The Luck of the Draw

[Wodjathefirst 2,423]

Professional effin entertainment, that is pretty much what the AFL is.

Throw in a few more teams, say Tassie, Canberra and the  NT, play each other once , throw in a bye or two if you still want 22 weeks of home and away games, then it would be much fairer.

 Unfortunately, never going to happen 

And while I am at it, never, ever let Geelong have home finals unless they massively increase crowd capacity and change the size of their oval ffs!

 

Edited August 22, 2022 by Wodjathefirst

[Red and Blue realist 2,026]

Just now, Pennant St Dee said:

Be easier to just play each other once and Rounds 18-23 are based on the previous season

Top 6 play each other again 

7th to 12th play each other again 

13th to 18th play each other again 

At least it’s set in stone and you know what you are facing. If it means no double ups of derbies, showdowns etc then so be it Anzac Eve, Anzac Day, QB, Dreamtime all stay locked in and alternate home sides every year. If there’s a double up of those teams involved in those games it happens after Rd 17

This has some merit, although for the interstate teams they really should face the other team in their state twice. So maybe there is an allowance there - but it wouldn't mean the team who finishes 3rd gets the wooden spooner! 

[Lucifers Hero 37,323]

Do the double ups really matter that much?

There is the odd anomaly like Collingwood getting into the top 4 on a very easy draw on the back of finishing 17th last year.  That could have been us in 2020 after finishing 17th in 2019, except that a covid riddled 2020 messed it for us when we just missed the eight. 

The cream still rises to the top.  And we are second top.

[Vipercrunch 2,818]

3 minutes ago, Lucifers Hero said:

Do the double ups really matter that much?

There is the odd anomaly like Collingwood getting into the top 4 on a very easy draw on the back of finishing 17th last year.  That could have been us in 2020 after finishing 17th in 2019, except that a covid riddled 2020 messed it for us when we just missed the eight. 

The cream still rises to the top.  And we are second top.

It matters to teams like St Kilda and Carlton who would have loved some finals reward and experience but missed out to Richmond who didn't play any finalists twice.

Edited August 22, 2022 by Vipercrunch

[In Harmes Way 7,613]

Part of the problem is that the AFL looks at the 2022 fixture (somewhat) based on 2021 finish. Some teams get the benefit of coming up against teams in 2022 that didn't perform the same as 2021, which compounds the problem.

 Melbourne's double up games were worse than envisaged at the start of 2022 due to improvement by Collingwood and Freo who didn't make the 8 in 2021. The AFL might have hoped Geelong got better opposition from West Coast (or it was just rigged). Sydney got even luckier than having to face 2 opponents who made the 8 in 2021.

This judgement in hindsight is why I like the idea of a fixture where we all play each other once and then work out the last 5 games based on ladder position at the time. It also gives the lower clubs a better chance of a win before wrapping up for the year. 

[La Dee-vina Comedia 16,534]

The inequities of the draw were possibly exacerbated by there being three (nearly four) of last year's finalists who have missed out on finals this year. Not only have Essendon and GWS missed finals, they've plummeted down the ladder. In addition, early in the year Port Adelaide were horrendous.

The AFL attempts to minimise inequities, but because the methodology has no choice but to be backward looking, it's always possible that a draw that starts as even as possible can be blown out - to be easier or harder - by the way teams actually perform.  

In the end, I'm not sure it matters. Would you rather be going into finals having had soft wins against inferior opposition or battle-hardened by having played teams also preparing to play finals?

[Webber 10,181]

Fantastic article, and gives perspective to our season. We are, followed by the Doggies, the most legitimate finalists. The 6 others, not so much. Lucky finalists.

[Lucifers Hero 37,323]

1 minute ago, Vipercrunch said:

It matters to teams like St Kilda and Carlton who would have loved some finals reward and experience but missed out to Richmond who didn't play any finalists twice.

No-one can predict who will rise and fall from one year to the next hence why I compared to last year's finalists rather than this years.

One thing that should change is that a top 4 team should not play a bottom 4 team twice which would eliminate the Geelong v North double up.  But we played Coll twice who finished 17th but weren't able to take advantage of it...

