- Aug 15, 2009
- 2,986
- 5,117
- AFL Club
- West Coast
Just saw an ad on fox, for AFL finals. richmond, geelong port, Brisbane.
Have we made finals? Or awaiting other results ??
Have we made finals? Or awaiting other results ??
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
most years we seem to get s**t promos or miminal highlights.Just saw an ad on fox, for AFL finals. richmond, geelong port, Brisbane.
Have we made finals? Or awaiting other results ??
Next thing Shueys names his newbie OctoberThat's a girl's name, like April. He will probably just call himself "Auggie" when he gets older.
That’s it. Let’s just get our first round match up done and get some good solid formmeh Who cares.
Richmond are the team to beat so someone has to get through them to win it.
Hopefully we can have an October to remember
On SM-G925I using BigFooty.com mobile app
It is true that Richmond derive little home ground advantage from a game against Collingwood. But it is yet another game at the G, which helps come GF day against a non-MCG tenant.
However, travel is absolutely the angle you should use when debating the inherent inequalities in the normal fixture. People will argue that there is nothing you can do about where West Coast and Freo are based.
But you can drop the automatic twice per year matchups of the ‘big clubs’, regardless of where they finish on the ladder. Theoretically, you should only play the same team twice if you finish in the same third of the ladder. Yes, that means we should accept only playing Freo once as well in the same circumstances.
This should help free up the fixture to ensure vic clubs are travelling regularly.
But, that’s the problem. We play those fixtures twice because of money. You can call it vic bias if you like, but it’s really bias to cash.
I’d love for there to be a 17 game season, but we’ve crossed the Rubicon and are addicted to cash now. A shorter season should allow for state of origin, if the TV fat cats want their money.
I was happy to see that Nesbitt, in his rebuttal of Caro and Ross Lyons’ argument against us receiving a home final mentioned that we are continuing to seek a more credible fixture.
One final per week at the MCG is dealt with. The GF at the MCG is a lost cause (although the WA government should be seeking to make a deal to be the official back up if we get any more unforeseen events like this year).
The amount of games which Richmond play at the MCG is a bit of a red herring. Some kind of travel parity is the long term change we should be seeking in the game.
5) Dylan's post was trash. It was reverse engineering a post for likes and then finding the data to support it.
Dylan is a very smart guy, and he knows as well as anyone that if you are using data to support an argument, you also present the data that doesn't support what you are saying, and present a balanced argument. He didn't, and I assume that he didn't on purpose, because he was just dishing out some red meat to the folks on here that are looking for extra ammunition to support their petty grievances.
5 day break vs 9 day break. Geelong were always going to be flat.
Richmond have a days break differential of +14 over their opponents this year, the most in the competition.
The six matches alone from Round 12 to the end of Round 18 provides them with a cumulative additional 12 days of rest over their rivals.
And yet people still marvel at how the Tigers manage to maintain such a high-pressure method - here's a clue, it's in the fixture.
You have to go back to Round 5 last year for the last time that Richmond had a two or more day break deficit in comparison to their opponent (and even then they still had 7 days break in total).
Fremantle alone have had that happen to them six times this season.
If you take a look of the number of matches where a day break differential of 2 or more occurs, the disparity with Richmond is clearly evident.
View attachment 959240
Indeed, compare the outcome tally on the above right to the competition ladder and it becomes apparent how much of an outsized impact this effect is having upon the season.
Anyone who thinks the fixture has been fair this season are absolutely kidding themselves.
Further to this, I had a look through the outcomes of these matches; the impact is even greater than I had anticipated.
If you remove situations where the team with additional days break advantage has travelled interstate to play a non-travelling team and the manufactured bye in Round 4 for Melbourne and Essendon (where the longer break became a disadvantage), the record for these matches this season is 23-3.
The only losses being:
- Essendon in Round 11 against GWS (where the Bombers threw away a five goal lead)
- Gold Coast in Round 16 against Brisbane (packed up for the season)
- North Melbourne in Round 17 against Fremantle (again, packed up for the season)
The majority of the "unusual-ness" of results this season can be explained by this effect.
Take Adelaide for example. 8 of their 11 matches from Rounds 3 and 13 had less days break than their opponents. They have two matches in the fixture where they have two or more days rest over opponents - Rounds 15 and 16 - it is no coincidence these are their only wins for the entire season.
Round 6, who expected Carlton to blow away the Bulldogs? The Blues had 3 additional days of rest for that match.
Round 12, Melbourne smashed Collingwood. The Demons had 2 additional days of rest for that match.
Round 16, West Coast lost to the Bulldogs. The Bulldogs had 4 additional days of rest for that match.
I could keep going on, there are examples throughout the season.
The correlation here is so strong I had to re-check several times to make sure that it was not a mistake. Whatever sliver of "integrity" the competition had completely evaporates in the face of this.
We have a FIX-ture that overwhelmingly advantages half the competition over the other, but specifically places the reigning premiers in a situation where, before even taking to the field, 6 of their 17 matches (more than a third of the season) have a near complete certainty of winning.
And this is just breaks between matches. It doesn't include absurdities such as cross-continent travel on 4 day breaks or a team playing over 80% of its matches within its home state for example. The situation is so far removed from any semblance of equity that any attempt to explain that it is rapidly decays into complete farce.
