BigFooty summer comp - to find the best team, according to BigFooty posters, of the modern era.

[Dan26]

My decision was based on which of two teams (that were essentally the same) were able to perform on the biggest stage.

One won in a gripping contest. The other got flogged by a fat ex-retiree.

EDIT - My point was simply I was surprised how one-sided the voting was....

Fair enough.

You know what's interesting, though? In 2009, St.Kilda has 16 more inside 50's than Geelong. As time goes on, I reckon we tend to forget the on-field stuff and remember the final result, but at the time, and in the hours directly after the game, most thought St.Kilda should have won.

And 2008 was the other way around. Geelong, 18 more inside 50's. I think, from memory it was the most ever recorded by a team that lost a game.

It almost makes me wonder whether Geelong's losing performance in the 2008 Grand Final (apart from their goal kicking) was actally better than their own winning performance in the 2009 Grand Final, where, in the first half in particular, they were totally outplayed by the Saints.

The last quarter of 2009 was won on grit and determination, but over the whole game, I think poor kicking probably decided the result more than anything.

It's all perception, I suppose. We all look at games and analyse teams in different ways.

 

[larrikin]

Are you seriously suggesting that Geelong played better than the the Hawks in the 08 GF?

 

[Dan26]

Are you seriously suggesting that Geelong played better than the the Hawks in the 08 GF?

Absolutely. Apart from not taking their chances. Pretty much everything else they dominated. As I was saying, people tend to rememebr the end result and a few select events in the game (like Stewart Dew) rather than the general run of play throughout the 2 hours, which Geelong had the better of.

 

[Dan26]

ROUND OF 16 KNOCKOUT STAGE, PART 1 COMPLETE

Hawthorn 1989 defeated Nth. melb 1999.........13-4
Essendon 2000 defeated Brisbane 2003.........15-2
Geelong 2008 defeated Geelong 2009.........16-1
Carlton 1995 defeated Brisbane 2002..........14-3

 

[Dan26]

ROUND OF 16 PART 2

VS

HAWTHORN '88 (19-3, 142.3%)......COLLW'D 2010 (17-4-1, 141.7%)





____________________________________________________________

VS

GEELONG 2007 (18-4, 152.8%)......CARLTON 1987 (18-4, 138.0%)






_____________________________________________________________

VS

WCOAST 1992 (15-6-1 125.9%)......BRISBANE 2001 (17-5, 127.6%)






_____________________________________________________________

VS

WCOAST 1994 (16-6, 132.2%)......WCOAST 1991 (19-3, 162.2%)







_____________________________________________________________








Select your winners for part 2 ONLY. (Open all day 16th January)

 

[Rioli magic]

Absolutely. Apart from not taking their chances. Pretty much everything else they dominated. As I was saying, people tend to rememebr the end result and a few select events in the game (like Stewart Dew) rather than the general run of play throughout the 2 hours, which Geelong had the better of.

I think you'll find the 1st quarter was even, Geelong dominated the 2nd quarter and failed to capitalise, and then Hawthorn were comfortably better in the 3rd and 4th quarters. Over the game Hawthorn were still the better overall team, 2-1 quaters, 1 even, hence being down by 1 point at 1/4 time, leading at 1/2 time, extending that lead at 3/4 time, and extending it again at the final siren. Geelong should've been up by 6 goals at half time from the 2nd quarter play, saying they dominated anything, let alone everything else, from then on (1/2 the game) is ridiculous. The only reason they had more scoring shots was because of the rushed behinds.

 

[Dan26]

I think you'll find the 1st quarter was even, Geelong dominated the 2nd quarter and failed to capitalise, and then Hawthorn were comfortably better in the 3rd and 4th quarters. Over the game Hawthorn were still the better overall team, 2-1 quaters, 1 even, hence being down by 1 point at 1/4 time, leading at 1/2 time, extending that lead at 3/4 time, and extending it again at the final siren. Geelong should've been up by 6 goals at half time from the 2nd quarter play, saying they dominated anything, let alone everything else, from then on (1/2 the game) is ridiculous. The only reason they had more scoring shots was because of the rushed behinds.

Well, you can look at rushed behinds in one of two ways. The ball has to be down there with Geelong attacking in the first place if Hawthorn is to take the option of forcing a rushed behind, so the very fact that one tema is forcing rushed behinds is an indication their their oponent is having the better of play.

From my memory of the game, Geelong had the better of play for most of the game, but I don't want to get into a big debate about it because how do you measure an intangible thing like "dominating play" unless you use pure numbers like "inside 50's?" (which Geelong has 18 more of.) The domination of play is often not something you can measure. Sometimes a team can have the ball, be in possession, but not be in control of play (chipping it around, panicking etc, under defensive pressure)

It doesn't matter in the end, because they lost.

Anyway, on with the voting.

 

[Rioli magic]

From my memory of the game, Geelong had the better of play for most of the game, but I don't want to get into a big debate about it because how do you measure an intangible thing like "dominating play" unless you use pure numbers like "inside 50's?" (which Geelong has 18 more of.) The domination of play is often not something you can measure. Sometimes a team can have the ball, be in possession, but not be in control of play (chipping it around, panicking etc, under defensive pressure)

It doesn't matter in the end, because they lost.

