MCG to host GF through to 2057

[VictorianCrow85]

Yes. Interesting to see all the threads full of Richmond fans saying that this loss means nothing because they'll win at the G while also arguing that the Crows fans were just whinging and that the Grand Final at the MCG isn't and advantage.

Very well said, though in fairness there are a lot of Richmond supporters that get it and aren't hypocritical. Even the Richmond supporters I sat next to grand final day said it's unfortunate for us that we had to play them over another side due to the MCG factor. Home ground advantage is just such a huge thing in the current comp.

 

[citizen-erased]

Never heard of this issue before the Tigers won the flag. The whole competition is Richmond obsessed.

Refer to 2013, 2014, 2015 and 2016 GFs
It definitely came up
Esp 2015

 

[juss]

Its more the 5 years in a row where the Vics have beaten the non-Vics. It reared its head when the last 2 involved the underdogs getting up.

Now we know now that the Tigers weren't a one month wonder like the bulldogs but obviously at the time a lot of people didnt have them as favourites for the GF.

It could have been any Vic team going in second favourite last year. Not specifically Richmond.

Hope that makes sense.

But what if we were just better on the day?

 

[Ishmael_]

Never heard of this issue before the Tigers won the flag. The whole competition is Richmond obsessed.

Haha ok.

Or perhaps it could be because since 2000, 10 interstate clubs have played in the grand final against Victorian sides for 4 premierships, with three of those being the Brisbane lions.

In an age of equalisation it's a huge advantage. That's indisputable.

Would Richmond have won at Adelaide oval? Highly unlikely.

Have the grace to accept you're in a privileged position and enjoy you're premiership.

 

[The_Reaper]

But what if we were just better on the day?

What if the COLA Swans were just better on the day?

You think nobody would have discussed whether or not COLA influenced it?

Richmond won the premiership and deserved to win. They still benefited from an unfair systematic advantage over Adelaide.

 

[TiggerMan22]

Naww dont like facts buddy?

You might want to go look up what a fact is. Just stating your opinion with nothing to back it up is not a fact

 

[Cincinnatus]

But what if we were just better on the day?

You were better on the day. There is no question.

Its when you look at trends over time that you see a concerning pattern. 0-5 for interstate clubs in last 5 years.

When Sydney won it in 2012 they had COLA.

WCE and Adelaide won it within 7 years of joining the comp benefitting from some concessions and exclusive access to some talent etc. Brisbane had a list that was just unbelievably good, which in the age of equalisation is hard to build, particularly now with players chasing media and sponsorship endorsements which are most lucrative in Victoria. Im not 100% on whether Brisbane had any concessions or anything like that but they did get to cherry pick from 2 lists and as alluded above, the list was better than any team save perhaps the 13-15 Hawks in the AFL era.

Port, Syd and WCE 04-06 all won against fellow Interstate.

So when you look at the last 5 years, 2007 etc you actually struggle to find an interstate team that has won the whole thing that either wasnt an expansion team with a whole host of concessions or Sydney with COLA.

Rational people who have concerns about the MCG arrangement dont see it as cheapening Richmond or any other teams flag. Richmond played the best and won a very deserved flag. There are irrational flogs who might use it to have a crack at the Tigers, thats just BF. Best ignore them.

But there are inherent inequalities in playing the GF at the MCG. That's not Richmonds fault. It is, and ever will be, their flag. Ive felt a lot better about us losing last year watching how terrific Richmond have been this year because it means we lost to a truly quality team- at the time it felt like we let one get away and that 9/10 times we would win that game. Thats not true at all. Richmond are a great side.

What ive always found odd is that we totally accept home ground advantage as a thing in the regular season and first 3 weeks of the finals and then the AFL tries to say the MCG suddenly becomes neutral on GF day.

If we all step back, put club bias aside, there aren't a lot of arguments that actually justify the MCG deal outside of stadium capacity which has everything to do with money and nothing to do with fairness.

Hope that makes sense.

 

[HTT]

You were better on the day. There is no question.

Its when you look at trends over time that you see a concerning pattern. 0-5 for interstate clubs in last 5 years.

When Sydney won it in 2012 they had COLA.

WCE and Adelaide won it within 7 years of joining the comp benefitting from some concessions and exclusive access to some talent etc. Brisbane had a list that was just unbelievably good, which in the age of equalisation is hard to build, particularly now with players chasing media and sponsorship endorsements which are most lucrative in Victoria. Im not 100% on whether Brisbane had any concessions or anything like that but they did get to cherry pick from 2 lists and as alluded above, the list was better than any team save perhaps the 13-15 Hawks in the AFL era.

Port, Syd and WCE 04-06 all won against fellow Interstate.

So when you look at the last 5 years, 2007 etc you actually struggle to find an interstate team that has won the whole thing that either wasnt an expansion team with a whole host of concessions or Sydney with COLA.

Rational people who have concerns about the MCG arrangement dont see it as cheapening Richmond or any other teams flag. Richmond played the best and won a very deserved flag.

