Is Dan24's finals system right or wrong? VOTE NOW!

[Same Old's]

Originally posted by ptw:
Yes I do think that a system where the best team is decided in 2 hours is right. The crux of my arguement is that I don't want the finals system devalued to the level of the Ansett cup (exactly what would the difference be Dan ? - except in 1 comp you atrt with 16 and the other with 8 teams).


The problem is that the finals under "your" system would not mean more than the Ansett cup which is not very much in the scheme of things. I see this as a backward step. Why in fact would you exclude the bottom 8 from "your" "finals"....it is a seperate competition anyway ?

There is a difference ptw. In the "new finals series" the teams involved would be of "high quality" as they would have proved themselves through the H&A season to be capable of joining in this elete series.

In the Ansett Cup, often teams don't put the best teams out for each game, so clubs that don't do normamaly as well in the regular season, often make the pre-season grand final.

[This message has been edited by Same Old's (edited 28 November 2000).]

 

[ptw]

Same Olds

yes I would agree with you under the current system. But under the proposed system the premier has already been decided. The only thing up for grabs is the "4 week competition Trophy" not the "Best team in the comp" trophy.

If you were a shot at next season's minor (now major) premiership, why would you risk fielding your stars in the GF ? As a player why would you risk injury or suspension by going in hard, and risk jeapordising next years chances in the comp that really matters ?

My view therefore is that under "Dan's" system the finals would become the ansett cup, played at the end of the year.

ptw

[This message has been edited by ptw (edited 28 November 2000).]

 

[Port Adelaide 1870]

PTW,
Dont be so hard on yourself, I happen to find what you say, enlightening, at times humorous, but most of all well thought out and informative.

full of F*cken Sh*t ? F*cken never!!
Ive never seen you F*cken,Bl**dy, Sh*t,C**t,ever abuse F*cken anyone,especially some of the D*ck Head comments made by some.

Oh, what the heck it just aint me !!!!

and you are pretty right about what you say.

We are all here to state opinion, sometimes backed by fact, but none of us is Omnipotent,


Oops, except for one contributor that is...

So lets just keep putting our points forward.

Keep it up PTW....


PA1870

PS. Shinboners, thanks for your personal remarks about me they were exceptionally enlightening !!!!

 

[sainter]

ptw,

It's amazing that someone like Dan, who studies "Profesional Writing" at university, still has to resort to personal attacks and swearing in order to get his point across.

Obviously the art of persuasive writing has yet to be covered.

And no, I am not even going to bother to put forward my two cents worth because this topic has been done to death, and then covered even more.

I also should apologise for returning this thread to the top of the page again.

------------------
Fortius Quo Fidelius

 

[elt]

sainter,

It really shouldn't be necessary to resort to the name calling either when you consider that no matter what anyone says Dan already knows he's right

Damn, now I've gone and returned this thread up to the top....

 

[Shinboners]

Sainter

Before you can learn the art of writing, you must learn the art of reading, and one tends to think that the milkshake kid hasn't mastered the ability to comprehend the thoughts of other's.

 

[Dan26]

ptw,

You have no idea, mate. Try to understand Okay.

The Ansett Cup is played at the start of the season. The final series, culminating with the Grand Final is played at the END. BIG difference. Even if it's a separate tournament, it's a huge difference. By playing the Grand Final as the last match of the season, it becomes (and already is) an event. The "hype" and prestige surrounding this event is huge. The FA CUP is the last match of the season, and does it lack anything? NO.

I have already stated MANY times, that the FA CUP final is only the conclusion of a tournament. But does this mean the match is not big ? Of course not. The macth is HUGE anyway. It's enourmous, even though the winner is NOT "whole season" champions; they are only FA CUP tournament champions.

What makes the FA CUP big is the fact it is the last macth of the season. Accordingly, it is a "celebration" and an "event" to conclude the seaosn. Our Grand Final has never found the best team of the year anyway, so why use it to call someone premiers?? Use 6 months to decide the "premiers", then use an exciting 4 week tournament, for the "exciting", knockout stuff, which gives team 2 through to 8 a chance at Grand Final glory (which they've had for the last 100 years anyway)

Did Chelsea care that manU had already won the premiership when they won this years FA CUP? Of course not. They would have loved to win, the premiership, of course, but they were still "over the moon" about winning the FA CUP. It's an event to conclude the season.

