Rik E Boy wrote:- wrote:Booney wrote:Please gentlemen,dont even contemplate comparing your clubs to the Port Adelaide football club,falling short is a certainty.
I fail to see where your argument is based -'er,who is rating Norwood,other than you,and how do you support them being "over-rated",if no one but your good self is involved in the process?
I think,you dont rate them,most football followers in SA would respect them greatly,and this you have trouble understanding.
I respect them greatly as the 2nd most successful club in the comp. They are miles behind 1st but like to think of themselves as close to them. The average bloke in the pub rates them closer to port than they actually are. This is why I think they are overrated.
I'd hate to see what you'd say about the Redlegs if you didn't respect them! Norwood are further ahead of Sturt and North in terms of premierships than they are behind Port so that means the 3rd and 4th most successfull clubs in league history are friggin miles away! While you are checking out just how far behind Norwood are to Port, check out the Norwood v Port Grand finals head to head stats and Norwood v Port head to head in finals overall. Norwood compare favourably..you know how I found this out..by reading John Wood's History of Port Adelaide that was owned by a Port supporter mate of mine (a mutual friend of ours Booney).
FFS!!Who are you mate, Graham Frigging Cornes??
regards,
REB
So you are one of those people who really believe 27 premierships is a true indication of Norwoods success. Good luck to you because you head is in the clouds. Try since 1900 16 to Norwood and 13 each to North and Sturt. That is when we have all been on a level playing field infact Sturt started a bit later than that.
Keep in mind I am not denying the fact Norwood are number 2 here. I recognise the fact that Norwood are comfortably ahead of North and Sturt in head to head records. I also acknowledge the fact that Norwood make finals roughly 3 in every 4 years and North and Sturt are only marginally better than 1 in every 2.
I don't particularly like the head to head finals records as an argument because you can play a certain team when you are the better side and when they are better than you they get to play another club and as a result they don't get the right to even the scores up. Finals head to heads are a lot about timing. The only head to head records I take note of are all inclusive ones. My point here is that North have a head to head finals advantage over Norwood and I really don't believe that is a true reflection because Norwood are roughly 140-110 ahead overall.
Anyone who says Port are only 50 50 in Grand Finals ought to take note of the fact that on a lot of those occasions they have probably exceeded expectations in reaching the Grand Final. Add to that some of their 2nds were recorded before Grand Finals were contested. I would argue that in the majority of cases the best team wins the Grand Final. In fact I would say in the last 20 or so years 84 and 94 are the only time where the outsider has won the Grand Final. I would say Sturt 02, and Glenelg 86 were only marginal outsiders. Port 89, Port 96 and Port 98 were genuine 50 50's. I spose you could argue that Centrals 2000 was 50 50 also.
