In 2018, the AFL was ruined. Well, it was if you asked every former player turned expert commentator.
The quality of the game was horrific, matches were looking ugly and there were not enough goals kicked.
The solution? Implement new rules.
A 6-6-6 formation at centre bounces was introduced during the off-season in an attempt to open the game up a little and encourage scoring.
And yes, to an extent the rule is working.
The Brisbane Lions in Round 2 provide a great example.
Brisbane scored 43 points from centre bounces to North Melbourne’s 14.
The Lions doubled North’s centre clearances that afternoon (20 to 10) and quick entries into the forward 50 resulted in big goals, especially in the final 15 minutes of the final quarter, when the game was in the balance.
(Jono Searle/AFL Photos/Getty Images)
So it’s opened the game up and created more opportunities to score, but it hasn’t resulted in more goals.
Of the 32 games played so far this season, the ton has only been achieved 13 times.
The issue of goal kicking was never going to be fixed by a few rule changes off season.
Because you can give teams more opportunities to score, but they won’t necessarily take their chances.
The amount of opportunities wasted in front of goal due to lack of confidence or lack of ability is at the heart of the issue.
I’ll give you a few examples from the weekend gone by.
Halfway through the second quarter on Saturday night, North Melbourne had scored 1.9 and finished with 17 behinds for the game.
Ed Curnow had the opportunity to kick the sealer for Carlton late in the final term.
I don’t need to remind Carlton fans how costly his miss was.
Of the nine games played this weekend, only one – Richmond versus Port Adelaide – saw both sides score more goals than behinds.
Yes, there are rushed behinds that come into consideration but it doesn’t excuse the main issue at hand.
If AFL CEO Gill McLachlan really wanted to see more goals in a game, he needed to put on a goal-kicking master class over summer.
(AAP Image/Tracey Nearmy)
Yes, the rule change has created more opportunities but it’s the players’ responsibility to make the most of them.
This shouldn’t be news to anyone, either.
Accuracy in front of goal has been on a slow decline for a while now.
In round 4, 1999 teams kicked 214 goals from 380 scores (56 per cent).
In round 4, 2009 teams kicked 201 goals from 385 scores (52 per cent).
In round 4, 2019 teams kicked 183 goals from 372 scores (49 per cent).
It’s also important to note that since 2009, the rushed behind rule was changed so kick-out defenders could not simply walk backwards if there was nothing they liked on offer.
There has been an addition of two sides between 2009 and 2019 but that simply gives us a larger sample size to work with, rather than impacting the averages.
The game has changed so much since the turn of the century and with the physical demands increasing on players every year, drafting has become increasingly focused on fitness and athletic ability rather than talent.
That is not to say our players lack talent but it probably means we will never see a Scott Cummings type player in our game again.
In his 128 game career, Cummings kicked 349 goals, picking up a Coleman Medal in 1999 and club leading goal-kicker gongs three times on the way.
He spent most of his time at full forward and rocked a hectic dad bod, but he was recruited on talent and not athletic build.
And more often than not, he delivered.
So the demands of the game have changed and there’s nothing wrong with that.
It simply means we need to deal with the consequences of lower scoring games.
But who says low scores don’t equal entertainment?
Four games were decided by less than 10 points this weekend and none of the eight sides involved scored three figures.
Yes, some were of a higher quality than others but all four were entertaining.
The real issue doesn’t lie in the lack of goals, it lies in the effect these changes are having on our umpires.
The standard of umpiring has been pretty ordinary in the opening four rounds of the season.
When watching your own side, you think the umps are rubbish and doing your team no favours at all.
But when you are watching with neutral eyes, it’s easy to see how overwhelmed the umpires would be during a game.
Yes, it’s their job but it hasn’t been made any easier by the AFL.
Every year the umpires are bombarded with a lot of new rules, most of which are unnecessary and just create more confusion.
There is so much for the umpires to think about during every second of play it’s no wonder there’s confusion and no one knows what the real rules are.
The AFL is so desperate to ‘save the game’ that as a result they’re making it more difficult for everyone to keep up with.
AFL is evolving at lightning pace and instead of trying to stop that from happening, AFL officials must do what they can to enhance its new strengths.
