Poll - Who would you rate as the weakest premiership side in the AFL era?

Which premiership team would you rate as the weakest of the AFL era?

  • Collingwood 1990

    Votes: 64 4.2%
  • Hawthorn 1991

    Votes: 4 0.3%
  • West Coast 92-94

    Votes: 3 0.2%
  • Essendon 1993

    Votes: 73 4.7%
  • Carlton 1995

    Votes: 16 1.0%
  • North 96-99

    Votes: 18 1.2%
  • Adelaide 97-98

    Votes: 126 8.2%
  • Essendon 2000

    Votes: 34 2.2%
  • Brisbane 2001-2003

    Votes: 3 0.2%
  • Port 2004

    Votes: 40 2.6%
  • Sydney 2005

    Votes: 35 2.3%
  • West Coast 2006

    Votes: 13 0.8%
  • Geelong 2007-2011

    Votes: 14 0.9%
  • Hawthorn 2008

    Votes: 28 1.8%
  • Collingwood 2010

    Votes: 26 1.7%
  • Sydney 2012

    Votes: 13 0.8%
  • Hawthorn 2013-2015

    Votes: 25 1.6%
  • Bulldogs 2016

    Votes: 494 32.1%
  • Richmond 2017

    Votes: 509 33.1%

  • Total voters
    1,538
I’m still trying to work out how we got 11 votes for 95.
Seriously, most dominant side ina single season
Essendon 2000, Geelong 2008 (H&A) say hi.

Not to mention you only barely beat an 8th place Brisbane by a couple of goals in your 1st final.

With that said, I can think of probably 15 other premiership sides in the AFL era who were weaker than Carlton in 1995. Question marks though over salary cap issues that year.
 

Final Siren

Mr Squiggle
Aug 18, 2009
4,229
17,495
AFL Club
Richmond
No. He is explaining how to interpret the graph which is fine, he’s correct but I’m explaining the effect of taking a home game away from Geelong and giving it to Richmond which is also correct but has obviously gone way over your head
No, you're still wrong. The data we started with was that on average, Richmond's win rate is 5.5 percentage points higher at home, while Geelong's win rate is 28.6 percentage points higher.

To see the problem with your position that those two numbers should be added together, you don't need any maths: Just consider how it would make Geelong's win rate against every other team higher than its average, which is a logical impossibility.

The reality is that Richmond, like all the MCG tenants, have a relatively small gap between home and away performances. Some teams have a big gap, and I notice that it's those supporters who are banging the "home ground advantage" drum, so maybe you're assuming it's like that for everyone. It seems like there's a bit of projection going on.

Here's a question for you, though: If home ground advantage is so important and everyone knows it, why did Geelong and Adelaide start as favourites vs Richmond? Didn't the betting market know where the game was being played?
 
Apr 6, 2005
24,235
17,581
La Côte d'Azur
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
Everton FC
Here's a question for you, though: If home ground advantage is so important and everyone knows it, why did Geelong and Adelaide start as favourites vs Richmond? Didn't the betting market know where the game was being played?

I think I can answer that, but I wont have any stats or numbers to back me up. I love all your posts but this isnt about logic at all.

It's about 35 years of... actually I should say 34 years, of mediocrity and insipidness. This has been ingrained as the Richmond way by all supporters, recently coined to be 'Richmondy'. I think that phrase was invented last year by a couple of Podcasters who all had many a laugh at the Benny Hill-like shenannigans the RFC had put out over that 34 years. It is a mindset that Richmond just aren't meant to be successful in the modern era and pre-conceived ideas of this defy what is clearly and factually right in front of them.

It's this kind of witness fallibility that we are seeing here. People aren't used to seeing it, so they deny it or cheapen it, when in fact the strength of the facts are slapping them stupid in the face, yet they still deny and try to find some kind of logic to suit their conditioning.
 

Grrr

Brownlow Medallist
Aug 16, 2009
11,550
26,229
mildura
AFL Club
Richmond
Wow. Looks like a lot of work to try and somehow disprove the simple fact that Geelong lose a 30% winning home ground advantage that they have earned in finals or deserve during the regular season while Richmond are gifted a 6% better chance of winning.

