The History Of Interstate Teams Being Forced To Play "Home Finals" In Melbourne

Remove this Banner Ad

sprockets said:
If a side finishes top of the ladder they should get an advantage in every week of the finals. Said no-one ever. How much advantage should a higher-finishing-team get? Advantage/advantage/advantage and possibly advantage is just too much, sorry.
Click to expand...

Clubs should earn any advantage not gifted it. Of course if you get the gift, you may feel entitled.
 
Snake_Baker said:
If you people had simply kept supporting your own local sides instead of destroying your own competitions to gain recognition from Victorians, then this thread would not even exist.

If you want to blame someone, then ultimately you must blame yourselves.
Click to expand...

Stop looking backwards, if something is not right, surely you would want to fix it, e.g the difference between the old state leagues & the AFL is all the best players play, not spread out across the country, despite the pro VFL sycophants continuing to be in denial.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought there is still a possibility of a non-Vic side getting shafted with a home final. The deal was re-negotiated so that a certain number of games have to be played at the G over a rolling period eg. 3 years.

If that deal is still in place, then at some future point it could happen again where a higher side has to travel to Melbourne. I hope however that this deal was renegotiated at some point and I just missed the news that day.
 
Dazzler10 said:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought there is still a possibility of a non-Vic side getting shafted with a home final. The deal was re-negotiated so that a certain number of games have to be played at the G over a rolling period eg. 3 years.

If that deal is still in place, then at some future point it could happen again where a higher side has to travel to Melbourne. I hope however that this deal was renegotiated at some point and I just missed the news that day.
Click to expand...

According to the 2005 AFL Annual Report

Finals scheduling

After lengthy negotiations, we successfully concluded a new agreement with the Melbourne Cricket Club and the MCG Trust regarding the scheduling of finals at the MCG. The key elements were:
  • Removing the requirement to play one preliminary final per year at the MCG in the event that two non-Victorian teams earn the right to host a preliminary final in their home states.
  • Ensuring all preliminary finals in Victoria are played at the MCG.
  • Allowing greater flexibility to bank finals in weeks one and two, with the clause amended to ensure that 10 matches are played over five years.
  • Delivering an additional four premiership season games to the MCG each year, taking the number of matches played to 45.
  • Delivering 14 Collingwood home and away games to the MCG
  • The AFL making the MCG available for other major sporting events on a limited basis.
  • Scheduling any representative football matches in Melbourne at the MCG.
  • Provision to review the agreement every five years, but only to the mutual benefit of both parties.
The AFL also reconfirmed that the Grand Final would remain at the MCG until at least 2032, when the current contract expires.
 
Bunk Moreland said:
According to the 2005 AFL Annual Report

Finals scheduling

After lengthy negotiations, we successfully concluded a new agreement with the Melbourne Cricket Club and the MCG Trust regarding the scheduling of finals at the MCG. The key elements were:
  • Removing the requirement to play one preliminary final per year at the MCG in the event that two non-Victorian teams earn the right to host a preliminary final in their home states.
  • Ensuring all preliminary finals in Victoria are played at the MCG.
  • Allowing greater flexibility to bank finals in weeks one and two, with the clause amended to ensure that 10 matches are played over five years.
  • Delivering an additional four premiership season games to the MCG each year, taking the number of matches played to 45.
  • Delivering 14 Collingwood home and away games to the MCG
  • The AFL making the MCG available for other major sporting events on a limited basis.
  • Scheduling any representative football matches in Melbourne at the MCG.
  • Provision to review the agreement every five years, but only to the mutual benefit of both parties.
The AFL also reconfirmed that the Grand Final would remain at the MCG until at least 2032, when the current contract expires.
Click to expand...
Yep, dot point 3.

Thread still has relevance.
 
Bone71 said:
If not finishing in the bottom 4 or finishing 7th instead of 10th equals advantage then yes non vic sides get an advantage. However we are talking about the contenders, you know the good sides. Any vic side contending for the top 4 is advantaged simply because they are playing away-neutral games against lesser opponents rather than the non vic clubs who will be playing their away games actually, you know, away. Your 1 game per year stat also includes poorly performing non vic sides still winning games - something that poorly performing vic sides are at a decided disadvantage.

All in all I would expect the non vic sides to win more games on average per year but that does not translate into a contending non vic side having a easier run throughout the H&A season in comparison to its contending vic side counterpart.
Click to expand...

Considering how close the top of the table was this year, do you think that just maybe if your mob hadn't had that advantage, they wouldn't have finished on top, and consequently wouldn't have had home finals to start with? Losing 1 win would have dropped you to 3rd after all (given that GWS would also drop).
 
Bone71 said:
Its only the most neutral if finals are played in Victoria between Victorian teams. It is not in any way neutral for non vic sides playing there against a vic side so stop pretending it is.

Edit: except for a GF where two non vic side meet
Click to expand...


It's the most neutral because it's the ground all clubs are most familiar with.

Most teams play on the ground several times each year, while for other grounds (excluding docklands), teams would play perhaps once, often less.

GWS plays 7 games a year on it's home ground, so opposition teams would, on average go there around every 3 years.
Do you think that's more or less 'neutral' than the MCG, where when the fixture came out, many were complaining about 'only' getting 2 games there?
 