As for the goal kicking?
That’s for the players to fix and not the AFL.
Rowdy
Roar Rookie
Ascendancy in game plans are short-lived. Someone will come up with a game plan to negate the flavour of the half-season. ---- To me, reducing the players by two or three will reduce player range and movement enough for the game to become more strategic rather than the rabid-fest it is atm. ---- Sports administrators, with a weather-eye to trends affecting collision games, will see the merit of reducing player congsetion. Head trauma will continue to be a growing problem. Savvy lawyers will have field day with leagues that don't implement player safety rules that reflect growing concerns. ---- This, with other advantages outlined earlier, will BE implemented before we know it. To do otherwise will invite a huge risk of major litigation and payouts to players so injured.
Doctor Rotcod
Roar Rookie
Petrie was also great at the Eagles
Doctor Rotcod
Roar Rookie
AFL and most Australian Rules games are played on huge grounds by world sports standards. There can be a lot of space available for 36 players, at least half of whom are moving in a limited area or static at any one time. Look at what Simpson has coached his players to do. …When the opposition has the ball, squeeze the ground, make it smaller by player movement. When you have the ball, make the ground larger by player movement so your elite runners can make position and take marks. More marks equals more kicks equals more forward 50s with effect. This doesn’t translate to higher scores but the opposition have to bust a gut over and over again and the last five minutes of quarters and games seems to be when the Eagles score
Goalsonly
Roar Rookie
This story ignores why players are missing in front of goal. It has to be fear. They freeze or blaze away. Ice cold clinical finishing is the true footy gold the coaches are panning for. This is an emotional intelligence issue. It used to be reading, writing and arithmetic in education. Emotional intelligence is what is needed in schools at a young age. Not just in footy teams but for all of us. Also, the coaches only want one thing and it's not winning ... it's four points. If losing gave you the points we'd all be kicking backwards. Change the rewards and change the game. Make goals the goal. If you kick 20 goals then that's your reward. So what if the other team gets 16 or however many. I am hearing this sort of talk about rewards more and more on (not moron) the radio by listeners and yet it remains an elephant in the room for a lot of analysis. As it stands there is only one imperative which is to outscore your opponent. What if the standard of any particular game had too stand up to the rigors of the entire competition in any given round? Winning with only ten (or sometimes less) goals on the board would no longer be good enough. Poor Ross (Lyon and other negating maestros) would have to direct their creative brilliance toward the only numbers that really should matter which is how many times you kick it through the big sticks with no one touching it. The only problem this would create is how do we get to the 6 o'clock news on time with all these goals being scored. The beauty of this 'goalsonly' simple rewards is that it overrides any rule changes and you don't have to change a (damn) thing. In point of fact you could return all the rules to gound zero (for want of a better term). It would be hard to implement because of the gravy train that feeds off the high drama that four points creates. I'd rather the high scoring spectacle for entertainment over the drama/tragedy of the win/lose at all cost mentality. I guess a legitimate question would be "Would the footy public still engage with the same intensity if the pain of losing was somehow reduced?" I mean walking away with one (or however many) less goals than the other team is hardly worth crying over. That does change (a lot) if the winner gets forty goals and you only get five. This is not about reducing the emotional pain of defeat. It's about administrating toward bringing out the best in the game. And .... just imagine some team like Brisbane or StKilda or Gold Coast (this year) kicking ten goals in the final quarter to make the finals. That's fever pitch.
Lawrence
Roar Rookie
I agree, watched the Eagles vs Freo, low scoring game. As soon as the Eagles had a lead they played possession footy in their back half, rarely kicking to a 50/50. Very much in the mould of soccer when a team is a goal up and tries to protect its lead. It's usually the best defensive teams in any code (soccer, basketball etc) that has the most success. AFL coaches are no different.
