Amazing teams that could have been...

[Dave]

World Cup indeed was 1992 so that can be discounted. Also turns out was nothing to do with ground works. It was actually a combination the league had an uneven number of 15 teams before Fremantle joined the league and this year of 1993 they also had a state of origin championship planned for first week of June so the season had teams needing byes and a week aside after round 10 for state of origin. Both those things combined the league , in their wisdom settled on 20 games each club only.


Geelong with 8 losses from 20 games and very healthy percentage missed the finals series.

Round 17
Geelong 4.0 9.2 11.6 13.9 87 Sat 24-Jul-1993 2:00 pm Waverley Park 38,166
Collingwood 3.3 4.4 8.6 11.13 79 Geelong won by 8 points

Round 18
North Melbourne 0.2 3.5 7.10 10.12 72 Sat 31-Jul-1993 2:00 pm M.C.G. 34,439
Geelong 6.6 13.8 18.13 25.16 166 Geelong won by 94 points

Round 19
Geelong 6.6 12.11 15.13 22.18 150 Sat 7-Aug-1993 2:08 pm Kardinia Park 25,817
Hawthorn 4.3 5.3 9.7 10.8 68 Geelong won by 82 points

Round 20
Brisbane Bye
Collingwood Bye
Geelong Bye

Round 21
Geelong 5.2 8.2 14.5 19.12 126 Sat 21-Aug-1993 2:00 pm Kardinia Park 32,808
Essendon 2.1 10.6 12.8 14.10 94 Geelong won by 32 points

Round 22
West Coast 4.3 8.7 12.11 14.12 96 Fri 27-Aug-1993 8:38 pm W.A.C.A. 32,121
Geelong 5.2 8.6 11.8 17.14 116 Geelong won by 20 points

1993 Ladder

1 Essendon 20 13 6 1 2333 1959 119.09 54
2 Carlton 20 13 6 1 2315 1968 117.63 54
3 North Melbourne 20 13 7 0 2597 2150 120.79 52
4 Hawthorn 20 13 7 0 2166 1858 116.58 52
5 Adelaide 20 12 8 0 2168 1840 117.83 48
6 West Coast 20 12 8 0 1912 1651 115.81 48

7 Geelong 20 12 8 0 2354 2109 111.62 48
8 Collingwood 20 11 9 0 2086 2060 101.26 44
9 Footscray 20 11 9 0 1978 1997 99.05 44
10 Melbourne 20 10 10 0 2101 1873 112.17 40
11 Fitzroy 20 10 10 0 2001 2011 99.50 40
12 St. Kilda 20 10 10 0 2040 2166 94.18 40
13 Brisbane 20 4 16 0 1886 2504 75.32 16
14 Richmond 20 4 16 0 1753 2480 70.69 16
15 Sydney 20 1 19 0 1837 2901 63.32 4

Ok, that makes sense. SOO probably won us the flag!! Was happy Geelong missed .

One of my favourite years. Some insane matches, the one against Fitzroy I remember well, phonegate! The shootout between Ablett & Salmon. Kernahan missing everything in the draw, the first night final, what an atmosphere that night. The prelim, most insane half of footy I’ve experienced crowd wise. Neale Daniher unlocking Carlton’s centre bounce tactics and then sending them to a Calrton supporting supplier by mistake! The GF was almost an anti-climax after all of that. Certainly a season out of the box.

And then I went and got married.

 

[footyfan1978]

1993 is my favourite insane season. Squiggle rated Geelong as the best team in the comp at the end of H&A.

I do not doubt they were. I distinctly remember going to the grand final week in city on Friday before grand final for the functions and could not believe my own team and Essendon in grand final as I thought teams like North and Cats were better than us both but Cats did not even make finals and North were gone first week of finals.
I been listening to podcast of 1993. Incredible s**t was going on. Fitzroy coach and list manager call out Mark Zanotti name at pre-season draft when warned they were not allowed to draft him as did not have the money to pay for him. When they did were in big trouble. The financial guy told them now you drafted him, you personally have to pay for him as we cannot. They were then investigated by AFL to figure out how they paid for him. The story Robert Shaw tells of Fitzroy season is amazing to hear. Cannot wait to hear episode of how Geelong missed the finals in that podcast too.

https://omny.fm/shows/the-greatest-season-that-was-93/episode-3-fitzroy

 

[Roylion]

But allow me to make two corrections:

1) there was nothing "dubious" about the deliberate out of bounds free kick paid against Nettlefold. He grabbed the ball midway between the point post and goal post and went straight for the boundary line under no physical pressure from the Hawk forwards. He took possession and just dove straight over the boundary line from 2-3 metres away. The crowd went up and the umpire agreed. Deliberate. Correct call by Glenn James. A weak, incompetent umpire would've missed it. Glenn James was neither.

