2 hours ago, BAMF said:

Even that's not fair as you wouldnt play every team on there home ground and vice versa.

That’s it, the only possible way a fixture is fair is to play them at home and away. But that would make too many games to fit into the entire year unless they were to go down the round ball path and make the team on top of the ladder wins the premiership. 

The fixture was a lot fairer many years ago when each team played each other twice (12 teams , 22 games). 

Perhaps if / when Tassie Devils come on board that the AFL hierarchy would consider having a 18 round season and a few byes. I bet most players would like this.

Unfortunately this most likely won’t occur.  AFL / broadcast interest basically means more games equal more money. Professional entertainment trumps purist principles.

Just maybe then if a 20th team is created (Canberra, NT or whoever!) it may slightly increase the chances of every team playing each other just once in the season proper  - but I am not still not confident .

 

The fixture should be equalised over 3 seasons, so over that period every teams plays every other team the same amount of times. And the result accurately reflects the competition.

The current fixturing undermines the integrity and simplicity of the competition.

31 minutes ago, PaulRB said:

The fixture should be equalised over 3 seasons, so over that period every teams plays every other team the same amount of times. And the result accurately reflects the competition.

The current fixturing undermines the integrity and simplicity of the competition.

I think the AFL does try to equalise the fixture, but not by each team playing every other team the same number of times. It's done more by ladder position. That is if you finish in the top third you play most, but not all, of your double up games against teams that also fished in the top third. Same for mid-third and bottom third. What the AFL can't do is design a fixture based on where they think teams will be during the year ahead. 

In short, there are always anomalies and always clubs with seemingly easier games. However, in all my years of watching football, I don't think there has ever been a Premier who didn't deserve to win the Grand Final, so I'm not sure it matters.

6 hours ago, Demonstone said:

Back in 2021 when the fixture was ... err, fixed ...

That's why they call it a fixture and not a draw

Case in point : Port Adelaide

Finished 2nd at the end of home and away season. Only beat one other top 8 side all year and that was the Dogs in rd 23 by 2 points. Beat Geelong in their QF, had week 2 off then got the dates wrong for their prelim only arriving at the ground with 12 minutes to go in the last qtr.

3 minutes ago, Bombay Airconditioning said:

Case in point : Port Adelaide

Finished 2nd at the end of home and away season. Only beat one other top 8 side all year and that was the Dogs in rd 23 by 2 points. Beat Geelong in their QF, had week 2 off then got the dates wrong for their prelim only arriving at the ground with 12 minutes to go in the last qtr.

But what about the strength of their fixture that season? It may well be that they weren't capable of winning those high profile games during the H&A, but that doesn't mean they didn't earn the home prelim.

I guess my point was more about Geelong could potentially reach top 4 spot because of the weakness of their fixture, not because they deserve it i.e. winning against Melbourne, Brisbane or Freo.

11 minutes ago, Bombay Airconditioning said:

Case in point : Port Adelaide

Finished 2nd at the end of home and away season. Only beat one other top 8 side all year and that was the Dogs in rd 23 by 2 points. Beat Geelong in their QF, had week 2 off then got the dates wrong for their prelim only arriving at the ground with 12 minutes to go in the last qtr.

I forgot to add Port did beat several top 8 teams, however only one top 4 (Bulldogs). I think you may have thought of the Bombers who I believe didn't beat any top 8 team and still made Finals.

3 minutes ago, ElDiablo14 said:

I forgot to add Port did beat several top 8 teams, however only one top 4 (Bulldogs). I think you may have thought of the Bombers who I believe didn't beat any top 8 team and still made Finals.

I don’t have time to double check tonight, but I’m pretty sure they didn’t, I remember posting about it on here during the finals. 
Who was it that you thought they defeated?

I am reminded of the days when we were dire and weren't concerned by the fixtures of the top 4.

Then when we were pushing for the 8 -- maybe with a bit of luck we'll scrape in!! -- fixtures & their ease or otherwise became a concern.

Now we're the best team in the land and put in the same effort whether we're playing 3rd or 13th. The fixtures of the top 4 don't concern us. Full circle!

20 minutes ago, ElDiablo14 said:

I forgot to add Port did beat several top 8 teams, however only one top 4 (Bulldogs). I think you may have thought of the Bombers who I believe didn't beat any top 8 team and still made Finals.

I think you are right actually. They beat the Bombers, Swans & Giants.

Edited May 10, 20223 yr by Bombay Airconditioning

Back in the Neeld era, Essendon said “they weren’t going to complain cos they only got to play Melbourne once”. 
 

Guess who knocked off Essendon 

Cannot possibly imagine a C 2000 side with the Fab Four, J Brown and Martin Pike whinging about a “tough draw”

13 hours ago, ElDiablo14 said:

Just heard on the radio that the Cats are playing both North and West Coast twice! 4 easy wins there for the geriatric cats.

Do we know if there is any other team from last year's top 4 with such and advantage?

