The Biggest Myths in Football History

[Shane Hird]

MYTH: that the disposal efficiency stat is a good indication of how good a user of the footy someone is.

You talking about Houli or Tuck?

 

[Knight Ryders]

I don't know if this is untrue.

He may have been injured. But his form was also poor.

Bucks publicly called him out on this after the prelim.

Beams was good in the first final (21 touches) and was clearly injured in the preliminary final where his form was adjudged to be "poor". I think Collingwood were pissed that Beams was playing with an injury and not making it common knowledge at the club or at least the extent of his injury.

 

[Dwight Schrute]

That Cotchin will be a top 5 player in the comp in a few years.....

He already is.

 

[Mateyman]

That Cotchin will be a top 5 player in the comp in a few years.....

He already is.

I don't think he is

 

[Senatorguesty]

I don't think he is

I dont either. Top 20 for sure and possible top 5 but not there yet....
Damn good player than and I'd love him at the Cats.

 

[Magpie Since 1986]

Myth: The best team usually wins the Grand Final.
Fact: The best team ALWAYS wins the Grand Final.
.

Nonsense, this is based on circular logic I bet. They won the grand final because they are the best team. Therefore they are the best team because they won the grand final.

What about 2010? By your logic we were only equal best team with St Kilda. What the 2nd Grand Final shows you is that on different days, you can get totally different results.

The 'myth' you quoted is closer to the truth, in that in the long run more often than not the better team wins, but on any given day there is always a chance of the lesser team getting up.

No team has ever won every single game in a season, therefore sometimes even the best team loses games, why should the Grand Final be any different?

 

[Wallaby]

Nonsense, this is based on circular logic I bet. They won the grand final because they are the best team. Therefore they are the best team because they won the grand final.

I think you miss the point.

The AIM of a football season is to win the GF. That's it. therefore the team that achieves that has performed the best. There are basically 3 things you need to do.

1. Win enough games to make the finals.
2. Win enough Finals to make the GF.
3. Win the GF.

That's it. All stats, opinions, ratings, dream team scores - whatever - all just fluff. The aim is to win the GF. Only one team can do it. They are the best.

If you are the 'Best' team all year up to the GF and then fail - you didn't do it right.

 

[tribey]

I think you miss the point.

The AIM of a football season is to win the GF. That's it. therefore the team that achieves that has performed the best. There are basically 3 things you need to do.

1. Win enough games to make the finals.
2. Win enough Finals to make the GF.
3. Win the GF.

That's it. All stats, opinions, ratings, dream team scores - whatever - all just fluff. The aim is to win the GF. Only one team can do it. They are the best.

If you are the 'Best' team all year up to the GF and then fail - you didn't do it right.

Had the planets remained aligned and Carlton fluked a win over North in the 1999 GF even their own fans would be all "the asterisk stays".

 

[Mr_Moogle]

Oatey won 7 flags, including 5 straight, and lost one by 5 points and one utter robbery by 1 point! Sturt OWNED Port Adelaide in Grand Finals.

Barrassi also brought over his Carlton champs in 69 or 70 and the Double Blues wasted them too!

Even Port people concede that Oatey was a master and changed the game.

Absolutely. Most of my family are Sturt supporters and they hate it when somebody else gets credit for Oatey's gameplan. The guy was a freak and well ahead of his time.

 

[Total_Juddshanks]

I think you miss the point.

The AIM of a football season is to win the GF. That's it. therefore the team that achieves that has performed the best. There are basically 3 things you need to do.

1. Win enough games to make the finals.
2. Win enough Finals to make the GF.
3. Win the GF.

That's it. All stats, opinions, ratings, dream team scores - whatever - all just fluff. The aim is to win the GF. Only one team can do it. They are the best.

If you are the 'Best' team all year up to the GF and then fail - you didn't do it right.

That is the circular logic Since 1986 is talking about.

I agree that winning grand finals is the ultimate, and really only, measure of success that matter, but you can very easily be the best (by which I mean on average over the course of the season, the side which is the most effective against opposition, and the side which, with its absolute most effective 22 on the park fully fit and in form > the absolute most effective 22 from other sides) team and not win the grand final.

Every decade there are a couple of super teams who smash the regular season and then cruise to a premiership without too many difficulties, because they have such a big margin for error over the opposition.

Outside of those super teams, which in the draft pick/salary cap era are a freak confluence of good coaching and systems, unselfish players, and lucky/inspired selections with late draft picks, most years the best team over the regular season goes into the finals series with, at most, a 50-60% chance of winning the flag.

There are so many things which can happen in those 4 weeks which are beyond the control of a team's planning- say your prime movers get the flu, or a key defender twangs a hammy or you just strike a team which is completely fit and in form, or a million other little things, that is going to be +5% or -5% in a tight race.

Add to that the fact that most sides have a few teams which they match up particularly well on, and there is so many things beyond a side's control in september football, that lesser sides can and frequently do snatch the flag. The most a coach of a top side can do is try and get their team relatively well rested and in form, with a double chance and home finals heading into week 1 of the finals, and then hope for luck.

By your logic, the norm smith medal would be more highly rated than the brownlow, which it plainly isn't.

 

[Shane Hird]

That is the circular logic Since 1986 is talking about.

I agree that winning grand finals is the ultimate, and really only, measure of success that matter, but you can very easily be the best (by which I mean on average over the course of the season, the side which is the most effective against opposition, and the side which, with its absolute most effective 22 on the park fully fit and in form > the absolute most effective 22 from other sides) team and not win the grand final.

Every decade there are a couple of super teams who smash the regular season and then cruise to a premiership without too many difficulties, because they have such a big margin for error over the opposition.

Outside of those super teams, which in the draft pick/salary cap era are a freak confluence of good coaching and systems, unselfish players, and lucky/inspired selections with late draft picks, most years the best team over the regular season goes into the finals series with, at most, a 50-60% chance of winning the flag.

There are so many things which can happen in those 4 weeks which are beyond the control of a team's planning- say your prime movers get the flu, or a key defender twangs a hammy or you just strike a team which is completely fit and in form, or a million other little things, that is going to be +5% or -5% in a tight race.

Add to that the fact that most sides have a few teams which they match up particularly well on, and there is so many things beyond a side's control in september football, that lesser sides can and frequently do snatch the flag. The most a coach of a top side can do is try and get their team relatively well rested and in form, with a double chance and home finals heading into week 1 of the finals, and then hope for luck.

By your logic, the norm smith medal would be more highly rated than the brownlow, which it plainly isn't.

I agree.

A team might not be the best of the season but you can have a coach who swaps defenders for forwards during a GF (1984) and the pendulum swings the way of the 'underdogs'...but after the win, they are no longer underdogs..they are called Champions.

36 players on the field at a time..many things change the course of events in a final.