RDFL Thread - 2013

[Dons81]

Firstly well done to all the winners. I agree with Matt comments about Riddell and no real advantage finishing first, WHAT my real question is that what the fu#$ were the RDFNL board thinking when giving the rest of the finals games out. Is it true you have to be on the so called BOARD to get your club a final, Yes guys I am disappointed that ROMSEY DOES NOT HAVE A FINAL you can all see that but as we all keep saying you want the best players playing on the best grounds and surfaces in the league. We asked a question today, the response we got today was "our netball court was not up to scratch" it is a cop out and just another excuse of bullshit... when 4 weeks ago we ask the league "did we need to do anything to the courts to host a final" their response was "no, they're fine"......IT IS A DISGRACE THAT THE ROMSEY PARK, WHICH IS IN PRISTINE CONDITION, IT'S A PICTURE AND UP TO AFL STANDARD maybe not that good.... and guys i am not saying let Romsey play there!!!!! but surely there should be a game playing there this week, the week after, or even the week after that???????whats your thoughts playing at Melton out of portables. what a disgrace for our league..... dont bring anyone from the Bendigo,Ballarat,Murray,or the EDFL....... the RDFNL would look like a laughing stock, you pack of people looking after their own backyards not the players and the spectators............................ THAT"S MY OPINION I HOPE PEOPLE CAN HAVE THERE"S DISGRACE

I have always found Romsey to be a good venue and enjoy it but why should Romsey or any other ground for that matter have a mortgage on finals games? Why should they or other clubs be allowed to make money from finals every season if other clubs are not going to be afforded the same opportunities? Of course we want good conditions for our players but its not as if the surface at these alternate venues is unplayable like Woodend and Riddell last season.

If change rooms come into the reckoning then Romsey would not have had finals for the last 5 years where the away rooms were disgraceful. To the clubs credit they have amazing facilities now but you can't begrudge the other clubs for aspiring to the same things.

 

[It Is Me]

Final 5 or 6 - well guys, its actually up to the clubs. If your club does not support a final six, put in a motion before the AGM, get other clubs to support it and change it. The Board are directed by the clubs for major issues like this. The management then do what is required.

I must agree though with the general disappointment of Romsey not getting a final - ground and facilities are excellent and the Romsey crew always put on a good show. It surprises me that Riddell always seem to get a final even though the ground surface is never up to scratch .... Looking forward to the trip out to Macedon prelim final - that is always a great venue

 

[X_box_X]

According to the RDFL website, there is only one match scheduled for this weekend - Saturday between Romsey and Sunbury. That can't be right, can it? I thought Sunbury plays Diggers for a spot in the Grand Final, and Romsey and Riddell play in the minor Semi Final. Can anyone confirm this?

I am assuming I am right, so where are the two Semi Finals being played this week and what days?

 

[Mongrel]

I know Macedon is no Riddell or Diggers Rest, but look out for Romsey. Massive second half suggests the Redbacks are a genuine chance of beating Riddell.

Genuinely feel sorry for the Bombers. No advantage for finishing on top of the ladder. Time to go back to the top 5. Finishing third shouldn't be the easiest passage to the grand final.

You have got to be kidding matt!!!!! Let me get this right, YOU FEEL SORRY FOR Riddell??????

So a team finishes on top of the ladder should be just handed a premiership or an easy ride there??
The advantage of finishing top for riddell is receiving a double chance which they have now lost and a home final this week. Between you and Omni I think your view on this is crap. Just as crap as people complaining about sunbury getting a home final. So they should!!!! That is their advantage for finishing 3rd instead of 6th. Its been that way for years now yet certain people are still complaining.

I would have thought that the team that finishes on top would back themselves to beat whichever team they face. Also I haven't heard Riddell complaining about the finals fixture, only a few of their loyal fans on here lol

 

[matt_nicholls]

Mongrel please.

Riddell finished on top of the ladder and played the second best team at a neutral venue. The Bombers lost and now face an elimination final.

The Kangaroos (through no fault of their own) played an elimination final on their home deck against the sixth best team.

