Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
LIVE: GWS Giants v Brisbane Lions - 7:30PM Sat
Squiggle tips Lions at 65% chance -- What's your tip? -- Team line-ups »
AFLW 2024 - Round 3 - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
Best suggestion of the thread IMO
The only problem is that the grand final destination has to be decided about 7-8 weeks before the grand final at the latest because of the logistical nightmare of planning a month out. If I'm wrong, and they can arrange grand finals later, then yes, let the top of the ladder decide any destination they want, crowd capacity be damned. The best alternative is that the reigning premier decides where they'd like to play the grand final the following season.
Used to think the G should always have it (tradition, crowd etc) but I like the idea of the highest GF qualifier getting it. Adds an extra dimension to the competition. It's great for expansion . Sydney has 80,000 seat venue. Perth can go to 80,000 ...Adelaide could increase to 70,000. Gabba could put on another level get up to maybe 60,000...It would be massive for the game... club membership for non Victorian clubs would grow significantly knowing there was some sort of chance to get a home GF. An MCG GF would still be pretty common. It will probably happen after 2058!
Even if they lose? I think it should be the GF winner because it embraces the idea that to be the best, you have to beat the best on their terms, so if the premier gets back to the big dance next year and they lose, the new premier has beaten them on their terms, making the dethroning even sweeter. That won't happen, though, because no one wants a grand final at the Giants or Suns home ground, or at Marvel or Geelong instead of the MCG. The thing is that GWS/Dogs prelim was one of the best. It helped that it was a tight and brilliant game, but the atmosphere was electric, and the small, narrow ground amplified the pressure and intensity of the match. I think ground size and capacity is overrated and the GF could be epic anywhere, but that's just me.
That just advantages the teams who play out of the larger stadia and forces a group of clubs to host GFs not in their home ground.
Either the argument is capacity - in which case MCG hosts - or the argument is fairness - in which case any team finishing top gets a home GF. Your halfway argument is not valid and not surprisingly favours the team you support.
Just set a capacity criteria.
And for the record that capacity criteria should be well above the 60k of Perth Stadium.
I think 75k / 80k as a minimum. What a great incentive for BigFooty stadiums to built around the country.
Don't know how much longer they expect the Southern Stand, and its AFL reserve, to go on without a proper rebuild. When it comes to finding the money for that there's going to be further agreements made to pay for it all.It will probably happen after 2058!
3 out of 4 years MCG
4th year, tender it out to other states
Stipulation that the stadium meet a certain criteria (size, facilities etc)
Ironically the Gabba is not even close
There is no top qualifying team. If there was there would be no need for a grand final.Absolutely. The top qualifying team should have the right to hold the GF.
There is no top qualifying team. If there was there would be no need for a grand final.
lets say the grand final is played between teams that finished 1 and 4 on the home and away ladder. Except team 1 lost their first final (to team 4) and had to win a semi and then a prelim as the away team. Team 4 however won its first final (against team 1), qualified for the prelim as the home team which it won.
who is the highest qualified team in the grand final? Do you think team 1 is now the home team in the gf even though it was the away team in the last final and team 4 was the home prelim side? Or is team 4 now the highest qualified side given it qualified for the prelims first Even thought it finished the home and away season in fourth?
you could easily make an argument for either. There is no higher ranked side come grand finals.
Exactly and im responding to that As not being right. In my example the higher ranked home and away team has already lost its higher ranking for the prelim because it failed in the first final and used a double chance. Why should they get their ranking back for the grand final? Higher home and away ranking gives you the double chance. If you use it up you get to keep playing but your higher ranking is lost.I think he/she meant the team that finishes on top of the ladder after the home and away season has been completed.
Exactly and im responding to that As not being right. In my example the higher ranked home and away team has already lost its higher ranking for the prelim because it failed in the first final and used a double chance. Why should they get their ranking back for the grand final? Higher home and away ranking gives you the double chance. If you use it up you get to keep playing but your higher ranking is lost.
Anyway, it would all get very messy but if COVID-19 has shown us one aspect of human nature, it is that events can be changed quickly if they need to.
But in principle, I like the idea of a team finishing top being able to choose their home ground for the grand final.
The alternative option is to rotate the grand final as stated above.
You tried to make a point by comparing margins in GFs in the categories of Vic def non-Vic, non-Vic def Vic, non-Vic def non-Vic, and Vic def Vic.so you are left with the same two groups that I’ve used.
vics beating Non vics, and vice versa.
you've claimed that 50% is the true calculation. Which is one group compared to the other.
which are the same groups that I’ve used.
so don’t give that crap about tiny data samples.
Yes this is true, but only when you have adequate sample sizes. If each of your pools was n = 1000, and mine was n = 2000, then sure, winning margin average would be more relevant than winning ratio. But that's not the case - the samples are microscopic.statistically that it is too binary to judge performance, margins indicate HGA far better than W/L does.
No, because your samples are so small. This is exactly why, in Olympic diving or gymnastics judging, they disregard the highest and lowest scores, because single outliers distort the mean so much. If Olympic diving had 500 judges, they would not need to remove highest and lowest scores. This is why statisticians, in contexts like this, prefer the median, rather than the mean, because individual outliers distort the mean too much.the margin for vics beating non vics is almost twice the opposite.
If you presented that variance (on a larger sample size) to any statistician or professional sports gambler, and asked them to put their money down on one or the other, no prizes for guessing where they’d put it. Every time.
Not sure why your'e trying to claim the moral high ground. You are the one who made generalised comments about the putative behaviour of an entire state, which is not really different to making a generalisation about a race or ethnic group. I just called you out on it.I’ve said enough. I know you won’t accept my post because that’s what BF is. You’ll probably resort to some childish insult about growing up and basic statistics. Again.