Imagine if the AFL structured the season this way ?

[RogerC]

Here we go again.

I get your point. You don't need to keep re-stating and re-stating it. I just don't agree with it. In fact, I'd like you to do a quick check and see exactly how many people you have convinced. If you can't convince these sort of footy fans, the ones who are at least interested in the machinations of the AFL, what sort of chance do you expect in the wider community? I know I can't convince you of anything either. You've spent nearly a year defending your opinion and you're pretty well dug in by now.

But once again:

The FA Cup is run SEPARATE to the Premier League. It has nothing to do with it except that the same bunch of teams compete. You can't compare it to your proposition.

If you can't see that the Grand Final is huge BECAUSE it decides the Premier Team and not DESPITE it, I'm not going to keep banging my head against a brick wall over it.

I'd like to test your little theory that "No only actually beleives that the GF is always the best (i.e premier) team, by definition."
I think many people do. (whether it is true or not is a matter of opinion, not of fact; by the same token, it could be argued that North Melbourne weren't a better team than Hawthorn in 1983 - there was only a game in it, they split their two home and away games, and Hawthorn had a better percentage - you could argue that the finals sorted out their respective claims. Ditto Geelong in 1980, North in 1978, Carlton in 1976, etc.)

You go on and on about not giving teams a second chance in the finals. When you think about it though, your finals proposition is ALL ABOUT second chances. If it is separate to the announcement of a premier team, then it is simply a second chance for teams 2-8 to grab some glory. I'm asking you to look at the wider picture here, not to regurgitate your spiel about no second chances in finals.

That said, I would like to say that I admire your tenacity. In a perverse kind of way, you make a point about giving more recognition to the minor premiers. They don't always deserve the title of premiers necessarily (eg the teams mentioned above), but they deserve something for their efforts.

And well done for not taking the invisible mullet's bait so far. I can see you've thought about this a lot, and it's not just about Essendon's dying swan act in 1999.

 

[Dan26]

Originally posted by RogerC:
The FA Cup is run SEPARATE to the Premier League. It has nothing to do with it except that the same bunch of teams compete. You can't compare it to your proposition.

And in my system, the knockout tourmanet will be separate to the Home and away. I never said the Grand Final was EXACTLY lke the FA CUP in my proposal. But there are striking similarities.

Firstly, the Grand Final is the LAST match of the season......just like the FA CUP is the last match of the season. Secondly, the FA CUP and Grand Final would both be one-off matches to conclude the season, with the winner being the "champions" of that particular tournament.

The final series would only have the best 8 teams in it, which makes it different to the FA CUP, but so what? It would be an ELITE tournament (unlike the FA CUP), strictly being confined to the best teams in the country.

So, I believe the Grand Final, whilst not identical, is STRIKINGLY simlar to the FA CUP. Hell, it s a one-off match to conclude the season after top spot has been decided. If you can't see the similarities, you're blind.

The Grand Final is entrenched in our culture. It will ALWAYS be the biggest match of the seaosn. Always. Nothing will ever change that. In England, the "top spot" premiership is the biggest thing to win, bigger than the FA CUP tournament. BUT, the actual FA CUP final itself is the biggest individual one-off match of the year. Our Grand Final will ALWAYS be the biggest individual one-off match of the year......by far. It has to be. It's the ONLY match, where one result determines wheter you win a trophy.

In my proposal, what makes the H&A premiership big (and what makes the "top spot" premiership big in soccer) is not one match.....but all the matches combined together, which go toward finding the best team.

Knockout cups are different. They are exciting one-off matches where one loss and you are eliminated. Under my proposal, I've got no doubt that the "elite knockout finals series" will be the most exciting time of the year, as is the nature with knockout tournaments. Having said that, the best team of the year, will have earnt the right to call themselves "premier" after 6 months of excellence.

When the FA CUP final takes place later this year, ManU will alread have been declared premiers. Do you think this will take something away from the FA CUP? I can assure you it won't. You seem to think it will. The FA CUP is a shot at glory at Wembley. The Grand Final is a shot at glory on the hallowed turf of the MCG on the last Saturday in September. It's a shot at glory. it's an event. And it will be a very prestigious tournament too.

