Who is the best team in the history of the game to not win a grand final??

[phantom13]

No. I haven't seen anyone say that.

I personally have said that probability dictates Richmond were fortuitous to win 3 flags in 4 seasons, given their lack of dominance throughout the years of their premierships.

Not dissimilar to Hawthorn 2013 to 2015. Though they had 2012 as a near miss as well.

Thats pretty much the same thing "fortuitous" might seem like a clever way to word it.

Fortuitous means lucky, or more accurately "happening by chance rather than intention", you reckon they didnt intend to win the flags? Gale famously stated that was their intention in his 10 year plan speech.

 

[Fadge]

Thats pretty much the same thing "fortuitous" might seem like a clever way to word it.

Fortuitous means lucky, or more accurately "happening by chance rather than intention", you reckon they didnt intend to win the flags? Gale famously stated that was their intention in his 10 year plan speech.

I would say 10 clubs are approaching 2023 'planning' to win the premiership, and whichever club ends up winning it will likely have their fair share of luck along the way, be it a good run with injuries, a couple of close wins, etc.

Unfortunately, not all 10 clubs can win the flag this year, despite their best intentions.

With Gale's 'famous 10 year speech' do you reckon he only 'planned' to finish top 4 on four occasions in order to win his 3 flags?!?

 

[phantom13]

I would say 10 clubs are approaching 2023 'planning' to win the premiership, and whichever club ends up winning it will likely have their fair share of luck along the way, be it a good run with injuries, a couple of close wins, etc.

Unfortunately, not all 10 clubs can win the flag this year, despite their best intentions.

With Gale's 'famous 10 year speech' do you reckon he only 'planned' to finish top 4 on four occasions in order to win his 3 flags?!?

Id never argue any team has won a flag without a bit of luck but your post suggests it was more luck than purpose. If they fluked one you might have a point but they didn’t.

With Gales speech history would suggest that finishing first doesn’t make much difference. I’d suggest his plan, as most teams plans would be is to win enough games early without being in peak form in April to make top 4 and then do your business when it matters in Sept.

I’ll take a Premiership every day over a McLelland trophy.

 

[Fadge]

With Gales speech history would suggest that finishing first doesn’t make much difference. I’d suggest his plan, as most teams plans would be is to win enough games early without being in peak form in April to make top 4 and then do your business when it matters in Sept.

Except in ALL of Richmond's flag years they actually left their run to the top 4 very late, relying on themselves to continue to win games, and other teams to lose games.

2017 - were 7 and 5 before winning 8 of their last 10 to finish 3rd, one win but 11% and 8% behind 5th and 6th respectively.
2019 - were 7 and 6 before winning their last 9 games to finish 3rd, one win and 1.2% ahead of 5th.
2020 - were 6.5 and 4.5 before winning their last 6 games to finish 3rd, half a win ahead of 5th.

This is where luck, or more pertinently 'probability' comes into it...

So, you were saying?!?

 

[phantom13]

Except in ALL of Richmond's flag years they actually left their run to the top 4 very late, relying on themselves to continue to win games, and other teams to lose games.

2017 - were 7 and 5 before winning 8 of their last 10 to finish 3rd, one win but 11% and 8% behind 5th and 6th respectively.
2019 - were 7 and 6 before winning their last 9 games to finish 3rd, one win and 1.2% ahead of 5th.
2020 - were 6.5 and 4.5 before winning their last 6 games to finish 3rd, half a win ahead of 5th.

This is where luck, or more pertinently 'probability' comes into it...

So, you were saying?!?

I’m not sure what relevance this has. They achieved what they set out to do and won 3 flags in 4 years including finishing top 4 4 times.

You’re making out like it was some complete ******* fluke, maybe it was perfect timing and perfect player management to do exactly what they needed.

It’s attempting to diminish an incredible accomplishment and it’s dumb.

That’s what I was saying.

 

[Fadge]

I’m not sure what relevance this has. They achieved what they set out to do and won 3 flags in 4 years including finishing top 4 4 times.

You’re making out like it was some complete ******* fluke, maybe it was perfect timing and perfect player management to do exactly what they needed.

