-
Mobile App Discontinued
Due to a number of factors, support for the current BigFooty mobile app has been discontinued. Your BigFooty login will no longer work on the Tapatalk or the BigFooty App - which is based on Tapatalk.
Apologies for any inconvenience. We will try to find a replacement.
Is Dan24's finals system right or wrong? VOTE NOW!
- Thread starter Grendel
- Start date
- Tagged users None
🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.
I am fuly awarre of the sarcasm, but I think some of them legitimately believe that the gold medallist bcomes the number one ranked individual in that sport.
If only they knew this wasn't true.
Why should Melbourne be the number one ranked footy team "IF" they had beaten the Bombers. They should have been number one in the 4 wek finals series, yes. But, overall, over 22 weeks, Essendon should have been declared number one. And whatever happens in the finals shouldn't affect that.
If only they knew this wasn't true.
Why should Melbourne be the number one ranked footy team "IF" they had beaten the Bombers. They should have been number one in the 4 wek finals series, yes. But, overall, over 22 weeks, Essendon should have been declared number one. And whatever happens in the finals shouldn't affect that.
Tsk, tsk, tsk Dan24
What's with all these Essendon fans and their thin skins? Where's yer sense of humour gone? The old Aussie tradition of the piss-take?
Thank God I didn't post that idea we came up with off board that went along the lines of, "Well, Dan24 has made some very convincing arguments on why Essendon are so much better than the 15 other clubs who dare to tread on the same turf as them, so in the interests of achieving excellence, all clubs should adopt the Essendon name, colours, and nickname, thus eliminating all mediocrity and guaranteeing a season full of quality". That way, you wouldn't have to worry over the Carlscum, Kangascum, Scum Kilda, and the rest of us who dare to even turn up to the toss of the coin when faced with the might of Kevin Sheedy's (praised be thy name) boys from Essendon (praised be thy name) and his trusty on-field general James Hird (praised be thy name).
Heaven knows what might have happened if we even suggested such an idea on a public forum.
Yours in good faith (and honestly, truly, swearing on various religious documents, I am not trying to wind you up)
Shin24
p.s. That's a neat observation about the sarcasm Dan24. Rearrange the following words, "pot", "black", "calling", "kettle", and "the" for the consensus view.
What's with all these Essendon fans and their thin skins? Where's yer sense of humour gone? The old Aussie tradition of the piss-take?
Thank God I didn't post that idea we came up with off board that went along the lines of, "Well, Dan24 has made some very convincing arguments on why Essendon are so much better than the 15 other clubs who dare to tread on the same turf as them, so in the interests of achieving excellence, all clubs should adopt the Essendon name, colours, and nickname, thus eliminating all mediocrity and guaranteeing a season full of quality". That way, you wouldn't have to worry over the Carlscum, Kangascum, Scum Kilda, and the rest of us who dare to even turn up to the toss of the coin when faced with the might of Kevin Sheedy's (praised be thy name) boys from Essendon (praised be thy name) and his trusty on-field general James Hird (praised be thy name).
Heaven knows what might have happened if we even suggested such an idea on a public forum.
Yours in good faith (and honestly, truly, swearing on various religious documents, I am not trying to wind you up)
Shin24
p.s. That's a neat observation about the sarcasm Dan24. Rearrange the following words, "pot", "black", "calling", "kettle", and "the" for the consensus view.
kenny_lingers
Rookie
- Sep 16, 2000
- 23
- 0
shin.....LOLOLOLOL
Log in to remove this Banner Ad
dons_r_tops
Team Captain
Don't Lump all of us in together shinboners because not all essendon (praise be thy name)supporters are as thin skinned as you think. (amen)
Stop talking crap Rooboy. Don't bait me either.
Anyone can lose "on the day". North lost on the day in 1998. They were a better team than the Crows that year, but didn't get acknowledged, because they played a poor 60 minutes of football.
Never mind that their previous 2,940 minutes in 1998 that were BETTER THAN ANY OTHER TEAM. Obviously, that is irrelevant (sarcastically)
An upset can happen in a finals match, just as frequently as it can happen in a Home and Away match. It's just a game of footy and it doen't matter whether it's a final, or a H&A, an upset still has the same likelihood of happening.
