Is percentage calculation fair.

[dimelb]

We'd be weighting an awful long time to get a result.

[snajik]

This applies also to the OP question.
If you're playing at Edihad every week with a closed roof, scores (and margins) will be higher.
Then you could also factor in the biggest inequity, playing lowly teams twice.
eg: Teams who played Essendon twice this year celebrated when the finding was released - maybe not such a walk in the park though.
Then the AFL can't get it right based on the previous year. Freo may well turn out to be the team you want to play twice...

This is very true. I find it really irritating when the draw is released and the usual suspects all come out and whinge about other teams (usually interstate teams) having such an easy draw. Claims always based on where teams finished the previous year which in most instances is a meaningless appraisal.

[RogueSwan]

... Claims always based on where teams finished the previous year which in most instances is a meaningless appraisal.

Exactly, it should be based on their total SuperCoach/FantasyFootball score.

[Nico]

You could throw up so many variables and inequities in the draw and still wouldn't nail how the season will pan out. We all know the draw is inequitable before the first bounce of a season. So Brisbane have a wet season (small margins and upsets), Geelong City has a wet season (as for Brisbane), 2 key Bulldogs players go down (out goes the Etihad theory), Freo players turn out to be over the hill, it rains at every Hawthorn and North Tassie game, Sydney has a dry season, Collingwood is already over rated etc etc etc

The % system has been used since the game started and stood the test of time. One good thumping and the Bulldogs % comes back to the field.

The answer is a pineapple.

[CureTheSane]

Actually, everything is 'pineapple'.

If you think about it, everything in the world is either pineapple, or it isn't pineapple

[Swansongster]

The answer is a pineapple.

Really?. I thought it was 42.

I guess it depends on what the question is.

On topic. Nothing wrong with percentage. Plenty wrong with the draw but it really is "the luck of the draw" in many ways. An Australian tradition.

No way they are going to shorten the season (TV rights) and unlikely they are going to lengthen the season (player welfare).

Status quo is OK by me. Swings and round-abouts. You win some you lose some.

Doing it on the previous season's finishing order (with some loading towards creating two derbies in each non-Victorian zone and making sure Collingwood never have to travel because Eddie said so) is arguably the most transparent way to develop the draw with probity.

[Doctor]

Nothing's perfect but that's ok. I'd rather be 2nd than 1st right now anyway. Noone is talking about us and I like it that way.

[aguy]

Nothing's perfect but that's ok. I'd rather be 2nd than 1st right now anyway. Noone is talking about us and I like it that way.

Spot on. Everyone was writing the swans off before the season began and look we've gone bang bang.

We play best when no one expects us to perform well

[S.S. Bleeder]

Looking at the results this season, and our position at 2 on the ladder. we know how the percentage is worked out, but all the same the Swans won by 80 and 60 points, whereas the Bulldogs won by 65 and 57 points, but they are still about 52 percentage points up on us. Just doesnt seem a very fair system

I think it is. It's not perfect but it's better than any other solution. Winning 200 vs 100 is no different to winning 100 vs 50 (yes I'm aware that they don't correspond exactly).

What is unfair is the uneven draw. Some teams playing the good teams only once in a year is unfair. Collingwood and Essendon getting the ANZAC Day match is unfair. Collingwood travelling interstate only 3 times a year is unfair. Melbourne based teams only having to travel interstate 17% of the time whilst interstate teams travel interstate 50% of the time is "very" unfair.