Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 13 to 24 of 49

Thread: RWO Game Day Thread - Finals - August 30/31

  1. #13
    Senior Player
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    quakers hill
    Posts
    1,378
    Quote Originally Posted by often_confused View Post
    As I understand the by-laws it is 6 games for the Club. For some reason the rule about playing 9 or more games at a higher level does not count if it is in a different competition. The NEAFL has a few byes so it is probably not hard to engineer the 6 Club Games required. As to it being in the spirit of the game ... that is an entirely different matter and SHH's observations make me concerned as to the Student's guesstimate.

    In any event it will be a big ask to get over the Dragons this week ... not impossible but challenging. However the last three player numbers give it a clear ring of truth.
    Would be interesting to see what the league think of it. Usually they say nothing unless an opposition club brings it to their attention.

    As for the NEAFL games being considered higher I raised the issue with the league when it came to finals eligibility and the Giants and Div 2 under 19's. Its a grey area but even they admitted it would be pretty rich for a kid playing NEAFL to potentially drop back to div 2 19's.

    As for team selections not being in the spirit of the game that exact type of manipulation cost my boys a spot in div 2 finals this year.

  2. #14
    Quote Originally Posted by often_confused View Post
    As I understand the by-laws it is 6 games for the Club. For some reason the rule about playing 9 or more games at a higher level does not count if it is in a different competition. The NEAFL has a few byes so it is probably not hard to engineer the 6 Club Games required. As to it being in the spirit of the game ... that is an entirely different matter and SHH's observations make me concerned as to the Student's guesstimate.

    In any event it will be a big ask to get over the Dragons this week ... not impossible but challenging. However the last three player numbers give it a clear ring of truth.
    I have no idea what the selection strategy entails but I doubt that it would have been decided that the coaches would have worked it so that Johnson and Sleigh would qualify for PD finals by playing them on NEAFL bye weekends. We aren't smart enough to see that far ahead. I'm also unsure of the rules given that James Howard is ineligible but played 6 PD games?

  3. #15
    On the Rookie List
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    259
    Quote Originally Posted by Pekay View Post
    It's a disgrace, that's what it is. I don't mind losing a game, but when blokes who haven't played a game in that grade during the year can drop down a grade, the spirit of the game disappears. I'm glad I played my last game, but wish it was under different circumstances, like maybe playing the same side we played a few weeks back.
    It's interesting that a side which finished fifth can win a crunch final over the third side by nearly 100 points.

    I also watched some of the Div 2 match, and Sydney Uni were so far ahead of their opponents it wasn't funny.

    Sydney Uni aren't going to worry about the spirit of the game when it comes to winning finals, clearly.

    Maybe you need to talk to the League.
    Last edited by mountainsofpain; 1st September 2014 at 07:32 PM.

  4. #16
    Quote Originally Posted by often_confused View Post
    As I understand the by-laws it is 6 games for the Club. For some reason the rule about playing 9 or more games at a higher level does not count if it is in a different competition. The NEAFL has a few byes so it is probably not hard to engineer the 6 Club Games required.
    In any event it will be a big ask to get over the Dragons this week ... not impossible but challenging.
    Those of us who follow the NEAFL as well as the SFL reckon that the Swans and Giants Reserves will rest some of their listed players for their finals this weekend and draw on SFL top-ups to make up numbers.
    This would impact mostly on Penno and St George...but, looking at the footage from Saturday arvo's game, I'm not sure that Mudge will be playing anywhere !!

  5. #17
    Quote Originally Posted by mountainsofpain View Post
    It's interesting that a side which finished fifth can win a crunch final over the third side by nearly 100 points.

    I also watched some of the Div 2 match, and Sydney Uni were so far ahead of their opponents it wasn't funny.

    Sydney Uni aren't going to worry about the spirit of the game when it comes to winning finals, clearly.