[monoccular 16,405]

18 minutes ago, Pennant St Dee said:

Be easier to just play each other once and Rounds 18-23 are based on the previous season

Top 6 play each other again 

7th to 12th play each other again 

13th to 18th play each other again 

At least it’s set in stone and you know what you are facing. If it means no double ups of derbies, showdowns etc then so be it Anzac Eve, Anzac Day, QB, Dreamtime all stay locked in and alternate home sides every year. If there’s a double up of those teams involved in those games it happens after Rd 17

Penant - this makes a lot more practical sense that naming the schedule for rounds 18-23 after round 17.   After all the big corporates need to know how to fit in their various junkets well in advance 

However it will never ever happen. Fairness is the farthest thing from the great minds of AFLHQ. 

[Gawndy the Great 7,716]

56 minutes ago, Fat Tony said:

We were unlucky that our bottom 6 double up was Collingwood and our middle 6 double up was Freo. 

We shouldn't rely on luck. I have said before, the fix is rather straight forward. I dont take credit for it as im sure others in the industry have proposed something similar. 

1. Every team plays each other once. location is based on a rotating YoY basis i.e. home one year, away the next. 

2. Rds 18-23 are floating in both time but also team and location. At the end of Rd 17, the next 5 rounds are divided into top 6, middle 6 and bottom 6. 

3. middle 6 can only playoff for spots 7 and 8 to avoid them leapfrogging teams in the bottom of the top 6 based on an easier draw. 

4. the location is flipped based on where the game was played in Rd 1-17. 

5. Points accrued in Rd 1-17 are kept intact to ensure any advantage obtained in Rd 1-17 is kept. 

The only issue with this are the dead rubbers for teams in 13-18 spots on the ladder. There is nothing to play for, so the commercial appeal of these will be low. Im sure the AFL could do something to provide some incentive here. It cant be draft concessions as that will go against equalization but im sure the DL collective could find some creative solutions here. 

The other parameter is the number of 5 day, 6 day breaks, 7 day breaks. It should be as equal as possible across the season or averaged over multiple seasons if it is not possible over one. 

[bluey 895]

That draws an eye opener.

[Jaded No More 59,142]

39 minutes ago, Lucifers Hero said:

Do the double ups really matter that much?

There is the odd anomaly like Collingwood getting into the top 4 on a very easy draw on the back of finishing 17th last year.  That could have been us in 2020 after finishing 17th in 2019, except that a covid riddled 2020 messed it for us when we just missed the eight. 

The cream still rises to the top.  And we are second top.

It matters to me that Geelong get the softest draw when they were a top 4 team. It would also matter to me if we finished 3rd and lost a home final because Sydney had a soft draw when they too made finals last year.

There will always be anomalies. Nobody thought Pies will finish top 4 and Port and Dogs were clearly both thought of as contenders. But the reality is that Geelong finished top 4 and yet they played the wooden spooners twice and West Coast twice, who didn't make the 8 and were wildly tipped to be rubbish this season.

 

[Fat Tony 4,533]

15 minutes ago, CYB said:

We shouldn't rely on luck. I have said before, the fix is rather straight forward. I dont take credit for it as im sure others in the industry have proposed something similar. 

1. Every team plays each other once. location is based on a rotating YoY basis i.e. home one year, away the next. 

2. Rds 18-23 are floating in both time but also team and location. At the end of Rd 17, the next 5 rounds are divided into top 6, middle 6 and bottom 6. 

3. middle 6 can only playoff for spots 7 and 8 to avoid them leapfrogging teams in the bottom of the top 6 based on an easier draw. 

4. the location is flipped based on where the game was played in Rd 1-17. 

5. Points accrued in Rd 1-17 are kept intact to ensure any advantage obtained in Rd 1-17 is kept. 

The only issue with this are the dead rubbers for teams in 13-18 spots on the ladder. There is nothing to play for, so the commercial appeal of these will be low. Im sure the AFL could do something to provide some incentive here. It cant be draft concessions as that will go against equalization but im sure the DL collective could find some creative solutions here. 

The other parameter is the number of 5 day, 6 day breaks, 7 day breaks. It should be as equal as possible across the season or averaged over multiple seasons if it is not possible over one. 

