From: 10703950@eng2.eng.monash.edu.au (BENJAMIN CUTLER)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.australian
Subject: Re: Multiple Musings
Date: 6 Oct 92 06:43:50 GMT
Organization: Faculty of Engineering, Monash University

In article <1992Oct3.055421.19017@news.vanderbilt.edu> LIPSCOJA@ctrvax.vanderbilt.edu () writes:
>From: LIPSCOJA@ctrvax.vanderbilt.edu ()
>Subject: Multiple Musings
>Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1992 05:54:21 GMT
>I think I'll start with some questions.  First, I think I've figured out
>"budgies" [WCE] and "dons" [Essendon].  But "woodsmen"? [Coll'wood?]
>
>Second, could someone post lists of teams [both names] in the "minor"
>leagues [VFA, SANFL, WAFL, etc.] and the 92 ladders?
>
>Now, my ideas.
>The parallels between the AFL and NSWRL this year are pretty wild.  Teams
>from outside the superstate winning both grand finals, and 2 Magpie sides
>in 5th (the rugby version is Western Suburbs {of Sydney} or Wests for short,
>for those of you who don't follow that sport).
>
>As far as the complaints about the final-six system, why not just go back to
>the final five?  Thinking about what would have been different this year:
> * Collingwood gets a double chance :), and might have done some damage (in
>particular, they easily beat Dogs in the QF, and I imagine WC would then do the
>same in the 1S).
> * West Coast faces sudden death all the way, and I doubt they would have taken
>out Geelong with the Cats having the bye in (no way would they beat the pies).
>Would still have been a good game though.
> * St. Kilda doesn't make the finals :(.
>
>And the first predictions for season '93: [trumpet fanfare]
>Home-and-away:
>1. West Coast
>2. St. Kilda
>3. Geelong
>4. Carlton (if they get an easier schedule)
>5. Collingwood
>6. Adelaide
>7. Hawthorn (wishful thinking, probably)
>8. Footscray (back to earth)
>9. Essendon
>10. Fremantle (read on)
>11. North Melbourne
>12. Fitzroy
>13. Richmond
>14. Brisbane Swans (which explains the rush to WA2; no point reducing the
>   league)
>15. Melbourne
>   If I'm wrong on the merger tip, move 10-13 up one each, and the Bears will
>just edge Sydney for the wooden spoon.
>
>In the finals:
>QF:  West Coast over St. K (their form won't quite be ready to leave a la 91)
>EF (3v6):  Geelong a bit too much *this* year, but extra time possible
>EF (4v5):  Blues blow it on their home ground :) :)
>2S:  Eagles (still not yet)
>1S:  Saints send Pies out 2 yrs running
>PF:  Geelong in a thriller
>GF:  The pressure to repeat too much.  Cats 17.14 (116), WC 13.22 (100)
>BTW, who was the last side to have a 2-yr reign?
>
>Andy Lipscomb
>lipscoja@ctrvax.vanderbilt.edu
>Carn the Magpies!  (I think that's a good thing.  If not, carn the Hawks!)
> 

The last side to have a two year reign was -
                                            HAWTHORN

and not all that long ago either 1988-9.

Watch out for them again next year too because they don't take kindly
to failing. Last time they failed (in 1990) they replied the next year by
winning the premiership!!
Look out for a similar scene next year.

BTW Geelong seem to have a similar tactic to start their Grand finals
that is they go for the man.
in 1989 Geelong players deliberately decked Brerton, Platten and the Dipper
in 1992 it was the west coast wankers Pyke to be delt with.
The final outcome in both games was the same - Geelong lost.
Maybe if they went for the ball they might win.