Jump to content

The Luck of the Draw


BradDemonSufferer

Recommended Posts

17 minutes ago, layzie said:

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

There’s only one way to stop it. 
We the Members of Clubs must loudly oppose it. 
Jeelong get a free ride. They own that Stadium outright, but Government money pays for the renovations 

What a deal!!

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, layzie said:

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

See, I think the NFL’s divisional fixture in a 17 game season compromising. 6 games in a [censored] division and you can be the Tennessee Titans getting the number 1 seed and going out straight away. They have 32 teams so it’s hard of course. I think we should play each other once and then move to pools of 6 and fight for position within those pools. Really interesting way to make it fairer and get some excitement. 13th at Rd 17 is effed of course…

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Demonstone said:

The football club doesn't actually own the stadium, SWYL.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kardinia_Park_(stadium)

I would dispute that DS

Brian Cook set it all up, so if it has changed it has been very quiet…

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, CYB said:

With the information presented like this it really does put things into perspective. Would love Champion data to do some kind of weighted ladder taking into consideration the fixture degree of difficulty. Not sure how you would go about it, but i think it will show a very different top 4. Richmond probably miss top 8 and Carlton/Saints probably get in. 

Don’t you guys realise the fixture is deliberately weighted against the most successful teams from the previous year, hence our extraordinarily difficult fixture this year as the reigning premiers. Frankly l don’t mind that, it is part of the equalisation process. 
 

What l do mind is when unfair fixturing is built in permanently to the system aka Geelong. Their ground is substandard in terms of size, and gives the Cats an advantage like no other in the AFL where their win/loss record is over 80%. It would be far fairer to play these matches against us either at the “G” or at Marvel, or even Alice Springs or Darwin. Then there will be no permanent built in advantage irrespective of where we or they perform on the ladder. 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

I would dispute that DS

Brian Cook set it all up, so if it has changed it has been very quiet…

SWYL, I fully understand and share your utter dislike for Geelong Football Club.

However, can you cite any evidence that they own the Kardinia Park ground?

You'll also find that the AFL and GFC helped fund the redevelopment and it's not just all Government money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, rpfc said:

See, I think the NFL’s divisional fixture in a 17 game season compromising. 6 games in a [censored] division and you can be the Tennessee Titans getting the number 1 seed and going out straight away. They have 32 teams so it’s hard of course. I think we should play each other once and then move to pools of 6 and fight for position within those pools. Really interesting way to make it fairer and get some excitement. 13th at Rd 17 is effed of course…

Fair call, it does depend on how strong a division is at a given time in NFL. I take it back slightly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


10 minutes ago, Demonstone said:

SWYL, I fully understand and share your utter dislike for Geelong Football Club.

However, can you cite any evidence that they own the Kardinia Park ground?

You'll also find that the AFL and GFC helped fund the redevelopment and it's not just all Government money.

Back to the Early days of Cook and Costa. The entire stadium was restructured. Car parking, advertising, seats, food and Beverage 

The whole thing was restructured, before it they were almost broke. Cook did a great job. What the deal is NOW, maybe different. 
The State Government has put in over $140 Million so far.. I would be very interested to see the AFL and GFC Commitments. Nowhere near that figure 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've been posting about this all week, probably ad nauseum.

It's not unfair. Unless we do a 34-game season where everyone plays everyone else home and away, every single model that is proposed is unfair. Even a 17-game season is unfair - some will get, say, Fremantle in Perth, others will get them at their home ground.

The 17-5 idea that gets bandied around creates different problems. Do we really want the last five weeks to be full of meaningless low-quality games involving the bottom 6 playing each other? Then there's tanking - why finish 6th after 17 games when you'll cop the five sides above you again when you could finish 7th and cop the five sides below you instead?

It's a bad idea for varying reasons.

The AFL tries to get it right by making good sides from one year play each other more often than not the next year. The obviously problem is that they don't have a crystal ball and so don't know what will happen the following year. For us, we were given Collingwood and Fremantle and they got much better. 

It's wrong to complain about Geelong getting North and West Coast twice. But it's right to point out that their fixture has ended up being easier than ours. So too Sydney and Richmond. Particularly in the second half of the season. So when you hear someone in the media say "Melbourne have only just been going in the second half of the year", or you see one of those "from Round 15" ladders, remember that as the fixture turned out, we had a much tougher second half of the season than everyone else.

  • Like 2
  • Love 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

Back to the Early days of Cook and Costa. The entire stadium was restructured. Car parking, advertising, seats, food and Beverage 

The whole thing was restructured, before it they were almost broke. Cook did a great job. What the deal is NOW, maybe different. 
The State Government has put in over $140 Million so far.. I would be very interested to see the AFL and GFC Commitments. Nowhere near that figure 

You've cited nothing to support your memory of what happened.  The footy club don't own the stadium.