Don't expect any favours in Round 18 either: each of Geelong, Richmond and Port Adelaide have 2 day break advantages over their opponents for the final round (as do West Coast over North Melbourne - the club's single such occurrence for the season).
Statistically, the club's best chance of finishing top 4 is in Brisbane losing both of its remaining matches - a very long shot indeed.
That's right. Left to chance alone, the likelihood of Richmond getting 6 such matches in its fixture is less than 1%.
Yet here we are.
Unless of course, you think that a 1-in-125 outcome in favour of the reigning premiers who happened to benefit from advantageous fixture anomalies in previous seasons also, is just purely coincidental.
But we get to sleep in our own beds #caroI'm not sure what your issue is with this, but the posts in question are simply a count of the number of matches this season where one team has two days or more additional break over the other. Nothing within them is either reverse engineered or fabricated.
Post 1: 2+ Additional Days Break
Post 2: Outcomes of Matches with 2+ Additional Days Break
This is the source data, day break differential for each club after the resumption:
View attachment 967297
Note the following from the above image:
It cannot be denied that the inequity of these totals from the fixture has had a major impact upon the outcome of the season.
- 3 of the bottom 4 positions on the ladder are occupied by clubs with a season differential of -9 or below.
- of the 6 clubs with a season differential of -7 or below, only West Coast alone managed to make the top 8.
- each of the 3 clubs with a season differential of 10 or above finished inside the top 8, with two of them finishing top 4.
If you really want the detail to 'balance' the argument, here are the figures in regard to matches with 2+ day break differentials in 2020:
View attachment 967364
The figures speak for themselves. The advantage gained here is more than considerable and actually correlates far higher for wins than interstate travel.
But that alone is not the source of ire. That is instead driven by the blatant inequity of the following:
View attachment 967247
That's right. Left to chance alone, the likelihood of Richmond getting 6 such matches in its fixture is less than 1%.
Yet here we are.
Unless of course, you think that a 1-in-125 outcome in favour of the reigning premiers who happened to benefit from advantageous fixture anomalies in previous seasons also, is just purely coincidental.
I'm not sure what your issue is with this, but the posts in question are simply a count of the number of matches this season where one team has two days or more additional break over the other. Nothing within them is either reverse engineered or fabricated.
Post 1: 2+ Additional Days Break
Post 2: Outcomes of Matches with 2+ Additional Days Break
This is the source data, day break differential for each club after the resumption:
View attachment 967470
Note the following from the above image:
It cannot be denied that the inequity of these totals from the fixture has had a major impact upon the outcome of the season.
- 3 of the bottom 4 positions on the ladder are occupied by clubs with a season differential of -9 or below.
- of the 6 clubs with a season differential of -7 or below, only West Coast alone managed to make the top 8.
- each of the 3 clubs with a season differential of 10 or above finished inside the top 8, with two of them finishing top 4.
If you really want the detail to 'balance' the argument, here are the figures in regard to matches with 2+ day break differentials in 2020:
View attachment 967364
The figures speak for themselves. The advantage gained here is more than considerable and actually correlates far higher for wins than interstate travel.
But that alone is not the source of ire. That is instead driven by the blatant inequity of the following:
View attachment 967247
That's right. Left to chance alone, the likelihood of Richmond getting 6 such matches in its fixture is less than 1%.
Yet here we are.
Unless of course, you think that a 1-in-125 outcome in favour of the reigning premiers who happened to benefit from advantageous fixture anomalies in previous seasons also, is just purely coincidental.
Unlike Gary Lyon
I'm not sure what your issue is with this, but the posts in question are simply a count of the number of matches this season where one team has two days or more additional break over the other. Nothing within them is either reverse engineered or fabricated.
Post 1: 2+ Additional Days Break
Post 2: Outcomes of Matches with 2+ Additional Days Break
This is the source data, day break differential for each club after the resumption:
View attachment 967470
Note the following from the above image:
It cannot be denied that the inequity of these totals from the fixture has had a major impact upon the outcome of the season.
- 3 of the bottom 4 positions on the ladder are occupied by clubs with a season differential of -9 or below.
- of the 6 clubs with a season differential of -7 or below, only West Coast alone managed to make the top 8.
- each of the 3 clubs with a season differential of 10 or above finished inside the top 8, with two of them finishing top 4.
If you really want the detail to 'balance' the argument, here are the figures in regard to matches with 2+ day break differentials in 2020:
View attachment 967364
The figures speak for themselves. The advantage gained here is more than considerable and actually correlates far higher for wins than interstate travel.
But that alone is not the source of ire. That is instead driven by the blatant inequity of the following:
View attachment 967247
That's right. Left to chance alone, the likelihood of Richmond getting 6 such matches in its fixture is less than 1%.
Yet here we are.
Unless of course, you think that a 1-in-125 outcome in favour of the reigning premiers who happened to benefit from advantageous fixture anomalies in previous seasons also, is just purely coincidental.
It's not for me, so I kindly ask not to be quoted or tagged in to this thread anymore.
The other point I made is that you seem to enjoy spending hours and hours constructing spreadsheets to trawl for likes with a group of people who are only more than willing to jump on the "VFL is biased" victim narrative that is so prevalent in these parts.
Timing is everythingDamn I was hoping to get a FreeTK melting gag in before he melted. Oh well I'm sure there will be another opportunity.
To be honest, deriving this kind of content doesn't actually take much time at all as it already exists within the same database that is used to update the squad selection/player ratings thread.