View Full Version : How to bring a premiership to WA
It's no secret that the recipe for a WA team (Eagles or Dockers) to win a premiership is to have an outstanding team with great depth, just like the Eagles' teams of 92-94. However, in my opinion, the level of success would greatly increase if most players were from WA, just like the Eagles (92-94). I believe that WA players, playing for a local AFL team are more consistent and more dedicated to the team they play for. Also and as we've seen yesterday and today, both the Dockers and the Eagles were flat teams. They looked spend, tired, exhausted, not only in physical terms but psychologically. I reckon the constant long distance travel, may have taken its toll on both teams and neither had the depth to cover for those players who felt the problem more intensely.
So, to be able to maintain the highest competitive levels, both teams needed more depth which the Eagles of 92-94 had and neither WA team has at the moment. Both lack quality players in certain areas or replacements that can cover for the injuries of key players. It was interesting to hear Connoly say that he's been trying to build a good midfield without much success. By coincidence, the good midfield that he needed is in the Eagles camp and of course some of the players at the Dockers would make the Eagles an outstanding team as well. The kind of team that would make either club a premiership candidate. And if you look carefully a great number of the best players on both teams are from WA.
Many people know what I think of the AFL footy in WA. I believe we are condemned to have two competitive teams in this state if we can avoid coaches like Drum and KJ, but I just can't see either team winning a premiership given the conditions mentioned previously. To win a premiership we need an outstanding team and where are we going to get that special team when our best WA players are not concentrated in the same club as it used to be in the first half of the past decade ?
I disagree, we are good enough and we will prove it in the next two years minimum.
Originally posted by jod23
I disagree, we are good enough and we will prove it in the next two years minimum.
I wish you are right and I hope I am completelly wrong but I think I won't be. We will be living under the illusion that we will have a chance to win a premiership for years, but under the conditions we are in, I don't think we will get there. The way we won our two premierships were very special. We got basically a state selection which is probably the only way to win a premiership in this state. The constant long distance travel takes its toll on many players and to counterbalance this problems it is important to have a very, very, very good team. Just a good team isn't enough. It was no coincidence that both WA teams, which are good teams, finishing so flat and exhausted physically and mentally and at the same time. But of course I will be very happy to be proven wrong.
Geonet - I don't know why you think that to be successful we need players from WA. In the Derby, we had only one player who had played for another AFL club (Chick) and six who were born out of WA. I think if we get a player at a young age, and nurture him in the culture of the club, it does not matter where his birth certificate says he is from.
As for the myth that we were a "state side" - because the Vics delayed the announcement that WA would field a team, 14 players went east. These included Bairstow,Winmar,Christian,Mitchell,Dennis, Peter Wilson,Spalding,Hepburn,Bewick,Starcevich and Harding. I'm sure all of those players would have been valuable additions to the initial squad!
The selectors were also restricted to 6 players maximum from each of the WAFL clubs (and this included ex-pats playing in Vic). Therefore such gems as Bartlett (4 games) Bennett (4) Davidson (2)King (1)Mifka (1)O'Loughlin (1) Langsford (-) MacNish (20) M O'Connell (20) Warwick (-)were chosen. If we had been able to choose a side without restriction and before those 14 went east, then you could well say we had a "state side".
Originally posted by vicki
Geonet - I don't know why you think that to be successful we need players from WA... As for the myth that we were a "state side"
Given the choice, all players from the Eastern States would stay at home. They come here because they want to play AFL footy and they were drafted. It doesn't mean that they don't give their best but in the back of their minds, home is always present. Wirrapunda has been in WA for so many years, yet there are constant rumours of him going home. Part of their minds, no matter how long they are in WA, are in their home state. That state of mind, even if slightly, affects their performance as a whole. I'm not saying that they don't play fantastic games but in my view a team made of a majority of players who never think of going home because they are already home, perform better. That's what we had in 92-94. A majority of WA very skilful players concentrated in one club. Now I'm not saying that we should pick only WA players, but I'm convinced the majority should be from our state.
