Digging deeper into the ‘Premiership Quarter’

Gordon P Smith Roar Guru

By Gordon P Smith, Gordon P Smith is a Roar Guru


9 Have your say

    This past weekend was a quintessential example of the value of the ‘premiership quarter’.

    You know – the second.

    Or perhaps, if you bleed yellow and black, the fourth.

    Or maybe, it’s the second extra-time period?

    Or could it be that the very concept of a ‘premiership quarter’ really IS a myth?

    » Five talking points Port Adelaide vs West Coast
    » Five talking points Sydney vs Essendon
    » Five talking points Geelong vs Richmond
    » Five talking points Adelaide vs GWS

    The basic idea of the premiership quarter is defined as that period that makes or breaks your make-or-break games, which generally would mean those battles in September, where a loss ends your season.

    Lance Skelton touched on this topic in this very forum last week, essentially calling the concept ‘fake news’ (as we Yanks are forced to say now) because no coach would ever suggest that the other quarters were less important. Which is certainly true.

    But the concept of the third as the ‘premiership quarter’ has long legs, and not just in the AFL. That same feeling exists in almost every four-period sport.

    One of the most prevalent strategies in American football at the initial coin flip is to defer the choice of possession to the third quarter kickoff, rather than simply accepting the ball with the opening kickoff of the game and guarantee that “extra possession” in hopes of getting off to a good start.

    Most coaches seem to feel that it’s more important to get the second half moving quickly, the theory being that once you’ve made your halftime adjustments, you want to exploit them as rapidly as you can.

    Even the major golf tournaments have an expression for the third of their four-day competitions – ‘moving day’. In other words, that’s the day that a golfer needs to put him or herself in a position to win. You can’t win a game in the third, but you can lose it.

    As is my mathematical bent, I dug into the numbers to see if this whole thing was perception or reality in the AFL.

    The games that truly matter towards the premiership, as the Bulldogs proved last year, are not the home-and-away contests (as long as you make the top eight) but the nine finals in September.


    (AAP Image/Julian Smith)

    So I examined the last ten years of finals data, going back to 2007, rather arbitrarily. Over those 95 games (ten seasons of nine games each, plus four so far this year and the grand final replay in 2010), I looked back through game records and narratives for the quarter that separated the eventual victor from the eventually vanquished, the quarter where the winner put its foot down and asserted their dominance on that day.

    Using a rather broad definition of such quarters, the data does not back up the third quarter as the most valuable period of the four. In fact, you could argue that it was the least decisive term of the game!

    If there had to be one dominant quarter in the winning team’s effort, this is how these 95 games broke down:

    1st: 20 | 2nd: 21 | 3rd: 17 | 4th: 20

    There were also 17 games where I wimped out trying to find such a quarter (although that included two extra time games and that drawn grand final).

    That’s pretty non-definitive. Even the margin that the third quarter trails the other three is probably within the margin of error. And thinking about what championship teams actually do in games, this spread feels right to me.

    Sometimes, a dominant team comes roaring out of the gate raring for blood (Hawthorn did this several times in their title run); sometimes, as with Sydney and Adelaide this week, there’s a ‘feeling out’ in the first period as the underdog holds it together against the pressure before the favourite goes on a run in the second. And in a close game, often a Richmond-pulling-away-from-Geelong-in-the-end scenario makes the fourth quarter the dominant period.

    Now, here comes the interesting part of this study.

    When I changed my criteria, or more precisely, changed the threshold of what makes for a dominant quarter, the numbers changed significantly.

    If the only times we claim a dominant quarter was when that game definitively turned in that period, when one team obviously put its stamp on the game, here’s how the 44 such games broke down:

    1st: 10 | 2nd: 11 | 3rd: 14 | 4th: 9

    Suddenly, there’s our premiership quarter.

    And if you take out last week’s three dominant games, the breakdown for the ten-year span is 10-9-14-8. (And the dynasty Hawks are responsible for many of those first-quarter throat-stompings).

    Hawthorn Hawks 2015 AFL Grand Final Premiership Flag

    (AAP Image/Julian Smith)


    I’m not sure. Previously in this article, I’ve given reasons for each of the four quarters to be the place one team might dominate the other. If you choose to call this a statistical anomaly, that’s a legitimate argument; if you think the gap is statistically valid, so be it.

    The bigger question is, ‘does any of this matter?’ Probably not. But then our little games’ don’t really matter, either, in any worldly sense, except to provide entertainment, a distraction from the world’s more significant matters, and a microcosm of our culture as a whole.

    So maybe it’s an analogy for our lives. Don’t wait until the last minute to try to make a difference, and make full use of whatever chance you get to make ‘halftime adjustments’ in your life.

    Or not. But it’s interesting to consider. (And by the way, my ELO-rating system picks Sydney and the Giants to win this weekend.)

    Do you find yourself logged out of The Roar?
    We have just switched over to a secure site (https). This means you will need to log-in afresh. If you need help with recovering your password, please get in contact.

    This video is trending right now! Submit your videos for the chance to win a share of $10,000!

    Oldest | Newest | Most Recent

    The Crowd Says (9)

    • Roar Pro

      September 11th 2017 @ 8:48am
      Marty Gleason said | September 11th 2017 @ 8:48am | ! Report

      I only started following in the 90s, but I think some of it came from the crappy 90s Grand Finals that would be decided long before the last quarter, hence “The premeriship quarter” being the 3rd. We have good grand finals now so that’s irrelevant now.

    • September 11th 2017 @ 11:01am
      Mattician6x6 said | September 11th 2017 @ 11:01am | ! Report

      Definitely a 90s term that has lingered usually in reference to the 3rd quarter.

    • September 11th 2017 @ 12:25pm
      I ate pies said | September 11th 2017 @ 12:25pm | ! Report

      The Premiership quarter is definitely alive and well in country and suburban footy.

    • September 11th 2017 @ 12:29pm
      Slane said | September 11th 2017 @ 12:29pm | ! Report

      I’ve always assumed the term was used because the 3rd quarter is a make-or-break quarter. You still have half a game to play. No matter how far in front the opposition may be, you can still catch them. No matter how far in front you may be, the opposition can still catch you. Win the 3rd quarter and you are either in position to get back into the game or you’ve put the game out of reach for the opposition.

    • September 11th 2017 @ 1:48pm
      TK said | September 11th 2017 @ 1:48pm | ! Report

      Guys…the term premiership quarter goes as far back as the 1970’s to my recollection.
      It was always used to depict the importance of the 3rd quarter when games were tight.
      In other words if you get ascendancy in the third quarter and go on to win the game it was compared to a great achievement like winning a premiership.
      The late Jack Dyer and Lou Richards consistently referred to the “premiership quarter” when broadcasting matches.

    • September 11th 2017 @ 3:54pm
      Kavvy said | September 11th 2017 @ 3:54pm | ! Report

      100% only a reference to the third quarter, and as mentioned above, dates back to when lots of game were close at half time but were then won or lost in the third when one side piled on a number of unanswered goals to break it open.

      Writing that just made me think of Stuart Dew in 2008, 3 minutes of pure joy!!!!!!!!!

    Have Your Say

    If not logged in, please enter your name and email before submitting your comment. Please review our comments policy before posting on the Roar.