Soft flags

[winty]

AFL era

2007 - Geelong - legit
2006 - West Coast - legit, but a bit lucky in the finals i admit
2007 - Sydney - softish, Nick Davis, flood flood flood, lame St.Kilda, GF luck
2004 - Port Adelaide - legit, finally get a flag
2003 - Brisbane - played like hacks one week and giants the next, dunno
2002 - Brisbane - legit but with GF scare
2001 - Brisbane - sort of woke up after being belted by Carlton...hard flag still
2000 - Essendon - ROCK HARD FLAG
1999 - Kangaroos - Soft GF due to Essendon losing its mo-jo the week before
1998 - Adelaide - soft, stupid finals system
1997 - Adelaide - not the showcase club of the year...soft doggies
1996 - Kangaroos - see 1999
1995 - Carlton - legit
1994 - West Coast - legit
1993 - Essendon - lottery finals series, anyone in the Top 6 could have won it
1992 - West Coast - won when it counted, crap finals system made it easier
1991 - Hawthorn - able to squeeze out one more premiership, legit i reckon
1990 - Collingwood - Sumich can't kick straight

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.

 

[FFB1]

AFL era

2003 - Brisbane - played like hacks one week and giants the next, dunno

I wouldnt say our flag in 2003 was soft, Collingwood went in as firm favourites to knock us off. I guess the end margin would make people believe that it was.

Besides the fact that no flag is 'soft', if I was to pick any of the modern era games that could be labelled as soft it would be the 2000 GF (I'll also chuck in that Michael Long was soft..), and last years. Mind you Melbourne in 2000 were up against a monster in Essendon at the time and Port last year, well I never believed for a second that they'd push Geelong which is why I cleaned up on the 60+ points margin

 

[Hodgies Heroes]

Very soft flag in 1916 - Fitzroy came last out of the 4 teams competing winning only 2 out of 12 games - then won a round robin finals series to take the flag.

 

[jacko57]

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.

Just how were Geelong lucky????

 

[jacko57]

AFL era

2007 - Geelong - legit
2006 - West Coast - legit, but a bit lucky in the finals i admit
2007 - Sydney - softish, Nick Davis, flood flood flood, lame St.Kilda, GF luck
2004 - Port Adelaide - legit, finally get a flag
2003 - Brisbane - played like hacks one week and giants the next, dunno
2002 - Brisbane - legit but with GF scare
2001 - Brisbane - sort of woke up after being belted by Carlton...hard flag still
2000 - Essendon - ROCK HARD FLAG
1999 - Kangaroos - Soft GF due to Essendon losing its mo-jo the week before
1998 - Adelaide - soft, stupid finals system
1997 - Adelaide - not the showcase club of the year...soft doggies
1996 - Kangaroos - see 1999
1995 - Carlton - legit
1994 - West Coast - legit
1993 - Essendon - lottery finals series, anyone in the Top 6 could have won it
1992 - West Coast - won when it counted, crap finals system made it easier
1991 - Hawthorn - able to squeeze out one more premiership, legit i reckon
1990 - Collingwood - Sumich can't kick straight

Wow, here's an expert at work!

I'll ignore the dumb comments about other teams......but according to this flog, North Melbourne in the '90s (with Carey, Archer, McKernan, Schwass, Stevens, Blakey, King, Allison, etc etc) weren't good enough to win one flag. It was all down to luck.

LOL, what a goose.

 

[jacko57]

No alleigance buddy just stating the facts.Anyway you should be more worried about North Melbourne becoming remembered for being a glorified truck route than a footy team because when your gone university football club will be better remembered.In twenty years i can just hear it now.Yeah but we had Wayne Carey !!!!!!! You can hang your hat on that.

You should be more worried about people reading your posts and concluding that you're a complete knob.

 

[emuboy]

North Melbourne in 1999 & Port Adelaide in 2004 had a great deal of luck go their way in those years. In 1999, Essendon choked against Carlton, and Brisbane suffered a bad run of injuries in the finals. In 2004, Port Adelaide got to play an inexperienced Geelong at home in the first final, and both Brisbane and St Kilda had severe injury problems, with both teams absolutely dead on their feet by season's end.

People say that Brisbane's 2003 flag is soft, but I would dispute this; the Lions simply tore Collingwood apart from the opening bounce, and never looked in any danger of losing.

Essendon in 1993 I would rate as a one hit wonder, a side that came from nowhere to win one flag. The Bombers next premiership in 2000 was a very different side to the one that won in 93.

 

[demonfan9]

How were they lucky? They were the best team in 2007 and thoroughly deserved it. Just like us in 1954... although I'm sure those f***ing Melbourne supporters will beg to differ!

Winning 6 of the next 10 made up for it.

But since then...

 

[Gavin Excell]

Very soft flag in 1916 - Fitzroy came last out of the 4 teams competing winning only 2 out of 12 games - then won a round robin finals series to take the flag.

Yes bloody fitzroy the ba$stards.

Do you think a flag is any more deserved when a team finished the home and away in top spot?

 

[gangsta deluxe]

Flags from 1914-1919 and 1939-1945 were all very soft flags.

 

[Smell The Glove]

How were they lucky? They were the best team in 2007 and thoroughly deserved it. Just like us in 1954... although I'm sure those f***ing Melbourne supporters will beg to differ!