As for the "myth" that you mention, the fact is that the majority of players in 92-94 were from WA. Perhaps not in 87 but slowly and steadily we built a team filled with very skilful players, most of them from WA. Now it is no longer possible because we were divided, weakened and conquered. Now we have very good WA players, great footy stars, playing for two different clubs in WA. It's basically impossible to built a great team like the Eagles 92-94, because some of our best players will always be shared by the two local clubs. You may say that the same happens in SA and VIC but I think those two states produce a far greater number of quality players than WA. Furthermore they don't have to travel as much as the WA teams. Week in week out our players travel the equivalent of a trip from Lisbon to Prague in Europe. That is from almost one end of Europe to the other. If any european soccer team had to travel that distance, week in week out, to play in a some kind of mad competition, they would probably finish wooden spooners every year, unless they were able to build a super squad. So this is what our two clubs have to face every two weeks. A trip from "Lisbon to Prague" but without the benefit of being outstanding teams. We are just two good competitive teams.
If your theory holds any water then how come both Adelaide sides go so well?
Originally posted by jod23
If your theory holds any water then how come both Adelaide sides go so well?
Read again my previous posts, specially the one before this one, where I mention SA and VIC teams. Two basic points on my theory were mentioned before. First they don't travel nearly as much as the WA teams. Also, I believe that if SA was geographically in WA and WA in SA, they'd probably be the ones with our problems. Second, and in my opinion SA produces far more quality players than WA and that's why SANFL is a stronger competition than the WAFL and the reason why they can sustain two excellent teams, which by the way, travel just a fraction of what Freo and the Eagles do. Not only that, but in my theory, SA may not need as much as WA that their local teams are made of a majority of SA quality players. Our isolation and the long distances we're forced to travel, may accentuate that need for us.
I would like to say again that I wish I can be proven wrong. There is nothing I want more than the Eagles to win another premiership. But don't hold your breath, because if I'm right, with two local teams competing for the best WA players, that will only happen in a far away future. It may happen only when WA starts developing a greater number of high quality players, that can supply in abundance two local teams fighting for a premiership. But then beware of the geniuses that will suggest a third team for WA if either of our teams win more that one premiership. They have to keep us in check you know.
Of course I will continue to follow the Eagles, in the hope that in some way we can win a premiership very soon and my concepts hold no water. I appologize if for some reason I have contributed to ruin some hopes for a premiership soon, but I have been thinking on this issue for a few years and opinions opposite to mine have yet to convince me this is just a hollow hypothesis.
Haven't you learnt a different tune yet?
If your theory holds so much water, please explain how Freo can go from 2-20 two years ago, to 14-8 this year?
The Draft.
The geographic location of a club has zero to do with anything else - WA clubs have a larger Home ground advantage, and more of a travel dis-advantage ... so it balances out.
Explain to me, and everyone else on this board in simple terms, with the draft, how removingt one team from any geographic location, affects any other, and attempt some rational thought this time if you could?
Cheers.
Distance between Perth, Australia and Melbourne, Australia, as the crow flies:
1690 miles (2720 km) (1469 nautical miles)
Distance between Lisbon, Portugal and Prague, Czech Republic, as the crow flies:
1395 miles (2245 km) (1212 nautical miles)
The soccer team has it a little bit easier. :D
This is a better comparison:
Distance between Lisbon, Portugal and Warsaw, Poland, as the crow flies:
1728 miles (2781 km) (1502 nautical miles)
Yikes, that really is one end of Europe to the other (south west corner to north east corner).
Originally posted by kuepper
Haven't you learnt a different tune yet?
If your theory holds so much water, please explain how Freo can go from 2-20 two years ago, to 14-8 this year?
The Draft.
The geographic location of a club has zero to do with anything else - WA clubs have a larger Home ground advantage, and more of a travel dis-advantage ... so it balances out.
Explain to me, and everyone else on this board in simple terms, with the draft, how removingt one team from any geographic location, affects any other, and attempt some rational thought this time if you could?
Unlike you I'm consistent with my views. You're the one, who as "Kuep" is on record to tell me a couple of years ago on the old "EaglesFlighHigh" board that the Eagles never won another premiership, since and because of the arrival of Fremantle. Not only you but many other Fremantle supporters have repeated that same mantra over over again. But now, conveniently, you've changed your tune. The fact of the matter is that you and your fellow dockers were absolutely right and now act as if nothing like that was said, just because your club made the finals after eight years of struggling. In fact, you took eight years just to improve slightly, for the same reasons the Eagles never won a premiership since the arrival of your club in the scene. If we didn't exist your club would have probably made the finals years ago.
