Extra Home Game For WA Teams

[telsor]

More like workers getting paid travel time - was that Eddie squeaking, nah its squealing. Pay the workers on an even basis for travel time, taking to account time zones not just the hours.

The case for more games in WA is excess demand in Perth compared to the inability of Melbourne clubs to pull a crowd where demand exceeds supply.

As Victorians claim there is no advantage in fixturing Grand Finals in Melbourne, how/why can they claim any disadvantage playing interstate?

Time zones? So QLD to Vic isn't travelling?

If demand exceeds supply in WA, add more teams there. 3 more should do it.

Sure there is an advantage in playing at the MCG, but it's less of an advantage than playing at any other ground would be because all teams get to play there.

 

[clogged]

If they had no meaning people would not turn up, that's how people let the AFL know what they want, by going to the games, if Freo v Gold Coast at the 'G attracted 90,000 like Richmond versus the Blues then the AFL would play them as the blockbuster, there is no sentiment involved it is about the clubs that are popular now, nothing to do with the sentimental club rivalries from the past.

As I have said I would prefer a draw being as fair as possible each side playing each other twice but that doesn't pay the bills and isnt likely to happen in the near future and at any rate the old big rival clubs have all been in the finals over the last few years so I'm not really sure what you are looking for, empty stadiums doesn't do a lot for excitement and lets be honest the Dockers under Ross Lyon like the Saints of a couple of years ago are not always the most exciting team to watch either.

Simple fact

Colllingwood, Hawthorn, Essendon and Richmond were some of last years biggest crowd drawers and 3 of those 4 were in the finals, so why wouldn't they be in the big games?

In spite of their lack of success for the past 20+ years, Carlton and Richmond are well supported teams. The reason why 80,000 people turn up to the Blues vs Tigers game has nothing to do with the quality of the spectacle but the habits of the fans. That's fine, but why do they deserve an automatic double up? Why do they deserve prime time?

We know why they get it, it's so the AFL can capitalise on big attendance matches and big ratings? But does it actually do anything for the competition or the sport as a whole? No.

I don't think Freo vs Gold Coast should get equal billing as prime double up like Richmond vs Carlton unless both sides are quality teams. But in spite of that, there are a number of side Freo has rarely played twice in the same season. Sydney and Collingwood are two stand outs. By the same token, Collingwood has not played Sydney at the MCG in ten years. All three of Freo, Sydney, and Collingwood have been thereabouts in the past decade as top four sides, and they rarely meet each other twice in H&A.

This is the consequence of locked in blockbusters each year. To me, if the best sides aren't playing each other twice a year more often than not, something is wrong.

In the current era, you have the perverse situation where a good side like Collingwood faces a crap one like Carlton twice a year. The advantage this gives a team is enormous. Collingwood has only lost six times in the past twenty matches against Carlton. This is like the advantage Freo gets against West Coast. In my opinion, these blockbusters should be done away with, and either a rolling draw or one purely based on the previous years ladder position used to determine the next year's fixture.

 

[Kickpuncher]

Freo and West Coast to play a derby in New Zealand at the cost of a Carlton home game. Lock it in Eddie.

 

[mehow2g]

What is this unfair advantage you guys speak of seriously? wouldnt it be the same as going to any other foreign club?

Surely the crowd cant hurt that bad.

 

[telsor]

What is this unfair advantage you guys speak of seriously? wouldnt it be the same as going to any other foreign club?

Surely the crowd cant hurt that bad.

They're softer than a Ty Vickery punch

 

[garlic munchers]

Extra homes games is a nufty idea/argument.

However, the right to play a home grand final if earned on the other hand is fair, equitable and inevitable.

It is a blight on the code that does not put a premium on finishing the regular season on top (i.e. like the Premier League), that non-Melbourne sides are required to overcome a significant inherent disadvantage to achieve ultimate success if they compete against a Melbourne based side.

Yeah, yeah we all know that the VFL/AFL signed contracts with the MCG, but the AFL condones contract breaking in almost every other sphere of the code and is happy to bankroll payouts to coaches etc. when poor clubs fire them for marketing reasons.

Give sides the right to host home GF's and you can keep your extra home games (and I will stop whingeing about travelling to Tassie).

It will happen because it is ultimately the only way to really crack the NSW-QLD markets and most arguments to the contrary simply reflect an innate recognition that a home city advantage is a massive advantage (otherwise, why would you care).

 

[Kwality]

Given the actual title of the thread, and the AFL article it was based on... am I the only one who wants to see a poll here?

I agree that the AFL should look into ways to minimise the impact of travel on clubs, and that there does need to be a more equitable schedule, but I wonder how many people (if any) actually think that giving the WA clubs an extra home game is a reasonable solution?