Becasue Geelong in 2007 = Steven Bradbury.

 

[Classyecho]

No such thing as a soft flag.

 

[gangsta deluxe]

Becasue Geelong in 2007 = Steven Bradbury.

Geelong were the most dominant premiers since 2000. To say that they got a soft flag, and to compare them to Steven Bradbury is foolish. Your analogy falls down with the fact that Bradbury had multiple opponents simultaneously, who were all better than him.


No one were better than Geelong last year, not even a full strength WCE. The only team that beat them towards the end of the season were Port. Did you watch the next game Geelong played against Port?? To think, and say, that Geelong weren't deserving premiers is something only a true idiot would do. If you continue saying these things then that is what you are.

 

[FootyJunkie]

LOL, what a goose.

that's West Coast Goose to you

 

[rokket80]

Bahaha look at the big Cartlon supporter. Looking forward to your great dissapointment yet again champ

How did Geelong not get lucky? Bugger all Injuries.. Power not turning up to play.. West Coast's horror run off-field and injuries. But good luck you guys..

If you can't accept when you get lucky and win a flag.. Make sure your not whinging when you get unlucky and loose one.

As for Carlton's year.. unless we finish between 14-16 which I'm pretty sure we wont.. I won't be disapointed.

 

[Smell The Glove]

Geelong were the most dominant premiers since 2000. To say that they got a soft flag, and to compare them to Steven Bradbury is foolish. Your analogy falls down with the fact that Bradbury had multiple opponents simultaneously, who were all better than him.

You idiot. Its the general comparison, not the specific details.

Should I not use the analogy because Geelong didnt play any of their matches on ice? Or because Bradbury's opponents fell over and not because he tackled them?

Once again, you frigging idiot.

No one were better than Geelong last year, not even a full strength WCE. The only team that beat them towards the end of the season were Port. Did you watch the next game Geelong played against Port?? To think, and say, that Geelong weren't deserving premiers is something only a true idiot would do. If you continue saying these things then that is what you are.

Rubbish. A full strength West Coast would have mauled Geelong. You can all have your opinions, mine is that a fit and firing West Coast would have been the best side of 2007.

 

[walhawk]

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.

 

[Salopek31]

North Melbourne in 1999 & Port Adelaide in 2004 had a great deal of luck go their way in those years. In 1999, Essendon choked against Carlton, and Brisbane suffered a bad run of injuries in the finals. In 2004, Port Adelaide got to play an inexperienced Geelong at home in the first final, and both Brisbane and St Kilda had severe injury problems, with both teams absolutely dead on their feet by season's end.

You are conveniently ignoring the fact that Port played the entire 2004 season with their best ruckman and midfielder playing half a game between them. And so what if our qualifying final opponent Geelong was inexperienced - does the fact that Geelong themselves played a young Kangaroos side in their first final last year make their flag 'lucky'? No way in hell!

 

[Seethus]

Bahaha once again this thread turns into a Giant Joke, Cartlon supporters are the punchline.
What a bunch of tools
They're the losers of the group, trying to cut down the tall poppy

 

[Southerntakeover]

Actually under the current finals system you would have played Melbourne at the G in the second week of the finals and considering they creamed you in week one - game over.

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.

 

[Malceski09]

Actually I looked it up.

Sydney won it's first final against St.Kilda in the first week of the finals, and then had to play the Crows, who finished 5th but lost their first finals game.

It was a screwed up finals system. If we had the same one today, Sydney would have went to the Preliminary Final, and Adelaide would have been knocked out.

 

[Malceski09]

The 1998 finals series. http://stats.rleague.com/afl/seas/1998.html#fin

 

[The Casey Cat]

You idiot. Its the general comparison, not the specific details.

Should I not use the analogy because Geelong didnt play any of their matches on ice? Or because Bradbury's opponents fell over and not because he tackled them?

Once again, you frigging idiot.

Rubbish. A full strength West Coast would have mauled Geelong. You can all have your opinions, mine is that a fit and firing West Coast would have been the best side of 2007.

Don't be calling anyone else an idiot when in this topic you've again proved yourself to be nothing more than a stupid pathetic troll. You're opinion is garbage and backed up by even more garbage. Geelong and non Geelong fans can see that now stfu moron. Take your filth to Bay 13 where it belongs. I'm sure all the stupid Hawthorn trolls there will love it.

 

[Ebert80]

You are conveniently ignoring the fact that Port played the entire 2004 season with their best ruckman and midfielder playing half a game between them. And so what if our qualifying final opponent Geelong was inexperienced - does the fact that Geelong themselves played a young Kangaroos side in their first final last year make their flag 'lucky'? No way in hell!

emuboy is a Collingwood supporter so would be used to making excuses for why every other club wins flags apart from his own.

 

[Southerntakeover]

Actually I looked it up.

Sydney won it's first final against St.Kilda in the first week of the finals, and then had to play the Crows, who finished 5th but lost their first finals game.

It was a screwed up finals system. If we had the same one today, Sydney would have went to the Preliminary Final, and Adelaide would have been knocked out.

If we had the same one today you wouldnt have played the 6th ranked St Kilda, you would have played the Bulldogs, who i believe would have beaten you.

Likewise, the Crows wouldnt have played the Demon, we would have played the bombers, at home none the less. The modern system would have actually made our run to the flag easier, as we wouldnt have had to play 4 consecutive home games.