Fifteen rounds into this season and it’s fair to say it hasn’t been a good one.
Round 15 was the perfect storm. In the week’s premium slot, Collingwood and Hawthorn produced one of the worst games in memory: a dour, unimaginative rock-fight that hardly managed to be the least bit interesting, despite a tight finish and an upset result.
Things didn’t get much better the next day.
As I sat in the front row of the top deck of the Southern Stand, enjoying a beer in the glorious winter sun, the Bombers and Swans again played a game of frightened, conservative footy that for three-and-a-bit quarters tried all it could to spoil an otherwise delightful afternoon.
And then something brilliant happened: Sydney realised they were about to lose.
Suddenly, the stodgy Swans were bold and aggressive, sprinting up the wings, biting off long and risky kicks and – gasp – trying to score.
Essendon seemed more than happy with this development, suddenly they had more space and freedom when the ball was in their control.
The ground seemed to get bigger, the players and the ball moved faster – hell, the beer even tasted better.
It was a reminder that you don’t have to scratch too far beneath the surface to find good football, and also that most players want to play this way – there has to be something in that part as well.
What’s causing this unimaginative footy? Well, coaches, obviously.
The men in charge are placing extreme value on maintaining possession. After all, your opponent can’t score without the footy.
But there’s a difference between smart and conservative ball movement and defensive ball movement. Too many teams are going with the latter and it’s sucking the life out of games.
The parity of the league is another factor, though I’m not sure if it’s a cause or effect.
Is the competition so even because lesser sides are so often able to drag superior opponents down to their level?
If you’re outclassed, it makes sense to slow things down and, in essence, shorten the game.
The Bulldogs successfully managed to do so against the ladder-leading Cats. Muck things up for three quarters and then hope a 20-minute edge is enough to earn the four points.
Photo by Quinn Rooney/Getty Images
Perhaps the Hawks deserve the same credit for their win against Collingwood.
Why two evenly matched teams in Sydney and Essendon would revert to such tactics is more confusing; perhaps it’s in those coaches’ DNA.
Or perhaps this season is so even because of a flood of mediocrity and not enough teams have the talent of the confidence to take on their opponents.
Regardless, it’s important to maintain some perspective. Not every game can look the same, nor should it, and it’s unreasonable to expect every match to be a good one.
It’s also important to make a distinction between good football and good contests. It’s possible to have good football in a bad contest – see Port’s Showdown win for an example – and the opposite is also true.
You have to wonder, too, if we’d be hearing the same complaints about the state of the game if the Sunday twilight match – consistently one of the best games of the round – drove the weekly narrative as strongly as Friday night does.
There are teams playing good football most weeks – the Lions, Power and Giants spring immediately to mind – it’s just that few of them live in Melbourne, where the game’s loudest voices reside.
Munro Mike
Roar Rookie
The firmer grounds are the biggest issue for injury. Granted that running through a boggy ground all day can increase fatigue....and in the old days the muddy cricket pitch areas could become treacherous glue pots as the started drying. However - the ground surfaces especially Docklands and Optus in Perth are too hard. And the irony of concussions in AFL is that head crashing into the ground is probably the biggest factor. Not as much give as in the past. Perhaps both those grounds used soccer pitch consultants??
Vicboy
Roar Rookie
I would be happy with 40 per game. Runner allowed on 10 times per quarter also. The higher intensity and increased interchange has not reduced injuries. The coaches are stuffing things up. Don't listen to them!
michael RVC
Roar Pro
16 on the field each, 4 interchange to a max of 80 each, 2 subs.
Peter the Scribe
Roar Guru
An interesting perspective Munro. I guess players are way fitter as well so can transition run to a much higher level.
Munro Mike
Roar Rookie
#Peter the Scribe "bigger grounds and better drainage should be opening the game not closing it down" You'd like to think so.....however - the biggest thing it does is allows players to run back and forth through the corridor of the ground. Defensively. It also means that the 'wall' has to cover that territory and ironically tightening down on 'out of bounds deliberately' only adds to the issue - because it provides a 'virtual' player(member of the 'wall') on each side of the ground......
Doctor Rotcod
Roar Rookie
Sides get tired, young and older players make turnovers,long kicks are still long,congestion gets reduced because players can't get to contests. Interchange reduction makes sense; maybe down to 60, or a maximum of 20 per quarter. Not all players need a rest https://www.afl.com.au/news/2019-07-11/whos-on-the-ground-the-most-surprising-names-in-the-top-15
Doctor Rotcod
Roar Rookie
A Billy Walker statue would be the best.
