Fairness of the Draw

[W.C. Fry]

So then how was it a soft run to start the year if we played a 'semi-competitive' team in Round 2?

My point is just that the Top 4 teams all have soft spots in their draw at various points - the Hawks current month (Rnd 8-11), the Pies month around their Bye (Rnd 10-14), and the Cats around theirs. (Rnd 9-13)

And Sydney get theirs twice. First to ease them into the season (Round 1-2). Second to freshen them up before finals (Rounds 15-16).

 

[Hawthorn United]

Another point as well in giving the top 4 teams tougher starts is to increase the number of "blockbusters" and bring more people to the game.

So they can go around telling everyone that crowd numbers are up compared to this time last year etc etc bs.

Sydney will always get GWS early on as, until they become competitive, the best time crowd wise is the start of the season.

 

[Bender571]

Why were the Roos more fatigued than the Crows?

Ask them.

You originally said

My point is people don't realise that it doesn't matter when these fixture oddities come up, they will affect teams evenly. The Swans are now losing players to injury because they have a tough run of games, and are dropping points as a result, such as last week against Freo. That's just the way things go.

I'm saying the draw had nothing to do with Sydney "dropping points", it was because Fremantle took them from you by playing good footy.

 

[Purple Suit]

Where did I say it had anything to do with injuries? My point is that we were up by 27 so should have won. Instead we choked due to fatigue and lost. What's so groundbreaking?

Right here champ

The Swans are now losing players to injury because they have a tough run of games, and are dropping points as a result, such as last week against Freo. That's just the way things go.

Blaming the draw on the draw, gold.

 

[SM]

And Sydney get theirs twice. First to ease them into the season (Round 1-2). Second to freshen them up before finals (Rounds 15-16).

Right. So we get two two week periods, and the Hawks, Cats and Pies get one four week period.

 

[Mr Mojo Risin]

Or they would have been upping their training earlier in the Pre-Season is more what I was referring to.

If you read the OP, I openly admit we received an advantage by playing those two first. That's not the premise of this thread. I'm actually just saying that all four top teams received the same advantage at different points in the season.

I disagree that it's the same advantage. Like you said, you could have upped the training earlier. However you also mention there were underdone players. The risk being you can cause injury to players loading them earlier than when they are ready to handle it. To ignore that is being naive in my opinion.

Will it matter that much heading into September? Probably not.

 

[SM]

Right here champ

Blaming the draw on the draw, gold.

Fair enough, I retract my comment about injuries.

 

[SM]

I disagree that it's the same advantage. Like you said, you could have upped the training earlier. However you also mention there were underdone players. The risk being you can cause injury to players loading them earlier than when they are ready to handle it. To ignore that is being naive in my opinion.

Will it matter that much heading into September? Probably not.

I guess your conclusion is more my point, that over the season all four teams receive an advantage at different points. You could argue that being able to lessen the load Pre-Season is more of an advantage, I would argue that being able to rotate/rest players half way through the Season when you know relatively well how each team is performing is more of an advantage. Each to their own, the premise of this is more to say that it's interesting that the Top 4 teams (Pies obviously out of the 8 at the moment, but pre-season were expected to be Top 4), have received advantages in different ways.

 

[W.C. Fry]

Right. So we get two two week periods, and the Hawks, Cats and Pies get one four week period.

Everyone has to play these sides. But if you were to ask a club when they wanted those games - 99% would say let us have a couple to start the year off on the right foot and ease our way into 8 points. Then give us a couple more at the back end of the season so we can manage some players, but not too close to finals as we want to start building towards September around about August.

Its perfect for you guys. Take it and move on. Quirks in the FIXture happen all the time. Starting a thread trying to defend it is just silly.

 

[Kram]

Dropping points?

Any credit to Fremantle at all? Both sides were pretty flat and played a scrappy game, but come on.

It's probably Paul Roos' BigFooty account.

