Banyo Bloods
Norm Smith Medallist
No the people advocated that some teams should receive exceptional assistance written into the rules of competition have the obligation justify it.
Onus still on you as spokesperson for "The People"
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
LIVE: St Kilda v Western Bulldogs - 7:30PM Thu
Squiggle tips Saints at 51% chance -- What's your tip? -- Team line-ups »
No the people advocated that some teams should receive exceptional assistance written into the rules of competition have the obligation justify it.
Your answer. Again.but there are simply pointing out how vague your claims are. They are not my claims.
you claim t5he your players are disadvantaged by inferior markets for third party deals for example. Thats not may claim. It your northern guys claim.
are you saying in the absence of figures, the claim must be accepted as fact?
they are you claims you guys have to provide the figures to back up your claims.
Onus is on you - If a team is getting "assistance" under AFL rules then if somebody disputes that the onus is on them to provide the reasons why it shouldn't be happening
Yeah come on.No the people advocated that some teams should receive exceptional assistance written into the rules of competition have the obligation justify it.
Of course the Giants and Suns should have advantages. The AFL can't bring them into the comp and have them fail... it would be a massive waste of money. So naturally they would ensure they would be strong clubs - and the best way they can control this is theough draft picks. The academies is another way to assist both clubs to be strong as well as strengthen junior interest across the states.
With a strong presence in both NSW and QLD the AFL will make all that money back and some through future TV rights deals.
It's not rocket science.
Hey mate here's some of the facts. It's been posted many times before so I'm sure you've seen
It's like arguing with Malcom Roberts on climate change. Even with the facts there you just choose to ignore them.The quotes don't mean much, The leigh quotes are just press releases form the propaganda department. Players will pile on the go home factor as it;s often the easy answer, very few are going to say it was the money, or rtes club was being run very badly,
Sloppy cherry picked data. Slick piece of propaganda,but not overly good analysis.
didnt brisbane have a salary cap bonus for some of the period covered.
whats the retention rate competition wide. homegrown v domestic players. whats the the first round picks too each club, if a clubs had twice the first round picks and lost twice the players it's the same mention rate, whats the retention rate for Sydney, what is the retention rate for clubs in the lowest 4 spots, is the mention related to Brisbane or just lower performing clubs.
there is a problem with never comparing like with like. Players recruited outside the draft don't appear.
there are all sorts of pretty subjective calls to in what you count. it's all a problem with statitics.
I decided to do my own analysis but it will take time.
It's like arguing with Malcom Roberts on climate change. Even with the facts there you just choose to ignore them.
refusal to face the facts can be annoying. You guys never go go we hadn't thought of that good piont, now you first response is your post is invalid, you are crazy, bais, or whatever, you just attack the man and ignore the argument.
brisbane may have experienced more interstate players "going home: but with far more interstate players on the list you are not comparing apples with apples.
there is a leaving rate for all players. that has to be factor in. OS work out the retention rate league wide for all players, then compare that to Brisbane leaving rate.
The graphic is bad statistics because there are so many more interstate players of course Brisbane all have more leave, even if they were leaving at the exact same rate as hime grown players.
Also during the period Brisbane was receiving zone concession outside the draft. calculate each 150 game player recieved as a first round player in, deduct that from the over leave.
Also if say Brisbane revived 19 first round picks and 10 leaves an another club receives 9 first round picks and 4 leave comparing the numbers leaving isn't the thing it;s number leaves/per first round pick. Nice graphic but sloppy statistics.
i'd allso check the leaving rate of say bottom 4 clubs and compare that , it could be a factor.
'The graphic is bad statistics because there are so many more interstate players of course Brisbane all have more leave, even if they were leaving at the exact same rate as hime grown players.'
No, that's exactly the point the Brisbane posters are making on the need for an academy to build up home grown players.
.
I
You've got some great ideas there about how the statistics might be invalid, but they're only ideas. Until you actually produce results showing that it's just a claim with zero proof, unlike the claims about those leaving.
