Yeah Frank u should know better. That post was way too sensible. If someone doesn't agree with u it means u r wrong.totallyfrank wrote:er.. sorry about that
![Cool 8-)](./images/smilies/icon_cool.gif)
Moderators: Saintsational Administrators, Saintsational Moderators
Whether Collingwood are the best team or not, or whether they travel well or not, is not the issue.saint tash wrote:Yeah Frank u should know better. That post was way too sensible. If someone doesn't agree with u it means u r wrong.totallyfrank wrote:er.. sorry about that
10 of the last 20?totallyfrank wrote:They've won 14 of their last 18 interstate games including 7 of the last 8.
They've won all their interstate finals in that period (2).
That's a win rate of 78%!
Do we really want them playing more games out of Melbourne?
By contrast their record at the G for the same period is 64.18% (2007-2010).
Good sides win anywhere. In fact 10 of the last 20 Premierships were won by teams who played roughly half their h&a games interstate, not to mention finals.
Bingo... couldn't agree more.Johnny Member wrote:Whether Collingwood are the best team or not, or whether they travel well or not, is not the issue.
It's totally irrelevant. We don't want them punished, or given unfair treatment to bring them back to the pack - we want and should rightfully expect them to be treated precisely as every other team in the comp is.
What's being discussed, is the bias and blatantly unbalanced 'draw'.
Someone posted earlier something suggesting that if we had more member then we could get the same treatment. But that's not the issue either.
The issue isn't that we should be favoured - it's that no one should be favoured.
Precisely. Don't worry about the AFL apologists on here, johnnymember. Or those who defend the clubs' weak stand on this issue. (ie, all clubs including the one dear to our hearts)Johnny Member wrote:Whether Collingwood are the best team or not, or whether they travel well or not, is not the issue.
It's totally irrelevant. We don't want them punished, or given unfair treatment to bring them back to the pack - we want and should rightfully expect them to be treated precisely as every other team in the comp is.
So you take 4 away but keep those years. You have an interesting way of using stats. I notice you didnt bother with the first part of what he said. Couldnt think of any unrealistic ways to say those stats are wrong.Johnny Member wrote:10 of the last 20?totallyfrank wrote:They've won 14 of their last 18 interstate games including 7 of the last 8.
They've won all their interstate finals in that period (2).
That's a win rate of 78%!
Do we really want them playing more games out of Melbourne?
By contrast their record at the G for the same period is 64.18% (2007-2010).
Good sides win anywhere. In fact 10 of the last 20 Premierships were won by teams who played roughly half their h&a games interstate, not to mention finals.
So that includes 3 Brisbane ones where they were gifted an additional player by the AFL.
It includes Port, who funnily enough gave Brisbane their first Grand Final defeat - after Brisbane were farcically forced to play their 'home' prelim at the MCG whilst Port played there's at home.
So that brings it back to 6 of the last 20. Just over 25%.
Not a great figure for the pros of travelling I wouldn't have thought!
Johnny Member wrote:10 of the last 20?totallyfrank wrote:They've won 14 of their last 18 interstate games including 7 of the last 8.
They've won all their interstate finals in that period (2).
That's a win rate of 78%!
Do we really want them playing more games out of Melbourne?
By contrast their record at the G for the same period is 64.18% (2007-2010).
Good sides win anywhere. In fact 10 of the last 20 Premierships were won by teams who played roughly half their h&a games interstate, not to mention finals.
So that includes 3 Brisbane ones where they were gifted an additional player by the AFL.
It includes Port, who funnily enough gave Brisbane their first Grand Final defeat - after Brisbane were farcically forced to play their 'home' prelim at the MCG whilst Port played there's at home.
So that brings it back to 6 of the last 20. Just over 25%.
Not a great figure for the pros of travelling I wouldn't have thought!
Why would you take those years out? It's still based on the last 20 as per the original stat.plugger66 wrote:So you take 4 away but keep those years. You have an interesting way of using stats. I notice you didnt bother with the first part of what he said. Couldnt think of any unrealistic ways to say those stats are wrong.Johnny Member wrote:10 of the last 20?totallyfrank wrote:They've won 14 of their last 18 interstate games including 7 of the last 8.
They've won all their interstate finals in that period (2).
That's a win rate of 78%!
Do we really want them playing more games out of Melbourne?
By contrast their record at the G for the same period is 64.18% (2007-2010).
Good sides win anywhere. In fact 10 of the last 20 Premierships were won by teams who played roughly half their h&a games interstate, not to mention finals.
So that includes 3 Brisbane ones where they were gifted an additional player by the AFL.
It includes Port, who funnily enough gave Brisbane their first Grand Final defeat - after Brisbane were farcically forced to play their 'home' prelim at the MCG whilst Port played there's at home.