Acknowledging travel is a part of any equalisation discussion is not accepted by many (usually fans of the Melbourne based based clubs although less Hawks fans) - in isolation I dont see an extra home game is an answer, but when coupled with those Melbourne games that cant cover costs, a case does exist.

Not sure a poll adds anything to the discussion dids.

 

[basashi]

The much needed third WA team will go some way to reducing travel

 

[Bomberboyokay]

It's a bad idea. However you're a fool if you think flying thousands of kilometres and crossing timezones 10+ times a season doesn't take its toll physically and mentally, let alone "It's actually an advantage because the other teams aren't used to flying to Perth lolz!!"

 

[Herne Hill Hammer]

Perhaps the AFL could lease an aircraft large enough and fitted out to requirements that is crewed to fly when they need, not to the airline schedule.

 

[telsor]

Acknowledging travel is a part of any equalisation discussion is not accepted by many (usually fans of the Melbourne based based clubs although less Hawks fans) - in isolation I dont see an extra home game is an answer, but when coupled with those Melbourne games that cant cover costs, a case does exist.

Not sure a poll adds anything to the discussion dids.

Sure travel is a burden, but there is little that can practically be done about it.
Having a home ground advantage for 10 games is the 'balance' you get.

If you want to travel less/have other teams travel more, have more teams in WA.

 

[telsor]

Extra homes games is a nufty idea/argument.

However, the right to play a home grand final if earned on the other hand is fair, equitable and inevitable.

This has been discussed elsewhere.

Firstly 'earned' (as in the highest placed qualifier) wont work, they can't put on the GF on a weeks notice.

Secondly, the game needs to have minimum seating requirements, and even if you cut out the MCC, there are only 2 grounds in the country that could take it (and ANZ may not for much longer).

Third. Everyone gets to play on the MCG each year. Imagine having the game at a 1 team ground like Metricon, where the visiting team hasn't been for years.

 

[Beutbrute]

Sure travel is a burden, but there is little that can practically be done about it.
Having a home ground advantage for 10 games is the 'balance' you get.

If you want to travel less/have other teams travel more, have more teams in WA.

You wouldn't want to bring extra teams into the AFL though, it would have to be a relocation from Victoria.
Potential clubs could be:

Western Bulldogs - already has West in the name so the way has been paved - colours Blue, Red and White encompass both traditional Fremantle teams so they could be based there after Freo have moved to Cockburn
Richmond - already use the traditional Black and Gold WA colours so they could move too
North Melbourne - Brad Scott would not be happy with the home ground fans so that wouldn't work
Melbourne - already have a ready made affiliate club in Perth that would match their on-field success perfectly

A bit more seriously though, a third WA team must be a while away, you'd want to see how the attendances settle down once the new stadium is built before making committing to any new teams. Also need to see how much corporate support there will be in a few years with the mining down-turn

 

[Beutbrute]

This has been discussed elsewhere.

Firstly 'earned' (as in the highest placed qualifier) wont work, they can't put on the GF on a weeks notice.

Secondly, the game needs to have minimum seating requirements, and even if you cut out the MCC, there are only 2 grounds in the country that could take it (and ANZ may not for much longer).

Third. Everyone gets to play on the MCG each year. Imagine having the game at a 1 team ground like Metricon, where the visiting team hasn't been for years.

I think the new Perth stadium and Adelaide oval would be perfectly fine for grand finals. With two teams based at these grounds every AFL team should get at least 1 game there every year

 

[The_Reaper]

You wouldn't want to bring extra teams into the AFL though, it would have to be a relocation from Victoria.
Potential clubs could be:

Western Bulldogs - already has West in the name so the way has been paved - colours Blue, Red and White encompass both traditional Fremantle teams so they could be based there after Freo have moved to Cockburn
Richmond - already use the traditional Black and Gold WA colours so they could move too
North Melbourne - Brad Scott would not be happy with the home ground fans so that wouldn't work
Melbourne - already have a ready made affiliate club in Perth that would match their on-field success perfectly

A bit more seriously though, a third WA team must be a while away, you'd want to see how the attendances settle down once the new stadium is built before making committing to any new teams. Also need to see how much corporate support there will be in a few years with the mining down-turn

lol
Any relocated Victorian team can get ****ed

 

[Riccardo11]

If a team from Victoria was going to be relocated, the last place they'd go, or be accepted, is WA. If a third team is going to come in, they need to be either a new team or a promoted WAFL side.

 

[telsor]

You wouldn't want to bring extra teams into the AFL though, it would have to be a relocation from Victoria.
Potential clubs could be:

Western Bulldogs - already has West in the name so the way has been paved - colours Blue, Red and White encompass both traditional Fremantle teams so they could be based there after Freo have moved to Cockburn
Richmond - already use the traditional Black and Gold WA colours so they could move too
North Melbourne - Brad Scott would not be happy with the home ground fans so that wouldn't work
Melbourne - already have a ready made affiliate club in Perth that would match their on-field success perfectly

A bit more seriously though, a third WA team must be a while away, you'd want to see how the attendances settle down once the new stadium is built before making committing to any new teams. Also need to see how much corporate support there will be in a few years with the mining down-turn

Why would an extra team be a relocated Vic team? Expand more.

