Roast State of the modern game; Clarkson

[Rich01]

2001 was an era where coaching was far less sophisticated. Teams were no where near as good defensively as they are now. The only way to go back to an era where players have more space to run and carry and also make decisions is to make it a lot harder for coaches to setup defensively. The only real way to do that is to have fewer players on the field as fewer players on the field means a lot more gaps in zone defences, and a lot more space to move.

So you are suggesting to go back to an era of high scoring, instead of replicating the rules from that time, we drastically change them without them being proven, again?

 

[RUNVS]

So you are suggesting to go back to an era of high scoring, instead of replicating the rules from that time, we drastically change them without them being proven, again?

You can't replicate the mindset of coaches though. You can't make high pressure defensive play or zoned defences just disappear from the mindset of coaches. The reason the AFL became worse in the last 20 years for scoring is because the coaches kept coming up with new and better ways of applying defensive pressure. Change all the rules you want, go back to the rules of 2001 or 1890 and it isn't going to suddenly make the 2020 coaches how to forget how to coach defensively.

The reason the game was so good in the 90's and earlier from a scoring standpoint was that the coaches were simple in how they coached. Strategy and defensive planning were not something they considered, at least not at a sophisticated level.

 

[RudyBlue]

You can't replicate the mindset of coaches though. You can't make high pressure defensive play or zoned defences just disappear from the mindset of coaches. The reason the AFL became worse in the last 20 years for scoring is because the coaches kept coming up with new and better ways of applying defensive pressure. Change all the rules you want, go back to the rules of 2001 or 1890 and it isn't going to suddenly make the 2020 coaches how to forget how to coach defensively.

The reason the game was so good in the 90's and earlier from a scoring standpoint was that the coaches were simple in how they coached. Strategy and defensive planning were not something they considered, at least not at a sophisticated level.

We’ve had congestion since the late 2000s - the average score per team stayed around the low 90s until 2015ish.

 

[Rich01]

You can't replicate the mindset of coaches though. You can't make high pressure defensive play or zoned defences just disappear from the mindset of coaches. The reason the AFL became worse in the last 20 years for scoring is because the coaches kept coming up with new and better ways of applying defensive pressure. Change all the rules you want, go back to the rules of 2001 or 1890 and it isn't going to suddenly make the 2020 coaches how to forget how to coach defensively.

The reason the game was so good in the 90's and earlier from a scoring standpoint was that the coaches were simple in how they coached. Strategy and defensive planning were not something they considered, at least not at a sophisticated level.

I don’t disagree with any of the above. But has reducing players on the field proven that scoring increased?

 

[RUNVS]

We’ve had congestion since the late 2000s - the average score per team stayed around the low 90s until 2015ish.

Unfortunately the problem is coaches are only getting better at it as they learn from each other. As a result without changes, significant changes, it is only going to get worse.

 

[RUNVS]

I don’t disagree with any of the above. But has reducing players on the field proven that scoring increased?

According to a number of coaches, most recently Chris Scott, he said that when Geelong plays 16 a side for practices he can see a huge change in how the ball moves.

I would go one further and go 15 a side, make it so applying defensive pressure is so much harder than it is with 18 a side. Going 15 a side is a one time change, and it will future proof the game.

 

[Rich01]

According to a number of coaches, most recently Chris Scott, he said that when Geelong plays 16 a side for practices he can see a huge change in how the ball moves.

I would go one further and go 15 a side, make it so applying defensive pressure is so much harder than it is with 18 a side. Going 15 a side is a one time change, and it will future proof the game.

Sounds like what the media said about the 6/6/6 rule. Before the AFL stuffs the game up any further, I’d like to see proof that a new rule change will improve the game over a reasonable amount of time. Chris Scott vouching for it in team practice doesn’t really cut it for me.

 

[RUNVS]

Sounds like what the media said about the 6/6/6 rule. Before the AFL stuffs the game up any further, I’d like to see proof that a new rule change will improve the game over a reasonable amount of time. Chris Scott vouching for it in team practice doesn’t really cut it for me.

