Soft flags

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
Ridiculous thread. The only thing soft about Geelong's premiership was Port on grand final day. Good injury runs apply to any premiership team.

And anyone who says every other club was rebuilding in any year is ridiculous - Rebuilding is the stupidest buzzword in football. Hawthorn and St Kilda did it, Carlton doesn't look like stopping doing it, Port and Brisbane are making a mockery of the whole "bottoming out" philosophy, and pretty much every other team just rotated there list the old fashioned way, resulting in good and bad years along the way.
 
yeah ok, it would have been easier for the all-mighty conquering Crows. :rolleyes: Whatever you say!


WTF are you on about?

Are you seriously suggesting that playing the 8th ranked team at home would be harder than playing the 4th team on the road?

The new finals system presents a far easier option as we dont travel 5 weeks in a row, like we did in 1998.

Either way, we beat the pants off your team in the second round, despite the most disgraceful example of umpire favourtism ive ever seen, so i dont know what you're getting so huffy about.

BTW, the 1998 Crows were all conquering, we've got the cup to prove it. Only thing that matters. :)
 
WTF are you on about?

Are you seriously suggesting that playing the 8th ranked team at home would be harder than playing the 4th team on the road?

The new finals system presents a far easier option as we dont travel 5 weeks in a row, like we did in 1998.

Either way, we beat the pants off your team in the second round, despite the most disgraceful example of umpire favourtism ive ever seen, so i dont know what you're getting so huffy about.

BTW, the 1998 Crows were all conquering, we've got the cup to prove it. Only thing that matters. :)


The umpires favoured us? What have you been smoking? Changing the subject because you're being beaten in an argument, bravo champ! :rolleyes:

And who mentioned anything about Round 22? Since when Round 22 is a finals game? :rolleyes: We do play 4 weeks of finals, so nice try champ.

And even if you did beat Essendon in 1998, you would have had a different opponent in the 2nd week of the finals because the Swans would have been on the other side of the draw! :rolleyes:
 

Log in to remove this ad.

The umpires favoured us? What have you been smoking? Changing the subject because you're being beaten in an argument, bravo champ! :rolleyes:

And who mentioned anything about Round 22? Since when Round 22 is a finals game? :rolleyes: We do play 4 weeks of finals, so nice try champ.

And even if you did beat Essendon in 1998, you would have had a different opponent in the 2nd week of the finals because the Swans would have been on the other side of the draw! :rolleyes:

What arguement have you been winning? Clearly not this one. You dont even have an arguement as far as i can see... A bunch of rambling doesnt constitute an arguement.

And no, try to understand the finals system. Sydney would NOT be on the other side. The winner of 5 v 8 plays the loser of 2 v 3, Sydneys match, and very likely to have been you. That is the whole point here, we would have ended up with an easier first round match, and the same second round match, clearly an easier draw when you consider the fact that our first round final would have been at Football park.

Round 22 is clearly relevant. If you cant see that travelling 5 weeks in a row is a huge disadvantage, you're an even bigger fool than your previous posting suggests. Just look at the record, how many teams win the week after travelling to Perth? not many. Doing it, and then having to travel again for the next four weeks is clearly a disadvantage.

As far as the umpiring goes... it was disgraceful in that match. Did you even follow football back then?
 
What arguement have you been winning? Clearly not this one. You dont even have an arguement as far as i can see... A bunch of rambling doesnt constitute an arguement.

And no, try to understand the finals system. Sydney would NOT be on the other side. The winner of 5 v 8 plays the loser of 2 v 3, Sydneys match, and very likely to have been you. That is the whole point here, we would have ended up with an easier first round match, and the same second round match, clearly an easier draw when you consider the fact that our first round final would have been at Football park.

Round 22 is clearly relevant. If you cant see that travelling 5 weeks in a row is a huge disadvantage, you're an even bigger fool than your previous posting suggests. Just look at the record, how many teams win the week after travelling to Perth? not many. Doing it, and then having to travel again for the next four weeks is clearly a disadvantage.

As far as the umpiring goes... it was disgraceful in that match. Did you even follow football back then?

No tool.

The winner of 6th and 7th, play the loser of 2nd and 3rd.
The winner of 5th and 8th, player the loser of 1st and 4th

That is how today's finals system works!