Comparing it to the Ansett Cup is idiotic, from you. This is NOT a pre-season competition. This is an elite 8-team knockout competition to CONCLUDE the season in a glorious fashion.

Trust me, I've thought all this through. I wouldn't be arguing this unless I knew I was right. Every argument from people against me, can be countered by a "logical" answer. I'm not just making stuff up. This IS the way things SHOULD be.

Your last post where you compared it to the Ansett Cup and declared it would "lose" something, because the whole season isn't riding on it (why should the whole season ride on one match anyway. What's the point of the first 6 months, if they don't mean anything?), have been logically rebuffed here again, as they were in previous posts.

Don't you "GET IT" ?

 

[ptw]

Dan

yes I do get it, I just don't think it is any good.

You are having your cake and eating it too. You cannot say not to think of how things are but to think of how they "should" be....and then use the GF as it is now....as an indication of how it would be under "your" scheme.

We used to have a night premiership, played at the end of the season, for a cup and a "premiership - night premiers". It meant nothing as the real competition to decide the "premiers" ie the best team in the competition was going on elsewhere.

I really don't see what the difference would be. You would have one competition to decide the premiers, then a completely new one just for the sake of it...for tradition....because people like finals....but there is nothing at stake, so the overall value of the "finals" would diminish. btw they could no longer be called "finals" and the real competition would already be "finalised".

I don't like your FA Cup analogy. Firstly the FA cup is played throughout the year, not at the end. It has different teams to the Leauge, and any club worth their salt would gladly trade every Cup they won for one League Premiership. They cheer and all that, but at the end of the Ansett cup the winner does a lap of the oval and all the players jump on each other and take photos, the fans brag...but its nonsense.

Here's where it sits for me....

your plan, when taken in isolation has merit.

However when compared to the current system it really only does one thing and that is recognise the minor premiers - that is a plus...no arguements here.

I think the point you miss is that it brings with it disadvantages as well. The finals system will disappear. It will be replaced by a seperate competition which would mean less than it does now.

So we have a choice....provide more recognition to the minor premiers but lose the finals (please don't say we woud still have them becuase they by definition would not be finals) OR stuff the minor premiers and keep the finals.

I'll have the finals any day thanks.

I can hear you now...."Don't you get it, you will still have the finals". My view is Dan that we would not. Just another knock-out comp, but this one played at the end of the season. This is a competion to end the season, but I cannot see how you could use the term "glorious"...where i the glory ?

ptw

p.s. congratulations.... a whole post without 1 '*'. Now just cut the condacending tone. You do not know more than me....you just have a diferent opinion.

 

[McKenna for PM]

I'm coming in late (as if I have the time to read 16 pages worth of this?) so please forgive me if any of this is misinterpreted but from what I have read I agree with ptw.

Leaving the minor premiers as season premiers is not just taking a step back, it is boring. What Dan24 has proposed is quite simply moving the Ansett Cup to post-season, except that it is the eight best teams.

The best team of the season should be able to cut it when it counts. Under Dan's system, for example, Geelong would have stood a far greater chance to win the premiership than they did. The fact is that Geelong in the late 80s and early 90s choked under pressure, and thus weren't the top team. Sydney in 1996 and St. Kilda in 1997 were not the top teams either, since they choked under pressure. Yet under the proposed system they would be. That is boring footy.

Furthermore, having a separate, elite, post-season affair would result in possibly two top teams each year. Who claims dominance? Sure, the second comp may be exciting, but I would expect it to be treated more like an Ansett Cup. That would not be conducive to good football.

 

[Dan26]

PTW,

I don't think you do "get it"

Let's look at the season, in blocks. Firstly, we have the H&A, which comprises 95% of the season. Then we have the finals series, which comprises 5% of the season.

Now, let's "suppose" for a minute that the finals series, did "lack something". It wouldn't, but let's "pretend".

So, what if it lacked something ? The final series doens't deserve to have as much prestige as the home and away, anyway, so what's the problem? It would mean that the "95%" portion of the season would actually gain something, while the "5%" portion would lose something.

Don't you think it wold be better for the competition, if the part of the season that comprises 95% was given more glory and recognition? After all, it is the bulk of the season. It's the meat and potatoes. In many ways it's the most important part, in terms of "pure football", because this is when nearly all the seasons football matches are played. Whether the league considers a season a success is based upon the gate receipts and so forth from the home and away season.