 

[SM]

Everyone has to play these sides. But if you were to ask a club when they wanted those games - 99% would say let us have a couple to start the year off on the right foot and ease our way into 8 points. Then give us a couple more at the back end of the season so we can manage some players, but not too close to finals as we want to start building towards September around about August.

Its perfect for you guys. Take it and move on. Quirks in the FIXture happen all the time. Starting a thread trying to defend it is just silly.

I started this thread to stimulate a discussion about the broader implications of all four teams getting such advantages. If you want to take the Swans out of it, fine, let's just discuss the fact that the Pies, Hawks and Cats have such quirks. Only thing is then people will say I'm complaining, when I'm not. People can't seem to look beyond the team I support and assume that that's my hidden agenda in starting this thread, when really it's just a genuine interest in the fact that only those four teams have such an easy run of fixtures in a row. No other club plays a combination of the Bulldogs, Demons, GC/GWS, Port or Lions over a 4/5 week period (if you include the Bye in between).

 

[SM]

It's probably Paul Roos' BigFooty account.

Nah I haven't mentioned Joey, or Hanners, or Reidy, or Goodesy.

 

[Tedeski]

While I don't really care, I think the argument was more about the Swans getting it the first two rounds after a shorter preseason, allowing them to ease into the year as opposed to Hawthorn.

You'll find thaty if we were coming up against Hawthorn, Geelong & Collingwood in the first three rounds, then the Swans would have had a different preparation to the one they had knowing they were playing GWS & GC first up.
The other issue is that we also had to play a GWS with their very best players all available. Same for GC. The Hawks played a depleted GWS & the GC allowing them to rest some important players.

You don't finish top four & then go on to win a GF by just being handed a pleasant draw. If a team is to win the p'ship, it needs more than just a helping hand.
Any knowledgeable football follower must know this.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

The fairness of the draw is determines by just five things.

Those five things are the five teams you play twice.

When you play them is an irrelevance.

 

[strobe00]

Pies obviously out of the 8 at the moment, but pre-season were expected to be Top 4).

Pies have probably had the toughest draw, in terms of opponents, so far this year. Won't be too long and they'll be back in the 8.

Kind of like Port being right up the top of the ladder... and then sliding back down when they started running up against the better teams.

 

[strobe00]

The fairness of the draw is determines by just five things.

Those five things are the five teams you play twice.

When you play them is an irrelevance.

Where you play the other teams matters too... I would have thought. And yes, this is a pointed statement.

We know the reasons for that twist in the fixture. But it's still there. It's not JUST the five teams that you double up against, which determines the fairness of the fixture.

It's fair to say that the Pies have copped a very tough set of teams for return-matches. But I think it's also fair to say that you have other advantages in fixturing to provide some counter to that.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

It's fair to say that the Pies have copped a very tough set of teams for return-matches. But I think it's also fair to say that you have other advantages in fixturing to provide some counter to that.

You are confusing financial advantage with advantage that helps teams win games.

As a general rule Collingwood play more games away from home (five per year) than they do at home against interstate visitors (four per year) , so they fall on the wrong side of that "home state advantage" ledger as well.

 

[Kwality]

With all those complaining over the opening weeks that the Swans had been gifted an easy draw to start the season, I was reminded of this complaint this weekend with the Hawks taking on the Suns after last week playing the Giants - which was the initial complaint made by posters about an unfair advantage for the Swans, playing the two expansion teams back to back.

I found this quite interesting, and when someone mentioned to me, unrelated to this issue, that the Cats' next two games are against, you guessed it, the Suns and Giants, I thought to myself 'Now, wouldn't it be funny if the Pies (the other team Pre-Season who would have been thought most likely to make Top 4) also played the Suns and Giants back to back?

And guess who the Pies play in Rounds 17 and 18? You guessed it. In fact, not only do they have the Suns and Giants over a two week period, like the Swans, they also have the Lions, Demons, Bulldogs, BYE, and Port in a row over the preceding weeks.