Why couldn't North be acknowledged as premiers" in 1998, and the Crows the "champions' of the 4 week finals tournament ? That will keep you (and everyone else) happy Rooboy, because the Grand Final winner (Crows) still get acknowledged as having won "something" (as they deserve to, I might add)
Anyone can lose "on the day". North lost on the day in 1998. They were a better team than the Crows that year, but didn't get acknowledged, because they played a poor 60 minutes of football.
Never mind that their previous 2,940 minutes in 1998 that were BETTER THAN ANY OTHER TEAM. Obviously, that is irrelevant (sarcastically)
An upset can happen in a finals match, just as frequently as it can happen in a Home and Away match. It's just a game of footy and it doen't matter whether it's a final, or a H&A, an upset still has the same likelihood of happening.
Why couldn't North be acknowledged as premiers" in 1998, and the Crows the "champions' of the 4 week finals tournament ? That will keep you (and everyone else) happy Rooboy, because the Grand Final winner (Crows) still get acknowledged as having won "something" (as they deserve to, I might add)
Dan there is only one premiership team... the team that wins the premiership... other teams can be successful... but they have not won the premiership... and it does not matter how unfair that is... that is the way it is and will always be...
in 1998 North were not good enough...
and you can wank on about paper premierships and all that other crap... Essendon would not have beaten the Kangaroos in 1999... and were lucky they got knocked out by Carlton...
like no-one was going to stop Essendon in 2000... and North were Lucky Melbourne beat them... saved me $90.00....
in 1998 North were not good enough...
and you can wank on about paper premierships and all that other crap... Essendon would not have beaten the Kangaroos in 1999... and were lucky they got knocked out by Carlton...
like no-one was going to stop Essendon in 2000... and North were Lucky Melbourne beat them... saved me $90.00....
North were certainly good enough in 1998. Any dickhead can see that. You act as though only ONE team is ever capable of winning the Grand Final. Ha ha. yeah right mate. Usually, there are two, or three teams that are capable of winning it.
Going by yur logic, the premier is ALWAYS better than the runner-up. And the runner-up is always a better team tha the 3rd team etc etc
Going by that flawed logic, Carlton in 1999 (who were an also ran. Just ask their fans) were a better team than Essendon.
Now, if you beieve that, you're a moron. And that's being nice to you.
1999 is a good example. The positioning of teams after the finals (eg Carlton as runner-up North as premiers) is not necessarily reflective of how good those teams were over 1999.
Anyone can lose a one-off match. Even the best can lose. The top team on the ladder always losesa coupe of games during the year. Upsets happen.
Don't you dare tell me, that Carlton were a better team than Essendon in 1999. Even Carlton fans know this isn't true. But that's what you seem to be saying.
Going by yur logic, the premier is ALWAYS better than the runner-up. And the runner-up is always a better team tha the 3rd team etc etc
Going by that flawed logic, Carlton in 1999 (who were an also ran. Just ask their fans) were a better team than Essendon.
Now, if you beieve that, you're a moron. And that's being nice to you.
1999 is a good example. The positioning of teams after the finals (eg Carlton as runner-up North as premiers) is not necessarily reflective of how good those teams were over 1999.
Anyone can lose a one-off match. Even the best can lose. The top team on the ladder always losesa coupe of games during the year. Upsets happen.
Don't you dare tell me, that Carlton were a better team than Essendon in 1999. Even Carlton fans know this isn't true. But that's what you seem to be saying.
Ok... Dan I was incorrect with one sentence... please replace above with "North in the end... were not good enough in 1998... nearly but no cigar... no cigar... no premiership... that is life"
In football... you must grasp your chances when they appear... ther is no point in saying you were the best... if you can't handle the pressure... that is associated with winning premierships...
Rooboy,
Normally rhere are two, three, perhaps even 4 teams that are "capable" of winning the Grand Final.
Usually, all of thses teams can play under pressure, but only one of them will win the GF.
No problem with having the one winner, but often that one winner isn't the best team
To rank Carlton 2nd in 1999 and Essendon 3rd is COMPLETELY disprepectful of Essendons 18 H&A wins. What point is there for we fans to go each and every week, if the home and away wins are going to be meningless ? That's right, no point.
