Australian-rules-football-afl-chatting-tipping-and-news

[Radar501]

" The club is always bigger than the individual, regardless of how good you've been."   - Wayne Carey.

 

Yes, Wayne.   A little fact which seemed to be lost on you during your time with North, until you were exposed for being the selfish fraud that you were/are.

[AlexRRR]

16 hours ago, Thechook said:

Geelong did the same with their vets and took the club 1st.  How have Geelong been performing over the last 12 years with good management.  North know they can't move forward with tired players. I hated seeing Harvey and Hayes leave the saints but it is has to happen. De Santo left the saints and it opened up the door for Jack Steven to come in, would pick Steven in a team any day now over Dal and loved him.

 

 

 

Geelong were on top coming down North were mid table going up, its worked for the Cats because they have many proven performers, it bombed for North because there always been a mid table team,  Cats go out and get Dangerfield one of the best mid's in the comp what do North do hang on to a dads army of veterans that haven't done too much.

 

Since mid year its been coming i certainly though there would be a clean out if they didn't Finnish in the top 3, Boomer was good enough to keep the injury prone Waite should have got the boot.....Del Santo i think could have kept his spot, dont have to be over 30 at north to get the chop many were found wanting after half season.

 

Boomer should not have been shocked, writing was on the wall....a little harsh it was and many think he deserved another year,  i personally dont think its in North's Scott, in my life time I've seen it a few times where a team has overload on veterans and failed miserably, i can only recall one team doing it and getting away with it and that was Hawthorn in the 80's they had a core group of about 5 players that had played over 300 games like Mathews and Tuck forget the rest now but they had 20 something Brearton and maybe even a young Dunston, they got done in one or 2 GF's i thought they were past it but the Hawks hung on to those 300 gamers and managed to snare a couple more before that core group retired.

 

If i was  North supporter i would be calling for Scotts head on a copper platter then to be fed to the sharks, and his core group of dead beat brains trust along with him, i didn't need a high IQ to know North would fail.

 

 

 

 

[BookMan]

Word on the soi is North is chasing Jaeger o Meara..

They should have hung on to the gang of 4 and offered a 4-1 trade

[BookMan]

All the team selections for this week!!!!

2 surprise selections for Sydney!   
Callum mills injured and OUT...massive loss Harry Marsh in for teh young fella... Harry was playing well himself until he got injured and lost his place.
MR Pressure himself, Dean Towers DROPPED for Kieren jack. Benny mcglynn came in for Jack last week and it seemed logical he would go out for Jack....kind of an odd replacement really

http://www.afl.com.au/news/teams

[BookMan]

1 hour ago, AlexRRR said:

 

 

 

Geelong were on top coming down North were mid table going up, its worked for the Cats because they have many proven performers, it bombed for North because there always been a mid table team,  Cats go out and get Dangerfield one of the best mid's in the comp what do North do hang on to a dads army of veterans that haven't done too much.

 

Since mid year its been coming i certainly though there would be a clean out if they didn't Finnish in the top 3, Boomer was good enough to keep the injury prone Waite should have got the boot.....Del Santo i think could have kept his spot, dont have to be over 30 at north to get the chop many were found wanting after half season.

 

Boomer should not have been shocked, writing was on the wall....a little harsh it was and many think he deserved another year,  i personally dont think its in North's Scott, in my life time I've seen it a few times where a team has overload on veterans and failed miserably, i can only recall one team doing it and getting away with it and that was Hawthorn in the 80's they had a core group of about 5 players that had played over 300 games like Mathews and Tuck forget the rest now but they had 20 something Brearton and maybe even a young Dunston, they got done in one or 2 GF's i thought they were past it but the Hawks hung on to those 300 gamers and managed to snare a couple more before that core group retired.

 

If i was  North supporter i would be calling for Scotts head on a copper platter then to be fed to the sharks, and his core group of dead beat brains trust along with him, i didn't need a high IQ to know North would fail.

 

 

 

 

I thought you were a big Brad Scott fan Alex..

Chimpy tells me he & Chooks were looking in your window  late the other night and they saw a wall poster of Brad Scott, next to posters of Damian Hardwick and Paul Roos. Candles under the Roos poster?  
 

[Radar501]

Okay fellas.    Just to add some raw data to the debate over home ground advantage during the finals:

 

The AFL final 8 system commenced in the 1994 season.   Since then, where a home team has played a team travelling from interstate in the elimination, qualifying, semi and preliminary finals, the results are as follows:

 

Home team wins: 87

Away team wins: 28

 

I have not included the grand finals in these stats because three of those games did not involve a Victorian team, so obviously an away team won.   Of the remaining grand finals between Victorian and interstate based teams, the results are:

 

Home team wins: 6

Away team wins: 6 

 

Make of these numbers as you see fit.