I've seen the footage many many times. Of course it was dubious. That's why the incident is remembered. Even commentator Skilton called the decision "courageous", implying that in his opinion the free kick decision was not clear cut. Quite apart from the fact that deliberate was almost never paid, Nettleford had two Hawks on his tail of which one Tuck was less than a metre behind. Did he 'dive'? That's open to interpretation. Hawks supporters will of course say he did. Fitzroy supporters will say he fell as he gathered the ball, which if look at the footage he was less than a metre and a half from the boundary (not 2-3 metres), [the average person is about 1.6 metres tall] and was clearly trying not to concede a point, given that the margin at the time was only seven points. Had Nettlefold conceded to Hawthorn a point there would have been no free kick at all.

2) the free kick did not "result in a four point loss". It happened at the 11 minute mark of the 4th quarter. [Watch it at 11:15 of the clip below]. Michael Tuck's goal made the score 17.10 (102) to 15.9 (99). They played for another 15-20 minutes... Fitzroy took the lead! Hawthorn kicked another 2.3 and the Roys kicked another 4 straight. Final score: Haw 19.13 (127) def Fitz 19.9 (123)

Tuck's goal added six points to Hawthorn's score. The Hawks eventually won by four points.

 

[simba_]

i cant get past Polec, Wingard and Neade being lumped together in any way. i guess they all have 2 legs each

 

[footyfan1978]

i cant get past Polec, Wingard and Neade being lumped together in any way. i guess they all have 2 legs each

You are drunk and in wrong thread.

 

[simba_]

You are drunk and in wrong thread.

Port Adelaide moving on players like Jake Neade, Jared Polec and possibly even Chad Wingard

i don't drink. 0/2 there champ

 

[footyfan1978]

i don't drink.

You should then.

 

[simba_]

You should then.

0/3

 

[footyfan1978]

Phonegate match 1993.

If Robert Shaw kept it secret for a few more minutes, Lions probably win and North finish top two above Essendon at end of year and get the double chance. Sliding doors moment.

 

[The King!]

Richmond 1995 team. Had players like Richo, Knights, Broderick, Gale, Gasper and a heap of others. But, off field dramas and egos at board level saw Swooper Northey go to Brisbane and the Tigers bring in Robert Walls. The rest is history.


Sent from my iPad using righteous Bhodi manpower

And if you landed Lockett as well

 

[captain blood 17]

And if you landed Lockett as well

Never forgiven the AFL for interfering on that one. campaigners.


Sent from my iPad using righteous Bhodi manpower

 

[The King!]

Never forgiven the AFL for interfering on that one. campaigners.


Sent from my iPad using righteous Bhodi manpower

I’m ok with it

 

[captain blood 17]

I’m ok with it

Still remember Quartermaine breaking that story on the news. We were frothing at the thought of Richardson at CHF and Plugger at FF


Sent from my iPad using righteous Bhodi manpower

 

[Roylion]

I been listening to podcast of 1993. Incredible s**t was going on. Fitzroy coach and list manager call out Mark Zanotti name at pre-season draft when warned they were not allowed to draft him as did not have the money to pay for him. When they did were in big trouble. The financial guy told them now you drafted him, you personally have to pay for him as we cannot. They were then investigated by AFL to figure out how they paid for him. The story Robert Shaw tells of Fitzroy season is amazing to hear. Cannot wait to hear episode of how Geelong missed the finals in that podcast too.

https://omny.fm/shows/the-greatest-season-that-was-93/episode-3-fitzroy

Fitzroy were actually developing a very good side that may have challenged for finals about 1997-1998 had they been able to keep them together. In 1993 the Roys finished in 11th place, won 10 games with a percentage of 99.50 and was only two games from the finals (then a final six)

Assuming that we had been able to keep our best '93 players as well our better players from 1994-1996 and added a few via the draft, a Fitzroy team in about 1997-1998 might have looked a bit like the following: (Age in brackets)

