Has an AFL decision/policy ever cost your club a potential flag?

[JackGraham]

March 2018, Federal Govt abolished 457 Visas and replaced them with a Visa available to individuals who are qualified to work or train in an eligible skilled occupation. Mason Cox

46

Mason Cox

Age

33

Ht

211cm

Wt

110kg

Pos.

F/R

Career

Season

Last 5

D

8.7

2star

K

5.2

2star

HB

3.5

3star

M

4.0

4star

T

1.6

4star

G

1.2

4star

D

6.0

1star

K

3.0

1star

HB

3.0

2star

M

2.3

2star

T

0.3

1star

G

1.0

4star

D

9.0

3star

K

5.4

2star

HB

3.6

3star

M

2.6

3star

T

2.4

4star

G

1.8

5star

was neither qualified nor had the skills to work in his chosen occupation and should therefore have been immediately deported back to Texas like a fire ant. Instead he claimed to be an Au Pair from the Dallas French Quarter and snuck in via the back door with the help of Gil.

Fast forward to prelim final, plays the best 1 quarter of his career on Tigers defenders who were crapping through the eye of a needle due to David Astbury

12

David Astbury

Age

33

Ht

195cm

Wt

96kg

Pos.

Def

Career

Season

Last 5

D

13.1

3star

K

7.9

3star

HB

5.2

4star

M

5.3

5star

T

1.3

3star

MG

204.2

3star

D

14.8

4star

K

9.8

4star

HB

5.0

3star

M

5.0

5star

T

1.5

2star

MG

230.8

4star

D

8.4

3star

K

5.0

2star

HB

3.4

3star

M

2.4

3star

T

1.8

4star

giving them gastro (strain later found to be imported from Houston).

Gil’s Au Pair debacle cost the Tiges the 18 flag. No way the Bradbury’s would have won on the ‘G with that chippy chippy possession game.

 

[Shane Heard]

It's a good thing really. You might have had to involve yourself in the 'who's the best team in the last X years thread', Rich/WC/Bris/Haw/Geel etc. Think yourself lucky.

our 84/85 and 2000 sides beat them all by a country mile

so me not worried about dat

 

[Grrr]

our 84/85 and 2000 sides beat them all by a country mile

so me not worried about dat

You got it exactly. Time to bump that thread....

 

[Shane Heard]

You got it exactly. Time to bump that thread....

i’m not a bumper

except for the tom
browne thread and my EFC board youtube thread

oh ..and the Lumumba suing MFC thread

 

[Lionheart182]

March 2018, Federal Govt abolished 457 Visas and replaced them with a Visa available to individuals who are qualified to work or train in an eligible skilled occupation. Mason Cox was neither qualified nor had the skills to work in his chosen occupation and should therefore have been immediately deported back to Texas like a fire ant. Instead he claimed to be an Au Pair from the Dallas French Quarter and snuck in via the back door with the help of Gil.

Fast forward to prelim final, plays the best 1 quarter of his career on Tigers defenders who were crapping through the eye of a needle due to David Astbury giving them gastro (strain later found to be imported from Houston).

Gil’s Au Pair debacle cost the Tiges the 18 flag. No way the Bradbury’s would have won on the ‘G with that chippy chippy possession game.

What's the source on this? Assume Collingwood sponsored him for his right to work here which is still legal under the new visa system I'm pretty sure.

 

[PJays]

Three AFL rules that potentially cost St.Kilda a flag:

Allowing crowd invasions - St Kilda was leading the 2004 prelim 14-0 after G-Train kicked his 100th. Crowd invasion killed our momentum. Port got back on track, kicking the next 2 goals after the break in play. Saints ended up losing by 6. Missed the chance to play Brisbane in the GF- who we had a 2-1 record against in 2003 and 2004.

No score reviews- In 2009 Hawkins hit the post and it was called a goal. Saints ended up losing by 12 but crucially didn't lose the lead until the 24 minute mark of the last quarter. That year St Kilda was very tough to score against (having 26 goals kicked against us in the 3 finals - 7, 7 and 12) and if that had correctly been a behind and St Kilda had a bigger lead going into the final quarter (12 instead of 7), then St Kilda's last quarter game plan may have changed and might've saved the lead instead of giving it up with 5 minutes left.

