73% of fans want a FAIR draw

[perfectionist]

...27 round season...

24? But that would mean I H and 2 A or vv.

I think option 2 is better but the media wouldn't permit it.

[bigcarl]

I assume that the 27 per cent who don't want a fair draw are Collingwood supporters.

Let's face it, they are on ... and have been on ... a good thing.

[plugger66]

I assume that the 27 per cent who don't want a fair draw are Collingwood supporters.

Let's face it, they are on ... and have been on ... a good thing.

Well it depends how you look at it. They have played more top 8 sides in the last 3 years than any other side. I wouldnt call that part of the draw good.

[vacuous space]

Also how does that make the draw fair.

A random draw evens out over time, thus it favours no one. There's no need for extra rounds so that everybody plays everybody everywhere. Just a draw that pits everyone against everyone the same amount of times over time. That's fair by any reasonable standards. Sure you might get a team more when they're up or down, but that can happen within a season anyway. I don't think West Coast's previous opponents are going to complain that they had to face Josh Kennedy. If advantages and disadvantages come about by chance, that's fair. It's unfair if they come about by design.

There's no reason you need to mess with the TV fixture either. Collingwood and Essendon still play at least once a year so you can have that happen on ANZAC day. Losing the other Collingwood v Essendon game isn't losing a ratings bonanza anyway. There is no manufactured rivalry game other than ANZAC day that regularly rates in the top games. What consistently rates is good teams. So you put young and up and coming teams in the prime slots earlier in the season and established older teams later on. There's no reason you couldn't do a flexible fixture either and move games around to suit TV (within reason), so they aren't stuck with meaningless nothings late in the season.

The point is you can make the game better, which generally helps sell the game. As I said before, we have the draft and a salary cap to make the game more fair, because an even comp is a good comp. It's called competition for a reason. There's no reason not to apply the same principle to the fixture.

[plugger66]

Also how does that make the draw fair.

A random draw evens out over time, thus it favours no one. There's no need for extra rounds so that everybody plays everybody everywhere. Just a draw that pits everyone against everyone the same amount of times over time. That's fair by any reasonable standards. Sure you might get a team more when they're up or down, but that can happen within a season anyway. I don't think West Coast's previous opponents are going to complain that they had to face Josh Kennedy. If advantages and disadvantages come about by chance, that's fair. It's unfair if they come about by design.

There's no reason you need to mess with the TV fixture either. Collingwood and Essendon still play at least once a year so you can have that happen on ANZAC day. Losing the other Collingwood v Essendon game isn't losing a ratings bonanza anyway. There is no manufactured rivalry game other than ANZAC day that regularly rates in the top games. What consistently rates is good teams. So you put young and up and coming teams in the prime slots earlier in the season and established older teams later on. There's no reason you couldn't do a flexible fixture either and move games around to suit TV (within reason), so they aren't stuck with meaningless nothings late in the season.

The point is you can make the game better, which generally helps sell the game. As I said before, we have the draft and a salary cap to make the game more fair, because an even comp is a good comp. It's called competition for a reason. There's no reason not to apply the same principle to the fixture.

But anyway you do the draw it evens up over time. The pies for example have an easy draw when Carlton and Essendon are no good and have a harder one when they are. And if you want everything fair then why would the Pies and Essendon play on Anzac day? And do you really think the TV station covering footy want GC v GWS on a friday night afterall to have a fair draw you also need sides to play pretty much the same amount of games on Friday, Saturday and Sunday because half the reason people want the draw fair is that the big sides dont get the prime spots and get even richer. And do you really think that in the growing states they should only have 2 derbies every 4 years. Yep that will help grow the game.

[#gosaintas]

Plugger I rarely post but I think you are missing the point. Most footy supporters are sick of the rigged draw. The arrival of dimwit and the crazy system of measuring the success of the AFL by ratings which therefore result in ever higher bonuses to dimwit is flawed. What happens when a Coll or Carl supporter is head of the AFL instead of a North supporter? How will the handouts look then or will we scrifice a stkilda? What sense is there in supporting a system where the minority get richer and we rely on handouts? Anzac day in Vic should be the best two vic sides and derbies in the other states. It really is so simple.

[vacuous space]

But anyway you do the draw it evens up over time.

That's only true if everybody is bad as often as they're good. Anybody with extra games against Richmond or Sydney would beg to differ. If everybody plays the same opponents the same amount of times, there's no room for inadequacies like that.

And if you want everything fair then why would the Pies and Essendon play on Anzac day?

In a football sense, ANZAC day isn't an advantage. If teams want to request a a recovery issue, I don't have a problem with it.

And do you really think the TV station covering footy want GC v GWS...

No.

...half the reason people want the draw fair is that the big sides dont get the prime spots and get even richer.

