Why did West Coast have to play in Hobart?

[CM9000]

Per the title, as we as a club (alongside Freo) travel more then then any other, why did we have to play in Hobart this year?

This isn't just because we lost - many on the West Coast board were expressing the same thing before the game. Richmond, as the reigning premiers, have travelled interstate four times this season. The question I have is why couldn't they forgo one MCG game to play North in Tasmania, rather than us having to travel even more? Why couldn't we have the extra game at the MCG?

Surely, as a national competition, interstate sides should get extra games at the MCG, rather then just adding to the already massive travel load for teams not in Vic?

 

[Macpotata]

Not good enough

 

[Rich]

Move Perth closer to the east coast, all problems solved.

 

[Captain_Bender]

North Melbourne's home ground is Etihad yet you want to play them at the MCG, so after all the sooking from Eagles supporters over home grounds they want to rob North Melbourne of their home game

 

[Bluelegs]

If Richmond played North in Hobart they would have lost an Etihad game not an MCG game.

If Eagles didn't go to Hobart they would have played at Etihad.

 

[Art Vandelay_]

Per the title, as we as a club (alongside Freo) travel more then then any other, why did we have to play in Hobart this year?

This isn't just because we lost - many on the West Coast board were expressing the same thing before the game. Richmond, as the reigning premiers, have travelled interstate four times this season. The question I have is why couldn't they forgo one MCG game to play North in Tasmania, rather than us having to travel even more? Why couldn't we have the extra game at the MCG?

Surely, as a national competition, interstate sides should get extra games at the MCG, over just adding extra travel for teams that don't play in Vic?

Simple.

The AFL won't schedule North/Hawks against Vic clubs in Tasmania.
Lose too many attendees.

 

[Lensen]

Home teams should be able to play home games wherever they want. No right to request where to play away

 

[Mcarcherey]

Be thankful it was in Hobart, under the roof you would've been smashed by 10+ goals

On [device_name] using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Spectore]

If Richmond played North in Hobart they would have lost an Etihad game not an MCG game.

If Eagles didn't go to Hobart they would have played at Etihad.

If this game was played at Etihad, the Hawthorn game could've been played at the MCG.

 

[Barry_Badrinath]

Per the title, as we as a club (alongside Freo) travel more then then any other, why did we have to play in Hobart this year?

This isn't just because we lost - many on the West Coast board were expressing the same thing before the game. Richmond, as the reigning premiers, have travelled interstate four times this season. The question I have is why couldn't they forgo one MCG game to play North in Tasmania, rather than us having to travel even more? Why couldn't we have the extra game at the MCG?

Surely, as a national competition, interstate sides should get extra games at the MCG, rather then just adding to the already massive travel load for teams not in Vic?

Because we played North at Etihad. How can we give up our MCG game against them when we played at Etihad lmao

Most embarrassing melt I’ve seen

 

[Bluelegs]

Move Perth closer to the east coast, all problems solved.

I have solved West Coasts travel woes.

 

[Bluelegs]

If this game was played at Etihad, the Hawthorn game could've been played at the MCG.

Maybe. The AFL has some weird thing about forcing MCG tenants to have an unnecessary home game or two at Etihad every year. We used to get it until we sold games to the NT.

 

[blue harvest]

Per the title, as we as a club (alongside Freo) travel more then then any other, why did we have to play in Hobart this year?

You get direct flights, it's not much further than going to Melbourne and less traffic on the bus to the hotel.

 

[Jugada]

Its an away game. No right to bitch and moan about where it's played

 

[kaiserchief13]

Simple.

The AFL won't schedule North/Hawks against Vic clubs in Tasmania.
Lose too many attendees.

So another fixture disadvantage for non Vic teams. At what point will the AFL actually become the AFL?

 

[projectv]

So another fixture disadvantage for non Vic teams. At what point will the AFL actually become the AFL?

Move your derby vs Freo to Tassie then.

 

[kaiserchief13]

Be thankful it was in Hobart, under the roof you wouldn't been smashed by 10+ goals

On [device_name] using BigFooty.com mobile app

Under the roof marks would have been marked rather than dropped and wind would not be a problem

 

[Senor M]

Per the title, as we as a club (alongside Freo) travel more then then any other, why did we have to play in Hobart this year?

This isn't just because we lost - many on the West Coast board were expressing the same thing before the game. Richmond, as the reigning premiers, have travelled interstate four times this season. The question I have is why couldn't they forgo one MCG game to play North in Tasmania, rather than us having to travel even more? Why couldn't we have the extra game at the MCG?

Surely, as a national competition, interstate sides should get extra games at the MCG, rather then just adding to the already massive travel load for teams not in Vic?

Why do we keep getting whinge threads disguised as genuine threads everytime a team loses?

We got a thread from a Collingwood supporter yesterday saying that subs should be returned to the game because of their injuries against Richmond at the MCG and now the Eagles lose a game and in under an hour the Eagles make a whinge thread that instead Richmond should've played North there isn't the Eagles.

If you were genuine about this as an issue you would've done enough research to realise that Richmond Vs. North Melbourne hasn't occurred during the H&A season at the MCG since 2012. Was the Eagles playing in Tasmania an issue for you when the draw for first released or at any time in the past 9 months--- or only after you lose the game?

 

[The Filth Wizard]

Simple.

The AFL won't schedule North/Hawks against Vic clubs in Tasmania.
Lose too many attendees.

Nah, we played Melbourne in Tasmania last season and Melbourne and Richmond the season before (with St Kilda and Richmond in 2015). This season is actually the anomaly in relation to our interstate opponents in Hobart.

 

[Isaac Cumming No 1]

Simple.

The AFL won't schedule North/Hawks against Vic clubs in Tasmania.
Lose too many attendees.

Tigers played down there a few times, and they draw a good crowd.

 

[kaiserchief13]

It's just like Bulldogs vs Port in Ballarat. Port already travel every 2nd week, why can't Dogs be playing another Vic team there? If you want to sell your home game then be prepared to lose the home ground advantage

 

[Dez!]

So another fixture disadvantage for non Vic teams. At what point will the AFL actually become the AFL?

Disadvantage? It's your f***ing away game, you have no right to dictate where it should be played as the AWAY team.

 

[trooroo4life]

It’s an extra hour on the trip ffs.

 

[Art Vandelay_]

So another fixture disadvantage for non Vic teams. At what point will the AFL actually become the AFL?

Knew you'd whinge about this lol.
Not sure you have a leg to stand on here though. You are the away team and in this case North have the right to decide where they play home games.

It's hardly a disadvantage playing an away game at an away venue.

 

[Brunswick Trap King]

As much as the AFL wants to keep us down, we still have 3 AFL era and soon to be 4 premierships.

Things could always be worse e.g. having 1 since 1990