B: Simon Hawking (24), Stephen Paxman (27), Matthew Dent (25)
HB: Marcus Seecamp (25), Paul Roos (33), Martin Pike (25)
C: Michael Gale (31), Paul Broderick (27), Matthew Armstong (30),
HF: Brad Boyd (26), Jarrod Molloy (21), John Barker (21)
F: Anthony Mellington (24), Alistair Lynch (29), Chris Johnson (21),
R: Matthew Primus (22), [Simon Black] (19), [Luke Power] (19)
I: John Rombotis (21), Rowan Warfe (21), Danny Morton (24), Brett Chandler (22)

Perhaps added the likes of
- Luke Power (#5 in the 1997 draft) - Fitzroy supporter from a Fitzroy family or Simon Black (taken at #31 in the draft and Fitzroy used to draft a few West Australians)
- one of Jude Bolton (No. 8), Mark McVeigh (No. 9) or Lenny Hayes (No. 11 from the 1998 draft

 

[ioppolo]

If the Eagles hadn't lost the plot in 07...

At least we got a flag unlike so many great teams

 

[btdg]

Fitzroy were actually developing a very good side that may have challenged for finals about 1997-1998 had they been able to keep them together. In 1993 the Roys finished in 11th place, won 10 games with a percentage of 99.50 and was only two games from the finals (then a final six)

Assuming that we had been able to keep our best '93 players as well our better players from 1994-1996 and added a few via the draft, a Fitzroy team in about 1997-1998 might have looked a bit like the following: (Age in brackets)

B: Simon Hawking (24), Stephen Paxman (27), Matthew Dent (25)
HB: Marcus Seecamp (25), Paul Roos (33), Martin Pike (25)
C: Michael Gale (31), Paul Broderick (27), Matthew Armstong (30),
HF: Brad Boyd (26), Jarrod Molloy (21), John Barker (21)
F: Anthony Mellington (24), Alistair Lynch (29), Chris Johnson (21),
R: Matthew Primus (22), [Simon Black] (19), [Luke Power] (19)
I: John Rombotis (21), Rowan Warfe (21), Danny Morton (24), Brett Chandler (22)

Perhaps added the likes of
- Luke Power (#5 in the 1997 draft) - Fitzroy supporter from a Fitzroy family or Simon Black (taken at #31 in the draft and Fitzroy used to draft a few West Australians)
- one of Jude Bolton (No. 8), Mark McVeigh (No. 9) or Lenny Hayes (No. 11 from the 1998 draft

While I agree with the overall point, I'm not sure you can just slot in Simon Black and Luke Power.

That said, even replacing them with anyone serious added over the 3 drafts leading up, that could have been a decent team. Great spine, and a lot fo toughness. Fitzroy batted above their weight well throughout the 80s and early 90s imo, and certainly had some great players.

One of the best additions to this thread, and one that really does fit the thread title (as opposed to a lot of the others that are just 'which team was really good but lost a game they shouldn't, or lost a player to injury at the wrong time).

 

[footyfan1978]

Fitzroy were actually developing a very good side that may have challenged for finals about 1997-1998 had they been able to keep them together. In 1993 the Roys finished in 11th place, won 10 games with a percentage of 99.50 and was only two games from the finals (then a final six)

Assuming that we had been able to keep our best '93 players as well our better players from 1994-1996 and added a few via the draft, a Fitzroy team in about 1997-1998 might have looked a bit like the following: (Age in brackets)

B: Simon Hawking (24), Stephen Paxman (27), Matthew Dent (25)
HB: Marcus Seecamp (25), Paul Roos (33), Martin Pike (25)
C: Michael Gale (31), Paul Broderick (27), Matthew Armstong (30),
HF: Brad Boyd (26), Jarrod Molloy (21), John Barker (21)
F: Anthony Mellington (24), Alistair Lynch (29), Chris Johnson (21),
R: Matthew Primus (22), [Simon Black] (19), [Luke Power] (19)
I: John Rombotis (21), Rowan Warfe (21), Danny Morton (24), Brett Chandler (22)

Perhaps added the likes of
- Luke Power (#5 in the 1997 draft) - Fitzroy supporter from a Fitzroy family or Simon Black (taken at #31 in the draft and Fitzroy used to draft a few West Australians)
- one of Jude Bolton (No. 8), Mark McVeigh (No. 9) or Lenny Hayes (No. 11 from the 1998 draft

No Ross "Whispering Death" Lyon, Doc Whieldon or Richard Osborne.

