We have to wonder about the AFL. Not so long ago, they bent every effort to make the game faster and more continuous, most particularly with immediate kick-ins after behinds. Now, we’re told, the game is running too long.
Mark Stevens, in the Hun, even makes the extraordinary inference that fans might find a game of kick-to-kick fits into their schedules better — “… other sports are looking at shortened formats to keep fans interested, with cricket’s most popular form now Twenty20.” Seriously, is two and a half hours too long for the modern fan to concentrate?
“The real driver is the fans,” says Adrian Anderson. Well, Ando, old mate, what about undoing the immediate kick-in for start? There’s a way to give players a rest during the game! Some of we fans could do with that rest too!
We’ve not finished groaning about the missed shot for goal when the ball is being rushed at breakneck speed through the opposition half-forward line, with our players haring back in desperate pursuit. We could do with a bit less of that.
But at a more basic level, Ando, it was the changes you blokes brought in that have created this hydra-headed monster. Rather than making more changes, have you considered winding a few of the recent changes back a bit?
And can we (not so) respectfully suggest to Ross Lyon that if he wants two 45-minute halves, he might be better suited to apply for Craig Bellamy’s job. Changing ends less frequently doesn’t bother the british bulldog blokes so much: if the ball’s in the air to be caught by a passing gale, it’s more likely been fumbled by someone than anything else.
You have to remember, Adrian, that footy is a little bit like climate change. You poke a bit more carbon dioxide into the air and it makes a subtle change that you don’t see for fifty years. In the meantime, you didn’t notice a change, so more carbon dioxide obviously wasn’t a problem. Then, by the time you realise carbon dioxide is a BIG problem, we’re all addicted to the stuff and we can’t turn the taps off. And the first lot of changes will now be affected even more by new sets of changes, and so on.
Every extra change we make to footy makes the game as a whole more like a chaotic weather system. No-one knows how the next lot of changes will turn out because the game is still digesting the changes for five to ten years ago.
Posts
8 comments:
As a new viewer of Aussie Rules (I only started seriously following the sport this season, after watching last year's Grand Final).
I have never understood how the final quarter is timed. Some times there's a five-minute warning and the clock flips and starts counting up, and at other times it just goes to 00:00. And during the five-minute warning games, sometimes the clock runs well past 5 minutes. In the 2006 GF, for instance, the 5-minute warning started at the 22-minute mark.
And according to Wikipedia, there's something called 'time-on', which you've mentioned as well. Now I'm completely confused.
I'd really appreciate it if someone could explain how this works to me. Right now, I'm honestly under the impression that it's arbitrary and someone flips a coin to decide when to finish the game.
It seems
Welcome Navaneethan, to AussieRulesBlog and to the greatest game in the world!
All quarters are timed in the same way. Twenty minutes of playing time. When a field umpire holds one hand up high, that is a signal to the timekeepers to pause the "game clock" — this is known as "time on" (which means time added on. When the ball is bounced, thrown in, or a player kicks or handballs (after a free kick or mark), the game clock is reactivated.
The 5-minute warning you mention is simply an artifact of one broadcaster — Channel 10. Channels Seven, Nein (when they had rights) and Foxtel all use a simple countdown clock, so viewers know exactly how much time is left in the quarter. Channel Ten decided there could be more tension for the viewer if they didn't know exactly when the siren would sound. So, with five minutes' game time to go, they change to a count up clock. Time on still applies for stoppages within this five minyute period, so that's why the five minutes can often stech out.
I can assure you it's not a toss of the coin that decides games — it's MUCH too important for that!
I personally dislike the countdown clock with a passion and would ban them if I had the power.
Does the clock stop after a mark? I thought it continued to tick - I know it stops for a toss-in, bounce, behind and goal. Don't remember the situation for a free kick (though I'd imagine it's same as a mark.
I love the 5-minute warning, because I have no idea when the clock is going to stop. In fact, I assumed that it was a conscious decision on the part of the AFL to keep the players and supporters from knowing when the game would end (which makes it really really interesting). Brilliant idea, if you ask me.
Is Channel 10 the one with Robert Walls, Matthew Lloyd and that lot? Do they always do the count-up? I've noticed that during the 5-minute warning, they don't stop the on-screen clock for throw-ins, bounces and stoppages, which is different from before the warning.
"Does the clock stop after a mark?"
No, not normally — I got that bit wrong in my haste to reply, sorry. Same for a free kick — normally no time on. But, if the umpire decides that a player retying his boot laces, for instance, is taking too much time, he might then signal time on, and then again to restart the clock.
The suspense of a count-UP, especially in a very close game, can be almost heart-stoppingly exciting. This is another example demonstrating that just because we CAN do something, doesn't mean we SHOULD do it.
Yes, Channel 10 is Captain Obvious (Robert Walls) and company. To be honest, I haven't taken any notice of the first three quarters (but I will now!). Of course, once the clock is counting up,the need for stopping it is removed. Stopping the clock is only relevant when counting DOWN.
Thanks again for your questions.
I gather from your profile that you're in the US? Do you support any particular AFL team yet?
I have decided, somewhat arbitrarily, to barrack for Collingwood. I suspect it's the fact that they're doing well this season (about 5 years ago, I chose to support Wales in rugby for similar reasons). I prefer watching out for individual brilliance like Buddy, or Alan Didak (who is exciting because of how mercurial he can be) or Brian Lake, etc. And Gary Ablett, of course. These guys are electrifying to watch.
We only get 3 games a week in the US, which is all right. I'm up at 2:30 am on Friday to watch that evening's game from Melbourne. And I usually catch a replay of the Saturday night or Sunday afternoon games.
I've noticed that Aussie Rules commentators for the most part are quite Captain Obvious. When has Bruce Mcaveney (sp?) ever had anything insightful to say? Or Andrew Hudson? Tom Harley and Matthew Lloyd are slightly better because they know the players and can provide a little domain knowledge. Dennis Cometti is tolerable because he has a sense of humour about him. Walls is unnecessarily polemic - haven't really heard much positive come out of him, except to criticise Stephen Quartermain for not supporting Hawthorn.
None of the commentators has any predictive ability on the game, except to say things like, "Oh, the next goal's going to be important." No, really? Thanks for letting me know!
That said, I really enjoy watching a packed house at the MCG or Etihad during a tight game - like the Hawthorn-Essendon one from Round 13!
Not Collingwood! :-)
You realise that you are dooming yourself to decades of disappointment? One solitary Premiership since 1958! Change now, while you're still relatively untainted by Magpie one-eyedness!
The quality of commentary is, generally, pretty ordinary, but no worse than for US sport (and much better in most instances in my view).
If you get the chance, being part of the crowd at the G when there's 100,000 screaming for their team will make the hairs on your neck stand out! Utterly awesome!
Last night's game was somewhat boring, wouldn't you say? I like Collingwood, but I don't like them winning by a cricket score. What is up with the Bombers?
What is special about Collingwood is that when they get the Premiership (and I'd love to see a 1-point win over St. Kilda), it's that much more special. And it brings them one closer to Essendon & Carlton.
Regarding American sports, I actually have no clue what they're about. I'm Indian, so I don't much care for American football or baseball.
Rugby has pretty good commentary and so does football (especially in the English and Spanish leagues). I probably shouldn't be so vehement about the footy commentators, but I was surprised at how little additional insight they brought to game being played (stats, history and trivia are excellent, but still).
Which game was that! ;-)
The Bombers are young and rebuilding. 13 players with less than 50 games experience, 2 were debutants. The Bombers will be OK (and have won 5 Premierships since 1958 — to Collingwood's one)! :-)
Post a Comment