Could interstate clubs sell games to the MCG?

[telsor]

This is true, although the travel factor is much less for your team. I would be fine with all teams within top 8 having more MCG time. 17 of your 24 games were within your home state at least.

If the travel factor is the big factor, then surely playing at docklands is just as good.

Exactly the same flights, hotels...everything except the ground.

Of course, if it IS the ground, then you'll have to concede that a Vic team (WB) had it worse than you.


Must be hard keeping your tinfoil hat on straight when the evil vic conspiracy keeps throwing you inconvenient facts like that.

 

[Kwality]

Depends on which basis you determine equivalency I suppose.

In the sense of being the best comp in the country, then yes, it is 'equivalent'.

In the sense that it's the same entity, it most certainly is.


Neither of those things mean nothing has changed (for better AND worse) however....Nothing ever stays the same.

Amen.
One comp had some of the best, & its being compared with todays comp with ALL of the best.

Just as the most successful club in the State based comp era is Port, put down the glasses BUT some present that as a VFL club - ho hum.

 

[kranky al]

They do, however when the opposition supporters don't turn up in enough numbers to make the G viable they move the game elsewhere.

It's not Victoria's fault WA teams play out of one of the most isolated cities in the world

We fill our stadiums - we can be last playing second last and we still have people waiting years for a membership - and still have a shitload rock up to watch

We will fill our stadiums without a single victorian club supporter ever attending one of our fames.

We have completed our part of the deal.


Why cant vic teams do the same?

Too many teams in one city.

 

[kranky al]

22 games in a season. 11 away games. 8 Melbourne teams, 5 use MCG as a home ground.

On average an interstate team will play 10 interstate games, 5 against a Melbourne team, 3 against a team that uses the MCG as a home ground.

I understand the Tasmanian issue, which probably means you only get 2 MCG games a year.

But even without any interference, an interstate team would only expect to play on the MCG 3 times a season. If you want more then you will need to trade home games.


As for the OP, it would be terribly unfair to reschedule games halfway through a season.

3 games a season is what we have been asking for - for years

 

[Kwality]

Dont blame me, blame the AFL. They say its the same one - literally and historically.

And please, please point me to anything Dick Seddon - or anyone like Allen Aylett, Ross Oakley, Alan Schwab, Jack Hamilton - said that contradicts the AFLs official historical view. Oakley and others detail the meetings that led to the branding change ffs.

Point me to any documents, books or otherwise that say the VFL isnt the same organisation and competition as the AFL, with a new name.

Weasel words interpretation?

& you have the gall to claim I'm biased.

 

[telsor]

Amen.
One comp had some of the best, & its being compared with todays comp with ALL of the best.

Just as the most successful club in the State based comp era is Port, put down the glasses BUT some present that as a VFL club - ho hum.

The difference between the VFL 40 years back & the AFL now is less than the difference between the VFL and the WAFL/SANFL 40+ years ago.

 

[blitzer]

Its not a terrible idea that teams that are in the running for a premiership get a few games at the MCG. Its hard to envision how they would implement it though particularly with the current setup. I must admit i'm generally of the thought school "good teams win anywhere" but certainly it would be good if teams in the running had at least 3 games at the MCG prior to playing in the finals.

 

[telsor]

We fill our stadiums - we can be last playing second last and we still have people waiting years for a membership - and still have a shitload rock up to watch

No you don't. Average for WCE was under 36K...i.e. NOT FULL.

We will fill our stadiums without a single victorian club supporter ever attending one of our fames.

Really? not one? ever?

We have completed our part of the deal.

How do 2 lies complete any non-existant deal?

Why cant vic teams do the same?

What, lie?

Too many teams in one city.

We average bigger crowds than you (actual truth, not a lie)....does that complete our part of the deal?

 

[The_Wookie]

& you have the gall to claim I'm biased.

Because I asked you for an actual quote that backs up anything you've said here?Just when was the VFL a second rate league compared to the others?

I didnt invent a new historical record to placate the neglected feelings of the poor football folk of WA and SA. Its the AFLs position that its competition is unbroken since 1897, thats a fact.

 

[The_Wookie]

We fill our stadiums

No you dont.

we can be last playing second last and we still have people waiting years for a membership - and still have a shitload rock up to watch

Easy to do when your stadium is the size of a postage stamp.

We will fill our stadiums without a single victorian club supporter ever attending one of our fames.

hahaha thats friggin hilarious.

We have completed our part of the deal.

What deal?

Why cant vic teams do the same?

Victorian clubs average just as well if not better in most cases. Several Victorian clubs exceed the members of WA clubs.

Too many teams in one city.

right then.

 

[kranky al]

No you dont.



Easy to do when your stadium is the size of a postage stamp.



hahaha thats friggin hilarious.



What deal?



Victorian clubs average just as well if not better in most cases. Several Victorian clubs exceed the members of WA clubs.



right then.

The only reason vic clubs have more members than us is 3 game memberships and our cap on the waiting list. We have people waiting years just on a waiting list to be a member. I cant wait to stuff it up you arrogant vic tossers noses when the new stadium opens and you see what happens in a two team state thats passionate about footy.