Wouldn't cut it for me either, but it is something the AFL should trial. I mean if the were serious they would, as there are a lot of games in the last few rounds that don't matter. The AFL should use those games to trial new rules. Too late now I suppose.

 

[BF Tiger]

Why not trial 15 or 16 a side in the pre-season? It's so simple. Each team could field two sides as well. That way a significant data set is created quite quickly. Run it for at least two seasons. Analyse the results. Make changes to the main season if appropriate.

 

[Rich01]

Wouldn't cut it for me either, but it is something the AFL should trial. I mean if the were serious they would, as there are a lot of games in the last few rounds that don't matter. The AFL should use those games to trial new rules. Too late now I suppose.

Wouldn’t be against trialling for an season in the lower leagues. Perhaps the WAFL. Then assessing. Making big changes without testing shows you don’t learn from your mistakes.

The first thing they need to do is bring back the longer quarters and not entertain the stupid festival of footy crap we have had to have this year. Players are fatigued and the game is obviously worse off for it.

 

[Lsta062]

OK so the game this season is worse than previous years IMO. It got better for like 3-4 rounds and probably degraded from there. It just seems to get worse and worse every year unfortunately.

I think it is safe to say that Hocking's rule changes from last season have not improved the game nor increased the scoring. I want him to wind back the 6-6-6 rule, the stand rule, and the 'nominate a ruck' rule because they are just not having a big enough impact on the game and are a nuisance to the flow of the game with the umpires often needing to address the players on them.

In general though, I'm at a loss as to what can be done about it because I think it's currently awful overall (not including the standard of some teams like Bulldogs or Brisbane) and can't think of a clear solution on how to fix the overall standard. Is it the coaches just being too afraid to concede? Is it the current group of players just not being as skilled as previous eras? Should we just remove the interchange cap altogether to keep the players fresher for longer?

I have been against the following for so long, but I think I might seriously start to consider supporting this if this trajectory continues - should we reduce the number of players on the field? Again, that's probably a last-resort thing as I prefer the number of players on the field now, but I am interested to hear from people who know more about the game than I do and what solutions they propose because I simply don't know.

 

[1990crow]

OK so the game this season is worse than previous years IMO. It got better for like 3-4 rounds and probably degraded from there. It just seems to get worse and worse every year unfortunately.

I think it is safe to say that Hocking's rule changes from last season have not improved the game nor increased the scoring. I want him to wind back the 6-6-6 rule, the stand rule, and the 'nominate a ruck' rule because they are just not having a big enough impact on the game and are a nuisance to the flow of the game with the umpires often needing to address the players on them.

In general though, I'm at a loss as to what can be done about it because I think it's currently awful overall (not including the standard of some teams like Bulldogs or Brisbane) and can't think of a clear solution on how to fix the overall standard. Is it the coaches just being too afraid to concede? Is it the current group of players just not being as skilled as previous eras? Should we just remove the interchange cap altogether to keep the players fresher for longer?

I have been against the following for so long, but I think I might seriously start to consider supporting this if this trajectory continues - should we reduce the number of players on the field? Again, that's probably a last-resort thing as I prefer the number of players on the field now, but I am interested to hear from people who know more about the game than I do and what solutions they propose because I simply don't know.

I think "zones" might be a better alternative.
Must have minimum three players in your front half at all times.
Force coaches to have stay at home forwards again.

 

[Lsta062]

I think "zones" might be a better alternative.
Must have minimum three players in your front half at all times.
Force coaches to have stay at home forwards again.

Yeah that's another idea that I don't like but will consider if it makes the game more watchable. I think the VFL have zones this year and it's probably not my favourite thing tbh

 

[Cmarsh]

I think "zones" might be a better alternative.
Must have minimum three players in your front half at all times.
Force coaches to have stay at home forwards again.

Sounds like netball.

 

[Back One Out]

I was watching the highlights of a game from 2011 and I saw 3 skilful dribble kicks bounce through the goals from the boundary line. The thought occurred to me: it was one of the great skilful innovations of the modern era, but we don't even see many of them anymore. Every small forward worth his salt was practising his arsey dribble kicks after training and putting it into practise on game day when the situation arose.