This system is fairer but it means we effectively have 2 sets of finals and a lot of dead rubbers. We also cannot release the full fixture until round 17 is done.

If I was running the AFL, I would actually go the other way and look to maximise revenue while creating as fair a draw as possible. This means more double up games between Victorian clubs. For interstate clubs, they should play double ups against each other, including 3 local derbies each year. This would mean less unnecessary travel and that fans could attend more games. 

The double up games should look to promote relative equality in the draw, with each team playing an even number of high and low clubs. (They should look to equalise the competition through draft and salary cap rather than the draw.)

 

[Pennant St Dee 11,481]

49 minutes ago, In Harmes Way said:

Part of the problem is that the AFL looks at the 2022 fixture (somewhat) based on 2021 finish. Some teams get the benefit of coming up against teams in 2022 that didn't perform the same as 2021, which compounds the problem.

 Melbourne's double up games were worse than envisaged at the start of 2022 due to improvement by Collingwood and Freo who didn't make the 8 in 2021. The AFL might have hoped Geelong got better opposition from West Coast (or it was just rigged). Sydney got even luckier than having to face 2 opponents who made the 8 in 2021.

This judgement in hindsight is why I like the idea of a fixture where we all play each other once and then work out the last 5 games based on ladder position at the time. It also gives the lower clubs a better chance of a win before wrapping up for the year. 

Happens every year

plenty of supporter groups would have been bemoaning the 2019 fixtures when they were released that they were playing Melbourne twice

2021 insert Richmond and Eagles

2022 Insert Port

[Lucifers Hero 37,323]

22 minutes ago, Jaded No More said:

There will always be anomalies. Nobody thought Pies will finish top 4 and Port and Dogs were clearly both thought of as contenders. But the reality is that Geelong finished top 4 and yet they played the wooden spooners twice and West Coast twice, who didn't make the 8 and were wildly tipped to be rubbish this season.

We played the 2021, 17th team (Coll) twice for 2 Losses.  Geelong played the 2021,18th team (North) twice for 2 Wins.

We played the 2021, 11th team twice (Freo) for 1W and 1L.   Geelong played the 2021 9th team twice (Eagles) for 2 Wins

Not sure there is much different between the two given what was known when the draw was done late 2021 before preseasons had even started.

So Geelong won 3 extra games of their equivalent 'soft draw' and gained a huge % from them.  We had  the same opportunity.

Edited August 22, 2022 by Lucifers Hero

[daisycutter 28,689]

1 hour ago, dl4e said:

There is no excuse for Geelong. It is the same problem every year with those drongos. Geelong are a buboe on the armpit of humanity

buboe: had to google that one - lol

[tiers 2,785]

40 minutes ago, CYB said:

The fix is rather straight forward. 

This suggested fix was posted some years ago. Seems more relevant now. Works for 18 teams so cancel 19.

AN ALTERNATIVE STRUCTURE FOR OUR FOOTY SEASON

A more balanced draw for the home and away season

To balance out the draw, the teams should play each other once over 17 rounds. Home and away advantage (ie interstate travel for Victorian clubs) can be rotated each year.

At the end of the round 17, place the teams in three groups of 6 viz. 1,4,7,10,13,16 / 2,5,8,11,14,17 / 3,6,9,12,15,18 or other suitable combination but NOT 1,2,3,4,5,6 etc.

The teams play an round robin series of 5 games within their respective groupings giving a total of 22 games for the H & A season. The draw for each group should be made by ballot so that the draw for each grouping will be unique to enhance the mystery.

This approach smooths out each team’s chances as no team should play multiple games against top teams or lower teams. Theoretically, each team vying for finals should have an more even chance and there would be greater interest in each round.

Introducing a finals season

A week off after the H&A season gives the players a chance for a rest and refresh and offers the prospect of a finals season, distinct from the H & A season and different to the current finals series.

Divide the eight clubs into 2 groups of four – 1,3,5,7 and 2,4,6,8 – to play a round robin series to determine the top team in each group based on wins and percentage. Every game will be important as percentage counts. And then, the two top teams play off in the grand final.

All four matches in the third week should be played at the same time so that teams can't game the system. The broadcasters would have the challenge to cover all four matches simultaneously using "round the grounds" images and reports. What a dynamic and exciting day of footy.

