Equalisation - the facts and the premiership merry-go-round

[Furn2]

Maybe not, but it is pure competition.

Everyone plays everyone, home and away. The team with the most amount of points at the conclusion of this is crowned champions.

European soccer works with its league system because it has other things to play for other than winning the league.

European places and relegation means most teams have something to aim for once they can't win it.

Without that 15 teams would have nothing to play for for half the season.

 

[Scotland]

European soccer works with its league system because it has other things to play for other than winning the league.

European places and relegation means most teams have something to aim for once they can't win it.

Without that 15 teams would have nothing to play for for half the season.

Agreed. But the knockout comps are fairer also. The Champions League for example is groups of 4 playing H&A progressing to H&A quarters and semis then a final at a neutral venue.

 

[Sando22]

Free agency seems to be working pretty well.....

 

[Demonic Ascent]

There is no such thing as a 'fair' fixture with 18 clubs and 22 games.

Of course there is - you're just confusing "fair" with "equal", a common mistake.

 

[M Malice]

the hawthorn dominance of the last 3 years is in part explainable by the introduction of the 2 new teams.
imagine if players like j.cameron, t.lynch, d.prestia, c.dixon, l.whitfield, r.thompson, s.may, a.saad, a.hall, k.kolodjashni, p.davis, d.smith etc... were spread around the other 16 clubs. geelong would love to still have ablett, bulldogs ward, collingwood shaw, sydney mumford etc... if freeo had one of cameron or lynch how much more competitive would they have been the last couple of years?

 

[JohnnyFontane90]

the hawthorn dominance of the last 3 years is in part explainable by the introduction of the 2 new teams.
imagine if players like j.cameron, t.lynch, d.prestia, c.dixon, l.whitfield, r.thompson, s.may, a.saad, a.hall, k.kolodjashni, p.davis, d.smith etc... were spread around the other 16 clubs. geelong would love to still have ablett, bulldogs ward, collingwood shaw, sydney mumford etc... if freeo had one of cameron or lynch how much more competitive would they have been the last couple of years?

tbh that's more effected the bottom sides being able to rebuild like melbourne, carlton, brisbane, st kilda etc

don't think any of the contenders would be substantially stronger if it weren't for the expansion teams with the exception of possibly geelong because of ablett, but even then they won a flag without him so they clearly didn't drop off that much.

 

[Kwality]

Nope, Tigers are not having success now, get real!!!!

Having said that GWS and Gold Coast gifted premierships to the Hawks and expansion put equalisation on a back seat!

Based on the clubs performance in the modern era (national comp), you are going as well as you ever have, sure everyone is chasing a flag, at least you are playing finals.

 

[Scotland]

Of course there is - you're just confusing "fair" with "equal", a common mistake.

What is 'fair' then?

 

[Rotayjay]

If the AFL became like the EPL (with the Crows not part of the 'big 4' or whatever), I'd stop following it. It's premiership or bust - no point following a team which has no chance of winning the championship. Avoiding relegation is not enough of a carrot.

 

[Kwality]

What is 'fair' then?

As equal as can be ?

 

[Scotland]

As equal as can be ?

And what is that?

 

[Pessimistic]

the hawthorn dominance of the last 3 years is in part explainable by the introduction of the 2 new teams.
imagine if players like j.cameron, t.lynch, d.prestia, c.dixon, l.whitfield, r.thompson, s.may, a.saad, a.hall, k.kolodjashni, p.davis, d.smith etc... were spread around the other 16 clubs. geelong would love to still have ablett, bulldogs ward, collingwood shaw, sydney mumford etc... if freeo had one of cameron or lynch how much more competitive would they have been the last couple of years?

You are right, but the hawks would still be good, but top 4 teams such as sydney and freo, who are our bunnies to an ectent, might have been replaced with stronger challengers.

The counter argument is did not hawthorn lose franklin in that time? So some players pay may have improved

 

[Mr Magic]

Based on the clubs performance in the modern era (national comp), you are going as well as you ever have, sure everyone is chasing a flag, at least you are playing finals.

Thats got nothing to do with the price of eggs.

