUTHOR

2016-04-03T14:12:25+00:00

Josh

Expert


Realistically odds are that the grand final isn't going to be that great a game most of the time... you'd generally hope it's going to be between two teams of a relatively even level, but even teams who are fairly close to eachother regularly win by 30, 40 points, especially at the end of a long season. With GWS and Gold Coast slowly gaining maturity the league has been lowish in blowouts lately. Personally I'd take a blowout win over a low-scoring scrubber nine times out of ten.

2016-04-03T01:05:06+00:00

Slane

Guest


Swings and roundabouts. I get just as bored watching two teams take turns scoring as I do watching 30 players crowded into one third of the ground. We aren't watching great footballers, we are watching intelligent structures and counter-punching midfielders kicking to forwards who rarely have a defender within spoiling distance. The 'free flowing', run through the guts style of footy leads to uncontested marks and easy goals over the top. So we are left with the excitement of a string of handballs through the center square while we miss out on watching a big forward fly over a pack. Feels to me like we are robbing peter to pay paul.

2016-04-02T22:22:55+00:00

BigAl

Guest


Really good, clever, Oscar winning players should handball into the air and then give the ball a good desperate defensive, clearing punch out of bounds !

2016-04-02T11:35:28+00:00

Chancho

Roar Rookie


Attack and counter attack Josh. Judging from this round (to the end of Saturday at least), inefficiency is what's killing sides and doesn't matter how much ball you have, if you give it away cheap or don't make the most of your inside 50 opportunities then you're cooked.

2016-04-02T07:35:59+00:00

Mister Football

Roar Guru


I think it's a terrific change too. One of my pet hates is the commentators saying: what else could he do? Better players find a way, lesser players will get pinged.

2016-04-02T02:47:31+00:00

Maggie

Guest


Heehee!

2016-04-02T02:27:33+00:00

Doc Disnick

Roar Guru


Agree also Paul - let's just hope they don't soften up on it. I felt the umpires in the Hawks vs Cats game were quite soft compared to the other 8 games. It was a good game, but it had a different feel about it. There was something I didn't like about it. I'd be interested to see if there were more boundary throw-ins, because it sure felt like there were due to some very soft decisions against deliberate.

2016-04-02T02:14:47+00:00

Samantha

Roar Rookie


I agree Paul D.

2016-04-02T02:09:56+00:00

Doc Disnick

Roar Guru


When you say 'grind approach', I assume you're talking about Freo and Sydney of the past? Well, I don't think most teams have been doing this. Malthouse last year was asked about his famous Collingwood offensive press, which ultimately won them the 2010 flag. He said it took about 5 years for that system to mature and in 2011, their team was also near unstoppable with it. It's not easy to develop premiership winning game plans, so even if you do copy the premiers, it will take a good 5+ years to fully mature in all likelihood. By then, the premiers have also changed, especially Clarko and the Hawks who've been the benchmark of the competition for half a decade now. As a result, most teams find themselves chasing their tales, but do not mistake that for so many coaches taking the 'grind approach' because I don't believe that's entirely true. Go read my article on offence vs defence, which I wrote two years ago. It highlights these points well and continues to be the case today - just more evident to the average punter now. There are many other factors that should also be taken into consideration when writing an article like this, before drawing such conclusions. For instance: The two expansion teams will have skew the data and possibly have allowed the top teams to stay on top for longer. It may not necessarily be their game plans that have been successful, but the inability for the middle tier teams to close the gap due to lack of player talent. Perhaps all the controversy in the NFL over concussions have resulted in the AFL being proactive in protecting the 'head'. The ramifications of such rule changes have been wide spread, possibly leading to rugby style mauls because players have not been able to tackle the same way, or use the bump effectively. As a result, teams that play free-flowing, attacking football have benefitted more than teams who can't get the ball away quickly, but who's to say had these rules not come in, Freo's game style may have prevailed in finals football better then Clarko's? With this years rule changes, the limited date we have from round 1 does indeed suggest me have more attacking football. Is that because of teams instigating this game style or more a result of the rules being changed? The significant increase in scoring across all teams suggests the later. It's never quite as simple as many make it out to be.

2016-04-02T01:44:41+00:00

Don Freo

Guest


...and just in case people complain that it changed the result, The Woods took a mark in the goal square seconds before that should have been paid, but wasn't.

2016-04-02T01:40:06+00:00

Paul D

Roar Guru


Loving the new out of bounds rule, I think it's going to be one of the best changes to the game we've seen for a while.

2016-04-02T01:28:27+00:00

Fadida

Guest


Given that Rick, why do you think that so many coaches have gone for the "grind approach"? You'd think that what wins trophies should be fashionable

2016-04-02T01:21:40+00:00

Doc Disnick

Roar Guru


"So what does it all mean? At this stage, it looks like it means more watchable footy, and it suggests that those teams with the ability to put up high scores will be the ones contending for the flag this year." This has been happening for nearly a decade now Josh. I even wrote an article on it two years ago. Offensively geared teams over the course of the AFL (not VFL) have won out more times than defensive ones.

More Comments on The Roar

Read more at The Roar