Now this thread in no way is to say that therefore AFL House is fair in its fixturing, but instead to bring up the interesting point that perhaps all four teams expected to finish Top 4 have intentionally been gifted 'breaks' in their season at various points to keep them in top form for Finals. And instead of me saying this means the Swans have a fair draw, it's instead me saying that, perhaps, none of the expected Top 4 have a fair draw.

tl;dr Hawks, Swans, Pies and Cats all have Suns and GWS over a two week period therefore giving them more rest at various points, therefore not fair draws for any of the four.

What draw, its a FIXture.

Long time since there was a draw.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

Generally teams who play tough teams twice (once early, once late) will get a "break" mid season. It only stands to reason. Theres no conspiracy there. They have to play the crap sides sometime and if the double up games take up most of April May and August then it only stands to reason that the games against weaker sides will be in June and July.

Personally Id rather my side played GWS twice and Geelong once but thems the breaks.

 

[strobe00]

You are confusing financial advantage with advantage that helps teams win games.

As a general rule Collingwood play more games away from home (five per year) than they do at home against interstate visitors (four per year) , so they fall on the wrong side of that "home state advantage" ledger as well.

Considering a very large proportion of all your other "away" games against Melbourne based clubs are at your home ground, I think that helps things a little.

I also think financial advantage might also have an impact on a team's ability to win games over the season too.

The five return-games teams you drew this year is a legit complaint. No argument there.

The other argument re: home state advantage is a meh. The other advantages the fixture provides you (noted above) comfortably wipe this out.

 

[Zgope1]

At a glance i thought this thread was "fitness of the Daw"

 

[Mr Mojo Risin]

You'll find thaty if we were coming up against Hawthorn, Geelong & Collingwood in the first three rounds, then the Swans would have had a different preparation to the one they had knowing they were playing GWS & GC first up.
The other issue is that we also had to play a GWS with their very best players all available. Same for GC. The Hawks played a depleted GWS & the GC allowing them to rest some important players.

You don't finish top four & then go on to win a GF by just being handed a pleasant draw. If a team is to win the p'ship, it needs more than just a helping hand.
Any knowledgeable football follower must know this.

I don't doubt that, however as SM has said there were underdone players. You push them too hard too early, you run the risk of injuring them. Because of this the soft start to the season was a bigger advantage. Any knowledgeable football follower must know this. If you had read my post you'd realise I said it would matter little come finals time, so not sure what point you are trying to make in the last paragraph if not to agree with me.

I'd certainly suggest the Hawks played GC when they were in better form than when Sydney played them, although I doubt that point you made was particularly relevant when it comes to GWS and GC as it doesn't make that much difference for a side of Sydney or Hawthorn's quality.

It's a moot point however as GWS and Melbourne would have been the softest draw.

 

[the big lebowski]

The fairness of the draw is determines by just five things.

Those five things are the five teams you play twice.

When you play them is an irrelevance.

That is simply not true IMO. Sydney had a clear advantage playing GWS and Gold Coast to start the year off. That's 2 wins locked away without needing to have your best 22 primed.

They could afford to give their senior players a 2 week late start knowing that they would be 2 - 0.

The premier should not get that luxury.

 

[SM]

That is simply not true IMO. Sydney had a clear advantage playing GWS and Gold Coast to start the year off. That's 2 wins locked away without needing to have your best 22 primed.

They could afford to give their senior players a 2 week late start knowing that they would be 2 - 0.

The premier should not get that luxury.

So basically the issue is because we would then have the same length of Pre-Season as the rest of the competition? If that is perceived as unfair, then it's interesting that AD and others have discussed the notion of setting a date for Pre-Season to start for all clubs, again taking away the unfair disadvantage the Premiers/Runners up have of starting their pre-season later.

 

[the big lebowski]

So basically the issue is because we would then have the same length of Pre-Season as the rest of the competition? If that is perceived as unfair, then it's interesting that AD and others have discussed the notion of setting a date for Pre-Season to start for all clubs, again taking away the unfair disadvantage the Premiers/Runners up have of starting their pre-season later.

Put it this way, if you were offered the chance to play GWS and Gold Coast in round 1 and 2 next year, would you take it?