VFL vs SANFL vs WAFL

[TeeJay]

12 people have voted mate give it a chance?
Your soccer examples are ridiculous. Its played by almost every country in the world. Not 3 states.
Less than half of the epl's players are english.....

[tbagrocks]

Four states and a Territory but whatever ::) So the examples of all the other sports just don't compare? Face it you're hanging on to some basic statistics like a bureaucratic moron and are basically calling all the footy experts throughout history as stupid, well once again you're wrong, but I see you will not be convinced so... either stop trolling or wake up ;D

[quinny88]

Interesting argument guys.
I have read through the debate from both sides and have done my best to look at it from a completely neutral perspective but my opinion lies in favour of the VFL having been the dominant league for a majority, if not the entire history of Australian rules football.
Call me bias if you wish but I will do my best to explain why I came to this conclusion.

Im only 24, I never saw an SANFL game nor did I see a VFL game prior to the start AFL. My opinion can only be based on what the record books and opinions of people who did see these leagues say.
The only people that I know or have heard the opinion of would all agree that that the VFL was certainly the dominant league in the country during the 70's and 80's. This is not debatable. The VFL was the major league, the highest paying and attracted the best players from all over the country. I think everyone that follows football knows this. A caption from Wikipedia to back this up, By the 1970s, VFL clubs were signing up an increasing number of the best players from other states and Victoria dominated state games
Pre 1970 I dont know anyone that knows enough about it so I have looked over a few books I have and websites to see what it was like.
I cant find anything to support the WAFL or SANFL ever being better or even level with the VFL.
The only instances that it was considered as strong was briefly following WW2 and very early on because of the split between the VFA and VFL and teams going back and forth between leagues.

The reasons for the VFL always having been stronger than the rest are simple.
Population and finances. They have always been superior in both areas.
This is a quote from Wikipedia "As the birthplace of Australian rules, and with advantages of population and finances, Victoria dominated the first hundred years of intercolonial and interstate football"
That is just it in a nutshell.
The VFL always attracted the best players because they wanted to play in the best leagues that could offer them the best pay. This may have not been as strong a pulling tool in earlier years but it does seem it was from very early on and just grew more and more over time.
As far as the population point goes, that's just common sense. More people means bigger talent pool. More money means more attraction. Its the same as any sport. Money and population will always develop or attract the best.
I know when comparing countries and large populations it doesn't always stack up as to why we, as a country of 20 million would be able to challenge a country of 1 billion but money invested into our sport in this country and our genetic make up allow us the opportunities to play and be good at sport.
When comparing Victoria, South Australia and Western Australia though, genetically we are the same, we have the same average talent, the same opportunities. The thing in favour of Victoria developing Footballers is the much larger population and the thing in favour of our league was the larger finances to lure players over.

There's no doubt the WAFL and SANFL have produced some of the games greats. Its a shame that the AFL wasn't developed earlier so we could have seen them all play with and against each other. Perhaps Barrie Robran was the greatest player ever. Perhaps Ken Farmer was the best full forward ever and would have kicked 100, 11 years in a row in the AFL aswell. We'll never know.
But the VFL was the strongest and most talented league as a whole over the history before it became the AFL. I cant see how that could be debated by anyone given the facts in front of us

[TeeJay]

Four states and a Territory but whatever ::) So the examples of all the other sports just don't compare? Face it you're hanging on to some basic statistics like a bureaucratic moron and are basically calling all the footy experts throughout history as stupid, well once again you're wrong, but I see you will not be convinced so... either stop trolling or wake up ;D

You are actually the most moronic and bias opinionated person I have ever spoken with.
Neither of us were alive to see the sanfl or vfl in the era's we are talking about so how is looking over the stats from that time and reading that victoria dominated for 100 years make me a bureaucratic moron? It is fact written in the history books. An era described as a "dominance" from one state cant be seen as anything other than just that!
Are they lying? Are the history books fake? I know footbal isnt played on paper but when its a dominance for 100 years then thats what it is!!
What experts mate, give me some names? What decades was the sanfl better, give me the decades? I back everything I say up with facts, you just talk crap because you have got yourself in so deep that you dont want to admit you are wrong even though I have blatantly proven you wrong for all to see. Give me some proof of anything tou say that isnt of your own opinion because im not giving you my opinion im giving you cold hard facts.
I think quinny88 has just backed up everything me and ziplock said aswell with more cold hard FACTS right there for your dumb ass to read.
Someone shoot me please, its like talking to a brick wall

[tbagrocks]

Well this is a better arguement and to think I liked you Quinny :P ::)

Still the debate is not about Victorian football being the dominant, it's about the fact they at times weren't the dominant state league in footy, don't ask me when, I was born in 1979, all I know is good judges say that other leagues were at times as good or better than Victoria.