Now the Roos are one win away from a grand final berth (with a week off) and get a SECOND CHANCE if they lose.

It's not a pro-Riddell or anti-Sunbury opinion, it's a hatred of the most ridiculous finals system known to man.

It's not about gift-wrapping the premiership for the minor premier, it's about making sure the best teams in the home and away season are rewarded with the best possible run.

 

[Wild Bill]

You have got to be kidding matt!!!!! Let me get this right, YOU FEEL SORRY FOR Riddell??????

So a team finishes on top of the ladder should be just handed a premiership or an easy ride there??
The advantage of finishing top for riddell is receiving a double chance which they have now lost and a home final this week. Between you and Omni I think your view on this is crap. Just as crap as people complaining about sunbury getting a home final. So they should!!!! That is their advantage for finishing 3rd instead of 6th. Its been that way for years now yet certain people are still complaining.

I would have thought that the team that finishes on top would back themselves to beat whichever team they face. Also I haven't heard Riddell complaining about the finals fixture, only a few of their loyal fans on here lol

The system is flawed and should looked at. I hate this top 6 format but if it is to stay the fairest system is to have the highest ranked side play at home.

You will end up win teams playing for 3rd. It happend in the BFL.

 

[It Is Me]

According to the RDFL website, there is only one match scheduled for this weekend - Saturday between Romsey and Sunbury. That can't be right, can it? I thought Sunbury plays Diggers for a spot in the Grand Final, and Romsey and Riddell play in the minor Semi Final. Can anyone confirm this?

I am assuming I am right, so where are the two Semi Finals being played this week and what days?

RDFL site not yet updated. If you look carefully you will see there is no venue allocated yet. I understand grounds are being inspected today so check later this afternoon. I'm sure there will be a summary on the news page when the matches are announced

 

[ChrisThaLedg]

Mongrel please.

Riddell finished on top of the ladder and played the second best team at a neutral venue. The Bombers lost and now face an elimination final.

The Kangaroos (through no fault of their own) played an elimination final on their home deck against the sixth best team.

Now the Roos are one win away from a grand final berth (with a week off) and get a SECOND CHANCE if they lose.

It's not a pro-Riddell or anti-Sunbury opinion, it's a hatred of the most ridiculous finals system known to man.

It's not about gift-wrapping the premiership for the minor premier, it's about making sure the best teams in the home and away season are rewarded with the best possible run.

Can you honestly say that if a club with three teams playing on the same day would have the manpower to run a full day of finals away from their team at an alternative venue and still have enough supporters to go and watch their team play, or physically go and play at another venue and leaving a small handful to run a busy finals schedule? Can you honestly say its possible for a club to operate on that scale?
You've been around football a long time and you clearly know how hard it is to run a day of finals football. You clearly should know the struggle that clubs have to get volunteers on the day, let alone go and out support or play for their club.
The move to have Sunbury host a final is a no brainer. Three football teams on the same day at a hosting venue.. those players serve behind the bar, help out at the canteen and do many other thankless jobs in and around their match. It was unfortunate that the Sunbury Kangaroo netballers couldn't all play at Boardman too..
There was a big crowd at Sunbury on Saturday.. they saw two great games of football and everyone went home happy.. I'd expect Riddell to host on Sunday, their Seniors play at home and a big crowd gets along.
Pickles.. you're a Lancefield man.. going on your philosophy, your beloved Tigers should not have played at home in the 2009 Grand final.. that in itself is a joke. What you seem to be forgetting is that players don't care where they play their finals, as long as they play in them. I've never heard a single netballer or footballer complain about the venue that they are playing finals.. they are thrilled to be part of the action. I was never good enough to play in a Grand final in the juniors and would've loved to have played a final in the Under 18.5s.. it wouldn't matter where I played it.. aslong as I was part of it.. forget your home ground advantage.. it counts for nothing.. we chose to broadcast at Sunbury on the weekend because we knew we'd get the big crowd, the best atmosphere and great games.. all of those delivered on what could arguably be the best day of finals in this finals series and if I'm wrong, we will get blown away because Sunbury was amazing!