As far as funding goes, check the link I posted.  The City of Geelong has also tipped in.  You're correct when you say other parties haven't contributed as much as the Government, but the money hasn't just come from one source.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, titan_uranus said:

I've been posting about this all week, probably ad nauseum.

It's not unfair. Unless we do a 34-game season where everyone plays everyone else home and away, every single model that is proposed is unfair. Even a 17-game season is unfair - some will get, say, Fremantle in Perth, others will get them at their home ground.

The 17-5 idea that gets bandied around creates different problems. Do we really want the last five weeks to be full of meaningless low-quality games involving the bottom 6 playing each other? Then there's tanking - why finish 6th after 17 games when you'll cop the five sides above you again when you could finish 7th and cop the five sides below you instead?

It's a bad idea for varying reasons.

The AFL tries to get it right by making good sides from one year play each other more often than not the next year. The obviously problem is that they don't have a crystal ball and so don't know what will happen the following year. For us, we were given Collingwood and Fremantle and they got much better. 

It's wrong to complain about Geelong getting North and West Coast twice. But it's right to point out that their fixture has ended up being easier than ours. So too Sydney and Richmond. Particularly in the second half of the season. So when you hear someone in the media say "Melbourne have only just been going in the second half of the year", or you see one of those "from Round 15" ladders, remember that as the fixture turned out, we had a much tougher second half of the season than everyone else.

Have no problem having a harder draw or hardest actually…it’s where we play those games …travelling to Geelong when I think

we were 1 & 2 on the ladder & also not being at the G for 6 games in a row. Don’t think we’ve been respected as reigning premiers …

  • Like 1
  • Angry 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Demonstone said:

You've cited nothing to support your memory of what happened.  The footy club don't own the stadium.

As far as funding goes, check the link I posted.  The City of Geelong has also tipped in.  You're correct when you say other parties haven't contributed as much as the Government, but the money hasn't just come from one source.

It is weighed fairly in the Governments Court.
My information came from listening to Brian Cook interviews when he was the CEO. Things may have changed since he moved on. But I doubt the template would be much different. It was too good!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Jaded No More said:

Absolute joke that Geelong who finished2nd and made a prelim last year, had a significantly softer draw than the remaining prelim finalists.

I totally understand the top 4 and premiers from the previous year getting the harder draw, but WTF is with the dream run that Geelong, Brisbane and Sydney got?

Hopefully it catches up with them in finals. We would have finished 1st if we also got to play North and West Coast twice, including two games at the MCG. 

 

It's not as if those sooks got an easy draw because it was supposed to be harder according to AFL Board gurus having weak leading in to finals games.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Demonstone said:

SWYL, I fully understand and share your utter dislike for Geelong Football Club.

However, can you cite any evidence that they own the Kardinia Park ground?

You'll also find that the AFL and GFC helped fund the redevelopment and it's not just all Government money.

There is never any such thing as government money: it is taxpayers’ money.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, titan_uranus said:

I've been posting about this all week, probably ad nauseum.

It's not unfair. Unless we do a 34-game season where everyone plays everyone else home and away, every single model that is proposed is unfair. Even a 17-game season is unfair - some will get, say, Fremantle in Perth, others will get them at their home ground.

The 17-5 idea that gets bandied around creates different problems. Do we really want the last five weeks to be full of meaningless low-quality games involving the bottom 6 playing each other? Then there's tanking - why finish 6th after 17 games when you'll cop the five sides above you again when you could finish 7th and cop the five sides below you instead?

It's a bad idea for varying reasons.

The AFL tries to get it right by making good sides from one year play each other more often than not the next year. The obviously problem is that they don't have a crystal ball and so don't know what will happen the following year. For us, we were given Collingwood and Fremantle and they got much better. 

It's wrong to complain about Geelong getting North and West Coast twice. But it's right to point out that their fixture has ended up being easier than ours. So too Sydney and Richmond. Particularly in the second half of the season. So when you hear someone in the media say "Melbourne have only just been going in the second half of the year", or you see one of those "from Round 15" ladders, remember that as the fixture turned out, we had a much tougher second half of the season than everyone else.

It's not as if they the AFL would have done it on purpose. And blind Nellie didn't know that Freo and Woods were going to be better.

Just one point though, I think that the brains trust at MFC took a fair wack of this into account when designing our run.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Deestar9 said:

Have no problem having a harder draw or hardest actually…it’s where we play those games …travelling to Geelong when I think

we were 1 & 2 on the ladder & also not being at the G for 6 games in a row. Don’t think we’ve been respected as reigning premiers …

Yes these are separate issues.

