A bigger AFL league is a risk to its players

Dan says:

05:54am | 10/05/10

I’m not a big fan of shortening games. However I do think that injuries are a problem, and so perhaps clubs need to be more creative. The AFL might hate it, but why do players have to play every week?

Caroline Wilson suggested that last week Ablett wasn’t so much injured, but given a rest. If so, I think that’s a good idea. Clubs should be prepared to rest their players every so often. If that means that Judd or Ablett or Riewolt miss a game here or there, then so be it. If clubs are creative with their list selections, and recruit for depth, then we might see less injuries, and more exciting football as players don’t play injured.*

*Jonathan Brown is the perfect example. Why is it any better for Brisbane that he be playing, and not contributing, than resting?

Steven says:

11:03am | 10/05/10

Footy players are the victims in this. The AFL will reap in the profits while the injured will suffer and be forced out of the seniors

AFLs a joke says:

11:08am | 10/05/10

Top job Julie. Someone needs to push for reforms. It’s a joke.

Vfl forever says:

11:23am | 10/05/10

The Afl will become the Vfl again in their own game of self distruction

Sky says:

12:20pm | 10/05/10

Is it just me or does anyone else think “professionalism” has ruined sport?
Ok ruined is harsh and probably not the word im looking for but hear me out….

Players (in all pro sports) are training harder, playing harder and getting injured more than ever. I know these players are getting paid lots because of professionalism, and sport is now a product but i think you have made an excellent point about injures and players health.

is it worth it? Are these games better to watch than 10-15 years ago? Less violent yes, but surely that could be achieved in other ways?? Are the games more entertaining? I’m not convinced…

Killing the pros says:

12:48pm | 10/05/10

Yeah injuries come with professionalism. Run like crazy, get knocked around, do a hammy, out for three months, blablabla. Bring back the aerial game because the running is killing AFL pros.

sam says:

02:10pm | 10/05/10

i want to see 23 sides in the afl for there 22 home and away

A Dose of Reality says:

04:51pm | 10/05/10

How quickly so many forget!  Otherwise few blogs above are written by those who have known the game for longer that a couple of years.

There is one overriding reason for the increased (SUSTAINED) speed the game is played at.  Whereas in yesteryear the game “surged” to top speed with the state of play and the need for players to “pace themselves”, the use of the interchange bench to rotate players for periodic rests means that in todays game the pace has increased to the players maximum for the duration that player is on the field.

Shorter quarters will only add to the problem as the players will be pushing themselves even harder (as it will be for a shorter period).

The real solution is to admit that modifying the bench to an interchange has not worked as originally planned, in particular the increase to 4 players to “cover injuries”.

The original objectives is to allow some flexibility with players and the coaches tactical responses.  This is a good thing for the game, however the “rotations” as they have developed are not, for the reasons explained in the article above and for the (arguable) more important point that the rotations mean that an injury early in the game means that that side can no longer maintain the rotations (that the opposition will instantly increase) and therefore will be at a disadvantage.  Sides with an early injury lose games over 70% of the time!

A solution is to remember that once upon a time the bench had 2 RESERVES, to cover injuries.  Increase this to 4.  To allow flexibility to sides have 2 players who are Interchange.  This will automatically limit the rotations, players will have to “pace” things a little, solving the problems the article mentions - plus no side will be capable of the various “flooding styles” that have polluted the game recently.  it also increases each sides ability to cover injuries (which need to be monitored so as not to be incorrectly used as interchange - with heavy penalties).

Mike says:

05:59pm | 10/05/10

It seems to me (And my untrained eye) that it is the Athletes in AFL that are getting injured, not the Footballers.

Chiko says:

11:44am | 27/06/10

AFL former champiuons are paid a mint to give accurate commntary on matches, why do they insist on never never ever questioning an umpires decision, especially when it is an obvious or biased mistake. Is it in their contracts that they are not allowed to say what they think? I am not saying bag the umpires but when something is an obvious mistake they shut up straight away, all other sports pay their commentators to make informed commentary, why not the AFL

chiko says:

12:22pm | 27/06/10

How far does a midfielder run in an AFL match?