Are you lot still happy with a Grand Final Replay??

[BAM! (shhhh)]

Winston Churchill once said "It has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried."

I hate the GF replay.

Only because we lost.

I'd loath it to be done with extra time.

Even though I've no doubt we'd have won.

[sunsaint]

I have absolutely no doubt that many against the GF "no draws" replay would be the same people screaming "leave the rules alone"
& I would hate a GF to be decided by extra - extra time golden point
If you think thats ok, you can go follow soccer.

If it was up to me, a Grand Final would be decided by the best teams over the course of a (shortened) season, playoff in a final series, then the last two teams play off in a best of three.

[degruch]

If it was up to me, a Grand Final would be decided by the best teams over the course of a (shortened) season, playoff in a final series, then the last two teams play off in a best of three.

Well, you can go follow ODI Cricket.

[sunsaint]

If it was up to me, a Grand Final would be decided by the best teams over the course of a (shortened) season, playoff in a final series, then the last two teams play off in a best of three.

Well, you can go follow ODI Cricket.

and Golf and Baseball

[Moods]

Never liked the idea of a replay - and I wasn't so sure that we would have won even if it had gone to extra time. The myth perpetuated that we were finishing all over Collingwood in that 1st GF doesn't hold up for mine. After Goddard kicked that goal in the last, the pies kicked another goal and started to attack more. I actually expected us to win the replay, but was still against the concept.

The GF is about performing on the day - not over 2 days. When you think about it logically, of course the pies won the replay. They were the best team all year (certainly the second half of the year) and if you give the best team 2 bites of the cherry they aren't going to get it wrong twice. If the 08 GF had of been replayed Geelong would have won that as well.

THis notion of losing a game in extra time doesn't seem right doesn't make sense to me. Extra time is merely an extension of the game itself. Of GRAND FINAL day. A replay is a totally separate day to prepare for. In our game we prepare to play in a Grand Final, and everything is geared twds that day. Just b/c the rule has been place for 150 yrs doesn't make it right. What a bizarre argument that is. You move with the times. WE are now the AFL not VFL. THere are so many reasons why extra time should have been used it's ridiculous.

NOt only did we lose the GF replay, but ppl are talking about us as if we never even drew the 1st GF. If we had lost in extra time by a few points, no way that some of the unfair slagging off of our club would be going on (some of which is coming from our own supporters) On top of this, we are now well and truly behind the 8 ball re preparation for next year. PLayers had injuries exacerbated by playing an extra week when they probably shouldn't have, and other clubs will start their pre-season in a couple of weeks when we are still recovering.

No brainer for mine, and the AFL surely will change it next year. Do we really want the AFL season to be decided in the middle of October? That's what will happen if we get another replay next year.

[SaintPav]

Notwithsatnding the lame result, the build up during the week of the replay was an anti climax. It didn't even feel like a GF. It's an outmoded idea and the AFL need to get with modern times. Bring on extra time.

[SaintPav]

Extra time would have decided who finished the draw better not necessarily the better team.

You could say that about any game. It's non sensical

No you can't say that about any game.

I think you are comparing the following two scenarios and calling them the same

A game played over 4 qtrs of 20 minutes plus time on whereby one team finishes strongly and wins

A game played over 4 qtrs of 20 minutes plus time on whereby one team finishes strongly to force a draw, it is then decided to play a further 10 minutes.

Forgive me for being "Non-Sensical" when I think they are different!!!!

The premiership should not be decided by 10 minutes of manufactured time. How completely loopy of me to think this way.

Erm, what? No I am not saying that. Are you saying that it should have gone to a replay because St Kilda fought back hard and forced a draw hence it would have been unfair for them to win in the 10 min of extra time? Is that what you are saying?

It's the score at the end of the game that matters regardless of what has transpired during the game. It's about the best team ON THE DAY. That's what the GF is all about.

If you want the best team to win then give the flag to the team that finishes on top but even that wouldn't work because of the compamised fixture.

[SaintPav]

The problem is on Grand final day the rule for the players is leave nothing out on the field. In that second half we played with a reckless physical abandon which nearly got us over the line. Unfortunately, it was not to be. However because of that approach to the game we just had no way of coming back the following week.
I think extra time would be preferable as I think anything would be preferable to how flat I felt during the week between the games. I never felt excited about the 2nd game at all even when sitting there in M3 I could not get excited.
However, the AFL will not change as it made an absolute fortune on the replay. An extra 94K people all paying an average of about $200+ for a ticket, the extra television revenue etc.... It is a complete no brainer for the AFL.

A++

[saintspremiers]

The problem is on Grand final day the rule for the players is leave nothing out on the field. In that second half we played with a reckless physical abandon which nearly got us over the line. Unfortunately, it was not to be. However because of that approach to the game we just had no way of coming back the following week.
I think extra time would be preferable as I think anything would be preferable to how flat I felt during the week between the games. I never felt excited about the 2nd game at all even when sitting there in M3 I could not get excited.
However, the AFL will not change as it made an absolute fortune on the replay. An extra 94K people all paying an average of about $200+ for a ticket, the extra television revenue etc.... It is a complete no brainer for the AFL.

A++

+1

But also remember our club made about an extra half a million bucks out of the replay, with the doubled prizemoney on offer to both teams.

That conflicts the clubs a bit doesn't it?!

[HSVKing]

If it was up to me, a Grand Final would be decided by the best teams over the course of a (shortened) season, playoff in a final series, then the last two teams play off in a best of three.

Well, you can go follow ODI Cricket.

and Golf and Baseball

Not always the case.

Some tournaments they play and entire round to decide a tie.

[goods]

hate the replay complete waste of everyones time and its only supported by the AFL power brokers for $$$$$

[bozza1980]

Erm, what? No I am not saying that. Are you saying that it should have gone to a replay because St Kilda fought back hard and forced a draw hence it would have been unfair for them to win in the 10 min of extra time? Is that what you are saying?

It's the score at the end of the game that matters regardless of what has transpired during the game. It's about the best team ON THE DAY. That's what the GF is all about.

If you want the best team to win then give the flag to the team that finishes on top but even that wouldn't work because of the compamised fixture.

The best team on the day argument is a good one.

I still disagree, but I'd just be repeating myself if I argued why.

Agree to disagree??

[sunsaint]

If it was up to me, a Grand Final would be decided by the best teams over the course of a (shortened) season, playoff in a final series, then the last two teams play off in a best of three.

Well, you can go follow ODI Cricket.

and Golf and Baseball

Not always the case.

Some tournaments they play and entire round to decide a tie.[/quote]
exactly... they dont play some dicky "closest to the pin" to decide

[samwell]

I don't really get the argument that it's unfair for the flag to be decided over 10 minutes - it's decided over 90 minutes. It's not like the extra time is a whole new game it's just making the game slightly longer than usual 4x20 min quarters in order to get a result????? Blokes who are up on the day will most likely continue to play well in extra time and Leon Davis will just be praying for another touch or 2.......

But much like the "leaving early" thread there will always be the same arguments for and against - neither is really right or wrong.

I'm not convinced we would have won in extra time anyway - we were one down on the bench for starters and the pies did kick the last goal of the game - but who knows..........

[aussierules0k]

[kalsaint]

Get rid of it. Typical, a stupid 150 year old rule pops up and bites us on the arse.

Some say the same about Daylight savings (me included)

I'll stick with tradition on the GF too. There are too many other factors that can go wrong and adversely bias extended time for a ffinal in my opinion. Secondly, these are no agreed by the many so we obviously woudn't get it right just like all the other rules changes in the last decade.

Best to restart later.