I mean, who cares, if the small "5%" of the season loses something. It's VASTLY more important to get the "95%" right.

But the Grand Final wouldn't lose anything anyway. You talked about the night premiership that was in vogue some 30 years ago as a knockout tournament to conclude the season. Thie was played between the teams that MISSED the top 4 (i.e teams 5-12). How could you even bring this up????

I've used the FA CUP example tons of times, and I'don't know how many more times I can say it. You go on about the differences between the FA CUP and our finals series, but what about the similarities? You conveniently igonre the similarities, to suit your own argument, don't you? I realise the FA CUP is played during the season, but what's that got to do with anything?

The main crux of the matter, is that the FA CUP is a knockout tournament, with the Final being played as the last match of the season. It's done after the "top spot" premiership has been decided.

That's how they do it, and the match is huge. It's an event to conclude the season, and it givs the winner "glory". Ask any winner and they will tell you how important it is.

But why is it so big PTW? Why ? The winner isn't "premiers" so why in the bloody hell is the FA CUP so big?

I'll tell you why:

Under my system, the Grand Final remains the biggest match of the year - by far. In soccer, the "top spot" premiership is bigger than the FA CUP tournament as a whole. But the actual FA CUP Grand Final match itself, is bigger than any premiership match. Sure, the FA CUP tournament overall isn't as big as the top spot premiership, but that one particular FA CUP match, which decides a trophy "based on one match", is the biggest individual match of the year.

Exactly the same under my proposal. The "home and away" premiership will be bigger than the "elite-8-team-knockout-cup", but the actual Grand Final itself will be the biggest individiual one-off match of the year - by an absolute mile. It will be the only match where a trophy will be decided based on the result of one match (The pre-season cup doesn't count. That's pre-season. This is the ACTUAL season)

What makes the home and way season big is not one particular match, but the combined cumulative affect of adding all 22 matches together. Every match is worth one win, and adding them all tgether makes the season big.

Under my system, the Grand Final and FA CUP's are huge events, where the overall tournament isn't as big as the "top spot stuff", but the Grand Final is easily the biggest match of the season. It all comes down to that one match. Win it and you win the tournament. Lose it, and you come runner-up.

I can't stress that enough. I havn't written and described it, in that light before, so maybe you'll now see where I'm coming from, when I say that the Grand Final will always be that special day of the year.

[This message has been edited by Dan24 (edited 29 November 2000).]

 

[ptw]

Dan

I will paste a few of your paragraphs to add some struture....


"Let's look at the season, in blocks. Firstly, we have the H&A, which comprises 95% of the season. Then we have the finals series, which comprises 5% of the season.

Now, let's "suppose" for a minute that the finals series, did "lack something". It wouldn't, but let's "pretend".

So, what if it lacked something ? The final series doens't deserve to have as much prestige as the home and away, anyway, so what's the problem? It would mean that the "95%" portion of the season would actually gain something, while the "5%" portion would lose something."

ptw
Sorry but I disagree. You are giving equal weight to every game, whereas under the present system the finals are far more significant as there is more at stake....so it is not 95% to 5%. I won't quote an alternative as it wouldn't mean anything, but by taking each game to be of the same significance in the current system is wrong. If Essendon are top in rd 22 and they play Collingwood who are last then you put as much weight on this, in the current system, as the GF...nonsense.

"Don't you think it wold be better for the competition, if the part of the season that comprises 95% was given more glory and recognition? After all, it is the bulk of the season. It's the meat and potatoes. In many ways it's the most important part, in terms of "pure football", because this is when nearly all the seasons football matches are played. Whether the league considers a season a success is based upon the gate receipts and so forth from the home and away season."

ptw
To be honest, yes I do think that the H&A winners should be given more recognition....but they should not be premiers....or even publicly recognised as the top team, especially at the expense of the finals series.

"I mean, who cares, if the small "5%" of the season loses something. It's VASTLY more important to get the "95%" right."

hmmm but if it is 50/50 or even 60/40 in favour of the finals then the boot is on the other foot.

But the Grand Final wouldn't lose anything anyway. You talked about the night premiership that was in vogue some 30 years ago as a knockout tournament to conclude the season. Thie was played between the teams that MISSED the top 4 (i.e teams 5-12). How could you even bring this up????

