A low-scoring weekend in the AFL has ignited the long-running debate on the “look of the game”

ONCE again the question of the “look of the game” has Australian football at risk of knee-jerk rule changes.

• AFL legends have format to fix game
• Debate over state of the game
• Saints have mixed emotions about zones

DON Pyke had coached the Crows for just 10 AFL games when he stepped out of his reserved character to implore: “Leave the game alone”.

Clearly, standing up for the game means more to Pyke than maintaining the image of saying as little as possible at a media conference.

Pyke is no Robinson Crusoe. He is among many football fans who have tired of every suggestion to make Australian football a different game.

“The amount of changes in the game now; it would be nice to let the game settle and let us play,” said Pyke ... exactly 23 months ago. And change remains a constant from AFL House, even when the laws of the game are not touched (but the interpretations or emphasis is, usually on a weekly basis).

Since then, the “third man up” in ruck contests has been outlawed. The bump has become too dangerous to keep in a player’s arsenal (and for good reason as the concussion issue presents great concern well beyond the AFL).

The deliberate out-of-bounds rule draws more passionate pleas from the fans on the terraces than the traditional chant of “BALL!” when a player is tackled. And even the long-debated holding-the-ball rule has become the centre of a campaign for those advocating the subjective “prior opportunity” clause be scrapped to favour the tackler if the ball-winner is too slow with his disposal.

Now there is the prospect of zones, demanding a minimum number of players be kept in each of the three parts of the playing field - such as six in attack, six in the midfield and six in defence. Although, Geelong premiership coach Chris Scott would prefer 16 on the field - and six on the bench.

The return of the “look of the game” to Australian football’s talkfest this week was as predictable as AFL boss Gillon McLachlan saying a twilight grand final is inevitable.

There have been six rounds of home-and-away football. AFL coaches are fearing the consequence of defeat more than the reward of winning. Defence rules. And, without surprise, only four of the 18 AFL teams - Port Adelaide, Adelaide, Melbourne and Richmond - passed the watershed 100-point barrier. The round’s average score was 80 points, dropping the season average to 85 points - the lowest since 1968.

For those who are keen to reinvent Australian football - in particular with less players on the field - think of AFLX, the 10-a-side, shortened game launched in the summer on rectangular fields. This should close the “look of the game” debate very quickly.

If round 6 became so dour because AFL coaches put defence before attack - out of fear for the consequences of defeat - it might be time to offer greater incentives for winning and scoring, as netball has done (and cricket long ago) with bonus points.

One former SANFL chief executive last month urged his successor to go to a State league session asking for a bonus point to be handed to teams that score 120 points or more.

“Give teams,” he wrote, “reason to attack and score heavily rather than fiddle with the fundamental structure and laws of the game.”

[e-mail]

Originally published as A low-scoring weekend in the AFL has ignited the long-running debate on the “look of the game”