It’s attempting to diminish an incredible accomplishment and it’s dumb.

That’s what I was saying.

Who's trying to diminish anything?

All I'm doing is pointing out how much luck was required to achieve what Richmond achieved, using basic probability.

I mean, my assessment is more accurate than you saying that Gale is a genius because he 'planned' for 3 flags and got them, and Hardwick is a genius because he timed his run to perfection and had Richmond peaking when it mattered most.

It wouldn't have taken a lot in any of those years for Richmond to miss top 4, and it would have inevitably been a very different story.

That is all I am saying.

 

[phantom13]

Who's trying to diminish anything?

All I'm doing is pointing out how much luck was required to achieve what Richmond achieved, using basic probability.

I mean, my assessment is more accurate than you saying that Gale is a genius because he 'planned' for 3 flags and got them, and Hardwick is a genius because he timed his run to perfection and had Richmond peaking when it mattered most.

It wouldn't have taken a lot in any of those years for Richmond to miss top 4, and it would have inevitably been a very different story.

That is all I am saying.

I didn’t call anyone a genius mate.

You’re pointing out statistics and using them to “prove” your argument that they got lucky, but they don’t prove that. They don’t even really support that. The fact that they very publically declared their intentions then went about achieveing them lends more weight to the likelihood it was by design and not chance and whatever way you want to spin it calling 3 flags in 4 years “fortuitous” is diminishing it.

 

[nut]

No. I haven't seen anyone say that.

I personally have said that probability dictates Richmond were fortuitous to win 3 flags in 4 seasons, given their lack of dominance throughout the years of their premierships.

Not dissimilar to Hawthorn 2013 to 2015. Though they had 2012 as a near miss as well.

Brisbane’s 3peat?

 

[Fadge]

I didn’t call anyone a genius mate.

You’re pointing out statistics and using them to “prove” your argument that they got lucky, but they don’t prove that. They don’t even really support that. The fact that they very publically declared their intentions then went about achieveing them lends more weight to the likelihood it was by design and not chance and whatever way you want to spin it calling 3 flags in 4 years “fortuitous” is diminishing it.

I'm not there there's a club in the competition who wouldn't be 'planning' for multiple flags in the next 10 years...

 

[phantom13]

I'm not there there's a club in the competition who wouldn't be 'planning' for multiple flags in the next 10 years...

Yeh but are any going to do it?

The proof is in the cups my friend. Plan all you like, if you plan and state and then achieve you write history. They did.

 

[Ceehook]

Who do you believe is the best side in thr history of the game to not win a grand final??

My bet is hands down on the saints of 09-10.

Will add a poll with options once i have a variety of valid options from posters.

Discuss away

semantics
taking the question to be which is the unluckiest team (not club) to not win the premiership in that year

to my mind 2008 Geelong, the dominant side all year, and followed on really well from their 2007 premiership

The Hawks were a worthy contender , but in a mid season dress rehearsal at the G bumper crowd on a Friday night the Cats showed they were the better side , but come grand final day the Hawks jumped the Cats and made the most of the stepping back thru the goals so their kick ins wouldn't go back to the Cats. It were the rules of the day and they were changed. If the two teams were to meet the next week I would have bet heavily on the Cats.

Was it the next 8 meetings between those clubs Geelong won 7 ??? something like that , I felt it burned with the Cats players as one that really got away

I know Richmond 2018 has been raised , we sat 2 games clear at the end of home & away, had a fantastic year but felt we were cooked and would have lost to WC in the GF

Plenty of people going 2009 Saints , I suppose this comes down to how you view unlucky
Saints 2 games clear at the end of the home and away , Cats next and playing in their 3rd GF in a row
I wasn't thinking that was the Saints flag and they were unlucky to lose
rather this game is line ball and it played out that way and the Cats worthy winners and Saints noble losers

we could debate this over 1000 beers LOL

 

[Fadge]

Yeh but are any going to do it?

The proof is in the cups my friend. Plan all you like, if you plan and state and then achieve you write history. They did.

With no luck involved at all. OK.

 

[phantom13]

With no luck involved at all. OK.