A lot of fans will quickly forget if their team didn't win the premeirship (by finishing on top). If their team is in the Grand Final (like beng in the FA CUP final), it will be a great chance at Grand Final glory. Do you think Chelsea fans were thinking to thelseves last year :

"Oh well. We failed to win the premeirship, so this FA CUP final doesn't mean anyting to us. Who cares"

No, they weren't thinking that at all. They wanted to win (and did) the FA CUP for the glory and "event status" that it holds. Our Grand Final doesn't need to override 6 months of hard work for it to be big.

You seem to think that the only way our Grand Final can be big, is if the Home and away seaosn is deemed irrelevant, and the Grand Final overrrides everything....... double or nothing style. Do you honestly beleive that is the ONLY way our Grand Final can be big. COME ON !

So, according to you, the GF can ONLY be big, if it continues to override the Home and away seaosn, making everything achieved in the H&A irrelevant.

Use a bit of common-sense. The Grand Final wll be big anyway. It's that one-special day of the year.

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

Nowhere near as big as it is now. Your plan DOES devalue the Grand Final. That is a fact!! FACT FACT FACT. Why? Because the seasons premier is currently decided by the Grand Final. If people consider that this is positive aspect of the GF and you take that away, then you are devaluing it. Haven't heard too many say that the Grand Final sucks because there is so much riding on the result.

This 'event' line is wearing thin. You are assuming that fans prefer the hype and bullshit that goes with the GF rather than the footy itself.

 

[Dan26]

LISTEN TO THIS CAREFULLY, I REPEAT :

You seem to think that the only way our Grand Final can be big, is if the Home and away season is deemed irrelevant, and the Grand Final overrrides everything....... double or nothing style. Do you honestly beleive that is the ONLY way our Grand Final can be big? COME ON !

So, according to you, the GF can ONLY be big, if it continues to override the Home and away seaosn, making everything achieved in the H&A irrelevant.

How short sighted of you. You better tell the AFL that the only reason the big game is "BIG" is because it overrides all before it. If the AFL gives recognition to the top teams as "premiers', then you seem to think the Grand Final would "magically" lose all of its glory.

It wouldn's lose its glory at all.

I dont think you even read what I write. You just ignore, and ignore and ignore. I keep on stating that the FA CUP Final is NOT the seaosn champions. The saosn champions have already been decided, yet the FA CUP is still huge. it was huge even when it began with no history 100 years ago. But do you acknoweldge this? NO !

You ust keep on "guessing" and assuming that the Grand Final will "lose something", when there is enough evidence, common-sense, logic and culture to suggest that the Grand Final will always be special.

 

[WCE2000]

Dan:

I've already mentioned this before, but the reason the FA Cup is so popular is because there is 130 years of history behind it.
The AFL can't create 130 years of history to an 'FA Cup' style tournament overnight.

You seem to think that people will just support whatever match holds all the glory. 90% of the people on BigFooty, who are fans, disagree with you and say that if the finals was made seperate they wouldn't care about it.
But you keep telling us (Big Footy members) that were wrong. Now we are AFL Fans aren't we. I believe we are. Now 90% of us dont want to change from the current system.

Now, what makes you think that if we put your new system into plan, that the wider community will accept it. 90% of people on Big Footy dont accept it, which in theory (i stress the word theory) would mean that 90% of the wider community would not accept the proposal.

Another problem with your system, which i have also mentioned is:
what happens if in 2001, after Round 17, Essendon are 17-0 and second place Carlton are 11-6. Then the premiership has already been decided. This means that there is nothing rising on the last 5 rounds. Therefore, in theory, wouldn't the crowds drop for the last 5 weeks. Why would people want to watch matches that have no value, other than to decide the final spots in a finals competition, which according to my theory, 90% of the AFL community do not support.

------------------
visit the Easts Cricket Club - <A HREF="http://www.eastscricket.com.au" TARGET=_blank>www.eastscricket.com.au
</A>
A must for anybody into statistics - http://cromulent.freehosting.net/

 

[RogerC]

Dan 24,

Let me just quote you there:

"Firstly, the Grand Final is the LAST match of the season......just like the FA CUP is the last match of the season. Secondly, the FA CUP and Grand Final would both be one-off matches to conclude the season, with the winner being the "champions" of that particular tournament.

The final series would only have the best 8 teams in it, which makes it different to the FA CUP, but so what? It would be an ELITE tournament (unlike the FA CUP), strictly being confined to the best teams in the country."

Sum total of similarities: 1. They are both the last game of the season. Hardly qualifies as STRIKING similarities.