So we are no longer terrible?

Thats has little to do with success but if you set the bar low enough like Homer Simpson well....

Who says we are necessarily playing finals?? At the moment we have natural progression on higher draft picks so far without the windfall of gains other teams have received!

 

[Seeds]

Equalisation isn't the hottest topic in the world of the AFL, but it's perennially brought up because it directly affects all of us two million-odd fans. If we didn't each want our team to win flags, we wouldn't be supporters.

Equalisation measures such as the salary cap, draft, and 'luxury tax' have their supporters and detractors. Some extol the virtues of such measures, while others bemoan what they perceive as the watering-down of equalisation, and still others call for equalisation to be scrapped and allow truly strong clubs to float to the top.

Five months ago, Hawthorn pulled it off and won their third flag in a row. This sparked debate as to whether dynasties were becoming the rule rather than the exception.

What if you look at the long-term record of the last half-a-century? In each given ten-year-period, how many teams won the premiership? How many were one-flag-wonders and how many were dynasties and super-teams?

2006-2015: five premiers (WCE, Geelong, Hawthorn, Collingwood, Sydney)

1996-2005: six premiers (NM, Adelaide, Essendon, Brisbane, Port, Sydney)

1986-1995: five premiers (Hawthorn, Carlton, Collingwood, WCE, Esssendon)

1976-1985: five premiers (Hawthorn, NM, Carlton, Richmond, Essendon)

1966-1975: five premiers (St Kilda, Richmond, Carlton, Hawthorn, NM)

The consistency of the pattern is remarkable: each of the last five decades has seen five or six different premiers. Interestingly, the pattern extends back into the pre-equalisation era. Overall, there have been 13 different premiership-winning clubs in the last 50 years. 10 of those 13 teams have won a flag since 1996. Is 13 different premiers in 50 years a good return for a league that spent the majority of that time with less than 15 clubs? Of course, premierships are not the only metric of 'how even' the competition is - since 1987 when the salary cap was introduced, every club except GWS and Gold Coast has played in a preliminary final.

Interesting finding. Do you get the same sort of consistent results when you look at the amount of teams that make a grand final in a decade? Or even amount of teams that make the top 4 over say a five year period?

 

[Scotland]

What's considered a 'cycle' now anyway?

Hawthorn were 2nd last in 2004, 3rd last in 2005 then 6th last in 2006. Since then they've featured in 8/9 finals campaigns, made 5 GFs, won 4 flags and finished in the top 4 6 times.

In that same time period (just 2007-) we've gone top 4, 2nd last, 11th, last, top 4, 5th, two years out of the finals then Grand Finalist.

Melbourne, well best not to go into them in too much detail. Their best season was winning 8 and a half games.

Geelong have been good the whole time and their worst year was 2015 just missing the finals.

I think that structural inequities are overplayed. The Bulldogs were supposed to be hopeless in 2015. Didn't do much in 2014, captain walked out, coach walked out... and they came 6th.

 

[Rotayjay]

Interesting finding. Do you get the same sort of consistent results when you look at the amount of teams that make a grand final in a decade? Or even amount of teams that make the top 4 over say a five year period?

I didn't have time to look at grand final appearances or top-4 finishes - that would probably paint a far more nuanced, different picture.

 

[Scotland]

2000-2015 inclusive:

Teams to win the flag: Essendon, Brisbane, Port, Sydney, West Coast, Geelong, Hawthorn, Collingwood
Teams to make the GF but not win it: St Kilda, Fremantle, Melbourne
Teams to make the PF but not he GF: Carlton, Western Bulldogs, Adelaide, North Melbourne, Richmond
Teams to finish 5-8 but not top 4: Nil
Teams not to make the finals at all: Gold Coast, GWS (who joined in 2011 and 2012 respectively)

2010-2015 inclusive:

Teams to win the flag: Sydney, Geelong, Hawthorn, Collingwood.
Teams to make the GF but not win it: St Kilda, Fremantle, West Coast
Teams to make the PF but not he GF: Western Bulldogs, Adelaide, North Melbourne, Port
Teams to finish 5-8 but not top 4: Carlton, Essendon, Richmond
Teams not to make the finals at all: Gold Coast, GWS, Melbourne, Brisbane

A lot depends on your sample size.