User
Roar Rookie
Miss the carpark at lathlain but to have both my sides based there is pretty damn good, go past the filth of steel blue oval everyday doc I'm surprised there isn't a toddy statue out the front ;)
Vicboy
Roar Rookie
Individual brilliance Not on show Too many players around the ball Every game looks the same on TV Rule changes have caused..... more Changes to other rules How we yearn for 1 on 1 contests Avatar football is boring No one seems to understand the Game anymore - media talk about Everything but the game
Vicboy
Roar Rookie
Yep stop tinkering. Reduce interchange Why is red time more interesting?!
Jonboy
Roar Rookie
You will never see the game played as it was in the first 5 years of the so called AFL. Nothing compares to the great SO Origin games between SA, WA and Vic. Apart from a few the skill levels displayed are ordinary to say the least in today's game.
Geoff from Bruce Stadium
Roar Rookie
To anyone who has followed AFL for a long time the current standard of footy is terrible. We just don't see the individual skills of champion footballers anymore - and that's due to the defensive mindset where players aren't allowed to take risks. In the past taking risks often led to reward but now players are punished for going outside the team ethic of possession football. RIP AFL- the previous greats of the game would be appalled.
Goalsonly
Roar Rookie
I think the mentality is tied in with the way the game is played. Sports too important to let it just be about winning without looking after the game itself. Play to win of course but don't let that stop the enjoyment. I think joy of life and mental health are linked.
Gavan Iacono
Roar Rookie
Peter, yes, North's last few weeks are possibly as impressive as anyone's. Their muscular approach appeals to my 70s sensibilties (I still get excited rewatching the '71 GF when 2 Aplha male coaches faced off), as well as providing an antidote to the current football-style zeitgeist. It would hold up in finals I think. Dogs come to mind also. Power possibly. Lions too. One of the top tier teams currently in a lull (your mob) can also rediscover their 2018 gusto. My mob could be a wild card, too. Eagles and Cats play attractive footy when they are released from the gloomy approach. The season can be saved. The bravest team would win the whole thing if I had my way. Let's hope.
Peter the Scribe
Roar Guru
Your last sentence summed up the challenges of suburban grounds back in the day. Remember they were tiny too like Victoria Park, South Melbourne, Glenferrie...bigger grounds and better drainage should be opening the game not closing it down
Peter the Scribe
Roar Guru
Them don’t have genuine hate though as do them against the Pies
PriddisJunior
Roar Rookie
Only if they could have marked it. i undertsnd better now and think you are onto something though, changers in players mentality has a big effect on a game.
Munro Mike
Roar Rookie
In general - people have to be careful what they wish for. The beauty of Australian Football is the relative lack of 'prohibitive' rules - - rules that say you can't do this and can't go there and .....so on. What we have to be careful is trying to manipulate the rules to provide a game style that largely never was. Oh 1993.....what a year......well, yep.....an interesting season (until Carey did his hammy up at Cararra). But in the main - many people growing up with the game through the 70s, 80s and into the 90s actually saw very little of it on TV and stuff all 'live'. Friday nights were mostly the domain of North Melbourne. In the '80s we had the Swans every second Sunday. Often we only saw some highlights from our own team.....on the Winners or Big League - perhaps a 20 minute period of play that was the key part of the game - - not realising the rest was pretty well a slogfest waiting for the game to crack open. In the '90s we got to see the Crows or Eagles on a Sunday.......and yay...even the Bears. Certainly there tended to be less mud in the middle of Subi or Footy Park. But - what do we actually want? I'm happy with games that ebb and flow; with a battle of wills, tactics and strategies; I know 'red time' in any quarter is always and always has been a danger time. In the 'old days' the third quarter was termed the "premiership quarter"......that's when a game would break open. These days - it's often the final term - but hey, I recall perennial wooden spooner St Kilda often being competitive right up to the final term when they would be broken wide open. Just gotta be careful about tinkering. And be aware that the biggest tinker ever was the removal of muddy cricket pitches along with kick-ass drainage systems.
Munro Mike
Roar Rookie
#Darrin Lia and others, You can't have an 'absolute' bonus system simply because - for example - on a given wet weather day one team might play under the roof at Docklands and another in the wind and wet at the 'G. And over a season - the irregular fixture means too great a bonus for those sides that might encounter a bottom side twice. At best - such a system needs to be relative in its measurement - beat your opposition by over 50%..... The fixture side of it - one could argue that the bonus points system applies only to 17 rounds of each team playing each other once. Perhaps rounds 1 to 17 (potentially 18 due to splitting 2 rounds across 3 'bye weeks'). The final 5 rounds then wouldn't factor in that way - because that's when list management is really kicking in and results can be hugely distorted.
Goalsonly
Roar Rookie
I like the kind of radical where the only change has nothing to do with onfield. It's just a different accounting system that salutes the game over the result.