I don't get you. I've explained time and time again that the GF would still be there in my system, but you still spout rubbish like, "But they didn't play well when it counts"
Well, under my system, if you don;t play well when it counts, you won't win the Grand Final. WOW. Big change there (sarcastically). See.....nothing changes. If you don't perform on the day, you won't win it.
BUT, I repeat BUT, you WILL be recognised for being the Home and away premiers, while the GF winner will be champins of that 4 week tournament ONLY. It's really not that hard a concept. Really, it's not.
Normally rhere are two, three, perhaps even 4 teams that are "capable" of winning the Grand Final.
Usually, all of thses teams can play under pressure, but only one of them will win the GF.
No problem with having the one winner, but often that one winner isn't the best team
To rank Carlton 2nd in 1999 and Essendon 3rd is COMPLETELY disprepectful of Essendons 18 H&A wins. What point is there for we fans to go each and every week, if the home and away wins are going to be meningless ? That's right, no point.
I don't get you. I've explained time and time again that the GF would still be there in my system, but you still spout rubbish like, "But they didn't play well when it counts"
Well, under my system, if you don;t play well when it counts, you won't win the Grand Final. WOW. Big change there (sarcastically). See.....nothing changes. If you don't perform on the day, you won't win it.
BUT, I repeat BUT, you WILL be recognised for being the Home and away premiers, while the GF winner will be champins of that 4 week tournament ONLY. It's really not that hard a concept. Really, it's not.
Dan24
It may not be a hard concept, but nobody here seems to want it. It seems to me that most people are perfectly happy with playing finals to find a champion team....one year, one champion. Now, is the rejection of your idea too hard a concept for you to understand?
It may not be a hard concept, but nobody here seems to want it. It seems to me that most people are perfectly happy with playing finals to find a champion team....one year, one champion. Now, is the rejection of your idea too hard a concept for you to understand?
Yes, it is too hard for me to understand.
I don't accept people not agreeing with this. Anything else, opinion are fine. You know me by now. I'll happily argue and people have the right to opinions on any other matters. I am quite an open minded person.
But not recognising the top team is a miscarriage of justice.
Essendon performance of 21 wins this year was one of the ost remarkable in any sport and because of our f*cked up system, it was basically irrelevant.
I FIRMLY believe people don't like change, but once the change is thrust upon them (for the better, as why would you change for the worse?) they will accept it, as they will see it is better. That is why the change is made in the first place. Because it is better.
I don't accept people not agreeing with this. Anything else, opinion are fine. You know me by now. I'll happily argue and people have the right to opinions on any other matters. I am quite an open minded person.
But not recognising the top team is a miscarriage of justice.
Essendon performance of 21 wins this year was one of the ost remarkable in any sport and because of our f*cked up system, it was basically irrelevant.
I FIRMLY believe people don't like change, but once the change is thrust upon them (for the better, as why would you change for the worse?) they will accept it, as they will see it is better. That is why the change is made in the first place. Because it is better.
Yup....with you there on that one Sandie!!!!!
Ooooops.....forgot to add these thingys!!!!
Dan,
What is the point of recognition..... if no one recognises it?? Sounds stupid, but read on.
I will use some of your examples. Along the lines of your gold medal example in the swimming, do athletes honestly give a toss whether they are ranked no1 but don't end up with a medal? Does anyone but u give a sh1t about their rankings except as a guide on the proceedings of the race?? No. Despite the books saying that we should should recognise no1's, the broader community gives no recognition to rankings- no ceremony no nothin. Do we have a ceremony rewarding each newly crowned no1?? In YOUR ideal world we would. If it was me I would sincerely not give a shit what ranking I was, as wouldn’t most people. I want a gold medal.
People only associate the glory in the Olympics with the gold medalists..... as they associate the glory in footy with the grandfinalists. It is unfair! I know! U know! Everyone f*ckin knows! But fair is boring! Face it. Fans love to say "poor buggas- went through the season unbeaten and got robbed in the granny"- It is ENTERTAINMENT. It adds far more than it detracts. These one off's are forever remembered. Our culture loves to have the whole season hinging on ONE game, irrespective of what preceded the game. I know this really shits you, but live with it. Knowing the premiers before the season is out takes something away from the game, (and don't give me this "perfect" English premier league shit again- they've lived with it for ages- as we have with our system).
