Why are supporters not more upset about the sham of the AFL fixture?

Remove this Banner Ad

Sep 15, 2007
50,401
46,706
Where i need to be
AFL Club
Geelong
This has to be the biggest problem in football right now and made even more glaring on the weekend.

We currently have a situation where the difference between top 4 and missing finals altogether looks like being only 4 points. And yet we have fixture with 5 double up games where some teams will play 3-4 of those double up games against top 8 sides and other teams may well play only 0-1 of those games against top 8 sides. This problem has always been there but made much worse now given there is only 5 double up games where there used to be a lot more and thus harder to make it unbalanced.

Not only is this incredibly unjust but it means the finals won’t have all the best teams in them nor in their right positions. There is too much randomness so we will end up with more lopsided finals results as the best team may play the 4th best team in the gf rather then the second best. Or worse yet the best team may miss out altogether cos they didn’t even make top 4 and played an interstate knockout final (the best team has never been unbeatable, not in any season in vfl history, so losing one game doesn’t make them not the best team).

The second problem with the fixture is that bottom teams are getting their usual end of season floggings against finals aspirants. Finals aspirants tend to be better teams but when you add in the fact they have everything to play for whilst bottom teams don’t we get smashing that aren’t reflective of the true difference between the sides. There is nothing to provide hope for the bottom sides. Sunday’s results were a joke and should make us fans angry.

These problems could easily be fixed. 17-5 was one such proposal that fixes these problems and yet we as fans don’t embrace it. Why? A couple of reasons I’ve noted:

We reject it cos we usually make the mistake of comparing it to our version of the perfect system rather then the present system.

When we do compare it to the present system we usually blow up the small flaws out of proportion and largely ignore the significant benefits. In part because we oddly are happy with massive flaws if we think they have always been there and get more angry at small flaws when they haven’t been there.

We embrace cliches like all changes are bad or are about money and don’t rationally evaluate each proposed change on its merits. This change is very good and actually is about taking money out of the fixture and focusing on fairness yet I’ve heard the opposite said about it

17-5 isn’t the only realistic option that improves upon the current system. We need to embrace the better systems. Not cos they are perfect but because they are better then the status quo and the status quo is deeply flawed.

This is the greatest problem of the game. It’s time to stand up as fans and ask for it to be fixed. To stand up for fairness, integrity and hope. To make the game what it should be.
 
If fixturing makes a difference, then your team isn't a contender anyway.

If a team cruises into final without beating top teams, then they'll be exposed.
False. All teams lose. Nearly all have lost multiple games in a season. Not one team has won a flag without losing. Thus if teams can be the best and still lose a couple of games then fixturing can make a difference. This is not an argument, it’s is an identity like 1+1 =2. Not up for debate.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

We could go to a conference-style system (best system when teams can’t pkay each other twice in my eyes) but then people would just whine about it being “too American”.

17-5 is one of those good in theory but not so much in practice type of systems. Plenty of commentary on this in other threads, would not like to see it brought in.

Alternatively we can just suck it up and stop trying to manipulate sports results that are always going to have a certain degree of error anyway.
 
It’s not just about who but also where
If Richmond play all 8 interstate sides away, then Melbourne in nt, Hawthorn and kangaroos in tassie. They miss finals by 2-3 games.
 
Not only is this incredibly unjust but it means the finals won’t have all the best teams in them nor in their right positions. There is too much randomness so we will end up with more lopsided finals results as the best team may play the 4th best team in the gf rather then the second best. Or worse yet the best team may miss out altogether cos they didn’t even make top 4 and played an interstate knockout final (the best team has never been unbeatable, not in any season in vfl history, so losing one game doesn’t make them not the best team).
The logical extension of complaining about randomness and unfairness is to get rid of finals altogether. Grand Finals throw up random results because teams that were the best by any measure in the H&A can, as you say, lose one-off games.
 
If fixturing makes a difference, then your team isn't a contender anyway.

If a team cruises into final without beating top teams, then they'll be exposed.
This is more true than most fans will accept.

Richmond are not top of the table because of an easy draw. Sydney are not battling to stay in the 8 because of a tough draw.
 
Few things will fix up the uneven nature of the AFL Fixture and the comp itself.

As a previous poster wrote, the only answer is to make it a 17 game season. One season you will play 8 home games, the next season 9. Where you play is completely up to the club, whether its Tassie, Ballarat or Afghanistan. Like the NFL, less is sometimes more.

Also remove the salary cap floor. No reason why Carlton should be paying a minimum of 95% of the cap to its undeserving list. If they were allowed to pay what they are worth (say 75%) they should be able to bank that money for future years. The way it is at the moment, they can only ever have a maximum of 500k more to spend than Richmond, which isn't enough to attract a few big names to the club. Instead Tom Lynch is going to accept maybe 100-200k less to play in front of 90k every week and a chance to win flags.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Equality (17 game fixture) or revenue (22 games). There can be only one and we all know what the AFL are most concerned with.
If we scrap finals, it is possible to fit in a 34 game season into the year outside finals.....we’ll, may need to find 2 weeks for that. But I’m sure we could easily get 1 if Sheffield shield final goes to suburban ovals.

But do we give up finals
 
It's really quite farcical that the draw is handicapped, with the AFL actually contriving to make it uneven. Been saying so for years, and concede that it helped Richmond in 2017.

But 17-5 is definitely not the answer. It's the same s**t, only more warped.
 
This is more true than most fans will accept.

Richmond are not top of the table because of an easy draw. Sydney are not battling to stay in the 8 because of a tough draw.

You are right to an extent, especially in regards to Richmond as they are good enough to win anyway.

But basing your double ups on last years results absolutely does effect the chances of making the finals.

Geelong for instance has double ups against Melb, Hawthorn, Richmond, Sydney and Gold Coast (4 sides in the running for finals). Whereas Collingwood has double ups against Essendon, Brisbane, Carlton, Freo and Richmond (one side will play finals). When teams are around the same mark and battling for a spot in the finals to ignore that that is a massive benefit for Collingwood.
 
You are right to an extent, especially in regards to Richmond as they are good enough to win anyway.

But basing your double ups on last years results absolutely does effect the chances of making the finals.

Geelong for instance has double ups against Melb, Hawthorn, Richmond, Sydney and Gold Coast (4 sides in the running for finals). Whereas Collingwood has double ups against Essendon, Brisbane, Carlton, Freo and Richmond (one side will play finals). When teams are around the same mark and battling for a spot in the finals to ignore that that is a massive benefit for Collingwood.
Yeah that's a fair point. What's the alternative - completely random? There'd still be similar scenarios, but then it's just purely luck.
 
Yeah that's a fair point. What's the alternative - completely random? There'd still be similar scenarios, but then it's just purely luck.

If you have to stick to 22 games, then I guess rolling fixture?

Or they work out as well as possible to give every team an even fixture based on last seasons results rather than the handicapped fixture we have now where the lower teams have easier fixture and the better teams gets a harder fixture.
 
If the mens AFL was moved to 17 weeks + finals they could then address the sham of the women's league draw and make that comp 9 weeks + finals.

Everyone's a winner.
Does anybody in here have the ability to use their brain? The TV rights is for 22 + finals. The rest is rubbish. Playing each other once each is not equal unless the venue is a neutral ground.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top