Can essendon win the flag without a ruckman?

  • Thread starter barney
  • Start date
  • Tagged users None

Remove this Banner Ad

B

barney

Guest
Everyone keeps telling us that Essendon have a great list but if you go through it they have a lot of the same type of player but are light on for genuine ruckman.No way is Barnes the answer and Alessio is better up forward.If you look at the contenders for the flag they all have one quality ruck and a decent backup ie Mckernan,Capuano...Wynd,Darcy,..Allan,Porter..Primus,Lade ..Gardiner,Turnbull etc etc
Essendon will be a pretender until they get a decent ruckman..maybe david hille is the answer.
 
Well, we finished last year on top, we were the best side of last season (generally, over all the season, hence we won the McCleland trophy), beat the premiers twice, even with Carey kicking 10!

Whats the difference between this season and last season? not much in relation to essendons ruckmen - we lose sommerville and pick up Barnes - Barnes cant be worse that Sommerville!

To answer your stupid question - yes, we 'can'! (neva said will, but last season we proved that we can - blind freddy can see the ruck dept is our weakest dept, but no side is flawless)
 
Essendon can't win the premiership until they learn not to choke.

They choked big time in the Prelim Final and anyone who can dismiss that are not being honest with themselves.

Reading all of these posts by Essendon supporters about finishing on top is just a joke. The premiership is what counts. Who gives a shit who finishes on top. It is worthless.

What is the difference between last year and this year? You had better hope there is a difference. You couldn't win the flag last year. But that doesn't matter does it because you will just be happy to finish on top and choke again.

They have been claiming to have the best list since 1993. When are they going to deliver? I think they have got a talented list but the players are as weak as piss.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

You can win without a genuine ruckman.

We did - twice.

(Apologies to Harding and Turnbull!)

btw, Michael Gardiner is looking very good this year. Watch for him.
 
You can win without a standout ruckman but you need a great list to compensate ! Hawks teams of the eighties (which lasted until 1993 by the way) didn't really have a standout (although Greg dear was pretty good - got the tigers int the finals for the only time in 20 years) Ruckman

The current contenders are quite ordinary in comparison. Glen Archer said so in that their next goal was to aim for Hawthorn's record - He admitted there's still a way to go Essendon and brisbane haven't consistently made the finals. Doggies are up there due to a great coach. None of them can make it without a good ruckman - look at adelaide or North when they missed the GF

By the way, I rate Adelaide highly - if they make the finals they are very dangerous - even back in 1993.

There is no team of the nineties.
Eagles dominated from 92-95 (but couldn't beat Hawthorn in 91 or 94
North dominated from 96 to 99 (making the finals since 93) but allowed adelaide back to back in 97-98

PS not claiming domination but Hawthorn has won one day and three night flags in the nineties. Some teams haven't even done that

The answer is - You need a ruckman

PS I rate Michael Long as Essendons driving force - he's there even when the others aren't. Lose him (and perhaps Bewick) and they're quite ordinary
 
I love this 'essendon choked' crap - did u even watch the games?
Carlton played as good as they could that day - they were red hot. They couldnt miss, and everything fell their way. One prime example is Whitnall - in the dying stages kicks a 60m goal from the boundary.

The next week, against North, they couldnt buy a goal, whitnell did nothing, and had a few mates dont worry. North didnt exactly destroy them either.

Essendon only played 20 mins of footy against Carlton - the 3rd qtr. They were red hot, and it was a good game.

However, we had our chances, but didnt take them. Carlton took theirs.

Sure, Essendon lost, but we didnt choke. Im not sure a team can choke, to tell u the truth.
 
As I have posted elsewhere, how can 18 players all simultaneously play bad (i.e choke)? It can't happen. There are too many variables.

Losing by a point to Carlton, despite having 33 scoring shots to 24 was a good performance by the Bombers.

In the GF, North and Carlton both had 29 scorng shots. Did you know this ?