You say the olympics doesn't really show the true "premier" sportsmen/women, and that these "record books" u always refer to state who is no 1. Fine. But who the f*ck cares who is No 1??? Lets use tennis as an analogy. Under your system- the number one ranked player in tennis at the end of the year would get the trophy (premiership). But it just doesn't work like that, the winner of individual tournaments get recognition (and trophys) for their achievements. We will always remember the winner of the one event, with everything hinging on it, moreso than the number one ranked player. For example, if a player was consistant finals (never winning tournaments), but managed to finish the year ranked no1 due to this consistency, he wouldn't be remembered as a top player, but the guy who managed to win two grand slams and flop in every other tournament would. Once again, unfair as the second bloke didn't consistently perform over the whole season.... stiff shit... he rose to the challenge when it counted.... just like teams do in our comp during the finals (Adelaide :mad
.
Test the "Sporting recognition etiqeutte in the 90's-Dan 24 Style" for me. Run along. Go find me who was ranked no1 during 1972 in the 400m freestyle from one of your stat books. WHAT??? Couldn't find it?? No hard copy recognition despite you constantly stating that this achievement is what swimmers are recognised for??? Geeze, Never saw that one coming!!
An easier one then- find me who won the gold in that event at the Munich Olympics.
"Olympics show the glory, but the history books show the true no1's and recognize them accordingly"
Where is the recognition Dan??? NO-ONE RECOGNIZES THEM!!!! These days, sure, rankings yada yada yada. The minority such as yourself recognizes these, not the general public- (whom convincing, I'm sure plays a significant role in the reason for preaching this system). And I doubt that the history books actually do recognze them with a constant running tally anyway. And BTW- what does the number one ranked individual receive- Sweet FA!... no premierships like you are suggesting.... NOTHING!
This is also the case with the AFL- even if your system was in place- i doubt anyone (public minus u) would actually care. U recognize the minor premiership- WE DON'T. U recgnize the No 1 Archer in the world, the rest of Austrlia recognizes Simon Fairweather's achievements today.
MY POINT IS-
IF YOUR SYSTEM IS IMPLEMENTED, WILL ANYONE ACTUALLY GIVE A SHIT ABOUT WHAT THE RECORD BOOKS SAY? .... just like they don't champion the no 1 ranked people from other sports!
OR
WILL THE MAINSTREAM COMMUNITY STILL ASSOCIATE THE GLORY AND PREMIERSHIP WITH THE GRAND FINAL WINNING TEAM NO MATTER WHAT THE BLOODY BOOKS SAY???? .... just like the public totally ignores the rankings of swimmers/tennis players, and gives the glory to gold medalists, tournament winners (premiers).
We have a different culture to England- and our code must represent this. It’s not that our system is right, its what our culture has become accustomed to over the past century.
As opposed to your totally unrelated example of change (moving towards a national competition in the 80's), changes in the overall system of awarding recognition is completely different. We have become accustomed to OUR SYSTEM, and our traditionalist psyche means change in this right through to grass roots level (local under 11s) will not be openly embraced.... and it will be almost impossible to implement! Why would we want to change something so successful. It is NOT WRONG to have a different way of going about it, no matter how "unfair" OUR way may seem. If it ain’t broken, don’t fix it. Your way isn’t wrong either, just not appropriate considering the circumstances.
This season was unique (because your team wasn't too bad
) but imagine it came down to a percentage fight (equal games won) betwen Essendon and Carlton (under your system), and Essendon had to lose by less than 20 goals to remain in top spot (win the title). If they lost to Collingwood by 10 goals in rd22, imagine they started celebrating the “premiership” after this loss, looking like total dickheads (to us in Australia- in England they do this regularly and would look normal
). Sure some people would care, but where is the glory of the premiership? where is the final siren of the grand final to signal “the moment” you've won. In England they have lived their whole lives through it. It is the ONLY way THEY know. But NOT HERE!!! OUR way is the ONLY way WE know.
The popualtion can not be “brain washed” (and just brush all of their current beliefs aside) into believing it in their hearts that the team at the top of the ladder after 22 rounds are the premiers, no matter what the AFL premiership guidelines say. I know who i regard as premiers. I know who won the past twenty grand finals. i do not know who won the past minor premierships before 95 and don’t care to know, whether your system had have been in place or not. Rightly or wrongly we remember single matches/events, and thats the way our brains work, dan24 system or no dan24 system.
