After an entertaining 2017 season, the state of the game is coming into conversation just seven rounds in.

Many experts and followers of the game are trying to find reasons and solutions for the congestion and lack of scoring that fans have seen this year.

Truth is, there’s only one reason causing it all and a few changes will find the solution.

Facebook Twitter Whatsapp Reddit Email Share

In a physical game where 36 players are on a field at a time, decision making can be the toughest component for those with whistle in hand.

Nevertheless, this toughness can be reduced by clearing the congestion where most free kicks appear.

In saying this, there must be a solution to help the umpires and the game develop into a better one.

In the wake of this conversation, many have said that the game could do with reducing interchanges or implementing a zoning system.

The issue with reducing interchanges is that you are making the game harder than it already is for players.

By reducing interchanges, fatigue will increase for players resulting in lower skilled games. This will most likely cause more congestion as stoppages will increase with more turnovers occurring from skill errors.



More stoppages will result in more contests and less scoring and free-flowing footy. This is evident in AFLW where skill levels are low, resulting in congestion and low scoring games.

A zoning rule is too big a change to the structure that the modern game is played in. As well as this, by implementing a zoning system, you’re changing the long-lived traditions and integrity of the game.

You might think of it as a way of reducing congestion although there are other solutions to this that won’t cause as much destruction to the values of the game.

When the solution to congestion of zoning was brought up, Collingwood coach Nathan Buckley responded with, “We don’t need to play under 9s and start putting players in zones, we don’t need to modify the number of players on the field. We just need to apply the rules as they were meant to be applied.”

Buckley wasn’t passionate for the zoning or lowering the number of players on the field to 16.

He believed that the solution to the congestion was paying more free kicks to award the tackler by giving no prior opportunity in context to when a player receives a disposal of the ball from another player.

Alastair Clarkson agreed with Buckley on this matter that the interpretation of prior opportunity needed to be changed.



Buckley said that “If teams want to handball in a short space to get numbers into that congestion and they want to handball and take the tackles on, if you possess the ball but you don’t kick or handball it, then it’s a free kick against.”

“It would change the behaviour of the people with the ball and the tactics they’re asked to execute because if you put two or three quick handballs together inside or you gave a handball to a player who was hot and he was tackled, regardless of prior opportunity or anything, if he had the ball, was tackled and didn’t handball or kick it, then that’s a free kick.

“That would be rewarding the tackler.

“Tactics would change because you wouldn’t get as many handballs in tight and if you don’t get as many handballs in tight then you’re less likely to commit your numbers in tight. You’re more likely to commit your numbers to other parts of the ground.

“You would see sides still willing to take the tackle on and still willing to stand up in the tackle and handball or dispose of the ball in a legal manner but you would probably get other tactics that would say we’re not going to handball in congestion, we’ll just kick.

“Because of those varying tactics you would get less congestion, there’s no doubt.”

[latest_videos_strip category=”afl” name=”AFL”]

People’s view of this solution became worrying from the umpires’ point of view as the thought of it as being too tough for the umpires to adjudicate came up. It is something that the umpires will need to develop into their roles to put the game in a better position.



The second solution is to change the way that games are adjudicated by umpires. It is time to scrap the ruck nomination and just bounce (or throw) the ball up.

The nomination system has got out of hand to the point where umpires are now waiting for the ruckmen to get to contests for ball-ups. This has given other players, including defenders and forwards, the opportunity to get around the ball resulting in congestion and slow play.

The AFL and their umpires need to make the decision of just balling the ball up. Not worrying about nominating rucks although continuing with the rules of the way rucks should contest.

The rules of only two players going up in ruck contests and keeping one metre apart still need to be applied.

This will decrease congestion by moving the game on and it will almost get rucks at contests every time, reducing the chances of forwards and defenders congesting around the ball.

The final solution for our game is to extend the running capacity from 15 metres to 20.

This will allow players with pace to use it to their advantage so they’re able to run the ball out of congestion without having to bounce it every 15 metres.



It will also give players the ability to break a game open which will bring a heap of excitement for fans. This will increase the entertainment value of our game as there will be more instances of the famous Cyril Rioli chase on Lewis Jetta that was seen in the 2014 grand final.

These three solutions are there although it is up to the AFL to decide when to implement them and judge whether their state of game needs a quick fix or one for the long term.

The AFL’s competition committee, which includes players, coaches and club administrators, will meet this Thursday to discuss several aspects of the game involving the issue of congestion.

You’d hope that there’d be some solutions coming out of that meeting.

The entertainment value of the game is crucial for its supporters and for the expansion of the game so the AFL needs to make sure that they’re getting it right.

Bear in mind the AFL showcases its game in less than two weeks in Shanghai for the second time when Gold Coast take on Port Adelaide.

Will they want a low scoring, congested game or a high scoring, free-flowing game?