Now your theory about the "draft" has nothing to do with what I've said. You know very well that the draft does not obstruct the building of a team made of a majority of high quality WA players, that is, if there was only one club in town. it's true that some of them would go to Eastern states but slowly, with players coming back home and others who insist in staying at home, it's possible to build an outstanding team like the Eagles of 92-94, in a one team town. In my view, that is no longer possible and also in my opinion you're deluding yourself if you think Fremantle can win a premiership any time soon, based solely on your beloved draft.
The last question about our geographical position affecting our performances in a long season was explained previously. I'm perplexed by your question, given that you like to come across as a smart individual. In short is "looong" distance travel that may also be affecting our performances as a whole and to compensate for this problem you need an outstanding team. Not just a good team but an above average team, made of highly committed players (thus the WA players thing). The kind of conditions we had in 92-94. After all, our two teams are travelling the equivalent of going from one end of europe to the other, every two weeks. If you told Real Madrid or Manchester United fans they had to travel those huge distances every two weeks and try to win the competition, they would probably label you crazy and would consider an impossible task to win any competition in those conditions. I hope that this time I was clear enough without having to repeat myself next time.
Voice of Reason
9 Sep 2003, 15:12
Originally posted by kuepper
Haven't you learnt a different tune yet?
If your theory holds so much water, please explain how Freo can go from 2-20 two years ago, to 14-8 this year?
The Draft.
The geographic location of a club has zero to do with anything else - WA clubs have a larger Home ground advantage, and more of a travel dis-advantage ... so it balances out.
Explain to me, and everyone else on this board in simple terms, with the draft, how removingt one team from any geographic location, affects any other, and attempt some rational thought this time if you could?
Cheers.
I can see where Geonet is coming from (and incidentally his views I think are shared by Dennis Cometti & the rest of the 6PR broadcast team - not sure if that adds or subtracts from their credibility!).
The greater home ground advantage in WA should yield 11 wins (assuming 2 derbies, 1 win each), but it's correspondingly harder to win interstate. Thus a good WA side can probably win 2 or 3 away from home, perhaps against the poorer sides, but is unlikely to garner the 5 or 6 wins necessary to finish on top of the ladder and guarantee a home run to the Grand Final (forget Port, follow the theory).
Therefore, it is easier for a WA team to make the lower half of the 8, but harder to hit the top of the ladder.
Granted, the travel is a big problem in terms of fatigue and player injury management.
I just hope we're good enough to overcome these marginally greater impediments in time. At the end of the day, it's 22 versus 22 on a patch of grass. But for 1 extra win this year, we'd have been 4th and potentially "doing a Sydney" with a week off and a home final to get to the 'G on the last Saturday in September and this with a relatively inexperienced side that was 14th 2 years ago.
I dismiss this theory.
In many games this year we showed that we COULD have won interstate (Hawthorn, Sydney, Essendon).
We showed during those three games especially that if we were a more polished side, we would have won those games, unfortunately we didn't. I don't put down our losses to travel, because we gave everything in those games.
If we had won those three games we would be sitting 2nd, with a home final, and a second chance. Hell, even if we had won one more game, we would have a second chance.
Of course we can win a premiership from WA. I don't believe this theory for a second.
Originally posted by ozzult
I dismiss this theory.
In many games this year we showed that we COULD have won interstate (Hawthorn, Sydney, Essendon).
We showed during those three games especially that if we were a more polished side, we would have won those games, unfortunately we didn't. I don't put down our losses to travel, because we gave everything in those games.
If we had won those three games we would be sitting 2nd, with a home final, and a second chance. Hell, even if we had won one more game, we would have a second chance.
Of course we can win a premiership from WA. I don't believe this theory for a second.