Did Chelsea win the FA Cup last year? To tell you the truth, I'd forgotten that. But I'm pretty sure I can tell you the champions of the Premier League for the past 5 years. And I can also tell you that Manchester United didn't bother to compete in the FA Cup last year as well.

Hmmmm. How long before an AFL home and away Premier would not bother to compete in this much lauded finals series? We already have a precedent.

 

[Dan26]

I've you forgot that Chelsea won the FA CUP, then you're the only one. Everyone knows who won the FA CUP.

Man U WANTED to compete in the FA CUP. Everyone wants to compete in it. But they were forced to go to Brazil to play in the world club championship, which no one cared about.

The Home and away seaosn comprises 95% of the seaosn, and is the most important part of the every season. This is where the majority of income and sponsorships are made.

The Grand Final doesn't need to override 6 months of hard work for it to be big. It will be big anyway. Look at rhe FA CUP for a working example. I can't believe that you think that the ONLY way that the GF can continue to be big, is if it continues to override the Home and away seaosn and deem it irrelevant. How sad, you feel this way. You musn't have much respect for the "event" and the "glory" that the Grand Final is about.

 

[Hawkforce.]

RogerC,

I think it only fair to point out that you were on the right track when you suggested banging your head against a brick wall.

Believe me, after several days of having Dan constantly repackage the same tired old arguments, all the while insisting that you "just don't get it", the brick wall will become a preferable option!

Oh and Dan, just a fact so you wont keep on embarassing yourself - ManUre CHOSE to play in the World League Cup. Just as they CHOSE to miss the FA Cup.

They had their reasons, but it was their decision.

 

[The invisible mullet]

And before you come back re Man United Dimmy - Man U could have fielded a weaker side for a couple of the early rounds of the FA and played in the World League Cup. The decision to not play in the FA Cup was their decision. What's more their decision to field a weaker team in the FA this year saw them exit early. And the value of the FA Cup was illustrated by the axing of Gianluca Vialli.

 

[Dan26]

Originally posted by The invisible mullet:
And before you come back re Man United Dimmy - Man U could have fielded a weaker side for a couple of the early rounds of the FA and played in the World League Cup. The decision to not play in the FA Cup was their decision. What's more their decision to field a weaker team in the FA this year saw them exit early. And the value of the FA Cup was illustrated by the axing of Gianluca Vialli.

Oh come on !!! Are you trying to tell me the FA CUP isn't huge? Is that what you are trying to say. You might as well give up. Man U also fielded a below strength side last week in the premier leaugue. They often do this, even when the premiership is close in the arly part of the season.

The decision not to play in the FA CUP was their decision, but they were pressured into maing this decision. There were a lot of politics behind that decision. They were criticized for it too.

Look, any attempt by you to ridicule the FA CUP is a lesson in stupidity. You know, as do I, that the FA CUP is huge, despite the fact that it has nothing to do with the "premeirship". So please........ enough of the crap.

 

[Dan26]

Originally posted by WCE2000:
Dan:

I've already mentioned this before, but the reason the FA Cup is so popular is because there is 130 years of history behind it.
The AFL can't create 130 years of history to an 'FA Cup' style tournament overnight.

This is an idiotic comment in my opinion.
First of all, our Grand Final, is 100 years old, and will still exist in my system.

Secondly, when our Grand Final was introduced 100 years ago, it was accepted immediately, even though it was traditionless. The traditional way to decided the premeirship was by "top spot", yet the public accepted the new traditionless way (the Grand Final), because that was what was given recogniton. The public will accpet whatever is given recognition.

The fact that the FA CUP is 130 years old is irrelevant. You act as though the ONLY reason it is big, is because it is old. What crap. It was big when it first began ! Did this occur to you? It was HUGE, even in the early years when it weas traditionless.

Also, if Essendon wrap up the premiership in Round 17, and everyone is just sitting around waiting for the spearate knockout tournament to start..........this is no different to Essendon wrapping up top spot in Round 17 2000, and everyone just waiting for the fianls to begin.

You see, under the CURRENT system, you can't win the premeirship UNTIL the finals start. The premeirship is decided IN THE FINALS, no matter what you achieved in the H&A. So, really they are seperate tournaments right now. They may not officially be separate now, but "for all intents and purposes" they are sepearate. The fact that you can't win the Grand Final (hence the premeirship) until this 4 week tournament begins confirms this.