Cons

Finishing 1 and 2 or top 4 might lose its appeal. The argument that the WB benefited from the bye is correct – but shouldn’t the best teams win, not the team with least injuries at the start of the finals. Injuries can occur in the finals that will test team lists but at least they could all start even.

Short notice to make arrangements for the last 5 weeks of the season. So what, arrangements for the current finals series are made on short notice so just extend the time and complexity a bit. That’s why Gil is paid the big bucks.

Pros

Enhanced excitement and interest in rounds 18 – 22 and four matches a week for the first three weeks of the finals where just winning will not be enough. The margin of victory and its effect on percentage will count as well. Every score will have real meaning.

The grand final would then be the ultimate match of the season with both teams having gone through an exhaustive process to prove their worth. Another weeks rest should be introduced to extend the promotion of the grand final and to ensure both teams are at their best.

Delete the byes to fit it into the length of the current season or start the season earlier now that the ‘G is no longer required for cricket..

Footy Awards Week

Brownlow, rising star, MVP, coaches and all other awards to be held in the week between the H&A season and the finals season to be known as "Footy Awards Week", an event in itself with daily functions with the Brownlow as the climax. What a celebration of footy. And then the final’s season of 13 matches without distractions. What joy.

Summation

What a dream – a much more exciting and interesting season in six phases – a pre season competition, the first 17 rounds, the final 5 rounds, Awards Week, three weeks of round robin preliminary finals (no semis, elimination or qualifying needed) and a MONSTER GRAND FINAL.

That’s what footy is all about. Why not?

[Jaded No More 59,142]

32 minutes ago, Lucifers Hero said:

We played the 2021, 17th team (Coll) twice for 2 Losses.  Geelong played the 2021,18th team (North) twice for 2 Wins.

We played the 2021, 11th team twice (Freo) for 1W and 1L.   Geelong played the 2021 9th team twice (Eagles) for 2 Wins

Not sure there is much different between the two given what was known when the draw was done late 2021 before preseasons had even started.

So Geelong won 3 extra games of their equivalent 'soft draw' and gained a huge % from them.  We had  the same opportunity.

Big difference is, we had no home advantage against the Pies, we played North and Eagles both away from home (they got one of each), and we travelled interstate 3 times from round 18 onwards versus Geelong twice, including the last round of the season.

[Gawndy the Great 7,716]

23 minutes ago, tiers said:

This suggested fix was posted some years ago. Seems more relevant now. Works for 18 teams so cancel 19.

AN ALTERNATIVE STRUCTURE FOR OUR FOOTY SEASON

 

A more balanced draw for the home and away season

 

To balance out the draw, the teams should play each other once over 17 rounds. Home and away advantage (ie interstate travel for Victorian clubs) can be rotated each year.

 

At the end of the round 17, place the teams in three groups of 6 viz. 1,4,7,10,13,16 / 2,5,8,11,14,17 / 3,6,9,12,15,18 or other suitable combination but NOT 1,2,3,4,5,6 etc.

 

The teams play an round robin series of 5 games within their respective groupings giving a total of 22 games for the H & A season. The draw for each group should be made by ballot so that the draw for each grouping will be unique to enhance the mystery.

 

This approach smooths out each team’s chances as no team should play multiple games against top teams or lower teams. Theoretically, each team vying for finals should have an more even chance and there would be greater interest in each round.

 

Introducing a finals season

 

A week off after the H&A season gives the players a chance for a rest and refresh and offers the prospect of a finals season, distinct from the H & A season and different to the current finals series.

 

Divide the eight clubs into 2 groups of four – 1,3,5,7 and 2,4,6,8 – to play a round robin series to determine the top team in each group based on wins and percentage. Every game will be important as percentage counts. And then, the two top teams play off in the grand final.

 

All four matches in the third week should be played at the same time so that teams can't game the system. The broadcasters would have the challenge to cover all four matches simultaneously using "round the grounds" images and reports. What a dynamic and exciting day of footy.

 

Cons

 

Finishing 1 and 2 or top 4 might lose its appeal. The argument that the WB benefited from the bye is correct – but shouldn’t the best teams win, not the team with least injuries at the start of the finals. Injuries can occur in the finals that will test team lists but at least they could all start even.