Replayed Grand Finals- St Kilda had all the momentum in the 2nd half of the 2010 draw. If there had been extra time, I would've given us a 60-65% chance of winning, whereas the aging Saints always had the task ahead of them for the replay.

All 3 rules have subsequently been changed.

If the rules in 2004, 2009 and 2010 were as they are now, St Kilda would've very likely won at least one flag, and potentially 2 or 3.

 

[The 747]

Three AFL rules that potentially cost St.Kilda a flag:

Allowing crowd invasions - St Kilda was leading the 2004 prelim 14-0 after G-Train kicked his 100th. Crowd invasion killed our momentum. Port got back on track, kicking the next 2 goals after the break in play. Saints ended up losing by 6. Missed the chance to play Brisbane in the GF- who we had a 2-1 record against in 2003 and 2004.

No score reviews- In 2009 Hawkins hit the post and it was called a goal. Saints ended up losing by 12 but crucially didn't lose the lead until the 24 minute mark of the last quarter. That year St Kilda was very tough to score against (having 26 goals kicked against us in the 3 finals - 7, 7 and 12) and if that had correctly been a behind and St Kilda had a bigger lead going into the final quarter (12 instead of 7), then St Kilda's last quarter game plan may have changed and might've saved the lead instead of giving it up with 5 minutes left.

Replayed Grand Finals- St Kilda had all the momentum in the 2nd half of the 2010 draw. If there had been extra time, I would've given us a 60-65% chance of winning, whereas the aging Saints always had the task ahead of them for the replay.

All 3 rules have subsequently been changed.

If the rules in 2004, 2009 and 2010 were as they are now, St Kilda would've very likely won at least one flag, and potentially 2 or 3.

True but not sure on 2009, you had us beat in the first half of the last and just kept missing. Can't blame that on that one goal. You kick one or two of those shots and we were done.

 

[Sttew]

True but not sure on 2009, you had us beat in the first half of the last and just kept missing. Can't blame that on that one goal. You kick one or two of those shots and we were done.

Also, Saints were gifted a goal on the half time siren which made up for the Hawkins one.

To blame the loss on the Hawkins goal/point in the first half does not explain how and why Saints were goalless in the last quarter

 

[PJays]

To blame the loss on the Hawkins goal/point in the first half does not explain how and why Saints were goalless in the last quarter

It doesn't need to. Not relevant to my point.

The point remains, all other things being equal, if the AFL had score reviews and the Saints therefore had a 12 point lead heading into the last instead of 7, it may have changed last quarter tactics and helped St Kilda ward off the onslaught for the necessary 5 extra minutes to win the game.

Saints could certainly apply extremely stingy defense when they wanted to.

 

[Roylion]

AFL policy of club rationalisation in the 90s (and keeping the competition at 16 clubs if possible) cost Fitzroy the chance of ever adding to its tally of eight premierships.

 

[Tarkyn_24]

Another 'what if' from that season: Had we beaten you in that last round derby (two goal margin iirc and we led most of the game) we'd have finished 4th. We were Port's bunnies at the time (and for several years after), Port would have rolled us easily and likely won the flag that year hosting a PF and then playing Collingwood in the GF. Instead they got a plucky Swans side who rolled them first week.

I mean we beat them by 50 points in the prelim. I don’t know if they’re making that up on the basis of an extra week’s rest.

Rocca also doesn’t miss in your hypothetical as Lade isn’t around to be hit late in the prelim.

 

[boncer34]

AFL policy of club rationalisation in the 90s (and keeping the competition at 16 clubs if possible) cost Fitzroy the chance of ever adding to its tally of eight premierships.

Fitzroy has 9 premierships.

 

[footyfan1978]

The salary cap policy forced Carlton, Essendon and Hawthorn super sides to be reduced after the mid 80's and cost those three clubs sharing the next 34 years of premierships between them. All other clubs could not keep up and were going broke trying.

 

[footyfan1978]

Fitzroy has 9 premierships.

The context is premierships in this league of which Fitzroy has 8 premierships.
Prior to this league starting they were the premier team of season 1895, which was a VFA season.