[BookMan]

1 hour ago, Radar501 said:

Okay fellas.    Just to add some raw data to the debate over home ground advantage during the finals:

 

The AFL final 8 system commenced in the 1994 season.   Since then, where a home team has played a team travelling from interstate in the elimination, qualifying, semi and preliminary finals, the results are as follows:

 

Home team wins: 87

Away team wins: 28

 

I have not included the grand finals in these stats because three of those games did not involve a Victorian team, so obviously an away team won.   Of the remaining grand finals between Victorian and interstate based teams, the results are:

 

Home team wins: 6

Away team wins: 6 

 

Make of these numbers as you see fit.

 

Nice work radar!

 

Astonishing figures really!

Just to repeat them .... excluding grand finals...

 

87 wins for home team
28 for away teams 

So...taking into account the % there, we could say the grand finals should have actually been 
9 away team wins
6 home teams wins

So, Melbourne based teams have stolen 2 or 3 extra wins based on home ground advantage!
 

I'm sure Alex will be along soon to push the official AFL propaganda line as to why the stats lie...

[joboss]

1 hour ago, BookMan said:

 

Nice work radar!

 

Astonishing figures really!

Just to repeat them .... excluding grand finals...

 

87 wins for home team
28 for away teams 

So...taking into account the % there, we could say the grand finals should have actually been 
9 away team wins
6 home teams wins

So, Melbourne based teams have stolen 2 or 3 extra wins based on home ground advantage!
 

I'm sure Alex will be along soon to push the official AFL propaganda line as to why the stats lie...

Rader wrote,   " Make of these numbers as you see fit. "

Seems that you,  "Make these numbers fit what you see"

[Radar501]

9 hours ago, BookMan said:

.......I'm sure Alex will be along soon to push the official AFL propaganda line as to why the stats lie.....

 

A total of 12 grand finals between Victorian and interstate teams is a very small sample size to play with.   Morgan Research would be hard pressed to make any meaningful interpretation of the data.

 

But, if they could.....one could possibly claim that the same number of wins (six each)  indicates that there is no home ground advantage in the grand final.  Therefore that game should always be played at The Mecca Cricket Ground.

 

That has been Alex's argument all along.

 

 

[Will27]

50 minutes ago, Radar501 said:

 

A total of 12 grand finals between Victorian and interstate teams is a very small sample size to play with.   Morgan Research would be hard pressed to make any meaningful interpretation of the data.

 

But, if they could.....one could possibly claim that the same number of wins (six each)  indicates that there is no home ground advantage in the grand final.  Therefore that game should always be played at The Mecca Cricket Ground.

 

That has been Alex's argument all along.

 

 

If there's no home ground advantage, why is it called home ground advantage?

 

Maybe no advantage if 2 Melbourne sides or 2 interstate sides but are playing, but definitely an advantage when a interstate side and a Melbourne side play.

 

WC play once, maybe twice at the MCG and Hawthorn play there 12 times a year.

How can that not be an advantage?

 

[BookMan]

10 hours ago, joboss said:

Rader wrote,   " Make of these numbers as you see fit. "

Seems that you,  "Make these numbers fit what you see"

 

Not at all Joboss!

 

We need to compare home & away finals against the anomaly of Grand finals.

 

This is the difference:
Home and Away finals actually have HOME games... so you have a rough 66% - 33% advantage to home teams during finals games.

The Grand Final does not have home games...It advantages Melbourne based teams. So by Radar's figures...
We should be seeing the same breakdown of 66/33 in grand finals.
but we are seeing a 50/50 split in grand finals!!!....

Small sample sure,...but still showing that Melbourne clubs CAN get an unfair advantage when playing a GF at home

 

 

1 hour ago, Radar501 said:

 

A total of 12 grand finals between Victorian and interstate teams is a very small sample size to play with.   Morgan Research would be hard pressed to make any meaningful interpretation of the data.

 

But, if they could.....one could possibly claim that the same number of wins (six each)  indicates that there is no home ground advantage in the grand final.  Therefore that game should always be played at The Mecca Cricket Ground.

 

That has been Alex's argument all along.

 

 

 

See my reply to joboss above.   12 games is a small sample but it still deviates greatly from the 66/33% split we see amongst other HOme and away finals

 

19 minutes ago, Will27 said:

If there's no home ground advantage, why is it called home ground advantage?

