Why has 4th on the ladder not won a grand final this century?

Remove this Banner Ad

PerthBoy86

PerthBoy86

Norm Smith Medallist
Veteran
May 23, 2016
8,022
6,930
AFL Club
West Coast
This is something I've wondered about myself. On first crack they brought up that no team finishing 4th has won it with the current finals system...while 2nd and 3rd have 7 times. Indeed they've only even made the gf 3 times. So effectively this century only the Bulldogs have made it from outside top 3.

I wonder if this is purely coincidence or is there any other logical reason why? 3rd place also plays an away qualifying final, so generally don't get a home advantage (unless it's 2 Vic teams at the G). Still, 7 vs 0 seems pretty crazy for pure chance.

I have a feeling the Giants could be the first team to break that hoodoo.
 
Last edited:
Starting point would be to see how often fourth has beat first in the QF. Generally fourth will be the away side so travel may be involved, and first will have usually received the most favourable timeslot for them as minor premiers. That immediately sets fourth up to lose in week 1 of the finals, and from there they have to win three in a row, including one against a team that has had a week off.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

PerthBoy86 said:
Indeed they've only even made the gf once.
Click to expand...
This is factually incorrect.

The following teams have made the Grand Final from 4th:
Collingwood in 2002 - beat Port in the Qualifying Final before losing the Grand Final to Brisbane by 9 points;
Sydney in 2006 - beat West Coast in the Qualifying Final before losing to West Coast in the Grand Final;
Geelong in 2020 - beat Port in the Qualifying Final before losing to Richmond in the Grand Final.

Other near misses of 4th placed teams include:
Collingwood in 2022
Collingwood in 2019
GWS in 2016

It is definitely more difficult to win it from 4th than it is from 1st, 2nd or 3rd, by my abacus says over the long term we'll see it every 10 to 12 years.
 
They’ve made the GF three times - Collingwood 02, Sydney 06, Geelong 20.

Honestly, I think the answer is a combination of:
a) Hardest draw (having to play first away)
b) Fourth usually being a slightly inferior team compared to the top three - which is natural. In some years they were a long way off the top couple of teams (see North 00/07, St Kilda 08, West Coast 11 - these teams were never making a GF)
c) A statistical quirk, with the sample size still being relatively small

Logically, 2v3 should be close to a 50/50 as there often isn’t much separating the teams. 1v4 there have been some very large ladder gaps over the years.

Interestingly enough, 4th pulled off the upset quite often in the early years of the current system - in 02, 03, 05 and 06. But the problem was (especially in that era) there were MORE strong teams left to upset to close out the flag. Collingwood 02 and Sydney 03 both pulled off impossible wins in their QFs against Port, but still had the three-peat Lions in their path.

Since then the QFs have really swung. 4th has only won twice in the 17 years since (16 and 19). Meanwhile 3rd has started to beat 2nd with much more regularity (10, 12, 13, 17, 19, 22). And with straight sets becoming more common 4th has been struggling to survive week 2, let alone 3 and 4.

A lot of teams have come very close:
  • Sydney 06 lost GF by 1 point
  • Collingwood 02 lost GF by 9 points
  • Geelong 20 lost GF after leading at half time
  • Collingwood 22 lost PF by 1 point
  • Collingwood 19 lost PF by 4 points
  • Geelong 04lost PF by 9 points
  • GWS 16 lost PF by 6 points
  • St Kilda 05 lost PF after leading at 3QT

So we may expect it to even out a little over time. But think there will always be a natural poorer success rate because of the first two factors.
 
SuperSub17 said:
They’ve made the GF three times - Collingwood 02, Sydney 06, Geelong 20.

Honestly, I think the answer is a combination of:
a) Hardest draw (having to play first away)
b) Fourth usually being a slightly inferior team compared to the top three - which is natural. In some years they were a long way off the top couple of teams (see North 00/07, St Kilda 08, West Coast 11 - these teams were never making a GF)
c) A statistical quirk, with the sample size still being relatively small

Logically, 2v3 should be close to a 50/50 as there often isn’t much separating the teams. 1v4 there have been some very large ladder gaps over the years.

Interestingly enough, 4th pulled off the upset quite often in the early years of the current system - in 02, 03, 05 and 06. But the problem was (especially in that era) there were MORE strong teams left to upset to close out the flag. Collingwood 02 and Sydney 03 both pulled off impossible wins in their QFs against Port, but still had the three-peat Lions in their path.