Anyway, on with the voting.

I'm just saying you make a statement that people remember certain events of play and attribute them to the whole 2 hours, when your memory sounds like the 2nd quarter, being attributed to the whole 2 hours.


Hawthorn
Geelong
Brisbane
West Coast 91

 

[butters78]

hawks 88
cats 07
eagles 92
eagles 94

 

[Pj.Rj.Hj]

Getting tougher

Hawthorn 1988
Geelong 2007
Draw (really close, I can't break them. Similar big bodied teams with good blend of enforcers and finesse players)
West Coast 1994 (older, wiser, mentally tougher)

 

[RogerC]

Are you seriously suggesting that Geelong played better than the the Hawks in the 08 GF?

He is suggesting that, because for Dan footy is a game played on a piece of paper, not on a football field.

I guess what this thread is demonstrating, more than anything, is that preconceptions outweigh analysis. It's not just Hawthorn 2008, who finished a distant 3rd behind a team that had fewer wins and a lower percentage, and didn't have to overcome a dominant team to win the flag that year either (there really was no 'dominant' team in 1994).

It's also St Kilda 2009 and Collingwood 2010. St Kilda 09 especially. They had a season very much like Geelong's in 2008 - one more loss, but their biggest losing margin coming into the finals was 5 points, and they only lost the grand final by a couple of goals. No team had their measure, and had some really good chances to put Geelong away in the grand final. If Geelong 2008 are deemed the best team in their division, then St Kilda ought to have been second in theirs. Instead, they languish with a 2-3 record. It's more about perception than what actually happened.

I also think Collingwood 2010 are slightly underrated. Should have been a clear second in their group. Essendon 1993 are also baffling.

 

[Pessimistic]

Fair enough.

You know what's interesting, though? In 2009, St.Kilda has 16 more inside 50's than Geelong. As time goes on, I reckon we tend to forget the on-field stuff and remember the final result, but at the time, and in the hours directly after the game, most thought St.Kilda should have won.

And 2008 was the other way around. Geelong, 18 more inside 50's. I think, from memory it was the most ever recorded by a team that lost a game.

It almost makes me wonder whether Geelong's losing performance in the 2008 Grand Final (apart from their goal kicking) was actally better than their own winning performance in the 2009 Grand Final, where, in the first half in particular, they were totally outplayed by the Saints.

The last quarter of 2009 was won on grit and determination, but over the whole game, I think poor kicking probably decided the result more than anything.

It's all perception, I suppose. We all look at games and analyse teams in different ways.

Thats the thing. The cats 2008 last GF quarter was a wimper

They went in at 3/4 time just 17 points down, having scored two in row for perhaps the first time in the game. In contrast Hawks had answered any Cats goal within a few minutes.

But a club coming from behind in last quarter is rare. Essendon 84 and Geelong 09 among the few. Cats have become much better in final quarters since. Maybe Geelong 09 would have beaten Hawks 08 ? by way of overcoming that deficit ?
The game certainly had an effect on Geelong since. Had 4 close wins over Hawthorn in a row. Youd probably go back 50 years or more to get 4 wins like that - I think Dan yourself highlighed the ratio of close wins was something like 13-2 (hawks-cats) before 2008

Essendon 93 and adelaide 97-98 also had the come from behind toughness. Why wasnt Essendon 85-85 in this competition ?

And the Lions 01-03 was one of the more complete teams ever - very underrated in this review

 

[Stevie80]

hawks
cats
lions
eagles 94

 

[Sharker18]

Hawks
Cats
Eagles
Eagles 91

...............................................................................................
I think the reason the lions have under acheived in this competition is because there was no single year they dominated, they never finished top and went into 2 of their 3 premiership games as underdogs....interesting their team from 2001-03 is thought of as one of the best of all time but in no single year did they dominate.....if this competition was done on era's rather then single year teams no doubt they would be higher ranked....

 

[Medders123]

Collingwood 2010
Geelong 2007
West Coast 1992
West Coast 1994

 

[Chasing the Dream]

Hawks
Geelong
Lions
WCE 94

 

[La Vache]

Hawthorn 1988
Geelong 2007
WCE 1992
WCE 1991

 

['51 Bewick]

Collingwood 2010
Geelong 2007
Brisbane 2001
West Coast 1991

 

[Quinz]

Hawthorn
Geelong
West Coast
West Coast 1991

 

[stugots]

hawks 88
cats 07
lions 01
eagles 91

 

[tucky74]

Hawks 88
Cats 07
Wc 92
WC 91

 

[BACCS]

Geez, were our premiership sides THAT bad?

 

[Rocky_Star_Pro]

Hawks 88
Geelong 2007
Brisbane 2001
West Coast 1991

 

[Simon_Nesbit]

I'm a little confused here - lots of votes for Hawks 88 and Hawks 89.....votes for Geelong 08 (their best year IMO), 07 AND 09....

Are posters not looking at the actual teams? Feel sorry for Dan having to audit these numbers.

 

[Simon_Nesbit]

Hawks 89 defeated Kangaroos 99
Essendon 00 defeated Brisbane 03
Geelong 08 defeated Geelong 09 (Hawks 08 would beat both!)
Carlton 95 defeated Brisbane 02