Grand Final Day Dimensions - Clubs Should Choose

[didaksrightfoot]

I actually agree with this 100% and have mentioned it a few times in other posts in the past.

1. I think we all accept that, for at least the medium term future, the GF will continue to be held at the MCG. Hopefully, we all also agree that this does pose a disadvantage, no matter how small, to clubs travelling from interstate, and particularly when they don't get regular games at the G all year. If a Melbourne/MCG team is Minor Premier - then fair enough, they deserve that advantage... but it is unfair for an interstate team who was higher on the ladder, to have to play the GF at the oppositions home ground - which has happened multiple times.
Now we clearly can't take the travel factor out of it. (at least unless other states develop similar stadiums)

2. Dimensions of the field are a pretty big factor in footy - whether in reality or just mentally. You see teams like the Swan's and Eagle's have much more success on their home ground (with styles suited to those unique dimensions) than they do elsewhere. Part of that is travel and home crowd (although not when you look at Swans at ANZ), and part of it is probably confidence... but actual dimensions also play a role.

3. Other sports with unique ground sizes also have a history of changing the dimensions of the playing field for certain competitions. Cricket does it all the time with the ODI and T20 games - in fact it's rare now to see a game that uses the fence as the boundary rather then bringing a rope... pretty sure it happens at the 'G as well, so there is a clear precedent. Soccer Fields also have maximum and minimum limits (which do vary somewhat between national leagues and UEFA - which is more restrictive) which clubs can vary based on their tactics for the season. (Although I do think it has to be set for the whole year - not sure if they change it mid-season at all - but theres no practical reason they couldn't).

4. The extra effort it will take to change the playing field width is neglible- it will literally be just about repainting the lines (and as OP said - could just accent this with a different colour for the OOB area). Shortenting length would require more work - with moving the goal posts would be more effort. I am not sure how routinely that is done are how costly ($ and time) it is - but it does happen when the G has other events midseason. If that is to costly, then just leave the length and only change the width.

5. There can be benefits to an extra few metres between the rope and the fence. Safety of players, both in terms of collisions with the fence, or from behaviour of fans, could be improved. I'm sure the AFL would also love more room to get some extra security, or extra space for media in that area?

 

[aCunningPlan]

watching Geelong would be like watching the soccer at the MCG

See, I wouldn't subscribe to such a view. Watching soccer at the MCG I am much further back from the ground than I would be if I was at AAMI Park or Etihad, yes. However at the MCG the centre bounce will still take place in the same spot it would otherwise, the vast vast majority of the play will take place in the same places, the only impact on the spectator will be the throw-ins will be further away from the fence.

 

[mikeg4]

Or the afl could be like most other sports and standardize oval dimensions.

Except that statement is quite false. For example baseball has varying sizes and shapes, soccer has some slight variation, the rugby codes have different end zone lengths and cricket varies even greater than football.

 

[JayJ20]

I like that idea.

What gives a team home ground advantage other than the home crowd is the dimensions of the ground. Teams that struggle at the SCG/SUBIACO do so because of the dimensions of the ground. I can imagine MCG tennants putting the ball OOTF more than usual if Subiaco's dimensions were put in place.

 

[Crawb]

Some club should just nominate the minimum dimensions of 135x110 for the laughs.

 

[kaiserchief13]

Wow I have seen some stupid ideas on this site over the years, but this may just be the dumbest of them all

Because it takes away your teams unfair advantage if they ever make another grand final?

 

[00Stinger]

Because it takes away your teams unfair advantage if they ever make another grand final?

That is assuming that we ever make a grand final and the opposition isn't based at the MCG.

It is stupid because it is a stupid idea. The advantage doesn't come from the grounds being slightly bigger or smaller. The advantage comes from the lack of travel, playing in front of more supporters, the climate ext.

 

[kaiserchief13]

That is assuming that we ever make a grand final and the opposition isn't based at the MCG.

It is stupid because it is a stupid idea. The advantage doesn't come from the grounds being slightly bigger or smaller. The advantage comes from the lack of travel, playing in front of more supporters, the climate ext.

I don't think so. The Eagles always struggle in SCG because they play on a complete opposite of a ground. Look at Melbourne playing away from MCG they can't play well because they aren't used to it

 

[HairyO]

Quite the cunning stunt.

 

[00Stinger]

I don't think so. The Eagles always struggle in SCG because they play on a complete opposite of a ground. Look at Melbourne playing away from MCG they can't play well because they aren't used to it

We won a couple of times away from the g this year. We cant play etihad, but its not the dimensions its the fast deck due to the roof.


Sent from my SM-G925I using Tapatalk

 

[Sando22]

An interesting idea, albeit one that I hope never ever occurs.

So if Geelong get to choose, I'd hate to be sitting on the wing a mile from the action with an acre of grass in front of me.

 

[kaiserchief13]

We won a couple of times away from the g this year. We cant play etihad, but its not the dimensions its the fast deck due to the roof.