Yeh cause I said that…

Id never argue any team has won a flag without a bit of luck

but keep banging on your straw man’s and false interpretation of data

 

[Meteoric Rise]

No. I haven't seen anyone say that.

I personally have said that probability dictates Richmond were fortuitous to win 3 flags in 4 seasons, given their lack of dominance throughout the years of their premierships.

Not dissimilar to Hawthorn 2013 to 2015. Though they had 2012 as a near miss as well.

Yes unbelievably fortunate to win the 9 finals you need to win in order to collect 3 flags by an AVERAGE of 7 goals, with the only close game amongst that in a COVID-shortened match where they beat Port in Adelaide by 0.6 and were running over them in the last term.

But Fadge logic AKA Fagic says didn’t win enough meaningless home and away games therefore got “lucky” when they smashed their way through 3 finals series.

 

[Fadge]

Brisbane’s 3peat?

Absolutely.

If there's an element of luck involved in winning a flag, clearly that is multiplied to win a Threepeat.

2001 - Essendon were the dominant team for the better part of two years ('unlucky' not to win in 1999?) and had tailed off to the point they were 'lucky' to get over the line against Hawthorn in a Preliminary Final. Hird injured, Brisbane were peaking, and they got the result. Brisbane play the Essendon that turned up on Grand Final Day a year earlier, I doubt they win.
2002 - Nothing more than a goal in it all day against Collingwood, dubious behind call for Rocca shot at goal, and Akermanis kicks the sealer on one leg with 3 minutes to play. That game could have gone either way.
2003 - Lose the Qualifying Final to Collingwood and start the final quarter of their Preliminary Final against Sydney only three points ahead. Enter the 2003 Grand Final as underdogs but belt Collingwood whose structure was thrown into disarray due to the Rocca suspension.

We can also look at Geelong, who I and many others believe were the strongest of all dynasty teams:
2007 - Win their Preliminary Final against Collingwood by 5 points courtesy of some GAJ magic late in the game.
2009 - The toepoke goes the other way and the ball goes down St. Kilda's end for a goal, and we could be talking about St. Kilda being back to back premiers (2009/10) and Geelong grossly underachieving.
2011 - The game was broken open at the start of the last quarter by Tom Hawkins who destroyed a clearly injury hampered Ben Reid (who wouldn't have played the finals series at all if Collingwood had a viable replacement). What if Taylor was hampered in the same way Reid was, allowing Cloke to break the game open?

Whilst the flags are in the bag for all of these teams, it doesn't take much for history to be rewritten.

 

[Fadge]

Yeh cause I said that…



but keep banging on your straw man’s and false interpretation of data

So what's your point?

You're now saying I'm right?

 

[phantom13]

So what's your point?

You're now saying I'm right?

No my point is that you’re wrong and have gotten obsessed with your interpretation of statistics.

Nobody has said teams don’t need a bit of luck (and no saints supporter EVER would) but your point that they didn’t dominate and finish top of the ladder isn’t where that luck comes from. There’s a million ways that could be interpreted and my point was that given they won 3 of 4 flags and missed on the 4 peat because of a bout of gastro to Astbury it would make more sense to argue that where they finished on the ladder, peaking form at the right time, having players fit and firing when it matters was absolutely design and the best way to win a premiership.

We also know that’s true, how many times did the hawks finish first? Brisbane? It’s not a requirement, it’s actually a flawed statistic altogether.

 

[Fadge]

No my point is that you’re wrong and have gotten obsessed with your interpretation of statistics.

Nobody has said teams don’t need a bit of luck (and no saints supporter EVER would) but your point that they didn’t dominate and finish top of the ladder isn’t where that luck comes from. There’s a million ways that could be interpreted and my point was that given they won 3 of 4 flags and missed on the 4 peat because of a bout of gastro to Astbury it would make more sense to argue that where they finished on the ladder, peaking form at the right time, having players fit and firing when it matters was absolutely design and the best way to win a premiership.

We also know that’s true, how many times did the hawks finish first? Brisbane? It’s not a requirement, it’s actually a flawed statistic altogether.

