Oppo Camp Non-Eagles Discussion

[Ljp86]

And GC should never have happened either. If I'm being honest I'd rather GC get binned ahead of either North or Saints.

Again, I disagree. Gold Coast Suns serve a strategic purpose for the AFL to enhance the game's standing in a non-traditional footy state and remain a long-term proposition with the purpose of increasing the interest and participation of the game within that geographic location.

The exercise is not too dissimilar to South Melbourne's move to Sydney to become the Sydney Swans. Whilst South Melbourne were originally a Melbourne based club, the similarities exist with the establishment of either club in a non-traditional footy area in an attempt to expand the game. Sydney didn't have a lot of success within the first 10 years of being located there aside from a couple of finals appearances during the late 1980's and went through a period in the early 1990's where there were generally uncompetitive, claiming three wooden spoons and having quite low crowds to boot (average crowd under 10,000). However, 1996 saw them qualify for a Grand Final and they've only missed the finals five times since along with being one of the best run clubs in the competition.

Whilst the Suns haven't had a great existence thus far, the establishment of the club there has enabled participation levels in the area to increase significantly, particularly in junior ranks which provides the competition with more participants and therefore the potential for more elite talent. Given the Suns' establishment more than 10 years ago, that is now bearing fruit with the club securing top-end talent from their academy at last year's draft with more to eligible at this year's draft.

Establishing a new club like the Suns takes time and a lot of money, hence the long-term view for the strategic goals the AFL would have implemented at the time. This is fairly typical for any new market which involves a lot of cashflow early before bearing fruit later on once the exercise progresses to a more advanced state. You can certainly make an argument that whilst the club has not had much on-field success thus far, the money spent there has helped enhance the game in the region, provided the competition with more talent and increased the interest/participation levels of the sport.

Contrast that with the plight of St. Kilda and North Melbourne during that period. Both clubs are in a saturated market, add little to the competition, possess small fan bases, have had very little success and continue to be propped up by the AFL's annual appropriation year after year. Not to mention that St. Kilda is saddled by various debts with North reliant on revenue from the Tasmanian government (soon to end with Tasmania being admitted to the competition) and continues to be unable to generate sufficient revenue to be self-supporting, despite both being part of the competition for around 100 years or longer.

Easy to see why the Suns are a better proposition for the AFL going forward.

 

[ioppolo]

just feels like an SA team will win the flag in 2024

On SM-S908E using BigFooty.com mobile app

Well it certainly isn't going to be Adelaide.

 

[kane249]

1999 apparently was the last time Collingwood had to make that globe trotting journey to Geelong

They can't get enough business class seats to justify the trip anymore

 

[KERRPOW]

no one deserves anything, this tassie team is just pandering to a state.

 

[Nuke Fremantle]

1999 apparently was the last time Collingwood had to make that globe trotting journey.

I remember hearing an ex Docker on radio saying he was shocked when in the lead up to a game at Kardinia his teammate, Chris Tarrant, told him he'd never played at the ground.

 

[Nuke Fremantle]

Lobb's management has been brilliant at boosting his career by hopping around clubs. Bloke is dead set average yet has been paid like an A grade KPP his whole career.

First rule of the AFL, if you can't be good, be tall.

 

[ioppolo]

I have a vague recollection of Hawthorn playing Richmond at York Park in the early 2000s when both were dogshit. Imagine the uproar of that fixture now! Only interstate teams and North/Bulldogs get that trip now.

 

[ioppolo]

First rule of the AFL, if you can't be good, be tall.

8 years for this guy was it? Remarkable stuff.

 

[kane249]

I have a vague recollection of Hawthorn playing Richmond at York Park in the early 2000s when both were dogshit. Imagine the uproar of that fixture now! Only interstate teams and North/Bulldogs get that trip now.

AFL Tables - Hawthorn v Richmond - Sun, 18-Jun-2006 1:10 PM - Match Stats

 

[ioppolo]

AFL Tables - Hawthorn v Richmond - Sun, 18-Jun-2006 1:10 PM - Match Stats

Jesus that Hawks team...average age of 23, total of only 1303 games with three over 100 (Smith, Dixon, Barker, none of whom were there in 2008)

Yet they still smashed Richmond who had 1900+ games experience and 7 with over 100 games.

 

[kane249]

 

[Bender_]

View attachment 2002333

There's just that pesky 50 year contract that might get in the way.

 

[woosha24]

There's just that pesky 50 year contract that might get in the way.

Easy fix:

Game 1 = Match played at the home ground of the finalist who finished higher on the ladder
Game 2 = Match played at second finalist's home ground
Game 3 = Match played at the MCG

A Grand Final match therefore always gets played at the 'G. If its a dead rubber by the time the teams get there then oh well, them's the breaks of a national comp.

 

[squashface]

I'm all for trolling the Vics but a best of 3 Grand Final series is still one of the worst ideas I've ever heard. What a fizzer that would be.

 

[UseR2006]

Watching this video of the Umpires boss explaining Holding the ball and incorrect disposal interpretations and I'm raging right now. It's the dumbest thing I have watched this year and I just watched our team act like witches hats for a few hours.

