After digesting the nuances and fine print of the AFL's 2012 draw, the teams - I think - that are most deserving of sympathy are Essendon, the Western Bulldogs, Richmond and Fremantle.

These four mid-ranking sides with legitimate finals aspirations next season have been dealt a rum hand because they only get to play the AFL new boys - GWS and Gold Coast - once each.

Meanwhile, Adelaide and North Melbourne - who also belong in that mid-table category of good-but-not-great clubs and top-eight wannabes - get to play the two new 'franchises' twice each, or four games in total.

If we make the assumption that GWS and Gold Coast will find it hard to win games in their first and second AFL seasons, respectively, then the maths are simple: North and Adelaide seemingly have a two-match advantage over the Ill-Fated Four.

In a draw full of inequities and illogical outcomes, this shapes as one of the most vivid examples of its unfairness.

How can it be reasonable that late in the season, when inevitably there will be a logjam of teams bunched together between, say, sixth and 12th positions, two extra victories will mean the difference between a finals berth and an early September holiday?

Because the AFL tries to fit the square peg of 18 teams into the round hole of 23 rounds, skewed outcomes will invariably arise. It means each club plays the other 17 clubs once, and five of them twice, with one mid-season bye thrown in. In elite sporting competitions I can think of around the world that formula would not be tolerated: most top-level leagues ask their participating clubs to play each other the same number of times - in the interests of fairness.

But the league compounds that issue with its stated priority of maximising attendances. This means Carlton, Collingwood, Essendon, Richmond, St Kilda and Hawthorn mostly get to play each other twice, and everyone else kind of fills in the gaps to fulfil the contract with the various broadcasters that nine matches be staged each weekend.

So, really, there are two compromised elements to the draw which lead every year to some clubs feeling dudded and others, like Adelaide and North Melbourne today, feeling like they've won DrawLotto.

(The five teams to play GWS next season are: Gold Coast, Sydney, North Melbourne, Adelaide and Melbourne. The five teams to play Gold Coast twice are: GWS, Adelaide, North Melbourne, St Kilda and Brisbane.)

Another point worth making here on the matter of fairness is Port Adelaide's draw. Why has a club which finished 16th last season, and very nearly 'won' the wooden spoon ahead of league debutants Gold Coast, not been given more of a leg-up with its fixture?

Port is one of 10 clubs to play GWS and GC once each. Yet cross-town rivals Adelaide gets the dream run with four games against the two fledgling franchises.

Port starts its season with four matches against last season's finalists: St Kilda, Essendon, Sydney and Collingwood. Adelaide's run, meanwhile, is: Gold Coast, Western Bulldogs (at AAMI), Hawthorn (MCG) and GWS.

It's quite possibile Port will be 0-4 and Adelaide 3-1 after the opening month, and the direction of their seasons set right then and there. In keeping with the socialist thinking behind the salary cap and national draft, why couldn't their draws be swapped around? That sounds crazily simplistic, but why not?

Anyway, it's just one of many questions to be asked in the wake of the release of this document which is called a Draw, but could just as easily be titled: Winners and Losers.