JamesH
Roar Guru
Good points. My fondest memories of footy are from the turn of the century (funnily enough the last time Essendon was a force in the competition). My Dad's are from the early 80s (when his Blues dominated). I'm really enjoying the style of footy the Bombers are generally playing right now, even though they're not yet a top side. Brisbane and Geelong too. A while back I was discussing on this site the idea of 16-a-side as a logical way to reduce congestion. Less players = more space. Personally, though, I'd rather the AFL didn't mess with the game as much as they already do, let alone make such a significant change.
shifty
Roar Rookie
Have to agree with you on this, pay the free kicks and the players will spread. Some might even stay somwhat in position in anticipation of the quick kick out of the pack or the inevitable free kick.
JW
Guest
There is a chance it would bring back the big full forward. If the defender tries to run off them and there is a turnover, then they are caught way out of position and have to back track to cover Plugger without as much team support. Good luck! It should leave more space for Plugger to lead into also in general play and less opportunity for a third or fourth defender to spoil. Of course, there is a risk it becomes like rugby 7s though and a game built for the runners.
JW
Guest
I agree with your sentiment. I don' think the game is that bad now. There are some good games and some duds as there always have been. I think the game peaked in the early 90s when you had the glamour full forwards - but that was because I was 10 yrs old at the time. My parents thought it peaked 30 years before that funnily enough, and my grandparents 50yrs before that. I threw out the 14 a side comment to spark the debate, and I do think it has some merit - particularly since it aligns with the AFL's goals of reducing congestion, increasing scoring and growing the game internationally (where 18 players per team and ground size are barriers to its growth).
Peter the Scribe
Roar Guru
AFLX is a marketing guys idea that Gil ran with. It’s Rock Paper Scissors and what Zoom goals? How many sports have 36 players on the same size field we play on? It is so simple. The field is crowded. We didn’t need the rule changes we needed to reduce the number of players on the field. Put your head in the sand if you prefer but it will happen,
Peter the Scribe
Roar Guru
I know forward and back pockets don’t exist anymore Maximus, It’s illustrative. Get used to a team sheet minus pockets. It may start slower by 16 a side or 15 but it will happen. It’s simple. It’s not about the past . Go watch some suburban footy and see how close most AFL games are to it.
J.T. Delacroix
Guest
That’s probably true, Chanco. Also the fact that the average small & not so small forward these days seem to be far more comfortable with the freakish banana kick or the impossible bouncing goal from the pocket than they are with a routine set shot from 40m on a slight angle.
Maximus insight
Guest
And the counter argument to this apparently is only athletes are being chosen at elite junior level! It is far harder to execute skills nowadays. Also you can hardly reduce footballing ability down to foot skills. There have been some fine athletes with silky foot skills who ultimately prove to be terrible footballers Ultimately though nowadays the best junior footballers always get drafted and athletes with low footballing ability rarely do
Maximus insight
Guest
Feel free to link this analysis so I can analyse it!
Rowdy
Roar Rookie
Yes, that is why a small reduction in players would reduce the defensive pressure.
Chancho
Roar Rookie
This comment perfectly sums it up: The amount of opportunities wasted in front of goal due to lack of confidence or lack of ability is at the heart of the issue. I have been thinking recently that the quest for athleticism is outweighing those with footy skills for too long. Would the likes of Plugger, Dunstal or Diesel Williams get a shot in this day?
IAP
Guest
There’s definitely more difficult shots now - from the 50, from the pockets, but players goal kicking technique is generally woeful. They lean back, they drop the ball from too high, they don’t run straight. This isn’t acceptable for league footballers. Most of the time I can pick which side of goal they’re going to miss to based on their run up. The frustrating this is that this is fixable, and it’s the most critical part of the game; so why don’t they fix it? All they need to do is run straight, drop the ball from knee height and pick a target and kick through the ball. It’s that simple.
IAP
Guest
The AFL wants the ruck contest to resemble a basketball tip off.
Peter the Scribe
Roar Guru
Totally different Richie. It’s about opening up the game again
Doctor Rotcod
Roar Rookie
Swimmers are often the same. Those taught technique from early on excel in pressure situations. But if you look at a back line of excellence, Hurn, Barrass, McGovern, Sheppard and Jetta, what stands out is their accuracy by foot. However those kicks aren't always straight kicks but often low and angled to players' advantage. You would think that being trained to kick goals from tight angles would translate to better goalfront kicking scoring but it hasn't transpired that way