For a couple of years there, they became so commonplace, you expected them to go through and they no longer won the Goal of the Round.
But how many have we seen this year? Maybe I'm not watching the right games??

AFL footy seems so boring these days. Not just cos the Hawks suck. Even the neutral games. I find myself tuning out and watching replays of the Euro Championships instead.

It's not just the rules or the umpiring. The coaches have killed our great game. They've taken all the flair out of it and turned the players athletes who play it into robots. They really are the most boring bunch of campaigners. Listen to the shit they dribble in their press conferences: Clarko, Dimma, Longmire, Bevo, Simpson, Teague, ... They have no personality and their teams follow suit. It's all processes, playing the percentages, field position, defence, discipline, controlling the things you can control, etc.

Players are handcuffed. They have all the spontaneity coached out of them. That's why good young footballers are the best to watch - they haven't yet been fully indoctrinated by the coaches & team systems.

 

[quotemokc]

OK so the game this season is worse than previous years IMO. It got better for like 3-4 rounds and probably degraded from there. It just seems to get worse and worse every year unfortunately.

I think it is safe to say that Hocking's rule changes from last season have not improved the game nor increased the scoring. I want him to wind back the 6-6-6 rule, the stand rule, and the 'nominate a ruck' rule because they are just not having a big enough impact on the game and are a nuisance to the flow of the game with the umpires often needing to address the players on them.

In general though, I'm at a loss as to what can be done about it because I think it's currently awful overall (not including the standard of some teams like Bulldogs or Brisbane) and can't think of a clear solution on how to fix the overall standard. Is it the coaches just being too afraid to concede? Is it the current group of players just not being as skilled as previous eras? Should we just remove the interchange cap altogether to keep the players fresher for longer?

I have been against the following for so long, but I think I might seriously start to consider supporting this if this trajectory continues - should we reduce the number of players on the field? Again, that's probably a last-resort thing as I prefer the number of players on the field now, but I am interested to hear from people who know more about the game than I do and what solutions they propose because I simply don't know.

I think "zones" might be a better alternative.
Must have minimum three players in your front half at all times.
Force coaches to have stay at home forwards again.

We need less rules, not more.

 

[btdg]

At the start of this year, it really felt like the rule change would work. The man on the mark rule has massively reduced congestion etc.

However as time has gone on, it simply hasn't worked. Some teams used the new rules to all out attack through the middle of the ground - Carlton was one - with even numbers across the ground. Those teams drastically underperformed

Instead, the 'meta'has been defined by Geelong - use the extra space to methodically chip the ball around and play slow, safe football. Build, build, build like a soccer team then try and pin point a kick inside 50. When the other team has the ball pull everyone back to the 50 and clog space.

Suddenly we are seeing decent teams like Richmond and West Coast kick scores in the 20s, which just feels unheard of previously. Both have in previous years had well balanced teams with stars on each line but also been great at generating forward pressure and turnovers. That seems not just dead in the face of the new rules but hopelessly buried. You can still scramble-ball to some extent but not reliably force turnovers.

I'll reiterate my claims from last year. The only way to open the game up and increase scoring is to directly incentivise it. Give a bonus premiership point for hitting 100 points in a game. Otherwise it just seems that Th ere are too many unforeseen consequences

 

[hawkman]

Get rid of the stand rule.

Amazing that it use to be if you were out of the marking contest and held someone who taken the mark it was 50. Same if you didn't immediately give the ball back. Now you can lie on it for a few seconds and then take a few more seconds to get the ball and it is still ok.

Now with the stand rule if you can hold up a players for 5 seconds it allows your team to rush back and then it usually results in a short 15m kick or a long ball down the line to a pack

Start enforcing that and it will open the game up even more as it won't allow defences to flood back

 

[Power Raid]

OK so the game this season is worse than previous years IMO. It got better for like 3-4 rounds and probably degraded from there. It just seems to get worse and worse every year unfortunately.

