If you could change the result of one grand final...

[And_ROOS]

2000. Woulda been great to see Melbourne hold up the cup after Essendon dominated all year and clearly deserved it. A 1 point win with a questionable free kick resulting in a goal after the siren would be ideal

I agree, nothing personal against Essendon i just love seeing a team flog everyone all year then drop the big one. Ive seen it happen to some very arrogant teams in my local league.

 

[wce4premiership]

2005.

But going with the rules then probably 2001.

 

[Power King]

hahaha 2004 has been said many times

1998 for me

kangaroos choked big time, 4.10 or something at half time?

crows being remember for doing a back to back, and hence being looked at as a team 10x better than what they really were (yep, a troll, but an honest answer to the thread)

 

[UpForGrabs]

1. 2004
2. 1984
3. 2006
4. 2000
5. 1985
6. 1996
7. 1997
8. 1998
9. 1992
10. 1994

Gee, something against West Coast & Essendon????

Why do I know that if the rules were different then 1993 would've been right up there?

 

[Kochie 16]

2004 is the most popular vote by far, wonder why?

For me i'd vote 2007 Grand Final, not chaging who won the game, BUT THE WINNING MARGIN!

If Geelong wonby 2-6 goals I might have enjoyed the game instead of falling asleep out of pure boredom of watching one of the most one sided games ever!

 

[Captain Random]

Gee, something against West Coast & Essendon????

Why do I know that if the rules were different then 1993 would've been right up there?

If West Coast had lost in 2006, would Judd even be at Carlton?

 

[Rave Slave]

hahaha 2004 has been said many times

1998 for me

kangaroos choked big time, 4.10 or something at half time?

crows being remember for doing a back to back, and hence being looked at as a team 10x better than what they really were (yep, a troll, but an honest answer to the thread)

That's fine cos 2 is still double 1

 

[Shane_Mag]

1997. the great robert harvey would have had it all by now if the saints won that one.

 

[nooB]

1997. the great robert harvey would have had it all by now if the saints won that one.

Oh yeah, he would've had it all alright, including the 97 brownlow that was given to him

 

[greg62]

hahaha 2004 has been said many times

1998 for me

kangaroos choked big time, 4.10 or something at half time?

crows being remember for doing a back to back, and hence being looked at as a team 10x better than what they really were (yep, a troll, but an honest answer to the thread)

Yep, how a team who finishes 5th, gets slapped by Melbourne in the first week of finals by 10 goals then is still playing the next week is bewildering. Premiership by default.

 

[flamethrower]

1966, 2004, 1992, 1994

 

[Shane_Mag]

surprised alot are saying 2004. dont get me wrong Brisbane were very good and very could of won 4 flags in a row but you cant be great forever and port were right up there in those years so the two best teams played in 04 and port were better on the day. Thats just my opinion.

 

[btdg]

surprised alot are saying 2004. dont get me wrong Brisbane were very good and very could of won 4 flags in a row but you cant be great forever and port were right up there in those years so the two best teams played in 04 and port were better on the day. Thats just my opinion.

I think most concede Port were better on the day. I just think they don't like Port very much!

For me, '97 and '98 would be the two I'd change. Both were fairly 'weak' years all round, and Adelaide didn't deserve one, let along two premierships. In '97, the two best teams were St Kilda and the Bulldogs, two clubs that looked like deer in the headlights once finals started. I don't know what happened in '98, but I do know that any team that finishes 5th and gets spanked by 10 goals in round 1 of the finals doesn't deserve to win the premiership. Had Carlton won in 1999, that would have been an even greater travesty (but I would have been happier with that one...)

 

[pansies]

You implied that there were issues in '95

The '95 premiership is at best "tainted"

I guess you must have stopped reading before the last 3 words, like everyone else.

I was not implying that we had issues with our TPP in 95, we were actually cleared by having everything in order, but more that it is assumed that most clubs have something dodgy going on we were stupid enough to get caught.

 

[Hap Hapablap]

read the question def 2004. wouldve been awesome to see 4 in a row.

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

Gee, something against West Coast & Essendon????

Why do I know that if the rules were different then 1993 would've been right up there?

Obviously I have something against Essendon as they are one of our biggest rivals. Of course I would wish for the 93 result to be different seeing as though my team lost that one. Goes without saying doesn't it?