 

[matt_nicholls]

Chris I think you've missed my point completely. I said Sunbury had to play at home, there was no other option. It would have been silly for the Kangaroos to play at Rockbank or Kilmore and host a final on the same day.

Last week I said the Roos shouldn't have been given a week 1 final because there was no Sunday option and Sunbury was always going to play finals. I didn't say they shouldn't play at Boardman. Once the decision was made for the Roos to host a final the only option was for the Kangas to play there.

My point is the advantage of third position. Even if played at a neutral venue it is a much for advantageous position than it should be.

 

[onlyintwos]

.... Looking forward to the trip out to Macedon prelim final - that is always a great venue[/quote]..........................It would want to get a lot of sun on it between now and then ....it was a bloody disgrace for the junior prelims

 

[Itsmyshow]

My point is the advantage of third position. Even if played at a neutral venue it is a much for advantageous position than it should be.

Nobody should debate this, because it is absolutely true.

But there is no better system on offer unless the league runs a top 8 or top 4.

Top 5 - Top has week 1 off, if they win week 2, they have week 3 off, throw in the current status of the league having byes and the possibility is that the side that finishes top could risk having a bye in the final 2 rounds, giving them 3 games in 6 weeks.

Top 6 (1 & 2 have the bye) - Read above.

Top 6
1 vs 6
2 vs 5
3 vs 4
If all of 1st and 2nd win in week one, the highest ranked loser would either be 3rd or 4th, thus making the game in the second week 3rd vs 4th again.

There is the possibility of having a "play around" with the finals fixture, but it all results in an inequality somewhere along the line..

The best alternative that I have been able to come up with.
Week 1
1st Vs 6th
2nd Vs 4th
3rd vs 5th
Week 2
1st Semi - Lowest ranked winner Vs Highest ranked loser
2nd Semi - Highest ranked winner Vs 2nd highest ranked winner

and so forth.

The inequality continues with 2nd drawing a tougher game than 3rd and 4th drawing a tougher game than 5th.

 

[Doona2]

You have got to be kidding matt!!!!! Let me get this right, YOU FEEL SORRY FOR Riddell??????

So a team finishes on top of the ladder should be just handed a premiership or an easy ride there??
The advantage of finishing top for riddell is receiving a double chance which they have now lost and a home final this week. Between you and Omni I think your view on this is crap. Just as crap as people complaining about sunbury getting a home final. So they should!!!! That is their advantage for finishing 3rd instead of 6th. Its been that way for years now yet certain people are still complaining.

I would have thought that the team that finishes on top would back themselves to beat whichever team they face. Also I haven't heard Riddell complaining about the finals fixture, only a few of their loyal fans on here lol

Unlike myself who gets on here to kill time and talk $hit most the time, Mongrel has hit the nail on the head here. After being the best team all year (and they probably were), all Riddell had to do was win a game of football on Saturday to be well placed.
It didn't pan out that way so they get the right to use their double chance (that they've well and truly earnt) at home this weekend.

As it was suggested, maybe it's up to the clubs to influence how the top 6 system best works, not the board, so I guess we'll see how big an issue it really is come AGM time.

 

[matt_nicholls]

Doona I agree with you and Mongrel that Riddell did itself no favours by losing, but I reckon 1 v 2 should be played second week with the winner to go to the grand final and the loser to get its second chance in a prelim.

If there must be a top six system, and I can see the benefits in a 13-team competition, 3 v 6 (Sat) and 4 v 5 (Sun) should play in week 1 of the finals.

The winner of those two matches would play the following Sunday in a semi-final, with the 1 v 2 match on the Saturday.

A top six has merit, but not in its current format. It's probably not a high priority for most clubs, but I reckon the Kangas would be rapt after finishing third and playing rivals Diggers Rest in week 2 for a grand final berth, with a second chance up its sleeve.

Although it rewards mediocrity in a 13 team comp, an AFL-style top eight would be a better format than the current top six. Works well in the MCDFL.