We had 7 interstate games (1 we sold) and Geelong.

To compare with the other Victorian finalists:

  1. Melbourne - 7 interstate games, 1 Geelong
  2. Bulldogs - 6 interstate, 1 Geelong
  3. Geelong - 6 interstate
  4. Collingwood - 5 interstate
  5. Richmond - 5 interstate

Yet to look into 5 and 6 day breaks, or relative breaks to opponents. And no one else got close to having six games in a row at different venues across four states/territories.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rarely would I disagree with Binman’s views. On the Monday night ‘podcast’ he said this year we are better of than last year being guaranteed all our finals will be played at the MCG. I sadly disagree. There is no doubt in my mind Melbourne  ended up having a distinctive advantage by playing its finals in WA? Why? Crowd support.

Last year our finals in WA in particular, had unbelievable one sided support (I’d say a 70 / 30 spilt) coming our way.  It was loud, unbelievably loud. The noise was louder than what the pies got from their supporters the other week when they played and beat us (and I personally feel that helped Collingwood get over the line). Our players in WA thrived on thr support they received over there.

This year when we come up against bigger Melbourne sides in the other finals there is a fair chance we will be outnumbered and ‘out noised’. Sad but very likely. Our team will therefore not have the advantage it had last year.

However, bit like  the industry super funds marketing tag line, it’s never too late to change. It doesn’t have to be this way.  I know I’m repeating myself so I’ll try and be brief.  We have 60k members and many more supporters. Pretty much everyone I suspect were upset not being able to attend the finals last year. So bloody well turn up. Help our lads. 

After last year’s premiership our players said they were going to try and do it for us this year. Anything under 80k at the G next Friday to me will be disappointing. Need I say anymore?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites


14 minutes ago, Wodjathefirst said:

Rarely would I disagree with Binman’s views. On the Monday night ‘podcast’ he said this year we are better of than last year being guaranteed all our finals will be played at the MCG. I sadly disagree. There is no doubt in my mind Melbourne  ended up having a distinctive advantage by playing its finals in WA? Why? Crowd support.

Last year our finals in WA in particular, had unbelievable one sided support (I’d say a 70 / 30 spilt) coming our way.  It was loud, unbelievably loud. The noise was louder than what the pies got from their supporters the other week when they played and beat us (and I personally feel that helped Collingwood get over the line). Our players in WA thrived on thr support they received over there.

This year when we come up against bigger Melbourne sides in the other finals there is a fair chance we will be outnumbered and ‘out noised’. Sad but very likely. Our team will therefore not have the advantage it had last year.

However, bit like  the industry super funds marketing tag line, it’s never too late to change. It doesn’t have to be this way.  I know I’m repeating myself so I’ll try and be brief.  We have 60k members and many more supporters. Pretty much everyone I suspect were upset not being able to attend the finals last year. So bloody well turn up. Help our lads. 

After last year’s premiership our players said they were going to try and do it for us this year. Anything under 80k at the G next Friday to me will be disappointing. Need I say anymore?

You are forgetting the Crowd numbers and noise level of the 2018 Finals Series 

The ‘G will be rocking loud when the Riegning Premiers take the field. We will sell our allocated tickets 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

My information came from listening to Brian Cook interviews

I'm just trying to sort the facts from the BS here, mate. 

The football club have never owned the stadium contrary to your claim.

We can all agree that Geelong get a leg up from training and playing (lesser teams) on their home ground.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

You are forgetting the Crowd numbers and noise level of the 2018 Finals Series 

The ‘G will be rocking loud when the Riegning Premiers take the field. We will sell our allocated tickets 

91k for Geelong and 90k for Hawthorn. Both were 50k+ MFC. The Geelong game was 60k MFC. 

If we don’t have 75k I would be disappointed that after so much pain, we are actually too damaged to enjoy the good times, regardless of all the excuses.

Edited by rpfc
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Demonstone said:

I'm just trying to sort the facts from the BS here, mate. 

The football club have never owned the stadium contrary to your claim.

We can all agree that Geelong get a leg up from training and playing (lesser teams) on their home ground.

It may not have OWNED the Stadium on Paper.

BUT it was a Clean Stadium, as in all revenue streams from the Stadium on Match Days: Car Parking, Food and Beverage Sales, Advertising Space, Seating, Corporate Box Foods and Beverage sales, All went back to Jeelong.  (Between $600-800,000 profit for a match day) This all came out whilst other Clubs were trying to “break even” at   Marvel Stadium  Jeelong cleaned up very nicely, and I suspect they still do

 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, monoccular said:

Let's see if Geelong having had training runs basically the past fortnight will be match hardened in their QF.   

Conversely our guys will be very much ready to roll  so maybe the Cats' easy run will do them no good - one can only hope so.