"Because it is a meaningless competiton...as you picked up, because the premiership was being decided elsewhere. IMHO that is what the finals would be reduced to under your model."

I've used the FA CUP example tons of times, and I'don't know how many more times I can say it. You go on about the differences between the FA CUP and our finals series, but what about the similarities? You conveniently igonre the similarities, to suit your own argument, don't you? I realise the FA CUP is played during the season, but what's that got to do with anything?

The main crux of the matter, is that the FA CUP is a knockout tournament, with the Final being played as the last match of the season. It's done after the "top spot" premiership has been decided.

That's how they do it, and the match is huge. It's an event to conclude the season, and it givs the winner "glory". Ask any winner and they will tell you how important it is.

But why is it so big PTW? Why ? The winner isn't "premiers" so why in the bloody hell is the FA CUP so big?


Under my system, the Grand Final remains the biggest match of the year - by far. In soccer, the "top spot" premiership is bigger than the FA CUP tournament as a whole. But the actual FA CUP Grand Final match itself, is bigger than any premiership match. Sure, the FA CUP tournament overall isn't as big as the top spot premiership, but that one particular FA CUP match, which decides a trophy "based on one match", is the biggest individual match of the year.

"Indeed the FA cup is big, not as big as the leauge....more a consolation prize than anything but big.

Why are the WSC finals also big. Why don't they just stop after the round robin and declare the top team the winner.

This is the problem with drawing examples from other codes, there are so many of them."

Exactly the same under my proposal. The "home and away" premiership will be bigger than the "elite-8-team-knockout-cup", but the actual Grand Final itself will be the biggest individiual one-off match of the year - by an absolute mile. It will be the only match where a trophy will be decided based on the result of one match (The pre-season cup doesn't count. That's pre-season. This is the ACTUAL season)
ptw
"No. No. No. No. It is not the Actual season anymore. That finished 4 weeks ago. It is an entirely new season...just like the Ansett cup the only difference is timing but that means nothing."

What makes the home and way season big is not one particular match, but the combined cumulative affect of adding all 22 matches together. Every match is worth one win, and adding them all tgether makes the season big.

Under my system, the Grand Final and FA CUP's are huge events, where the overall tournament isn't as big as the "top spot stuff", but the Grand Final is easily the biggest match of the season. It all comes down to that one match. Win it and you win the tournament. Lose it, and you come runner-up.

I can't stress that enough. I havn't written and described it, in that light before, so maybe you'll now see where I'm coming from, when I say that the Grand Final will always be that special day of the year.

ptw
Maybe. But not as special as it is now...because now there is something to play for....under your scheme clubs would rest players or players would not go in hard because they might risk the chances in the real comp in the next year.....it would become even more of a theatre show. Look at what happened to state of origin ? Should....in theory be the biggest game of the year (and was in SA !!)but lost all its meaning because there was nothing attached to it. They , made up trophies (the Malcolm Blight Cup) Medals (the Fos Williams Medal) but it still meant nothing as the real game was going on elsewhere. If they played it as the last game of the year do you think it would suddenly be the biggest game of the year ? Of course not.

[This message has been edited by Dan24 (edited 29 November 2000).]

ptw

p.s. I have never posted inside someelse's post so I hope it works.

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

Dan, I don't think you "get it"!!! You're not listening to us. Trust us, we have thought this through. We wouldn't be arguing unless we knew we were right!

Familiar? It works both ways. It is a contentious issue and there are two sides who can both see what the other side is saying but believe totally in what they themselves are saying. The mind you see is a mysterious thing. It doesn't send out thoughts that are exactly in line with everybody else's.This is not a society of droids that should be capable of all seeing things in the same light.

People of differing nationalities and religions will go to war because they both know they are right. Guess what? They are both right!!!! Guess what again??? They are both wrong!!!!

This is not Animal Farm where all supporters are right but some are more right than others.

By the way, I would have thought if something was difficult to obtain you would fight your way through the 95% to strive to become part of the 5%.

------------------
mens sana in corpore sano - a sound mind in a sound body

 

[Hawkforce.]

No trees were harmed in the writing of this thread!

 

[McKenna for PM]

Dan24, may I draw your attention to a vital flaw in your argument?

