AFL Ladder - wrong?

[WhyPhilWhy?]

The AFL website, the Age and the Herald Sun all show ladders with the Pies 4th.

Those ladders may be correct as at Round 22, but as far as I understand it, the official end-of-season ladder should show us as 2nd, shouldn't it? Aren't our picks after the Crows and the <snigger> Power?

If I'm correct, I suggest we all email all three to ask them to show us the respect we deserve.




"I am disrespectful to scum! Can you see I am serious!"

[Ian]

Correct - we were runners up - we finshed 2nd,Port 3rd,Adelaide 4th.

[Dr Alf Andrews]

How is 3rd and 4th decided?

Both sides lost Preliminary Finals, so how do they decide which team gets rated on top of the other?

Is it decided by which of the two sides had the highest home and away ranking, or is one Preliminary Final considered higher than the other?

Common sense would suggest that the home-and-away ranking would be used ... but I tend to avoid putting the words "common sense" and "A.F.L." in the same sentence.

Can anyone tell us for sure?


GO HARD OR GO HOME

[AnthonyC]

Does this help?

http://afl.com.au/default.asp?pg=home&spg=display&articleid=11936

It only confuses me more. I know richmond finished third last year after losing to brisbane in the prelim. I think they were fourth after rnd. 22, therefore brissy being the higher ranked? prelim. team meant richmond finished third. I think!

We are definately second.




Go Pies!

[Dr Alf Andrews]

Thanks for that, Anthony.

I think, from my interpretation, the home and away ranking is the deciding factor.

After week one of the finals, the losing elimination finalists are ranked 7th and 8th ... with the 7th ranking going to whichever of the two sides finished higher in the Home-and-Away.

After week two, the losing semi-finalists are rated 5th and 6th ... the 5th spot goes to whichever one finished higher in the H&A.

After week three, the losing preminary finalists get the 3rd and 4th ranking ... 3rd spot goes to whichever of the two teams finished higher in the H&A.

After the Grand Final ... the loser gets ranked 2nd ... and the winner gets the Cup.

What's going on here? The A.F.L. is actually using COMMON-SENSE?

Nah, couldn't possibly be true.

Hang on ... I missed the small print.

It says, "Each team's newly ranked position is then divided by the square root of their salary cap limit plus the number of cane toads found on their home ground that year." Obviously this provision was to make sure that even if we had won the Grand Final, Brisbane would have still got the premiership.

Whatever way you look at it ... we came 2nd.

GO HARD OR GO HOME
**************
Ph.D. thesis, "Football: the People's Game?" http://alf.magpies.net

[MissMagpie_20]

Whatever way you look at it we are GRANDFINALISTS and therefore finished 2nd in 2002.

But that wont be the case in 2003...

Cos we'll go one better

_________________________
VOULEZ VOUS COUCHER AVEC MOIR TAZZA?

Floreat Pica - May the Magpies prosper

[Ian]

Yes,home and away ranking is the deciding factor as far as I know - Port finished 3rd(minor premier,preliminary finalist),Adelaide finished 4th (preliminary finalist).

[Black_White]

As you say MM20, GRAND FINALISTS!

Saw a couple of really nice mounted photos of GF day. The first was the team breaking the banner, $130. The second was of Bux leading the team down the race with that look on his face, $140.
I would have bought both but,.... the brass plaque on both stated;
"Collingwood Runners-Up 2002"

RUNNERS UP!!! Geez I know we lost but how about "GRAND FINALIST 2002"?
I could never always look at those with "runners-up" on them, never.

Still cost them a sale.


-Craig



[This message has been edited by Black_White (edited 19 November 2002).]