My favourite bit is: Q: There seems to be some confusion around what constitutes holding the ball, so what is holding the ball Steve?
A: "We've spent a lot of time with the umpires, and they have a very good understanding of what holding the ball is,
We have to judge prior opportunity first; if the player has had prior opportunity, they must dispose legally by kick or handball. And that's well understood by the fans out there.

Where we get into some confusion or difficulty is when a player is tackled immediately. In that circumstance, they must make an attempt to kick or handball and if the ball is pinned, it will result in a ball up. If the ball is knocked out in the tackle, we will call play on."

The $%^ is a reasonable amount of time Steve? is it 1-2 seconds, is it 2-5 seconds, is it all the goddamn time in the universe Steve? Can't put a number on it so it can be measured and checked. Everything has to be secret and grey so the AFL in it's infinite wisdom can never be wrong even when it is beyond obvious they are wrong.

By the way he never actually tells you what the ground level umpires interpretation is, just that it's very good.

How DO you judge prior opportunity by the way?
Is there some mystical $%&(^ guide on how it's judged? or is it like everything else where we just have a fancy term that means absolutely nothing and it's left to the poor sacks out on the field to interpret something that will inevitably always be wrong.

His answer on the frustrations around incorrect disposal are further enraging...

"One of the hardest decisions to pick up is when a player is at the bottom of a pack or is in the middle of a tackle on the blind side throws the ball out," he said. "We do see throwing the ball missed from game to game.

"What we try and do is put more than one umpire in a position to see it. Now that we have four umpires, we get different angles and perspectives and if they can see the player throw the ball out, they will call incorrect disposal."

I dunno Steve... I have some thoughts on how you can make it easier to spot clear throws...
Don't wait until the player has done a 720 spin to call holding the goddamn ball and then maybe they wont be in a position where the umpire can't see the attempted disposal?

Plus if you have 4 umpires on the ground watching the play at all times from, multiple angles as you describe then maybe they are just doing a really shit job? Oh wait, Can't say that, looking forward to the Please explain and fine in the mail for having an adverse view on the performance of an AFL official.

 

[ioppolo]

I've long thought the obvious answer is A) play the grand final at the higher team's home or B) rotate it around like the NFL does.

 

[Forward Press]

I've long thought the obvious answer is A) play the grand final at the higher team's home or B) rotate it around like the NFL does.

Those are obvious answers.

But the AFL in their infinite wisdom locked in the MCG for half a century.

 

[Ochre]

Should play the 2 prelims at Optus and Adelaide Oval, that way the Vics can keep the GF at the G, everyone has to travel to win a flag and each of the 3 main footy states gets one of 3 big finals. Could even play them at the SCG or Gabba if a QLD or NSW team is involved.

 

[Bender_]

Should play the 2 prelims at Optus and Adelaide Oval, that way the Vics can keep the GF at the G, everyone has to travel to win a flag and each of the 3 main footy states gets one of 3 big finals. Could even play them at the SCG or Gabba if a QLD or NSW team is involved.

Imagine the uproar if we finished lower than a Vic team but still get the prelim at Optus against them.

My pants are getting tighter just thinking about it.

 

[Mr Eagle]

I'm yet to hear a good reason why you wouldn't have a best of seven grand final series.

 

[KBLT]

Far out, people clearly don't remember how pissed people were in 2010 when the premiership took two weeks to decide.

 

[Selurs]

Should play the 2 prelims at Optus and Adelaide Oval, that way the Vics can keep the GF at the G, everyone has to travel to win a flag and each of the 3 main footy states gets one of 3 big finals. Could even play them at the SCG or Gabba if a QLD or NSW team is involved.

Ha, would be great to have someone in the media actually put that suggestion up, just to farm the "but it's not fair" reacts. Well no duh.

Wouldn't actually be possible though because as far as I'm aware there's still a requirement each year for the MCG to have a minimum number finals outside of the grand final (I think it's four, but who the hell knows, and the AFL isn't going to tell you). There's some flexibility around it and they're allowed to "bank" and "pay back" years where there are less with years where there are more, but there's a rolling window in which it needs to be satisfied. It's part of the reason that none of the Docklands teams ever get to have their finals games there, because if they did it increases the odds that one of the non-Vic teams would be forced to host a final at the MCG.

 

[Cuzz09]

Do they play extra time in the GF now or is it a replay?

Cant remember if this got changed?

On SM-S908E using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Rowan18]

Do they play extra time in the GF now or is it a replay?

Cant remember if this got changed?

On SM-S908E using BigFooty.com mobile app

Extra time. If drawn at extra time, there is no siren and it goes to golden point (ie play continues until any score, players won't know but umps and TV viewers will).

 

[squashface]

Extra time. If drawn at extra time, there is no siren and it goes to golden point (ie play continues until any score, players won't know but umps and TV viewers will).

This was changed in 2019.

If the GF is a draw they play two 3 minute halves at each end then if it is still drawn they just continue playing two 3 minute halves until there is a winner.