You drew a comparison between soccer and AFL, suggesting that since the FA Cup is fought hard, a similar knockout comp in AFL would also be.

You are making the assumption that what is done in soccer will be done in AFL. Not necessarily - for at least two reasons.

1. A hard, tough match in AFL almost always carries with it more injuries than a big soccer game. This is because AFL involves more contact than soccer, and AFL clubs are far less likely to take the risks they would in a GF under the current system.

2. Soccer players are paid a great deal more than AFL players, so they are probably more likely to risk injuries which would threaten to impede their progress (and hence income) the following year.

This all points to an AFL version of the FA Cup which would be far more akin to the Ansett Cup - an event whereby few teams play to their best potential. Why would already injury-riddled AFL teams be keen to risk their players in a competition that doesn't even give them the chance to become premiers, instead of giving themselves more recovery time for the real competition the following year?

 

[Same Old's]

Originally posted by McKenna for PM:
2. Soccer players are paid a great deal more than AFL players, so they are probably more likely to risk injuries which would threaten to impede their progress (and hence income) the following year.?

Depends on which country you are talking about. But if they are paid more wouldn't they wan't to not play in case they do get injured.?

Originally posted by McKenna for PM:
This all points to an AFL version of the FA Cup which would be far more akin to the Ansett Cup - an event whereby few teams play to their best potential. Why would already injury-riddled AFL teams be keen to risk their players in a competition that doesn't even give them the chance to become premiers, instead of giving themselves more recovery time for the real competition the following year?

The "new" finals system is not the Ansett Cup. The finals system has the best teams int the country, while the Ansett cup doesn't necessarily have the best teams, since they are trying out young players etc.

You then say that players wouldn't risk injury in this "new" finals series. They'll haave six months to recover from an injury, if they were to get one.

You can also turn the table's around and say why do teams risk the players in the current H&A system, especially if you know you are going to make the finals.

 

[McKenna for PM]

If a soccer player is injured, then he is far more likely to have amassed sufficient retirement savings to leave the game than an AFL player. An AFL player, who makes less money, needs to maintain a longer career to make good money, and taking unnecessary risks is not conducive to a long career.

The new finals system is a lot like the Ansett Cup, because it doesn't decide the premiership. Teams will have no great desire to win at all costs since the HA games constitute the real season. Imagine how boring the final round would be if the premiers had already decided?

No thanks.

 

[Dan26]

Originally posted by McKenna for PM:
If a soccer player is injured, then he is far more likely to have amassed sufficient retirement savings to leave the game than an AFL player. An AFL player, who makes less money, needs to maintain a longer career to make good money, and taking unnecessary risks is not conducive to a long career.

The new finals system is a lot like the Ansett Cup, because it doesn't decide the premiership. Teams will have no great desire to win at all costs since the HA games constitute the real season. Imagine how boring the final round would be if the premiers had already decided?

No thanks.

The FA CUP doesn't decide the premiership, either.

Then again, in a way it does, because the winner is PREMIERS of the FA CUP. In this finals system, the winner is "premiers" of that elite, prestigious, top 8 team, knockout tournament. There will be TWO trophys to win.

There are ALREADY two trophys to win, anyway (the McClelland for top spot), so it's not really changing anything. It's just changing the "recogntition" factor- and deservadly so !

It's really just the same as it is now. Currently, the winner of the Grand Final is "called" whole season premiers, but in reality, all they have won is a 4 week tournament. Currently, you only win the premiership by winning thr finals series, anyway, so what's the difference. None !

The football public isn't stupid. They know that currently, even though the GF winner is called "whole season premiers", that they only get this accolade for performing over 4 weeks. Their performances in the 22 week H&A season are basicaly irrelevant, so why should we call them "whole season champions". That's stupid !

It's just playing on our suspicions that already exist. The football public KNOW that the best team doesn't always win the GF, and they KNOW that they only need to play well for 4 weeks to be called "whole season premiers", so OBVIOUSLY it would make more sense, if the GF winner was only called "finals series" champion.

Since the 22 week home and away season is irrelevant once the final serirs starts, what is the big deal about being called "whole seaosn champions" anyway??? I mean, the H&A has been declaraed irrelevant, and this is even acknowledged by the media. So if the winner was only caled "finals series champions", it would just be doing it how it is done now!!!

