Australian Rules football has never relied on just one kind of ranking. Club ladders have long shown who is best placed to win a premiership, while awards and statistical ratings have offered different ways to compare individual players. The methods have changed as competitions grew, seasons became more structured and more match data became available.
To understand how rankings developed, it helps to separate the league ladder from player ratings. A ladder orders teams by their season results. Player rankings, by contrast, may reflect votes from umpires or coaches, or a statistical model that weighs actions during a match. Each answers a different question—and none tells the whole story on its own.
From match results to a league ladder
In Australian football’s early decades, clubs played within local competitions whose schedules and premiership arrangements were not always as uniform as today’s. The Victorian Football Association (VFA), formed in 1877, gave clubs a more organised competition. When the Victorian Football League (VFL) began in 1897, it introduced a regular season among its founding clubs, making a season table a clearer way to compare their records.
The basic idea was simple: teams earned premiership points for wins and were ordered by their results. Draws also earned points, while a loss did not. The VFL added finals in 1898, creating an important distinction that remains today: the ladder records regular-season performance, but the finals series decides the premier. A team can finish first on the ladder without winning the premiership.
Other major competitions, including the SANFL and WAFL, developed their own ladders and finals arrangements. The details differed, but the central method was familiar: rank teams by premiership points, then use a tie-breaker if their records are level.
How the modern AFL ladder works
For most of the AFL era, a win has been worth four premiership points and a draw two. The league doubled the previous two-points-for-a-win system in 1994; this changed the scale of the ladder, not the underlying reward for results. Teams are ranked first by their total premiership points.
If teams finish level on points, percentage is used as a tie-breaker. It is calculated by dividing points scored by points conceded, then multiplying by 100. For example, a club that has scored 1,800 points and conceded 1,500 has a percentage of 120.0. A higher percentage can move a team above another club with the same premiership points.
| Ladder measure | What it shows |
|---|---|
| Premiership points | Season results: four for a win, two for a draw, and none for a loss. |
| Percentage | Points scored compared with points conceded; used to separate teams level on points. |
| Wins and losses | The results behind a team’s position, though points are the formal ranking measure. |
Percentage rewards more than simply winning. A side that scores freely and defends well may build a useful buffer, while a narrow loss can still affect its standing. That can matter late in the season when several clubs are chasing the same finals spot. It is also why fans watch not just the result of their team’s match, but the scores in other games.
Finals changed what a ranking could mean
As the competition expanded, finals formats changed too. The AFL’s current top-eight system gives the first eight teams a place in the finals, with ladder position shaping the path through the series. A higher finish brings a more favourable starting position, but it does not guarantee a premiership. The finals are a separate contest in which one poor performance can end a club’s season.
This gives the ladder two jobs: it measures consistency across the home-and-away season and it sets the starting order for finals. Finishing first is a major achievement, but it is not the same as being crowned premier. Fans and commentators often discuss “the best team” in a season, and the answer may depend on whether they mean the most successful over the regular season or the team that won the finals.
How individual player rankings developed
For much of the game’s history, individual comparisons came mainly through awards, reputation and observation. The Brownlow Medal, first awarded in 1924, became the best-known honour for the fairest and best player in the VFL and later the AFL. Umpires vote on performances, so the Brownlow is an informed judgement rather than a statistical ranking of every player.
Coaches’ votes offer another view. The AFL Coaches Association Champion Player of the Year recognises players based on votes from senior coaches after matches. Coaches may value work that is easy to overlook in a basic stat sheet: a midfielder’s pressure, a defender’s positioning or a forward’s ability to create space for teammates.
As detailed match data became more common, statistical player-rating systems added a different kind of comparison. They assess actions such as disposals, contested possessions, tackles, clearances, marks and scores, often giving different weights to different events. Champion Data’s AFL player ratings are one prominent example. These models can help compare players across positions and track form over time, but their results depend on how the system values each action.
That matters because football roles are not identical. A key defender may influence a game by spoiling and closing space, while a small forward may apply pressure without collecting many disposals. A rating can organise evidence, but it cannot fully capture every tactical instruction, difficult matchup or off-ball effort. Brownlow votes, coaches’ votes and statistical ratings should therefore be treated as different lenses, not interchangeable verdicts.
What rankings can—and cannot—tell you
Modern rankings make it easier to follow a season, compare players and spot changes in form. But the best approach is to ask what a ranking measures before drawing conclusions from it. The AFL ladder is based on team results; the Brownlow reflects umpire voting; coaches’ awards reflect coaches’ assessments; and statistical ratings depend on recorded actions and a scoring model.
Fantasy football scores are another separate category. They reward actions according to rules designed for a game played by fantasy participants, not to produce a complete measure of a player’s value to an AFL side. A high fantasy score can indicate a busy match, but it is not automatically proof that a player was the most influential on the field.
Related Articles
- How Does the Australian Rules Football Ranking System Work?
- How Did Australian Rules Football Become an International Sport?
- How Does the Rating System Work in Australian Rules Football?
Frequently Asked Questions
How are AFL teams ranked on the ladder?
Teams are ordered by premiership points: four for a win, two for a draw and none for a loss. Percentage separates clubs that finish level on points.
What does AFL percentage mean?
Percentage is points scored divided by points conceded, multiplied by 100. A figure above 100 means a team has scored more points than it has allowed across the matches counted.
Does the team on top of the ladder win the premiership?
No. The ladder ranks clubs across the home-and-away season and determines finals qualification and position. The premiership goes to the team that wins the finals series.
Are player ratings the same as the Brownlow Medal?
No. The Brownlow is decided by umpires’ votes for the fairest and best player. Statistical ratings use recorded match actions and a model, while coaches’ awards rely on coaches’ assessments.
Final Thoughts
Australian Rules football rankings developed from straightforward season records into a broader set of ways to assess teams and players. The ladder remains the clearest measure of club performance over the home-and-away season, with percentage providing a tie-breaker. Individual awards and data-based ratings add useful detail, but each has its own limits. Read them together, and you get a fuller picture of who performed well—and why.
Aiden Cross is a sports writer and editor at BeliveSports, covering a broad range of sports with a focus on clear, accurate, and practical information. His work covers rules, techniques, player roles, competitions, equipment, statistics, and the details that help readers better understand how different sports are played. Aiden takes a research-driven approach to sports writing, using reliable sources and established sporting information to provide context rather than simply repeating surface-level facts. His goal is to make complex topics accessible while maintaining the accuracy and depth expected by knowledgeable sports fans. At BeliveSports, Aiden contributes to the site’s editorial standards by focusing on accuracy, clarity, useful context, and reader-first explanations.
1 thought on “How Did Ranking Systems Develop in Australian Rules Football?”