 |
|
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
E
Joined: 05 May 2010
|
| Post subject: |  |
|
| What'sinaname wrote: | | E wrote: | | Piesnchess wrote: | | Donny wrote: | | Up to 118.6 from 107.9 |
Well, now I am a happy little black duck at last.   |
Another few more percentage points and well be dead set premiership favorites. That's just how important it is.
PS: The league is at the cross roads I reckon. too many games where all a side cares about is percentage. the competition needs more quality games. seriously, if you look at this week's games, the only interesting one was Swans v Geelong and that was decided by 110 points. Next is probably tigers v bombers but even that is simply two also rans.
In NFL, nearly every game has a lot riding on it. |
Most AFL games still have a lot riding on it. Compare the difference for us between a win and a loss tonight. Maybe Top 4 after round 11 vs struggling to stay in the 8 if we lose. That's a lot riding on the game. Similar to the NFL, not every game is close, but the results are important. Lose a game unexpectedly can mean the difference between division champion and wildcard. |
I didn't mean there were no ramifications if we lost. I just mean that the competition is so uneven and the talent pool is so diluted that there are far too many mismatches in the modern game. interestingly, the league seem to have decided to schedule a lot of mismatches through the middle part of the season. we are not the only ones facing an easy month. Look at who Port are playing over the next month.
there should be 4 really exciting games a week and a minimum. At the moment there is one maybe 2. that doesn't mean there wont be upsets, but they are fairly rare once the season settles down.
_________________
Ohhh, the Premiership's a cakewalk ....... |
|
|
|
 |
MattyD
Joined: 19 Apr 2010
Location: Kew
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| 35forever wrote: | | MattyD wrote: | LOL percentage.
I feel like I am having de ja vu.
We should beat some teams in the lower half of the ladder by bigger margins, with of course the odd game where our boys have a bad day, or the other team plays exceptionally well.
But you have to account for the umpire factor.
As far as I am concerned, every game that we could and should win by 10 goals plus, the umpires intervene and make it impossible.
How do they do that?
By giving our opponents 9 free kicks in the first quarter to our 1. Or by giving us 9 frees for a game and 20 to our opponents.
And there is also of course the Collingwood Forward Line Rule:
no free kicks to Collingwood under any circumstances inside 50, and especially not Cloke.
|
And you ain't just imagining things my friend! The figures (which don't even take into account things like WHERE and for WHAT frees are paid) are definitely on your side. Any measurable way you look at the umpiring Collingwood gets the poorest treatment by a mile. And that’s this season, last season, over the last decade, any way you carve it we get screwed each & every week. Sometimes it costs us games, sometimes it only lowers our margin, sometimes it costs us Brownlows, and sometimes it costs us flags Harmes, '99!)
Now I don't actually believe this is a deliberate or systemic thing - unlike the bias shown by certain individuals (and ex-individuals) within the AFL. I think it’s a simple reflection of the fact that millions of Australians, particularly Victorians, are either Collingwood supporters or hate Collingwood. Umpires are people, and the majority must fall into the group of brain-dead spazzos mentioned above. The figures are simply too stark and consistent for there to be any coincidence or accident. |
And the damn commentators really crap me off too. Every free kick we get they say things like that "Wasn't there" or they are somehow 'controversial.' Like the Adelaide game. We had 9 frees for the game. NINE. And somehow half of our frees were either controversial or not there. How is that not bias? And it wasn't just that game, it's EVERY game.
And the free kicks we get, never seem to assist with our momentum. In fact, it's the opposite. Like Anzac Day. Half way through our incredible comeback, there were two so called 'controversial' decisions. The mark in the goal square and Cloke's disallowed goal. Against a better team, these umpiring decisions would have stopped our comeback.
Admittedly last night against the Aints after quarter time the umpiring was even. We ended up with one more. Of course the number of frees doesn't necessarily mean anything. But when it is almost always that way, something is up. It was very unusual last night to see St Kilda miss out on some obvious frees or we received some dodgy ones. |
|
|
|
|
35forever
"I feel sick - dada dada dada da"
Joined: 23 Feb 2005
Location: Physical=Sunshine Coast -- Mental=Vic Park
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Yep, there's no way anyone can beat the Swannies at home! Oh wait...
We did, didn't we?
If last night was Rd.23 (and the ladder might well look very similar to what it does now) Sydney's win and huge percentage boost moved it ahead of Geelong, who drop to 4th, meaning they'd likely play GCS instead of Port. Who would you rather play?