If a team wraps up top spot and seals the flag, it is no different to Essendon warpping up top spot in 2000. Everyone was just waiting around for the finals this past year because Essendon were so far in front. The last 4 weeks were meaningless since Essendon had already wrapped up top spot. There were some finals spots to play for, but in my system, you can still play for those finals spots if top spot has eluded you.

 

[The invisible mullet]

Time for some reality Dimmy - the FA Cup isn't what it used to be (which is why ManU were prepared to sacrifice it 2 years in a row) just as the Littlewoods Cup isn't either. Lack of success in the league led to Vialli's axing despite winning that prestigious FA Cup. The FA cup is no more significant than the Italian Cup or any of the other major European midweek tournaments. It's like the Ansett Cup was before it became a preseason tournament. The value it has lies in the possibility of minor leagues teams coming and creating an upset (something that your suggested end of season cup won't have). However, the real focus now is on the Champions League and the UEFA Cup.

We all know that you are stubborn about this issue because you perceive that the do or die nature of the finals robbed Essendon of the number one title in 1999. That's sad. Get over it and retain a little dignity.

 

[Dan26]

You should know by now, that the team I barrack for nas ZILCH, nothing, zero to do with the discussion. It is irrelevant. I have felt this way for years. I would still feel this way if Essendon finished 8th and won the premiership. Club loyalty is irrelevant in this discussion.

Cant beleive you're trying to tell me the FA CUP isn't huge. Give up. We all know the FA CUP final is the biggest day on the English socer calendar. My seperate tournament is actually a bit of a cross between the FA CUP and the champions league.

On the one hand, it is the last match of the seaosn, and it concludes the season (like the FA CUP). On the other hand, the BEST teams from the year all get to progress to a spearate tournament where they have a shot at glory. Thsi is "similar" (I never sad it was identical) to the champions league, where the top teams progress to the separate champions league tournament. My tournament will be an elite tournament. There won't be any crap teams in it like the FA CUP.

It's a bit of a cross between the FA CUP and the champions league. I know it's not exactly the same - you don't need to tell me that. But it will be unique in it's own way.

 

[WCE2000]

Dan:
You still haven't replied to my 90% theory. You keep telling us that were wrong, but 90% of us are telling you that your wrong. Now if 90% of people on BigFooty are saying your wrong, wouldn't that, in theory, mean 90% of the wider football community would think its wrong.

You keep telling us we don't understand your system. I know i understand it, and it seems to me to be fairer than the current one, but I dont want it the way you want it. I want it (along with 90% of the BF members) the way it is with Grand Final the decider.

------------------
visit the Easts Cricket Club - <A HREF="http://www.eastscricket.com.au" TARGET=_blank>www.eastscricket.com.au
</A>
A must for anybody into statistics - http://cromulent.freehosting.net/

 

[RogerC]

Thanks invisible mullet and Hawkforce.

I think you're right. Brick wall.

It's like trying to keep mice under a rug. You nail one of his arguments down and another one pops up out of nowhere. Sort that one out and, bang, back comes the first one.

Tell you what, Dan2330. Why don't you shop your idea around the VFL, or one of the minor leagues. See if it catches on, then bring it back to the AFL. At least then you'd have a proper precedent. There's so many variables and points that rely on opinion that we're never going to reach consensus here.

Cheers.

 

[Shinboners]

Originally posted by Dan24:
You should know by now, that the team I barrack for nas ZILCH, nothing, zero to do with the discussion. It is irrelevant. I have felt this way for years. I would still feel this way if Essendon finished 8th and won the premiership. Club loyalty is irrelevant in this discussion.

Somehow, I don't think that during the premiership celebrations, you would stop to think, "Gee, we didn't deserve this because we wearn't the best during the home and away".

With your unparalleled record of backflips, I'm sure you'd find a million and one reasons why Essendon would be exempt from your theory that the best team is the one that finishes on top after the home and away.

 

[Dan26]

Originally posted by WCE2000:
Dan:
You still haven't replied to my 90% theory. You keep telling us that were wrong, but 90% of us are telling you that your wrong. Now if 90% of people on BigFooty are saying your wrong, wouldn't that, in theory, mean 90% of the wider football community would think its wrong.

You keep telling us we don't understand your system. I know i understand it, and it seems to me to be fairer than the current one, but I dont want it the way you want it. I want it (along with 90% of the BF members) the way it is with Grand Final the decider.

95% of Victorians didn't want a National competiton in 1986. If they were surveyed now, they would agree virtualy 100% with the national competiton, because it is BETTER.