 

[Dons81]

The fact that Riddell are playing home is pure luck and nothing to do with getting a home final. They could easily have had to go to Romsey and play an away final to the 4th ranked team just as Diggers did last year. This has to change. If we can't change the top 6 then the home final being guaranteed would be a good way to even things up.

 

[Itsmyshow]

Doona I agree with you and Mongrel that Riddell did itself no favours by losing, but I reckon 1 v 2 should be played second week with the winner to go to the grand final and the loser to get its second chance in a prelim.

If there must be a top six system, and I can see the benefits in a 13-team competition, 3 v 6 (Sat) and 4 v 5 (Sun) should play in week 1 of the finals.

The winner of those two matches would play the following Sunday in a semi-final, with the 1 v 2 match on the Saturday.

A top six has merit, but not in its current format. It's probably not a high priority for most clubs, but I reckon the Kangas would be rapt after finishing third and playing rivals Diggers Rest in week 2 for a grand final berth, with a second chance up its sleeve.

Although it rewards mediocrity in a 13 team comp, an AFL-style top eight would be a better format than the current top six. Works well in the MCDFL.

You must have trouble reading Matthew.

I would love to know of any club/coach anywhere that would accept playing 2 games in 4 weeks at finals time, let alone the chance of playing 3 games in 6 weeks!!!

 

[matt_nicholls]

You're right. It's a dilemma. But it's the same case in the top 5 with 1st getting a week off and then potentially another week off. I wouldn't be against home finals in the first two weeks and have set venues for the prelim and GF.

Without wanting to complicate country footy too much, it would be great to see some sort of "equalisation" as far as finals revenue. I reckon the best way to do it is to have the RDFL run the whole show, ie run the gate and employ people to run the canteen/bars and reduce the league fees each year.

The problem with that is there is no real incentive for a club like Lancefield to invest heavily in infrastructure and facilities. Although the Tigers have made plenty from hosting the GF each year, at least you can say they and the park committee have spent money improving the place and not on footballers.

There'll never be a perfect system, but I reckon if the RDFL was to run the finals via contractors it would alleviate some of the issues, although come at a cost as wages would have to be taken into account, whereas clubs generally rely on volunteers in the current era.

 

[leo tolstoy]

Was at Boardman on sat and I don't think kangaroos would have thought finishing third was very advantageous for most of the game.

 

[matt_nicholls]

Was at Boardman on sat and I don't think kangaroos would have thought finishing third was very advantageous for most of the game.

All finals are tough. The silly thing about the current system is that if the Roos had lost to Rupo, then Romsey, which finished fourth, would get a double chance this Saturday and be playing for a grand final spot in the second week of the finals.

 

[Doona2]

You must have trouble reading Matthew.

I would love to know of any club/coach anywhere that would accept playing 2 games in 4 weeks at finals time, let alone the chance of playing 3 games in 6 weeks!!!

Yeh go and ask Sheeds how 1990 panned out after the Pies v Eagles draw on week one of the finals

 

[matt_nicholls]

Yeh go and ask Sheeds how 1990 panned out after the Pies v Eagles draw on week one of the finals

What about the poor old Eagles that year?

Round 21 v Brisbane (Carrara, Gold Coast)
Round 22 v Geelong (Kardinia Park)
Qualifying Final v Collingwood (Waverley)
Qualifying Final Replay v Collingwood (Waverley)
Semi Final v Melbourne (Waverley)
Preliminary Final v Essendon (Waverley)

 

[Jack_Bauer]

Just to add another little footnote to this whole debate about home ground advantages...

Rupertswood U18s (who finished the season on top and convincingly won their first final) will now play a second final in as many weeks against a team with a "home ground advantage". First Sunbury at Sunbury and now Riddell at Riddell. And contrary to Mongrel's view that the home ground advantage is given to the higher ranked team, this may be the case for the 1st 18 but it is not the case in either of these U18 games, actually the lower ranked team has the "advantage".

