Perth Stadium should be packed fuller than the cupboard of a toilet paper hoarder.

Yeah, one more bucket against the Hawks, and this could have been a cracker.

Hopefully its an opportunity for extra bench minutes and for a couple of the slightly lesser lights to shine.

Perth Arena...

Hang on, if Perth win then United lose both games they finish on even wins so it's still a possibility (if the ladder is correctly updated)?

Melbourne's playing Adelaide.

In other words, United have got the minor 'ship all sown up

^ how could you possibly distinguish that in an anonymous poster based on that post?

It's a shame Cotton isn't out there

United would've likely won the title anyway, they've only lost one game for the entire season when they've been either full strength or missing one rostered player

But now the title will be seen (by some) as having an asterisk in Cotton's absence

Plus of course, I do enjoy watching Cotton.

Apart from his bizarre leg kicks (which are as bad as anything CG43 does) he's a genuine NBL superstar and an absolute legend of the league

United would've likely won the title anyway, they've only lost one game for the entire season when they've been either full strength or missing one rostered player

But now the title will be seen (by some) as having an asterisk in Cotton's absence

Interestingly this new lockdown has restricted the power of that argument

By the end of the regular season, United will have played 18 games inside Victoria against interstate teams or NZ, plus 13 games outside Victoria.

Given NZ was forced to play every game away, that isn't much of a discrepancy at all.

78% lol

Plus of course it's looking like United won't be getting any home playoff games

Which would make their achievement extra special if anything, a bit like Storm and Richmond of 2020

United would've likely won the title anyway

Someone do the analysis - exactly how many more games beneficial will United's schedule be compared to most other teams, by the time they've played the last 6 games in a row away from home?

Not too much I would've thought, when you consider that

- Every team got the benefit over NZ this year in true home/neutral/true away split

- 5 of United's Victorian games were neutral vs SEM

Besides United is like 7+ games clear of every team except Perth, so it would be nonsensical to suggest this gave them some unfair advantage in terms of playoff positions

And given Perth will likely have true home court advantage in a playoff matchup anyway, that means the whole argument is nonsense- if the ONLY team where United could've had an unfair advantage ends up with the playoff home court advantage over United anyway

Given NZ was forced to play every game away, that isn't much of a discrepancy at all.

Someone do the analysis - exactly how many more games beneficial will United's schedule be compared to most other teams, by the time they've played the last 6 games in a row away from home?

" But now the title will be seen (by some) as having an asterisk in Cotton's absence
But playing 78% of their games at home isn't asterisk-worthy at all, of course."

Neither are asterisk worthy.

Can't play this game of “what if” and call everything asterisk worthy.

LV regular season means jack shit, last year proved that where Perth trounced Sydney when it counted.

Also, Melbourne haven’t won it - you’re playing with fire there and revving people up. Your club is like real madrid and rarely gets the job done despite spending big each year. The time it got the job done was a very dubious series v 36ers where Adelaide had injuries and probably still ought to have come away with it.

That’s not a confidence instilling track record.

You know which club has a history of getting shit done? Perth - so you’re taking the piss.

You should really be sheepish and hope your club doesn’t screw it up (again).

KR - Need to get over the Victorian thing. Ok you didn’t like the NBL Cup idea. But you’re acting like a Collingwood fan where you’re happy to take all the advantages of being a super power club but the moment you feel disadvantaged or slighted you go to town on the league.

Some of us go for clubs where we don’t have the benefit of feeling so entitled! At least we are happy to give the league props for trying something, for planning ahead and try to cover their bases in a time that’s not great for business. You refuse to take into consideration that there may have been some really beneficial factors at play when they decided to do it.

If SEM manages to win it all, will there be the same criticisms or is it reserved for United?

Fair points, I'm not counting my chickens

Perth plays good defence and Perth is a tough place to play. Blanchfield or Steindl gets into form and they'll remain a super tough opponent

Plus I've been following NBL and AFL and the injuries keep mounting. It's something to do with covid and training loads, but there remains a serious possibility of further injuries which will require adjustments and lineup shuffling

There's a long way to go, no doubt. Especially when we don't even know where the playoffs will be held!

But having said all that, United is favourites for a reason

And SEM is a huge threat too. If they make it.

Can we all agree the only fair outcome is for the Hawks to win it all? ;)

KR - Need to get over the Victorian thing. Ok you didn't like the NBL Cup idea. But you’re acting like a Collingwood fan where you’re happy to take all the advantages of being a super power club but the moment you feel disadvantaged or slighted you go to town on the league.

If SEM manages to win it all, will there be the same criticisms or is it reserved for United?

Looking over the year I can't see any team other than Perth with more than a very outside chance of taking Melbourne in a 5 game final series.

Possibility if Perth avoided injuries the whole way through, Melbourne had a more balanced set of Victoria based vs away games, and just two baskets had gone the other way (Wagstaff.. you know the one, Mooney prayer last game), Perth would have locked up top spot and the equation would have been fairly even.

In the hypothetical scenario Melbourne deeper and with more talent, Perth with better systems, more discipline, better coaching, and home court advantage.

Melbourne get sloppy with the ball > Perth win.
Melbourne don't hit their shots > Perth win.
Melbourne don't box out > Perth win.
All the usual "how to beat Perth requirements".

This year I don't think Perth will make the grand final, and 90+% chance (at least) Melbourne will sail through with an easy win. But no asterisks - they put a power team on the court this year, would have been coming top two no matter what else did or didn't happen during the season, and would have started favourites in any scenario except potentially if Perth finished top and had home court finals advantage.

Perth have proven again and again they can beat teams that on paper should be superior - being able to lockdown a team and stop them from scoring for a quarter or a half is their basketball and can always get a win. But there's very little margin for error for Perth when the finals get started this year..

Yeah you pointed out that Bendigo once had Boomers v fucking Qatar so therefore the world should hate Victoria. So much context.

My team did shit in the Cup, and it was still a good idea .