Also the bigger the population, the more people there are to agree that a league is better, but trust me, this has not been always the case, as always it's only opinion, but many purists agree that other leagues have been as good as the Vics ;)

[tbagrocks]

TeeJay you one eyed poser, maybe read something written outside Victoria for once ::)

[TeeJay]

Well this is a better arguement and to think I liked you Quinny :P ::)

Still the debate is not about Victorian football being the dominant, it's about the fact they at times weren't the dominant state league in footy, don't ask me when, I was born in 1979, all I know is good judges say that other leagues were at times as good or better than Victoria.

Also the bigger the population, the more people there are to agree that a league is better, but trust me, this has not been always the case, as always it's only opinion, but many purists agree that other leagues have been as good as the Vics ;)

How else can you measure it other than the states playimg against each other tbag, honesty? Your measuring it on some so called "expert opinins". Who are the experts?
I have heard the odd person in football say the sanfl was as good a league the vfl in parts. I have never heard anyone apart from you say it was better at any point in the history and vast majority vic and non vic agree the vfl has always been the best.

[TeeJay]

How can you actually argue something when the people in favour of the vfl have given you facts, quotes, statistics and opinions in their favour and all you have given in your favour is opinion?

Explain that to me....
You did not see this era you just think it was the way you believe because you have heard some people say it was... Thats it. Thats all you have and we have given you all of the proof against that argument and you still are so one eyed and stubborn to admit maybe your opinion was wrong.
Its 3am and im arguing with moron  ::) goodnight

[quinny88]

Well this is a better arguement and to think I liked you Quinny :P ::)

Still the debate is not about Victorian football being the dominant, it's about the fact they at times weren't the dominant state league in footy, don't ask me when, I was born in 1979, all I know is good judges say that other leagues were at times as good or better than Victoria.

Also the bigger the population, the more people there are to agree that a league is better, but trust me, this has not been always the case, as always it's only opinion, but many purists agree that other leagues have been as good as the Vics ;)

Haha sorry tbag.
No your right, but as tj has said, its the only way it can really be measured.
I don't doubt that there may have been years here and there that the SANFL could have been at as good a standard as the VFL but for the large majority of the history I believe that the VFL would have been better because of the 2 main factors of population and finance. They are the only factors that I find majorly relevant really. The same as every professional sport. The bigger the talent pool and funding, the better the competition.

[tbagrocks]

Meh, still opinion! We can argue all night and until christmas but you won't convince me, we accept that the Vics like to think they were always the best, but we know that they weren't. It's just folk law, which most of history was written by ::)

Stits and stats meh! Call a radio station outside Victoria I dare you (Tas, WA and SA only for propper feedback) and ask them, see what responce you get, then let me know!

so just when was the SANFL better than the VFL, well at least from 1877 till 1896 and from 1990 to present, maybe I'm messing around but this if fact!

P.s calling me a moron doesn't make me a moron :P Sheesh some people are stupid ::)

Look at me, I'm a moron because I believe that there were some state leagues that were as good or better than the victorian league at some point in history ::) flower you're a stupid moron tj :P

[TeeJay]

Hahaha you are a grade A flowering idiot! I see now what everyone was talking about when they call you bias and have a go at you!
You're one of a kind mate, well not really, your just another one eyed tosser that cant be proven wrong despite solid proof infront of your face.
From 1877 till 1896 it was better was it? Haha impressive stat there mate im amazed....did you miss the part where it said from 1900 -1990? the vfl teams werent established or finalised before 1896 and the afl was introduced after 1990... Or is that just my opinion as well?
if I called a radio station or ran a poll from every state I would probably get a result saying that about half  think the same, bit less than haf think vfl was better with a few in favour of other leagues.. Fair call?
And you would therefore think that those opinions of "experts" that werent there and didnt see sanfl or vfl football from 1900 onwards would be of a more valid answer to the debate than what is written out in the history books? That is just stupid. Victoria beating s.a and w.a year after year for 100 years is the only true proof anyone can give and its there infront of your face. If you cant make sense of that then you are quite simply a moron. Theres no other way to describe it

[tbagrocks]

Have a go at me all you want, like I give a pile of toad stools, was just messing around with that SANFL stat and you take it seriously :-X

Call me names all you want but we as non victorians know the truth, deny it all you want we really don't care, we're used to it!