A one point loss, when you have 9 more shots, is extremely unfortuante.

Here is an example of choking : The Bulldogs, vs Adelaiode in the 1998 preliminary final. The Bulldogs, with a weeks rest, three positions higher on the ladder, and playing at the MCG, lose by 70 points. They didn't perform.

Did Essendon perform. YES !!! They had 9 more shots, and lost by the smallest possible margin.

Carlton was the team that let a 24 half time lead slip. Carlton, whilst an average team, played very well that day. You've got to give them credit

But obviously, Essendon was unlucky.
 
Simon, I can't read your pile of utter crap without responding.

I have written so much about this over the last few weeks, that it gets kinda tiresome(Arch over at Bomber talk will be tearing his hair out)

Finishing above 15 teams over 22 gruelling weeks is harder than winning 3 matches in a 4 week tournament.

Simon, you said : "No one give s a crap about finishing top"

First of all, I believe it is important to analyse WHY the clubs only aspire to be winning Grand Finalists. It's because the home and away season is seen as a “means to an end”. The clubs are only striving to get a double chance.

If there was no double chance, and all 8 teams were treated equaly in a knockout tournament(like the FA Cup), the teams wouldn't be striving to get a double chance, becasue there wouldn't be one. Instead, they would be striving to finish top and be "home and away" premiers

Simon, if top spot was given more recognition, then YOU (and everyone else) would want to win it much more than what you curently do. It's current;y not given any recognition so you don't care, but if it was, then you would.

You don't need to twell me how it IS perceived. I already know. So does everyone.I'm saying how it SHOULD be.

A Double chance is a TERRIBLE "reward" for 22 weeks of hard work. If all 8 clubs were treated equally in a separate knockout tournament, the home and away season would cease to be the “means to and end” that it currently is. Instead, it would become something to win, and to aspire to in its own right. I'm not talking about replacing the GF here. Just complementing it.

****** SIMON, do you honestly believe that with the gruelling pre-season campaigns and lengthy home and away season, that the clubs would not be willing to accept the recognition for the hardest acheivement in football (in addition for striving to win the Grand Final in addition)? I think they would aspire to it.******

Answer that question Simon ?

As a supporter, I find it very frustrating going to a number of fantastic home and away games, where I come away from the match thinking, “What a great match, but so what ? It doesn’t mean anything”. I am sure that if given the proper recognition, the Coach and Management would be happy to see their efforts rewarded rather than ignored. Who wouldn’t ! Remember this would not be replacing the Grand Final. It would complement it.

I’ve sent my thoughts to a number of clubs. You might be interested in a response I received from David Parkin. He said :

“I have no problem with the separate knockout tournament (i.e over three weeks) IF recognition for top spot is adopted”

1st losing to 8th and being elimianted wouldn't be that bad if top spot was recognised in the first place

The best way to recognise top spot is to have the home and away season separate from the finals, and not treat it as the “means to an end” that it currently is. Having a double chance merely serves to “link” the finals and the home and away season. The best way to recognise top spot is to “un-link” them.

If the home and away season was something to aspire to in its own right, would you not foresee an increase in attendance over those 22 weeks ? Currently, the “home and away” season is almost meaningless, yet it averages more than 30,000 people a game over 176 matches. What would this average rise to if the home and away season was given more recognition ? The potential is mouth watering. It would also be a great reward to the fans who turn up in such tremendous numbers each year. Whilst these people would want to see their club win the Grand Final, they would also want to see their club win the “home and away” premiership.

Recently,finals crowds have not been great, especially in the first week. There are many examples of crowds, whilst not being poor, falling below expectations. We will have to wait and see, whether the new finals system can address that problem, but can you imagine the excitement that a knockout tournament would generate, given that every match would leave a team eliminated.

Hypothetically, you could have the fairest finals system ever invented, giving the top teams greater percentage probabilities of winning the Grand Final than their lower ranked counterparts. But if the top team can lose one match (even if that one loss is in the Grand Final itself), what does it matter ?