Since then the QFs have really swung. 4th has only won twice in the 17 years since (16 and 19). Meanwhile 3rd has started to beat 2nd with much more regularity (10, 12, 13, 17, 19, 22). And with straight sets becoming more common 4th has been struggling to survive week 2, let alone 3 and 4.

A lot of teams have come very close:
  • Sydney 06 lost GF by 1 point
  • Collingwood 02 lost GF by 9 points
  • Geelong 20 lost GF after leading at half time
  • Collingwood 22 lost PF by 1 point
  • Collingwood 19 lost PF by 4 points
  • St Kilda 04 lost PF by 6 points
  • GWS 16 lost PF by 6 points
  • St Kilda 05 lost PF after leading at 3QT

So we may expect it to even out a little over time. But think there will always be a natural poorer success rate because of the first two factors.
Click to expand...
Collingwood supporters are generally amazing analysts.
 
Let's assume the top four teams each have an equal chance of winning the Premiership, and only top four team have a meaningful chance. That gives a 75% chance each season that fourth does not win and the chance that fourth doesn't win for 24 years is about 0.13%. This is improbable, but certainly not impossible.

However, what if you assume that ladder finishes actually mean something, and will typically be a fair ranking of ability? In this case, we could make an arbitrary assumption that, on average, 1st should win the Premiership 40% of the time, 2nd 30%, 3rd 20% and 4th 10%. Now, the chance that 4th doesn't win it in 24 years suddenly shoots up to 8%. This is still low, but it's no longer remarkable that such a thing should happen. Over 100 years, the chance that there is at least one bracket of 24 years with no winner from 4th is somewhere just above 35%.

A more rigorous system of applying chances of winning from 4th would probably give you a value somewhere between those two extremes but, almost certainly, on the side of, "unlikely, but not extraordinary as it may seem, given enough time".
 
PhilX said:
Let's assume the top four teams each have an equal chance of winning the Premiership, and only top four team have a meaningful chance. That gives a 75% chance each season that fourth does not win and the chance that fourth doesn't win for 24 years is about 0.13%. This is improbable, but certainly not impossible.

However, what if you assume that ladder finishes actually mean something, and will typically be a fair ranking of ability? In this case, we could make an arbitrary assumption that, on average, 1st should win the Premiership 40% of the time, 2nd 30%, 3rd 20% and 4th 10%. Now, the chance that 4th doesn't win it in 24 years suddenly shoots up to 8%. This is still low, but it's no longer remarkable that such a thing should happen. Over 100 years, the chance that there is at least one bracket of 24 years with no winner from 4th is somewhere just above 35%.

A more rigorous system of applying chances of winning from 4th would probably give you a value somewhere between those two extremes but, almost certainly, on the side of, "unlikely, but not extraordinary as it may seem, given enough time".
Click to expand...
Are you sure you're not a Collingwood supporter, given that level of statistical analysis?
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Slightly off topic but I have never understood why the finals don’t have a ‘highest placed loser vs. lowest placed loser’ setup in week 2. If 1st loses in week one they likely play 5th whilst the loser of 2nd and 3rd plays 6th or 7th
 
Happy_Neale said:
Slightly off topic but I have never understood why the finals don’t have a ‘highest placed loser vs. lowest placed loser’ setup in week 2. If 1st loses in week one they likely play 5th whilst the loser of 2nd and 3rd plays 6th or 7th
Click to expand...
If a team finishes 1st and loses to 4th and 5th in consecutive finals, they deserve to be eliminated.
 
Fadge said:
This is factually incorrect.

The following teams have made the Grand Final from 4th:
Collingwood in 2002 - beat Port in the Qualifying Final before losing the Grand Final to Brisbane by 9 points;
Sydney in 2006 - beat West Coast in the Qualifying Final before losing to West Coast in the Grand Final;
Geelong in 2020 - beat Port in the Qualifying Final before losing to Richmond in the Grand Final.

Other near misses of 4th placed teams include:
Collingwood in 2022
Collingwood in 2019
GWS in 2016

It is definitely more difficult to win it from 4th than it is from 1st, 2nd or 3rd, by my abacus says over the long term we'll see it every 10 to 12 years.
Click to expand...
Whoops yes meant to put 3 but wrote once for some reason. Corrected.
 
BF Tiger said:
Starting point would be to see how often fourth has beat first in the QF. Generally fourth will be the away side so travel may be involved, and first will have usually received the most favourable timeslot for them as minor premiers. That immediately sets fourth up to lose in week 1 of the finals, and from there they have to win three in a row, including one against a team that has had a week off.
Click to expand...
Not sure about that but there have only been 3 occasions where the team that beat their opponent in a QF lost to them in the GF. Sydney vs West Coast in 05, West Coast vs Sydney in 06 and Hawthorn vs West Coast in 15. All involved the Eagles. Actually I think there might be one I'm missing.
 