 

Maybe no advantage if 2 Melbourne sides or 2 interstate sides but are playing, but definitely an advantage when a interstate side and a Melbourne side play.

 

WC play once, maybe twice at the MCG and Hawthorn play there 12 times a year.

How can that not be an advantage?

 

Of course it is a MASSIVE advantage...
You wont get too many non-melbournite's saying it isnt

Hawks this year...if they get to the GF they will be licking their lips...Finish a very lucky 4th (could have been 7th and really should have been) and they play a GF on their home ground??  Crazy stuff....

[joboss]

Well I am glad that St Kilda have a perceived home ground advantage against Brisbane on Sunday.

My daughter works at Etihad on game days and said the she and other casual staff enjoy singing the Saints song.

[Radar501]

57 minutes ago, BookMan said:

We should be seeing the same breakdown of 66/33 in grand finals.
but we are seeing a 50/50 split in grand finals!!!.................

Small sample sure,...but still showing that Melbourne clubs CAN get an unfair advantage when playing a GF at home

 

 

I'm having difficulty understanding your logic, Mr. Bookman.

 

Let's accept the 66/33 win rate for home finals and 50/50 rate for grand finals.

 

Interstate teams are performing very well in GF's which belies the historical trend from other finals.   In fact, they have an even statistical chance of  beating a Victorian team, based on the sample pool.    50/50 odds means no advantage.

 

 

[GrantSmith]

Word coming in from the sois of Bondi that a deal between the AFL and ANZ stadium has been reached for non-derby finals to be played at the SCG! 

Edited August 26, 2016 by GrantSmith

[BookMan]

2 hours ago, Radar501 said:

 

I'm having difficulty understanding your logic, Mr. Bookman.

 

Let's accept the 66/33 win rate for home finals and 50/50 rate for grand finals.

 

Interstate teams are performing very well in GF's which belies the historical trend from other finals.   In fact, they have an even statistical chance of  beating a Victorian team, based on the sample pool.    50/50 odds means no advantage.

 

 

 

Im frequently misunderstood...

 

I'm going by your figures....The logic is that Home Finals (excluding grand finals) have a a 66% win rate...and so Grand finals should have this win rate too if they were held on HOME grounds of interstate teams (or geelong
I quote from your figures:

 "Since then, where a home team has played a team travelling from interstate in the elimination, qualifying, semi and preliminary finals, the results are as follows:..."
So i take that to mean any interstate team travelling to another state.

But Grand Finals are not held on a dominant teams/or interstate teams home ground....therefore u have 50/50 for GFs, not a rate of 66/33 as u have from home finals in general...
 

So...just taking the 66/33 rate. That shows there is a clear and distinct advantage for home teams and a makes a case for home teams GFs

 

 

[BookMan]

2 hours ago, joboss said:

Well I am glad that St Kilda have a perceived home ground advantage against Brisbane on Sunday.

 

My daughter works at Etihad on game days and said the she and other casual staff enjoy singing the Saints song.

 

 

Nothing perceived joboss... 66/33

[BookMan]

56 minutes ago, GrantSmith said:

Word coming in from the sois of Bondi that a deal between the AFL and ANZ stadium has been reached for non-derby finals to be played at the SCG! 

 

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2016-08-26/swans-to-play-home-finals-at-scg-with-one-exception

[Old Croc]

http://www.aussportstipping.com/sports/afl/home_advantage/

[joboss]

4 minutes ago, BookMan said:

 

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2016-08-26/swans-to-play-home-finals-at-scg-with-one-exception

There must be some influential ANZ Stadium members.

[sceadugenga]

I may not have read all the posts but doesn't the team finishing higher in the 8 get the finals home ground advantage?

(Excluding the grand final).

To me it indicates that they are theoretically the better side anyway.

Unless I've missed something.

[BookMan]

35 minutes ago, joboss said:

There must be some influential ANZ Stadium members.

 

 

AFL driven to have it there in the first place.

Smirking Gil and his past cronies always know best

[AlexRRR]

7 hours ago, Radar501 said:

 

A total of 12 grand finals between Victorian and interstate teams is a very small sample size to play with.   Morgan Research would be hard pressed to make any meaningful interpretation of the data.

 

But, if they could.....one could possibly claim that the same number of wins (six each)  indicates that there is no home ground advantage in the grand final.  Therefore that game should always be played at The Mecca Cricket Ground.