Like I said, if the top team can be eliminated after one loss in the Preliminary final, or the Grand Final, they why can’t they be eliminated in the first week too ? They can be eliminated after one loss anyway, so what difference does it make if that one loss is in the first week, or the third week ?

Think of it this way. I look upon the home and away season as the true test as to who the best team is. It is a measure of who is consistently the best over 22 weeks. The finals (which are very prestigious in their own right) are perceived as an “on the day” tournament. You have to be the best “on the day”, and “on the moment”. Given that this is the case, why do we have a double chance at all ? Doesn’t a second chance destroy the whole notion of being the best “on the day” While this is common-sense, the way we have been brought up means we often don’t see things from this perspective.

That is why the whole notion of a separate, elite, tournament, with everyone being treated equally makes so much sense. It is more exciting for the fans, forces teams to perform on the day or they are out, and still recognises the top team after 22 weeks. For those teams that can’t win the “home and away” premiership, these teams can still fight for the 8, to compete in the separate elite finals series tournament.

Simon,let's suppose that Manchester United finish on top in Soccer. That means they win the premiership. Now lets suppose that Man United ALSO, lose the final of the FA CUP final to a lower team.

If this happens, they are not reagrded as "chokers". They are reagrded as premiers, and they are the runners-up of a separate tournament. That separate tournament being the FA CUP.

Top spot is the hardest thing to acheive and should be recognised accordingly.

Remember Simon, answer this question : Do you think the clubs would not be willing to accept recognition for the hardest acheivement in football. ? I am sure that if given the proper recognition, the Coach and Management would be happy to see their efforts rewarded rather than ignored. Who wouldn’t ! Don't you think ?
 
What you are talking about mate is dismantling 100 years of football culture and tradition.

In this country we have one competition that comprises a home and away season then the finals. This is how it has always been and how it always will be. That is how the Australian public want their football and have always had it. It will never change.

You can't make people accept something they don't want to. The football public consider the best team to be the one who wins the flag. It doesn't matter what recognition is given to the team that finishes on top if the public still consider the grand final winner to be the best.

England have had two seperate competitions for over 100 years. That is what is accepted in their football culture. That isn't accepted here.

The Grand Final is all that matters. I agree that the team that finishes the H&A season on top could be and possibly should be regarded as the best but they aren't.

You're wasting your time trying to change it because the Australian football public through 100 years of tradition just aren't programed for that to happen.

By the way, if you finish on top with 18 wins and come up against a team as mediocre as Carlton and can't beat them when you have to then you are a classic choker.
 
I agree that top spot should be given a bit of recognition, but the object of the season is to win the flag, not just finish ontop.
Thats the beauty of the game, there is a season, then it steps up to finals football.
With the season the way it is, that is not each team playing each other twice, you can not realistically say that the order of the ladder after 22 rounds is the order from best to worst - too many variables.
Soccer is different to AFL, they play each other twice, and each side plays each time once at home, then once away. All clubs have their own home grounds. In aussie rules, take ESS v Carl for example. Game 1 is at the MCG, ess home ground, then game 2 is at optus (assuming ALL teams get one home, and one away game, forget crowd problems), carltons home game. Carlton have the advantage, as their advantage at optus is more than essendons at the g. It works all over the AFL - WCE has more of an advantage playing Essendon in perth, rather than ess at the G, as WCE play at the G a fair few times a year - ESS only go over once/twice a year. (same with adel, all interstate clubs) - how can it work? realistically, mathamatically, it just doesnt even out.
There are too many variables - the only time there isnt is when two MCG based clubs meet in the grand final I suppose.
Dont compare it to soccer, as they have a very even comp, we dont, we never have, and never will. Finals is our answer, which is the best we can do.
 
WHAT ??????

Finals are the answer ???