I think it is safe to say that Hocking's rule changes from last season have not improved the game nor increased the scoring. I want him to wind back the 6-6-6 rule, the stand rule, and the 'nominate a ruck' rule because they are just not having a big enough impact on the game and are a nuisance to the flow of the game with the umpires often needing to address the players on them.

In general though, I'm at a loss as to what can be done about it because I think it's currently awful overall (not including the standard of some teams like Bulldogs or Brisbane) and can't think of a clear solution on how to fix the overall standard. Is it the coaches just being too afraid to concede? Is it the current group of players just not being as skilled as previous eras? Should we just remove the interchange cap altogether to keep the players fresher for longer?

I have been against the following for so long, but I think I might seriously start to consider supporting this if this trajectory continues - should we reduce the number of players on the field? Again, that's probably a last-resort thing as I prefer the number of players on the field now, but I am interested to hear from people who know more about the game than I do and what solutions they propose because I simply don't know.

I've loved footy all my life and witnessed some great games since the 70s and seen some dreadful games due to muddy ovals. I was one of those footy supporters who would gladly watch games Port weren't playing, either because I liked the teams playing, liked certain players or thought a genuine contest was on offer.

But this year has consistently pumped out the most boring spectacle.

Last night I was watching the port hawks game whilst surfing the net and watching youtube clips of when the game was interesting. I can't believe I can't be bothered watching my team win.


Personally I see no return to decent footy until we reduce the coaches and measurement system.


Solution:
1) one coach on game day and no communication devices
2) no measurement or monitoring systems. If 12yo kids can play footy without it, then professionals can go without
3) no pain relief
4) no cap on rotations or zones
5) two man bench

 

[Minka Beaver]

Blaming coaches and administrators is the general approach, but it misses the wider point.

The biggest factor that would improve the game isn’t even something the AFL can control (and they love control in general).

Unless a greater number of children can be encouraged to develop better foundational skills (which means more practise outside of structured settings), then the standard of footy will continue to decline. The AFL relies on fielding too many players whose skill development doesn’t match their athleticism or courage (or their family ties).

 

[Power Raid]

Blaming coaches and administrators is the general approach, but it misses the wider point.

The biggest factor that would improve the game isn’t even something the AFL can control (and they love control in general).

Unless a greater number of children can be encouraged to develop better foundational skills (which means more practise outside of structured settings), then the standard of footy will continue to decline. The AFL relies on fielding too many players whose skill development doesn’t match their athleticism or courage (or their family ties).

I hear you but to show ones talent, you need a system that encourages players to use that talent

I personally feel risk taking and showing skills is trained out of players and replaced with a system


If I wanted to watch systems, I'd watch a computer simulation

 

[Minka Beaver]

I hear you but to show ones talent, you need a system that encourages players to use that talent

I personally feel risk taking and showing skills is trained out of players and replaced with a system


If I wanted to watch systems, I'd watch a computer simulation

You’re right, but that also conversely makes the players who can break systems apart even more valuable. The point is that they are increasingly rare, which is a consequence of factors beyond just formal coaching/pathways.

 

[THE EQUALIZER]

Scoring is basically the same now as it was in 2019, even with the rule changes.

Tackling seems to have gone through the roof since the mid season break.

 

[Cubs2Lions]

The AFL relies on fielding too many players whose skill development doesn’t match their athleticism or courage (or their family ties).

That's pretty much the reason in what is wrong with the sport these past couple of years.

Clubs are more interested in selecting draftees at the draft now that have a better fitness ability and base compared to their fundamental skills these days, and as a result, has been why the skill-level of players has DRAMATICALLY fallen away since 2017 IMO.

Add in the fact that 99% of teams are defence first in the way they play in their system, a team scoring 100 points in a game is now quite rare in the current generation while teams scoring less then 60 points is a new normal compared to past generations.

