The
rankings agree – the new AFLW conferences are about as lop-sided as most people
think they are.
This
year, somewhat controversially, the AFL has split the
AFLW teams into two conferences. Ostensibly this is because, following the
introduction of two new teams, it is no longer the case that all of the teams
will play each other during the course of the season (a decision that was
itself controversial). Critics may of course note that all of the teams in the
men’s AFL do not play each other the same amount of times, and conferences have
not been introduced for that (yet).
Even
before the season started some
people noted that one conference – Conference A – looked to be stronger
than the other. First, all of the odd-placed teams from last year (first, third, etc.) were placed in one conference, and all of the even-placed
teams were placed in the other. Second, the stronger of the two new teams – North
Melbourne/the Kangaroos – was placed in Conference A. Third, two of the
Conference B teams – Brisbane, and particularly Collingwood – were significantly weakened by losing
players to the Roos.
After
the first two rounds, including the first round of ‘cross-conference’ matches, there
is now a spate of commentary about how uneven the conferences appear to be. As
noted in The
Age:
“Melbourne sit bottom of
Conference A with one win and a percentage of 119.1. The Brisbane Lions, with
one win but a vastly inferior percentage of 73.4, are atop Conference B.”
And since the top two teams in each conference will play off in
the finals:
“It doesn’t take too deep an
inspection to see how this is an issue, with an increasing likelihood that
mediocre Conference B teams will take finals spots ahead of better Conference A
sides.”
Are
the two conferences really as uneven as they seem?
It’s probably not just the
fixture
Particularly
early in the season, the fixture can somewhat mask the ‘true’ strength of
teams. Results obviously in part depend upon who you play and where you play
them.
It’s
not hard to see that it’s probably not just the fixture causing the disparity so
far though. Every team in Conference A is well ahead of every team in
Conference B following the first round of ‘cross-conference’ matches, and home
ground advantage seems unlikely to be large enough to explain the difference.
The five Conference A teams beat the five Conference B teams by an average of
20 points on the weekend, and none won by less than 13 points.
The
rankings put 46 per cent of their weight on the results of the most recent two
matches. Accordingly, Conference A sides now occupy five of the top seven
positions in the rankings. Further, the two Conference B sides in the top seven
– Brisbane and Collingwood – who as mentioned above were weakened by player
movements, are falling faster than anyone.
It may well be that a
significant test of the relative strength of the conferences comes in the final
cross-conference match of this weekend. If Melbourne, the last-placed team in
Conference A, can win away against Brisbane, the first-placed team in
Conference B, then the comments that the sixth and seventh ‘best’ teams could
get into the finals may gain even more momentum.
No comments:
Post a Comment