It’s a swing of 36% in Richmond’s favour
Don't you see your contradiction. You say Geelong 'earned' their home ground final... by winning mostly on their home ground. Their away % of wins was poor, so it is alright by your logic for Geelong to have a large home ground advantage to get them in the position to have a home ground final, but not alright for Richmond to have a home ground final. And we have a good away record, so you could almost say we deserve more than Geelong the home advantage because we earned it over the season on all grounds. Or is is just ladder position to you, all else is irrelevant.
 

bh90210fan

Norm Smith Medallist
Sep 4, 2017
9,623
11,108
AFL Club
West Coast
No, you're still wrong. The data we started with was that on average, Richmond's win rate is 5.5 percentage points higher at home, while Geelong's win rate is 28.6 percentage points higher.

To see the problem with your position that those two numbers should be added together, you don't need any maths: Just consider how it would make Geelong's win rate against every other team higher than its average, which is a logical impossibility.

The reality is that Richmond, like all the MCG tenants, have a relatively small gap between home and away performances. Some teams have a big gap, and I notice that it's those supporters who are banging the "home ground advantage" drum, so maybe you're assuming it's like that for everyone. It seems like there's a bit of projection going on.

Here's a question for you, though: If home ground advantage is so important and everyone knows it, why did Geelong and Adelaide start as favourites vs Richmond? Didn't the betting market know where the game was being played?
I should have taken the gross gain and divided it by 2 to get a result

The betting markets take into account other things besides the home ground

What would’ve been the odds if the game
No, you're still wrong. The data we started with was that on average, Richmond's win rate is 5.5 percentage points higher at home, while Geelong's win rate is 28.6 percentage points higher.

To see the problem with your position that those two numbers should be added together, you don't need any maths: Just consider how it would make Geelong's win rate against every other team higher than its average, which is a logical impossibility.

The reality is that Richmond, like all the MCG tenants, have a relatively small gap between home and away performances. Some teams have a big gap, and I notice that it's those supporters who are banging the "home ground advantage" drum, so maybe you're assuming it's like that for everyone. It seems like there's a bit of projection going on.

Here's a question for you, though: If home ground advantage is so important and everyone knows it, why did Geelong and Adelaide start as favourites vs Richmond? Didn't the betting market know where the game was being played?

Yes the betting market knew where the game was being played. That’s why the odds would have dramatically shortened for a Richmond win on your home ground when by all rights should be much larger for a Geelong home game
 

bh90210fan

Norm Smith Medallist
Sep 4, 2017
9,623
11,108
AFL Club
West Coast
Don't you see your contradiction. You say Geelong 'earned' their home ground final... by winning mostly on their home ground. Their away % of wins was poor, so it is alright by your logic for Geelong to have a large home ground advantage to get them in the position to have a home ground final, but not alright for Richmond to have a home ground final. And we have a good away record, so you could almost say we deserve more than Geelong the home advantage because we earned it over the season on all grounds. Or is is just ladder position to you, all else is irrelevant.
Geelong’s away win % is still better than Richmond’s looking at the graph.

Let’s just penalise every team that wins too many games at home and play them all on Richmond’s home ground so we can make the game more even. Good logic

Hawthorn win 15% more at home. Is it fair that they are gifted games all year?
 

Grrr

Brownlow Medallist
Aug 16, 2009
11,550
26,229
mildura
AFL Club
Richmond
Geelong’s away win % is still better than Richmond’s looking at the graph.