Yes, I know the home and away season is not totally even. But it is MUCH more even than the finals, where the winning Grnad Finalist potentially only has to play 3 of the other 7 finalists. Is that even ??

At least in the home and away, you are truly tested agasint everyone. Admittedly, you don't play everyone twice, but you do play EVERY other team in the competition at least once.

You can't fluke top spot. So, the draws not even. So what ? It's more even than the finals, where luck plays a part.

In the finals, the Kangaroos, only played 3 matches, against 7th, 3rd, and 6th. Is that even ???

That's what makes the finals so great. Luck, and unpredictability. That's why it should be a separate tournament with all 8 teams being treated equally. If you lose you are out. That's what finals are about.

BOMBER, you have to understand, I'm not talking about disbanding the finals. The final are exciting, a great time of the year. GF day is my favourite day of the year.

But why can't the winning Grand Finalist just be the premiers of that 4 week tournament. Nothing more. How can one match represent your season. That stupid. Carlton being declared runners-up of the WHOLE season, is one of the most adsurd things I have seen. They should have been runners-up of the 4 week finals series.

Still have the finals, but have the top team be declared premiers of the home and away season, and the winning Grand Finalsist declared the premiers of the 4 week finals series.

You can still strive toward winning the GF. You will just be able to win the "home and away" season too.
 
Simon, the Australian Public does not necessarily regard the GF winning team as the best. Yes, the winning Grand Finalist currently get all the glory. But not many people I know actually believe Adealide was the best team in 1997 and 1998. Do you actually beleive that anyone thinks that Carlton were the second best team in 1999?

Of course people would want 6 months of hard work to be rewarded instead of ignored, IN ADDITION TO STILL HAVING THE FINALS, AND BEING ABLE TO WIN THE GF IN ITS OWN RIGHT.

We're not talking about changing much are we ? The home and away season still happens. The finals still, happen. Top spot, would just (desevedly so) get more recognition.
That's all.

Regarding that crap you spin about 100 years of tradition.

Has it occured to you, that for 100 years, the home and away season has been a means to an end. i.e. teams have been striving to get a double chance.

If there was no double chance and everyone was treated equally, you qould find top spot (becasue it would be seen as seperate), would get more glory than it currently does.It's easy to claim this stuf you say when top spot hasn't had any recognition. If it received some attention, then people (including you), would want to win it (at least win it more than you currently do)

The GF would still be the biggest day of the year. In England, the FA CUP tournament, is not as prestigious as the premiership (won by finishing top), but the actual FA CUP final, because it is a one-off match, is still be the biggest day of the year. The GF will always be the biggest day.

Did you know that when the VFA started in 1877, ther premiers were decided by finishing top ? That is why a season exists. It is what a season of matches is for, TRADITIONALLY. A season exists to find the best team over 6 months. It is what a season is for. In the 1920's, South Sydney (Rugby League) won 5 premierships in a row. They won them by finishing top.

The VFL, basically introduced a GF as a means of deciding the premiers, but premier means best. And the team that wins the GF isn't always the best.

And despite what you say......everyone knows this. Everyone knows the best team doesn't always win the rand Final (see my Adelaide example)

Do you honestly think clubs, fans, everyone, would not want to see 6 months of hard work rewarded instead of ignored IN ADDITION TO THOSE SAME PEOPLE STILL WANTING TO WIN THE GRAND FINAL ?
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

OK Simon

Let's put the ball in your court

How would YOU recognise the top team on the ladder, so that the years best team gets recognised more ?

A.) Perhaps, the McClelland trophy being presented ON THE GROUND after the home and away match in which top spot is aquired, for example.

B.) Or a siginificant cash bonus, perhaps ?

C.)What about, rasing the "home and away" premiership flag on the field before the first knockout match agasint 8th ? Similar to how the winning Grand Finalist, rasie the flag before the first home and away game the next year (which they can still do by the way)

D.)Perhaps, basing the draft order on "home and away" finising positions, as a gesture by the AFL, stating "this is what your finishing positions are based on"

Any more, anyone ??????

