To Shins, Roylion, Tim. Great moments in the Olympics (and Soccer World Cup)

Remove this Banner Ad

Dan26

Brownlow Medallist
Jan 23, 2000
25,354
21,094
Werribee
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
post count: 38,986
I wanted to make a seperate topic for this. Now we have all read Shinboners well written post about finals football. No doubt he also feels the same way about great moments and memories from the Olympics, and the Soccer world cup for that matter.

Now these three fellows (Shins Roylion and Tim) have basically been telling me they like it how the finals currently override the H&A. Makes the Grand Final bigger, they reckon.

In fact, Tim went so far as to say this to me : "Dan24, The "logical" conclusion of your argument is to take the biggest sporting event on the planet, the Olympics, and replace them with a simple medal ceremony in which the fastest/highest/strongest performer of the year is given the gold medal, etc. I can see that taking off in a big way."

Let me explain. I'm not saying that at all. If they actullay read what I said, you will notice I still conclude the season with knockout finals.

Lets examine the soccer world cup. I have no problem with the soccer world cup. Why ? Because the team that wins it is only called "World Cup champions". That title is fine and appropriate. It would be stupid if they were suddenly called "the worlds best soccer team". Thankfully that isn't the case.

After Frace won in 1998, Brazil remained, according to OFFICIAL rankings, the worlds number one soccer team. Brazil's status as the best team in the world was not affected by one loss in a tournament. Aparently, they all think it should be.

Same with the Olympics. We love the Olympics. Not because they tell you who the best is, but because of the exciting nature of the competition between athletes. if Ian Thorpe does not win the 1500 metres gold medal, he will still be the OFFICIAL number one swimmer in the world according to OFFICIAL rankings, right ? Yes he will.

Now say someone else wins the gold. Does it make that swimmers achievenment any less becasue he doesn't magically become the number one in the world ? No, of course not.

We are about to witness sone Olympic memories that will stay with us foever. Some heroic, some tragic. The worlds biggest stage will host some incredible moving performances. But none of these performances will affect that aheletes offical ranking in their chosen sport. Does Shinboners, Tim, and Roylion not like the Olympics (or soccer world cup ) because of this ?

See what I mean ? The final of an Olympic event is remembered forever. It is remembered even though the winner isn't magicaly the best (or premier). It has great memories and moments. But, despite this, you don't have the number one world ranking for your sport dependent on the outcome. Rightly so.

Can you see now, how the Grand Final would lose nothing ? It wouldn't. Please understand that. I promise you. Do the Olympics lack something, since they dont decide the "premier" team or individual, ? No, they don't. They lack nothing. That should end the argument

Look at Tennis. Lets say Pat Rafter wins Wimbledaon. He will NOT become the number one player in the world. People like Roylion want him to become number one, becasue they think that it would make Wimbledon bigger. I can imagine Roylion saying something like "If Rafter wins Wimbledon, it would be even bigger if the number one ranking was dependent on it"

Now every normal human being knows that Wimbledon is HUGE, not because it determines the number one ranked player, but because of the event, prestige and exciting nature of the knockout tournament etc etc. That's why it is big (as any Grand Slam is for that matter)

Same with the Olympics.

Same with the soccer world cup.

Every fan knows that the best team doesn't necessarily win the soccer world cup. FIFA don't even acknowledge the winner as the best, since official rankings indicate this. According to Roylion, this makes the world cup "not as big"

Well, you're wrong, because the world cup is huge. Just like our Grand Final will continue to be, if it becomes the culmiation of a seperate tournament.

Try arguing against that.

Look, I'm not trying to sound mean or arrogant. I'm also not trying to put anyone down. I simply firmly believe that certain things (such as this) don't require an opinion. They are facts.

And that's the bottom line.

Will you three be watching the Olympics ?
 
Yes, soccer has the world cup and official world rankings. However your argument does not stand up because the greater recognition is given to the winner of the soccer world cup than the country ranked 1st in the FIFA world rankings (what do you actually get for achieving this ranking?). I'm sure Brazil would gladly swap the No.1 ranking for the 1998 world cup.

Under your system the reverse would be true because you are trying to make the home and away series (aka the ranking system) a greater prize than the Premiership Cup (aka the competition).

My point is: FIFA soccer which you are using as an example to highlight the merits of your system in reality supports the current AFL system. The minor premier heads the rankings but the greatest prize is a Grand Final Victory.
 
No, it's not so much the greatest prize, just the most marketable match.

Such is the nature of exciting one-off matches. Of course it is going to be more "exciting" winning the World cup than achieving the number one ranking . My point is the team that has achieved the number one ranking is still recognised. This doesn't thappen in the AFL if you fail in the Grand Final. That's wrong. Plain and simple.

