Along with the fixture list on Friday, it was announced two-legged semifinals will be added to the A-League Men's (ALM) playoff format this season.
The teams that finish first and second on the regular season ladder will play home and away legs against the winners of single-leg elimination finals between the next best four teams. While the six-team finals format remains, an extra weekend of games has been added to the schedule.
"The new format rewards the sides that finish first and second by eliminating the one-off semifinals, and it rewards the fans who we know love finals football," Australian Professional Leagues (APL) commissioner Greg O'Rourke said.
- Stream ESPN FC Daily on ESPN+ (U.S. only)
- ESPN+ viewers' guide: LaLiga, Bundesliga, MLS, FA Cup, more
"After the excitement of last season generated by a new wave of Australian talent, we think the new campaign promises to deliver even more captivating drama for supporters and viewers."
Granted, there are reasonable arguments both for and against the merits of finals and first-past-the-post league formats, because of the existence of a cup competition and/or the current lack of promotion and relegation.
But let's zoom in, because from there, we can start to ask more pertinent questions about the format change itself.
Firstly, will adding a second leg to the semifinals impact the football on the park? Secondly, why did the APL make the change and why is it being pitched to the football public in this way?
We cannot simply assume that the format change will add drama, especially when adding into context how football is predominantly played in the A-League.
Looking at the past three finals series, the most startling figure is that only three out of 15 match-winners finished the game with more possession than the opposition.
The first of those matches -- Melbourne City's Grand Final win last season -- saw its complexion significantly changed with Luke Brattan's first-half dismissal. Already without their talisman Milos Ninkovic, it was like pushing the proverbial excrement uphill for Sydney FC.
The second match was also last season, Macarthur FC's extra-time win over Central Coast. The Bulls dominated the ball, and arguably would have been eliminated, if not for James Meredith's tackle and denial of goal-scoring opportunity as the last defender, leading to his sending off. Extra-time saw Ante Milicic's side score two goals with 24% possession and a player less.
The third match was in the 2018-19 season, where Ritchie de Laet spared us penalties between Adelaide United and Melbourne City, with his mistimed clearance/hamstring pull from Ryan Kitto's attempted ball over the defence -- as the latter was slipping over -- that Adelaide's Ben Halloran punished.
In footballing terms, A-League Men's is a shining example for Nassim Nicholas Taleb's declaration that abundance is harder for us to handle than scarcity. Evidence overwhelmingly suggests that, if given the choice, A-League Men's coaches and teams would choose not to have the ball at all.
An extra leg in the semifinal doesn't alter that reality, irrespective of whether away goals impact the aggregate score or not. Watching teams pass the ball around in a U-shape only to get hit on the counter-attack already makes for a psychopathic form of excitement, let alone adding another 90 minutes.
The lack of tactical adjustment between repeated home-and-away fixtures, that then leads into potential finals match-ups, only adds to that pragmatism.
This addition of footballing context then leads to the second question: Why the change and why this sales pitch?
We can ignore the dubious potential of the format change to add drama and excitement here for a second. If the motive is to add drama and excitement, however dispiriting that prevailing pragmatism can be, it still does not make it correct to legislate or manufacture against. Removing choice is removing the very thing that makes football, football.
Meanwhile, the teams that finish first and second on the ladder after the home-and-away season are already rewarded -- firstly with the week off, and secondly with qualification for Asian competition. That's sufficient.
Furthermore, it's hard to swallow the idea of the A-League being driven by a new wave of Australian talent, when only two Australian attackers under the age of 25 saw a minimum of 50% of available minutes last season.
After some clean-up, minutes distribution for Australian players by age in the last A-League Men's season. One hopes for change, but scarce responsibility to decide matches for younger attackers and midfielders.https://t.co/2xnRn3iIs8 pic.twitter.com/SnHHvTWvai
— Ante Jukić (@antejukicESPN) October 31, 2021
One of those players, Dylan Wenzel-Halls, was among the least efficient starting strikers in the league last season, and has transferred to a club that went on to confirm the signing of a 31-year-old foreign striker earlier this month; Aleksandar Prijovic joins four other players aged 30 and over to sign for Western United this offseason.
Average age of transfers this off-season in A-League Men's, excluding the end of loan spells. With Hooper's return as an exception, Wellington going distinctly young and local with the majority of signings, bringing the league average down with them.https://t.co/qXLQKNZ7A3 pic.twitter.com/GFABDENDwI
— Ante Jukić (@antejukicESPN) October 31, 2021
Out of transactions between clubs this offseason, only three teams have an average age of under 25 for transfers in -- Brisbane, Newcastle and Wellington.
This all leads us to a third and final question: Is the APL promoting the product, or the mere increase in content?
Considering the new television rights deal for Australian football, pushing through the latter is a reasonable cause from an organisational standpoint.
Ultimately, though, the latter is not as attractive a narrative to sell to the Australian footballing public as the former, however many evident holes are in it.