The REAL reasons we don't get finals at GMHBA Stadium

[lionbear]

I agree with Frank Costa on the issue:

"It should be the clubs choice, but I would not want to be the board member who advises 45,000 Geelong members they wont be able to get into the game"

 

[dazbroncos]

I agree with Frank Costa on the issue:

"It should be the clubs choice, but I would not want to be the board member who advises 45,000 Geelong members they wont be able to get into the game"

Agreed with the statement.... but so far it seems 51k or more have not taken the chance to buy tickets for QF1....

Bit disappointing from a numbers perspective.

GO Catters

 

[Captain chaos]

We have more real away games (games at a venue preferenced by the opponent and not preferenced by ourselves) than any other team because we only have 9 games at our preferred venue. It's not hard to run the numbers.



Travel is just a consequence. Feel for St Kilda who sold a home game to play in China, and yet they still have 10 home games at their preferred venue, plus some away games as well.



The issue has existed for a long time, whether or not you want to accept that it has. Just because something is being discussed more at present doesn't mean it wasn't an issue previously.

Cant agree.. if this was such an important issue why did Scott remain silent about it for nearly 8 years?

Its all come to a head because Scott has barely won a final there in 8 years.

As for the “ preferred” venue argument, we still get 4/5 G games most years on top of the home games, so thats still more preferred than China or ballarat or Canberra.

Again, lets not ignore the benefits we get by training and playing at our venue... the irony is the home games are a big reason we finish on top.

 

[cats_09]

Cant agree.. if this was such an important issue why did Scott remain silent about it for nearly 8 years?

Its all come to a head because Scott has barely won a final there in 8 years.

As for the “ preferred” venue argument, we still get 4/5 G games most years on top of the home games, so thats still more preferred than China or ballarat or Canberra.

Again, lets not ignore the benefits we get by training and playing at our venue... the irony is the home games are a big reason we finish on top.

It's been an issue for a long time, but until 2016, AFL finals were played in the biggest AFL stadiums within the home teams state, except for 2013 when because of 4 x Victorian finals one had to be moved from the MCG and that meant we were "lucky" to host our home final at our home ground & then we lost anyway.

The big thing that changed in 2016 is that GWS were allowed to host their home preliminary final in front of barely 21,000 fans at their home ground. That game came 2 weeks after Sydney hosted the "battle of the bridge" final against GWS with that game played at ANZ stadium - if it was ok for the AFL to decide to move the Swans home final from the SCG, then why not move the Giants preliminary final to a larger venue also?

After this, the AFL confirmed that both the Giants & Suns would host home finals at their home grounds, the potential exception being if they were to play either of their direct rivals and a potentially larger crowd.

The fact that the 2 new teams of the league are permitted to host their home finals at their home ground, both of which have lower seating capacities than KP, it makes it a kick in the guts to Geelong.

It should be a league wide rule - either all finals are played in the largest AFL specific venue within the state or all teams get to host their home finals (through to the grand final), at their home ground.

 

[TomsBulgingDisc]

I would say Scott isn’t arguing about this year I think he is looking to the future and asking if this is fair and does it give us the same chance to win flags as the G tenants.

With due respect, I'd like the coach to shut his trap regarding anything more than the game at hand. Not the venue, not the disadvantage etc, just concentrate on the game and brush aside questions or comment about the fixture. There are avenues available for the club at Exec level to have those conversations with the AFL.

 

[ep2018]

Without reading through this thread and forgive me for mentioning my reasoning for this when someone else may have already, simply put I believe that if the AFL gives you Kardinia finals (especially against non Vic sides), Marvel tenants will expect finals played at Marvel too and that's an issue the AFL dont want to deal with.

 

[Spazz Cat]

Without reading through this thread and forgive me for mentioning my reasoning for this when someone else may have already, simply put I believe that if the AFL gives you Kardinia finals (especially against non Vic sides), Marvel tenants will expect finals played at Marvel too and that's an issue the AFL dont want to deal with.

Good point. I think it'd be great though. A fully packed Marvel is Loud!!!!