My point is that Brazils status as the number one ranked country isn't affected. If Essendon don't win the Grand Final,their status as number one is affected. If they don't win the Grand Final, they will be "runner-up" of the whole year.

If Brazil are runner-up of the wrold cup, they still retin the number one ranking.

This doesn't happen in the AFL and it in unacceptble.

So, will you will be watching the Olympics ? You probably won't like them becasue the winner doesn't becmoe number one in the world. I suppose no one will care about the Olympics now ?
 

Log in to remove this ad.

What I'm saying is that both the FINA and FIFA world rankings are not recognised by the general public to begin with. Kieren Perkins is introduced as a duel Olympic Gold Medalist and France is recognised for being reigning world cup champion. They never get recognised for being "ranked 1st" for 56 (or whatever) consecutive weeks.

If you are trying to argue for a system in which the minor premier gets due recognition for their efforts, you cannot possibly use soccer or the Olympics as examples because these rankings are not given due recognition.

And since when did I mention 'excitement' in my last post?
 
The winner of the world cup are known as 'world champions' in soccer, cricket, whatever!

The FIFA rankings is a point based system, and teams pick up points for whoever they play and beat. However, obviously not all teams play other teams, South Americans rarely play European teams in non competition and vice versa - they are horribly flawed. However, they are used to indicate the Seedings for the World Cup. Clubs strive for that seeding, in that they dont have to play any other top (seeded) teams untill later in the tournament.

That in itself is very much similar to our competition.
 
Dan 24
I am an avid soccer follower.
As Bomber pointed out, the FIFA rankings system is flawed (much like our AFL H/A system).
All friendlies are taken into account, teams use these as a means to blood promising youngsters and stars refuse to play. When choosing opposition, they have games against inferior teams, and some nations choose to only participate in a handful of games (severly hampering there position).
Points are awarded without taking many of these factors into account.

I will use the Czech Republic as an example. Are you aware that they are ranked third in the world (but they could have moved down a couple of spots after Euro 2000)? Would you rate them above Italy, England, Argentina? Of course not. They have a couple of stars(???) in Nevded, Berger, Chovanec and Pavel, but who of you regard this kind of team the third best in the world? Dan24, would you?
Commentators world wide mock this system and rightly so.
Les Murray jockingly said, before Australia was playing the Czech Rep. in a friendly, that "Australia now has the opportunity to beat the supposed third best team in the world if we win this, hahahahaha". But to make a point, if we were playing France, a win would be taken far more seriously. "We have just beaten the world champions"
Teams are rated on totally subjective information.
Would you deem it fairer to rate a team based on their performances on a world stage, in a tournament where all the teams bring out their biggest stars, the games are pressure filled and sudden death.

I know this isn't exactly totally relevant to our league, but you brought it up.
 
The whole point I'm tryng to get through to you all is that Brazil still kept their number one ranking. It IS recognised in so far as they KEEP THE RANKING.

If the top team loses the AFL Grand Final, they lose all semblance of any ranking they had and OFICIALLY finish 2nd. At least Brazil, are OFFICIALLY the best team in the world. In the AFL, Essendon were the best team last year, but North Melbourne are OFFICIALLY the best team because they won the Grand Final. Stupidly so, really.

Whether FIFA's system of ranking is fair or not, is not realy the point. The point is, no matter what happens in the World Cup Brazil still reatin the ranking. In the AFL Grand Final, the result of that ONE match determines your ranking for the whole year, even if you are 5 wins better off than your opponent.

This is stupid and illogical.

The other point I was trying to get across which NONE of you have denied since I posted it, was that the public will still love the GF just as much, even if it is part of a seperate tournament (as the World Cup, and Olympics prove)

There is no point denying that. Just read my above posts again and you will see why. There is proof all over the world in hundreds of examples. And as I've said tons of times, "for all intents and purposes" the finals is a seperate tournament right now. it might not "officially" be, but for all intents and purposes, it is.
 
Originally posted by Dan24:
The whole point I'm tryng to get through to you all is that Brazil still kept their number one ranking. It IS recognised in so far as they KEEP THE RANKING.

The point is, no matter what happens in the World Cup Brazil still reatin the ranking.
No, it's not so much the greatest prize, just the most marketable match.

Now say someone else wins the gold. Does it make that swimmers achievenment any less becasue he doesn't magically become the number one in the world ? No, of course not.

The other point I was trying to get across which NONE of you have denied since I posted it, was that the public will still love the GF just as much, even if it is part of a seperate tournament.

