injuryupdate
22-09-2004, 05:18 PM
David Parkin is attributed with the line that the Premiership team in the AFL is not "the best team of the year" but is the "good team with the best run of injuries".
If you go back through the winners of the GF and see whether this trend is followed:
2003 - Brisbane (NO); 2002 - Brisbane (sort of); 2001 - Brisbane (definitely yes); 2000 - Essendon (definitely yes); 1999 - Kangaroos (definitely yes); 1998 - Adelaide (yes, in terms of September rather than the whole year); 1997 - Adelaide (see 1998); 1996 - Kangaroos (yes); 1995 - Carlton (yes); 1994 - West Coast (yes); 1993 - Essendon (yes); 1992 - West Coast (yes); 1991 - Hawthorn (yes).
Looking at the Premiership winners of recent years, only Brisbane of 2003 could possibly be described as being beaten up and limping yet they still managed to nail the Grand Final. This makes them a major exception, and it seems that the general view is that it is because they are superhuman and unbeatable etc. It also may be that they were very lucky that they were playing quite an ordinary team (Collingwood) who were there because they had beaten a better side (Port) because they were fitter. According to the fitness theory, Collingwood actually started favourite in the 2003 Grand Final, with a team that wasn't fit to tie the Lions' bootlaces, and this probably didn't help them at all.
I am prepared to go out on a limb and say Port are a great bet at $2.50, as they should win the AFL Grand Final, because they are an excellent team that finally gets a chance to be fully fit in September. The Lions are human, they are beat up, and the "fitter team (injury-wise) wins Grand Finals" rule is generally a very good one.
Of course, Brisbane could prove they are easily the best team of all time by still winning, but I am almost certain that if they do it will be a very tough match.
If you go back through the winners of the GF and see whether this trend is followed:
2003 - Brisbane (NO); 2002 - Brisbane (sort of); 2001 - Brisbane (definitely yes); 2000 - Essendon (definitely yes); 1999 - Kangaroos (definitely yes); 1998 - Adelaide (yes, in terms of September rather than the whole year); 1997 - Adelaide (see 1998); 1996 - Kangaroos (yes); 1995 - Carlton (yes); 1994 - West Coast (yes); 1993 - Essendon (yes); 1992 - West Coast (yes); 1991 - Hawthorn (yes).
Looking at the Premiership winners of recent years, only Brisbane of 2003 could possibly be described as being beaten up and limping yet they still managed to nail the Grand Final. This makes them a major exception, and it seems that the general view is that it is because they are superhuman and unbeatable etc. It also may be that they were very lucky that they were playing quite an ordinary team (Collingwood) who were there because they had beaten a better side (Port) because they were fitter. According to the fitness theory, Collingwood actually started favourite in the 2003 Grand Final, with a team that wasn't fit to tie the Lions' bootlaces, and this probably didn't help them at all.
I am prepared to go out on a limb and say Port are a great bet at $2.50, as they should win the AFL Grand Final, because they are an excellent team that finally gets a chance to be fully fit in September. The Lions are human, they are beat up, and the "fitter team (injury-wise) wins Grand Finals" rule is generally a very good one.
Of course, Brisbane could prove they are easily the best team of all time by still winning, but I am almost certain that if they do it will be a very tough match.