Review Censure for Demetriou

[SJ]

No, its more to do with the excitement level it brings knowing that extra time, makes it MUCH more intense, knowing that one little mistake can cost an entire years worth of hard work.

The NRL might be a shamble sometimes, but the extra time / golden point way of deciding draws adds a whole level of excitement to the game itself.

Imagine how intense a game of footy would be come for example, if it was simply, first goal, wins. Intense stuff.

Seems you are happy to forego fairness for five minutes of excitement.

For example, a penalty shootout is as exciting and "intense" as you get but it is a terrible way to decide a sporting tournament.

Its not about patience or convenience, its about a higher level of excitement and stimulation, which is the hole point of a GF in the first place, its the apex of the season, and you can't have two apexs.

No it's not. The point of the grand final is to grant the winner the premiership. Without a winner you cannot have a premier. Excitement and stimulation are merely side effects.

The draw will eventually be forgotten, as next week is what really counts.

You reckon? I'm 24 and the two grand finals from before my time that are talked about as the most memorable and famous are 1970 (biggest comeback) and 1977 (draw). I know who played in 1977 but couldn't tell you who played in 1978.

Draws are horrible, Id even be an advocate of getting rid of them in the H+A season, as they completely mess up the ladder.

Don't see how they mess up the ladder.

 

[vealesy]

Yeh but its hard to compare to soccer, which as we know is a low scoring game, even at the best of times, a soccer game could go for 7 hours extra time.

But how is what I said 'unfair' ?

Is a rematch 'fair' to interstate teams?

 

[SJ]

Yeh but its hard to compare to soccer, which as we know is a low scoring game, even at the best of times, a soccer game could go for 7 hours extra time.

But how is what I said 'unfair' ?

Is a rematch 'fair' to interstate teams?

Sorry, added more to my post above.

 

[vealesy]

No it's not. The point of the grand final is to grant the winner the premiership. Without a winner you cannot have a premier. Excitement and stimulation are merely side effects.


You reckon? I'm 24 and the two grand finals from before my time that are talked about as the most memorable and famous are 1970 (biggest comeback) and 1977 (draw). I know who played in 1977 but couldn't tell you who played in 1978.


Don't see how they mess up the ladder.

Im about your age, Ive never had conversations regarding 1977 before, different strokes for different folks i guess.

Id say the most memorable before my time, in terms of conversations anyway, was 1989 ( I found aussie rules a few years later).

They mess up the ladder because they make percentage irrelevant for the teams involved in a draw.

If you have a low percentage, and then get a draw, it takes away the reason to completely bury a side, when you are say ten goals up at 3/4 time. You'd be silly not to take your foot off the pedal and let the game finish with a 10pt margin. There is no point going on to win by 100+ where as you would have that incentive if you had not already drawn.

Same goes for when you are 10 goals down at 3/4 time. Why not just let it slip out to a 100pt margin, if the percentage is irrelevant.

Im an idealist, and in competitive sport, draws are completely hypocritical of why we have a scoreboard in the first place. We don't want participation trophys, we want WINNERS and LOSERS.