Let’s just penalise every team that wins too many games at home and play them all on Richmond’s home ground so we can make the game more even. Good logic

Hawthorn win 15% more at home. Is it fair that they are gifted games all year?
Let's keep it simple.
Geelong home ground, Simmons Stadium, played 8 lost 1.
Richmonds home ground, MCG, played 12 lost 2.
so Geelong's home ground advantage by % is better than Richmond's....
It's simplistic but if you bang on about home ground advantage.
 

bh90210fan

Norm Smith Medallist
Sep 4, 2017
9,623
11,108
AFL Club
West Coast
Let's keep it simple.
Geelong home ground, Simmons Stadium, played 8 lost 1.
Richmonds home ground, MCG, played 12 lost 2.
so Geelong's home ground advantage by % is better than Richmond's....
It's simplistic but if you bang on about home ground advantage.
The main difference there is the number of games you get on your home ground with a obvious advantage
 

Grrr

Brownlow Medallist
Aug 16, 2009
11,550
26,229
mildura
AFL Club
Richmond
The main difference there is the number of games you get on your home ground with a obvious advantage
Richmond will play 14 MCG games this season.... West Coast – 12 home games, Sydney 11, Port 11 etc.
The difference being only 4 of those games will be real home ground advantage, i.e. against sides that do not play the MCG often like GWS/West Coast etc.
The other games are against co-tenants like Collingwood, Essendon, Carlton, or regulars like Saints and Doggies (who have been playing there forever). No home ground advantage against Collingwood wouldn't you say. So if anything, our home ground advantage is less than say West Coasts / Sydney etc.
Even Geelong who everyone is using as an excuse of home ground advantage play 7 games at the MCG.
 

bh90210fan

Norm Smith Medallist
Sep 4, 2017
9,623
11,108
AFL Club
West Coast
Richmond will play 14 MCG games this season.... West Coast – 12 home games, Sydney 11, Port 11 etc.
The difference being only 4 of those games will be real home ground advantage, i.e. against sides that do not play the MCG often like GWS/West Coast etc.
The other games are against co-tenants like Collingwood, Essendon, Carlton, or regulars like Saints and Doggies (who have been playing there forever). No home ground advantage against Collingwood wouldn't you say. So if anything, our home ground advantage is less than say West Coasts / Sydney etc.
Even Geelong who everyone is using as an excuse of home ground advantage play 7 games at the MCG.
You forget we get more games with a disadvantage and you get more games with a advantage in them overall

You have definitely got a large advantage over the Saints, north and Dogs
 

Grrr

Brownlow Medallist
Aug 16, 2009
11,550
26,229
mildura
AFL Club
Richmond
You forget we get more games with a disadvantage and you get more games with a advantage in them overall

You have definitely got a large advantage over the Saints, north and Dogs
14 (Rich) vs 12 (W.C) is hardly a large advantage. And given that in 14 of those we play at the MCG, 7 of those games are against co-tenants, i.e. sides that we have no home ground advantage over. So we play 7 games against sides like West Coast, and I will concede we have an advantage over sides like St.Kilda and the Dogs, but nothing like the home ground advantage that interstate sides have where a visiting team will play 1 game per season at that interstate venue.
 

bh90210fan

Norm Smith Medallist
Sep 4, 2017
9,623
11,108
AFL Club
West Coast
14 (Rich) vs 12 (W.C) is hardly a large advantage. And given that in 14 of those we play at the MCG, 7 of those games are against co-tenants, i.e. sides that we have no home ground advantage over. So we play 7 games against sides like West Coast, and I will concede we have an advantage over sides like St.Kilda and the Dogs, but nothing like the home ground advantage that interstate sides have where a visiting team will play 1 game per season at that interstate venue.
You are advantaged in more games than you are disadvantaged.

We are advantaged in the same number of games that we are disadvantaged in

The only teams that are given anything in finals are mcg tenants
 

Grrr

Brownlow Medallist
Aug 16, 2009
11,550
26,229
mildura
AFL Club
Richmond
You are advantaged in more games than you are disadvantaged.