Your word isn't the law, all it really says is you’re going to find a way to complain because you don’t like Victoria. I’m south Australian with an inherent anti-Vic bias but even I’m not that unreasonable.

Agreed hopscotch

Wonder how much this game will be a precursor to the Grand Final...

The Cup was a terrible idea:

It blocked out a full month of the season in a year where scheduling flexibility was paramount.
It added games to a season that needed to be rushed through due to a late start.
It oversaturated the Melbourne basketball market and contributed to horrendous crowd numbers in the second half of the season.
It gave the two Melbourne teams a massive advantage, when one of them is already one of the best teams in the league.

Given the new import and roster restrictions and the NBL Cup, this was always an asterisk year no matter who won it.

There is zero * on this season no matter who wins.

Cotton is out so whomever plays Perth get that boost...but injuries happen in sport, move on. If Perth wins this with a team most thought couldn't make the playoffs. No *.

Utd have had a ridiculously favoured run with home games and SFA travel...but it's nothing that isn't expected when the owner of the team owns the league. No *.

SEM similarly have had a dream run of games in Vic but and got a boomer boost mid year, but they have had to deal with the Creek stuff and injuries. No *.

Illawarra, low budget, no fans, will anyone notice if they win...probably only the team they beat. Definitely no *.

If Sydney make it...well...they are owned by Paul Smith and Bogut. Definitely an *.

It blocked out a full month of the season in a year where scheduling flexibility was paramount.

- provided a hub environment which the nbl viewed as a big plus for providing certainty that games could go ahead

It added games to a season that needed to be rushed through due to a late start.

- ensured there were a critical number of games should things have taken the turn for the worst

You have the benefit of being just an NBL fan without consideration for sponsors, a continuing league, logistics, and most important of all, risk strategy. Your arguments against doesn't put into consideration those factors.

Loeliger is on record saying part of the Cup was risk mitigation for the uncertainty and it makes sense to provide that kind of certainty via a hub.

It oversaturated the Melbourne basketball market and contributed to horrendous crowd numbers in the second half of the season.

- So Melbourne United/SEM take a financial hit with lower crowd numbers for their home games for the benefit of the NBLs finances given they received $$$ from Vic Gov.

What should we do? Hand the two Vic clubs money to remedy potential financial hit?

It gave the two Melbourne teams a massive advantage, when one of them is already one of the best teams in the league.

- Perth won the cup, how much of an advantage really was it? The crowds were kind of shit, no real atmospheric advantage.

But sure - Is this a thing now where we cry about mechanisms designed to advantage particular clubs?

Can we please start the list of complaining at the marquee mechanisms which let rich clubs sign great players that are out of the financial realm of other clubs despite the league purportedly intended to be "competitive"?

Can we start there? Or is that inconvenient?

Some of us rationalise the marquee rule as being good for the league to bring home great talent, despite being problematic in the “competitive” aspect.

I rationalise NBL Cup as being good for the league when there was no certainty that games could be played or the league even going ahead and they managed to get games and additional finances, even if it meant United and SEM had extra “home games”.

Ironically, Adelaide gets to play a United home game in Adelaide - wonderful result in an otherwise trying time!

LOL TB - appreciated that

- provided a hub environment which the nbl viewed as a big plus for providing certainty that games could go ahead

Perth won the cup, how much of an advantage really was it? The crowds were kind of shit, no real atmospheric advantage.

But sure - Is this a thing now where we cry about mechanisms designed to advantage particular clubs?

Can we please start the list of complaining at the marquee mechanisms which let rich clubs sign great players that are out of the financial realm of other clubs despite the league purportedly intended to be "competitive"?

" Being fair is the entire point of sports..."

Being competitive is the entire point of sports, hence why some leagues use salary caps. What “fairness” exists in a draft for AFL? That just rewards bad teams. Why? Because they want to lift bad teams to be competitive.

“ Marquee spots are available equally to all teams.”

Hardly “competitive” if that enables one club to leverage better finances and spend more on players than another.

Providing a mechanism “equally” is meaningless than some clubs couldn't possibly use it. Even you know that was response of yours is bullshit!

“ Just because Adelaide don't recruit well, it doesn't mean they don't spend a lot of money on their roster.”

Adelaide aren’t the only club in the league, nor am I crying poor about Adelaide. I’m on record for saying that despite it being advantageous for rich clubs, which it is, I rationalise it as being good for the league in bringing top talent in. Albeit it’s something that probably can’t continue long term for the sake or competitiveness and sustainability.

Perhaps think about Cairns instead?

The point in all this is it’s all well and good to complain about advantage in a bizarre logistical scenario of a pandemic, and then ignore institutionalised mechanisms providing an advantage, and simply trying to find ways to rationalise it like “available to all clubs” full well knowing exactly what the mechanism does - providing an advantage to those who can afford it.

It’s very hard to take sooking so seriously when it’s laced with hypocrisy and gives the NBL very little room for benefit of doubt on a pandemic all on the basis of being slanted Victorian. The fact that Boomers v Fucking Qatar was used in an argument in all this encapsulates desperation to view the world in a very Rose-tinted way.

To be absolutely clear we are talking about logistical moves by the league made in a pandemic not in a pre-covid environment.

Can't just completely ignore the fact they have to work with state govs, each with varying strict approaches, and you have sponsorship obligations to fulfill and you’ve got finances that have to be considered.

Given the above, there has been so little room for error given to the NBL by posters here, it’s remarkable. Zero benefit of doubt!

Almost as if people are making bold and unabashed criticism without the inside knowledge of the factors and why decisions are made ;)

There's a very easy and obvious answer to that.

Melbourne will end the year with the "same allocated home games" as every club. That’s a clear point to make - there simply weren’t many away games to be had.

Why would they force Melbourne to leave and play extra away games and have less home games? How do you break that to members that the league decides - against logistical sense to deprive members of their home games?

If that means not leaving Melbourne for two months than that’s how it pans out.

The aim is to get through the pandemic as easily as possible, not for the league to go out of their way to push away games onto Vic clubs because the NBL Cup was in Melbourne.