Sent from my SM-G925I using Tapatalk

Sure that's why Melbourne got spanked by Port in NT and in WA again

 

[00Stinger]

Sure that's why Melbourne got spanked by Port in NT and in WA again

Lol. This year we beat port in SA,, beat Freo in NT & beat Gold Coast in QLD. Lost by a kick to your mob in WA & North in Tasmania.
Like to try again?



Sent from my SM-G925I using Tapatalk

 

[mcgarnacle]

my nuts feel a bit like geelong or perth

 

[im_a_lazy_sod]

I remember teams not used to Subi or Kardinia park would often kick the ball out on the full when trying to counter punch on the wings, or it would trickle out in when trying to kick in to space.

Just like the width of the MCG is an advantage to clubs used to playing there, so too should the narrowness of Subi/KP to the teams used to it.

Further to this, the length of the SCG meant the swans could really perfect their Roos era gameplan

I mentioned earlier I thought this wasn't a bad idea, but now I think it definitely has a lot of merit

There is obviously a massive advantage to a team playing a GF on a ground where they have played 10-15 games there per season, while other teams may not have even played 10 games there in the past 5 years

watching Geelong would be like watching the soccer at the MCG

You'd need binocs if you were sitting on the wing

 

[kranky al]

That is assuming that we ever make a grand final and the opposition isn't based at the MCG.

It is stupid because it is a stupid idea. The advantage doesn't come from the grounds being slightly bigger or smaller. The advantage comes from the lack of travel, playing in front of more supporters, the climate ext.

Alastair clarkson actually played around with a version of the web before discounting it as it wouldnt work on the wide mcg.


I love this idea.

 

[Gold Member]

This embarrassing thread wouldn't exist if not for Hawthorn's little run...

Tell me again how the ground dimensions were an issue in 1992, 1994, 1995, 1997, 1998, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006 & 2012.
Add in Geelong 2007, 2009 & 2011 for shits and giggles based on not being an MCG tenant.

AFL era premierships by MCG tenant clubs..
1990, 1993, 1996, 1999, 2008, 2010, 2013, 2014, 2015

 

[kranky al]

This embarrassing thread wouldn't exist if not for Hawthorn's little run...

Tell me again how the ground dimensions were an issue in 1992, 1994, 1995, 1997, 1998, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006 & 2012.
Add in Geelong 2007, 2009 & 2011 for shits and giggles based on not being an MCG tenant.

AFL era premierships by MCG tenant clubs..
1990, 1993, 1996, 1999, 2008, 2010, 2013, 2014, 2015

At tge end of the day you get to play grand finals at your home ground. Whether you earn it or not.

This seeks to even up that inequity - not fully - but just a little bit.

 

[kranky al]

Oh and several of those years you mentioned it was interstate clubs playing interstate clubs....

 

[Jhye Clark 13]

Subiaco is 15m longer than the MCG so I'm curious as to how that would work.

You pull out some seats at either end and reduce the capacity.

 

[cosman123]

You should apply for work with the AFL.. You would fit in perfect

 

[Gold Member]

Oh and several of those years you mentioned it was interstate clubs playing interstate clubs....

So 2 wrongs make a right??

 

[aCunningPlan]

This embarrassing thread wouldn't exist if not for Hawthorn's little run...

Tell me again how the ground dimensions were an issue in 1992, 1994, 1995, 1997, 1998, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006 & 2012.
Add in Geelong 2007, 2009 & 2011 for shits and giggles based on not being an MCG tenant.

AFL era premierships by MCG tenant clubs..
1990, 1993, 1996, 1999, 2008, 2010, 2013, 2014, 2015

It is just an idea to counteract the otherwise ingrained advantage MCG tenant clubs have. I'm not advocating the Grand Final go to another ground and reduce the atmosphere.

1998, 2002, 2003, 2012 are the only years a non-MCG tenant won a premiership against a club where the MCG is their primary home ground.

 

[Gold Member]

At tge end of the day you get to play grand finals at your home ground. Whether you earn it or not.

This seeks to even up that inequity - not fully - but just a little bit.

If it wasn't for your home ground you would barely make the 8...

Some inequities are are more unequal than others. BOOOOOOOOOOooooooooooo




I demand we get a percentage multiplier to compensate for only playing under a roof once a year.

 

[WCE_phil]

Brilliant idea. 100% behind it. Players may be confused by the difference in how much space there is on the wings so the areas would need painting for the GF but very much a fair idea.

Unless of course all the melbourne clubs are happy for the mcg not to host the grand final and the top ranked side to get to play on their states largest ground if from sa/wa/nsw or victoria and if a team is from queensland or tassie or whatever in the future they can nominate the ground as long as the ground has a minimum capacity of that of adelaide oval. Take away all the mcc seats and afl member seats and you'll find the adelaide oval, the perth stadium and stadium australia are all well and truly big enough to host it.