There is no point denying that.
Firstly,
FIFA introduced the ranking system in 1993. By your thinking, since no rankings system was in place, no World champions existed prior to its formation.
Secondly,
FIFA only introduced it to publish comparisons of the relative strengths of internationally teams at regular intervals, by no means to give an official measure.
Look at any soccer knowledgeable publications, and if you find the rankings printed as "official", I will never bother you again. Then look at how these publications regard France as the world champions.
(I'm sure people are soooo over the soccer debate, so please let it go, as it is not relevant- i.e Under your theory, if Brazil and France were neck and neck on rankings coming into the most "marketable match", the (grand) final would determine the "real champions", even after the "H/A" season- how devastating would that be- a final decide the world champs- unthinkable.

Thirdly,
Yes, it makes the swimmers achievement less significant. Ask any losing medallist after having busted his balls for years, whether he is rapt to be number one in the world but not have a gold medal to show for it. These events are the materialistic, "superficial" occurences that will be remembered. It is wrong. I know. But it will not change. Writing long posts and having dickheads like me reply with even longer posts will not achieve anything.

Lastly, and probably most importantly, I, like many others, would not like the Grand Final as much if it was part of a seperate tournament, Period. The same feeling would not be there. The buzz would not be there. The fact that it determines the premier is its inherent appeal factor. I could not give a f*ck about the celebrations, the half time entertainment, or a match that has no bearing on the season. I watch it because I want to know who the premiers are going to be. Take that facet away, and I will not watch a meaningless complementary "exhibition" match, to see who won the "finals series knockout tournament".
I know you will now tell me that I do not really feel this way. Wrong. It is how I would feel, no matter the arguments you provide.
All your arguments are based on fairness. I understand and agree that it is not fair. Life is not fair. But this is the world we live in. Gold medallists, World cup winners, and grand final winners are held in higher regard, and considered better. It comes down to culture. It is not going to change because of what is "right and just".
Please, understand this.

PS I'm starting to write posts as long as Dan24's. Nooooooooooooooooooo!!!! Only kidding. Just healthy debate gone to extreme lenghts.
 
Dan, obviously you are not the biggest fan of soccer in the world. The FIFA rankings are a joke - hardly anybody gives them any significance at all.

Italy are a perfect example, FIFA have them ranked 6th, but 99% of soccer fans know they are in the top 2 or 3 in the world, and have been for a long time. The thing is, Italy experiment heavily in non-competition, but come the big stage, they always seem to produce the goods! Look at the recent Euro2000 tournament, they went in with a horrible run of games behind them, but in the end were basically robbed of the championship!

FIFA rankings rank all games, friendlies, dead games, whatever. Its like the AFL season ranking practise matches, and matches played against the Bundoora 3rds!

Most people rate France the best team in the world, followed by probably Brasil, Italy and Argentina.

Spain are rated 3 or 4 by FIFA, thats because they tend to crush teams in friendlies and games that mean nothing, but come the real stuff, when other teams field their best teams and formations, they struggle and always go home early! Nobody considers them a real power in soccer, no matter what FIFA try to tell you!
 
Well, whatever.

The FIFA rankings can be what they want to be. I still believe that if the top team was recognised in the AFL and the finals were seperate, then the fans would respond. For all intents and purposes it's that way right now. It is, whether you like it or not.

If it was recognised, the GF wouldn't lose anything becasure the fans already know that the best (i.e premier) team doesn't alweays win the GF anyway.

The fact that the fans don't care if the GF represents the whole seaosn, or just a 4 week tournament shows why it wouldn't lose anything. It's the "event" of the Grand Fnal that makes it big (like the FA CUP) and it always will.

If you people can't see this, then you lack a propensity to think.

COME ON...think about it. I think you all believe me, but you wouldn't dare agree with me, so you disagree, despite the UNARUABLE facts I present. It's OK to agree. Your pride won't be affected, trust me.

Oh well..... I pity you all.
 
Originally posted by Dan24:

The fact that the fans don't care if the GF represents the whole seaosn, or just a 4 week tournament shows why it wouldn't lose anything.

Why the f*ck do you keep making assumptions on our beliefs? The fact is that your beliefs are not representative of the wider community.
Find me one f*ckin person that has said that he/she doen't care about what the Grand Final represents. How the hell is something "fact" when no-one one thinks it. Please send your "letters" in to the footy show, so that they can get the public humiliation they deserve.

And oh yeah-
"Oh well..... I pity you all"
Right back at ya mate. You just don't see it. I just hope you write these letters in order to sh1t everyone.
 
I dont believe what Im reading.