I'm all for keeping administration in check, but there has been very little benefit of doubt for such a tough scenario, and a whole lot of flat out conspiracies peddled.

If the NBL or LK wanted to give Melbourne United all the advantages in the world to win, pretty sure he could do that with the millions plowed into the NBL instead.

There’s a lot of savvy ideas they’re trying out, there’s a lot of involving stakeholders like Vic Gov which unlocks doors for basketball, there’s a lot of risk factors for covid requiring out of the box planning. There deserves to be a level of benefit of doubt given.

Someone like KR will criticise something in absolute terms without actually being part of the NBL or stakeholders and having no actual understanding why decisions are made.

I just don’t think that’s a fair approach.

Given LK is single handedly propping up the league for the moment, I'm willing to let any perceived favoritism slide for this year.

> Melbourne played their allocated 14 home/14 away games
> Can't make Melbourne travel away if they don’t have away games to travel for
> only way is to deprive Melbourne of home games and why would they do that? Why deprive Melbourne members of a game unnecessarily? Why make things harder logistically when the whole aim in a pandemic is to not make life harder logistically than necessary?
> As it turns out, they have to deprive members of a game and travel to Adelaide
> NZ were hubbed in Victoria during the time Melbourne played them - why would they make teams travel out of the state to conduct the game? To make things logistically harder than necessary?

I definitely answered your question, I think you just didn’t like the answer of "they played their allocated home and away games"

" why do you think it made sense for Melbourne to stay at home for two months after the Cup finished?"

NBL Cup finished 14th March.

Sydney v Melbourne Qudosbank Arena 19th March

5 days or 2 months? Come on....

V NZ “away” because NZ were hubbed in Vic - already addressed this.

V SEM “away” - irrelevant both Vic

V Cairns in Cairns April 4th

I don't know why it even matters if the club plays their allocated games? Adelaide played a lot away to the end of the season, nobody complained because they had a front loaded season.

Seems like you've convinced yourself that Melbourne didn’t play away for 2 months and that it matters.

I don’t know how you arrived at that, or why it would matter. Melbourne go through that kind of thing most years due to Oz Open like Spurs and their Rodeo trip. Not 2 months perhaps, but that didn’t appear to actually happen in reality anyway!

I always viewed the Cup as kind of a financial insurance policy for the league in a season that had the potential to be a lot more Covid-interrupted than it actually ended up being. To me, the league surviving the season was important enough to cop some hits to parity, and I am fine with putting my personal opinions aside and deferring to LK when it comes to matters of league finances.

So sure, looking back it would have been good not to have the Cup. But it's kind of like regretting ever purchasing car insurance just because you didn't end up in a crash.

Completely agree Luuuc and you've summised as concisely as I ever could.

I do think there are some on here that view LK with the kind of conspiracies that make anti-vaxxors blush.

I’m all for parity and competition, but I’m aware there are complexities and barriers when it comes to Covid.

I think in a precovid postcovid world, a slimmed down NBL Cup tournament elimination style would be perfect in the US alongside NBL x NBA to be able to show off NBL talent to American scouts and GMs and media generally. It would mean more than a traditional preseason cup.

And if they even wanted to be innovative and make sure it’s competitive, could give half a point for every ladder spot ie 1st get 6 points, last place 0.5 points. Gives clubs more reason to try because every point can count come end of NBL season.

The only reason I am not overly salty with the Cup and Melbourne getting additional home games (which I believe they did, even if they weren't official), is that my team (Perth) managed to win the cup despite that, and overall I can't see it as changing outcomes this season over much just because of the way things turned out.

Sure it potentially could have dramatically changed things.. imagine a more marginal United team - it could have pushed them into the finals when they'd otherwise have missed out.

But would it have changed Adelaide's ladder position? NZ? SEM? Cairns?
Not by enough to make a difference.

Maybe it could be argued it cost Perth top spot, but without Cotton at this end of the season against a full strength United? I don't see that changing the end result either.

It should've massively upset the season, it was objectively unfair.. but, just the way things happened to play out by chance, it didn't seem to make much difference in the end.

If Cotton doesn't get injured, Perth finish on top and get HCA.
With Magnay improving every game, and the benefit of a 13 man roster, no way Melbourne takes them in a 5 game series. End of Story.

I STILL reckon Perth are a chance, but it will depend on badly MU get fucked by Covid.
If lockdown is over by the GF, and they get upto 3 home games with crowds, then I would say they are unbackable favourites.
If they still couldn't play in Melbourne and had to play in say Sydney, then things get interesting.
Worse-case scenario for MU, the league agrees to play all games in Perth for commercial reasons, and then all bets are off. (Won't happen though.)

The Cup was an utterly stupid idea. And we were very lucky it didn't blow up in their face. Imagine if Melbourne had gone into lockdown with all the teams there.

Perth won, but the schedule impacted them severely in following games.
Melbourne teams got a stupendously unfair advantage.
Several teams basically had their seasons ended by the cup.

V Cairns in Cairns April 4th

If Cotton doesn't get injured, Perth finish on top and get HCA.
With Magnay improving every game, and the benefit of a 13 man roster, no way Melbourne takes them in a 5 game series. End of Story.

Travers playing well at small forward!

Finally Corey Sherville is back! Dont know what else this guy needs to do to get more minutes

So this is how it feels to suck.

Commentary trying to talk this result up as a season changing event :)

Well done Melbourne, you had the gifted run with travel but you still had to win the games. Now the real season starts.

Doesn't matter which floor this MU team ends up playing finals just hand them the trophy now. Speaking of not fair they have so many weapons and knock down shooters its ridiculous!

After watching that, I'm hoping it wasn't a Grand Final preview

Come on SEM, win these last 2 then knock Perth out!