All these things would conspire to giving top spot more recognition than it gets now.

E.) Oh yeah.........most importantly. Separating the home and away seaosn from the finals, by having the finals as a knockout tournament, with NO double chance. (Finals are about performing on the day, anyway)
Then teams won't be striving to get the double chance (which is all they strive for over the home and away season, anyway), becasue there wouldn't be a double chance.

C'mon Simon. You must have some. Those a few ways the AFL can do it, just off the top of my head.

F.)Marketing is another way etc, etc.

Imagine if ALL these ideas were all used at the same time, and all put in place.

You would find top spot would be more sought after, while the GF would still be the biggest day of the year.

Can you think of any more ?
 
as I said, I agree top spot deserves a bit more recognition, but if u finish top spot, get a second chance, the ball is in your court to win the flag - there are no excuses from there.
I think you are still pissed from our prelim final loss last year - there are no excuses. You could have given essendon all the trophys and money you want for finishing on top, yet North were the premiers, and will go down in history as premiers, not essendon.
I dont understand how u can give so much recognition (as u want to) to a season which is so uneven as ours, it seems stupid to do so.
Finals games are lifted a notch, to get to finals u need to go well in the home and away season, then u need to get thru the knockout finals comp (basically knockout) - it takes talent, skill and luck to win a flag - thats why they are appreciated so much. Teams aim to peak at the end of the season, not at the start.
 
Hey Bomber- just to clarify a point, we played at the 'G twice last year (+ finals). Both Friday night games (our worst). I don't really call that a "fair few times", do you? In fact, in 1997, we played just as many games at the 'G as you did Subiaco (2). Same in 96 (1).
But if you want to play over here more often, I'm sure the Eagles would oblige
wink.gif


Anyway, carry on with your topic.
 
BOMBER

This has got NOTHING to do with Essendon. It could be any team which finishes on top. Carlton weren't remembered for winning 20 games in 1995. They were remembered for winning the GF. They should have been remembered for BOTH.

I've been mentioning this for AGES, not just since September 1999 !

The GF is hard to win yes, but top spot is harder. Unquestionably. Both deserve recogniton.

Why do you keep mentioning the uneven season ? I have to keep repeating myself. Yes, it is uneven, but you still play EVERYONE over the course of the season. You are truly tested.

Now lets lok at the finals. Is that even ? You only have to play 3 of the other 7 finalists (In North's case, 7th, 3rd, and 6th)

It's a myth that people "lift" at finals team. Certain players lift in home and away games too. Carey, for example, has played some shit finals matches. Sure, he's played some great finals, but he's played some great home and away matches too !

To say a team lifts is like saying they don't give 100% in the home and away. They give 100% every match. How can you lift, when you are already trying your hardest.

Did North peak in the GF ? No ! They had 29 scoring shots (the same as Carlton) If you look at it that way (at least in terms of scoring shots), Essendon's performance agaisnt Carlton was in some ways better than the Kangaroos! Essendon had 33 shots to 24 agaisnt Carlton.

Becasue finals are a one-off match, anything can happen. If you win, everyone says : "Oh look, thety peaked". But if they lose, everyone says : Oh look, they faltered". If various Grand Finals were home and away matches, the same result probably would have happened.

Winning knockout finals should get credit, yes, but it is not as hard as performing week in week out in the home and away.

Have you thought about it this way. To win top spot, you virtually have to PEAK over the WHOLE season. You can't afford lapses, becasue someone else will get top spot off.
you.

A good example that "peaking" is a myth, is the 1998, and 1999 Grand Finals. North's preparation for both were identical. They had virtually the same team, and yet, becasue of the different variables that exist on the day, they won one and lost one. I'm sure they were trying to win both, and they were giving 100% in both.