Are you really this simple? :rolleyes:
 
Geelong
Port Adelaide
West Coast
Kangaroos
Hawthorn
Collingwood
Sydney
Adelaide

Finals
Rnd Home Team Away Team Ground Date
QF Port Adelaide 1.3 2.7 6.9 9.14 (68) dftd West Coast 2.3 3.6 7.10 9.11 (65) AAMI Stadium Sep 7 (Fri 8:20pm) Details
EF Hawthorn 4.3 8.7 10.10 15.15 (105) dftd Adelaide 7.4 10.7 12.12 15.12 (102) Telstra Dome Sep 8 (Sat 2:30pm) Details
EF Collingwood 6.5 8.9 13.12 18.17 (125) dftd Sydney 1.4 7.5 9.8 13.9 (87) Melbourne Cricket Ground Sep 8 (Sat 7:30pm) Details
QF Geelong 3.5 10.10 16.16 23.18 (156) dftd Kangaroos 3.0 4.1 6.1 8.2 (50) Melbourne Cricket Ground Sep 9 (Sun 2:45pm) Details

SF West Coast 0.4 5.5 8.9 10.14 (74) lost to Collingwood 1.5 4.8 7.11 13.15 (93) Subiaco Sep 14 (Fri 8:45pm) Details
SF Kangaroos 3.3 5.5 9.7 14.9 (93) dftd Hawthorn 2.1 4.3 6.8 8.12 (60) Melbourne Cricket Ground Sep 15 (Sat 7:30pm) Details

PF Geelong 4.4 7.6 9.13 13.14 (92) dftd Collingwood 2.5 6.7 9.8 13.9 (87) Melbourne Cricket Ground Sep 21 (Fri 7:50pm) Details
PF Port Adelaide 6.0 9.3 17.10 20.13 (133) dftd Kangaroos 3.2 3.7 4.10 5.16 (46) AAMI Stadium Sep 22 (Sat 4:30pm) Details

GF Geelong 5.7 11.13 18.17 24.19 (163) dftd Port Adelaide 2.2 4.3 5.5 6.8 (44) Melbourne Cricket Ground Sep 29 (Sat 2:30pm) Details
That was last years finals. You noticed that 1st played 4th.

That is last years finals. Work it out yourself, and then realise that you're wrong. :rolleyes:
 
1991 was soft IMO. Beat a Geelong side missing Ablett and Hinkley by 2 points in the semi, then beat a fatigued West Coast who had travelled the length of the country twice in 2 weeks in the grand final, back before the professionalism of handling travel became as prevalent as it is nowadays.

You forgot to mention hawthorn went to perth and won against the team that finished on top and would not have had to do two weeks travel in a row it was a great game
 
I remember reading various comments over the years that rated certain years as "soft flags" - eg 1990 Collingwood, 1993 Essendon; 1997-98 Crows and even 2007 Geelong.

For various reasons the winners of these years were dismissed as lucky where things fell their way and competitors for various reasons had a bad run enabling the respective success.

I reckon its a load of crap. Theres no such thing as a soft flag. A flag is a flag is a flag and thats all there is to it.

Feeling a bit insecure are we?
 
A couple basic things would apply:

- one argument is that "you're only ever as good as your opposition allows you to be"- most likely applicable to last year's Grand Final.

- another argument is that there are times when the circumstances for a said team winning a premiership are extremely favourable (e.g. the opposition not being in the best of shape, injuries, etc) BUT... if you can't take full advantage of those circumstances, you can't be very good. It's as simple as that.

You can apply the "soft title" argument to virtually everything- Chelsea's two titles in '05 and '06 might be considered to have been won in favourable circumstances owing to Man Utd and Arsenal being in a rebuilding phase at the time- and judging by this season, that's not totally wrong. It seems that same argument is being applied to Geelong's flag last year, in that they were able to take advantages of favourable circumstances/supposedly weakened opposition/teams simply not ready to seriously challenge for a flag, etc.

A word on finals systems. The finals system used by the AFL from 1994 to 1999 is more or less the same system used by the NRL since the 90s. It's one that can be easily criticised, but those who defend it will say that it suits Rugby League better, due to 1st v 8th, 2nd v 7th et al throwing up a greater number of upsets in that sport. But that's not something we'll get into here. Consersely, the current AFL finals system was the one used when the NSWRL became the ARL in 1995 (two years before the ARL/Super League split competitions).
 
Another fool who either didnt check the facts, or doesnt care.

AFL Ladder 1998-

1 NORTH MELBOURNE 22 16 6 0 2486 2117 117.4 64
2 W. BULLDOGS 22 15 7 0 2353 2019 116.5 60
3 SYDNEY 22 14 8 0 2283 2143 106.5 56
4 MELBOURNE 22 14 8 0 1989 1956 101.7 56
5 ADELAIDE 22 13 9 0 2172 1763 123.2 52
6 ST.KILDA 22 13 9 0 2148 2104 102.1 52
7 WEST COAST 22 12 10 0 1940 1773 109.4 48
8 ESSENDON 22 12 10 0 2250 2071 108.6 48

9 RICHMOND 22 12 10 0 2018 1906 105.9 48
10 PORT ADELAIDE 22 9 12 1 1928 2017 95.6 38
11 CARLTON 22 9 13 0 2018 2109 95.7 36
12 GEELONG 22 9 13 0 1777 1963 90.5 36
13 HAWTHORN 22 8 14 0 1992 2083 95.6 32
14 COLLINGWOOD 22 7 15 0 1968 2167 90.8 28
15 FREMANTLE 22 7 15 0 1739 2277 76.4 28
16 BRISBANE 22 5 16 1 1860 2453 75.8 22


So...

