News Should WA Clubs Get an Extra Home Game?

[_007_]

I saw this article on the AFL website this morning.

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2015-01-27/extra-home-games-for-wa-teams

It is an interesting concept, but I can't see the AFL giving out what would be seen as an advantage over the Victorian + non-footy state clubs. Interesting to note that the vote was 57% yes when I was having a look. Not travelling to Hobart so often would be a more realistic start and a step in the right direction in my opinion.

I think this is the strongest argument for the idea;

"Having one more game at home, one less week of travel for the WA sides, is not a big imposition on the competition and it is certainly not an advantage. It would bring the two clubs in line with Hawthorn. The Hawks travel nine times in 2015, the most of all Victorian clubs. Four of those trips are to Tasmania, which is the equivalent of Fremantle or West Coast travelling to Kalgoorlie to play."

I think this is the strongest legitimate argument against the idea;

"Besides, focusing only on the travel burden is to forget the advantages the Dockers and Eagles can reap from their geographical position. When they are playing well, there's arguably no more formidable home ground advantage in the competition. Collingwood plays 11 'home' games in Melbourne next season, but eight of those matches are against Victorian clubs."

 

[FD2646]

I think based on the price of our memberships as compared to those in Victoria, we deserve another game!

 

[Bicco]

We shouldn't have an extra home game, that is ridiculous. Apart from trying to justify it to other teams supporters it's just not fair in an 'even' competition.
Reducing our requirement to fly to Brisbane/Tas or anywhere that requires 2 flights to get there is an obvious compensation, such as NZ or Cairns.

 

[beetz]

I'd be happy if they just didn't subject the WA clubs to the Tasmania game against the Hawks.

 

[clivenator26]

This would be totally unfair, I mean could you imagine another club getting an advantage like an extra $1m in salary cap space just because they're ina different state, PREPOSTEROUS!

 

[Frank J Moose]

Just have all the preseason games in perth. Reduces the travel impact and increases it for the vic clubs. As long as there are no derbies preseason it is fair all around without compromising the competition.

 

[Quokka]

If it's comes at the cost of a game at the MCG its not worth it. Anyway there's already enough leeway in the fixturing to help ease the impact of travel if they were serious about it, no Tassy games wouldn't hurt, so I don't really see the need for a WA only rule.

 

[Moist Biscuit]

This would be totally unfair, I mean could you imagine another club getting an advantage like an extra $1m in salary cap space just because they're ina different state, PREPOSTEROUS!

This.

 

[rodney hoo]

I think if you asked the players honestly they would like it, don't think they would admit to it but from my experience from flying a lot between East and West coast it becomes draining the longer it goes on.

 

[go_the_dockers]

Giving us an extra home game is ridiculous, it would be like giving the Sydney and Brisbane teams an academy to select the best players at a cheaper price which is trying to offset one disadvantage by giving you another advantage.

So yeah we should get one

 

[Moist Biscuit]

Giving us an extra home game is ridiculous, it would be like giving the Sydney and Brisbane teams an academy to select the best players at a cheaper price which is trying to offset one disadvantage by giving you another advantage.

So yeah we should get one

Or giving those same two sides with an academy an extra million dollars in their salary caps.

 

[PurpleWizard]

and Collingwood so do deserve more games in Melbourne because they draw bigger crowds.

 

[im_a_lazy_sod]

Someone suggested an extra bye:

-both WA teams start a week earlier and get an extra bye later in the season
-play GWS/GC/Brisbane/Sydney ideally to avoid needing to make the trip mid-season

 

[Silent Alarm]

Yes.

The notion of 22 games, and 11 home and away, is a real relic and hangover from the VFL.

There is absolutely no fairness in some teams leaving Victoria four times a year and others continually travelling, on average, four and a half hours every second week. It's unfair. Freo, and the Eagles, should play 12-14 home games in Perth.

 

[Schauermann]

Considering travel load not a bad idea. But it means a home game less for fans of other clubs, which probably makes it impossible...

PS Perhaps Melbourne teams should travel to Adelaide and back before a away game they play in Melbourne...

 

[ilikepotatoes]

Quote from the article:

.
It might be an era of equalisation, but not everything can be equal.

Pretty much sums up the AFL.

 

[Freofalcon]

At least they let us play home finals.

 

[Taylor]

I thought it might be attractive for a club in debt to sell a home game to Crown Stadium and get 40-60,000 there for it. +$600,000 into their wallet.

Then we could play:
Home
Away (Derby)
Home
Away (Melb home game in Perth)
Home

A whole month at the end of the season without travel. We would feel like Collingwood.

 

[yoong]

Quote from the article:


Pretty much sums up the AFL.

All teams are equal, but some teams are more equal than others.

 

[yoong]

I thought it might be attractive for a club in debt to sell a home game to Crown Stadium and get 40-60,000 there for it. +$600,000 into their wallet.

Then we could play:
Home
Away (Derby)
Home
Away (Melb home game in Perth)
Home

A whole month at the end of the season without travel. We would feel like Collingwood.

I think you nailed it.
It'll never happen solely on the fairness argument.
The big question is, will it be possible for the afl to sell more tickets if a match that is originally supposed to be at Etihad gets shifted to Subi (or the new stadium).

 

[Taylor]

I think you nailed it.
It'll never happen solely on the fairness argument.
The big question is, will it be possible for the afl to sell more tickets if a match that is originally supposed to be at Etihad gets shifted to Subi (or the new stadium).

I was thinking more in place of the likes of TIO stadium or Cairns. I think it's against the spreading the game ideal though.

 

[ImperialPurple]

I think this is the strongest legitimate argument against the idea;

"Besides, focusing only on the travel burden is to forget the advantages the Dockers and Eagles can reap from their geographical position. When they are playing well, there's arguably no more formidable home ground advantage in the competition. Collingwood plays 11 'home' games in Melbourne next season, but eight of those matches are against Victorian clubs."

Collingwood also plays another 6 'away' games in Melbourne - for a total of 17 for the year. Travis King has made the stats say what he wants them to say, without taking the whole picture into account.

They could just help by not sending us (or them) to Tasmania (both clubs) or Darwin (one of us) each season.

 

[Admiral Byng]

Easy solution would be just to change policy and allow Melbourne-based clubs to shift their home games against us or the Coasters to Perth, if they wanted to.

 

[Bicco]

Everyone here is aware that the reason Collingwood have so many games in Melbourne is that every Melbourne team wants a home game against them, right?
At the same time, it hasn't really helped them.

 

[Tonga Bob]

The only way to make it truly equitable is to reduce the number of teams in Melbourne, but as we all know there's Buckley's chance* of that happening.

*pun intended