Where losers win

[mightytiges]

By Jake Niall
realfooty.theage.com.au
May 12, 2004

In keeping with the league's tendency to be influenced by the crisis or outcry of the day, what will be its reaction if Collingwood, grand finalist for the past two seasons, finishes at or near the bottom and qualifies for a priority draft choice?

The obvious injustice of priority picks is the advantage they confer on the bottom teams, compared with the rest, particularly those unlucky clubs mired in no-man's land, stuck between ninth and 13th without a top-five pick, while denied access to an uncontracted player via the pre-season draft.

For a competition that professes to follow a socialist model, the priority-pick rule is strangely unequal, given that it actually rewards one or two teams - those that don't exceed five wins in a given season - over and above the rest.

Of far greater concern, though, is the effect this rule has on the integrity of the competition.

Melbourne has already shown that its priority pick gained last season wasn't warranted. The rule, remember, was originally established to assist continued poor performance, not a one-off blip.

And watching St Kilda soar from bottom to top and establish the foundations for a Brisbane-esque dynasty, rival clubs are more aware than ever that the bottom is the place to be and that the middle and lower middle - where Geelong has lived for years - are the worst addresses on the AFL ladder.

Full article: http://www.realfooty.theage.com.au/realfooty/articles/2004/05/11/1084041405731.html

[Puntroadroar]

its a joke of a system

I understand the AFL doesnt want the same teams on the bottom year after year but then perhaps this priority pick should be, not only for teams with fewer than 5.5 wins a year but also you would have to be in the bottom four for 2 or more seasons.

they have to understand that the team that comes last gets the first pick anyway thats a reward in itself really.

[mightytiges]

particularly those unlucky clubs mired in no-man's land, stuck between ninth and 13th without a top-five pick, while denied access to an uncontracted player via the pre-season draft.

The rule, remember, was originally established to assist continued poor performance, not a one-off blip.

At us to that list. We've only made the finals twice in the past 10 years yet finished in the bottom three only once (2002).

The priority pick if not already is a joke if Collingwood end up getting one. The AFL should change the rule so that clubs that have one poor year are ineligible to receive a priority pick. Only after a club has had consecutive bottom 4 finishes should it be entitled to the extra pick.

ps: bet me to it PRR     

[Struggletown]

A good idea would be to have the priority picks come after the first round of picks(1-16)

This way the lure of 'tanking' games is lessened as the real cream of the crop have been taken, and as such the mediocrity isn't so highly rewarded.

[Ox]

The AFL obviously want to cull the competition
The way it is structured now i see no other long term option 
but to merge two Vic clubs or worse still.......anihilate them.

[Harry]

This is why Richmond is doing more harm than good by fighting and grinding for these meaningless wins.  Yes the Sydney win was meaningless and if they beat the bulldogs that will also be meaningless.  They should try and lose at all costs.  The system is stuffed and the only way to get to the top is to play the system accordingly.......that is to play to lose, stockpile your list with talent and then make an assault.

Otherwise we're just treading water.