 

[Captain chaos]

It's been an issue for a long time, but until 2016, AFL finals were played in the biggest AFL stadiums within the home teams state, except for 2013 when because of 4 x Victorian finals one had to be moved from the MCG and that meant we were "lucky" to host our home final at our home ground & then we lost anyway.

The big thing that changed in 2016 is that GWS were allowed to host their home preliminary final in front of barely 21,000 fans at their home ground. That game came 2 weeks after Sydney hosted the "battle of the bridge" final against GWS with that game played at ANZ stadium - if it was ok for the AFL to decide to move the Swans home final from the SCG, then why not move the Giants preliminary final to a larger venue also?

After this, the AFL confirmed that both the Giants & Suns would host home finals at their home grounds, the potential exception being if they were to play either of their direct rivals and a potentially larger crowd.

The fact that the 2 new teams of the league are permitted to host their home finals at their home ground, both of which have lower seating capacities than KP, it makes it a kick in the guts to Geelong.

It should be a league wide rule - either all finals are played in the largest AFL specific venue within the state or all teams get to host their home finals (through to the grand final), at their home ground.

Thats all well and good but coll/ rich etc have always had the advantage Scott is talking about.

If we were winning most of our finals at the G , he wouldnt have said a word.

 

[GeneticCat]

So just to clarify...
There are some Cats fans who understand there is an advantage to playing games at a team’s home ground but are happy for their team not to have it IN A FINAL!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Catters 070911]

Well, he did out-coach Scott as recently as this year...


My response was regarding you assuming I desire Chris Scott to fail and am running some sort of arbitrary vendetta against him. I don't want Scott or any Geelong coach to not succeed, but I think, based on what we've seen, that's all we're likely to see post-2011.


Is the eight years some sort of critique? I'd rather the club spend 8 years developing a side that is then capable of making 4 GFs and winning 3 flags rather than spending the exact same amount of time meandering around the top of the ladder but never getting close to making a GF let alone winning a flag. Under Bomber, we invested in the draft and in-house development as a primary mechanism for list development; under Scott, we've attempted to bring in ready-made talent and top-up with recycles roleplayers as a means to sustain success. We can see which list build strategy has worked better.


We were found out in 2010, no doubt about that. I don't know why Bomber really left. He says he thought he was done as a senior coach, he also says that, had he had another off/pre-season he could have addressed the problems with the game plan similar to what Scott did. He was also a lot more loyal to his senior players and saved some of them from being delisted/retired at the end of 2010. We don't know how Bomber would have fared in 2011; all we know is that the team did very well in 2011, and for that I'm thankful. I do think he was spent at the end of 2010, so whatever his own motivations were, I have no lingering issue with his exit. He was not a player in his prime deserting us for an AFL franchise for millions of dollars; he was a coach who had been with us for 11 years, built us a phenomenal list capable of winning 3 flags, and was likely suffering from personal issues.

We don't know how many games he would have given younger players. We know he gave some a taste in 2010, but that's not indicative of him not intending to provide more consistency after another pre-season and season into the older players. While he was more loyal to his premiership legends than Scott was, which perhaps would have been to the detriment to the side, I would say we're seeing similar loyalty (this time somewhat more unfounded) coming from Scott to the detriment of the side. A guy like Guthrie continues to retain his spot despite constantly under-performing while Constable remains trapped in the VFL.

I wouldn't say Scott's youth policy has been all that much better than Bomber's during the premiership years. Scott has relied heavily on recycled players from other clubs and mature-agers from state leagues. Very few kids have come into the system and been developed into AFL-quality players under Scott. There are a few, now, but these are mostly recent additions. After so many years, Duncan remains the only player who has really flourished under Scott after beginning with him as a relatively fresh prospect.



Point out where I said that. I expect that if you make 5 top 4/4 top 2 finishes, then it's reasonable to expect at least a GF, right? Is that really unreasonable? Expect a little more fight than zero goals in first quarters and multiple 30+ point deficits at qtr time of finals. Yeah, no, I want the team to be invincible because I don't think they should keel over in nearly ever final in an 8-year period. Expecting too much after five top 4 finishes in that period, clearly.


