SA Footy

After the season is done and dusted we can see who.had the toughest and easiest draws according to where teams ended up ans who played each other twice. Toughest draw is No 1, Easiest is 18.

1) Port
2) Geelong
3) Freo
4) Gold Coast
5) Essendon
6) West Coast & Melbourne
8) St Kilda
9) Nth Melb & Carlton
11) Sydney
12) Adelaide & Richmond
14) Brisbane & Bulldogs
16) Hawthorn
17) Collingwood
18) GWS

Hawthorn surprises me without checking.

Hawthorn, unquestionably had the easiest draw this year.

They were the only team to play everyone who finished below them last year....

Lightning McQueen wrote:Hawthorn surprises me without checking.

Four of their double ups were outside the 8, their only other double up was Sydney.

Also interesting to note how different the ladder would be if you took the double ups out of the equation.

Wedgie wrote:After the season is done and dusted we can see who.had the toughest and easiest draws according to where teams ended up ans who played each other twice. Toughest draw is No 1, Easiest is 18.

1) Port
2) Geelong
3) Freo
4) Gold Coast
5) Essendon
6) West Coast & Melbourne
St Kilda
9) Nth Melb & Carlton
11) Sydney
12) Adelaide & Richmond
14) Brisbane & Bulldogs
16) Hawthorn
17) Collingwood
18) GWS

Didnt quite get the answer you were looking for, but 2nd hardest is pretty close

Of course Port and Geelong will be at the top of the list when they dropped so far.
Doesnt take into account who you played at home and away, I reckon WCE and Freo played alot of the higher ranked teams in Perth making their draws a little easier

Yeah but if you base it in the 2014 results Geelong were No 1. The AFL tried

Wedgie wrote:Also interesting to note how different the ladder would be if you took the double ups out of the equation.

it would be interesting, but not sure how you would do it.

i started to have a look at this, but how would i count the crows double up games for instance? we split our games vs west coast, port adelaide, geelong we lost and had a no result, (and we won both against gold coast and brisbane.)

Not sure how we account for those games


Secondly, there is a statistical bias in the way that ladder is calculated. For instance, geelong and port are assessed as having harder draws, with the implication that they should be higher on the ladder than they are.

But then the ease of Adelaide's draw is based on the ladder positions of Geelong and Port, whom we doubled up against. Which then makes the Crows draw probably slightly harder than what is listed there.

Same goes with Hawthorn, who also doubled up against geelong and port, though they also had essendon, carlton (and sydney)

If you're the best side you beat all comers.

bennymacca wrote:

Wedgie wrote:Also interesting to note how different the ladder would be if you took the double ups out of the equation.

it would be interesting, but not sure how you would do it.

i started to have a look at this, but how would i count the crows double up games for instance? we split our games vs west coast, port adelaide, geelong we lost and had a no result, (and we won both against gold coast and brisbane.)

Not sure how we account for those games


Secondly, there is a statistical bias in the way that ladder is calculated. For instance, geelong and port are assessed as having harder draws, with the implication that they should be higher on the ladder than they are.

But then the ease of Adelaide's draw is based on the ladder positions of Geelong and Port, whom we doubled up against. Which then makes the Crows draw probably slightly harder than what is listed there.

Same goes with Hawthorn, who also doubled up against geelong and port, though they also had essendon, carlton (and sydney)

Count the first game between each club, easy, as the second game wouldn't occur under a fairer model.

problem with that is it makes a team like the crows much worse just because they had a good run of form near the end of the season.

Go over two seasons

Home and away

that gives you an indication of where teams are

bennymacca wrote:problem with that is it makes a team like the crows much worse just because they had a good run of form near the end of the season.

Stiff shit, irrlevent to the point, Essendon could have had great form in round 57 if each team played each other 4 times.
Its still a fairer display of where the teamsa are at.

why not use the last time they all play than the first? how do you account for home any away?

im not saying the current draw is fair, but it is a pointless exercise to form some sort of ladder based on them only playing once, because everything is so variable during a season.

I think the 17-5 fixture model has some merit, and should be looked at.

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2015-09-17/t ... ebate-gale

bennymacca wrote:I think the 17-5 fixture model has some merit, and should be looked at.

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2015-09-17/t ... ebate-gale

Sore point will be once you get to the 5 stage, 3 clubs will play 3 home games and 3 will only play 2. In addition to this there will be an uneven amount of homes games in the 17 stage too.

Lightning McQueen wrote:

bennymacca wrote:I think the 17-5 fixture model has some merit, and should be looked at.

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2015-09-17/t ... ebate-gale

Sore point will be once you get to the 5 stage, 3 clubs will play 3 home games and 3 will only play 2. In addition to this there will be an uneven amount of homes games in the 17 stage too.

yeah good point.

The first 17 rounds wouldnt be too much of an issue because you would just alternate each year, but the last 5 rounds, and the uneven amount of home games would be a problem. I think you could do it that the top clubs in the bracket get the extra home game.

For the bottom 6, i think you would also have to think about how the draft picks are awarded.

I dont think it is fair to say the most wins out of the clubs 13-18 gets the number 1 draft pick, as the bottom clubs need to still be rewarded.

I think they could do it if they changed the system to an NBA style lottery though.

Could have 6 balls for 18th, down to 1 ball for 13th, before the last 5 games are played, and then from that point on you get an extra ball in the lottery for every win. that would both incentivise teams to win, but also give a greater chance for the bottom teams of still getting the best draft picks

Just play everyone twice and be done with it!
Its too late now but the 2 expansion sides shouldnt of been admitted to the comp.
A 16 team comp is a 30 week H&A, scrap the practice matches and start the season earlier.

Gill said on 360 last night that he is a fan of a 17-5 type of system, and he acknowledged that the draw needs fixing, but he said it is more likely to get up for the 2017 season rather than next year as these sorts of issues need to be worked through

Jim05 wrote:Just play everyone twice and be done with it!
Its too late now but the 2 expansion sides shouldnt of been admitted to the comp.
A 16 team comp is a 30 week H&A, scrap the practice matches and start the season earlier.

The problem with longer season is ground availability with cricket. by having a much longer season you would also have to increase squad sizes, which would then further dilute the talent pool more than what the introduction of two teams did.

I understand the debate around the fixture and the absolute unfairness around it, we can put our ideas forward but due to the nature of the beast and the circumstances that dictate it there will never be a fair and equitable fixture in the AFL.

When it all comes down to it though can you make any argument for the teams that have played in the grand final in previous years not being the best two sides in the comp? Has the premier of each season not been the best side or not deserved it?

2014 Hawthorn def Sydney
2013 Hawthorn def Freo
2012 Sydney def Hawthorn
2011 Geelong def Collingwood
2010 Collingwood def St Kilda
2009 Geelong def St Kilda
2008 Hawthorn def Geelong
2007 Geelong def Port
2006 West Coast def Sydney
2005 Sydney def West Coast