I have no problem with your dismissal of this theory which, I'm surprised, seems to be shared by Dennis Commetti and others. I had no idea they shared the same or similar views. Thanks for telling me this VOR. I usually don't listen to radio and not much TV either. Anyway ozzult, as I said, I respect your opinion but I don't think your examples are the best ones. I even agree that we might have won, one or two of the Hawthorn, Sydney and Essendon games, finishing 4th or even 3rd. At times this year we were brilliant and could and did match any team and beat them convincingly as we did to Brisbane. That's not the point. The point is that we are usually finishing poorly, not because we don't have a good team but probably because we don't have an outstanding team as we did in 92-94. Being that the case, the 4th place wouldn't do us much good since we were flat and exhausted. Port Adelaide, in view of the way we were playing lately, would have probably beat us easily. Besides, not long ago, Ripper said in this board that the Eagles have been finishing poorly for so long. He's right and why is that ? The fact is that after 95, we always made the finals but crashed soon after, usually in our first game. The reasons, I think, is that we did not have and do not have an outstandig team as in 92-94, capable of resisting an entire year of long, very, very, long distance travel every two weeks and compensate that, with highly skilful and very committed players, which by the way were mainly from WA. Neither team in WA has that kind of special team nor I can see either the Dockers or the Eagles to get a team like that, because those special players are playing for two different teams.
You could also say that the reason we finished poorly is because we have a very young list.
Kenny_01
9 Sep 2003, 18:43
Originally posted by ozzult
You could also say that the reason we finished poorly is because we have a very young list.
That's not really an excuse though, younger lists should have more run in their legs left towards the end of the year. But having said that, younger players do fall away a bit I guess.
For us though, exlcuding our final, we won 4 out of our last 5 so I don't think being a young list affected us.
Geonet, since we do have a really strong home ground advantage, you would think either side would be a decent chance to win a premiership if they finish in the top 2 with 2 home finals?
Originally posted by ozzult
You could also say that the reason we finished poorly is because we have a very young list.
You can find a different reason every year, but I think there are just a few common but very significant causes for the problem, given that this has been happening for eight years and now you can also add the Dockers to this trend. Besides we won our two premierships with a very young list. So much so, that The Geelong coach of the time (Malcom Blight) said in an interview after the game, that the Eagles example of building a very young team was possibly the way to go. So now we have a young team, but so did we when we won two premierships. The difference is that those young players of the early 90's were very special. All the conditions were there for us to build a fanstastic team made of highly skilled young players, mainly from WA.
Originally posted by Kenny_01
Geonet, since we do have a really strong home ground advantage, you would think either side would be a decent chance to win a premiership if they finish in the top 2 with 2 home finals?.
Kenny I don't have a clear answer for that specific question. All I can do is theorise as I have been doing in my posts. After all and as I mentioned before, my theory has not been proved but also not disproved. It's still a concept waiting for a more clear answer in the future. However, I think that if either WA team finished top 2 with two home finals, our chances might greatly improve to win a premiership, even if running solely on adrenalin. But if either team finished that hight in the ladder it was possibly because the team was a little bit more special than what we have now.
Voice of Reason
9 Sep 2003, 20:14
Originally posted by Kenny_01
Geonet, since we do have a really strong home ground advantage, you would think either side would be a decent chance to win a premiership if they finish in the top 2 with 2 home finals?
Kenny, I think that's the key which does give both Eagles & Freo a good chance. If either team can develop a side that can win enough games to get the two home finals plus a week off, then it's a question of going over to the 'G and winning the big one. If we're good enough...........
On 6PR, Dennis, Brad Hardie, Peter Vlahos and one other (I can't remember whether it was Barich or Watters) agreed that neither the Eagles nor Freo would win a Premiership in their lifetime under the 1 Final a Week at the MCG rule (which was the context of the debate). Personally, I would gladly sacrifice Hardie, Vlahos & Watters or Barich for a flag, but......
Originally posted by Voice of Reason
The greater home ground advantage in WA should yield 11 wins (assuming 2 derbies, 1 win each), but it's correspondingly harder to win interstate. Thus a good WA side can probably win 2 or 3 away from home, perhaps against the poorer sides, but is unlikely to garner the 5 or 6 wins necessary to finish on top of the ladder and guarantee a home run to the Grand Final (forget Port, follow the theory).
Therefore, it is easier for a WA team to make the lower half of the 8, but harder to hit the top of the ladder.
IMO this is 100% correct (and explains why teams from outside Vic should have a harder time winning premierships). Conversely it means that it is also less likely for a non-Vic team to end up in the bottom reaches unless they are really ordinary (hence the way the 2001 Eagles managed 14th despite being really, really crap all season).
I also believe this is what contributed to the extraordinary log jam between 2nd and 8th this year. Other than the Vic teams all the top eight were struggling to win enough away matches to get a jump on each other hence so many teams with about 14 wins.