 

[boncer34]

The context is premierships in this league of which Fitzroy has 8 premierships.
Prior to this league starting they were the premier team of season 1895, which was a VFA season.

Oh in that case they have 10 premierships.

 

[footyfan1978]

Oh in that case they have 10 premierships.

Are you including the 1978 night series premierships in your count ?

 

[boncer34]

Are you including the 1978 night series premierships in your count ?

They won a VAFA flag in 2018. I didn't realise Roylion was only referring to VFL/AFL flags.

 

[Tzatziki_Man]

AFL stopping the Lockett to Richmond trade killed our chances in 1995.

1995 - finished 3rd, made the preliminary final, with Lockett and Richo in the same team. We would have given Carlton a fair shake. Not to mention they were over the salary cap (Colin Carter Geelong President said this), so if the AFL actually penalised Essendon 1993 and taken their premiership off them - instead of fining them cash, the Carlton wouldn't of cheated in 1995 -

Let Lockett go to the Tigers and it's Richmond - Geelong, Lockett/Richo against Ablett for the premiership.

But karma is sweet,

Geelong 2007, 2009, 2011
Richmond 2017, 2019, 2020

Carlton and Essendon, got smashed eventually for their constant cheating.

Sydney also played Judas to the AFL and gave them Karma, by snatching Buddy from Gws the way the AFL snatched Lockett from the Tigers.

Brilliant.

 

[Roylion]

Fitzroy has 9 premierships.

Eight VFL—AFL premierships. No chance of any more

 

[adammania9]

If extra time was a thing in 2010 instead of a replay, St Kilda would have won that Grand Final. Don't @ me, you know I'm right.

Possibly the biggest myth in football. The story that everybody believes in that grand final is that St Kilda finished with a flurry of goals and it was only a matter of time before they overpowered Collingwood, but it's not true. When St Kilda kicked their last goal of the game to hit the front for the first time, there were 7 minutes let on the clock.
- Collingwood kicked the last goal of the game, not St Kilda
- in that last 7 minutes, Collingwood had five inside 50's and St Kilda had just two. Collingwood also took the only mark inside 50 but Dawes' kick fell short by a little bit.

Fortunately St Kilda were able to register a tying score with one of those inside 50's. If they were so full of momentum at the end of the game, they would have entered the 50 more than twice in 7 minutes of game time.

Not that I'm saying Collingwood definitely would have won in extra time. Both teams were absolutely spent and left everything out there. It would have been a coin toss.

 

[Stan_Darsh72]

AFL not rotating the zones cost St Kilda getting the frankston zone.

 

[Toump Ass]

Dees deserved a few extra priority picks that would have come in handy I reckon.

Also AFL not retroactively awarding Dees 2000 flag after Essendon were found to have breached salary cap.

 

[PJays]

When St Kilda kicked their last goal of the game to hit the front for the first time, there were 7 minutes let on the clock.
- Collingwood kicked the last goal of the game, not St Kilda
- in that last 7 minutes, Collingwood had five inside 50's and St Kilda had just two. Collingwood also took the only mark inside 50 but Dawes' kick fell short by a little bit.

However:

• Saints had 11 scoring shots to 5 in the second half. (12 to 8 but Pies had 3 rushed behinds, Saints one)
• Saints had 6 of the last 7 scoring shots of the game
• Saints got very close to a goal with 90 seconds left, extremely unlucky bounce of the ball. A normal bounce and Saints likely win the flag and no Grand Final replay required.

Pies had kicked 2 goals and 3 behinds in an entire half of footy (plus 3 rushed). Saints had kicked 3 goals in the last quarter and very unlucky not to have a game winning 4th.

That's why the perception is Saints would've likely won in extra time.

 

[Tzatziki_Man]

lol, Geelong win that game easily and we finally break the drought years ago if that was the case.

Not dissimilar to Geelong v St Kilda as we always had their number even with Lockett/Loewe putting up 10+ goals between them.

You probably would have won it easily, and deservedly so, cause you didn't cheat. Maybe we would have also succeeded years earlier? Built belief far sooner than 2017, we won't know though.

 

[ItsAllAboutMe]

Eagles would have romped in the 2007 GF had the AFL not completley de-railed their season suspending Cousins.