Under the current circustances, even if your philosophy was in place, it would be totally disregarded by the wider community. Would this faze u? Olympic swimmers (ranked no1) getting no recognition from the wider community obviously doesn't. The f*ckin books tell us the truth don't they Dan? But what happens when no-one gives a sh1t about the rules Dan?
So is this what u want?????? The “BOOKS” saying that North won the premiership in 98, Essendon in 99, but no-one giving a shit about these newly implemted rules by the AFL, therefore still regarding Adelaide and North the best anyway???
If u do feel this way- i.e. recognition is there but not taken seriously, and the whole communities’ perceptions on the premiers are meaningless to u, have your f*ckin footy record and history books’ listings of premiers and let us hold OUR TRUE PREMIERS in higher esteem.
Have your system, and the f*ck all changes in the footy record it ends up bringing in. People still won’t believe in/ remember/ place any significance on what your fighting for- the minor premiers wining the premiership, they’ll still only give a shit about the Grand Final of your f*ckin four week- knockout- finals -tournament.
Dan- Please don't call me a foul mouthed moron on the next page ok! .... oh... and don't bring this thread back up in two months!
[This message has been edited by Westy Boy (edited 23 November 2000).]
What is the point of recognition..... if no one recognises it?? Sounds stupid, but read on.
I will use some of your examples. Along the lines of your gold medal example in the swimming, do athletes honestly give a toss whether they are ranked no1 but don't end up with a medal? Does anyone but u give a sh1t about their rankings except as a guide on the proceedings of the race?? No. Despite the books saying that we should should recognise no1's, the broader community gives no recognition to rankings- no ceremony no nothin. Do we have a ceremony rewarding each newly crowned no1?? In YOUR ideal world we would. If it was me I would sincerely not give a shit what ranking I was, as wouldn’t most people. I want a gold medal.
People only associate the glory in the Olympics with the gold medalists..... as they associate the glory in footy with the grandfinalists. It is unfair! I know! U know! Everyone f*ckin knows! But fair is boring! Face it. Fans love to say "poor buggas- went through the season unbeaten and got robbed in the granny"- It is ENTERTAINMENT. It adds far more than it detracts. These one off's are forever remembered. Our culture loves to have the whole season hinging on ONE game, irrespective of what preceded the game. I know this really shits you, but live with it. Knowing the premiers before the season is out takes something away from the game, (and don't give me this "perfect" English premier league shit again- they've lived with it for ages- as we have with our system).
You say the olympics doesn't really show the true "premier" sportsmen/women, and that these "record books" u always refer to state who is no 1. Fine. But who the f*ck cares who is No 1??? Lets use tennis as an analogy. Under your system- the number one ranked player in tennis at the end of the year would get the trophy (premiership). But it just doesn't work like that, the winner of individual tournaments get recognition (and trophys) for their achievements. We will always remember the winner of the one event, with everything hinging on it, moreso than the number one ranked player. For example, if a player was consistant finals (never winning tournaments), but managed to finish the year ranked no1 due to this consistency, he wouldn't be remembered as a top player, but the guy who managed to win two grand slams and flop in every other tournament would. Once again, unfair as the second bloke didn't consistently perform over the whole season.... stiff shit... he rose to the challenge when it counted.... just like teams do in our comp during the finals (Adelaide :mad
Test the "Sporting recognition etiqeutte in the 90's-Dan 24 Style" for me. Run along. Go find me who was ranked no1 during 1972 in the 400m freestyle from one of your stat books. WHAT??? Couldn't find it?? No hard copy recognition despite you constantly stating that this achievement is what swimmers are recognised for??? Geeze, Never saw that one coming!!
"Olympics show the glory, but the history books show the true no1's and recognize them accordingly"
Where is the recognition Dan??? NO-ONE RECOGNIZES THEM!!!! These days, sure, rankings yada yada yada. The minority such as yourself recognizes these, not the general public- (whom convincing, I'm sure plays a significant role in the reason for preaching this system). And I doubt that the history books actually do recognze them with a constant running tally anyway. And BTW- what does the number one ranked individual receive- Sweet FA!... no premierships like you are suggesting.... NOTHING!