Basically for a WA team to win a premiership a year like this would be very useful, where we are competing for the most part with other non-Vic teams for the top spots as it makes it easier to get to the top, whereas if a couple of Vic teams are dominant they will win 17-19 games, something we would be lucky to compete with.
Port's side this year (choking aside) and the last two Brisbane sides were IMO better than the Essendon side of 2000, but the travel arrangements mean their records don't look quite as good. Similarly I believe that our performance over the whole year is at least as good as Collingwood, but they had the advantage of all those neutral games against weak opposition (right now I think they'd beat us easily in Vic, but here would still be better than 50-50 we'd win. Sadly we'll never know).
It also explains why WA & SA teams need an equal salary cap to Vic teams (remember that next time they use Sydney's salary cap advantage in an attempt to put us at a disadvantage).
kuepper
10 Sep 2003, 09:35
Originally posted by Geonet
Unlike you I'm consistent with my views.
Consistantly paranoid, sure.
You're the one, who as "Kuep" is on record to tell me a couple of years ago on the old "EaglesFlighHigh" board that the Eagles never won another premiership, since and because of the arrival of Fremantle.
Um, bzzzzzzzzzt. Sorry champ.
I pointed out to you that since Freo and West Coast have been in the comp, we have won the same about of premierships, but never - either online, in person or anywhere else have I said that it is because of Freo, more to stir you, and it seems 2 years down the track you still remember, so I'll chalk that one up, good work me.
But now, conveniently, you've changed your tune.
Once again not at all, I still think you are a one trick pony, and are completely incorrect - same opinion I have always held.
The fact of the matter is that you and your fellow dockers were absolutely right ...
Well said.
In fact, you took eight years just to improve slightly, for the same reasons the Eagles never won a premiership since the arrival of your club in the scene. If we didn't exist your club would have probably made the finals years ago.
See this is just madness.
Are you trying to tell me that the recruiting and coaching failures that Messrs Neesham and Drum (scratch recruiting for drummy) had nothing to do with the clubs abject mediocrity (albeit I still loved the ride!) - it was all because of the Eagles? I mean honestly, how can you justify this?? Its absurd.
By your chaos theory, anything that Port Adelaide does, affects the Melbourne Demons - as they are 2 clubs in the AFL. (if you dont understand that link, don't worry, I dont either)
Now your theory about the "draft" has nothing to do with what I've said. You know very well that the draft does not obstruct the building of a team made of a majority of high quality WA players, that is, if there was only one club in town.
Um, pardon? Remind me where the best WA player of last year went, in the draft - Daniel Wells. The eagles? The dockers perhaps? oh wait on, no - because of the draft, he went to Nth Melbourne ... are they also on in this conspiracy to nobble your beloved eagles?
but slowly, with players coming back home and others who insist in staying at home, it's possible to build an outstanding team like the Eagles of 92-94, in a one team town.
These quality players that are rushing back to the one team ... do you get them for free, or do you trade draft picks and/or players? and does this, in turn balance out the equation??
In my view, that is no longer possible and also in my opinion you're deluding yourself if you think Fremantle can win a premiership any time soon, based solely on your beloved draft.
"My" beloved draft? Well thats for crediting me, but it wasn't my idea, in its entirity.
Do I liek the draft and/or Salary Cap? hell yes - it makes the comp as even and unpredicatble as we find it today - something far far better than the 80's/early 90's where clubs such as Calrton etc bought they way to success, and your eagles didnt do too bad either with some nice concession picks ;)
The last question about our geographical position affecting our performances in a long season was explained previously. I'm perplexed by your question, given that you like to come across as a smart individual.
You're too kind.
I hope that this time I was clear enough without having to repeat myself next time.
Hey dont feel bad, you've been repeating the same mantra for 3 years ... why change now?
Re: Travel, I agree with VOR's posts regarding harder to get to the top exchelon ... but that said, how many sides do go through at 18 + win seasons, not many.
If Freo had one one more game (vs Swans for eg when game was won, and we choked in last) we'd have been 4th etc.
My final point - the only advantage I can see in a one team town is marketing dollars and finances, thats it.
You still have not shown or explained to me, in any way shape or form, how a team can gain players, with the existance of the draft, soley by being in a state by itself - and the fact of the matter is, you can't.