The winner of 5 v 8 plays the loser of 2 v 3.

This is Sydney. Thankyou, try again.

Its great when someone makes themselves look like a complete idiot - you think I didn't do my research and check it 3 times to make sure..

fool..
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Yes, a flag is a flag is a flag, but you can still be very lucky in the process. Geelong in 2007 were just that, you dont like it, stiff.

By that logic Essendon were 'lucky' in 2000.
 
Of course there is such thing as soft flag. It’s all relative, some years the competition will be that much stronger than some other years.
True. It’s so rare you can get teams like Hawthorn of the late 1980s (even if a gerrymandered country zoning system was the cause), Carlton of 1995, Essendon of 2000, or Geelong of 2007 to 2009. This was very true of seasons like 1992 or 1993, in which any of the top seven or so teams could easily have won a flag with the right luck with injuries and weather/ground conditions.

AFL era

1996 - North Melbourne - see 1999
1991 - Hawthorn - able to squeeze out one more premiership, legit I reckon
It is important to distinguish between North Melbourne in 1996 and 1999. There is no doubt that they were helped by Essendon’s inaccuracy in the 1999 Preliminary Final, but at the time I thought they played so well against a super-speedy Brisbane on-ball division in the Preliminary Final that they were a premiership quality team.

In 1996, it is fair to say that under the weather conditions which prevailed for a large proportion of that season North Melbourne were undoubtedly the best side in the AFL. However, under today’s drier climate (even 2010’s footy season was drier than the average from 1885 to 1996 and southwestern Australia in 2010 had its driest year for at least 10,000 years and probably longer) and with a roofed stadium like Docklands I do not think North Melbourne would have beaten Sydney, Brisbane or Essendon teams from that year. On the rare occasions in 1996 when grounds were reasonably firm, North Melbourne did not show themselves quite as good as those teams.

The same could be said of Hawthorn in 1991 - and even in 1988 when they were four games ahead of the field. In the rainless first half of 1991 Hawthorn were moderate, but in the wet weather and muddy grounds from Sunday, June 2 onwards their aggressive attacking style and experience was too good for any opponent. West Coast, in contrast, were unbeatable owing to their speed and defensive skill in the rainless first half - and even in the rain in Perth - but vulnerable on the slow grounds of a wet Melbourne winter at least when Sumich was not firing - something they of course showed in two memorable games late in their first premiership year when they achieved the amazing feat of kicking by a huge margin the two lowest scores of the season and then winning the flag.
 
Yeah, no soft premiership victories. There have been a few where an outclassed opponent has made it to the grand final, teams who were never given a chance of winning (Carlton 1999, Melbourne 2000/1988). But the thing about this is it needs to be viewed in hindsight, because prior to the game, no-one would have given Geelong a chance in 1989, nor Collingwood in 2002 and they gave two of the greatest teams ever all they could handle. There's a few bandicoots on the road for every premiership team I can remember: a losing streak during the season, which put their premiership credentials in doubt; an opponent who clearly had the wood on them and they were fortunate not to meet in the finals; or a cliffhanging final that was still in the balance deep into the last quarter.
 
Haha, soft flags, good joke.:D:D (It is a joke isn't it).

Because anyone who says any side who goes through a pre season, a home and away season, a finals series and then a gut busting 3 hours on Grand Final day and ends up the winner (sometimes after 2 GF's;)) is a "soft winner".

No such thing as a soft flag, there are better "premiers" some years, but that doesn't make the lesser premiers soft, it just makes the better teams immortal and " truly great".
 
Collingwood's flag was considered 'soft' because there was no oustanding team that year, and they would not have got close to the Hawks of 89 or 91.
But a flag is a flag. No one really cares about who you beat. You can only beat the teams you play and if you are up when other teams are down, then that's sport.
Like everything in life it requires a little bit of good fortune.

I think this is the best way to describe a "soft" flag. All premierships are hard fought and well deserved but sometimes there is just no real challenger to them that year (not the case in 1990).

Whatever year Essendon got knocked out of the finals by Carlton by a point. That is a good example as although the premiership was hard fought and well deserved, it would have been more respected if it was against Essendon that year as they were the standout team for the year. But you can hardly blame the eventual premiers for that happening but it does not mean questions will always be asked.
 
Yes, a flag is a flag is a flag, but you can still be very lucky in the process. Geelong in 2007 were just that, you dont like it, stiff.

LOL.
Lost 4 games for the year.
Won 3 finals by a total of 230 points.

Yeah, I'm glad lady luck was there to help us get across the line in the end... :rolleyes:
Dunce.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top