I wasn't crying about it in 2007-2011 and am not now.

1) Ken Hinkley outcoached Chris Scott this year- Well, even a broken clock is right twice a day.

2) You don't know what we are likely to see post-2011. We are in another finals campaign, and who knows how far we will go.

I think you cannot assess CS's tenure at Geelong until after he leaves. While he is still there, there is always a chance of him coaching another flag with us.

3) So you don't want ready-made players? Okay, so you would have been happy for the Cats to tell Patrick Dangerfield that we are not interested? If Nat Fyfe or Dustin Martin wanted to play for us, you would want the club to say "No"?

Scott plays ready-made players, as well as youngsters. Bomber played premiership players past their prime, and youngsters only got a look-in when a premiership hero was injured.

4) Bomber saved some of his players being delisted/retired in 2010.

At the end of 2010, some looked like retirement was the best thing for them. Chris Scott was a fresh voice, and got another year out of some of them.

Take Cameron Ling. He was finished in 2010. I thought he should have retired. By the end of the 2011 GF, I thought that he could go on another year. Maybe it was a new voice, someone new challenging him, maybe it was Scott's declaration that everyone had to earn a game, so players like him gave his all so that he wouldn't be dropped. Maybe it was proving himself to a new coach. Maybe it was the excitement of youngsters like Allan Christensen and Mitch Duncan being in the side and freshening up a stale list. All these things that wouldn't have happened if Bomber was there in 2010.

I have a problem with Bomber leaving, because he broke a contract, he lied to the club, and he bullied Gary Ablett for being disloyal, yet was disloyal himself. What he did after he left Geelong showed what sort of person he really was.

Besides, none of the players CS retired are playing now. Do you think Stevie J, Chapman or Bartel would still be in our side in 2019? Would you be happy them keeping other players out?

How would you feel if these three players kept out Miers, Clarke and Atkins from the side?

5) You criticise Scott picking mature-agers from our VFL side, and want kids in instead.

Firstly, it is harder for us to get our first pick now. Our first pick 15 years ago is much further down the order now, with Gold Coast and GWS getting extra picks, GC getting priority picks every year, as well as Brisbane (up until this year), and with interstate academies, having to sacrifice earlier picks for F-S, and more teams in the league, it is harder to get a lot of picks.

Besides, Steven Wells is getting older, and may not up to picking players like before. The landscape has changed, and skewed heavily towards the interstate teams. We could get earlier picks, but we need something of value. Maybe if Tim Kelly leaves, we can get in a couple of first-rounders. But, other than Ablett, we haven't had anyone of value to trade out for a while.

Free agency has kept us afloat, and we are getting most of our picks there. Also, it has helped our age demographic, as we now have more 23-29 years olds then we used to (before we only had kids or veterans, thanks to Bomber's neglecting of recruiting youth, so that he can continue to give premiership heroes games).

Also, FA hasn't hurt us, and other than possibly Henderson and Zach Smith, every other FA we have got either has delivered (e.g. Dangerfield, Dalhaus) or cost us very little either salary cap wise or draft pick wise (e.g. Gary Rohan for pick 65).

As for our VFL side, well picking 18 year olds is a speculative market, and youth in the draft being the answer is overstated. At least with our VFL side and mature recruits, we can develop our players and then play them in the seniors when they are ready.

I suppose us picking up Max Rooke, Matthew Stokes and Tom Stewart as mature-age recruits was a failure in your eyes.

The VFL has allowed a Gryan Miers, Mark Blicavs or Mark O'Connor to develop first, and then play senior football when they are ready, rather than be a team of youngsters who get smashed every week, like St. Kilda or Carlton pre-Teague.

 

[Catters 070911]

I think Gil needs to come out at the start of next season and either declare that Geelong will get home finals going forward, or they won't.

If we don't, we need to accept it and move on.

If we do, Richmond, Hawthorn etc need to shut up and accept it.

What is either side going to do? They can't go to another league.

Gil needs to grow a set, and make a decisive decision, once and for all, forever. That will end all speculation, and CS can get it off his chest before Round 1.

