This Kerr article about Aussie Rules reminds me of inane and moronic Graham Cornes articles 'discussing' Soccer. People who don't follow or like a sport and know jack shit about why certain aspects of that sport exist should just shut the fuck up and stop embarrassing themselves.

Historically, Aussie Rules originally started with just two posts and the only score being a goal. To encourage more attacking play and scoring shorts, the 'behind' was introduced by adding two smaller posts either side of the goalposts. Initially, the 'behind' was for tiebreaker situations but in a short space of time it became officially part of the scoring system. Behinds make draws very rare in Aussie Rules and in close games mean a team can go from winning to losing or vice versa with just one kick at goal. The kick-in after a behind is also tactically important. All nuances that a non-follower wouldn't understand nor appreciate.

The argument that removing it would create less blowouts is also swings and roundabouts nonsense. The 2008 AFL Grand Final between Hawthorn (18.7-115) and an inaccurate Geelong (11.23-89) would've seen the scores further apart without behinds. The 1977 Grand Final draw between North Melbourne (9.22-76) and Collingwood (10.16-76) is well remembered in Victoria for the amount of behinds kicked, and removing the behinds would've changed the result and the team that eventually won the premiership. Same thing happened in all 3 drawn Grand Finals. St Kilda would've won the 2010 premiership instead of Collingwood if only goals were recorded (well maybe they should be removed in that case :D).

As for Rugby League, when you go through the 108 years of NSWRL/NRL Grand Final scores, just under a half were blowouts or one-sided contests on the scoreboard. For every cracker like last year's, you have a blowout like the Grand Final the year before when Souths won 30-6. It's just the nature of the various sports. You don't stupidly argue that conversions should be removed just to make one-sided games on the scoreboard closer.

The 1977 Grand Final draw between North Melbourne (9.22-76) and Collingwood (10.16-76) is well remembered in Victoria for the amount of behinds kicked, and removing the behinds would've changed the result and the team that eventually won the premiership. Same thing happened in all 3 drawn Grand Finals. St Kilda would've won the 2010 premiership instead of Collingwood if only goals were recorded (well maybe they should be removed in that case :D).

So you're saying that if the rules were changed in this manner, the team that scored the most goals would have won the match.
And you're saying this as if it's a bad thing. :-k

This Kerr article about Aussie Rules reminds me of inane and moronic Graham Cornes articles 'discussing' Soccer. People who don't follow or like a sport and know jack shit about why certain aspects of that sport exist should just shut the fuck up and stop embarrassing themselves.

Historically, Aussie Rules originally started with just two posts and the only score being a goal. To encourage more attacking play and scoring shorts, the 'behind' was introduced by adding two smaller posts either side of the goalposts. Initially, the 'behind' was for tiebreaker situations but in a short space of time it became officially part of the scoring system. Behinds make draws very rare in Aussie Rules and in close games mean a team can go from winning to losing or vice versa with just one kick at goal. The kick-in after a behind is also tactically important. All nuances that a non-follower wouldn't understand nor appreciate.

The argument that removing it would create less blowouts is also swings and roundabouts nonsense. The 2008 AFL Grand Final between Hawthorn (18.7-115) and an inaccurate Geelong (11.23-89) would've seen the scores further apart without behinds. The 1977 Grand Final draw between North Melbourne (9.22-76) and Collingwood (10.16-76) is well remembered in Victoria for the amount of behinds kicked, and removing the behinds would've changed the result and the team that eventually won the premiership. Same thing happened in all 3 drawn Grand Finals. St Kilda would've won the 2010 premiership instead of Collingwood if only goals were recorded (well maybe they should be removed in that case :D).

As for Rugby League, when you go through the 108 years of NSWRL/NRL Grand Final scores, just under a half were blowouts or one-sided contests on the scoreboard. For every cracker like last year's, you have a blowout like the Grand Final the year before when Souths won 30-6. It's just the nature of the various sports. You don't stupidly argue that conversions should be removed just to make one-sided games on the scoreboard closer.