I'd like to think that GCS would be replaced by us come season's end, but right now there are 6 teams good enough to make the 4, but the maths on that don't quite work. If each of these sides (Port, Horks, Geel, Freo, Us, & Siddley) had just one loss each for the rest of the H&A, they would all have to be considered good enough to go all the way. Two of these sides, however, will miss the 4 & the double chance, and who those two sides are will not be decided by who has the best looking Gurnsey, or by Brownlow votes, and not even by who Demetriou (oh yes folks, he's still running things!) likes the most.
Percentage will decide, who gets the double chance and who gets home games. Sides like Freo & Port get a big boost to their chances if they play at home, regardless of who they play. If we don't pick up our percentage between here & September we could be one of those who miss the 4 or start our Finals campaign at someone else's fortress, despite winning every game in that period. And now is the time to get it. We need to beat St.kilda tonight or we'll be out of the counting for now. But flogging them by 50 or 60 will decide whether we finish this round in 4th, or 5th spot. But of course gaining that percentage will require us to play most of 4 quarters like we did last week, and like Sydney did last night.
As it's just turned out we won by 80-something, and the media whores are calling it "A good effort", but not a patch on Sydney's epoch-changing brilliance. They forget Sydney have been our bitches for a decade. A bit of a shame we lost Maxy, Swanny, & Grundy, and Sidey will miss 2. Still, it's not like they're important players! Fortunately Thomas, Billy, and Fas were brilliant, and Trav gave the usual response to his media bashing. Dasher Young put in his best showing in Black & White as well, as did Mount Jarrod, which was a big help. An even bigger help was the percentage we got by keeping the Saints scoreless in the last, as well as the confidence we gained from a second straight 4 quarter performance. That percentage boost moved us from 6th to 3rd, albeit temporarily (Hawthorn & GCS will likely score wins leaving us 5th on percentage), however if Gold Coast manage to lose to a somewhat resurgent Adelaide in Adelaide, we'd find ourselves in the top 4 on PERCENTAGE in front of the Suns & Geelong, whose percentage was destroyed by Sydney the other night.
There's another aspect of the percentage system that goes unnoticed. Our game against the saints was a good example, Sydney's was even better. If the game is decided by half or ¾ time, what incentive is there for a team to continue putting in their best effort? The answer of course is percentage. We would see many incredibly boring games if there was no reason for sides to continue putting their necks on the line, and we wouldn't have seen Geelong so utterly & deliciously destroyed on Thursday night!
The opposite side of the percentage system is that it rewards low scoring, and therefore very defensive games. Personally I quite like those kind of dour struggles, but the AFL, and the media hate them. Demetriou's obsession with high scores led to many of his idiotic rule changes which have made our great game almost indecipherable to players, fans & even umpires.
What does surprise me is that this whole debate has gotten this far without anyone proposing an alternative system to separate teams with an equal number of wins. Where are the great minds of Nick's when we need them?!
Personally I can only think of variations to the percentage system, such as counting margins rather than percentage (the total of a sides margins would be divided by the number of games played). This would provide a similar result to percentage but without the preference for low scores.
I'm sure there's a better way though... Anyone?
_________________
"If at first you dont succeed...
... oh who cares, we did it!!!!!"
-me, 2010
"The pies are going to the big dance!"-P.Daicos 2010
Visit My Website! |
|
|
|
|
Piesnchess
piesnchess
Joined: 09 Jun 2008
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| 35forever wrote: | Yep, there's no way anyone can beat the Swannies at home! Oh wait...
We did, didn't we?
If last night was Rd.23 (and the ladder might well look very similar to what it does now) Sydney's win and huge percentage boost moved it ahead of Geelong, who drop to 4th, meaning they'd likely play GCS instead of Port. Who would you rather play?
I'd like to think that GCS would be replaced by us come season's end, but right now there are 6 teams good enough to make the 4, but the maths on that don't quite work. If each of these sides (Port, Horks, Geel, Freo, Us, & Siddley) had just one loss each for the rest of the H&A, they would all have to be considered good enough to go all the way. Two of these sides, however, will miss the 4 & the double chance, and who those two sides are will not be decided by who has the best looking Gurnsey, or by Brownlow votes, and not even by who Demetriou (oh yes folks, he's still running things!) likes the most.
Percentage will decide, who gets the double chance and who gets home games. Sides like Freo & Port get a big boost to their chances if they play at home, regardless of who they play. If we don't pick up our percentage between here & September we could be one of those who miss the 4 or start our Finals campaign at someone else's fortress, despite winning every game in that period. And now is the time to get it. We need to beat St.kilda tonight or we'll be out of the counting for now. But flogging them by 50 or 60 will decide whether we finish this round in 4th, or 5th spot. But of course gaining that percentage will require us to play most of 4 quarters like we did last week, and like Sydney did last night.