But only making a decision late in the season every season is policy on the run, and not the way to do things.

 

[Captain chaos]

Does everybody understand that if we played coll/ rich at home, the ticket allocation is done according to membership...ie they would get more than us and reserved seats etc are null and void.

 

[GeneticCat]

I think Gil needs to come out at the start of next season and either declare that Geelong will get home finals going forward, or they won't.

If we don't, we need to accept it and move on.

If we do, Richmond, Hawthorn etc need to shut up and accept it.

What is either side going to do? They can't go to another league.

Gil needs to grow a set, and make a decisive decision, once and for all, forever. That will end all speculation, and CS can get it off his chest before Round 1.

But only making a decision late in the season every season is policy on the run, and not the way to do things.

This why we should run with requesting KP dimensions on the G (yes I know the G is marginally shorter). It a compromise that is achievable and the concept works for all non G tenants. We will never get a home final against Melb based teams but we could get something if the rest of the comp is on board. #bringintheboundary


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Liger]

Setup some jumbo-tron screens on the ovals around kardinia park, have a bunch of food stalls and entertainment and make it a huge rally for those that cant get a ticket into the stadium, both teams fans welcome. Make it a finals festival. * it, put some temp femcing around like they do at a musical festival and charge an entry fee to raise revenue.
Probably more of an atmosphere to be outside if they did this every year and got it working well. Theres no point making finals every year to just bend iver and go to melbourne because AFL says you have no choice. Might as well tank and rebuild for a decade until the stadium is finished being upgraded, be a burden on the AFL.

Just stay at home an watch it on the tv because its better than getting to your seat at the mcg just before half time on a friday night.
If its raining and they shut the mcg car park down, forget about it if your coming from Geelong.
Starve the AFL. They could have atleast given the Cats a Sat night reach around while screwing them to make it somewhat serviceable.

 

[cats_09]

Does everybody understand that if we played coll/ rich at home, the ticket allocation is done according to membership...ie they would get more than us and reserved seats etc are null and void.

Isn't ticket allocation for finals 50/50 - that's how the tickets were divided for next weeks match, 55k seats for members of both clubs with each club allocated 27,500 tickets

Neither teams members sold out the available tickets

 

[Captain chaos]

Isn't ticket allocation for finals 50/50 - that's how the tickets were divided for next weeks match, 55k seats for members of both clubs with each club allocated 27,500 tickets

Neither teams members sold out the available tickets

Either way half our usual supporters who go every week wouldn't be able to go.

 

[Munich]

Isn't ticket allocation for finals 50/50 - that's how the tickets were divided for next weeks match, 55k seats for members of both clubs with each club allocated 27,500 tickets

Neither teams members sold out the available tickets

I'm interested, where are the numbers for that?

 

[cats_09]

I'm interested, where are the numbers for that?

The AFL confirmed that Geelong and Collingwood members were allocated equal numbers of tickets when the four-hour pre-sale opened at 9am.

“Competing club members get the largest share of tickets for finals — which for this match at the MCG is 55,000,” AFL spokesman Jay Allen said.

“Geelong and Collingwood members each are allocated 27,500 tickets for the member pre-sale period.

“At the conclusion of the member pre-sale at 1pm Collingwood members had purchased approximately 16,500 tickets and Geelong members 9,000 tickets.

Full article:

Geelong Advertiser

No Cookies

www.geelongadvertiser.com.au

 

[Landgraft]

Cant agree.. if this was such an important issue why did Scott remain silent about it for nearly 8 years?

Its all come to a head because Scott has barely won a final there in 8 years.

Even if this were true or significant his finals record quite possibly is far more positive if the league were to give us home finals.

As to why it's suddenly more of a talking point maybe compare where the grounds redevelopment is at now vs where it was at in 2012.

As for the “ preferred” venue argument, we still get 4/5 G games most years on top of the home games, so thats still more preferred than China or ballarat or Canberra.

You are weirdly fixated on Canberra games when they're no different to any other interstate trip. Is Canberra just an exotic city to your mind?

