U 18's

[mountainsofpain]

Read the Sydney AFL rule book and you will see that the players get the credit of the goals even if they lose there score

I don't have a Sydney AFL rule book to read.

[northernspy]

The percentage at the final column is the match ratio.

In a comp where all teams play the same number of games (eg Prem Div or Div 1) the points per win system is used, because having played the same number of games it is considered to be a level playing field for all clubs (notwithstanding the fact that all clubs may not necessarily play each other the same amount of times, eg Div 4).

Once teams play a different number of games, the points system isn't used and the match ratio (ie percentage of games won compared to games played) is used.

In the U18 Premier Cup, some sides have played 13, some 14 and one 15 games. So the match ratio system is used. Under that system, for the top 4 -
North Shore - Won 10, Won 2 by Forfeit = 12 wins; Games played (also including Forfeits) = 14; therefore 12 wins out of 14 games as a percentage = 85.71 match ratio
East Coast Eagles - 11 wins out of 14 games, percentage = 78.57 match ratio
Sydney Uni - 10 wins out of 14 games, percentage = 71.43 match ratio
St George - 9 wins out of 13 games, percentage = 69.23 match ratio

Bear in mind that the ladders on Sporting Pulse are a little deceptive, the "W" figure represents wins on the field only. You need to add the "W" figure to the "FF" figure (forfeits for) to get the total wins by the club. So when you were looking at the ladder (prior to the current round), not all clubs would have been sitting on 9 wins as you thought.

Make sure you click on Round 19 on the ladders page to get the updated ladder - I think Round 19 is to allow for the extra round played due to the pull out by the Balmain side.

The updated ladder changes considerably byt doing this putting the Eagles on top over the Bombers with St george in 3rd followed by Uni and Penno...

[beameup]

The percentage at the final column is the match ratio.

In a comp where all teams play the same number of games (eg Prem Div or Div 1) the points per win system is used, because having played the same number of games it is considered to be a level playing field for all clubs (notwithstanding the fact that all clubs may not necessarily play each other the same amount of times, eg Div 4).

Once teams play a different number of games, the points system isn't used and the match ratio (ie percentage of games won compared to games played) is used.

In the U18 Premier Cup, some sides have played 13, some 14 and one 15 games. So the match ratio system is used. Under that system, for the top 4 -
North Shore - Won 10, Won 2 by Forfeit = 12 wins; Games played (also including Forfeits) = 14; therefore 12 wins out of 14 games as a percentage = 85.71 match ratio
East Coast Eagles - 11 wins out of 14 games, percentage = 78.57 match ratio

Sydney Uni - 10 wins out of 14 games, percentage = 71.43 match ratio
St George - 9 wins out of 13 games, percentage = 69.23 match ratio

Bear in mind that the ladders on Sporting Pulse are a little deceptive, the "W" figure represents wins on the field only. You need to add the "W" figure to the "FF" figure (forfeits for) to get the total wins by the club. So when you were looking at the ladder (prior to the current round), not all clubs would have been sitting on 9 wins as you thought.

Thanks I at least understand it even if not convinced of it being a level playing field. The draw has been significantly compromised by 11 teams then Balmain withdrawal. Teams that played them early should be thankful

[ShortHalfHead]

Noticed that East Coast had their win taken off them against Moorebank Sports for playing an ineligible player

[Junior]

Noticed that East Coast had their win taken off them against Moorebank Sports for playing an ineligible player

Not entirely accurate...

[ShortHalfHead]

Not entirely accurate...

But pretty damned accurate, I would say from what I hear.

Why do you differ in opinion?

[Junior]

I differ in opinion because all players that took the field against Moorebank were eligible to play.

can I ask what you have heard?

[ShortHalfHead]

I differ in opinion because all players that took the field against Moorebank were eligible to play.

can I ask what you have heard?

The comment on the website said there had been a breach of the by-laws (7.13) which states that an Under 18's player can only play one 18's game on any given weekend. I assumed that as East Coast had their Premier and Challenge teams playing on different days, that a player (or players) played in both. What was your interpretion of the reversed result?

Official Match Report
Original Score East Coast Eagles 10.15.75 Moorebank Sports 3.9.27. East Coast Eagles breached AFL Sydney By-Law 7.13 and subsequently the match has been awarded to Moorebank Sports.

[tara]

The comment on the website said there had been a breach of the by-laws (7.13) which states that an Under 18's player can only play one 18's game on any given weekend. I assumed that as East Coast had their Premier and Challenge teams playing on different days, that a player (or players) played in both. What was your interpretion of the reversed result?

Official Match Report
Original Score East Coast Eagles 10.15.75 Moorebank Sports 3.9.27. East Coast Eagles breached AFL Sydney By-Law 7.13 and subsequently the match has been awarded to Moorebank Sports.

There were a number of players who dropped back to challege cup on the Saturday and then played again in PD on the Sunday - I was surprised that it had any bearing on this game though as it was the first one played - I guess the AFL looked at it and decided that a Challenge Cup penalty would be a claytons penalty as opposed to applying the penality in the division it occured which would have had a direct bearing on the minor premiership in the PD 18s.

[Junior]

You are correct, Challenge Cup played on the saturday and Premier Cup played on the sunday. Due to a few late withdrawals from the premier cup team, including one player called into the Premier Division side on the sunday morning due to injury in that team, three Challenge Cup players backed up on the sunday and played Premier Cup as well. The negligence on the part of the club came from assuming that the rules for U18 was similar to rules in senior grades whereby players can play two games in a weekend, but the must play in the lower grade first. Our mistake.

My disagreement was with the word ineligible. On the saturday morning, all 22 players that played Challenge Cup were eligible to play.

[Norris Lurker]

It's an interesting one. One interpretation of the rules would be that they were all legal on Saturday, and it was only backing up on Sunday that breached the rules; and therefore the Sunday game was the illegal result. But, in the context of both competitions, that may have been too harsh a penalty for an honest mistake.

[Junior]

Tara, I've got to correct you. The three players in question were all picked in Challenge Cup on thursday night, and none could be considered regular premier cup players. At the time in question, only one of the three had played more Premier Cup than Challenge Cup and that was a 7/6 split, and one of the three had played only one Premier Cup game and the rest of the year in Challenge. I hardly see how that is dropping players back...

[ShortHalfHead]

My disagreement was with the word ineligible. On the saturday morning, all 22 players that played Challenge Cup were eligible to play.

So you are saying that the Premier Cup team should have been penalised because they were the team that played ineligible players?

[Junior]

that's not for me to say. The AFL came up with their decision and we have accepted that.

[tara]

Tara, I've got to correct you. The three players in question were all picked in Challenge Cup on thursday night, and none could be considered regular premier cup players. At the time in question, only one of the three had played more Premier Cup than Challenge Cup and that was a 7/6 split, and one of the three had played only one Premier Cup game and the rest of the year in Challenge. I hardly see how that is dropping players back...

My understanding on the day was it was the first time that you had the opportunity all year to play you side as most weeks injuries in the senior grades saw the need from PD kids to play seniors and therefore CC players played higher than they normally would and this particular week you were better off than normal - hence the reason I changed my bloody tips from Wests to you. I hadnt looked at your team and who played in which team normally and from what I could see today there were only two you could consider regular PD 18's, one of whom didnt play on the Sunday anyway, my comments were based on what was said to me from your camp so sorry to cause offence.