How Malcom Blight plans to “fix” the AFL


Tear 'em apart
Sep 10, 2003
my pet hate, the rule says 15m but they always err on the short kicks i.e. they will pay marks for 8/10/12m kicks, if they paid marks from an 15 m kick as is the rule this would negate half of the little chip kicks esp out of defence
I hate it too but its not that simple this year. I've seen 9m kicks paid the mark and 22 metre kicks called play on not 15. its all over the joint. My view is the state of umpiring reflects the state of AFL governance.

Agree consistent competent application of the rule should be the norm. Ditto holding the ball, throw, block etc etc.:confused:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user


Get out Gillon
Jun 4, 2006
Blightwatch - last 50 years:

Round 17 - 76.9 (2nd/50)
Round 16 - 81.2 (9th/50)
Round 15 - 74.3 (3rd/50)
Round 14 - 77.5 (5th/50)
Round 13 - 86.6 (18th/50)
Round 12 - 78.2 (6th/50)
Round 11 - 82.3 (4th/50)
Round 10 - 75.2 (2nd/50)
Round 9 - 82.4 (4th/50)
Round 8 - 79.7 (3rd/50)
Round 7 - 77.4 (1st/50)
Round 6 - 80.8 (2nd/50)
Round 5 - 84.8 (6th/50)
Round 4 - 75.3 (1st/50)
Round 3 - 88.4 (6th/50)
Round 2 - 81.2 (1st/50)
Round 1 - 78.7 (1st/50)

Round 1-17 - 80.0 (1st/50)

Lowest Round 17 score was 1984's paltry 48.1, with all six games played in steady rain on Saturday afternoon. Richmond kicked the sweep in a big win over the Swans at the MCG in front of 13K hardy souls (including me!). David Rhys-Jones got three weeks for retaliating to a whack from Michael Pickering, who went unpunished.

Worth noting also that the Round 17 average was above 100 in 20 of the 50 years.
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users


Tiger Superstar
Sep 16, 2003
This is a graph of average scores and average accuracy from 1897 to 2018.

For interest, the last few years scoring was
2010 90
2011 92
2012 92
2013 92
2014 86
2015 86
2016 88
2017 89
2018 82

Our year wasn't too bad.

To me, the spikes indicate a period or even an isolated year where there was one dominant team (maybe two).
The more even the comp, it seems the more moderate the scoring.
Funny that a lot of 'experts' cite the recent hawk's success as one of the great teams that was an example of 'good football' by a team that was aesthetically pleasing to watch, yet their 14/15 wins were troughs in the scoring, spiked back up by our 2017.
We've been involved in a few spikes 69, and 82 in particular were pretty big. 82 still stands miles above anything else.
80s and early 90s was the era the league struggled with crowds and clubs going down the gurgler.
The AFL took steps to make the comp more even and competitive so all teams being even would naturally bring scoring down in general.

While 2018 was a trough, bringing in a raft of rules based just on scoring was short sighted in my opinion. Accuracy was down in that year too.
Richmond and Adelaide had shown in 17 that a new way of playing (which was in fact an old way of playing on quickly and risk taking) could increase scoring again, but ironically the umpires darlings in Collingwood and West Coast brought that way down again as they milked free kicks then went chip chip chip. If the AFL was to do anything about rules to promote scoring, surely it would be better to look at things like holding the ball interpretations and quicker around the ground ball ups, without having to introduce silly things like netball zones and changing kick in areas.


  • Like
Reactions: 4 users