Play Nice AFL Womens - General Discussion

Remove this Banner Ad

have a bigger sook

there is a nice sexist thread on your board about The Eagles women's team
maybe go there to share misogynist comments with fellow cockburn supporters

Pretty sure there isn't.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

To those who follow AFL clubs with a team in the ALFW - does it give you some interest in games? I think women's footy is a brilliant thing, I have been to a Box Hill VFLW game and reckon I would watch if Hawthorn was in, but as I have no team, I cannot muster up the slightest interest. Not even the slightest.
 
To those who follow AFL clubs with a team in the ALFW - does it give you some interest in games? I think women's footy is a brilliant thing, I have been to a Box Hill VFLW game and reckon I would watch if Hawthorn was in, but as I have no team, I cannot muster up the slightest interest. Not even the slightest.

Of course, when they wear your colours and you get to know the people behind the colours you start to get invested.
 
To those who follow AFL clubs with a team in the ALFW - does it give you some interest in games? I think women's footy is a brilliant thing, I have been to a Box Hill VFLW game and reckon I would watch if Hawthorn was in, but as I have no team, I cannot muster up the slightest interest. Not even the slightest.

I've found its definitely helped - I had an interest in the first couple of seasons, but it wasn't a must watch

Once Geelong got their team the interest level definitely increased, including with what's happening outside of just how (poorly) we're traveling
 
To those who follow AFL clubs with a team in the ALFW - does it give you some interest in games?
Yeah of course. It just makes it all that much better
 
sure sure that's what most misogynists would say
did you defend your coach after he sexually assaulted his female staff as well ?
To be honest I did defend Ross Lyon when the incident happened.

I was hoping it was just a wild rumour not that I wished anyone to be sexually harrased on this Forum
 
Of course, when they wear your colours and you get to know the people behind the colours you start to get invested.
And the relative quality of Melbourne's womens team makes it slightly better than following the mens, for the most part (the last couple of weeks have tested that,however!)
 
dirty birds...sexist and degrading

expect nothing less from freo
Maybe you should speak your concerns directly to the woman who created the thread and came up with the title?

She will no doubt be very grateful that someone who named themselves numero ono has identified her as a misogynist. I never saw that coming because she likes women a lot.
 
I have been referring to the team known as the Eagles as "Dirty Birds" for over 30 years. You are aware eagles are birds, are you not? Are you conscious also of the concept of internal rhyme?

I realise you are just shitstirring but you really are clownshoes. These waters are murky enough without an arseclown like you wading in and flinging filth.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

We're allowed to defend ourselves mate, we didn't start the accusations your fellow wc supporter did so maybe direct your frustration there
That post was to all.

Ive let you all go back and forth now it’s time to move on. Take it to PMs if it’s needs to be dealt with more, I don’t want it clogging up this thread any further.

If there’s an issue report it.

👍🏽
 
There is an emerging tension between

1) A sense of urgency to include the final four clubs into having AFLW teams
2) Competitive imbalance between the squads...particularly "foundational" versus "expansion"

The third factor is the rate of improvement in quality to which expansion necessary slows in the short term.

One potential way of mitigating against (2) is to split the 18 teams into two divisions through the regular season.

Next season, short of Richmond upsetting the Bulldogs on Friday and Carlton beating the Giants, the original 8 expansion teams plus North would be the top division and the other 5 plus the new four would be the second

Under next years 10 rounds, each team will play ever other team in its division once and two cross over games

Under the current 6 team finals system you could have:

-top 5 in division one qualify
-top of division 2 would qualify and host one of the semi/elimination finals

The bottom team in division 1 would automatically be "relegated" in the next season. The second bottom team could play off against the 2nd team in division 2. Potentially also 3rd bottom versus 3rd top

Under such a system a team in division 2 could still win the premiership
 
There is an emerging tension between

1) A sense of urgency to include the final four clubs into having AFLW teams
2) Competitive imbalance between the squads...particularly "foundational" versus "expansion"

The third factor is the rate of improvement in quality to which expansion necessary slows in the short term.

One potential way of mitigating against (2) is to split the 18 teams into two divisions through the regular season.

Next season, short of Richmond upsetting the Bulldogs on Friday and Carlton beating the Giants, the original 8 expansion teams plus North would be the top division and the other 5 plus the new four would be the second

Under next years 10 rounds, each team will play ever other team in its division once and two cross over games

Under the current 6 team finals system you could have:

-top 5 in division one qualify
-top of division 2 would qualify and host one of the semi/elimination finals

The bottom team in division 1 would automatically be "relegated" in the next season. The second bottom team could play off against the 2nd team in division 2. Potentially also 3rd bottom versus 3rd top

Under such a system a team in division 2 could still win the premiership
A division 2 team wouldn't win the premiership though, because of the competitive imbalance you've mentioned. Divisions don't change that imbalance.

As I said in this Expansion thread, if the AFL has a second crack at spreading out the players better (learning from what worked and what didn't work previously), I'm confident a well-matched competition can be instantly achieved.
 
A division 2 team wouldn't win the premiership though, because of the competitive imbalance you've mentioned. Divisions don't change that imbalance.

The point is to create optimal levels of competitive balance while allowing all teams to still be competing for the same premiership. Obviously the team that finishes tenth this year won't be winning the premiership next year.

As I said in this Expansion thread, if the AFL has a second crack at spreading out the players better (learning from what worked and what didn't work previously), I'm confident a well-matched competition can be instantly achieved.

I'll have a look at the expansion thread when I get a chance but I am highly doubtful. I think this year proves that teams are created over several years. You couldn't engineer it in one year without something approaching a full reset
 
The point is to create optimal levels of competitive balance while allowing all teams to still be competing for the same premiership. Obviously the team that finishes tenth this year won't be winning the premiership next year.
The team that finishes tenth this year should have a reasonable chance of winning the premiership next year though.

That's why there are equalisation measures with regards to player selection and recruitment that can be enforced in order to, as the AFL puts it, "achieve an even and well matched AFLW."

I think this year proves that teams are created over several years.
Depends on whether you think North Melbourne coming in and winning 16 of their first 22 games is a fluke. Or is it simply a reflection of starting with a much stronger list than the other expansion teams?
 
The team that finishes tenth this year should have a reasonable chance of winning the premiership next year though.

That's why there are equalisation measures with regards to player selection and recruitment that can be enforced in order to, as the AFL puts it, "achieve an even and well matched AFLW."

My suggestion is transitional.

Within, say, 5 years you would aim to have a consolidated 18 club league playing a 17 game single round robin




Depends on whether you think North Melbourne coming in and winning 16 of their first 22 games is a fluke. Or is it simply a reflection of starting with a much stronger list than the other expansion teams?

The latter. North were allied with one of the two dominant tradition women's clubs and attracted a lot of talent back to them in the first season and perhaps inherited the "pathos" of the melbourne uni set up.

Every other team has clearly found it harder with their initial endowments.
 
The latter. North were allied with one of the two dominant tradition women's clubs and attracted a lot of talent back to them in the first season and perhaps inherited the "pathos" of the melbourne uni set up.

Every other team has clearly found it harder with their initial endowments.
People weren't talking about the Melbourne Uni ethos making North too strong 2-3 years ago, the concern was purely about the players they recruited (a lot of whom actually didn't have a pre-existing connection to MUWFC).

Even so, all the more reason why it was crucial that Geelong and co. should have been given more help to ensure they were able to recruit as heavily as NM did, which is the view I expressed at the time. If that happened, the league wouldn't be anywhere near as lopsided as it is right now.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top