So that brings it back to 6 of the last 20. Just over 25%.
Not a great figure for the pros of travelling I wouldn't have thought!
If we do take those 4 out, which I cant work out why especially the PA one it is 6 out of 16. Before this year how many interstate teams are there? And how many other clubs.
Travelling is completely relevant. That is how this thread started. Their lack of travel and having a lot of games at the G. I knew you would just piss those stats off as they dont suit your point of view.Johnny Member wrote:Why would you take those years out? It's still based on the last 20 as per the original stat.plugger66 wrote:So you take 4 away but keep those years. You have an interesting way of using stats. I notice you didnt bother with the first part of what he said. Couldnt think of any unrealistic ways to say those stats are wrong.Johnny Member wrote:10 of the last 20?totallyfrank wrote:They've won 14 of their last 18 interstate games including 7 of the last 8.
They've won all their interstate finals in that period (2).
That's a win rate of 78%!
Do we really want them playing more games out of Melbourne?
By contrast their record at the G for the same period is 64.18% (2007-2010).
Good sides win anywhere. In fact 10 of the last 20 Premierships were won by teams who played roughly half their h&a games interstate, not to mention finals.
So that includes 3 Brisbane ones where they were gifted an additional player by the AFL.
It includes Port, who funnily enough gave Brisbane their first Grand Final defeat - after Brisbane were farcically forced to play their 'home' prelim at the MCG whilst Port played there's at home.
So that brings it back to 6 of the last 20. Just over 25%.
Not a great figure for the pros of travelling I wouldn't have thought!
If we do take those 4 out, which I cant work out why especially the PA one it is 6 out of 16. Before this year how many interstate teams are there? And how many other clubs.
The suggestion of the stat was that travelling either isn't a disadvantage, or is actually an advantage and it makes no difference to winning the flag or not.
The 4 I took out were clearly situations where the travel 'disadvantage' was balanced out by another factor in the winning team's favour.
So back to the original stat, there could only possibly be a case for 6 of the past 20 flags proving or even suggesting that travelling is not a disadvantage.
As for the first part of the post, I don't know why I need to respond to that.
I'm not discussing whether Collingwood are any good or not, or what their travelling record is.
It's irrelevant.
Having said that, how did Collingwood go by the end of the year in the years when they have travelled a lot?
And how did they go in the finals after the one's they played interstate?
Sorry, you've lost me.totallyfrank wrote:
But 2 of Brisbane's Premierships were against a side that had the advantage of only having to travel 4 times for the year?Does that cancel each other out?
So what about their other Premiership you ask? Ok, I'll give you that. What about Carlton cheating the salary cap? I think that's evened it all out again![]()
So, as I was saying... Good sides win anywhere. In fact 10 of the last 20 Premierships were won by teams who played roughly half their h&a games interstate, not to mention finals.
Btw, I noticed you had nothing to say about Collingwood's recent record. I assume it's a little harder to twist those facts to suit your argument?
They don't travel as much as everybody else. That's a factplugger66 wrote:Travelling is completely relevant. That is how this thread started. Their lack of travel and having a lot of games at the G. I knew you would just piss those stats off as they dont suit your point of view.Johnny Member wrote:Why would you take those years out? It's still based on the last 20 as per the original stat.plugger66 wrote:So you take 4 away but keep those years. You have an interesting way of using stats. I notice you didnt bother with the first part of what he said. Couldnt think of any unrealistic ways to say those stats are wrong.Johnny Member wrote:10 of the last 20?totallyfrank wrote:They've won 14 of their last 18 interstate games including 7 of the last 8.
They've won all their interstate finals in that period (2).
That's a win rate of 78%!
Do we really want them playing more games out of Melbourne?
By contrast their record at the G for the same period is 64.18% (2007-2010).
Good sides win anywhere. In fact 10 of the last 20 Premierships were won by teams who played roughly half their h&a games interstate, not to mention finals.
So that includes 3 Brisbane ones where they were gifted an additional player by the AFL.
It includes Port, who funnily enough gave Brisbane their first Grand Final defeat - after Brisbane were farcically forced to play their 'home' prelim at the MCG whilst Port played there's at home.
So that brings it back to 6 of the last 20. Just over 25%.
Not a great figure for the pros of travelling I wouldn't have thought!
If we do take those 4 out, which I cant work out why especially the PA one it is 6 out of 16. Before this year how many interstate teams are there? And how many other clubs.
The suggestion of the stat was that travelling either isn't a disadvantage, or is actually an advantage and it makes no difference to winning the flag or not.
The 4 I took out were clearly situations where the travel 'disadvantage' was balanced out by another factor in the winning team's favour.