'People' is nobody in particular. I can't speak on behalf of 'people' any more than I can speak on behalf of any other amorphous blob. I want a fairer fixture to level out the playing field. Like the draft or the salary cap.

And do you really think that in the growing states they should only have 2 derbies every 4 years.

I think you're massively overselling the draw of the northern rivalries. Whether the teams win or not will have far more to do with their survival than fixturing.

[3rd generation saint]

So here I am as a test case re TV ratings.
Anzac Game, have hardly watched it for 10 years now as I am sick of the same two teams over and over and over again, it is just boring.
In reality, I might just check a score, it it is close towards the end, might watch the finish.
Friday night GWS vs Gold Coast, actually belive that would be a more interesting game then the one on this Friday night, would begin watching out of curiosity as to how the two go against each other, who knows, it might not be a great game etc for skills, but it might be an exciting game because it might be close and the result go to the wire.
I will watch any other game, if I think it might be good watching, regardless of whose playing, I just like to watch a good close game.
Use to enjoy watching North in the late 90's, hated the guy, but geez Carey and co provided great entertainment.
Even last Friday night, I enjoyed the fact that I was watching the type of football we played last year, but because it wasn't my team anymore, I could happily watch something else.
If TV ratings is the only measure of success and the draw, hell, then the league should make sure those marque teams make the finals and play each other.
A real draw, will enhance the comp, it will still bring in plenty of revenue as people will still watch and go to games regardless of whose playing.
But the draw as it is, is very much tipped to benefit a few of the teams of the comp, not all of them.
Oh yes plenty of revenue is raised to be given to the teams that are not beneficial of the loaded draw, which they may not need if they played some of those big teams more than just once a season.

[plugger66]

So here I am as a test case re TV ratings.
Anzac Game, have hardly watched it for 10 years now as I am sick of the same two teams over and over and over again, it is just boring.
In reality, I might just check a score, it it is close towards the end, might watch the finish.
Friday night GWS vs Gold Coast, actually belive that would be a more interesting game then the one on this Friday night, would begin watching out of curiosity as to how the two go against each other, who knows, it might not be a great game etc for skills, but it might be an exciting game because it might be close and the result go to the wire.
I will watch any other game, if I think it might be good watching, regardless of whose playing, I just like to watch a good close game.
Use to enjoy watching North in the late 90's, hated the guy, but geez Carey and co provided great entertainment.
Even last Friday night, I enjoyed the fact that I was watching the type of football we played last year, but because it wasn't my team anymore, I could happily watch something else.
If TV ratings is the only measure of success and the draw, hell, then the league should make sure those marque teams make the finals and play each other.
A real draw, will enhance the comp, it will still bring in plenty of revenue as people will still watch and go to games regardless of whose playing.
But the draw as it is, is very much tipped to benefit a few of the teams of the comp, not all of them.
Oh yes plenty of revenue is raised to be given to the teams that are not beneficial of the loaded draw, which they may not need if they played some of those big teams more than just once a season.

Firstly what is a real draw. You can only play 5 sides twice so it will never be fair. You must have growing states playing 2 derbies. Surely people can see that. And your opinion of what games are worth watching do not show up in ratings and that isnt an opinion it is fact. i cannot beleive people dont see that if the TV revenue goes down, which it will if we make every game fair and the times they are shown, that the AFL will not have the money to make every side survive. The counter arguement that sides will make more money because the draw is fair again just doesnt hold up. North controled Friday nights for 2 years when successful but what have they got to show from it.

[vacuous space]

You must have growing states playing 2 derbies.

38K to the season opener. 21K for the the first Q clash.

No way the league survives without that.

[plugger66]

You must have growing states playing 2 derbies.

38K to the season opener. 21K for the the first Q clash.

No way the league survives without that.

Nothing to do with the AFL as a whole, it is about the states but i suppose if you are that close minded you would still have a broke VFL. Sorry you wouldnt actually. It would be broke. Anyway lets make the draw fair. I can stand the fact that the pies get those poor sides like Essendon and Carlton twice this year. They should play GWS twice as well as GC then it would be fair.

[vacuous space]

Nothing to do with the AFL as a whole, it is about the states but i suppose if you are that close minded you would still have a broke VFL.

It was an entertaining outburst, but it still doesn't explain how a couple of extra scarcely watched derbies will grow the game. Maybe the northerners will feel sorry for the empty seats and bring a friend next time.

[bigcarl]

I assume that the 27 per cent who don't want a fair draw are Collingwood supporters.

Let's face it, they are on ... and have been on ... a good thing.

Well it depends how you look at it. They have played more top 8 sides in the last 3 years than any other side. I wouldnt call that part of the draw good.

And played them all at their home ground in front of their screaming horde of feral supporters. What was it, 12 or 14 consecutive games at home leading into the 2010 Grand Finals?