I understand West Coast was competitive last year, but why do you give 2 games against the wooden spoon to any of the top 4?

If this helps them to make finals then I say great. Especially if we meet them in a final 

 

12 hours ago, Lucifers Hero said:

Well, 2 of last year's top 4 are virtually out of the race.  The 4th was the mighty dees.

 

That 4 teams have fallen out of last year's top 8 has created a heap of anomalies in the draw.  It has made ours harder, Geelong's easier and given the Blues a dream run.

Tigers haven't done too badly either.  Games they have for the rest of the season:  Port x 2, Hawks x 2, Bombers, x 2, Eagles x1, North x 1, GCS x 1.  On that they could easily sneak into top 4.

 

But, it is what it is.  The first few weeks of he finals will sort it out.

Port will beat them, twice, GCS a sneaky chance also.

Surely Essendon have the most reason to complain?! Fringe finals side gets to start the first three rounds of the season against three of the top 4 including the premiers.

No wonder they're stuffed this year...

Until we have a situation where every club plays everyone else home and away it will always be compromised. 

I get more irritated by the compromises within these compromises like every interstate side getting to play their cross town rivals twice every year regardless of ladder position and the big Melbourne clubs never having to visit KP. 

Let’s just concentrate on getting to 18 wins as soon as we can whilst expending the least amount of energy and in the best possible health. The gloves can come off in September. 

18 hours ago, Jaded No More said:

There is no point playing easy teams and making finals. If you can't beat top sides, you won't go far in September.

Last year we beat everyone in the top 8. I rather play hard games and test ourselves and our game plan against the best sides heading into finals. What do Geelong get from playing North and West Coast other than a false sense of achievement? 

16 points.

19 hours ago, deelusions from afar said:

I kinda love it - it gets Geelong thinking they're a chance again - but there's no way they will be able to knock off two of Dees, Freo and Bris in finals.  It means they get worse picks which means a longer rebuild when the cliff finally arrives.  

We pushed them over the cliff, these years of bubbling mid-table mediocrity are just the rock edges that they are hitting on the way down.

Even the ridiculous discussion on the ground from Scott to not discuss their reversion back to slow kick ‘keeping’s off’ is a sign of their mental weakness - both in reverting and in not owning up to it.

43 minutes ago, UK Demon said:

16 points.

Great. I would love another easy prelim kill. 

Conspiracy theory. Who is the current Afl Operations boss and is there a family link.  Who was the previous AFL operations boss and what club does he work at now. Geelong has been receiving charity for years in the rebuild of its stadium, why stop now.

The most logical way to get the closest to making it fairer is once everyone has played each other once then set who plays each other twice. The AFL proved last year and this year that you can set the fixture on a rolling basis so there shouldn't be a reason this couldn't be done. 

As for Cats, get a ridiculous home ground advantage without the penalty of having to play interstate every other week like the interstate teams. Plus that game is not a real AFL ground and with all the redevelopment there surely they could have fixed the width but that would have taken away that massive home ground advantage. 

1 hour ago, Its Time for Back to Back said:

The most logical way to get the closest to making it fairer is once everyone has played each other once then set who plays each other twice. The AFL proved last year and this year that you can set the fixture on a rolling basis so there shouldn't be a reason this couldn't be done. 

As for Cats, get a ridiculous home ground advantage without the penalty of having to play interstate every other week like the interstate teams. Plus that game is not a real AFL ground and with all the redevelopment there surely they could have fixed the width but that would have taken away that massive home ground advantage. 

I guess the issue with that approach (i.e. top 6 playing each other, 7-12 and 13-18 likewise) is that 6th gets a really tough final five rounds and much tougher than the teams in the next group. If 6th is a game ahead of 9th after 17 rounds, they could easily miss finals due to the much tougher final five rounds. 

I think this season is being statistically skewed by the massive early drop in form from Port and the Dogs. If both those sides played true to last years form then we would look even further out in front than we are. To be fair I think we are the reason the Dogs have dropped off. The GF and then round 1 psychological damaged them. They KNOW they are a fair way behind us.

As for Geelong I’m not sure it really matters. They have the experience and ground advantage to make top 4 anyways. It’s whether they’ve got the speed, depth  and dynamics to do it in September - and that’s been the same question for 5 years. 

1 hour ago, The heart beats true said:

I think this season is being statistically skewed by the massive early drop in form from Port and the Dogs. If both those sides played true to last years form then we would look even further out in front than we are. To be fair I think we are the reason the Dogs have dropped off. The GF and then round 1 psychological damaged them. They KNOW they are a fair way behind us.

As for Geelong I’m not sure it really matters. They have the experience and ground advantage to make top 4 anyways. It’s whether they’ve got the speed, depth  and dynamics to do it in September - and that’s been the same question for 5 years. 

Completely agreed regarding the Dogs 

The worst possible outcome for them this season was playing us round 1, getting out to a lead and then losing comfortably. Psychology I think it ruined them as they realized this season is not going to be one of redemption but again being second best (or worse as it turned out).