Au_Blue#24
10 Sep 2003, 12:12
Originally posted by Kenny_01
That's not really an excuse though, younger lists should have more run in their legs left towards the end of the year. But having said that, younger players do fall away a bit I guess.
Kenny - your first sentence is widely regarded as wrong. Heard the expression "getting miles in the legs" ?? - it basically means the more you have run , the more you can run. Young blokes cannot see the season out as much as seasoned players in terms of running.
Your second sentence contradicts your first.
Kuepper or should I say kuep or perhaps pudding head ?
Your post is so full of cr@p that it doesn't even deserve to quote anything you said. You're just a winky tricky guy with pretension of intelectual ability. You don't even understand the basic things of what I said and then resort to utter bull****. And don't come back with your usual "touché" imbecility because your french is even worse than my swailli. Now if you want to continue our exchange be my guest.
Oh ! I missed one thing kuepper. Your capacity to understand some concepts are so dismal, that you can't even see how it is possible to gain a majority of local quality players with the existence of the draft. It's been done before dolt ! It was done with the Eagles and in a less extent it's being done now, but unfortunately they're not being concentrated in the same club. If your intellect can't reason this then you're just a simpleton.
Oh ! There is more kuepper. Just like that guy selling kitchen knives I have more for you to think about how it is possible to gather high quality players from WA in a one town club.
Before I show you a list of players that should be playing for the same club, I already know your answer to this. You'll tell me in that irritating style of yours, that some of these names might have been drafted by other Eastern States clubs. That may be true, but some of those players that were in fact drafted to the East, might as well be in Perth. Take and give a few, the fact of the matter is that they couldn't take them all and a one town club would end up with a great number of high quality players from WA. It's been done before with Eagles 92-94 and could be done again in a one town team.
Now some of the WA players that would make that WA CLUB an outstanding team, capable of fighting for a premiership.
Peter Bell
Jeff Farmer
Paul Hasleby
Des Headland
Graham Polak
Paul Medhurst
Antoni Grover
Daniel Chick
Ben Cousins
Andrew Embley
Daniel Kerr
Ashley Sampi
Philip Matera
Andrew MacDougal
There could be others but these ones would probably help make a team similar to one we had in the early 90's. Now add a little bit of salt, such as Judd and Pavlich, because I'm saying that it should be a majority of WA players, not just WA players, and you would have a fantastic team to fight for a premiership.
You're a tool Kuepper and that's why I couldn't help but posting my two previous posts. A bit abusive I know, but you deserve it! It's about impossible to have an intelligent conversation with you, you know.
|D_J^B_J|
10 Sep 2003, 17:57
Originally posted by Geonet
Second, and in my opinion SA produces far more quality players than WA and that's why SANFL is a stronger competition than the WAFL and the reason why they can sustain two excellent teams.
I Disagree. Sure, WA only produced one standout player in last years National Draft with pick 2 (Daniel Wells), but that was more a one off than anything else. Similarly, in 2001, only two SA players were drafted, with picks 35 (Jarrad Wright) and 71 (Brian Harris).
Of all senior listed players in the AFL, 93 were drafted from SA and 92 from WA (not including those who moved from the NT to play in the WAFL or SANFL).
A large group of quality players will also be drafted from WA this year, and WA recently won the U/16 state championships, meaning the breeding ground in WA is still very strong.
It is also debatable as to whether the WAFL or SANFL is the stronger competition, although at the current stage, the SANFL is probably only slightly stronger.
The SANFL have won the last few REPCOL challenge (SANFL v WAFL) games, but the WAFL still holds the lead, winning 45 overall games to the SANFL's 44, since the concept started.
I agree the travel factor makes it more difficult for the two WA teams, but it works both ways. It gives us a major home ground advantage and also makes us more suited to the interstate travel, since, unlike Victorian based sides, we travel every second week.
A good Western Australian based side should be able to win 11 of 12 games at home, and at least 6 of the 10 interstate games, giving it the best chance to finish in a top two position and well placed to win the premiership.
The MCC contract however, certainly gives the Victorian based sides a massive advantage and makes it much harder for the WA based sides (and all other non-Victorian sides) to win a premiership. If an agreement between the AFL and MCC has not been reached for next season, the WA based sides will be required to finish at least in the top two to give itself a fair crack at the premiership, whereas it is not impossible for a Victorian team to win the premiership by finishing outside the top four.
kuepper
10 Sep 2003, 18:11
ok, you got me at pudding head - thats gold.