Now don't get me wrong, I am not sooking up that our boys have a "disadvantage". In fact the two times these teams have met this year, the away team has won. And I do fully understand the fixturing issues as to why the two teams will meet on Riddell's home ground - considering all of Riddell's teams are at that venue and even Rupo's reserves will be there, it just makes sense.

BUT...

The perception of a home ground advantage will always be there and IMO this just backs up my belief that all finals should be played at a neutral venue, grounds that we don't play on during the year. Clarke Oval, Macpherson Park, Gardner Reserve or possibly even Darley's ground would be good. This takes away any perception of a home ground advantage and it also takes away the definite financial advantage that the hosting clubs get. I really like the idea of the league making more money out of finals and that money being passed onto clubs in the form of reduced fees.

I could be wrong but a lot of other leagues have neutral finals venues...
Bendigo = QEO
WRFL = Chirnside Park/Whitten Oval
EDFL = Windy Hill

 

[Blueboy67]

Just to add another little footnote to this whole debate about home ground advantages...

Rupertswood U18s (who finished the season on top and convincingly won their first final) will now play a second final in as many weeks against a team with a "home ground advantage". First Sunbury at Sunbury and now Riddell at Riddell. And contrary to Mongrel's view that the home ground advantage is given to the higher ranked team, this may be the case for the 1st 18 but it is not the case in either of these U18 games, actually the lower ranked team has the "advantage".

Now don't get me wrong, I am not sooking up that our boys have a "disadvantage". In fact the two times these teams have met this year, the away team has won. And I do fully understand the fixturing issues as to why the two teams will meet on Riddell's home ground - considering all of Riddell's teams are at that venue and even Rupo's reserves will be there, it just makes sense.

BUT...

The perception of a home ground advantage will always be there and IMO this just backs up my belief that all finals should be played at a neutral venue, grounds that we don't play on during the year. Clarke Oval, Macpherson Park, Gardner Reserve or possibly even Darley's ground would be good. This takes away any perception of a home ground advantage and it also takes away the definite financial advantage that the hosting clubs get. I really like the idea of the league making more money out of finals and that money being passed onto clubs in the form of reduced fees.

I could be wrong but a lot of other leagues have neutral finals venues...
Bendigo = QEO
WRFL = Chirnside Park/Whitten Oval
EDFL = Windy Hill

I'm pretty sure that South Bendigo and Sandhurst play at the QEO. I'm happy with the idea of a neutral venue, but so long as the takings from food and beverages comes back to the RDFL somehow rather than a club from another league taking away $$$ from funds which should go to RDFL clubs.

 

[Jack_Bauer]

I'm pretty sure that South Bendigo and Sandhurst play at the QEO. I'm happy with the idea of a neutral venue, but so long as the takings from food and beverages comes back to the RDFL somehow rather than a club from another league taking away $$$ from funds which should go to RDFL clubs.

Absolutely, this would have to be a given. Don't want clubs from other leagues making money off us.

 

[blues12]

Sunbury Kangaroos have played a home game at Clarke oval 4 or 5 years ago, also hosted a prelim there probably 15 years ago.
Arrangements were made with the Social club. Kangas moved there liquor booth licence for the day, sold alcohol from a booth, ran a BBQ, the canteen and raffle. All proceeds went to kangas. The catch was the presidents lunch had to be purchased and ran by the social club (fair enough) The half time raffle also went to the Kangas. There was also been a fee for possible loss of income to the social club. Also social club members had the right to free entry.

It is workable as the venue is a council public space. hiring through the council.
The biggest problem is working with the BFL and Sunbury Lions to minimise the chance of a clash as Sunbury have themselves hosted many finals.

If the league could access Clarke oval any clubs wishing to participate can be drawn out of a hat for various income opportunities. Not a rotating roster week to week or annually. When clubs are then ready, they go straight into the hat.
If the league persists with Lancefield as the Grand Final venue this will have to eventually happen, Perhaps with Lancefield Guaranteed 1 sopt, then into the hat for the opportunity at a second.

 

[Mongrel]

any news on how Sylvester is????? looked like he was in a bad way on the video