We wont need pet memberships or to play games in antarctica to pay the bills

What deal? Are you a moron?

Its explained clearly

 

[telsor]

The only reason vic clubs have more members than us is 3 game memberships and our cap on the waiting list. We have people waiting years just on a waiting list to be a member. I cant wait to stuff it up you arrogant vic tossers noses when the new stadium opens and you see what happens in a two team state thats passionate about footy.

We wont need pet memberships or to play games in antarctica to pay the bills

No, you just need to leach off the Vic clubs paying most of the bills.

What deal? Are you a moron?

Its explained clearly

No, really, what deal is satisfied by part filled stadiums and the 9th highest home attendance?

 

[kranky al]

No, you just need to leach off the Vic clubs paying most of the bills.



No, really, what deal is satisfied by part filled stadiums and the 9th highest home attendance?

The fact that we can make money out of it

s**t tonnes of money. Delusional you lot.

 

[Coinz]

No, you just need to leach off the Vic clubs paying most of the bills.



No, really, what deal is satisfied by part filled stadiums and the 9th highest home attendance?

37,000 average attendance for a 40,000 stadium (92.5 full) is pretty dam good considering the 3000 loss is mainly due poor weather conditions.
9th highest home attendance means nothing when you have a 40,000 capacity stadium up against a 100,000+ stadium!
What would the average 'part filled stadiums' be at the MCG? 60%? 70? id say it would scratch 50% with all the games played there.
Sure, a friday night game with your team vs say Collingwood would probably be a sell out but overal the average would be way down due to many factors.

 

[Kwality]

The difference between the VFL 40 years back & the AFL now is less than the difference between the VFL and the WAFL/SANFL 40+ years ago.

So you are saying mid 70s?
Why do I ask?
Is Stephen Michael a problem that requires blinkers? No wonder Tigers fans need to over rate Roy their VFL side of Michaels era.

Yes, there is a difference between the AFL & the VFL as you acknowledge - the scope of that difference, indigenous football perhaps ... how big was that difference when the likes of Stephen Michael played Aussie Rules & rejected offers to play VFL footy :

A Noongar Australian Aborigine, Michael played in the WAFL between 1975 and 1985 with the South Fremantle Football Club, playing 243 games and kicking 231 goals. He played in South's 1980 premiership side and was appointed captain in 1983. He holds the WAFL record for the most consecutive league games with 217. Throughout his career, Michael resisted numerous advances by VFL clubs to move east and is often listed as one of the best players to never play in the VFL.

He was a strong, high leaping ruckman who won the Sandover Medal in 1980 and 1981. His 37 votes in 1981 (with nine best-on-grounds and receiving votes in 15 of the 21 games played) was a record tally under the 3-2-1 voting system in place at the time. He represented Western Australia in State or State of Origin football on 17 occasions, captaining the side 3 times. In 1983 he won the Simpson Medal for the best player in the WA vs SA game and the Tassie Medal as the best player in Australia in State of Origin football and was named captain in the 1983 All-Australian Team.[1] He won the South Fremantle's fairest and best in 1977, 1978, 1979, 1981 and 1983.

 

[kranky al]

So you are saying mid 70s?
Why do I ask?
Is Stephen Michael a problem that requires blinkers? No wonder Tigers fans need to over rate Roy their VFL side of Michaels era.

Yes, there is a difference between the AFL & the VFL as you acknowledge - the scope of that difference, indigenous football perhaps ... how big was that difference when the likes of Stephen Michael played Aussie Rules & rejected offers to play VFL footy :

A Noongar Australian Aborigine, Michael played in the WAFL between 1975 and 1985 with the South Fremantle Football Club, playing 243 games and kicking 231 goals. He played in South's 1980 premiership side and was appointed captain in 1983. He holds the WAFL record for the most consecutive league games with 217. Throughout his career, Michael resisted numerous advances by VFL clubs to move east and is often listed as one of the best players to never play in the VFL.

He was a strong, high leaping ruckman who won the Sandover Medal in 1980 and 1981. His 37 votes in 1981 (with nine best-on-grounds and receiving votes in 15 of the 21 games played) was a record tally under the 3-2-1 voting system in place at the time. He represented Western Australia in State or State of Origin football on 17 occasions, captaining the side 3 times. In 1983 he won the Simpson Medal for the best player in the WA vs SA game and the Tassie Medal as the best player in Australia in State of Origin football and was named captain in the 1983 All-Australian Team.[1] He won the South Fremantle's fairest and best in 1977, 1978, 1979, 1981 and 1983.

Was at the game when he tore the vics a new a-hole - after seeing him destroy my wafl team repeatedly we were looking forward to seeing him torment some other bastard. We were not disappointed.

Funny how the vfl was so superior and thats why they always beat us - then when soo started they lost 'because they werent really trying.'