Again, lets not ignore the benefits we get by training and playing at our venue... the irony is the home games are a big reason we finish on top.

We play fewer home games than any other team in the league and mostly in games against teams where any home side is expected to win. It's frankly pathetic that you want to twist the facts to try and undermine the hard earned gains of a team you claim to support.

 

[Captain chaos]

Even if this were true or significant his finals record quite possibly is far more positive if the league were to give us home finals.

As to why it's suddenly more of a talking point maybe compare where the grounds redevelopment is at now vs where it was at in 2012.



You are weirdly fixated on Canberra games when they're no different to any other interstate trip. Is Canberra just an exotic city to your mind?



We play fewer home games than any other team in the league and mostly in games against teams where any home side is expected to win. It's frankly pathetic that you want to twist the facts to try and undermine the hard earned gains of a team you claim to support.

Canberra? I mentioned two other places....did your read that?

Let's not forget we lost the home final, so not sure Scott's finals record would improve. He is behaving like a very nervous coach who is again afraid of losing.

 

[Munich]

The AFL confirmed that Geelong and Collingwood members were allocated equal numbers of tickets when the four-hour pre-sale opened at 9am.

“Competing club members get the largest share of tickets for finals — which for this match at the MCG is 55,000,” AFL spokesman Jay Allen said.

“Geelong and Collingwood members each are allocated 27,500 tickets for the member pre-sale period.

“At the conclusion of the member pre-sale at 1pm Collingwood members had purchased approximately 16,500 tickets and Geelong members 9,000 tickets.

Full article:

Geelong Advertiser

No Cookies

www.geelongadvertiser.com.au

9,000?

What the heck?

 

[Landgraft]

Canberra? I mentioned two other places....did your read that?

Let's not forget we lost the home final, so not sure Scott's finals record would improve. He is behaving like a very nervous coach who is again afraid of losing.

Yeah, but Canberra is a very weird one to hook into as a difficult trip. It's for GWS games so has to be compared to the trip up to Sydney and it would just be easier... bit colder at times but nothing big.

 

[Vdubs]

“Chris, do you think finishing top you deserved a home final?”
“No comment”

CHRIS SCOTT DEFLECTING FROM THE ISSUES YET AGAIN WHY CANT HE JUST ANSWER THE QUESTION HE IS SUCH A FAKE

I would normally say yes that's true.
But in this case going on about it so close to finals I know I'd start to have doubts if the coaches think we can get it done.
Rightly or wrongly it was always 100% going to be at the G so just embrace it and give the players confidence.
Leave the complaining to the president.

CS is the spokesperson for GFC issues.
He can also coach- winning 70% of his games.
He is well qualified to offer opinions WHEN ASKED.
He knows only too well that we are definitely an inferior list to those from 07->11. He knows that we have to play above ourselves to have any chance of going ahead this finals series. We have hardly had a significant injury this year to any key player (and yes, Cocky is not one of those), yet our form is fickle.
We seriously need home finals to be significantly competitive.
He is arguing for the future.
No way were we going to get a final at Geelong against any Victorian team in 2019. But given that the 07->11 teams were so superior, and will never be replicated, it makes sense to set up something for future Geelong teams that may just finish on top, and in a fair competition, oxymoronic I know, deserve a home final.

 

[winty]

I wonder how much of the outrage on the main board is due to the fact that people are simply ignoring what Scott is saying because it is Chris Scott who is saying it, and most people despise him for one reason or another.

I wonder if it was someone like Luke Beveridge asking for the Dogs to play home finals at Marvel or wherever, if they'd still be up in arms or actually think he has a point.

 

[Isaac Norm Smith]

I think Gil needs to come out at the start of next season and either declare that Geelong will get home finals going forward, or they won't.

If we don't, we need to accept it and move on.

If we do, Richmond, Hawthorn etc need to shut up and accept it.

What is either side going to do? They can't go to another league.

Gil needs to grow a set, and make a decisive decision, once and for all, forever. That will end all speculation, and CS can get it off his chest before Round 1.

But only making a decision late in the season every season is policy on the run, and not the way to do things.

Great post, couldn't agree more.