 

Short notice to make arrangements for the last 5 weeks of the season. So what, arrangements for the current finals series are made on short notice so just extend the time and complexity a bit. That’s why Gil is paid the big bucks.

 

Pros

 

Enhanced excitement and interest in rounds 18 – 22 and four matches a week for the first three weeks of the finals where just winning will not be enough. The margin of victory and its effect on percentage will count as well. Every score will have real meaning.

 

The grand final would then be the ultimate match of the season with both teams having gone through an exhaustive process to prove their worth. Another weeks rest should be introduced to extend the promotion of the grand final and to ensure both teams are at their best.

 

Delete the byes to fit it into the length of the current season or start the season earlier now that the ‘G is no longer required for cricket..

 

Footy Awards Week

 

Brownlow, rising star, MVP, coaches and all other awards to be held in the week between the H&A season and the finals season to be known as "Footy Awards Week", an event in itself with daily functions with the Brownlow as the climax. What a celebration of footy. And then the final’s season of 13 matches without distractions. What joy.

 

Summation

 

What a dream – a much more exciting and interesting season in six phases – a pre season competition, the first 17 rounds, the final 5 rounds, Awards Week, three weeks of round robin preliminary finals (no semis, elimination or qualifying needed) and a MONSTER GRAND FINAL.

 

That’s what footy is all about. Why not?

 

Not against the alternative pooling, but the reformed finals structure will immediately get you offside with a lot of the footy public. They love the finals fixturing. 

[tiers 2,785]

1 hour ago, CYB said:

Not against the alternative pooling, but the reformed finals structure will immediately get you offside with a lot of the footy public. They love the finals fixturing. 

Why? Doesn't everyone want more footy?

[Gawndy the Great 7,716]

3 minutes ago, tiers said:

Why? Doesn't everyone want more footy?

Its the whole 'resistant to change' or 'if aint broke dont fix it' mentality. 

Ultimately i think we are heading for shorter games (15 min quarters) in order for a higher number of H&A rounds. 

[kev martin 9,323]

1 hour ago, tiers said:

Divide the eight clubs into 2 groups of four – 1,3,5,7 and 2,4,6,8 – to play a round robin series to determine the top team

Would prefer:

Round 1:

1 play 8, 2 ply 7, 3 ply 6, 4 ply 5.

2 bottom teams out, top 2 get a week off, based on win and losses and where placed at end of H & A.

Round 2:

3 ply 6, 4 ply 5, . The two losers out.

Prelim:

Winner 3 Ply 6, play team 2 from first round. Winner 4 ply 5, play team 1 from first round.

Then the grand as losers are eliminated.  

Home ground to those higher on ladder at end of H & A.

Top 4 really shouldn't play each other until further into final series.

[Wodjathefirst 2,423]

4 hours ago, Sir Why You Little said:

Yes but Jeelong do not feature in ANY of that. 
And where is the equality of teams being sent down the Highway to play the Bastards? Who allows that rubbish EVERY YEAR!!

That is just corrupt and lazy

I started to get concerned that when the stadium works were completed that Jeelong would really start pushing for home finals even against Victorian teams.

My understanding is that the refurbished stadium would hold 40k.  I could see an argument been pushed to have finals against interstate sides, but surely not against Victorian sides

Had the revised capacity being say 60k I would have become very nervous. Particularly when playing 2nd tier Melbourne based teams like the ones they currently play down there more often than not (like us).

[Sir Why You Little 34,938]

Just now, Wodjathefirst said:

I started to get concerned that when the stadium works were completed that Jeelong would really start pushing for home finals even against Victorian teams.

My understanding is that the refurbished stadium would hold 40k.  I could see an argument been pushed to have finals against interstate sides, but surely not against Victorian sides

Had the revised capacity being say 60k I would have become very nervous. Particularly when playing 2nd tier Melbourne based teams like the ones they currently play down there more often than not (like us).

Jeelong can scream for Finals down there when everyone plays there. At the moment it is a total disgrace 

We have been down there 18 times this century. 
other teams never go near the dump. 
It is just wrong 

[layzie 29,771]

There's no other major competition with a fixture as fundamentally flawed as this one. What do you expect?