How To Fix The Foxtel Cup

[The Sleeping Giant]

Didn't bother Claremont, won the WAFL.

Didn't bother Williamstown, 2nd to the unbeaten Port Melbourne.

Didn't bother West Ad..... oh, scratch that

<serious>
Perhaps part of the reason it didn't bother Claremont/Willy is that their immediate rivals also participated, thereby negating some of the disadvantage?
</serious>

May have harmed a few teams who declined to participate also. See how it works. :grin:

[Pseudo]

Wonderful, Pseudo

Only one small flaw in that 'logic'.

How many teams can win a Premiership each year? It automatically follows that only a maximum of 3 out of 9 'possible facts' can be attained.

Would you also like to explain your SANFL finals statement that 8 out of 9 'facts' support the same

Weird

Three teams from each comp, each team finishing in the top three last year and with a reasonable expectation of doing so again. Let us revise your concept of success from "premiership goal" to "top three goal".

Doesn't miraculously resurrect East Perth and Swans' from the bottom rungs of the table.

Doesn't miraculously transform Ballarat & Bullants from making up the numbers in the finals.

It _does_ give you the satisfaction of claiming Willy as a success - though we must note that Willy was not kept from the premiership by a fellow K-tel cup participant. True, not all of the clubs can finish top - but in the VFL, noneof the K-tel cup teams did.

So relaxing your criterion of success still gives us 7 facts from 9.

Perhaps we could relax it further, to "won at least 5 games and didn't come last"? Do that and I'll concede, the Fauxtel Cup clearly didn't impact upon the success of any of the participants in their domestic leagues.

[redandblack]

Oh, so now you've changed your theory to 'top three'

Your goalposts keep changing, Pseudo, I think they're currently on the half-forward flanks.

As TSG says, woukld you like to test your theories on the non-competing teams?

[FlyingHigh]

Also, South finished 8-11-1 whereas Subiaco finished 12-8. Given that the Eagles finished 13-7 I don't think the Centrals v South is the right analogy. Subiaco finished 3rd like the Eagles here. I think the correct analogy is Centrals v Eagles but then the analogy falls flat because the Eagles won. So I don't know if that supports your argument or not. Perhaps we should avoid these hypothetical comparisons.

Claremont finished minor premier and beat the 2nd and 3rd ranked teams easily on the way to the WAFL premiership in the same year they played the Foxtel Cup.

PS: Claremont beat West Perth by 85 points in the 2nd semi final

Granted, those win/loss ratios don't on the face of it support my argument.
To me it seemed as though this year there were three genuine contestants for the SANFL GF, and for much of the year only two in the WAFL, Claremont and West Perth. West Perth were top and lost 4 of their last 5 minor round games.
Having watched the WAFL GF, Claremont were far superior to Subi in the same way Centrals would have been to South.
As an aside, I think this is a good argument for the final five as any team apart from the top one has to win three games to make the GF, whereas in a final four the third or fourth team had can lucky in their second game and suddenly they are in the GF.

[Pseudo]

Oh, so now you've changed your theory to 'top three'

Only to accomodate your concerns. I'm happy to present the facts in whatever form is easiest for you!

Your goalposts keep changing, Pseudo, I think they're currently on the half-forward flanks.

Not at all; the point remains the same: Most of the Vic, WA and SA FakeTel Cup competitors underperformed in their domestic leagues. To select the one club which didn't underperform and use this to summarily dismiss all concerns of the better-performed SANFL clubs is a complete perversion of rational thought.

Personal opinion: I do think that participation in FalseTel cup would have an effect on a team's regular-season performance. Whether or not this effect is large enough to affect premiership chances is another matter. There is a myriad of other semi-random factors which affect a team's performance. I suppose that there is at least the potential for a premiership to be lost over it. I understand completely if this potential causes a premiership contender to turn down the chance to compete in what is essentially a meaningless competition.

As TSG says, would you like to test your theories on the non-competing teams?

Already done: The top three SANFL teams didn't compete, and they all came top three again, unlike their WAFL/VFL counterparts.

But yes, I'd like to see the best teams in the SANFL hit it out with the best teams in the WAFL & VFL. But not in the Fauxtel Cup (thanks again ) as it currently stands.

[redandblack]

Only one team can win in each comp.

One participating team won a premirership, one came second.

None of the SANFL teams were expected to figure in the GF and didn't.

'Rational thought' would say those results show that the participating teams had a good success rate in their regular comps.

Many of the non-competing teams also had very poor seasons, your team among them.ppreciate your acknowledgement of my 'Fauxtel' Cup offering, but I'm not a big fan of changing names (eg: Falsetel) as a rational argument.

[Pseudo]

Only one team can win in each comp.

One participating team won a premirership, one came second.

None of the SANFL teams were expected to figure in the GF and didn't.

'Rational thought' would say those results show that the participating teams had a good success rate in their regular comps.

Many of the non-competing teams also had very poor seasons, your team among them.ppreciate your acknowledgement of my 'Fauxtel' Cup offering, but I'm not a big fan of changing names (eg: Falsetel) as a rational argument.

Glenelg had a poor season, as you have written above. West, Port and North finished below Glenelg. Therefore West, Port and North had poor seasons. East Perth and Swan Districts finished 7th and 8th, with less wins than North Adelaide. Therefore East Perth and Swans had poor seasons.

At least 5 of the 9 WA, Vic and SA teams had poor seasons. Not just underperformed, but poorly performed. More than half. Yet your "rational thought" shows that "the participating teams had a good success rate in their regular comps".

Now you're just being silly!

[redandblack]

West, Port and North were expected to finish below Glenelg, so there goes 3 of your points to start with.

The whole argument with the Foxtel Cup is that it harms side's premiership chances. Well, that has been proven wrong, regardless of results of teams that finished 7th the year before.