From that podcast found it amazing that they made Paul Roos captain between end of 1992 season to go into 1993 but Richard Osborne was upset about it he did not turn up to pre-season training so they had to de-list. Forgot all about that type of stuff.
Also Doc Whieldon basically dropped after kicking 8 goals one game virtually because Robert Shaw was so frustrated he did not turn up to a Sunday interview on channel 7 Sportworld.
Denis Pagan was complete opposite, Hated media street. Robert wanted Doc to embrace this chance.

Marl Zanotto told to leave back of his ute open at Olinda in practice match and brown paper bag of 12,000 worth of coins and $5 notes in it.

Andrew McKay writing a letter to them to specifically not draft him so when Fitzroy played him they wanted to sledge him all game for not wanting to play with them. They played the guy they ended up drafting on him, Dundas, I think and won narrowly in round one.

 

[footyfan1978]

Fitzroy batted above their weight well throughout the 80s

They did not bat above their weight. They were one of the better teams in early to mid 80s. Garry Wilson, Bernie Quinlan, Micky Conlan, Gary Pert, Paul Roos,Matt Rendell, Warwick Irwin, Grant Lawrie etc etc had more talent in their team than a team like Richmond right now but with no salary caps and only 12 teams there was always one or two teams even more talented. 1983 was the year I always look back as their most missed opportunity. They probably were the best side that year but were just slightly off form at wrong time.

 

[Roylion]

No Ross "Whispering Death" Lyon, Doc Whieldon or Richard Osborne.

Osborne left Fitzroy at the end of 1992 and so didn't play for Fitzroy in 1993, Ross Lyon retired at the end of 1995 so wouldn't have been around in 1997 and Doc Whieldon was gone from the AFL by the end of 1995.

 

[Roylion]

While I agree with the overall point, I'm not sure you can just slot in Simon Black and Luke Power.

That said, even replacing them with anyone serious added over the 3 drafts leading up, that could have been a decent team.

That was my point. There could have been further talent added to the 1993-1996 lists. Power and Black could have possibly been draftees by Fitzroy. That's not to say they would have been.

 

[PeanutButter Pies]

Current day GSW Giants if they had:

• Devon smith
• Josh Bruce
• Will Hoskin Elliott
• Adam Treloar
• Taylor Adams

Theses player had a great year, besides the injures all the players put up some great numbers.

 

[Thrawn]

In Rd 22 2001 Richmond had to win to make the top 4. We finished top no matter the result. They won because they had more to play for. Given we flogged them the next week and they then went on to beat you I'm quite confident had your mob finished fourth we'd have dispensed of you with similar ease. I'm also comfortable that it had no bearing on what might have happened a year earlier.

When the game was in the balance, you decided to rest up key players and not try to win. The massive gulf in just one week between the two teams is telling; they were never a 24 point better side than you, the QF proved that. It was simple - you threw the game because you guys knew that Richmond was a lot easier to play. It was a tactical decision. Carlton gave you problems that year (that's why you lost twice), including Round 3 with no Kouta, Allan and Bradley. In fact, that game was your only loss until Round 10 so don't give me this BS that you would've dispensed us with similar ease.

No, as the AFL didn't collect them back then, but there are numerous articles referencing 2005/2006 as the period when rotations really ramped up. I also rely on this funny thing called a memory. I know rotations were far smaller in 2000 because I went to almost every game and watched a lot on tv. Don't believe me?

How can I quantify it? Easily, it's what the experts in the industry, ie players and coaches, have said is the impact of losing players in game today, ie the impact it has on your ability to rotate and keep players fresh.

So you don't have s**t? No quotes, no direct sources, just a vague "numerous articles" without linking to anything. You need to offer some proof that there was some sort of wild disparity between rotations then and now such that it would mean being two men down was not a big loss in 2000. "Memory" can also be made up when there are gaps in it.

Your argument that being two down on the bench meant nothing back then is simply ridiculous. Rotations to keep legs as fresh as possible still occurred in 2000. So put up or shut up.

Only to someone who thinks one teams injured personnel are relevant but another's aren't.

Injuries during the match are far more relevant, because you're at a bigger disadvantage. The fact that one of them happened to be the form player of the competition at that time just makes more impactful.

Except rotations weren't at anywhere near the level they are today. Hird was also injured in the match, impacting our rotations and Fletcher missed it. Both were fit for finals.

Numbers? Define "weren't anywhere near". Was it 10% less? 25% less? 60% less? What's the magical number where having two down on the bench half-way through a game doesn't impact a team's ability to run out the game? Interchange benches are there for a reason. I can't seem to find any mention of James Hird being injured (or at the least, injured enough to not participate for the rest of the night). Not according to this match review which gives a very descriptive account of the game and how close it was.