The GF is such a big event because it is the holy grail for nearly 10 months of work! Thats why it means something. Teams had to strive to make the finals, then lift a cog in cut throat games to get there, now must lift again to prove themselves the best. (Like the Superbowl, World Series, European CUp final whatever).

Its why ALL clubs aim to peak at finals time, not round one. No club can hold a peak for 22 weeks - even the so called immortal Essendon had peaks and troughs this year, it was just that they were good enough to lose only 1 game.

If the Grand Final wasnt representative of the whole year, then OF COURSE it wont be the same. Thats friggen obvious. It would be like the Ansett cup or Lightning Premiership final. People would have a passing interest.

People want premierships, not little 4 week tournaments that would be obviously be there as a money spinner! We have the little comps now at the start of the season. Why would we want another one at the end?

You keep bringing up the FA cup Dan - that competition was the oldest comp for English soccer, you dont lose your roots overnight, thats why its still popular. The VFL started with 1 season of the top being premier, then got rid of it. There is no history to it like there is in England. The FA cup is an anomoly!
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Thanks to Bomber and Westy Boy for posting their views and pointing out the bits where Dan24 doesn't make sense, and so saving me time.

Anyway, to Dan24. We are never going to agree on this and you will not change my (or many other people's) minds no matter how logical your arguments are. The point that the rest of us are trying to get across is that we like the excitement and risk that finals football has...as someone else posted somewhere else, we like the prospect of someone tripping up the hot favourites. Looking at yesterday's game, I'm pretty certain that had it been a home and away game, the Dons players would have shut up shop and just cruised to a lazy 12 to 15 goal win. But I watched players like Barnard, Bewick, Moorcroft...the fringe players if you like....playing the game as if it was their last because they want to make sure that they'll be lining up in Essendon's Grand Final side. These players know that even in such a dominant side, if they don't perform, there's not going to be a next week for them....just for another teammate who might have worked that little bit harder.
 
Shinboners- exactly.
Imagine we were playing the "four week tournament" now. Teams would play almost a reserves side in order to determine delistings etc. Why would they risk players who could injure a knee (ala Murphy GF99), just to obtain a secondary prize. Because of the significance placed on the current finals format (ie premiership), players risk themselves for ultimate glory, something that would be missing if it were just a useless series.
 
Thanks to all those for posting what essentially are my views on this debate and as Shinboner said, saving me a large amount of time and effort. Again nothing that Dan has said (and I've read all his posts carefully) has convinced me that his system would be better than the one we already have. We all have a capacity to think too Dan 24, so please stop the patronising comments such as "I pity you all". Actually Dan, I pity you.
 
Roylion,

Well, I don't think you did read my posts that carefully (though I'm glad that you said you did)

Why respond to other messages, rather than responding to my first message at the start of the post ? You don't need to respond to others responses. It's a response to my post that I am looking for. Otherwise, it looks as if you are hiding behind a curtain.

Despite what "Bomber" says, the Grand Final doesn't need to have the whole season riding on it to be big. I have used the FA CUP as an example of this, but it falls on deaf ears. The Grand Final is the LAST game of the season, and wil always be big. it is an EVENT.

Everyone on this board knows that it doesn't accurately reflect the years best team. So, as I seem to have said before, making it the culmination of a seperate tournament, just confirms the suspicions we have about the Grand Final already.

The Grand Final does NOT need to have the season riding on it to be big. Technically, Essendon have won the McClelland trophy anyway, and that can't be taken away from them (it ust needs to be given more recognition), so it's not changing things as much as you think.

The world will not end if this happens.

Final are about performing on the day. No double chances. A knockout finals series, with 1v8 etc is the fairest and best way of concluding the season.

Th winner of the Grand Final wil always be just that.....the Grand Final winner. Teams don't want to win the Grand Final to say they are the best (since often they are not the best). They want to win for the braggng rights.

In 1996, I knew Essendon were not the best team. Not by a long shot. I wanted to win the Grand Final, not becasue of the title premiers (which means best, and Essendon were not the best), but because of the bragging rights whch go with winning the Grand Final.

The GF is the individual biggest match of the year, and always will be. It is an event, more than a symbol of who the best is. The best team is aready proven over 6 months. This is why it will be just as big.

You'll argue for the sake of it, for your own pride no doubt.
 
Why repeat what others have already stated? Unless you like reading re-hashes of the same arguments. Everyone else said pretty much what I would have said... please take my reply to your first post as essentially the same. However if you would like me to cut and paste other comments made on this thread to reflect my own specific views + as well as my comments made on other threads, please let me know. You can have the pleasure of reading them again!!!
 

Remove this Banner Ad

To Shins, Roylion, Tim. Great moments in the Olympics (and Soccer World Cup)

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top