Human beings generally don't lke change. They resist change. But once that change takes place, they accept it. It's a trend that runs throughout history over many different things. People didn't want the GST because it was different. But once it was intorduced, it was no big deal. A similar analogy can be drawn with my proposal.

I hope that clears things up for you. I think it will.

 

[Dan26]

Originally posted by RogerC:
Thanks invisible mullet and Hawkforce.

I think you're right. Brick wall.

It's like trying to keep mice under a rug. You nail one of his arguments down and another one pops up out of nowhere. Sort that one out and, bang, back comes the first one.

Tell you what, Dan2330. Why don't you shop your idea around the VFL, or one of the minor leagues. See if it catches on, then bring it back to the AFL. At least then you'd have a proper precedent. There's so many variables and points that rely on opinion that we're never going to reach consensus here.

Cheers.

I've actualy written to Wayne Jackson and all the AFL coaches. They were nearly all in agreeance. Wayne Jackson, wrote me two letters regarding the proposal. This was done about one year ago. I can type out what they all said if you want.

 

[The invisible mullet]

Originally posted by Dan24:

I've actualy written to Wayne Jackson and all the AFL coaches. They were nearly all in agreeance. Wayne Jackson, wrote me two letters regarding the proposal. This was done about one year ago. I can type out what they all said if you want.[/B][/QUOTE]

We'll take your word for it that Mark Williams, Ken Judge, Gary Ayres and Wayne Jackson agreed with you.

 

[Dan26]

Here are two of the replies I can find from David Parkin and Leigh Matthews. The first one is from Parkin, while the second one (which is very brief) is from Matthews :
.
.
.
.
Dear Daniel,

Interestingly, I receive many letters with ideas to improve our club, our game, our selection, our coaching, our medical practices etc etc. Every year. Not many present logical arguments, or information we are not already aquainted with. I find it most times, both time consuming and frustrating to reply.

There is great logic in your argument for recognising the team which finished top after 22 gruelling weeks (even though the uneven competiton/draw i.e everyone doesn't meet everyone twice, detracts a little from your argument). I have read your persuasive case on numerous occasions - as the AFL commission/Admin has too, but nothing changes. But to restructure a finals series (I have no problem with the sepearate tournament i.e knockout over 3 weeks, if recognition for top spot is adopted), which reduces the financial gain from 9 matches to 7, would be extremely difficult to sell to the governing body. Your ideas have great merit!

Good luck selling them.

Regards, David Parkin.
.
.
.
.
.
Dear Daniel.

Your thoughts are interesting. I agree the top team after 22 weeks is the best team that season.

Much of what you propse might well come to fruition.

Regards,

Leigh Matthews

 

[Napoleon (room4 - ward D)]

Dear Daniel,

I have discussed your proposals with David Parkin, Leigh Matthews and other people at the hospital including: Julius Caesar, Blackbeard the Pirate and William Shakespeare.

I think you have many fine ideas, and express them concisely and logically.

Once I have finished invading Russia I will endeavour to have your ideas implemented as part of the Republic's constitution.

Regards,

N. Bonaparte
Emperor of France
Room 4, Ward D
Cuckoo Institute for the Mentally Deranged

 

[elt]

lmao@Napoleon

 

[Dan26]

This is the letter I received back from Wayne Jackson :

Dear Daniel,

Thankyou very much for your letter, which I received on Friday 21 January 2000.

I have read your letter and believe there is some merit in the points you have made in your note.

You will be interested to know, as I have said publicly, that the subject of recognizing the top team at the end of the home and away season is one that is currently on the agenda of the AFL commission. The Commission raised the issue several months ago and the administration is looking at the possibilities.

You should be aware of course, that at the present time, the home and away team which finished top is awarded the Dr Hugh McClelland trophy (ed: Wayne is wrong here. It is called the William McClelland trophy)

You have obviously given this subject a lot of thought and given your interest therein I wonder whether you would be prepared to provide some further input. As a grassroot supporter, I would be really interested to know the recognition you believe the top team should receive. For example, as you indicated, firstly they recieve the Dr Hugh McClelland trophy. You have suggested that this trophy be provided on the ground after the end of the home and away match in which top spot is sealed. Thirdly, you have suggested the significant cash bonus should go to the top team.

I wonder whether you are suggesting that the cash reward should come from the team that wins the premeirship, or from the prize money of all other finalists. In other words, for there to be a significant cash bonus, from where should that cash be provided.