Rich01 said:
Lions were robbed of a flag in 04 because of having to play a home prelim final in Melb.Extra travel cost them the next week and Port got the win, with an inferior side.
Click to expand...
to be fair the lions were kissed on the arse by lady luck up until 2004. never finished top and came up against the pies of 2002 and 2003 who were not a grand final standard team. The team they should of been playing in those years was port and port probably would of beaten them at least once.
 
Seeds said:
to be fair the lions were kissed on the arse by lady luck up until 2004. never finished top and came up against the pies of 2002 and 2003 who were not a grand final standard team. The team they should of been playing in those years was port and port probably would of beaten them at least once.
Click to expand...
Maybe. But this threads about interstate teams being forced to play 'home' finals in Melb, like the Lions were in 2004.
 
Power Raid said:
I love Matthew's line up

B: Gavin Wanganeen, Stephen Silvagni, Matthew Scarlett
HB: Nathan Buckley, Peter Knights, Andrew McLeod
C: Peter Matera, Michael Voss, Malcolm Blight
HF: Chris Judd, Wayne Carey, Kevin Bartlett
F: Gary Ablett snr, Jason Dunstall, Peter Daicos
Foll: Simon Madden, Tim Watson, Gary Ablett jnr
Inter: Bruce Doull, Lance Franklin, James Hird, Greg Williams
Coach: David Parkin
Click to expand...

Enter Matthews himself, move Watson/junior/Judd to the bench and kick out Hird and it would have been perfect.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

I love Matthew's line up

B: Gavin Wanganeen, Stephen Silvagni, Matthew Scarlett
HB: Nathan Buckley, Peter Knights, Andrew McLeod
C: Peter Matera, Michael Voss, Malcolm Blight
HF: Leigh Matthews, Wayne Carey, Kevin Bartlett
F: Gary Ablett snr, Tony Lockett, Peter Daicos
Foll: Simon Madden, Rob Harvey, Gary Ablett jnr
Inter: Bruce Doull, Lance Franklin, Chris Judd, Greg Williams
Coach: David Parkin
 
Seeds said:
to be fair the lions were kissed on the arse by lady luck up until 2004. never finished top and came up against the pies of 2002 and 2003 who were not a grand final standard team. The team they should of been playing in those years was port and port probably would of beaten them at least once.
Click to expand...
We beat Port in both finals series, once by 44 points (not to mention the Lions as well) yet we weren’t a grand final standard team? Right.
 
Tarkyn_24 said:
No point. Just an idiot creating threads about non issues.
Click to expand...
This guy has a cry every time an interstate side has to travel to play at the MCG when they are the higher ranked team. All clubs know the rules pertaining to the MCG and all clubs agree to those terms. If you're good enough, you'll win regardless: West Coast '92 and '94, Adelaide '97 and '98, Brisbane '01-'03, Port Adelaide '04, Sydney '05, West Coast '06, Sydney '12.

If you're not good enough you won't win. Sydney, West Coast and Adelaide just weren't good enough from 2014-2017. Simple.

This thread, despite what the OP will have you believe by the examples he's given is manifested out of the 2015 grand final where most of his posts post-grand final were of him crying about the unfair advantage of interstate teams in GRAND FINALS not finals, GRAND FINALS.

Now due to the fact Sydney weren't good enough against the Doggies and Adelaide weren't good enough against the Tigers, he feels creating a thread about interstate teams having to travel to play at the MCG will suit his "agenda" because in his delusional mind, he now has "evidence" to suggest West Coast having to play at the MCG was unfair.

This thread is a load of crap created by one person who just can't take the fact that his team and any interstate team that loses just wasn't and just isn't good enough. Period. However he did try to hide his real agenda by providing evidence of clubs having had to travel when they had earned the right to a home final. I'll give him points for trying, no matter how poorly he's put forward his argument and no matter how pathetic the premise of the argument is.
 
Bone71 said:
In fact that is actually said in most sporting competitions throughout the world where finals decides the best team. Either that or they play at truly neutral venues.
Click to expand...
You know this is an AFL forum, right?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

RUNVS
Who is the best player in AFL history for a clone team?
2 3 4 5 6
Replies
143
Views
6K
Enviable Tradition
Enviable Tradition
Lach72
Roast Geelong getting home finals…but only against small drawing teams
7 8 9 10 11
Replies
269
Views
6K
The Casey Cat
T
Connar
  • Article
Which WA AFL/AFLW Team will play finals in 2024?
Replies
10
Views
461
Freomaniac
Freomaniac
PowerfulPies2023
Hawthorn to play finals in 2024?
16 17 18 19 20
Replies
492
Views
19K
PerthBoy86
PerthBoy86
PowerfulPies2023
Top 10 coaches in the history of the game?
2 3
Replies
54
Views
2K
Mr.X
Mr.X
GC2015
  • Poll
Opinion Should Marvel tenants have the option to play a home final at Marvel?
2 3
Replies
56
Views
2K
Rickee
Rickee
PowerfulPies2023
Best quarter ever played in a Grand Final?
2 3 4
Replies
83
Views
4K
Back One Out
Back One Out

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top