Either way, I think United vs SEM has potential to be a good series, so I'd rather see that in best of 5

For whatever reason Illawarra has struggled vs Perth, so I wouldn't be surprised if Perth defeats Illawarra even without Cotton

No one wants to see 3 games like tonight in a GF, let's be honest. Norton might help make it a bit closer but he wouldn't get Perth over the line

[LV the fact you have said "Norton might help make it closer" really tells us how little you understand of the game. ]

Tonight was a scrappy, low scoring affair where one team's only chance of winning was if the other team degenerates into iso ball or has a horrific shooting night

That would be the same equation with Norton, the only difference being the other team slightly more likely to play themselves out of it

I repeat- no one wants to see a GF series like that

[I can't see Perth's offence not having any counters to that in the playoffs, I suspect they just did not show it tonight, as they have in the past.]

Perth's offense is struggling without Cotton, they've not scored more than 81 points since he went down. Against United's Defense, what exactly are they going to do differently that would work? Even maestro Trev can't pull a rabbit out of a hat

I'm honestly curious:
Do people from Melbourne really not understand how pathetic they sound? Crowing about winning a meaningless dead rubber, in which the opposition was without it's starting guards, and gave the bench extended minutes??

Normally I would concede that a win is a win, but in this case it's not even that.

And it's not as though we didn't already know this go into the game.
sure if Norton and cotton weren't injured, and top spot was still up for grabs, this would have been an absolute cracker of a game.
and had Melbourne won, their fans would be justified in partying like it was 1993.

Anyway, question now becomes; can anyone challenge them for the championship?

If United stays healthy, there's only one team who could beat them.

Perth's system is incredible but there comes a time with any team and any system when the talent gap is simply too big to overcome. Even the Spurs eventually missed the playoffs after 22 straight years

But there's one team who doesn't have a massive talent deficit vs United

SEM

Without cotton Perth looks like Cairns team...

Within 12 points but without breaking a sweat.

Playing with the entire bench on the floor at times and still outplaying a determined wildcats team. Give credit where its due.

SEM was missing about 4 players and beat Melbourne

But Melbourne was missing a couple themselves

This is what I've pointed out before, we're comparing apples and oranges, SEM has had a constant stream of injuries all year and even now missing Gliddon plus Pineau out for the year. I'd love to see what SEM could do with their full lineup for an extended stretch

United Also constant injuries.

Perth has been very healthy until Cotton went down

" Still waiting for KET to explain why there were no away games available for Melbourne to play in during that two month stretch."

Thought you had admitted you were wrong already.

Please produce dates of two month stretch post cup.

(I did check, and there is no 2 month stint post cup).

Also please explain why logistics in covid is not a satisfactory answer.

Please provide explanation as to why you, an outsider has a satisfactory answer to the above without any inside knowledge as to the factors at play when making fixturing decisions.

Please explain why an extended period at home (what actually happened post cup) is unusual when Melbourne do that most years as a result of Australian Open loading of games.

Please explain why you aren't complaining about Adelaide who played the first month or so at home with front loaded games.

Then finally, get out of your little conspiracy bubble and take that tin foil hat off

Given your repeated carry on and claim despite being told otherwise - the dates should reflect two months.

Not one, not one and a half. Not "April 4th to may 18th".

Two months. Post Cup. That's what you have repeated and capitalised for emphasis.

Backup your claim or backdown.

Troll alert!

Troll alert!

I'm here to talk about basketball

Nonsensical conspiracies don't deserve replies

Melbourne did what they needed to win a sew up top spot, no more no less.

Perth played a lot of young guys and different combinations and didn't get blown out, no more no less.

Neither team gave anything away so I read nothing into this game.

LV you need to ease up on the injury crap, jack white went out mid season and Utd has had a chance to adjust for his loss. Perth only in the last week have had to start looking at life without Cotton. Injuries happen in sport but the impact of losing a good defender mid season compared to an MVP on the eave of the finals...come on mate, your smarter then that.

Not to mention, I've answered your "question" about momentum before on this forum, if not multiple times

Yet you keep raising it

If I was Dean Vickerman, I'd prefer a momentum building, home game schedule over the BACK END of the season than over the first half

Even before covid hit, United was due for a busy travel schedule with 5 road games over the last 3 weeks of the season, including 2 trips to Perth (ie the hardest away game, plus the longest flight)

Its just as logical to argue that United's schedule was set up to reduce their chances of having "momentum" heading into the playoffs, as it is to suggest the schedule was set up to help them build early momentum

And I'm sure, if United was only leaving Melbourne once in the last 6 weeks of the season (instead of once in 6 weeks from late march to early May) you'd be right here arguing the schedule was rigged to help them build "momentum" into the playoffs

You didn't answer why logistics isn’t a perfectly reasonable explanation.

You’re saying there wasn’t an explanation, why isn’t that a good one?

What inside knowledge do you have to judge.

Why can’t logistics during covid era be reasonable?

Why was Adelaides front loaded schedule where lockdown was minimal and outbreak was minimal an excuse but Melbourne’s isn’t?

The answer was there you just ignored it.

Why can’t venue booking, travel, gov borders be reasonable?

SEM look good when they are allowed to play loose and confident and as a team. They look terrible under tight defence or when the shots aren't dropping, which leads them into going iso mode which doesn’t suit them so much.

Same with United.

Much as I’d love a United V SEM final, I can see Perth extending their GF streak by beating United at the end, even without MVP Cotton.

Eg look at Richmond in 2019, started disastrously at 7-6 their season looked in peril. But they fired off 9 straight wins heading into the finals before dominating the finals and winning the flag. helped by building momentum their last 7 straight home and away games at the MCG.

That's a more helpful fixture than getting mid season home games. You want momentum heading into playoffs. That's when you want confidence to build towards peak form

And they did play away games just against SEM and NZ.

It's how it falls. Why would the NBL go out of their way just to satisfy some Perth fans’ conspiracy?

Makes zero sense.

12 straight Richmond won in 2019, including finals. 10 of them at MCG, including the last 7 straight home and away

And including the prelim at the MCG, an "away prelim" against Geelong cos the AFL plays all Melbourne finals at the G

Now that's a helpful fixture.