Peaking too early as usual..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Demonland Forums  

  • Match Previews, Reports & Articles  

    2024 Player Reviews: #5 Christian Petracca

    Date of Birth: 4 January 1996 Height: 187cm Games MFC 2024: 13 Career Total: 189 Goals MFC 2024: 14 Career Total: 184 Brownlow Medal Votes 16 Melbourne’s most important player who dominated the first half of the season until his untimely injury in the Kings Birthday clash put an end to his season. At the time, he was on his way to many personal honours and the club in strong finals contention. When the season did end for Melbourne and Petracca was slowly recovering, he

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    Melbourne Demons 6

    2024 Player Reviews: #2 Jacob van Rooyen

    Date of Birth: 16 April 2003 Height: 193cm Games MFC 2024: 21 Career Total: 41 Goals MFC 2024: 30 Career Total: 58 Brownlow Medal Votes 1 Strong marking youngster who plays forward and relief ruck, continued to make significant strides forward in his career path. The Demons have high hopes for van Rooyen as he stakes his claim to become an elite attacking forward.

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    Melbourne Demons 12

    LIVE AND LET DIE by Meggs

    The Demons’ impressive late season charge to finals will most likely come unstuck this Saturday evening when the Bombers blow up the also-ran Blues in the Ikon Park double-header.   To mangle McCartney, what does it matter to ya? To have any chance to play next week Narrm has got a job to do and needs to do it well.  We’ve got to give the Pie sheilas hell, say live and let die! It’s Indigenous Round for this game and the chance to celebrate and engage with Aboriginal and Torres

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    AFLW Melbourne Demons

    2024 Player Reviews: #32 Tom Sparrow

    Had to shoulder more responsibility as the club’s injury concerns deepened but needs to step up more as he closes in on 100 games. Date of Birth: 31 May 2000 Height: 186cm Games MFC 2024: 21 Career Total: 95 Goals MFC 2024: 6 Career Total: 34 Games CDFC: 1 Goals CDFL: 0

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    Melbourne Demons 24

    2024 Player Reviews: #35 Harry Petty

    Date of Birth: 12 November 1999 Height: 197cm Games MFC 2024: 20 Career Total: 82 Goals MFC 2024: 9 Career Total: 28 Brownlow Medal Votes 3 Failed to fulfill the promise of his breakout six goal effort against the Tigers in 2023 and was generally disappointing as a key forward. It remains to be seen whether Simon Goodwin will persevere with him in attack or return him to the backline where he was an important cog in the club’s 2021 premiership success.

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    Melbourne Demons 17

    2024 Player Reviews: #22 Blake Howes

    After a bright start to the season, playing mostly in defence, Howes seemed to lose his way in midseason but fought back with some good performances at Casey and finished the year back at AFL level. One to watch in 2024. Date of Birth: 7 March 2003 Height: 191cm Games MFC 2024: 15 Career Total:  15 Goals MFC 2024: 0 Career Total:  0 Games CDFC 2024: 6 Goals CDFC 2024: 0

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    Melbourne Demons 5

    2024 Player Reviews: #33 Tom Fullarton

    Originally an NBL basketballer with the Brisbane Bullets, he moved across town in 2019 to the AFL Lions where he played 19 games before crossing to Melbourne where he was expected to fill a role as a back up ruckman/key forward. Unfortunately, didn’t quite get there although he did finish equal sixth in Casey’s best and fairest award. Date of Birth: 23 February 1999 Height: 198cm Games CDFC: 14 Goals CDFL: 13

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    Melbourne Demons 5

    2024 Player Reviews: #10 Angus Brayshaw

    Sadly, had to wrap up a great career in midstream on the back of multiple concussions which culminated in the Maynard hit in the 2023 Qualifying Final. His loss to the club was inestimable over and above his on field talent given his character and leadership qualities, all of which have been sorely missed. Date of Birth: 9 January 1996 Height: 188cm Games MFC 2024: 0 Career Total: 167 Goals MFC 2024: 0 Career Total: 49

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    Melbourne Demons 8

    2024 Player Reviews: #40 Taj Woewodin

    The son of former Demon Brownlow Medalist Shane, Taj added a further 16 games to his overall tally of games but a number were as substitute. He is slowly fitting into the team structure but without doing anything spectacular and needs to take further steps forward in 2025 for his career to progress. Date of Birth: 26 March 2003 Height: 182cm Games MFC 2024: 16 Career Total: 20 Goals MFC 2024: 1 Career Total: 3 Games CDFC 2024: 6 Goals CDFC 2024: 1

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    Melbourne Demons 5
  • Tell a friend

    Love Demonland? Tell a friend!

×
×
  • Create New...