As for West, we won both games after the Cup matches and our season went backward after the game we won at Prospect when we were hit by injury and suspensions.

Whatever contortions your argument develops, the fact is that two of te competing teams made the Grand Final and one won a premiership, so the argument that it affects your premiership chnaces is just silly

[overloaded]

I bet if the prizemoney was 4 times what it is now we'd me amazed at how quickly our clubs would build a bridge over these concerns about their premiership chances. That would be the quickest "fix" to the "problem".

spot on

[Pseudo]

West, Port and North were expected to finish below Glenelg, so there goes 3 of your points to start with.

Here's what I said in relation to the SANFL participants:

"Extend the claim with the clause " ... and participating SANFL teams weren't affected in their goal of finals participation", then 8 facts out of 9 support the claim."

So the three points stand.

The whole argument with the Foxtel Cup is that it harms side's premiership chances. Well, that has been proven wrong, regardless of results of teams that finished 7th the year before.

Proven wrong only by considering the results of one team, and generalising to the rest of the teams. Fallacious reasoning.

As for West, we won both games after the Cup matches and our season went backward after the game we won at Prospect when we were hit by injury and suspensions.

I respect your assessment of West Adelaide's season.

Whatever contortions your argument develops, the fact is that two of te competing teams made the Grand Final and one won a premiership, so the argument that it affects your premiership chnaces is just silly

The point under contention is the claim that it doesn't affect premiership chances - in the general case. Had you claimed "it didn't affect Claremont's premiership chances" then you'd have been correct. Participation may well have affected Claremont anyway, but evidently not enough to preclude the premiership. Rather, you claimed "Claremont won the flag, so participation in Foxtel Cup didn't affect the chances of the WAFL/VFL teams", which is clearly ridiculous.

I do not claim that Foxtel Cup participation neccessarily prevents all participants from winning their domestic comps; that would be as irrational as the argument that it doesn't. I suggest that there is potential for it (in its current format) to affect a team's domestic season. It is therefore valid for SANFL clubs with aspirations to a premiership (or other lesser goals) to offer this as a reason to decline the invitation.

[Pseudo]

I bet if the prizemoney was 4 times what it is now we'd me amazed at how quickly our clubs would build a bridge over these concerns about their premiership chances. That would be the quickest "fix" to the "problem".

spot on

Raise the prizemoney to the point where it exceeds all financial benefits of participating in the SANFL season and clubs would be silly not to have a tilt.

In this case the SANFL would cease to be the premier competition, supplanted by a Mickey-Mouse cup whose sole objective is to stop Foxtel viewers from clicking over to the pr0n channel in between AFL games.

Is this desirable?

[redandblack]

I have a proposal for you, Pseudo.

I agree with your last paragraph and have also said that many times. We disagree about many things relating to the Foxtel Cup, several of which will become clearer with time. I doubt that either of us have the time to repeatedly debate every item in dispute, so how about we agree on your last paragraph and let the other things take their course.

I doubt that the comp will run for a lot of years, but I enjoyed Westies participation last year and I'm happy that we're in it again. I'm sure many are happy their team isn't in it and that's also fine.

Deal?

PS: You can keep referring to it as the Fauxtel Cup, no royalties payable

[once_were_warriors]

You can hold a tennis tournament in Dubai worth double the prize money of Wimbeldon but it would not even compare to the presitge of winning Wimbeldon.


Similar with any other sporting league around the world.

Foxtel Cup v Sanfl premiership no different.

Plastic Surgeon v Heart Surgeon same deal.

[Hondo]

You can hold a tennis tournament in Dubai worth double the prize money of Wimbeldon but it would not even compare to the presitge of winning Wimbeldon.

It may not have the same prestige but every top player would be there.

In sport, as everywhere else, money talks.

Look at the IPL for example. 10 years ago would you have predicted that every top cricket player in the world would play in a domestic cricket competition in India.

That said, I agree the SANFL premiership is >>>> prestigous than any other filler comp would be. Ditoo AFL premiership >>>> NAB Cup. Test Cricket >>>> prestigous than 20-20. That doesn't mean you don't do the secondary comps at all though.

Sometimes it's the less "prestigous" competitions that pay the bills although not in the case of the Foxtel Cup yet.

[once_were_warriors]

You can hold a tennis tournament in Dubai worth double the prize money of Wimbeldon but it would not even compare to the presitge of winning Wimbeldon.

It may not have the same prestige but every top player would be there.

In sport, as everywhere else, money talks.

Look at the IPL for example. 10 years ago would you have predicted that every top cricket player in the world would play in a domestic cricket competition in India.

True

But ask them if they could choose between representing Australia in a test v IPL , other than those that are off the radar or moving into retirement , 90% would say test match.

Ask clubs if they potentially want 100K from foxtel cup or to win a Sanfl premiership , they would all choose the later.

The debate is, can they successfully achieve both? Some say no some say yes.

[overloaded]

clubs may also look at it formt he point of view of winning $100K increases their ability to win an SANFL premiership

[heater31]

I fail to see how you could argue how Swan Districts and East Perth were affected by participating. Both Teams had poor seasons before the competition even started

[PhilH]

Cancel my thoughts on playing Saturday Morning, I think I have worked it out.

Foxtel is showing ALL AFL games live next year

On Saturday afternoon AND Saturday night there are TWO games so they will need TWO channels.

However Saturday Twighlight there is only ONE AFL game

Which means the second AFL channel has no match to show in the twighlight timeselot .....

It's head to head v AFL but still fills a hole in their broadcast schedule.

[Wedgie]

Id imagine when theres two games on at the same time one will just be shown on one of the Foxsports channels.

[holden78]

Call it the ROXTEL Cup , where average clubs from SA can get their " Rox " off over nothing !