Sorry take that back, Richmond earned the home prelim as Geelong lost in the qualifying final

But still, the overarching point about end season momentum being more valuable than early or mid season momentum, stands

" Seriously? You think that one small mistake invalidates the entire question? “

It does because you're peddling that 2 months is inherently unreasonable. It was less, it was actually closer to what usually occurs due to aus open situation each year. Add in the obviousness of covid related aspects of logistics which Adelaide also had, and the period becomes inherently justifiable. Especially when they did play away games vNZ and vSEM and they did play all their allocated games.

NBL would be having to go out of their way to make Melbourne travel which would just be silly. There is nothing inherently unreasonable just because you didn’t like it.


“You're not stupid, you know exactly what I'm asking, but you keep on deflecting from having to detail your supposed simple explanation"

I answered with 1) logistics 2) they did play away v NZ and SEM and 3) it’s not uncommon in non Covid seasons why is it an issue now.

Very obvious answers that you simply don’t like so you choose to ignore them.

Why don't you flick Jeremy an email so they can give the logistics answer?

If you keep asking the same question the same answer will apply. Logistics logistics logistics.

Do you know any better to judge? I doubt it.

Give them a semblance of benefit of the doubt or go join an anti-vaxxor March or some other conspiracy of your choosing

Adelaide could have played anywhere bar NSW when their games were front loaded. How did they escape criticism?

If that was Melbourne - would we be here fighting about it instead?

Where's the consistency?

Why can’t the NBL be given benefit of doubt? Nobody had actually answered that. During a Covid pandemic why can’t they be given a bit of breathing space to navigate a pandemic?

They did play away games though - just not the ones you clearly want. SEM and NZ were away games. Bookended by Sydney, Cairns, Illawarra in your two month period.

That's really not as bad as you make it sound. Your issue is NBL should have made them physically leave the state more.

Well when you have a second Vic club you’re gonna play away games in Victoria. When you hub NZ in Vic you’re gonna play them in Vic.

Whose to say it was logistically easy to move latter away games just to satisfy some Perth fans conspiracy?

When you’re trying to make life easy as possible with fixture management, you’re not gonna make decisions just to satisfy some Perth random.

You still haven’t responded re Adelaide. Adelaide had the same thing. Why aren’t you complaining about that?

Because it’s inconvenient to your narrative?

Why weren’t Adelaide forced to play more away games earlier?

Is it possible covid logistics is the answer? Or would that be a problem with Melbourne having the same situation?

Be honest with yourself, Adelaide had the most favourable circumstance of any team, Cup aside I guess.

They’re even playing Melbourne in Adelaide. Go figure. Where’s the complaint?

14 -2 SEM -2 NZ

Yeah, what's the issue?

Maybe your state should have paid up to have NZ at home? Or for the Cup?

Vic Gov did! Then Tassie paid up so then they got the kiwis.

Money and stadiums talk :)

" Yes I have"

Your response was there were lockdowns when there wasn't.

Only state with issues at the time was NSW.

Why couldn’t they have played Perth in Perth? Or Melbourne in Melbourne?

Come on, I'm in Adelaide fan, I’m willing to hold my club to the spotlight like everyone else’s.

Where’s the endless complaining about it? Why does Adelaide get an easy pass? Is it because they’re shit?

[finding themselves in an unattainable top spot since round 16]

Except top spot was attainable

Perth had 2 late season home games against United.... and got beaten twice.

United also went on the road to Illawarra a fortnight ago and won. Which Perth failed to do the following week

Plus of course any other team could have got top spot. If they were good enough

(and their starting centre, who has been injured for the entire season)

" Immediately after the Cup there were no similar covid logistical issues which would have prevented united leaving Victoria,"

How could you possibly know that? How could you possibly know how the logistical factors lay?

What on earth makes you think it's easy or convenient to shift plans on a whim?

You’re determined to not give any benefit of doubt to concepts of planning as if they can so easily change everything week to week.

It’s a staggeringly tough thing to do which you refuse to acknowledge.

It’s easy to bitch when you’re not the one making decisions.

We aren't going to get anywhere with this clearly.

We might well put a fork in it.

Ok mate, if you feel you need the last word.

Adelaide had a bunch of home games because NSW was in lockdown and WA was requiring 14 days quarantine, so teams could serve the first week in SA and play in Adelaide, then serve eye second week in WA and play Perth.

This is untrue. They had an away game against NZ in Bendigo.

Why the constant whining about United then, and not SEM, who had one quick 6 day road trip in the 7 week period between April 2 and May 21, and were otherwise in Melbourne during that time?

That was a momentum promoting stretch, was it not?

(And one game in Cairns on April 25, followed by 5 straight games in Melbourne)

In fact SEM did not leave Melbourne in all of February and March

They played in Perth on Jan 29 and didn't travel again until April 1 in Wollongong

(Moved this from the other thread. Anon suggested I misunderstood the argument when I complained about these conspiracies about United)

So why the complaints about United's "momentum building" fixture but no complaints about SEM who didn't travel for 9 weeks, or Adelaide who started with 7 straight home games?

Wasn't the criticism the lack of spread of travel away games? Where the clustering created momentum opportunities?

(With understanding they play more in Vic due to NZ sitch and Cup and their being two Vic clubs)

For Melbourne why didn’t they take some of the latter travel and move it forward during that April period;

For SEM knowing they also played the Cup why didn’t they bring in travel games earlier;

For Adelaide why didn’t they play a few games in Qld earlier than they did.

All three seem relevant to argue if that’s the basis for argument. But the focus has only really been on one team.

The response was logistics which wasn’t accepted, which I think if we ought to be more generous in giving benefit of doubt to the NBL but there are people here who clearly don’t believe so.

I love it how the "perfect world" scenarios apply to United. Like it should be this perfect world where every team does every single thing exactly the same, even though we're dealing with a pandemic influenced rolling fixture, plus all the usual logistics

Yet the same idealism isn't applied to SEM. Why couldn't the NBL give SEM more away games in early Feb- when they knew there was about to be a month straight of basketball in Victoria?