Carlton, Richmond, Melbourne and Essendon haven't featured in prelim final week for 15 years. Is the competition stacked against these clubs?

 

[NYJetsfor2029]

tbh that's more effected the bottom sides being able to rebuild like melbourne, carlton, brisbane, st kilda etc

don't think any of the contenders would be substantially stronger if it weren't for the expansion teams with the exception of possibly geelong because of ablett, but even then they won a flag without him so they clearly didn't drop off that much.

No it definitely affects the mid ladder clubs as well. West Coast made the GF last year with Gaff as their B&F winner, who WCE got with pick 4 in the Gold Coast draft. Other later top ten players such as Prestia and Heppell could definitely have helped elevate some middle ladder clubs up by now.

Of course it depends on the draft but there is usually a big difference between the top 10-12 players each year and the rest which the mid clubs didnt have access to those years.

 

[Kwality]

Thats got nothing to do with the price of eggs.

So we are no longer terrible?

Thats has little to do with success but if you set the bar low enough like Homer Simpson well....

Who says we are necessarily playing finals?? At the moment we have natural progression on higher draft picks so far without the windfall of gains other teams have received!

Didn't say you were no longer terrible, perhaps you have peaked with this list, its been a climb up, not bouncing along the bottom, you are clearly a hard marker, more credit to you, I'd suggest the masses don't share your realistic view ....

 

[Kwality]

And what is that?

Probably in the eye of the beholder .. those prone to needing an excuse prosper !!

 

[Randy Campbell]

Hawthorn gave equalization a chance.
The 16 year break between 1991 to 2008.

 

[Rob]

What is 'fair' then?

A lottery is fair. That doesn't mean everyone wins the same prize. DA is right, you can have a fair fixture but it just won't be equal.

Best one i've heard is the 4 year rotation of playing all teams 5 times over 4 years with 1 agreed 'rival' that you play twice a year. Pretty fair, but obviously not equal.

 

[Kwality]

A lottery is fair. That doesn't mean everyone wins the same prize. DA is right, you can have a fair fixture but it just won't be equal.

Best one i've heard is the 4 year rotation of playing all teams 5 times over 4 years with 1 agreed 'rival' that you play twice a year. Pretty fair, but obviously not equal.

Then there is the difficulty of home & away fixturing week to week & across the year, breaks between games, travel - all need to be factored in.

 

[telsor]

Then there is the difficulty of home & away fixturing week to week & across the year, breaks between games, travel - all need to be factored in.

and I dare say nobody could agree on the order/degree to which those factors matter, so regardless of the result, few if any would truly think it's fair/even.

 

[harmesy 37]

Good post by the original poster. However, if you looked at the decade 1960-69 there were a lot of different winners in that decade.
Melbourne, Hawthorn, Essendon, Geelong, St Kilda, Richmond, Carlton. 7 out of 12 won a flag.

Maybe the problem is there are too many teams now? but the AFL is funnelling money into specific clubs to give them an advantage over clubs that get no money other than the dividend.


Equalisation is not working as it is piecemeal depending on what club the AFL deems is needing assistance. For equalisation to fully work you couldn't have COLA (used to get/retain many players in Sydney and Brisbane), father-son, Hawthorn/Tasmania link, North Melbourne/Tasmania link, free agency compensation etc etc etc etc...


So Carlton misses out on players due to the entry of GWS and Gold Coast into the competition, that is ok. They won a flag back in 1995, what is a few more years, eh?
Where is the compensation for these clubs that might have got Jeremy Cameron etc, but instead went to a newly established club? Should a GWS and a Gold Coast team have been established so close to each other? Was it handled well?

Isn't that yet another loophole to cover for the errors of not giving teams on the bottom some sense of a chance, and it goes on and on. The decisions are often to cover up for the mistakes of previous decisions.

The Hawthorn/Tasmania thing is really diabolically bad. They shouldn't be playing any games in Tasmania.