3 more WA teams
1 more in SA
1 in Tas

Gives 23 teams, 23 rounds, 1 team gets a bye each week and everyone plays each other once (swap venue each year).

 

[telsor]

I think the new Perth stadium and Adelaide oval would be perfectly fine for grand finals. With two teams based at these grounds every AFL team should get at least 1 game there every year

So WA and SA teams get to host grand finals, but NSW/QLD (and potentially TAS) teams don't?

 

[Riccardo11]

Why would an extra team be a relocated Vic team? Expand more.

3 more WA teams
1 more in SA
1 in Tas

Gives 23 teams, 23 rounds, 1 team gets a bye each week and everyone plays each other once (swap venue each year).

Could the competition really support 5 WA teams?

 

[telsor]

Could the competition really support 5 WA teams?

Why not? It's about 500K population per team, same as Vic. (also same as SA with 3 teams and Tas with 1)

 

[Riccardo11]

Why not? It's about 500K population per team, same as Vic. (also same as SA with 3 teams and Tas with 1)

A lot of those people may not be footy fans, and the rest would probably be already committed to Freo or the Eagles. One more I can see, but 3 seems like it would be pushing it, especially given they have one AFL ground until the new Perth Stadium gets up, and that's if they continue using Subi.

 

[Tiger2709]

In spite of their lack of success for the past 20+ years, Carlton and Richmond are well supported teams. The reason why 80,000 people turn up to the Blues vs Tigers game has nothing to do with the quality of the spectacle but the habits of the fans. That's fine, but why do they deserve an automatic double up? Why do they deserve prime time?

We know why they get it, it's so the AFL can capitalise on big attendance matches and big ratings? But does it actually do anything for the competition or the sport as a whole? No.

I don't think Freo vs Gold Coast should get equal billing as prime double up like Richmond vs Carlton unless both sides are quality teams. But in spite of that, there are a number of side Freo has rarely played twice in the same season. Sydney and Collingwood are two stand outs. By the same token, Collingwood has not played Sydney at the MCG in ten years. All three of Freo, Sydney, and Collingwood have been thereabouts in the past decade as top four sides, and they rarely meet each other twice in H&A.

This is the consequence of locked in blockbusters each year. To me, if the best sides aren't playing each other twice a year more often than not, something is wrong.

In the current era, you have the perverse situation where a good side like Collingwood faces a crap one like Carlton twice a year. The advantage this gives a team is enormous. Collingwood has only lost six times in the past twenty matches against Carlton. This is like the advantage Freo gets against West Coast. In my opinion, these blockbusters should be done away with, and either a rolling draw or one purely based on the previous years ladder position used to determine the next year's fixture.

I'm not disagreeing with you, I would love to see a draw as fair as is possible, but the AFL is and always has been all about the dollars, they compromise the competition throughout the year for the blockbusters, you cant really blame clubs for taking advantage of it to raise revenue.

I would be more than happy for some kind of rolling draw anything that gets us as close as possible to what we should have which is each team playing the others the same amount of times, only way I see it happening is more expansion then we play each other once, at least then they could have it one year at home the next away, but I doubt it will happen under the current AFL leadership.

 

[Riccardo11]

Not to mention the extra strain on travel for the Eastern states sides. All the complaints in this thread from WA based supporters about travel and recovery time would then go back onto the teams on the eastern seaboard if they are traveling a possible extra few times a year up to Perth.

 

[Tiger2709]

A lot of those people may not be footy fans, and the rest would probably be already committed to Freo or the Eagles. One more I can see, but 3 seems like it would be pushing it, especially given they have one AFL ground until the new Perth Stadium gets up, and that's if they continue using Subi.

God help us I don't think my knees could take another game at Subi.

 

[Beutbrute]

lol
Any relocated Victorian team can get stuffed

Ha, the other club that could relocatences is Port Adelaide but I don't think they would get many fans over this way

Why would an extra team be a relocated Vic team? Expand more.

3 more WA teams
1 more in SA
1 in Tas

Gives 23 teams, 23 rounds, 1 team gets a bye each week and everyone plays each other once (swap venue each year).

Victoria is struggling to support all of their teams as it is, SA is struggling to support 2 teams, so I'd hardly be thinking 5 more teams in the national competition would be wise.
I would be very interested to see how the next rights deal goes as well with the advent of internet streaming TV. However it works out I think the next rights deal will look very different to what we have now, and I don't know how much that will affect the AFL revenue stream.