I think you should remember that this all started by you stating (about Richmond) 'I’d suggest his plan, as most teams plans would be is to win enough games early without being in peak form in April to make top 4 and then do your business when it matters in Sept.', which is clearly NOT how Richmond achieved their success (as supported by my subsequent post).

My belief is that the best way to position your team for a flag is exactly what you stated, and some of the best teams we have seen in the past two decades have indeed done that. It enables them to rest players accordingly and ensure they are primed for when it counts. I'm not saying Geelong 2022 are one of the best teams in recent times, but did it help them that they had wins on the board and could therefore manage Dangerfield, Selwood, etc. appropriately?

However, Richmond did not do that, and as per my previous posts required a significant amount of luck to secure their top 4 position and therefore legitimately contend for and indeed win those premierships.

 

[phantom13]

Sigh.

Sure man, whatever.

 

[Frank Grimes]

No. I haven't seen anyone say that.

I personally have said that probability dictates Richmond were fortuitous to win 3 flags in 4 seasons, given their lack of dominance throughout the years of their premierships.

How many times did Brisbane finish as minor premiers (top of the ladder) in their 2001~2003 threepeat?

History shows that that finishing top 4 gives a team a very good chance of winning the premiership. A teams form varies during the year, even the teams at the top.

The best chance for a team to win a premiership is to finish top 4 and going into the finals in good form.

The year where Richmond actually finished on top (2018) is the only year during their successful era where Richmond were starting to show signs of falling out of form going inn to finals (only scrapping over the line of ordinary opposition). In 2017, 2019 and 2020 Richmond went into finals in strong form.

 

[Osho]

Is anybody guilty of fadging the data?

 

[Osho]

Oh you haven’t read half of it Osho. Old Fudge has concocted a whole alternative reality which when you follow it to its logical conclusion has Richmond 2010 roughly on a par with Richmond’s dynasty team. I kid you not. That is how much better the super era 2009-11 was than the AFL of the last 6 years according to Fadge

The Tige Pies thing is alive and well. Good for footy.

I hope my mob can fluke 1, let alone 3.

 

[Lex22]

Bulldogs from about 2007 to 2010 were really unlucky to come up against Geelong, Pies, Hawks and Saints teams to just pip them into making Grand Finals. They had some good teams around then that were always just short somewhere.

We got Barry Hall 2 years too late, have him (especially in 2009) then it could’ve been the difference.

Great contributor when he came, but the team wasn’t quite the same.

 

[Lex22]

Carlton 2009 had the following:

• Chris Judd aged 25 (and 12 months off winning the Brownlow)
• Brendan Fevola aged 28, the reigning Coleman medallist, in his absolute prime
• Murphy (21) and Gibbs (20), both of whom had just finished top 10 in the Brownlow
• 22 year old Eddie Betts, arguable the best small forward ever, as well as 19yo Jeff Garlett
• Chris Yarran, Andrew Walker, Jordan Russell, Shaun Grigg - all top 10 draft picks under the age of 22, and all solid enough at least
• Matthew Kreuzer, Sam Jacobs, Shaun Hampson and Robbie Warnock as uckmen
• a host of solid veterans- Kade Simpson, Jarrad Waite, Heath Scotland, Andrew Carazzo, Brad Fisher, Richard Hadlee, Ryan Houlihan, Michael Jamison, Bret Thornton- all aged 22-28 and with plenty of good footy left

Best 22 at the time:
b: Russell, Jamison, Scotland
hb: Yarran, Thornton, Simpson
c: Walker, Gibbs, Grigg
hf: Houlihan, Waite, Garlett
ff: Betts, Fevola, Kreuzer
Foll: Jacobs, Judd, Murphy

Bench: Carazzo, Fisher, Hadlee, Hampson,
Again, only Fev/Scotland are 28, and Houlihan 27. The rest of the team was 26 and under.

That team never finished higher than 5th in the years that followed. I reckon if you went back and replayed from that point forward 100 times that is just about the worst possible outcome.

That’s just an okay list plus 1-2 stars. They achieved about what they should’ve.

 

[Captain_Bender]

Lol fadge is melting due to his lack of footy knowledge KWAB