As it's just turned out we won by 80-something, and the media whores are calling it "A good effort", but not a patch on Sydney's epoch-changing brilliance. They forget Sydney have been our bitches for a decade. A bit of a shame we lost Maxy, Swanny, & Grundy, and Sidey will miss 2. Still, it's not like they're important players! Fortunately Thomas, Billy, and Fas were brilliant, and Trav gave the usual response to his media bashing. Dasher Young put in his best showing in Black & White as well, as did Mount Jarrod, which was a big help. An even bigger help was the percentage we got by keeping the Saints scoreless in the last, as well as the confidence we gained from a second straight 4 quarter performance. That percentage boost moved us from 6th to 3rd, albeit temporarily (Hawthorn & GCS will likely score wins leaving us 5th on percentage), however if Gold Coast manage to lose to a somewhat resurgent Adelaide in Adelaide, we'd find ourselves in the top 4 on PERCENTAGE in front of the Suns & Geelong, whose percentage was destroyed by Sydney the other night.
There's another aspect of the percentage system that goes unnoticed. Our game against the saints was a good example, Sydney's was even better. If the game is decided by half or ¾ time, what incentive is there for a team to continue putting in their best effort? The answer of course is percentage. We would see many incredibly boring games if there was no reason for sides to continue putting their necks on the line, and we wouldn't have seen Geelong so utterly & deliciously destroyed on Thursday night!
The opposite side of the percentage system is that it rewards low scoring, and therefore very defensive games. Personally I quite like those kind of dour struggles, but the AFL, and the media hate them. Demetriou's obsession with high scores led to many of his idiotic rule changes which have made our great game almost indecipherable to players, fans & even umpires.
What does surprise me is that this whole debate has gotten this far without anyone proposing an alternative system to separate teams with an equal number of wins. Where are the great minds of Nick's when we need them?!
Personally I can only think of variations to the percentage system, such as counting margins rather than percentage (the total of a sides margins would be divided by the number of games played). This would provide a similar result to percentage but without the preference for low scores.
I'm sure there's a better way though... Anyone? |
Yes, we do have the wood on the swannies I agree, but when we played them Tippet was not there yet, and billionaire buddy was still settling in remember. Their multi talent forward line is a concern, but then again, if cloke could really get on his bike, and Elliott starring, along with white and our centres chiming in, we can match them with scoring hopefully, and we don't play at that peanut sized ground they played the cats at. Percentage will play a big part in top four positions, fully concur, and if we could somehow get top two, but grab second spot on % from swans, a home final on the G would be just what the doctor ordered IMHO 
_________________
Poverty exists not because we cannot feed the poor, but because we cannot satisfy the rich.
Chess and Vodka are born brothers. - Russian proverb. |
|
|
|
|
Pies4shaw 
pies4shaw
Joined: 08 Oct 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| GCS will be lucky to win 2 of their next 6. Let's worry about likely outcomes. |
|
|
|
|
Piethagoras' Theorem 
the hypotenuse, is always a cakewalk
Joined: 29 May 2006
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| prawnstar wrote: | | E wrote: | | Piesnchess wrote: | | Donny wrote: | | Up to 118.6 from 107.9 |
Well, now I am a happy little black duck at last. |
Another few more percentage points and well be dead set premiership favorites. That's just how important it is.
PS: The league is at the cross roads I reckon. too many games where all a side cares about is percentage. the competition needs more quality games. seriously, if you look at this week's games, the only interesting one was Swans v Geelong and that was decided by 110 points. Next is probably tigers v bombers but even that is simply two also rans.
In NFL, nearly every game has a lot riding on it. |
That's fine, except NFL is boring as batshit. |
can't argue with that, really. 
_________________
Formally frankiboy and FrankieGoesToCollingwood. |
|
|
|
|
Piesnchess
piesnchess
Joined: 09 Jun 2008
|
| Post subject: | |
|
^ FWIW, I actually find NRL boring at times, but as my late Dad said to me once as we watched a game " Bit boring compared to our game eh, but yer gotta give these thick necked, fat bastards credit, they sure can run fast as buggery " ! He had a point.
_________________
Poverty exists not because we cannot feed the poor, but because we cannot satisfy the rich.
Chess and Vodka are born brothers. - Russian proverb. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
|
|
The Rules
FAQ
Usergroups
Calendar
Search
Log in
Register