This is also the case with the AFL- even if your system was in place- i doubt anyone (public minus u) would actually care. U recognize the minor premiership- WE DON'T. U recgnize the No 1 Archer in the world, the rest of Austrlia recognizes Simon Fairweather's achievements today.
MY POINT IS-
IF YOUR SYSTEM IS IMPLEMENTED, WILL ANYONE ACTUALLY GIVE A SHIT ABOUT WHAT THE RECORD BOOKS SAY? .... just like they don't champion the no 1 ranked people from other sports!
OR
WILL THE MAINSTREAM COMMUNITY STILL ASSOCIATE THE GLORY AND PREMIERSHIP WITH THE GRAND FINAL WINNING TEAM NO MATTER WHAT THE BLOODY BOOKS SAY???? .... just like the public totally ignores the rankings of swimmers/tennis players, and gives the glory to gold medalists, tournament winners (premiers).
We have a different culture to England- and our code must represent this. It’s not that our system is right, its what our culture has become accustomed to over the past century.
As opposed to your totally unrelated example of change (moving towards a national competition in the 80's), changes in the overall system of awarding recognition is completely different. We have become accustomed to OUR SYSTEM, and our traditionalist psyche means change in this right through to grass roots level (local under 11s) will not be openly embraced.... and it will be almost impossible to implement! Why would we want to change something so successful. It is NOT WRONG to have a different way of going about it, no matter how "unfair" OUR way may seem. If it ain’t broken, don’t fix it. Your way isn’t wrong either, just not appropriate considering the circumstances.
This season was unique (because your team wasn't too bad
The popualtion can not be “brain washed” (and just brush all of their current beliefs aside) into believing it in their hearts that the team at the top of the ladder after 22 rounds are the premiers, no matter what the AFL premiership guidelines say. I know who i regard as premiers. I know who won the past twenty grand finals. i do not know who won the past minor premierships before 95 and don’t care to know, whether your system had have been in place or not. Rightly or wrongly we remember single matches/events, and thats the way our brains work, dan24 system or no dan24 system.
Under the current circustances, even if your philosophy was in place, it would be totally disregarded by the wider community. Would this faze u? Olympic swimmers (ranked no1) getting no recognition from the wider community obviously doesn't. The f*ckin books tell us the truth don't they Dan? But what happens when no-one gives a sh1t about the rules Dan?
So is this what u want?????? The “BOOKS” saying that North won the premiership in 98, Essendon in 99, but no-one giving a shit about these newly implemted rules by the AFL, therefore still regarding Adelaide and North the best anyway???
If u do feel this way- i.e. recognition is there but not taken seriously, and the whole communities’ perceptions on the premiers are meaningless to u, have your f*ckin footy record and history books’ listings of premiers and let us hold OUR TRUE PREMIERS in higher esteem.
Have your system, and the f*ck all changes in the footy record it ends up bringing in. People still won’t believe in/ remember/ place any significance on what your fighting for- the minor premiers wining the premiership, they’ll still only give a shit about the Grand Final of your f*ckin four week- knockout- finals -tournament.
Dan- Please don't call me a foul mouthed moron on the next page ok! .... oh... and don't bring this thread back up in two months!
[This message has been edited by Westy Boy (edited 23 November 2000).]
🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.
Sandie we could get one more post if you apologised for being PROUD OF YOUR CLUB CHEATING & GETTING CAUGHT... surely it is not too big a price to pay...
and think you will be helping out Grendel...
Come on, shows us what sort of girl you are...
and think you will be helping out Grendel...
Come on, shows us what sort of girl you are...
Dan... I was just thinking... does the Australian Soccer League decide their Premiership with a Grand Final or who Finishes on top of the Ladder???
I think it is a Grand Final... all Australians must think your idea is just plain stupid... even the soccer boys prefer it our way...
I think it is a Grand Final... all Australians must think your idea is just plain stupid... even the soccer boys prefer it our way...
Get a grip Rooboy I've already said that I'm not proud we cheated, I am not saying it again as it is pointless, you will still keep bringing it up, anyway another post for Grendel.
Hey Grendel aren't you going to keep your thread going?
------------------
Mantis
Hey Grendel aren't you going to keep your thread going?
------------------
Mantis