I agree, luck plays a part in wining finals, which basically means, that the GF is not won by the best team (i.e the top team, whoever it happens to be)

That is EXACTLY the reason, why finals and home and away should be separate. You would still have to "peak" (as you call it) in the finals to win, but you would have to "peak" over the whole season to win the "home and away" premiership.
 
I give up - you and leigh matthews are the only two Ive ever heard come out with such nonesense.
Ive asked about 15 hardcore footy fans I know about this topic - giving top spot more recognition - nobody agreed. Why, the common theme was the uneveness of the comp. Cant u understand that Aussies dont want it, finals it what it comes down to, and you are wasting your breathe. Even Leigh didnt harp on as long as u have!
 
Ok, you keep busting a vein for the minor premier to get more recognition.
Go out and speak to people and see what they think - Ive asked around 15 or so footy fans, and everyone has brought up the uneven season - but that issue has always been around, making the season either longer and getting rid of ansett cup, or something.
No Finals arnt fair - you only play 3 games before the big one, but in the final you play a team that got thru the other 'half' of the draw - North didnt play 1st, but they played Carlton, who beat ess, and who therefore deserved to go thru.
I think we must agree to disagree. Didnt Leigh Matthews bring up a similar point? Gee it went down well, I dont think anyone in footy took notice.
 
BOMBER

EVERYBODY I have spoken too beleives top spot should get more recognition (in ADDITION to still wantiong to win the GF as well !)

YOU EVEN SAID IT YOURSELF !!!!!!!!!

Do you honestly, believe the clubs wouldn't want 6 months of hard work rewarded rather than ignored ? Of course they would ! Who wouldn't ?

Then, after the home and away season is over, and the home and awa premier declared, they can then strive to win the GF just like normal.

You will still have to be the best "on the day", to win in the finals. Nothing changes there

WHERE IN THE HELL DID YOU GET THE NOTION I WANT TO DISBAND THE FINALS ????? I LOVE FINALS.

It is just completely obvious that a teams performance in theose exciting one-off matches we call finals, should obviously just represent the finals series. It should NOT represent the 22 weeks of hard work before that. It is disrespectful to the players and supporters not not recognose those 6 months of hard work.

You can still aim to win the GF as normal.
 
When I said I asked people about more recognition, I meant giving as much recognition as the premiers - its stupid.
A presentation of some sort of the McClelland trophy would be 'more recognition' enough for me.
We both keep going over the same points - its useless. Everybody knows that the aim is to win the flag - not necessarily finish top. Forget your 6 months hard work argument - everybody knows the 6 months of hard work is for a favorable finals spot, nothing else.
Its the reason why clubs aim to peak at the end of the season, not at the start. Cmon, u must have played footy and understand that.
 
BOMBER,

To finish top you have to "peak" over the whole season. North didn't peak in the finals. Beating Carlton, and having the same amount of scoring shots as them isn't "peaking".

Playing for a double cance, over 22 weeks is a crap "reward" for 22 weeks of hard work. it's terrible. You can see that yourself. That's al you get ? A double chance. Let's open up the champagne for that.

A more fitting reward would be to be recognised as "home and away" premiers.

It's easy for you to say that the GF is what everyone plays for, whn it's the only thing that's given any recognition. Of course it's going to be the only thing anyone plays for !!!!!! Nothing else is recognosed, or even attempted to be recognised !

Listen BOMBER, it takes NOTHING for you to come in here and tell me how it IS. I know how it IS. You don't need to tell me. You don't need to tell anyone as a matter of fact.

I'm talking about how it SHOULD be. There is a difference.

I am damn sure EVERYONE would want 6 months of hard work rewarded instead of ignored, in adition to still winning the GF too ! Everyone would love that. Instead of the home and away being seen as a "means to an end", it would be something to aspire to in it's own right. And so it should. It comprises 90 percent of the season, and as Denis Pagan, and Leigh Matthews have said, it is harder to do that than get through September.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Can essendon win the flag without a ruckman?

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top