Eagles don't deserve a final/percentage?

(Log in to remove this ad.)

SpaceClef

Big Willie
Joined
May 14, 2011
Posts
16,688
Likes
20,401
Location
Vegas
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Las Vegas Bears
#3
Fair enough to an extent. Maybe it should go on points against, rather than for. So that when you lose (presumably to a side above you on the ladder) you get punished more for getting thumped than you do for letting it slip, like we did on a few occasions this season.

But conversely, you don't get any benefit for beating up on minnows, which is what this article is arguing against.
 

nameless

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Feb 17, 2006
Posts
11,841
Likes
15,504
Location
Perf
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Arsenal
#5
I somewhat agree with him, we aren't what I'd call a finals side, but to be honest, Richmond had the easiest draw out of anyone, so they don't really deserve it and Adelaide lost to Melbourne, while Collingwood have half their side out.

So really, if you looked closely at each of the teams fighting for 8th spot you could make a pretty strong case against all of them.
 

The Dodger

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Apr 12, 2010
Posts
6,585
Likes
5,361
Location
Perth
AFL Club
West Coast
#6
I dont understand this stuff. You finish where you do. Yes we are flat trackers but that makes us better than the worst because we can do that.
If we weren't deserving then our flat track percentage would have all been eaten up because we were worse than the other teams.

Look who else is in the running:

Adelaide - lost to us at home, lost to Melbourne at home...very similar season to us.

Richmond - always do their best just to fall short of finals...status quo.

Collingwood - thumped by us, lost to Adelaide as well probably "the most deserving" out of the lot but with massive injury toll are limping in anyway.
 

The Dodger

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Apr 12, 2010
Posts
6,585
Likes
5,361
Location
Perth
AFL Club
West Coast
#7
I somewhat agree with him, we aren't what I'd call a finals side, but to be honest, Richmond had the easiest draw out of anyone, so they don't really deserve it and Adelaide lost to Melbourne, while Collingwood have half their side out.

So really, if you looked closely at each of the teams fighting for 8th spot you could make a pretty strong case against all of them.
I guess that is the argument for shortening the numbers in the finals. As the pool is getting pretty shallow by the time it gets to 8th.
 

Trouto

All Australian
Joined
Jul 3, 2007
Posts
903
Likes
885
Location
Bunbury
AFL Club
West Coast
#8
yeah, he needs to name a team that DOES deserve it. also, at the start of the year, every club was a chance at the finals, the clubs at the bottom with low % are there cos they got flogged, not the other way around (if that makes sense).
its all a moot point. whoever finishes 8th might jag a win in the finals but will ultimately get bundled out. its just there to make it somewhat interesting for supporters.
 

Noctorniquet

Premiership Player
Joined
Oct 1, 2012
Posts
3,187
Likes
2,916
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Los Angeles Lakers, Perth Wildcats
#10
What an absolute garbage article from an alleged West Coast fan.

If other teams deserved to be in finals more than us, ummmmm they would be either already guaranteed 8th or will get it this week.
We can only play against who we are fixtured against.
 

bradee

Debutant
Joined
Sep 30, 2013
Posts
110
Likes
66
AFL Club
West Coast
#11
Fair enough to an extent. Maybe it should go on points against, rather than for. So that when you lose (presumably to a side above you on the ladder) you get punished more for getting thumped than you do for letting it slip, like we did on a few occasions this season.

But conversely, you don't get any benefit for beating up on minnows, which is what this article is arguing against.

You get what you deserve.As woosha used to say,and ive heard simpson say it too,you end up where you deserve to end up.Win enough games,you play finals,if you don't,you wont.end of story.

Yes teams get easier draws than others every year,bit it is what it is.Its never going to change unless everyone plays each other twice.Which isn't happening,so no use even mentioning that.

Who ever finishes 8th deserves it,it my opinion.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

dajesmac

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Aug 9, 2009
Posts
16,559
Likes
9,051
Location
Perth
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Perth Demons, Liverpool
#12
I think it is a little crazy that we're still in contention.

I don't think we're such a poor side that the whole system requires a re-think.

Blame the other four or so sides that haven't been good enough to sew up a spot prior to now either.
 

MIKE85

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Feb 9, 2012
Posts
6,318
Likes
6,958
Location
PERTH
AFL Club
West Coast
#13
Bit harsh really, but coming from a guy who says he is an Eagles supporter, maybe he is justed as pissed about our choking as the rest of us are.

