TOPIC:

Same rules should apply to sf then, if they had 6 of their best in and kicked straight the result may have been different. Then it would have been back to back. Not to mention we only finished 1 win but less % clear in top spot from the next 2 sides. Might as well chuck the tiges in to this equation too Roman

If South or Claremont had in their side Dewar, Marsh, Matera and Lockyer then fair enough.
No other side can lay claim to 4 top liners from other wafl clubs and how Subi can afford that on top of the eastern states players is the big question.

We have the same discussion every season. Nothing changes. Nothing will change. This has been going on for 20 years and is too deeply entrenched to ever change. The WAFC will see 30k at the GF and assume everything is going well. It's clearly not. This is the WAFL: Subi - big gap - SF/C - big gap - WP - big gap - EP/EF/SD - big gap - P. Then you have the aligned teams, who fluctuate with AFL availability. They have been the only teams to seriously challenge the dominance of Subi, but the measures taken after 2017 mean that they are unlikely to do so again. 

Every year Subi fans say "yes, we agree, it needs to change", but apparently by other teams somehow becoming better, and in a way that doesn't affect them at all. The only thing the points cap has achieved is Subi being unable to get Clarke for one year - and they won the flag anyway - and also missing Dela's cousin. (He played a passable season at Perth, but probably wouldn't have been a league player at Subi.) Otherwise, despite the points cap, Subi have had no problem accommodating Dewar, Marsh, Lockyer, Matera, Powell, Dela, Kitchin and others in past years. They will always have at least 6 interstate/exAFL and they will all be of the highest quality. So BC says Subi will come back to the pack next year because they might lose a few players. That would actually be the worst result for other clubs, because if Subi lose players, they will replace them, leaving clubs like Perth to pick over what's left. Perth have gotten into bidding wars with Subi over players before. Guess who won? 

Sorry, guys, but this is how things are. My ladder for 2022: S, SF, C, WP, EP, EF, SD, PT, P. My ladder for the 5 years after that: pretty much the same, but with EP, EF, SD and PT swapping around a bit. 

Fair call MO, we really didn’t need to get Matera, we have 2 good young guys Farone and Robbins that would have been better choices. Maybe slap hefty transfer fees 20-50k on such players, applied to all clubs. Sounds like the commish are going to go the opposite way though, which I can’t understand the reasoning

Ted I don't agree that there is daylight between $ubi and sf/cl

DG, in the last 20 years Subi have played in 14 grand finals, winning 10. SF and C have each played in 7, winning 3 and 2 respectively. WP have played in 5, SD, EF, EP and PT in 2 (3 of those 4 as alignment teams), and P in none. How is Subi playing in twice as many GFs and winning 3 times as many not daylight? 

Aren't we talking about now though Ted?

Ted Nugent wrote:

DG, in the last 20 years Subi have played in 14 grand finals, winning 10. SF and C have each played in 7, winning 3 and 2 respectively. WP have played in 5, SD, EF, EP and PT in 2 (3 of those 4 as alignment teams), and P in none. How is Subi playing in twice as many GFs and winning 3 times as many not daylight? 

Because Souths and Claremont being so dominant have to play someone in the GF each year and it might as well be Subi.  

BC hasn’t the restrictions on Subi recruiting now expired?

Yes DD they have...which just goes to show how ridiculous they were in the first place in that it only lasted a season. I've said on here many times that restrictions should apply to all clubs and not just single out one or two. Things like taking a 5 year rolling average on where a club finishes on the ladder and not allowing clubs to recruit players from others lower on the ladder including returning AFL guys. That would preclude Subi taking players from pretty much anyone and allow the likes of EF to go hard after whomever they want.  Or use the same scenario and place extra points on recruits from lower clubs.