So 7 of the top 9 margins are Vic over non Vic teams (7 goals or more) and you still try to justify your position.
”yeah, if you ignore the facts that don’t suit my argument, I’m 100 % correct”
Opinion If you could, would you reward the side who finishes top of the ladder as the grand final host?
- Thread starter Coolangatta
- Start date
- Tagged users None
”yeah, if you ignore the facts that don’t suit my argument, I’m 100 % correct”
RichLeMonde
Club Legend
I’m comfortable with the fact that an exactly 50% winning ratio for interstate teams in Gfs is more significant than your winning margin stats, which don’t really tell you anything important
And you should be comfortable with selectively misleading statistical information, because that’s how Vics can justify a logically indefensible position..
RichLeMonde
Club Legend
Ok mate - let me break it down for you. I am using a larger data sample, comprising all GFs involving interstate teams. It’s not as big a sample as you’d want, but at least it takes in 30 years of GFs. You are breaking down the larger sample into 4 much smaller samples (V def non-Vic; non-Vic def Vic; non-Vic def non-Vic; Vic def Vic). Breaking it into such small pools of data makes the figures much less valid. Single results - such as Geelong v Port - distort those tiny data samples greatly. You are the one using stats in a laughable way, and then having a sook about it being something that apparently ‘Vics do’. Grow up and learn something about basic statistics.
That just isn't going to ever happen. Neither is a GF at Metricon, or Spotless or in Tassie for Hawthorn
Neither is a GF at Etihad for North, St Kilda or the Bulldogs.
So this argument is actually that if WCE, Freo, Port, Crows, Sydney or Brisbane finish top of the ladder they get rewarded with a home GF. Same as for the Victorian clubs who play out of the MCG. This argument is not at all about fairness at all.
That's about to be victoria
This year? Although each team played each other just once, the season has been far from equal
Ok mate, I said at the beginning that the entire sample is too small but chose to humour you, let me break it down for you.
Trying to claim a 50% winning percentage overall means little, when 2 of the 4 groups that I’ve used don’t apply.
non vics playing non vics equal 50%. Always.
Vic playing vics doesn’t count. Always.
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.
the difference is that you think that a W/l calculation is the only measure.
statistically that it is too binary to judge performance, margins indicate HGA far better than W/L does.
Moneyball is the applied example that taught everyone that statistical correlation. W/L can produce skewed results over smaller sample sizes like a best of 7 playoff, but percentages always wins over the long term.
Casinos make their profits exclusively off this thinking.
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.
No guesses for even guessing where you’d put it if you were honest.
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.
Big Crow
Cancelled
- Aug 28, 2016
- 1,660
- 3,811
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
Well that’s not what I’m arguing. I’m saying if you earn a home Grand Final then you should get it. Simple.That just isn't going to ever happen. Neither is a GF at Metricon, or Spotless or in Tassie for Hawthorn
Neither is a GF at Etihad for North, St Kilda or the Bulldogs.
So this argument is actually that if WCE, Freo, Port, Crows, Sydney or Brisbane finish top of the ladder they get rewarded with a home GF. Same as for the Victorian clubs who play out of the MCG. This argument is not at all about fairness at all.
- Thread starter
- #135
That just isn't going to ever happen. Neither is a GF at Metricon, or Spotless or in Tassie for Hawthorn
Neither is a GF at Etihad for North, St Kilda or the Bulldogs.
So this argument is actually that if WCE, Freo, Port, Crows, Sydney or Brisbane finish top of the ladder they get rewarded with a home GF. Same as for the Victorian clubs who play out of the MCG. This argument is not at all about fairness at all.
I understand. It's not exactly fair to the Suns, Giants, Dogs, Kangas, Saints, Cats, or a future Tassie side. I think, for instance, GWS would rather play a grand final at the MCG than the SCG if given a choice, although after last years result, perhaps not...
If stadium sizes were similar.
The cost would go up too much in smaller stadia
The cost would go up too much in smaller stadia
- Jul 16, 2013
- 14,435
- 18,887
- AFL Club
- Essendon
Team who wins it the year before gets to host it the following year.
Then hope Gold Coast or GWS never win it.
Then hope Gold Coast or GWS never win it.
I like this approach. Gives a year for planning. Would help drive bigger stadiums around the country too.
- Jan 14, 2016
- 2,825
- 7,229
- AFL Club
- West Coast
Make it a home-state final.
That still means the highest seeded team doesn't have the disadvantage of travel, they get to sleep in their own bed, have regular routine and the stadium will still be predominantly the highest seeded teams fans (as it should be).
You're so right. Why should the top team get an added advantage when that advantage could go to a Victorian team.
On SM-G960F using BigFooty.com mobile app
- Thread starter
- #142
The other advantage of the reigner premier state hosting the grand final is that if their follow-up season is just as good as the previous, and their rival team has a strong year, too, you're more likely to get a derby grand final in WA, a showdown GF etc. If it isn't, you're not going to get that dream GF anyway.
It doesn't even matter. I'll say it. If Port Adelaide win the premiership It won't be the same, and it won't have merit given the heavily compromised season. Brisbane have had the biggest advantage this season and if they take out the flag it's purely down to the advantages that they've been granted by the AFL.
No.
Chinacats
Premium Platinum
- Sep 20, 2014
- 6,106
- 7,187
- AFL Club
- Geelong
The AFL is an extension of the VFL It’s a different cultural environment concerning the AFL. We always (nearly always) want to maximize crowd and respect the tradition that the final will be played at the theatre of football- the MCG. It’s not like the US or the champions league in Europe where there is a rolling stadium allocation .
Other states holding the GF would seem ‘small’ compared to the G.
Other states holding the GF would seem ‘small’ compared to the G.
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.
- Banned
- #147
What does any of that have to do with anything?
Yeah, top 4 sides get a double chance. What would you prefer?
So if Richmond and WC play in a PF, where should it be played? Adelaide Oval?
Yes,
Vic clubs play the GF at MCG.
Interstate should play at their ground of choice if finishing top.
All Vic clubs should rotate through the season with equal number of games played at the MCG.
This means we then have an even competition without some clubs currently having a homeground advanatge at the G.
Make it fair, make it even, it will be a much better competition.
Some games would be played at night, some through the week, but fair fixture would be fantastic.
Vic clubs play the GF at MCG.
Interstate should play at their ground of choice if finishing top.
All Vic clubs should rotate through the season with equal number of games played at the MCG.
This means we then have an even competition without some clubs currently having a homeground advanatge at the G.
Make it fair, make it even, it will be a much better competition.
Some games would be played at night, some through the week, but fair fixture would be fantastic.
StevenwellerHFC
Brownlow Medallist
- Banned
- #149
So much fear in this thread.
Similar threads