One state beating another state does not prove a league is better than another league ::) fridge you are stupid!

[Ziplock]

Well this is a better arguement and to think I liked you Quinny :P ::)

Still the debate is not about Victorian football being the dominant, it's about the fact they at times weren't the dominant state league in footy, don't ask me when, I was born in 1979, all I know is good judges say that other leagues were at times as good or better than Victoria.

Also the bigger the population, the more people there are to agree that a league is better, but trust me, this has not been always the case, as always it's only opinion, but many purists agree that other leagues have been as good as the Vics ;)

....

literally, agreed with all the points teejay and I had been making over the last 5-6 hours.

I'm a non-victorian, and I'm still backing VFL.

'Was Ricciuto better than Andrew McLoed? No but McLoed didn't win a brownlow, along with Goodwin all three won three Malcome Blight Medals, so are they then equal players? People will tell you McLoed was better, but others will say it was Roo'

those medals and awards are all subject to bias of one form or another. I've expressed my distaste several times before on the precedence the brownlow gives to winning team + mids, but w.e

the stats I pulled up were free of  bias- I honestly dont give a flower who was better, vfl or SANFL/ WAFl. I'm just saying stastically, what it most probably was.

SANFL was the dominant after 1990? Once again, the only way to compare them are by SOO matches... of which victoria didn't lose between 1995-2008.

We've given you numerous, unbiased statistical evidence of why the VFL was the dominant competition, and produced the best players. And you just started spewing opinionated bs. As normal.

[tbagrocks]

You can pretend that your bureaurocrartic statistics mean something but again you'd be wrong, going by stats to prove pro 1990 lol I thought you were stupid ::) Are you not aware that good players now play in the AFL ???

Life is not about facts, stats and proof of anything no.

Life is about discussion, relationship, communication, things are measured by opinion and folk law not stats and records. The greatest gift we have is communication, the ability to relate and communtcate, these are lifes fundamentles, it is what history is based on

You can believe in your stats and record books all you want but it's the opinions of people that count, to be able to discuss the events with your fellow man. That's what brings life!

[AFEV]

Obviously the VFL was the premier league for the majority of the period, money and population ensured that.

But that's not what we're (or at least I) am arguing against. I'm just saying that the VFL was not the premier competition from 1896-1990. For the overwhelming majority they were the best, and when they started poaching players in the 70s there was no way that the SANFL/WANFL could compete.

But of course the main reason this actually came up - The SANFL/WANFL weren't so far behind the VFL that you can discredit an entire career just because they played there. Especially if they were one of the most dominant players on the international team of their time.

Of course the player being mentioned is Ken Farmer. TeeJay has already outright said there are several VFL full forwards that are better than him:

I would've given it to Lockett, Dunstall, Hudson. Ablett or Coleman.

But I guess I'm pretty clueless  :(

Not clueless at all your spot on.
The person these guys are talking about is quite clearly NOT the best full forward of all time.

So lets investigate.

Playing career - 1929-1941 (During the same era as some of the leagues best defenders ie. Scott.)

Interstate - 81 goals in 17 games @ 4.76.

Had he played a 'full' interstate season - 104.72 goals.

Now lets compare his SANFL record against all the records set in the VFL -

Goals in a game:

Ken Farmer (23), Fred Fanning (18).

Total goals:

Ken Farmer (1,419), Tony Lockett (1,360). Hudson did kick more goals than both, but if you don't rate the SANFL I seriously doubt you're going to value the goals he kicked in the TANFL/TFL.

Most goals in a season:

Ken Farmer (134), Bob Pratt/Peter Hudson (150).

Most seasons as leading goalkicker:

Ken Farmer (11), Dick Lee (8 )

Highest goals per game:

Ken Farmer (6.33), Peter Hudson (5.64)

Most seasons with 100 goals or more:

Ken Farmer (11), Tony Lockett (6).



Now, I know that you don't think that the SANFL/WANFL was as good as the VFL, but if you honestly think this man shouldn't (at the very least) be considered for the title 'Best FF Ever'...Well...I don't know. :P

Robran has a similar case, as does Doig etc. etc.

There are a lot of great players that are forgotten simply because they didn't play in the 'right' league...