    Maybe you need to talk to the League.
    Our Div 2 side had 6 players that had played a combined total of 26 PD games - one of whom had played more PD than D2. The Div 3 side had 12 players that had played Div 2, four of whom who had played the majority of their games in the higher grade. I guess this is an unusual occurrence throughout clubs with a number of teams - I mean there's no way Nor-West would have picked blokes in Div 5 yesterday that had played Div 3 during the season. Oh wait, looking at the team list it appears that there was about a dozen of them. Seems it's okay for some but not for others?

  6. #18
    All clubs do it, can't really fault them. I know our 19's played a lot of ressies and a fair few had 1's games through out the year. There's probably 5 or 6 that are ineligible for 19s though because of too many PD games.. Could have been a much better side.

  7. #19
    Regular in the Side
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Bateau Bay
    Posts
    508
    Quote Originally Posted by Footy Barista View Post
    Penno v Manly at Blacktown just like last years grand final should be a fantastic match next week.
    Interestingly I saw that Robertson from Manly played in the reserves after breaking his leg in May or June. They have been going fine without him but he's a big addition, even if he plays forward.
    I had a quick look at the Syd Uni PD team on Sunday. There were 3 or so players who have played less than 6 games in the SydAFL and theres probably another 3 or so who would probably have played too many neafl to qualify down for SydAfl games. So at a guess 5 players played PD fairly under the rules (it seems) which you could argue maybe shouldn't have. If each lower division thus gains 5 players from above and losers there bottom 5....it makes sense they will dominate every game they are in.

  8. #20
    On the Rookie List
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    259
    Quote Originally Posted by The Student View Post
    Our Div 2 side had 6 players that had played a combined total of 26 PD games - one of whom had played more PD than D2. The Div 3 side had 12 players that had played Div 2, four of whom who had played the majority of their games in the higher grade. I guess this is an unusual occurrence throughout clubs with a number of teams - I mean there's no way Nor-West would have picked blokes in Div 5 yesterday that had played Div 3 during the season. Oh wait, looking at the team list it appears that there was about a dozen of them. Seems it's okay for some but not for others?
    The two matches in Div 3 between Sydney Uni and Nor-West Jets during the H&A season resulted in a 2 point win to SU and an 11 point win to NWJ. Suddenly the finals match between the clubs blows out to 94 points.

    The two H&A matches in Div 2 between Sydney Uni and Blacktown saw a 69 point win to Blacktown and a 17 point win to Sydney Uni. Then the finals match between the two clubs blows out in favour of Sydney Uni, in pretty ordinary conditions. Amazing!

    But I'm sure it's just a case of SU suddenly having everyone available. Plus I am sure everyone hit form at the right end of the season as well!

    Don't blame people for just noticing the discrepancies.

    If NWJ Div 5 had suddenly produced a similarly inconsistent result I would have probably asked similar question of them by the way.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by saviour01 View Post
    All clubs do it, can't really fault them. I know our 19's played a lot of ressies and a fair few had 1's games through out the year. There's probably 5 or 6 that are ineligible for 19s though because of too many PD games.. Could have been a much better side.
    I actually think that Sydney Uni benefit from having so many sides. And having played so much finals footy they have learned how to play the eligibility requirements to their advantage.

  9. #21
    Regular in the Side
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Bateau Bay
    Posts
    508
    Ive delved a little deeper. Players with very few pd games for syd uni are under age players. So other than Johnson (7 pd vs 10neafl) and sleigh(10 pd vs 9 neafl) under any rules you want to consider all others look ok. (normally once you play 9 games you can't go down in sydafl)

  10. #22
    Query was made in regards to the few mentioned playing too many NEAFL, response was that they only played 7 & 8, were on NEAFL lists for some games and did not play and were not taken off the list(apparently).

