- Apr 12, 2012
- 46,296
- 42,176
- AFL Club
- GWS
You're 5 mins down the road.And teams like the bulldogs? We are lucky to play 6 games at the G over 2 years.
Didnt impact us in 2016
Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
You're 5 mins down the road.And teams like the bulldogs? We are lucky to play 6 games at the G over 2 years.
Didnt impact us in 2016
And if the Eagles comfortably win surely the debate ends.
I differently think the Eagles and other interstate sides should play at least half a dozen games a year at the G and as this doesn't happen is the real problem that needs to be addressed.
Have a read of the thread title. It says neutral venue.It is relevant because if/when the GC or GWS finish highest and host a GF, then your stadium capacity is limited to 20,000. That would be rediculous and you know it.
You got to play an interstate team thereAnd teams like the bulldogs? We are lucky to play 6 games at the G over 2 years.
Didnt impact us in 2016
If the rules were changed we wouldnt play it at spotless.It is relevant because if/when the GC or GWS finish highest and host a GF, then your stadium capacity is limited to 20,000. That would be rediculous and you know it.
Money mate Money. AFL cash grab. More seats more money.I really hate the argument that it has to be at the G because of capacity
Talking to a Collingwood fan last night and he conceeded it's not ideal for non Vic sides but then said "if Perth had a 100,000 seat stadium then they should host it this week"
The **** has the amount of seats got to do with it? ? What a ridiculously arbitrary argument
Yeah but 100 000 is a far cry from the next biggest stadium at 60 000. I reckon it needs to start being spread around but we need stadiums that will hold at least 80k in the other states.We need to invoke the champions league format, where the game is played in a state (country) away from the teams location. The AFL really need to let go of this crowd excuse, as it's a competition that consistently boasts record crowds; so a game (being played in the fairness of the opposition) at a neutral venue should be their number 1 priority. Also, a sellout (no matter the venue) will always be a good look for the game. Anyway, as it stands the game is heavily favored towards Victorian teams
20 year+ waiting list for that anywayAnd it also conveniently ignores the fact that there is practically zero reason for a fan of a non-MCG tenant to join the MCC.
One example this way or the other way doesn't change the underlying unfairness of the premise.
I mean, imagine that the game was being played in Western Australia. What chance would you give Collingwood then?
When most of that is given away to people who don't hold a membership with either club, I think the difference between 100k and 60k could be a little moot.Yeah but 100 000 is a far cry from the next biggest stadium at 60 000. I reckon it needs to start being spread around but we need stadiums that will hold at least 80k in the other states.
Nope.
Just means the Eagles were much much much better.
Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk
Yes and that is what matters, the location of the ground doesn't.
The Eagles have not had to travel for several weeks, so having to travel back and forth which could be an issue has been somewhat lessened.
So we play Collingwood v West Coast in Adelaide, Brisbane or Sydney. Make it virtually impossible for the members of participating clubs to actually attend the game.Have a read of the thread title. It says neutral venue.
Money mate Money. AFL always looking to cash, surprised they actually gave away the idea of Grand Final Replays.When most of that is given away to people who don't hold a membership with either club, I think the difference between 100k and 60k could be a little moot.
And none of their three flags, that said, were against Melbourne teams.The Eagles have three premierships, two were against Victorian sides
You mean like it is for non vics now?So we play Collingwood v West Coast in Adelaide, Brisbane or Sydney. Make it virtually impossible for the members of participating clubs to actually attend the game.
And none of their three flags, that said, were against Melbourne teams.
Still, I don't think that specific examples really help here. There's an undeniable long-term trend that sides play better at home, and worse when playing interstate.
True - but compare it to what would have happened if the Eagles were a Victorian team (i.e. like Richmond). Three games solid at their home ground - including the GF.particularly when they have to travel back and forth, the Eagles don't have that this time around because they have played both finals in Perth and had the week off.
Not neutral. The MCG is located in the same city as the Dogs are.The 2016 Grand Final was played at the neutral MCG - neither the Footscray Football Club nor the South Melbourne/Sydney Swans Football Club play home games at the vanue.
The city of Sydney is only a 45 minute flight from Melbourne - it takes longer to get to Melbourne from the outer Eastern and outer Western suburbs.
I have never understood why AFL teams based outside of Melbourne don't spend the week in Melbourne for the Grand Final, as NFL teams do for the Superbowl.
Thanks Christ the AFL isn't run by people like youYep welcome to the world of interstate members.
Because you would have to travel. Like every non vic club?Thanks Christ the AFL isn't run by people like you
You're 5 mins down the road.
Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk
Have a read of the thread title. It says neutral venue.
You got to play an interstate team there
Not neutral. The MCG is located in the same city as the Dogs are.