The only difference is that the winner only gets "called" final series premiers, instead of being called "whole season premiers". But that's no big deal, because currently, the H&A season is irrelevant once the final series starts, so there is no link between the two anyway!!! We would just be calling the GF winner "final series champions" and we would NOT call them "whole seaosn champions". Giving them recognition for the WHOLE seaosn when they have just won a 4 week tournament is ridiculous. And like I said, it is 'basically' that way NOW, since the H&A is declared irrelevant once the finals begin, anyway! See what I mean !!!! It's basically two separate tournament right now, even though it isn't "officially" acknowledged as such.

I don't think you people realise how big the FA CUP is as an "event", even though it DOESN'T decide the "whole season champion", and it never has and never will.


[This message has been edited by Dan24 (edited 01 December 2000).]

 

[ptw]

que ?

 

[Dan26]

Originally posted by McKenna for PM:
Imagine how boring the final round would be if the premiers had already decided?

No thanks.

This is such an ignorant comment and very frustrating to reply to.

Let's look at Round 22 in 2000. Essendon were already 5 games clear and they could not lose the McClelland trophy (top spot). It was impossible.

They hadn't won the premiership, yet, but this couldn't be won until the 4 week tournament starts, anyway. Eveyone was just waiting - and waiting - for the finals to start.

This year, Round 22 was boring. You act as though this years round 22 was interesting (in regards to top spot), but in reality, this years round 22 was just as boring, as it would be in my system. There would be NO difference.

It doens't matter whether you use my system, or the current system, the GF winner can't be found until the finals start anyway. This is the MOST IMPORTANT POINT. That why it should be a spearate tournament.

It already IS a separate tournament, if you look at it logically (I know that's hard to do)

The final series, which currently gets a trophy is declared irrelevant and meaningless once the finals series begins. That's how it is NOW. Sounds separate to me! It's just not acknowledged that way "officially", I know, but in practice it is basically separate. That's why the H&A is declared irrelevant !!!!!!

It's amzing how people claim that the premiership already being won by Round 22 is boring. Essendon having already wrapped up top spot and waiting for the finals to start is no different in terms of "excitement", that Essendon winning the "premiership" in my system, and then waiting for the 4 week tournament to start. Same diff.

And the Grand Final will be HUGE. Look at the FA CUP!!!!!! I said in a previous post that the actaul FA CUP final is the biggest match of the year, by a mile, even though the FA CUP "tournament as a whole" is not as big as the "top spot" premiership. The actual one-off FA CUP final is the biggest match of the year, even though the "top spot" premiership has already been decided.



[This message has been edited by Dan24 (edited 01 December 2000).]

 

[Shinboners]

Hum.....soccer fans will know of the reserves side that Manchester United sent out to play in a Worthless Cup tie vs Sunderland earlier this week, and how in recent seasons, both Manchester United and Arsenal sent out less than full strength sides to play FA Cup ties. In Italy and Spain, their FA Cup competitions are strictly considered second class competitions (the likes of Real Madrid, Barcelona, Juventus, AC Milan etc only take them seriously if they think they may miss out on European competition via the League).

So, would AFL clubs take the finals series seriously if all the prestige is shifted to the home and away season? Make up your own mind*.

Cheers
SB

*Of course, I'm only saying that out of politeness because you won't be allowed to think for yourself because the milkshake kid has done all the thinking for you.

 

[Same Old's]

Originally posted by McKenna for PM:
If a soccer player is injured, then he is far more likely to have amassed sufficient retirement savings to leave the game than an AFL player. An AFL player, who makes less money, needs to maintain a longer career to make good money, and taking unnecessary risks is not conducive to a long career.

Again, not necessary. In theory, a club from the forth division can make the final of the F.A. cup. Players from that club wouldn't get paid much.

Furthermore, not every single player that plays proffesional soccer is on multi-million dollar salary.

Originally posted by McKenna for PM:
The new finals system is a lot like the Ansett Cup, because it doesn't decide the premiership. Teams will have no great desire to win at all costs since the HA games constitute the real season. Imagine how boring the final round would be if the premiers had already decided?

No thanks.

Well, imagine how much more exciting the H&A season would be if all the matches "meant something". Every game counts etc. Especially if the season were close, and the race came down to the final round or final game.

One plus would be that you could get a ticket to the game, unlike the grand final.