SuperSub17 said:
They’ve made the GF three times - Collingwood 02, Sydney 06, Geelong 20.

Honestly, I think the answer is a combination of:
a) Hardest draw (having to play first away)
b) Fourth usually being a slightly inferior team compared to the top three - which is natural. In some years they were a long way off the top couple of teams (see North 00/07, St Kilda 08, West Coast 11 - these teams were never making a GF)
c) A statistical quirk, with the sample size still being relatively small

Logically, 2v3 should be close to a 50/50 as there often isn’t much separating the teams. 1v4 there have been some very large ladder gaps over the years.

Interestingly enough, 4th pulled off the upset quite often in the early years of the current system - in 02, 03, 05 and 06. But the problem was (especially in that era) there were MORE strong teams left to upset to close out the flag. Collingwood 02 and Sydney 03 both pulled off impossible wins in their QFs against Port, but still had the three-peat Lions in their path.

Since then the QFs have really swung. 4th has only won twice in the 17 years since (16 and 19). Meanwhile 3rd has started to beat 2nd with much more regularity (10, 12, 13, 17, 19, 22). And with straight sets becoming more common 4th has been struggling to survive week 2, let alone 3 and 4.

A lot of teams have come very close:
  • Sydney 06 lost GF by 1 point
  • Collingwood 02 lost GF by 9 points
  • Geelong 20 lost GF after leading at half time
  • Collingwood 22 lost PF by 1 point
  • Collingwood 19 lost PF by 4 points
  • Geelong 04lost PF by 9 points
  • GWS 16 lost PF by 6 points
  • St Kilda 05 lost PF after leading at 3QT

So we may expect it to even out a little over time. But think there will always be a natural poorer success rate because of the first two factors.
Click to expand...
You'd think the gap between 2nd and 3rd would be bigger than 3rd and 4th, as 2nd gets the home qf while 3rd gets the away (except if they're both Vic teams). So you'd expect a greater differential in premierships between 2 and 3 than 3 and 4.

Yeah it is interesting how close the 4th placed team has come.
 
Happy_Neale said:
That’s not the point though. Finishing first should mean you play lower ranked teams than the teams below you
Click to expand...
They might, if 8th beats 5th in the Elimination Final...

Regardless, it doesn't really matter. It doesn't matter where you finish on the ladder - if you're not good enough to win one if your first two finals to make a Preliminary Final, you deserve to be eliminated.

If the Qualifying Final results go to seedings, it makes sense that 4th plays 5th in one semi-final, and 3rd plays 6th in the other semi-final.
 
Fadge said:
They might, if 8th beats 5th in the Elimination Final...

Regardless, it doesn't really matter. It doesn't matter where you finish on the ladder - if you're not good enough to win one if your first two finals to make a Preliminary Final, you deserve to be eliminated.

If the Qualifying Final results go to seedings, it makes sense that 4th plays 5th in one semi-final, and 3rd plays 6th in the other semi-final.
Click to expand...
You are having a different conversation, I’m not saying who should or should not win, my point was a higher winner vs. lower loser system makes more sense, my guess is they don’t do it for fixturing reasons. There are very realistic scenarios where the higher placed team ends up with a stronger opponent in week 2 than the team that finishes 2nd or 3rd and loses in week 1
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Why has 4th on the ladder not won a grand final this century?

Similar threads

SpiritOfCarlton
Games Won Beaten Ladder 2024
Replies
23
Views
764
Billy ray
Billy ray
Lunchtime
2024 AFL Membership Ladder - Final Figures
Replies
20
Views
547
garlic munchers
garlic munchers
Chief
Fixture 2024 AFL Grand Final - The Road Ahead
Replies
0
Views
153
Chief
Chief
B
Brisbane vs Port grand final
2
Replies
26
Views
718
Macca180
Macca180
PowerfulPies2023
Which Grand Final or Big Final was the '' one that got away '' For your Team?
2 3 4
Replies
82
Views
4K
terrybull
terrybull
BigVic
The most unlikely grand final matchups in recent times
Replies
0
Views
183
BigVic
BigVic
D
Why is Haw v Carl not played more? (this is the 9th year in a row they’ve met once and the 7th match in a row played during the day)
Replies
17
Views
764
theiaofseed
theiaofseed

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top