You may well have other thoughts on how to recognise the top team at the end of the H&A andI would really appreciate your thinking about that, as we really do appreciate the thoughts of supporters of the game which are put forward in a constructive way.

There are acouple of other issue to be thought of that aren't raised in your letter eg. the team that ends the H&A on top is not always CLEARLY the best team. i.e the team may finish on top by the barest of percentage margins or indeed there may be two other teams on the same number of points. Do you think that the team can be rewarded if they are only ahead on percentage?

A second matter, is that the clubs themselves only aspire to be winning Grand Finalists. i wonder whether they would embrace their players being rewarded on the field following the game in which they secure the home and away top position. Some people would say that the coach and management of that winning team would have them off the field and not enjoy the spoils of being at the top of the H&A series, but rather preparing for the finals the following week.

The point above is relevant in so far as we would not be prepard to turn the whole Finals Series upside down at the present time.

In summary, your thoughts are very much appreciated and I am asking you to please try and develop them a little further.

I don't think we have a major tiing issue, as it is more important to get the process and the end result right rather than rush into something not fully thought through.

Thankyou for your letter - much appreciated. it will be helpful to the AFL's deliberations particularly if you could expand on the issue I have highlighted above.

Good luck for the 2000 Season.

Yours faithfully,

Wayne Jackson
Chief Executive Officer

 

[Dan26]

Obviously I wrote back to Wayne Jackson. This was my response :
.
.

Dear Mr Jackson,

Thank you very much for responding to my letter. It is much appreciated.

You raise a few points in your response, which I would like to address. Firstly, the notion that the top team at the end of the "home and away" season, may not be clearly the best team. Is this any different to a soccer team winning the premiership on goal difference ? Indeed, is it any different than winning the Grand Final, by the barest of margins – one point ? There have been numerous examples in soccer, where the premiership has been decided on goal difference, as both teams were on the same amount of points. In fact, this situation is preferable, as it would make the culmination of the season more exciting.

Take 1997 for instance. In the last Round, St.Kilda, needed to beat Port Adelaide at Football Park to win the “home and away” premiership. They did so, and finished equal with Geelong on 15 wins, but ahead on percentage. Whether it be close or not, they have still managed to finish above 15 other teams over 22 gruelling weeks. Now as I addressed in my letter, the AFL draw might not be totally even, but it is much more even than the finals series, where the Grand Final winning team potentially only has to play 3 of the other 7 finalists ! At least, over the home and away season, you play everyone over the course of the season at least once. You have to earn top position.

I notice you did not refer to top spot as the "minor premiership". I do not like the term "minor premiership" either and I refrain from using it myself. I think it is derogatory to the top team, and the use of the word "minor", indicates that top spot is not important. Top spot should be something to strive for, and the term "Home and Away" premiership is much more appropriate. I would be interested to know how the Commission refer to it.

Another matter you bring up, is that you said, "the clubs themselves only aspire to be winning Grand Finalists. I wonder whether they would embrace their players being rewarded on the field following the game in which they secure the home and away top position"

First of all, I believe it is important to analyse why the clubs only aspire to be winning Grand Finalists. It is because the home and away season is seen as a "means to an end". The clubs are only striving to get a double chance. As I mentioned in my letter, 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.

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 ? I think they would aspire to it. 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. Given that you wonder whether the Coach and Management would embrace their players being rewarded on the field, 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”

You mentioned, you would not be prepared to turn the whole finals series upside down at the present time. Having had a final 5, two versions of a final 6, and two versions of a final 8 since 1990, I understand that problem. Nevertheless, 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.

As the knockout tournament can be played over 3 weeks, it leaves a potential week off after the end of the home and away season. This is relevant, because you said that Coach and Management would have the players off the field preparing for the finals the following week. A week off would separate the two even more, although the 4 quarter-finals could be split, with two in week one, and two in week two if need be.

Having the Coach and Management keep a lid on celebrations is an aspect of professionalism, really. Is it any different to Manchester United winning the FA Cup, or the prestigious European Cup, then fronting up to play in the premier league a few days later (or vice-versa) ?

As for recognising the team “on the field”, there may be instances where the top team only seals top spot, after a particular opponent has lost. For example, the top team may play on a Friday night, and have to wait until Sunday afternoon to see if they retain top spot. This is no different to soccer either. In fact, it is something that has cropped up from time to time in that sport. The top team can unfurl their “home and away “ premiership flag before their first finals match, similar to how the reigning winning Grand Finalist unfurls their flag, at their first home game of the next season. It could become a tradition.