Anyway, lets do this.
Can any other west coast supporter who reads this board, please post agreeance if they think having freo nobbles their beloved team, and if so, explain how they think it is the case.
Fair enough?
As it stands, I think the basic concepts of how you think this uber team will be developed under the contraints of the draft is beyond you - so lets see if someone else understands.
PS at least that annoying "but wait there is more!" tool did actually have more, not the same **** over and over again.
PPS - touché is an expression used to convey an agreement or understanding among said parties - hence the lack of me using it around you, my argumentally challenged friend.
If WA sides want to fly the premiership flag in the near future, we're going to have to do something about the WAFL. I'm probably not the expert, living in Melbourne but my observation is that the WAFL is simply not of a high enough standard to prepare our blokes (I'm from the West and a WCE supporter) for the rough and tumble of AFL. Watching Macca on Saturday against the crows, I wondered how he managed to kick seven goals for Subiaco a few weeks prior? Even if we account for the fact that Subi's opponents were Peel Thunder, it still doesn't say much for the WAFL!!
If we want to win Premierships we're going to have to improve the depth of our list. It's going to be hard to do this if we're relying on the WAFL to develop the skills of our fringe players. I'm sorry to say, that I don't have the answers, but I hope that this something that WCE will look at.
Needless to say, there's nothing we can do about Freo. Wether we like it or not, there here to stay. The best we can do is to keep'em quiet by teaching them a football lesson next time we meet them at Subiaco. Go Coasters Go!
Originally posted by |D_J^B_J|
I Disagree. Sure, WA only produced one standout player in last years National Draft with pick 2 (Daniel Wells), but that was more a one off than anything else... A good Western Australian based side should be able to win 11 of 12 games at home, and at least 6 of the 10 interstate games, giving it the best chance to finish in a top two position and well placed to win the premiership.
Well formed opinion and that's how I like it. I don't mind to be wrong when different opinions against my views are put forward in an intelligent manner. However, examples of one or two years where we supplanted SA in the national draft may not prove that WA is at the same level of SA in the "production" of great players. I reckon that should be measured in a 5 or 10 years period. I don't know. Just a thought.
In any case, my point is that given the huge distances we are from all the main cities in Australia and the high demand for constant travel to "the other side of the continent", more than any other state we need a fantastic team, of highly committed players, to compensate for the physical and mental exhaustion of players who have to travel very long distances every two weeks. Other than that, in my opinion we are condemned to have two good teams that may make the finals often enough to keep us occupied with the thought that one day we will win another premiership.
carneagles
10 Sep 2003, 18:41
The creation of Freo destroyed our grand plan of dominating football through the exclusive use of WAFL Father-Son picks until the second generation of the 1992 premiership team came up to speed.
And we would have gotten away with it too, if it wasn't for those pesky kids.
Originally posted by kuepper
my argumentally challenged friend.
As far as I am concerned I haven't lost an argument with you ever, which by the way isn't that difficult, given the cr@p that you often spell in this board. You come here talking rubbish, ridiculously indicting others of being "conspiracy theorists" for everything that you don't like and using the word "touché" right and left to prove that you're a smooth guy with dash. Let me be very clear. We are not here to comply with your likes and dislikes and won't be intimidated by your fake and egghead way of operating in this board. As for being your friend, believe me. I don't have friends like you. My friends are nicer and smarter than you.
kuepper
10 Sep 2003, 19:45
Originally posted by Geonet
You come here talking rubbish
Oh c'mon, dont be nasty ... some of it is quality rubbish, soem fo it witty rubbish, and some is well total ****.
Rubbish by itself, just doesn't do me justice.
ridiculously indicting others of being "conspiracy theorists" for everything that you don't like
Thats not nice either, you are the only fellow I have ever called that, from memory - I think I also made some jovial remark about you checking for russians under the bed at night, if I recall correctly - I mean damn, that's quality stuff.
Touché me, in fact.
and using the word "touché" right and left to prove that you're a smooth guy with dash.
Damn, scratch the above will you?
Let me be very clear.
Please do, a refreshing change.