" The response was there were no available away games for United to play in the previously mentioned period which is simply untrue. Still waiting for an explanation for that."

But there was a response, logistics. How do know for certain that agreements with gov, venues, financial risks all meant that away games could be moved forward in a realistic way?

Why are you so certain that can't be a reasonable answer? What inside knowledge do you have otherwise?

Why can’t in the balance of risk and complexity it be a perfectly valid answer?

The answer of logistics and your refusal to accept being not as generous as I am in a pandemic where I’m content to give benefit of doubt and you’re not seems to be a very fair summary.

LV is right, you’re treating the Melbourne circumstance with a “perfect world” expectation and I just don’t think that’s reasonable and I think it borders on conspiracy.

[Or, and hopefully you can understand this question because this is the crux of the discussion, why couldn't the NBL give United more away games during the two month period straight after the Cup considering they'd just played a month straight of basketball in Melbourne?]

And my question is why all the complaints about one situation on this forum and not the other?

And why no recognition that United's schedule actually made it inherently more difficult to develop winning momentum on the all-important run into the playoffs?

Just be consistent. That's all.

And it damn well answers your question too.

And you ought to have shone the spotlight on Adelaide more if you weren't so unashamedly bias against Melbourne in your approach.

I hate Melbourne United but Jesus fucking Christ I’m not a conspiracy theorist. There’s a limit to insanity.

" You're proposing scenarios based on your assumptions and I've responded with comments where I don't agree with your assumptions and logistical analysis. You are speaking as if you have the answers"

No mate, you're not reading my answer but at least you’re approaching the point.

My response was clear - logistical factors is something we couldn’t understand unless we were there part of it all so therefore benefit of the doubt ought to apply in a pandemic world.

Your response was to try to analyse why the logistics didn’t make sense which is why I said you didn’t accept my response of logistics and benefit of the doubt.

That leads me to...

“ I've responded to the Adelaide situation multiple times. The commencement of the season was directly impacted by lockdowns and border closures.”

How could you possibly know the flow on effects of things to say it was an issue for AdeIaide but not Melbourne? I would argue logistics affected the NBL before the season began inherent in covid existing. To confine it, in my argument, is utterly ridiculous.

You also really lacked clarity in your argument because “adding away games” could be easily interpreted as “creating additional away games” not moving them forward which leads me to the point you just did that here...

“ The NZ situation is obviously a logistical factor however during the period they set up a home base in Tassie, they actually travelled up to Melbourne to play United twice in Melbourne. Surely from a logistical POV, you'd send Melbourne down to Tassie for the sake of, you know, taking a consistent approach of making every team play away games during the same period of time.”

The NBL were clear that the Tassie situation was for post-Easter, they did travel to Melbourne twice post Easter.

They were Melbourne home games. If you’re turning them into away games, you’re depriving Melbourne members of two home games, why would the NBL do that just to satisfy some conspiracy?

That was the argument levelled earlier as well, that’s how I definitely initially interpreted your argument initially because you weren’t being clear about “moving forward” I had to clarify that for you.

It certainly didn’t help in clarity for you to also peddle “two months” so repeatedly and emphatically after when it had already been dispelled. It just made things messier.

Then what you’re left with, is ~6 weeks, games v NZ in Vic instead of travelled, games v SEM instead of travelled, and Aus Open affected fixturing. Suddenly, that’s not so unreasonable or unlikely. Add in other covid onflow and it’s rather in controversial, you know, for most people.

That is, who provide a semblance of benefit of doubt.

[All the while, LV is ignoring the comment regarding momentum, which he loves bringing up if United lose (or Perth win) and is now referring to other teams "advantages" as a way of avoiding answering the question. ]

Either the NBL gifted SEM, MU and ADL a schedule that offered opportunity for momentum, or they offered none of them that opportunity

One or the other, take your pick.

Secondly, if United's schedule is in fact a "momentum" building schedule through the middle stages, then it's also a momentum reducing schedule heading into the playoffs.

It cannot be true that United had a momentum building schedule BECAUSE of all the home games, but having heaps of travel on the eve of playoffs isn't a bad thing

Again take your pick. Use consistent logic.

Rather uncontroversial*

" consistent approach of making every team play away games during the same period of time"

I don't think that’s the approach though, and it has never been for Melbourne due to Oz Open.

The approach is to fit the same number of H/A games in the season.

Teams have loaded schedules, that has always been the case.

As bad as 6 weeks? Well, if you’re hubbing NZ and there’s another Vic team, in a pandemic, how unlikely really is that?

Unprecedented times delivers unprecedented stuff.

" Fucking LOL!!!"

You literally just argued that saying Melbourne should have gone to tassie for their away games

At the end of the day, either you're willing to go "I don’t understand the factors that had to be considered so I’ll give them the benefit of the doubt" or you aren’t.

That’s the crux of my argument.

If you aren’t, my answer is “you don’t know the reasoning so it’s a shame you won’t give benefit of the doubt”

I won’t ask why you won’t give benefit of the doubt, because I fear the answer is some bullshit LK Melbourne conspiracy

And nobody sane here will argue with someone who's a conspiracy theorist.

"some bullshit LK Melbourne conspiracy"

What's Hoops.com.au here for anyway!?

If you do that, you either 1) deprive members of two games or 2) deprive two other games of Melbourne playing away.

Every team will have played their allocated H/A games. Doing that would shift that unnecessarily.

Hence the answer, no more away games to be added - because that would be depriving Melbourne members unnecessarily or some other club unnecessarily.

Also makes zero sense. That's just dumb.

" stating it was impossible to send United on a road trip, "

Didn't say that. That’s a bullshit response.

I said realistically, with factors to be considered.

Ie, not going out of their way to make life as hard as possible for themselves to satisfy some random Perth fan.

That's a drastic difference.

You know you're taking the piss when your answer is "let’s deprive a team of their home games unnecessarily".

Not financially smart, not logistically smart. It’s straight up unashamed anti-Melbourne bias that’s beyond comical.

