Talk:2021 AFL season

Kick-off times
apologies if I'm being stupid and have missed this - but what time zone is used for the kick-off times? 141.92.67.43 (talk) 12:20, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
 * It's all local times depending on the stadium, not one unified time zone. WDM10 (talk) 20:15, 4 May 2021 (UTC)

round 9
I am mentioning that Melbourne’s win over Carlton became it’s first time since 1956 that it won 9 games in a row and added a reference to it. It was removed without explanation then the person removing it claimed it was a “season” note, not a game note. I argue it is a game note as it was the game which won it. This editor also added the next game as their first loss since 2020. That would seem like a “season” note as well. I feel the note is important and should remain. 2001:8003:D548:B200:FC76:5037:46AA:168 (talk) 02:18, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

The note does remain, but in the 2021 AFL season section where it belongs, and where similar content is placed in other season pages. I have removed only duplicate content from the rounds. This - and the presence of a gamenote in round 10 - is furthermore consistent with the longstanding policy for streak-type notes to be listed only when the streak ends of exceeds an all time record, neither of which is true here. Aspirex (talk) 03:08, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

No the note you have added is a streak-related note as it for refer to another streak. Sorry but I feel you’re a bit biased and want another opinion 2001:8003:D548:B200:6002:372E:9951:AB68 (talk) 04:30, 31 May 2021 (UTC)


 * What exactly do you suggest I'm biased against? All I see here is a style disagreement, so to be throwing around accusations of bias is pretty unreasonable. Furthermore, you are mistaken that I added a gamenote regarding Melbourne's subsequent match, as this diff clearly shows an entirely different editor originally responsible for this addition, before being corrected by a separate editor here. In any case, the existing consensus is very clear: ever since the 'season notes' section was added to articles in 2015, this has been the section we've used to capture about records or long-standing marks in unbeaten or winless starts to seasons (refer Adelaide and Sydney in 2017 and Carlton in 2018). Aspirex (talk) 07:03, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Winless starts to season, yet you allow the first “loss” since “last season.” How is that different. And yes I want someone else. This just seems like a toy against me argument 2001:8003:D548:B200:6002:372E:9951:AB68 (talk) 07:17, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Style for covid impact
My bold edit here was reverted, so taking it here for discussion as I believe makes a strong improvement. There are two style changes I'd seek to make, and seeking discussion on each separately:

Firstly, removal of all gamenotes related to matches played without a crowd due to covid. These gamenotes are redundant, since the absence of crowd is noted in the AFLGame template by "(crowd: 0)", and the fact that covid is the cause is self-evident from the context of the article. Hopefully this is non-controversial.

Secondly, removal of most gamenotes related to match relocations. Here again, I'm seeking a summary style to make use of general context to avoid the need to fill the results section with repetitive "Team A vs Team B was relocated from Stadium X to Stadium Y due to covid in State Z" because, in most cases, the reason is clear from season context. I also feel that the approach we're taking is oversimplifying the overall covid impacts (e.g. by neglecting medium-term road trips and fly-in/fly-out arrangements) but that outlining every special arrangement for each round would put further undue weight of text into a section which is meant to be about results. My proposal is to use a purpose-built AFLGameRelocated template to note venue changes rather than prose. I recognise this one is more controversial, but I think it makes an improvement to overall readability without losing the content.

This is a style question so it's preference over policy. Views welcome. Aspirex (talk) 09:11, 5 July 2021 (UTC)


 * I support the AFLGameRelocated solution - it's simple, yet elegant in the way it presents the information - would you consider the use of this appropriate for fixtures prior to 2020 that were moved for other reasons (stadium availability issues, crowd size, turf issues)?. Storm machine (talk) 05:04, 19 July 2021 (UTC)
 * I think it's a applicable. I'm remembering that it was a semi-frequent thing in the 90s to change a venue mid-season due to crowd size. (Top-of-the-ladder clash between Carlton and Richmond in Rd 14 1995 springs to mind). Most of those are just part of history and don't warrant full gamenote explanation. Aspirex (talk) 21:37, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

I'm going to go ahead and enact the first step (removing 'behind closed doors' gamenotes), and wait a little longer for comment on the AFLGameRelocated template. Aspirex (talk) 21:38, 23 July 2021 (UTC)
 * One agreement and no dissent, so I'm going to make the changes with the AFLGameRelocated template now.

I know this has already been decided, but I support this decision. I think we should research other games that were relocated in prior seasons due to non-COVID reason. RoryK8 (talk) 02:01, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

Ladder Progression Table
Has this become garbled? Eg it has Melbourne on 8 points after 4 rounds, but they won all 4 games 80.3.105.120 (talk) 12:26, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

Finals Status.
This is a counter-example to a previous edit made to the ladder.

1. Melbourne          16  5  1  130.3% 2. Western Bulldogs   16  6  0  135.4% 3. Geelong            16  6  0  128.8% 4. Port Adelaide      16  6  0  104.3% 5. Brisbane Lions     14  8  0  124.3% 6. Sydney             14  8  0  112.8% 7. Carlton            10 12  0  120.6% 8. Richmond           10 12  0   99.9% 9. St Kilda           10 12  0   89.8% 10. Fremantle         10 12  0   88.8% 11. West Coast        10 12  0   87.9% 12. GWS                9 12  1   82.6% 13. Hawthorn           8 13  1   88.8% 14. Collingwood        8 14  0   98.0% 15. Essendon           8 14  0   93.7% 16. Gold Coast         8 14  0   86.6% 17. Adelaide           8 14  0   84.1% 18. North Melbourne    5 16  1   72.9%

Carlton not only can still make the 8, they can even finish 7th. RoryK8 (talk) 13:23, 7 August 2021 (UTC)

If you cannot demonstrate why a team has qualified for finals, or has been eliminated, don't make the edit. RoryK8 (talk) 10:03, 9 August 2021 (UTC)

Because people insist that Carlton cannot play finals, here is an update scenario. Carlton, again, can still finish as high as seventh position.

1. Melbourne          16  5  1  126.7% 2. Geelong            16  6  0  128.8% 3. Port Adelaide      16  6  0  104.3% 4. Western Bulldogs   15  7  0  130.1% 5. Brisbane Lions     14  8  0  124.7% 6. Sydney             14  8  0  112.8% 7. Carlton            10 12  0  120.6% 8. Richmond           10 12  0   99.9% 9. West Coast         10 12  0   90.2% 10. St Kilda          10 12  0   89.8% 11. Fremantle         10 12  0   88.5% 12. GWS                9 12  1   82.6% 13. Essendon           9 13  0   97.1% 14. Hawthorn           8 13  1   88.3% 15. Collingwood        8 14  0   98.6% 16. Gold Coast         8 14  0   86.6% 17. Adelaide           8 14  0   84.1% 18. North Melbourne    5 16  1   72.9%

Again, please ensure you can verify why a team is eliminated or has qualified for finals. RoryK8 (talk) 09:58, 11 August 2021 (UTC)