The fixture/draw will never be fair and even until we drop it to everyone plays each other once, home one year, away the next, then finals. Top 8 is fine, there are still 10 sides that don't make it so you still have to be better than more than half the teams to play finals, no issues there.\

That won't happen while we have TV rights deals based on a certain number of games each week/season, but maybe when the next deal comes up it could be changed. For now the system that has just started (top6, middle 6, bottom 6) seems to be the most fair.
 

bodazoka

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Aug 12, 2008
Posts
11,777
Likes
1,247
Location
Kalgoorlie
AFL Club
West Coast
#14
I don't understand what the article is about?

Is it about suggesting we tanked end of 2013?
Is it saying that the fixture is broken?
Is it saying the finals should be the top 6?
Is it saying we had a soft draw and don't deserve finals?

In 1000 words you don't have room to respectfully delve into so many complex topics and have anything meaning full to say but this article tries. It is like a rock skimming the water, touches on everything but delves no where.
 

Shupe

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Jun 21, 2011
Posts
13,098
Likes
9,927
Location
Perth
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Indianapolis Colts
#15
Fair enough to an extent. Maybe it should go on points against, rather than for.
An absolutely flawed idea. Teams have different gameplans/styles that result in higher and lower scoring games. The reason percentage is a factor is because it caters to both FOR and AGAINST, which is reasonable. You can't just discount one of them for the lols.

Having said that, West Coast still have the fewest points against than any side still in the running. So it's kind of moot. What makes it even more moot is the fact that Melbourne have conceded less points than Adelaide, and just 120ish less than Geelong (which is less than a goal a game). Points against is clearly no indicator in the quality of a side…
 

dajesmac

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Aug 9, 2009
Posts
16,559
Likes
9,051
Location
Perth
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Perth Demons, Liverpool
#16
An absolutely flawed idea. Teams have different gameplans/styles that result in higher and lower scoring games. The reason percentage is a factor is because it caters to both FOR and AGAINST, which is reasonable. You can't just discount one of them for the lols.
Agreed. It would then foster an era of ultra defensive gamestyles.
 

dajesmac

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Aug 9, 2009
Posts
16,559
Likes
9,051
Location
Perth
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Perth Demons, Liverpool
#18
This is what happens when you get fans to write articles about their own team. It actually ends up being worse because there's a fair amount of emotional bullshit that they let get in the way, and they think that because they're a fan they can get away with it. Which I understand but it doesn't make for good articles.
 

MIKE85

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Feb 9, 2012
Posts
6,318
Likes
6,958
Location
PERTH
AFL Club
West Coast
#20
Yeah I got the feeling he was trying to say we tanked at the end of last year to get in the bottom 6 bracket. Maybe we did, I don't really remember where we were on the ladder after that Bombers win in round 20, but we then got belted by the Cats, who were top 4 at home, was always going to happen. Then went to the G and played the pies, who were around 4th to 6th I think, and got flogged, as expected. Then last game of the year we got thrashed by the crows, by then we were finished, all the rumours about Woosh were really firing up and you could tell the players just didn't want to be out there.

I don't reckon we did any of that on purpose, we were just the same as this year, middle of the road team who beat who we should, and lost to better sides.

I hate this "deserve" shit that's goign around ATM, you finish where you finish, that's that, until the AFL can come up with a better fixture there will always be teams who get hard draws and fall away, and teams who get easier draws and rise up the ladder.
 

southcoast

Club Legend
Joined
Sep 25, 2006
Posts
1,386
Likes
1,418
Location
southcoast
AFL Club
West Coast
#22
So really, if you looked closely at each of the teams fighting for 8th spot you could make a pretty strong case against all of them.
True - and you could probably make the same statement at the end of every year. I struggle to think of any eighth placed side that was truly considered a threat in Sept.
 

Ochre

I am the 72.1%
Joined
Aug 25, 2008
Posts
29,135
Likes
22,888
Location
Not In Portland
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Claremont
#23
Everyone's missing the main problem with the article.

For instance, if Richmond, Collingwood, West Coast and Adelaide all finish on 44 points, the AFL should examine the percentage from results between those sides to determine who takes eighth place.
West Coast 119.5
Adelaide 98.9
Richmond 95.0
Collingwood 89.2

So in conclusion, the current system is unfair because West Coast get an undeserving spot, so they should use this system, which suggests West Coast deserve it to an even greater extent.
 

TroyUgle

Team Captain
Joined
Oct 5, 2005
Posts
495
Likes
160
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
West Coast Eagles
Thread starter #24
Everyone's missing the main problem with the article.



West Coast 119.5
Adelaide 98.9
Richmond 95.0
Collingwood 89.2

So in conclusion, the current system is unfair because West Coast get an undeserving spot, so they should use this system, which suggests West Coast deserve it to an even greater extent.
I thought that might be the case - on the back of the Collingwood thumping :)

Can I ask how you got 119.5 though?
 
Top Bottom