West Coast came up against Geelong twice and the Swans. I felt sorry for the Cats in 94 and didn't want the cup going out of Victoria in 92. The Swans are just a fairytale team and I usually go for them. I also had something against the Crows and Powers flags.

Put West Coast or Adelaide against Collingwood, Essendon and probably Port and I'd be happy for a win.

 

[Red Crow]

I'd have to go with 1997. Without doubt the softest flag I've ever seen. Also there is a special bitterness about this one for Geelong supporters. We finished 2nd, lost the first final when Carey kicked 7. Then were forced to play Adelaide (who finsihed below us!) in Adelaide!! Leigh Colbert mark disallowed...say no more. They then stumbled over the line against the Bulldogs and defeated a nervous St Kilda team who, despite finishing top that year were not that good.

That was how the finals system worked back then. Teams were re-ranked after week one of the finals, so don't cry. Everybody knew the rules and played by them.

We actually EARNED a home final in 2002, but were forced to play it in Melbourne against the Demons. Luckily we won, but I have no doubt that if we had played it in Adelaide, we would have been fresher the following week and wouldn't have been run over by Collingwood in the PF. Still woulda got beaten in the GF by Brisbane though probably.

Speaking of the Lions, they also earnt a home final in 04, this time a Prelim, but were forced to play it in Melbourne also, this time against Geelong. Playing it in Brisbane may have meant that they would have 4 in a row.

On topic, I would say 2000. Would love to have seen Melbourne get up and grab their first flag since the 60s, as well as seeing Essendon dominate all season then stuff up the big one

 

[jimmy35]

1996

 

[Hellgood]

One of the Cats flag chances in the late 80's -90's

 

[emuboy]

As a Magpies supporter I could nominate many, but in recent times at least, Collingwood did not deserve to win the 2002 & 2003 grand finals.

I was less than impressed with what happened in the 2004 Grand Final; also I wish that the Swans had kicked one more goal in 2006, sending the Eagles back to Perth empty handed again.

However, the result I would most like to change is 1993. After stealing the preliminary from Adelaide, Essendon dropped the loyal and talented Derek Kickett from the team after playing every game for the season. After that, I was hoping Carlton would win, but kharma must have had an RDO that day and the Bombers won.

 

[True Bluebagger]

No doubt it would be 1990!!!

 

[KissStephanie]

As a Magpies supporter I could nominate many, but in recent times at least, Collingwood did not deserve to win the 2002 & 2003 grand finals.

But that's like saying that the New York Giants didn't deserve to win the Super Bowl because they lost 6 matches during the season while the New England Patriots were undefeated. The Giants did deserve to win the Super Bowl though because they were the better team on the day, and if Collingwood had have won either of those two Grand Finals, then they would have deserved it too for being the better team on the day. The reward for being the best team during the season is finishing on top, and nothing more. The finals is a brand new season, and the best team in the finals fully deserves to win the premiership, regardless of how many matches they may have lost previously.

I was less than impressed with what happened in the 2004 Grand Final

You would have been happy to see Brisbane equalling Collingwood's record of four premierships in succession after they had just beaten Collingwood in the two previous Grand Finals? A Brisbane team that had received considerable assistance by the AFL to win their premierships? Since I am a true Collingwood supporter, I will say that I was happy to see Port prevent Brisbane from winning four successive premierships, just as I was happy to see Brisbane beat Essendon in 2001 to prevent them from winning their 17th premiership.

However, the result I would most like to change is 1993. After stealing the preliminary from Adelaide, Essendon dropped the loyal and talented Derek Kickett from the team after playing every game for the season. After that, I was hoping Carlton would win, but kharma must have had an RDO that day and the Bombers won.

So you would have preferred to see Carlton win their 16th premiership in 1993, in preference to Essendon winning their 15th premiership? Since I am a true Collingwood supporter, I will say that it was better for my team that Essendon won on that day. What I don't get is that you say that you're a Collingwood supporter, but every one of your preferences would not benefit Collingwood at all. Who do you really barrack for?

 

[strategy]

sooooorrrrrrrrrrrrrrry

The 2004 Grand Final, I would have liked Brisbane to having equal Collingwoods record of four flags.

the umpires killed Brisbane that day .

 

[Deledio2Conca]

Fremantle's Gra.........oh

 

[red+black]

1993 - The grand final should have been called off, no-one really deserved a flag that year

LOL I probably have to agree with you there!