" that Melbourne hosting NZ could have been switched around?"

Let me know how that would be achieved keeping in mind NZ in Tas was after the Mel v NZ Bendigo games and therefore they've played their away games to NZ already.

You can't post-fact call it a Melbourne home game, then you’re depriving the Melbourne members of a game.

Same thing, unnecessarily depriving a member base of a game.

" but also play the second away game."

We already know you're not happy to accept that you don’t know the logistics planning finances and give benefit of doubt.

It’s so easy to say “they should have done this this and this” without any consequences of achieving it.

No benefit of the doubt. Lots of talk, no responsibility, very easy to judge.

From the get go the fixtures were largely set with timing of games and stadia location moved around based on circumstance.

So how does “change the team” work? That’s a change in approach.

Easy? Fuck no.

So why would they do it just to satisfy some Perth randoms criticism? Why not make the most logistically easy move for them?

AFAIK they never switched teams around, they moved games forward or delayed games or moved the game to a different stadium.

They didn't go "let’s give an extra NZ game and take away somewhere else".

Because suddenly they’re moving a whole lot of things around.

Which is the point. Make life easier in a pandemic not harder.

" Why call it a Melbourne away game to begin with? Did any other club get "away" games within their home state this season?"

Yes, Adelaide today. Obviously. Against Melbourne.

Come on.

And Cairns were going to until Qld gov nixed that possibility.

So, it's a consistent approach one would suggest.

NZ hubbed in Vic paid by Vic gov isn't?

They’re there because of Covid.

Why didn’t Melbourne play Adelaide in any state other than SA?

Why when they originally fixtured did they have Melbourne v Cairns in any state other than Qld?

Why move directly to the away teams home?

Maybe it’s to have a semblance of crowd and extra money?

Why move an original fixture from Bendigo to Tasmania and delay in order to be in Tasmania?

How is that efficient and financially smart when you’re trying to make life easy in a pandemic?

I would argue you're pissed about Melbourne because you feel it affects your team but not about Adelaide because Adelaide are shit.

And Melbourne fans don’t complain about today instead of playing at a neutral stadium because the result will make no difference.

Both times NBL probably did what made logistical and financial sense.

And you have to do some mental gymnastics to not see the clear inconsistent reaction between Melbourne’s advantages and Adelaides. Either be pissed at both or cop both as a result of Covid IMO

Why couldn't they play today in a different state? Why make Melbourne play in Adelaide for a home game and not a neutral place?

Why doesn’t that aggravate you?

And for the infinite time - if it was easy, financially viable and efficient why didn’t they do it the way you’ve suggested?

Is it because there’s lots of factors to consider that you won’t give them the benefit of doubt about? That you expect some hoops poster to outline to you?

What of your arguments do you actually thing the NBL haven’t considered?

It really just looks like you’re on some LK conspiracy and trying to argue around your conspiracy even though you wouldn’t know shit about the machinations.

I’m game to admit I don’t know the internal machinations and I’m happy to give them benefit of doubt.

It’s the sane approach, I argue.

I also argue there's nothing inconsistent in their approach to make out anything nefarious.

As established by Melbourne playing in Adelaide when they could have made both teams go to a different state to play.

They’ve favoured logistics and financials by the looks of it.

It really looks like you're doing mental gymnastics to criticise the NBL because you feel your team is affected.

My team is shit and irrelevant so I’ve got no reason to go through those mental gymnastics so from an outward observer your arguments look like you haven’t thought about it much pragmatically and quick to hunt the NBL down for things you couldn’t possibly fully understand.

You're aggravated by Melbourne playing away in Victoria instead of a neutral state.

Consistency....

I do think you should give more benefit of doubt to the NBL, evidently you don't agree.

To me a lot of the moves make sense, clearly they don’t to you.

Clearly I’m not affected because my team isn’t good and yours did because yours is and you’re going to be more emotional about it and unwilling to give that benefit of doubt.

We done here?

You're just ignoring the whole covid impact of having NZ hub in Vic and the Vic gov funding?

So Adelaide is the only possible place they could have played the game?

They couldn’t have done the inconvenient thing and changed it to another state?

Which is what you’re trying to argue they should have done with NZ.

Don’t mention straw man if you don’t know what it means.

You also ignored a slew of arguments like how do you know better and why won’t you give NBL benefit of the doubt?

You haven’t answered that once.

You seem to constantly argue in a way that shows you won’t give them benefit of doubt but you’re refusing to admit it.

You're criticising on something you couldn’t possibly know the whole story about, at the same time you won’t address the obvious elephant in the room of why you’re not giving them the benefit of the doubt?

You keep ignoring it and arguing on things where you don’t know how they arrive at outcomes - why shouldn’t they be given the benefit of the doubt?

You’re confining decisions in moments of time and supposed "affected by covid and not affected by covid" which I would argue is simply not how logistics work. Like when you suggested adding a NZ game when they appear to have set matchups for the year and simply delayed or move fixtures by state.

Or saying they should have planned a Bendigo game as being a home Melbourne game which would have then really been best moved to John Cain for Melbourne members but what if that caused issues with the financing for Bendigo games for NZ home games?

How can you do easily overlook complexities and to criticise the NBL?

You’ve got no real knowledge to be so openly critical.

If this wasn’t such a Covid affected life, I’d be game to indulge the criticism. But this year?

Totally unfair and unrealistic in expectation.

Come on answer the question.

Why won't you give benefit of the doubt to the NBL?

That’s what this comes to.

We can argue decisions til the cows come home and I can say you're arguing fallacies and straw men and you can argue I am and I can argue you’re wrong and you can argue it wrong.

But at the end of the day, I certainly don’t know the factors that make for the decisions and I’m willing to defer in a pandemic to give the NBL benefit of the doubt.

Why is it, that equally not having a clue about the factors, that you are unwilling to give the NBL benefit of the doubt?

There’s no point arguing "well NBL don’t deserve it because of xx" when you have zero clue why “xx” was decided.