We are not here to comply with your likes and dislikes
Damn, dos this mean my pint of James Squires Pale Ale isnt being sent electronically? well thats ****ed.
and won't be intimidated by your fake and egghead way of operating in this board.
Well if you are just going to all me names, then I may be forced to run and tell my Dad, he'll get mad at bullies.
As for being your friend, believe me. I don't have friends like you. My friends are nicer and smarter than you.
Well that's a relief.
Anyway, enough about me.
This topic, I have thought long and hard, and consulted with a learned and intelligent members of this board, who bored and/or ignored me, then luckily Ozzult appeared and pointed out something, that a single team town would have the advantage of reclaiming any players returning home.
Aha! I exclaimed - good point. However, the one issue would be affording these players, see: Chick and Headland last year - they don't come cheap.
So whilst i can seea small steap ahead there, I am still awaiting a reasonable and sensible post regardiong how, and why Freo crippled West Coast.
lets not use emotive language (I mean pudding head? nastypants.) and lets not get personal, and if you are really lucky, and I see some validity, there may be a little touché loving come your way too.
Im too kind sometimes, arent I?
Originally posted by kuepper
then luckily Ozzult appeared and pointed out something....lets not use emotive language (I mean pudding head? nastypants.) and lets not get personal, and if you are really lucky, and I see some validity, there may be a little touché loving come your way too. Im too kind sometimes, arent I?.
First of all your posts are terrible and almost unreadable. This isn't usenet where you can quote in a legible way each and every passage. As for not being personal, there is no other way with you. You're not the type of person to be reasoned with in an intelligent way. You are a manipulator but only to those who can't see through the fog you create in your pathetic attempts to murk the environment. But now you're even worse. You're pitiably trying to beg the help of ozzult. I can already hear
"Please ozzult help me in this fight ! Pleeease
You can't even stand in your feet. You need the help of others. At least you could ask a Dockers fan for help. But no ! You're now trying to manipulate our board so that Eagles supporters go against each other. You're nothing but a phony little person who aspires to be taken seriously. Go and beg for help in another place because here you're not welcome.
kuepper
10 Sep 2003, 20:52
Um mate, Ozzult's point actually helped your arguement.
I saw the validity and agreed that it was salient, so was actually acknowledging a small point that I had overlooked.
Anyway, it has been a pleasure as always, good to see you a man of conviction, albeit the conviction is ****ed.
I notice from the crickets chirping in the background, and the lone cough in the distance as the only noise, that everyone else is being rather silent in their backing of your idea, why the heck is that?
oh and this:
You're nothing but a phony little person who aspires to be taken seriously.
Is a cracker.
Thanks for laugh, been a pleasure as always.
Originally posted by kuepper
I notice from the crickets chirping in the background, and the lone cough in the distance as the only noise, that everyone else is being rather silent in their backing of your idea, why the heck is that? Thanks for laugh, been a pleasure as always..
You always say there is silence when I'm up against your fudging performances in this board. What do you want ? A cheer squad ? As for your laugh you mean your silly smirk don't you ? No pleasure here. Just a sense of duty to keep you from manipulating this forum.
The Hitman
11 Sep 2003, 08:50
Curse you Freo, curse you to hell!
Geonet, do you propose the AFL merge West Coast and Fremantle, then give the club the best five WA players each year? Man, that'll make things fair!
The Hitman
Originally posted by The Hitman
Curse you Freo, curse you to hell!
Geonet, do you propose the AFL merge West Coast and Fremantle, then give the club the best five WA players each year? Man, that'll make things fair!
Hitman, believe it or not, but my posts aren't against Fremantle. At the moment they are exactly in the same predicament as the Eagles. When the idea of a second club in this state was first mentioned, I was immediatelly against it and I didn't even know they had Fremantle in mind. I felt at the time that, that would mean the end of our capacity to fight for premierships. And I haven't changed my view since then. On the contrary, my conviction in that regard grows with each passing year and everytime we're kicked out of the finals in the first week. I'm just stating what to me, seems obvious and that is that the chances of our two clubs to win a premiership in the near future are slim. For that to happen, one or the other team needs more than just a good team. In my view it's necessary an outstanding team, made of a majority of quality and commited WA players, which given the conditions we are in, is almost impossible to achieve. The rest of my position has been stated over and over again in previous posts. Cheers.