You really just don't get it or refuse to. There is not enough AFL grade players in Queensland. So they have to draft interstate players in order to stay competitive. The academies is the first successful attempt in changing thatrefusal to face the facts can be annoying. You guys never go go we hadn't thought of that good piont, now you first response is your post is invalid, you are crazy, bais, or whatever, you just attack the man and ignore the argument.
brisbane may have experienced more interstate players "going home: but with far more interstate players on the list you are not comparing apples with apples.
there is a leaving rate for all players. that has to be factor in. OS work out the retention rate league wide for all players, then compare that to Brisbane leaving rate.
The graphic is bad statistics because there are so many more interstate players of course Brisbane all have more leave, even if they were leaving at the exact same rate as hime grown players.
Also during the period Brisbane was receiving zone concession outside the draft. calculate each 150 game player recieved as a first round player in, deduct that from the over leave.
Also if say Brisbane revived 19 first round picks and 10 leaves an another club receives 9 first round picks and 4 leave comparing the numbers leaving isn't the thing it;s number leaves/per first round pick. Nice graphic but sloppy statistics.
i'd allso check the leaving rate of say bottom 4 clubs and compare that , it could be a factor.
1. After this period it got worse. It doesn't cover that huge exodus just afterThere's definitely an argument to say those graphics are misleading.
1. The period covered shortly follows the merger with Fitzroy, that built a super list and naturally, there's going to be a squeeze-out.
2. Significant more 1st round picks means the raw number of players leaving will be higher
3. There are 16 clubs where "homesickness" can be claimed. Victorian clubs only have 8.
For the record, I'm not against Brisbane getting assistance, and I don't dispute that there is a retention problem. But the scale of that graphic isn't right.
sure the stats are not proven invalid burt there are probable problems with their methodogly. Thats enough toot accept them at face value. Sure /i haven't proven a counter argument, i have only pointed out some flaws in the statistics presented, and unless those factors are addressed then what relevance do those statistics have, they do not prove the case you are arguing.
Again you have the burden of proof you guys are arguing for exceptional rules to be applied to your clubs. You have been throwing some statistics around without stopping and thinking what they mean. Sure I haven't disproved the statistics, but they are not through or conclusive ,as they lack real context.
You guys pretending that those statistics are some argument clincher is just poor thinking. You want to prove your case you will have to do better. You want special treatment the onus of NTTAWWT is on you, saying that there is no evidence that you don't deserve special treatment or there are some flawed statistics suggesting you might be operating at a significant disadvantage surely isn't enough.
1. After this period it got worse. It doesn't cover that huge exodus just after
2. It doesn't matter how many picks there are. More than half the picks you claim shouldn't claim homesickness
3. Just compare Queensland to Victoria for homesickness. It's just as bad when you compare by state
You really just don't get it or refuse to. There is not enough AFL grade players in Queensland. So they have to draft interstate players in order to stay competitive. The academies is the first successful attempt in changing that
I just think there's a lot of evidence that makes it an apples to oranges comparison. I don't dispute that something needs to be done but I look at those graphics and dismiss them as irrelevant because of the mitigating factors. Give me evidence that is accurate
You haven't "pointed out" flaws. You claim those are flaws but you haven't provided any evidence to support that claim, specifically that they affect the result in a significant fashion.
really. you haven't refuted my points
you just say any argument is rubbish, without actually entering the actual debate,
there is more to debating
than just chanting "I'm so good" and "you are shite".
Give the evidence that it isn't accurate. You raised some points that might be valid. Are you able to demonstrate that they are actually valid, by calculating the numbers on the points you demonstrated?
FWIW I can answer #1 off the top of my head - no first round players were "squeezed out" from the Brisbane Lions post-merger. The only departures were at the player's demand to move, e.g. Des Headland.
1.Jason Gram
2. Shane O'bree
3.Damian Cupido
4. Dez Headland
Is that 4/10 of the "homesick" players? A cursory glance suggests 40% of the list is dodge. Those guys just couldn't break into the team.
You've raised points with no evidence to back them up. I could make up all sorts of pro-academy arguments too if I didn't want to bother actually having reality play a part either
Childish.
I have raised a number of points about the statistics and talked about how better statistics could be structured. But I'm really reluctant to go away and do the work when you dismiss EVERYTHING without the slightest consideration.