We are advantaged in the same number of games that we are disadvantaged in

The only teams that are given anything in finals are mcg tenants
I'm sorry, but if you can't see that playing home games against Essendon or Collingwood is no advantage then that is strange. Of course interstate sides like WC and Adelaide are disadvantaged by not playing more at the MCG, especially when playing finals. But the argument that we get through the home and away with an advantage because we play more games at the MCG is incorrect. You for example play 12 games with a home ground advantage. I am not talking just ground size, no surface/dimensions are that much of an advantage. But umpiring certainly is as the figures bear out, normally favouring the home team. (Richmond are a strange anomaly because we were bottom of the league in free kick advantages, so in that respect home ground didn't advantage us). So your home advantage helps you through the season and not at finals. Of course you travel a lot more which is again difficult. It is not an even playing field. But to discredit our finals win due entirely to home ground advantage which some posters have said, is nonsense.
 

bh90210fan

Norm Smith Medallist
Sep 4, 2017
9,623
11,108
AFL Club
West Coast
I'm sorry, but if you can't see that playing home games against Essendon or Collingwood is no advantage then that is strange. Of course interstate sides like WC and Adelaide are disadvantaged by not playing more at the MCG, especially when playing finals. But the argument that we get through the home and away with an advantage because we play more games at the MCG is incorrect. You for example play 12 games with a home ground advantage. I am not talking just ground size, no surface/dimensions are that much of an advantage. But umpiring certainly is as the figures bear out, normally favouring the home team. (Richmond are a strange anomaly because we were bottom of the league in free kick advantages, so in that respect home ground didn't advantage us). So your home advantage helps you through the season and not at finals. Of course you travel a lot more which is again difficult. It is not an even playing field. But to discredit our finals win due entirely to home ground advantage which some posters have said, is nonsense.
I understand that there is no advantage playing fellow tenants but would you consider it an advantage playing Geelong at home?
 
Oh boy! No, that's not how the maths works. You have managed to combine misreading the graph with double counting.

First, the difference between Richmond's home & away win performance is 5.5%, not 10%:

r225057_1295x864_3-2.png


That's one of the smallest in the league, and why the "MCG queens" argument is a weird one.

Geelong does have a big advantage at the Cattery! (Although they are 0-1 for finals.) That is 28.6%. So you could reasonably conclude that they'd be a significantly better shot if they got to play all their finals there.
Two variables are not controlled for in that chart, both from the bias in the fixture. Geelong tends to play:
1. A much higher proportion of interstate teams at its main home ground, in comparison to other Victorian teams
2. On average, a weaker standard of teams at its main home ground, in comparison to all teams

These factors help to overstate Geelong's dominance at its main home ground (in comparison to other sides) and thus overstate the Cats' advantage at the ground.
 

Grrr

Brownlow Medallist
Aug 16, 2009
11,550
26,229
mildura
AFL Club
Richmond
I understand that there is no advantage playing fellow tenants but would you consider it an advantage playing Geelong at home?
Yes a slight advantage. But given they played 7 games at the G, and they have won umpteen finals and GF's, they are hardly strangers to the ground. I don't think it was a 50 pt difference. People are looking for thin excuses. We peaked at the right time, everything aligned and we won.
 

Grrr

Brownlow Medallist
Aug 16, 2009
11,550
26,229
mildura
AFL Club
Richmond
Two variables are not controlled for in that chart, both from the bias in the fixture. Geelong tends to play:
1. A much higher proportion of interstate teams at its main home ground, in comparison to other Victorian teams
2. On average, a weaker standard of teams at its main home ground, in comparison to all teams

These factors help to overstate Geelong's dominance at its main home ground (in comparison to other sides) and thus overstate the Cats' advantage at the ground.
Agreed, stats don't take into account many aspects of a game/season.
 

bh90210fan

Norm Smith Medallist
Sep 4, 2017
9,623
11,108
AFL Club
West Coast
Yes a slight advantage. But given they played 7 games at the G, and they have won umpteen finals and GF's, they are hardly strangers to the ground. I don't think it was a 50 pt difference. People are looking for thin excuses. We peaked at the right time, everything aligned and we won.
Sorry but not having to play them on their home ground where you haven’t won in 16 years is a bit more than a slight advantage
 
Sorry but not having to play them on their home ground where you haven’t won in 16 years is a bit more than a slight advantage
We'd actually beaten them more recently in Geelong then at the MCG I believe.
 
Back