 

[The_Wookie]

The only reason vic clubs have more members than us is 3 game memberships and our cap on the waiting list. We have people waiting years just on a waiting list to be a member. I cant wait to stuff it up you arrogant vic tossers noses when the new stadium opens and you see what happens in a two team state thats passionate about footy.

Im not Victorian. Nor is my nose.

We wont need pet memberships or to play games in antarctica to pay the bills

Its amazing what an incredibly beneficial stadium deal does for you. Cant wait for the new Perth stadium deal.

What deal? Are you a moron?

How is these discussions always end up in playing the man?

 

[The_Wookie]

Was at the game when he tore the vics a new a-hole - after seeing him destroy my wafl team repeatedly we were looking forward to seeing him torment some other bastard. We were not disappointed.

Funny how the vfl was so superior and thats why they always beat us - then when soo started they lost 'because they werent really trying.'

Its also a literal proof that the VFL was a higher standard of league. Until 77 it was VFL v WAFL - not the Victoria v WA of origin rules. WA may have been a stronger state that year, but the VFL was unquestionably the stronger league. Theres a big difference, especially in the context of these argument.

 

[telsor]

So you are saying mid 70s?
Why do I ask?
Is Stephen Michael a problem that requires blinkers? No wonder Tigers fans need to over rate Roy their VFL side of Michaels era.

No reason for that date, just the most recent round number where the distinction was clear.

It does amuse me that you, who thinks the AFL shouldn't have more teams because it drops the overall standard and depth pin your claims of the levels of competition on one player.

There is no question that some of the top players weren't playing in the VFL...but the for depth and consistency of quality the VFL was far ahead, and that gap was getting wider as time went on (as more money came in it both caused and made it easier for quality players to move to the VFL...Even causing clubs to want to shift over).


Of the top 1000 players in the country, probably about 975 play in the AFL (some wouldn't want the attention, discipline, having to leave home, etc)

30, 40, 50, 80 years ago, of those, there were probably 500 in the VFL, 200 in each of the SANFL & WAFL and 100 'elsewhere' (country leagues, other states, etc). (based very roughly on population numbers and current recruitment levels) So VFL back then would be closer to the AFL now (~500/975 or 50% as good) than the WAFL & SANFL were to the VFL (~200/500 or 40% as good).

 

[telsor]

The fact that we can make money out of it

s**t tonnes of money. Delusional you lot.

Yes, it must be tough when you're being subsidised so heavily. What's it like being a charity case?

In Vic we pay for our grounds (and you get the benefits). Pay your fair share of the new Perth stadium and get back to us.

We also have to compete with the AFL for members...With you getting paid out of from the money they collect.

 

[kranky al]

Yes, it must be tough when you're being subsidised so heavily. What's it like being a charity case?

In Vic we pay for our grounds (and you get the benefits). Pay your fair share of the new Perth stadium and get back to us.

We also have to compete with the AFL for members...With you getting paid out of from the money they collect.

I will be paying my share mate - through taxes

 

[Papa G]

Yes, it must be tough when you're being subsidised so heavily. What's it like being a charity case?

In Vic we pay for our grounds (and you get the benefits). Pay your fair share of the new Perth stadium and get back to us.

We also have to compete with the AFL for members...With you getting paid out of from the money they collect.

Seriously WTF are you on About? The WA government is paying for their stadium. Your parochialism is so nonsensical and misguided.

 

[Kwality]

Its also a literal proof that the VFL was a higher standard of league. Until 77 it was VFL v WAFL - not the Victoria v WA of origin rules. WA may have been a stronger state that year, but the VFL was unquestionably the stronger league. Theres a big difference, especially in the context of these argument.

My argument is not with which was sometimes/ usually/ not always the top state based league, I'm fed up with the misrepresentation you push knowingly, the AFL is a cut above ALL aka every state league, & it is not about which state league was stronger - they were all inferior, 2nd rate when compared with the AFL.

 

[telsor]

Seriously WTF are you on About? The WA government is paying for their stadium. Your parochialism is so nonsensical and misguided.

Where did I say otherwise?

He's boasting about how WA clubs have more money than Vic clubs...They get a free stadium, we pay for ours (and give it to, among others, the WA clubs) while at the same time competing with the AFL for members (after they take the best seats).

Of course, being from SA, you wouldn't know anything about how stadium deals affect the bottom line of clubs, would you....

 

[telsor]

My argument is not with which was sometimes/ usually/ not always the top state based league, I'm fed up with the misrepresentation you push knowingly, the AFL is a cut above ALL aka every state league, & it is not about which state league was stronger - they were all inferior, 2nd rate when compared with the AFL.

That's an odd way of looking at it....Just consigning everything from history to be second rate because the new version is better.

Tell me, do you consider test cricket from 40 years back to be 'second rate' because more countries compete now and there has been a restructure at the admin level? A sizable majority of the best players still took part after all, even if some of the very best weren't among them (some of the South Africans blocked by the apartheid ban for example).

The VFL was the top competition in the country, and still is (it's just been renamed now). The later expansion doesn't change that, nor does going from ~60% of the talent to 95%.