Another thing Mr Parkin mentioned in his response to me, was that to reconstruct a finals series, in which the financial gain drops form 9 matches to 7, would be difficult to sell to the governing body.

Let me address this. 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. The ceremony (on the ground) after top spot has been sealed, would be tremendous for both clubs and fans alike.

You would also be aware, that since the final 8 was adopted in 1994, 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.

You no doubt receive many letters from well-credentialed people, suggesting ways to improve the season, finals systems, etc, etc. While these people have good intentions, I feel they tend to miss the point. 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.

I would be interested to hear your views, and the Commissions regarding this, in particular. I hear the terms, “finals are about performing on the day” so much, yet a double chance exists, which ruins the whole “on the day” concept. Don’t you agree ? As Mr Parkin alluded to, 1st losing to 8th wouldn’t be so bad as long as top spot was recognised in the first place.

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.

You also asked me where I believe the cash reward should come from. While I don’t profess to being an expert on the AFL’s finances, and I realise you can’t just go throwing around $250,000, the reality is that the Grand Final winning team and the “home and away” premier deserve separate cash bonuses. After all, they are separate tournaments aren’t they ? Currently, (correct me if I’m wrong), the winning Grand Finalist gets about $100,000, with the amounts getting smaller and smaller down to the 7th and 8th placed teams (after the finals). Wouldn’t it be far more appropriate for the “home and away” premier to get, say $250,000, with progressively smaller amounts going to the other top 8 teams, based on the home and away season. The winner of the finals series tournament gets the usual $100,000, but none of the other teams get anything. They have already been rewarded for their finishing positions over the home and away season. Things like this are a symbolic gesture, of what the AFL believes is the true measure of success.

There are also smaller details which can contribute to top spot getting more recognition. Take the National Draft for instance. The point of the draft is to give assistance to those clubs which require it, by giving them earlier picks. Take the 1999 season. Based on their performances in 1999, Carlton clearly require more assistance than Essendon. They had 12 wins, as opposed to Essendon’s 18. Yet Essendon had an earlier pick than Carlton (I’m not taking into account the salary cap breach), because they lost one match, by one point.

Given that the point of the draft is to give assistance to those clubs that need it more, wouldn’t common-sense indicate that the draft order should be based on home and away finishing positions ? In addition to being common-sense, it is a gesture to the clubs that the home and away positions are what count. Whilst they can still, as always, aspire to win the Grand Final, it won’t be the sole thing there is to win. Even though this draft example is only a small detail, it is a gesture from the AFL, stating : “This is what your finishing positions are based on”

I would be interested if the “home and away” premiership was planned on being marketed at all. Whether it be through such avenues as the AFL record, (stating some of the points I have mentioned) or through the media. I have seen commercials recently promoting the Ansett Cup. These commercials focus on just the Ansett Cup, and only the Ansett Cup. Is there any reason why there cannot be a similar set of advertisements focusing on the home and away season, perhaps stating that it is the hardest thing to win ? Like I’ve said, I see no reason why clubs and supporters would not want to aspire to win BOTH the home and away premiership and the finals series premiership.

Once again, thank you very much for your response and good luck for the coming season. I await your reply with interest.

Yours sincerely,

Daniel ****** (I'm withholding my last name from bigfooty)

[This message has been edited by Dan24 (edited 07 February 2001).]

 

[Dan26]

Wayne then responded to my second letter Here is his reply :

Dear Daniel,

I wish to acknowledge receipt of your second letter received 1 January 2000, Again, thankyou for the interest you have shown in the AFL.

I have, again, read your comments with much interest and I think you have made some very good points. I am not sure where we will go with this whole issue of the winner of the Dr Hugh McClelland trophy ie. the home and away series champion. I suspect we will "chew over" all the issues for quite some time, as indeed we did when we stated to think about the McIntyre system.

I have talked to Ian Collins and our Football Operations personnel about some of the issues you have raised and I want to know we think there is smoe merit in what you have commented on.

I do thank you very much for the interest you have shown in the AFL. As a small token of our appreciation I enclose an AFL tie, which hopefully you may be able to wear from time to time.

Best wishes.

Yours sincerely,

W.R Jackson

Chief Executive Officer