 

That has been Alex's argument all along.

 

 

 

 

FOR THE GUYS THAT DONT UNDERSTAND.....when an expansion team.....(interstaters) play a final in Vic it means they finished below that team there playing on the home and away ladder.....dont need a massive IQ to understand that so OBVIOUSLY the home team would be FAVORITES in a sense....GEEEEeeeeeeeeesssssssss.......

 

And with 50/50 GRAND FINAL wins....GOOD TEAMS WIN ANYWHERE......pretty simple maths us VIC's understand.

 

 

 

 

[AlexRRR]

7 hours ago, Radar501 said:

 

A total of 12 grand finals between Victorian and interstate teams is a very small sample size to play with.   Morgan Research would be hard pressed to make any meaningful interpretation of the data.

 

But, if they could.....one could possibly claim that the same number of wins (six each)  indicates that there is no home ground advantage in the grand final.  Therefore that game should always be played at The Mecca Cricket Ground.

 

That has been Alex's argument all along.

 

 

 

 

FOR THE GUYS THAT DONT UNDERSTAND.....when an expansion team.....(interstaters) play a final in Vic it means they finished below that team there playing on the home and away ladder.....dont need a massive IQ to understand that so OBVIOUSLY the home team would be FAVORITES in a sense....GEEEEeeeeeeeeesssssssss.......

 

And with 50/50 GRAND FINAL wins....GOOD TEAMS WIN ANYWHERE......pretty simple maths us VIC's understand.

 

 

 

 

[Will27]

1 hour ago, AlexRRR said:

 

 

FOR THE GUYS THAT DONT UNDERSTAND.....when an expansion team.....(interstaters) play a final in Vic it means they finished below that team there playing on the home and away ladder.....dont need a massive IQ to understand that so OBVIOUSLY the home team would be FAVORITES in a sense....GEEEEeeeeeeeeesssssssss.......

 

And with 50/50 GRAND FINAL wins....GOOD TEAMS WIN ANYWHERE......pretty simple maths us VIC's understand.

 

 

 

 

I don't think you've grasped the concept Alex.

 

Yes good teams win anywhere, but why should a side who over the course of a season

finishes below a side, get to play on their home ground, which despite what you say, is an advantage?

 

If positions on the ladder remain as is, Sydney will finish on top and Hawthorn will finish 4th.

So there could be a scenerio where Sydney will then have to travel to Melbourne, to play the Hawks

on their home ground despite finishing above them.

 

Surely you can see that isn't fair.

[joboss]

Breaking news:   Adelaide star slips out.

Star forward Eddie Betts is a late withdrawal from tonight’s clash with the West Coast Eagles as he has slipped on a banana skin and rolled his ankle and landed on his arse.

Ohhh!!.  If only it were true… 

[Thechook]

8 hours ago, Will27 said:

If there's no home ground advantage, why is it called home ground advantage?

 

Maybe no advantage if 2 Melbourne sides or 2 interstate sides but are playing, but definitely an advantage when a interstate side and a Melbourne side play.

 

WC play once, maybe twice at the MCG and Hawthorn play there 12 times a year.

How can that not be an advantage?

 

Saints play on the MCG maybe once or twice a year tops.  2010 saints  played there once, Collingwood 13 times.  Collingwood won the grand final with a home ground advantage, the grand final should have been played at Etihad as we finnished above them on the ladder.

[Thechook]

This year's grand final will be between Sydney and Adelaide played on neutral territory at the MCG.  Sydney will have to fly an extra 152.3 km more than Adelaide or around 7 minutes longer in the air so they will be at a disadvantage losing time to get over jet lag.

[joboss]

This year's grand final will be between Sydney and the Weagles,  played on neutral territory at the MCG.  Eagles will have to fly an extra 2000+ km more than Sydney or around 4 hours longer in the air so they will be at a disadvantage losing time to get over jet lag. But they will have 2 hours up their sleeve.   

[ripstanley]

Well to nights result throws the cat amongst the pigeons. Where will Adelaide end up? Look out for more upsets this weekend. 

 

[Will27]

3 hours ago, Thechook said:

Saints play on the MCG maybe once or twice a year tops.  2010 saints  played there once, Collingwood 13 times.  Collingwood won the grand final with a home ground advantage, the grand final should have been played at Etihad as we finnished above them on the ladder.

Surely you're not comparing flying interstate to driving up the road?

 

Anyway, I know you're trying to forget the 2010 GF, but Collingwood finished on top, St's 4th

Edited August 26, 2016 by Will27