[This message has been edited by Same Old's (edited 01 December 2000).]

 

[Same Old's]

Originally posted by Shinboners:
Hum.....soccer fans will know of the reserves side that Manchester United sent out to play in a Worthless Cup tie vs Sunderland earlier this week, and how in recent seasons, both Manchester United and Arsenal sent out less than full strength sides to play FA Cup ties. In Italy and Spain, their FA Cup competitions are strictly considered second class competitions (the likes of Real Madrid, Barcelona, Juventus, AC Milan etc only take them seriously if they think they may miss out on European competition via the League).

Shinboners, you must also remember that Manchester United sent out a less then full strength side against PSV of Holland in a Champions League clash last month. And we all know that the champions league is a very prestigious competition.

On your point about the Worthington Cup tie, clubs do not sometimes send out full strength sides because they do not want there "star players" to risk injury in not be available for a premiership match or especially a champions league fixture.

European Cup success is much more important than, say the Worthington Cup, since the prize money and revenue gained from competing in that particuar competition. If Man Utd weren't in the champions league then I sure they would have took it more seriously.

On a side note, Manchester United have reportedly booked a hotel for their squad in Cardiff (where the F.A. cup is being played). They are confident they are going to make the final.

So it seems like Man Utd are taking the F.A. cup pretty seriously.

Originally posted by Shinboners:
In Italy and Spain, their FA Cup competitions are strictly considered second class competitions (the likes of Real Madrid, Barcelona, Juventus, AC Milan etc only take them seriously if they think they may miss out on European competition via the League)

Other countries may not take their domestic cup's seriously as the English or Scottish do, but what this means is that clubs take the league competition even more seriously. Clubs and fans may feel satisfied, for example, in finishing sixth in the league then making the final of a cup competion.

 

[Dan26]

Same Old's

It's good to have someone sprouting logic, in words other than my own.

I think a lot of people in here saythings that can "twisted" around the other way.

For example, when Shinboners said that ManU didn' field a full-strngth side, Ican say that they didn't do this in heaps of "top spot premiership" matches too.

And when people say that the fight for top spot could be boring, I could say: "Well, what if the fight for top means something and it's CLOSE (currently it doesn't mean anthing). This could make the fight for top spot a highlight of the year."

Heaps of things can be twisted around just to suit people arguments.

The bottom line, is that top spot deserves more recognition. The public will accpet whatever is given recognition (just like they accepted the "new" Grand Final 100 years ago) and the Grand Final, because it is an event, will always be big- just like the FA CUP final is MASSIVE even though it doesn't decide the "whole season champions"

As I stated, the GF is separate to the H&A anyway, when you think about it. No matter what system we use, you can't actually win the Grand Final until the final series begins. Currently, the H&A is rendered meaningless, unless you win the final series tournament. So, in reality it is already a separate conmpetition. The fact that you can't win the premiership until the last 4 weeks of the season proves this. So, obviously, they should "offically" be separate things to win.

No matter how much they all twist their words and anecdotes to suit themselves, no one can get away from the fact that top spot deserves more recognition, and doing so will NOT affect peoples enjoyment of the sport of Australian Football. It just gives the 6 month season more credibility in ADDITION to being able to have the "glory" of winning on that one day in September.

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

glory of winning that one day in September???

Dan, if Essendon won the H&A season and Carlton won the Grand Final and I was to revel in our Grand Final victory, somebody like yourself would be likely to belittle the achievement as being nowhere near as good as your H&A premiership. Don't say you wouldn't as in previous posts you have found any subtleties to belittle Carlton's achievements when compared to Essendon's. For example, in one post your answer to Carlton never having received the wooden spoon was along the lines of us deserving to be wooden spooners and it was only a pathetic St Kilda that kept us out of it. This was to argue Essendon having a prouder record than Carlton. In a different thread, you stated that Carlton having never collected the spoon was a proud achievement. See, you change around your opinion on matters to suit the topic you are arguing at the time. I'm sure people could give many instances of this happening. In fact, it could have it's own separate thread!

My point is, if the achievement can be belittled as being only a four week tournament compared to the real stuff, then it will lose something. It loses prestige, it loses status. I'm not twisting anything anywhere. You are the spin doctor on these boards.

------------------
mens sana in corpore sano - a sound mind in a sound body

 

[ptw]

what ODN said

ptw