You’ve spent the entire thread really avoiding the critical question in all this, everything else doesn’t matter because that’s all “xx” including our little battle about away games and flipping hosting and preplanning and gov funding. Neither knows jack shit about the deals that happened.

So why doesn’t the benefit of doubt to the NBLs way in a pandemic?

It has dawned upon me that I may have been indulging a troll that decided to follow me into a completely unrelated thread and chastised me for calling out a vile comment which was fairly moderated out by this site.

If that's the case I would ask if that’s the same person and if so I will withdraw from indulging said disgusting troll.

Disagreeing with you is not trolling, especially when what you're saying is stupid.

" Disagreeing with you is not trolling, especially when what you're saying is stupid."

No, following me and trolling me for criticising a Nazi comment is.

If you read what I said, KR. Aren't you the king of hunting people down for not reading properly?

There we go.

Troll.

Thanks but no thanks. Enjoy Melbourne's success.

[NBL probably did what made logistical and financial sense.]

Spot on.

The whole situation is summarised in this one sentence.

And then turned into incessant arguments by nuffies who want to read some nefarious intentions into it all

[And you have to do some mental gymnastics to not see the clear inconsistent reaction between Melbourne's advantages and Adelaides. Either be pissed at both or cop both as a result of Covid IMO]

Again spot on

SEM too who didn't travel for 9 consecutive weeks, and went about 4 months playing a total of 5 away games, with several of those bunched into one trip of 3 games in 6 days

Interstate* games not "away" games but I'm sure everyone got what I meant

Either way, the integrity of this site just went down the toilet because posting anonymously is no longer anonymous depending on the admins discretion.

There are different levels of moderator.

Most are lower level ones who can merely flag or obscure the contents of a post temporarily pending final moderation/deletion by a higher up.

If possible just get rid of anonymous posting.

The standard of the contributions on this forum would, on average, increase.

And the ability to understand and respond to others would also increase.

If you took 2 wins from United, a win from Cairns, a win from SEM, and added 4 to NZ you probably just about balance out the effects of the draw, based on the number of genuine home games, neutral games and away games across the league.

That would still leave United on top, Cairns at the bottom, and NZ higher but not in the finals.

The interesting point of contention would actually be SEM and Sydney.
They'll finish reasonably close on the ladder, if SEM wins their next game moot point. But if they lost it, and Sydney had of had a couple less out of state games, and SEM a couple more.. perhaps positions might have switched.

Worked out based on (regardless of team strength) a team likely to win 70% at home or within their home state against an out of state team, 30% on the road (not in their home state), and 50% in a neutral venue, inclusive of where both teams are out of their home state, even if one has it as a temporary home.

So to me the draw was unfair, but not as significantly as I thought before putting that overlay on it, and probably didn't affect things that much, and potentially not as much for the teams that have been talked about most.

Sydney probably the team most hard done by - given for NZ things were pretty unavoidable.
If Sydney had picked up a couple extra home games (I have them playing more teams in the other team's home state, than vice versa), and SEM played a couple more times out of state, I see potential for them to have flipped on the ladder.

Still SEM with a game to play though, so even in that scenario chance for SEM to stay in.

Scenario 16H 14 A 6 neutral (hypothetically) at 70/30/50% win ratios..

Vs 18H, 18A 0 neutral

1st > 18.4 wins
2nd > 18 wins

2 extra home games sounds like a big advantage but not so much if those percentages could be taken as reasonable expectations (all other things being equal). Would only net 0.4 additional wins.

Not saying the above should be taken as a proof, or solid evidence, it's a dramatic oversimplification - but just a way I turned it over in my head.

I wasn't an antagonist from another thread. I made a joke, KET said it was in poor taste, I explained that it was just a joke and thats where the exchange.

Hopscotch spot on, United finished 7 games clear of everyone bar Perth

If they play Perth in the GF, ironically Perth will have the home advantage despite finishing lower

so it's absolutely absurd to suggest the fixture resulted in United getting any unfair advantage over any team at the end of the day

The travel factor in terms of hours flown is the only other issue but it's not a huge issue imo. And the "in their own bed" thing, well based on the small sample size of the 2020 AFL and NRL seasons, sleeping in a different bed is an advantage!

As you note, SEM has crept into playoffs, so they have had an infinitely greater advantage than United by their fixture at the end of the day, as its perfectly reasonable to argue it was the difference that got them into the playoffs. Whereas it made zero difference to United being top 2 (and ironically they finished 1st but for fixture purposes are really equal 3rd, as Hawks and Perth both get home advantage over them in playoffs. So United have been DISADVANTAGED by covid issues more than anyone else because they're the only team who isn't allowed to play home playoff games they rightfully earned. Or would've given the 7 game advantage)

Sometimes it's easier than you think to pick anonymous people from each other based on writing style or arguments. And the occasions where someone guesses wrong pass without much interest.

Re: SEM late season travel

Yes, I can see the thinking there. When I did a count including that though I still gave them more "home" games than away. Bearing in mind I count any game in Victoria as a home game for them or neutral, never away - regardless of how it is coded (some will agree with that, some won't).

But broadly agree - I think the way things happened to play in reality, rather than on paper, we probably got the right 4 teams in the finals, in approximately the same order they would have been.

In another season, where the competition was more even, the scheduling imbalance could have resulted in a very inequitable outcome.. think 2 Melbourne teams scraping in, that wouldn't have made it otherwise, and two teams missing out that very likely would. But I don't think that is what we got, so it is ok (in context.. to me).

End of the day...
The Cup was a risky idea during covid, which fortunately didn't bite them in the arse.
Playing in the middle of the season, when the fatigue then directly impacted following games, was a mistake.
Notwithstanding that it helped Perth, I still think that counting the games towards the season was wrong. Who knows how Adelaide and Cairns might have performed subsequently if their season wasn't already over.

In future it needs to be run pre-season.
They need to combat fatigue, maybe bigger squads pre-season, maximum minutes imposed, or shorten the games (to say two x 15 minute halves.)
And it has to be rotated between cities.
And no carry-over of points.