In fact, you were only two points up at the last change. Let's admit it, having Kouta and Bradley down helped a lot. Match could've got either way otherwise.

Essendon were also without players in the '99 final, something your lot conveniently forget

Carlton weren't even a top 4 side in '99 and were smashed in their first final but due to a flawed finals system, they remained alive despite that.

You brought them both up. They're both irrelevant.

You keep on mentioning '99 injuries. It was only used as an example where a win is not a given, and how Koutoufides would've given you boys a headache. He has a very good record in finals.

You can state it all you like, doesn't make it a fact. If you want to be pedantic about, I shouldn't have said no impact, I should have said minimal impact. You also conveniently ignore Fletcher's absence and Hird's injury (both fit for finals) when assuming that Carlton's injured players would have improved their performance had they played but Essendon's would not have changed

Minimal impact, lol. Have you ever played a game of football with two down on the bench? Do you realise how hard it is to win games with 2 men down? That's two less players to rotate, which is going to have a massive knock-on effect especially if the game's played at such a frenetic pace. You had a 2 point advantage going into the final quarter with a full bench, as opposed to Kouta and Bradley down. That's a huge advantage. To just brush it off and pretend it's hardly a problem is ridiculous.

What was Hird's injury that game? You haven't specified. Fletcher missed, but you still had a full bench to rotate from. Matthew Allan didn't play either, he was reigning AA ruckman who would've had a huge impact too but I am not mentioning him either. What matters more is what happened during the game.

You missed the point, I wasn't saying they were. Your argument appears to be that a depleted Carlton side's performance in R20 shows what they could have done against Essendon in finals had they been fully fit. My point is that you conveniently ignore that Essendon were also not fully fit in that match. The competition's best backman did not play and one of the best midfielders was injured and didn't play again for the H&A season. To suggest, as you have, ("cancels nothing") that they wouldn't have contributed anything is what's ludicrous.

Carlton's injury state was much more dire to that of Essendon's (especially during the game), that's not even arguable. And you keep on mentioning Hird but don't specify his injury, when he got it, and whether that even left you a man down (because some injuries can be played through, not knees and hammies).

The word "reality" seems to be a foreign concept to you. We know that Essendon beat Carlton in the finals in 2000, so there's nothing to be hypothetical about, your point has no basis in reality. You can bang on about injuries until the cows come home. We had them too, but as in '99 they don't seem to count, only Carlton's do. Dig up.

You seem to miss the entire point of this thread. We're dealing with hypotheticals, remember?

The reality is that a fully-fit Carlton was the only team in 2000 with the potential to beat you. '99 Carlton weren't even as good as they were in 2000, injuries or not you had many more scoring chances so it wasn't injures, it was your giant choke-job. As the '08 GF showed with a more dominant team than Essendon circa 2000, a GF win is not a given even with a team full of fit and firing stars... which is why the hypothetical is there in the first place. You can disagree and say Carlton would've been smashed like Melbourne all you want, but the respective quality of the teams and the amount of wins Carlton had against you in your period of dominance (three) says otherwise. Especially with one bloke who was more than capable of stopping you from winning a flag (who did it before).

It would've still been a great GF regardless, because those were the true top two teams in the competition. And as such, it stands to reason that Carlton really was the only team able to compete but they needed all their stars to do so. Especially with Kouta, we were never going close to winning without him there.

 

[Thrawn]

I think being the only team to lose twice to the top ups has made some people a little unhinged.

Lol, you're counting pre-season games now?

You couldn't even beat us in our shittiest year in history... that ultimately cost you a finals spot. That's even worse.

 

[boncer34]

Lol, you're counting pre-season games now?

You couldn't even beat us in our shittiest year in history... that ultimately cost you a finals spot. That's even worse.

Um even if we'd beaten you we were still 26% off Geelong.

So while you no doubt cling to the belief that loss cost us finals it did no such thing.

 

[Thrawn]

Um even if we'd beaten you we were still 26% off Geelong.

So while you no doubt cling to the belief that loss cost us finals it did no such thing.

Who's to say you wouldn't be able to make that percentage elsewhere after a huge win? Or do you think the winning/losing margins are going to stay exactly the same win or loss? One game can still be the difference in this little hypothetical. Otherwise what are you doing here, instead of stirring up s**t as usual?