So back to the original stat, there could only possibly be a case for 6 of the past 20 flags proving or even suggesting that travelling is not a disadvantage.
As for the first part of the post, I don't know why I need to respond to that.
I'm not discussing whether Collingwood are any good or not, or what their travelling record is.
It's irrelevant.
Having said that, how did Collingwood go by the end of the year in the years when they have travelled a lot?
And how did they go in the finals after the one's they played interstate?
We all know it is unfair and it always will be. It would be even more unfair if sides couldnt win interstate but good sides do as proven by stats. People blame AD but before him the draw was unfair and after him it will still be unfair. The AFL have always stated it is to maximise the crowd and even though people disagree you must always have 2 derbys as well. Those things will never change.Johnny Member wrote:They don't travel as much as everybody else. That's a factplugger66 wrote:Travelling is completely relevant. That is how this thread started. Their lack of travel and having a lot of games at the G. I knew you would just piss those stats off as they dont suit your point of view.Johnny Member wrote:Why would you take those years out? It's still based on the last 20 as per the original stat.plugger66 wrote:So you take 4 away but keep those years. You have an interesting way of using stats. I notice you didnt bother with the first part of what he said. Couldnt think of any unrealistic ways to say those stats are wrong.Johnny Member wrote:10 of the last 20?totallyfrank wrote:They've won 14 of their last 18 interstate games including 7 of the last 8.
They've won all their interstate finals in that period (2).
That's a win rate of 78%!
Do we really want them playing more games out of Melbourne?
By contrast their record at the G for the same period is 64.18% (2007-2010).
Good sides win anywhere. In fact 10 of the last 20 Premierships were won by teams who played roughly half their h&a games interstate, not to mention finals.
So that includes 3 Brisbane ones where they were gifted an additional player by the AFL.
It includes Port, who funnily enough gave Brisbane their first Grand Final defeat - after Brisbane were farcically forced to play their 'home' prelim at the MCG whilst Port played there's at home.
So that brings it back to 6 of the last 20. Just over 25%.
Not a great figure for the pros of travelling I wouldn't have thought!
If we do take those 4 out, which I cant work out why especially the PA one it is 6 out of 16. Before this year how many interstate teams are there? And how many other clubs.
The suggestion of the stat was that travelling either isn't a disadvantage, or is actually an advantage and it makes no difference to winning the flag or not.
The 4 I took out were clearly situations where the travel 'disadvantage' was balanced out by another factor in the winning team's favour.
So back to the original stat, there could only possibly be a case for 6 of the past 20 flags proving or even suggesting that travelling is not a disadvantage.
As for the first part of the post, I don't know why I need to respond to that.
I'm not discussing whether Collingwood are any good or not, or what their travelling record is.
It's irrelevant.
Having said that, how did Collingwood go by the end of the year in the years when they have travelled a lot?
And how did they go in the finals after the one's they played interstate?
That's what the thread is about.
And that makes the 'draw' incredibly uneven, unbalanced and unfair.
That's what the thread is about.
Why are you interested in Collingwood's recent record - seeing as that you're a Saint supporter 'n alltotallyfrank wrote: But 2 of Brisbane's Premierships were against a side that had the advantage of only having to travel 4 times for the year?Does that cancel each other out?
Btw, I noticed you had nothing to say about Collingwood's recent record. I assume it's a little harder to twist those facts to suit your argument?
It's a fair point you make tash.saint tash wrote:Geeze I would hate to be an interstate side that travels every second week.
Funny you say that.saint tash wrote:Geeze I would hate to be an interstate side that travels every second week.
What has AD done to fix this?plugger66 wrote: We all know it is unfair and it always will be. It would be even more unfair if sides couldnt win interstate but good sides do as proven by stats. People blame AD but before him the draw was unfair and after him it will still be unfair. The AFL have always stated it is to maximise the crowd and even though people disagree you must always have 2 derbys as well. Those things will never change.
Nothing. Did you read what I said?Johnny Member wrote:What has AD done to fix this?plugger66 wrote: We all know it is unfair and it always will be. It would be even more unfair if sides couldnt win interstate but good sides do as proven by stats. People blame AD but before him the draw was unfair and after him it will still be unfair. The AFL have always stated it is to maximise the crowd and even though people disagree you must always have 2 derbys as well. Those things will never change.
Glen Jakovich reckons that travelling every second week cut his, and some of his teammate's careers short.Dr Spaceman wrote:It's a fair point you make tash.saint tash wrote:Geeze I would hate to be an interstate side that travels every second week.
It's a hard gig for those sides, but somewhat compensated by the fact they have genuine home games every second week which are very difficult for the visitors to win.
Swings and roundabouts