    As for their lower grades, i thought if all were playing on same weekend then all those qualified for the club, could play where selected, this could mean someone dropped for whatever reason from PD could actually play DIV 3 having not played a game for them all year, but as soon as PD were knocked out, then this player would then become inelligible, does not make it morally or ethically right, but due to injuries etc 26 players may have played more than the 9 PD games(over qualified), if a club has its PD & lower div sides in finals, then how can the 4 players who were not selected for PD be sitting in the stands, this is also not fair on those players.

    Like all rules, can be manipulated by clubs and coaches with enough forward planning.

  11. #23
    Pushing for Selection
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    73
    Quote Originally Posted by mountainsofpain View Post
    Looks like the flow through of players didn't stop at PD. Their Div 2 and Div 3 sides thrashed their opponents on the weekend.

    Also, Macarthur Giants yesterday turned up to their U19 Div 2 Semi-Final with only 15 players. A pretty poor look for the game.
    A pretty poor look for the game due to the fact that AFLNSW change the guidlines around numbers for the finals from the regular season. Why have a rule all year that if sides have less than 18 then the other side reduces to a minimum of 16 to then change the goal posts in the finals????????? Do you really think those players wanted to play against 3 extra's and have no chance. if it had been 16-15 then it would have been a contest for sure.

  12. #24
    Quote Originally Posted by often_confused View Post
    As I understand the by-laws it is 6 games for the Club. For some reason the rule about playing 9 or more games at a higher level does not count if it is in a different competition. The NEAFL has a few byes so it is probably not hard to engineer the 6 Club Games required. As to it being in the spirit of the game ... that is an entirely different matter and SHH's observations make me concerned as to the Student's guesstimate.

    In any event it will be a big ask to get over the Dragons this week ... not impossible but challenging. However the last three player numbers give it a clear ring of truth.
    It seems to me the 9 game rule may have served its purpose in the past, before the introduction divisionalisation and the creation of mega clubs , but has now seen its day and allows for these clubs to abuse the spirit of the rule .
    There needs to be a change.

    I am guessing the number 9 was used as it represented half the number of team games in a season but in any case misses the real mark under the current competition structure . Very few players play 18 games a year.. I would guess its less than 5%..
    The finals eligibility rule should be aimed at the Player , not the Team.

    For a Players finals eligibility........

    If a player plays the majority of his games in a higher grade, he should be deemed a higher grade player.
    If a player plays the majority of his games in a lower grade then he should be deemed a lower grade player.
    very simple.. no arguments.. no grey areas.

    An Under 19 player should have played 6 games in a senior team to be eligible to play finals for the senior team. He should be treated no different from any other player .. very simple.. he is either an Under 19 player or a Senior player...

    The new rule introduced this year allowing a higher grade player to play in a lower grade Grand Final if his club nominates him as ineligible for the higher grade, is another rule which needs to go. It only serves the larger clubs and allows them to offer a higher grade player a consolation flag due to their inability to make a mans call and tell him he is dropped from the Grand final team he played in all year, as the consequences of telling a lower grade player he is dropped are far less.

    The NEAFL players allowed to play in PD finals, who have played more games in NEAFL than PD, is a farce and this loophole should be changed THIS WEEK... it favours one club only.
    It should be changed NOW, not after the season end but THIS WEEK before the next game. It needs to be corrected as an urgent matter.
    Its wrong, we all know it is wrong. Lets fix it now.

    Interesting the Sydney Uni Div 4 team on the weekend had 11 regular players miss out on a game yet they found room for players who had not played Div 4 at all this year, which included their club president to our surprise.
    What a great culture.. . What great club mates....
    It says a lot about the character of these higher grade players who have never played in the team and drop down and take these regular players positions in the team for finals games .

    Is another SOFT lower grade premiership really that important?
    Let the boys who got themselves into the finals play in the finals and win a deserved flag.

    A glance at UTS div 4 side and Div 1 side on the weekend tells a similar story with many players playing more games in a higher grade and taking the placess of regular player positions .

    The sooner the 9 game rule is changed to be based on the "players games", not the "team games" , the fairer it will be for all clubs.
    Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. Albert Einstein

Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO