Crisis or all is fair in footy? What the data says about AFL equalisation

Concerns are mounting among some fans and media personalities that the Australian Football League (AFL) is drifting towards a state of competitive imbalance, despite ongoing efforts to ensure fairness.

Over the past four decades, the AFL has implemented numerous adjustments to rules governing player acquisition, including drafting and trading, with further changes to draft rules occurring recently. On-field rules have also been modified to enhance athleticism and foster an environment where teams with disparate strengths can compete effectively.

“

the AFL is in danger of becoming the most unequalised equalised competition in the history of sport.

Despite these measures, figures like commercial radio host Mark Duffield have voiced alarm, stating the AFL risks becoming "the most unequalised equalised competition in the history of sport." Kane Cornes echoed this sentiment, describing the situation as "almost a crisis level."

“

This is almost a crisis level situation where we have poor teams, great teams, and then a couple in the middle, and it's no good.

AFL chief Andrew Dillon acknowledges the importance of equalisation but notes that "there's always been a team that comes (last) and there's a team that finishes on top." However, recent seasons show a pattern of teams like North Melbourne, West Coast, and Richmond consistently at the bottom, while Brisbane, Geelong, and Sydney frequently contend for premierships.

Interestingly, coaches and players often report a closer on-field gap between the top and bottom teams, suggesting that even a single "soft" game can lead to an upset. This raises the central question: does every team truly have a fair chance to compete, or are inherent league inequities pushing the AFL toward a breaking point?

“

So it's important for us (the AFL) on field, equalisation is important. But there's always been a team that comes (last) and there's a team that finishes on top.