Why the AFL need to stop modifying the game's rules specifically for the AFLW.
The low scoring of the AFLW has been a source of constant criticism in the game's extremely short tenure, and now the debate has been reignited following the opening round of the season.
A recent memo from AFL head of football operations, Steve Hocking, has instructed the eight AFLW teams to rethink their tactics to produce higher scoring games and a higher calibre of football.
AFLW sides have been asked to promote a five-six-five set-up at centre bounces, create protective zones in front of goal-side stoppages and to encourage forwards to hold their positions and not be dragged into the play.
These proposed changes are intended to create less congestion, and ultimately a freer and quicker brand of football.
The edict has sat uncomfortably with several players, most notably Brisbane forward Jess Wuetschner, who took to Twitter to express her grievances over the AFL's recommendations.
“This is my view only, but are they bloody serious? We are out here to win, whatever it takes. If you ask me I saw some pretty exciting stuff on the weekend and I think this is ridiculous. How many rule changes do you want? Is it even afl anymore?” - Jess Wuetschner
While Wuetschner's tweet has since been removed, she raises a very relevant point and one which needs to be posed to supporters of Aussie Rules.
With these newly suggested changes to the game, is it even AFL anymore?
The low scoring in the AFLW, while present in several matches last season (11 teams scoring under 20 points), is not a pressing issue which needs to be rectified.
The AFL's edict is simply a knee-jerk reaction in response to the scrappy affair between Carlton and Collingwood last Friday night at Ikon Park.
Following last year's lockout match between the two clubs in what was the inaugural game of the AFLW, the expectations were high coming into 2018.
Yet in an unattractive 3.4 (22) to 2.2 (14) game, where only four behinds were registered in the second half, the highly-anticipated spectacle yielded a less-than-impressive result, and certainly not the one the AFL were hoping for with a 19,852 strong crowd present.
And in what was marketed as the grand opening to the second season of the AFLW, the powers above were disappointed with the combined 36-point total score, and hence a probable reason for the edict being sent out.
It’s understandable the AFL wants to market this new “product” and want more spectacular results, but what sort of message is it sending by forcefully trying to change it?
Yes, a higher and more frequent scoring game would be much preferred to a goalless second half, but the rest of the opening round presented much promise and skill.
Melbourne and Greater Western Sydney impressed with a tight 7.3 (45) to 6.3 (39) game which was won in the dying minutes, while the Western Bulldogs put on a fine display against Fremantle, 7.7 (49) to 3.5 (23).
Brisbane meanwhile overcame the reigning premiers, Adelaide, 3.1 (19) to 4.7 (31) at Norwood Oval in front of 11,120.
With the Crows failing to record a score for three quarters and the Dockers being kept scoreless for an entire half, there is of course room for improvement and development.
And the 2018 has shown growth compared to round one of the previous season.
35 goals were scored in round one this season as opposed to the 28 kicked in 2017, while only two teams posted a score of under 20 points in comparison to the four in the AFLW's inaugural round.
And with time, higher scores will come as not only the players, but the game develops alongside them.
It is unfair for us as viewers and supporters to expect huge scoring spectacles with the AFLW in its infancy stages.
Players are still adapting, acclimatising to the physical and mental rigours of the game.
For the AFL to jump on such an issue and request teams to change their very style of football is not only an extreme overreaction to one very low scoring game, but an insult to players of the AFLW.
To suggest maintaining set positions and holding ground in the 50m arcs will reduce congestion is reverting back to Under 9s football rules - a clear slap in the face to women who are professional athletes.
The AFL may introduce rules they see fit for the betterment of the game, but in no way should they have any say in how AFLW sides are coached - especially to provide more "entertainment" for spectators.
It’s important to note that the entertainment lies within the sport.
It’s organic. It’s unpredictable. And that’s what makes it exciting.
Trying to forcefully modify the game to make it faster and to keep viewers entertained is part of the problem, and the rules they have implemented are potential contributors to the lower scoring.
Constant rule changes impede the very development and growth of the game.
The last-touch out of bounds rule which has been brought in to the AFLW this year, is meant to promote keeping the ball in play, thereby creating a quicker and freer flowing brand of football.
Instead of the typical boundary throw-in when the ball goes out of bounds, the newly implemented rule rewards a free kick against whoever touched the ball last.
When in doubt, umpires have been instructed to throw the ball in.
But the rule itself is part of the issue to low scoring.
In accordance with the regular rules of the game, should the ball spill out of bounds, it is thrown in, giving both teams an equal opportunity to advance the ball to their advantage.
Now, instead of teams resetting at the throw in and giving either side a fair go, the advantage rests solely with one team.
It not only removes the fairness, but the contest of the two teams vying for control for the ball - which most importantly for the AFL, is the entertainment.
If anything, this new rule slows the game down and presents less chances for scoring.
In the event where a player boots the ball inside 50 and it just sails over the heads of those involved in the marking contest and dribbles out of bounds, this new rule dictates the defensive side be rewarded with a free kick.
Why should a team be penalised for advancing the ball forward?
Instead of a potential scoring opportunity for the attacking side with a throw-in, the defence are given passage out of the danger.
With the throw-in, the offence are given an opportunity to capitalise with a score, while the defence have the chance the prevent this.
It’s a harsh penalty for a simple error, and one which contributes to low scoring.
Of course, this one rule is not the sole factor to the low scoring affairs, but it’s further modifications to the rules which separate the women’s and men’s football, ultimately yielding different results.
The time-on rule now only occurs in the last two minutes of each quarter.
In theory with the last-touch rule and less boundary throw-ins, there's no real need for the clock to stop as the ball is meant to continue moving with these new rules.
But in practice, players are missing out on so much more match time compared to the men's game.
The clock doesn't stop at stoppages, and when it's all added up, it's a significant amount of game time the women are missing out on.
Also keep in mind, women only play 15-minute quarters (part of the reason which is due to the AFLW commencing in summer), and coupled with no time-on is a major reason for less scoring opportunities.
Head of the AFLW, Nicole Livingstone, has urged supporters not to compare men's and women's football.
She's right in the sense that supporters are unfairly drawing parallels to the scoring differentials between the AFL and AFLW, and in a simplistic view, it's because the AFLW is of a lesser quality.
But football is football, irrespective of gender, and that's where the problem resides.
The goal is to break down the barriers between AFLW and AFL, and have us talking about football.
Bringing in these new rule changes isn't bridging the gap - it's widening it.
The rules should not be drastically modified and brought back to a premature level in the women's game, just to keep viewers’ brains occupied and create high scoring matches.
Don't have the same code of football with two separate interpretations.
Of course, the AFL will want their new product to be entertaining and successful, and that's understandable from a business standpoint.
But higher scores will come as the game and players develop - you can't force it upon teams to change their very game style to accommodate for viewers wanting more action.
Low scoring does not equate to a lesser quality of football, more so, a game which is still growing in only its second season, with rules different to the ones we are accustomed to.
Would it be nice to have higher scoring games? Sure.
But stop changing the rules.
Comentários