Like don't get me wrong, I'm a valid AFL supporter who gets to watch most matches every week on the T.V/ground, but besides watching my team play every week, around 90% of matches of neutral-supporting have been pretty much BORING with the way most teams operate these days cause instead of taking risks and pushing forward to their F50, clubs are now more then happy to just chip it around 15-20m to a spare man backwards and wait until there is a clear opening for however long it takes now. As well as that issue, a dramatic overview needs to take place with that HTB rule cause I'm sorry but that rule is now clearly confused for everyone and it seems like there are numerous interpretations for different players/situations these days and now as a result, players are not trying to pick up the ball and hold possession for the fear of being caught HTB now.

I think five simple easy changes that need to be operated in the future, to allow the flow of the game to be more exciting for all of us and also keep the competition entertaining as well at the same time, include:

1. A much simpler HTB rule that needs to be enforced and easy for everyone to understand, regardless of what situation they are in, if that just means blowing the whistle quicker or calling the free-kick quicker, the AFL needs to fix it before the sport becomes a mess like how it currently is now with players not wanting to take possession of the football and it becomes all ****ed from there to decide what is HTB or what is not IMO.

2. Players who catch the football in their D50, after someone kicks the ball backwards to them, is just an instant "play on" and no mark would be rewarded as such to stop teams playing defence-orientated football around the ground.

3. Any player who kicks/handballs the football out of bounds, after it touched the field and then bouncing out of the playing field without the opposition touching it, will be called Last Touch Rule (similar to AFLW), and the opposition get the football back on the boundary line as a result.

4. Players to have only "20 seconds" now to take a set on goal otherwise it is "play on" and the man on the mark can then tackle the player who is taking the shot or whatever.

5. Clubs who score 100+ points in a match automatically receive 1 bonus point, regardless of if they win, lose or draw.

 

[quotemokc]

That's pretty much the reason in what is wrong with the sport these past couple of years.

Clubs are more interested in selecting draftees at the draft now that have a better fitness ability and base compared to their fundamental skills these days, and as a result, has been why the skill-level of players has DRAMATICALLY fallen away since 2017 IMO.

Add in the fact that 99% of teams are defence first in the way they play in their system, a team scoring 100 points in a game is now quite rare in the current generation while teams scoring less then 60 points is a new normal compared to past generations.

Like don't get me wrong, I'm a valid AFL supporter who gets to watch most matches every week on the T.V/ground, but besides watching my team play every week, around 90% of matches of neutral-supporting have been pretty much BORING with the way most teams operate these days cause instead of taking risks and pushing forward to their F50, clubs are now more then happy to just chip it around 15-20m to a spare man backwards and wait until there is a clear opening for however long it takes now. As well as that issue, a dramatic overview needs to take place with that HTB rule cause I'm sorry but that rule is now clearly confused for everyone and it seems like there are numerous interpretations for different players/situations these days and now as a result, players are not trying to pick up the ball and hold possession for the fear of being caught HTB now.

I think five simple easy changes that need to be operated in the future, to allow the flow of the game to be more exciting for all of us and also keep the competition entertaining as well at the same time, include:

1. A much simpler HTB rule that needs to be enforced and easy for everyone to understand, regardless of what situation they are in, if that just means blowing the whistle quicker or calling the free-kick quicker, the AFL needs to fix it before the sport becomes a mess like how it currently is now with players not wanting to take possession of the football and it becomes all f’ed from there to decide what is HTB or what is not IMO.

2. Players who catch the football in their D50, after someone kicks the ball backwards to them, is just an instant "play on" and no mark would be rewarded as such to stop teams playing defence-orientated football around the ground.

3. Any player who kicks/handballs the football out of bounds, after it touched the field and then bouncing out of the playing field without the opposition touching it, will be called Last Touch Rule (similar to AFLW), and the opposition get the football back on the boundary line as a result.

4. Players to have only "20 seconds" now to take a set on goal otherwise it is "play on" and the man on the mark can then tackle the player who is taking the shot or whatever.

5. Clubs who score 100+ points in a match automatically receive 1 bonus point, regardless of if they win, lose or draw.

#5 doesn't work unless every ground is indoors and the same size.