But there are inherent inequalities in playing the GF at the MCG. That's not Richmonds fault. It is, and ever will be, their flag. Ive felt a lot better about us losing last year watching how terrific Richmond have been this year because it means we lost to a truly quality team- at the time it felt like we let one get away and that 9/10 times we would win that game. Thats not true at all. Richmond are a great side.

What ive always found odd is that we totally accept home ground advantage as a thing in the regular season and first 3 weeks of the finals and then the AFL tries to say the MCG suddenly becomes neutral on GF day.

If we all step back, put club bias aside, there aren't a lot of arguments that actually justify the MCG deal outside of stadium capacity which has everything to do with money and nothing to do with fairness.

Hope that makes sense.

You claim Brisbane can't be used as evidence against your opinion, because they had an insanely good list.
Then you admit Hawthorn were much the same
But you still use them as part of evidence supporting your opinion?

 

[The_Reaper]

You claim Brisbane can't be used as evidence against your opinion, because they had an insanely good list.
Then you admit Hawthorn were much the same
But you still use them as part of evidence supporting your opinion?

Brisbane can't be used as evidence because they had salary cap concessions.
Hawthorn did not.

 

[HTT]

Brisbane can't be used as evidence because they had salary cap concessions.
Hawthorn did not.

That really doesn't matter. When you get to the GF, all those concessions don't mean s**t, it's the players that matter and Hawthorn, according to the poster either matched or bested them in that regard. But Brisbane still won, and against MCG tenants too.

 

[beema limapep]

Brisbane can't be used as evidence because they had salary cap concessions.
Hawthorn did not.

thats besides the point.

 

[Cincinnatus]

You claim Brisbane can't be used as evidence against your opinion, because they had an insanely good list.
Then you admit Hawthorn were much the same
But you still use them as part of evidence supporting your opinion?

Yeah I used Brisbane as an example that in the age of equalisation its very hard to build a list that good. As in they are the last side that were good enough to get the job done at MCG. So by that standard, an interstate team needs that kind of list to overcome the odds. At least thats what history says.

Thats sort of how I use Brisbane...but I do see that some would see it the other way, I just cant be bothered looking up exactly what they got etc.

I didnt mean it to sound that Brisbane cant be used but Hawthorn can. I just meant building a Brisbane like list would be incredibly hard given Viccos wanna piss off home these days.

I guess given how good Hawthorn were you could tolerate their victories and probably didnt win just because of MCG although that would certainly help.

Its mainly just the last 2 years where the underdog has won it....although as I have said, Tigers have backed it up so its certainly more tolerable to me that they be premiers.

But again, the main point is that there is a systemic advantage in the biggest game of the year, regardless of club.

Whether its 0-10 or 3-7 (making up figures here) thats still statistically significant data.

 

[Cincinnatus]

That really doesn't matter. When you get to the GF, all those concessions don't mean s**t, it's the players that matter and Hawthorn, according to the poster either matched or bested them in that regard. But Brisbane still won, and against MCG tenants too.

Those concessions do matter. Thats the point, you cant find an interstate team who has won it that didnt have some type of concession. Unless they were playing a fellow interstate club at what is a neutral ground in that circumstance.

 

[HTT]

Those concessions do matter. Thats the point, you cant find an interstate team who has won it that didnt have some type of concession. Unless they were playing a fellow interstate club at what is a neutral ground in that circumstance.

They really don’t.
The fact is those clubs got themselves in the same position (by different methods) and got the same results. Is that not fairness?
Sure, the concessions helped Brisbane get to that position, but there’s nothing stopping any other team getting there without concessions - Hawthorn showed us that. Once you get to that position, the statistics say the ground doesn’t matter.

 

[pjcrows]

It doesn't matter whether Brisbane had an insanely good list or not. That's irrelevant. Saying "Well look at Brisbane, they won 3 in a row" as justification for the MCG being the sole venue for the Grand Final is ridiculous. Yes, they won 3 in a row. And imagine how good they would've been if the finals system was actually based on merit.

 

[HPKS]

Voss, White and Akermanis were pre draft zone selections. No pick required just straight onto the list.

They also had a version of COLA called the retention allowance.

Plus the F/S in Brown.

Plus the pre draft selections from the corpse of Fitzroy. They were destined to be a super side. Just took a good coach to get them to gel n play hard tough finals footy.

 

[Cincinnatus]

They really don’t.
The fact is those clubs got themselves in the same position (by different methods) and got the same results. Is that not fairness?
Sure, the concessions helped Brisbane get to that position, but there’s nothing stopping any other team getting there without concessions - Hawthorn showed us that. Once you get to that position, the statistics say the ground doesn’t matter.

Hawthorn has 2 things going for it-

They built a list to rival Brisbane's which was insanely good (although its been confirmed they had several concessions so they are no longer able to be used for this purpose)

They are an MCG tenant so they are not up against the disadvantage.

Clubs usually win their home finals. Thats how interstate clubs USUALLY get there. They use their home ground advantage. No different to Vic clubs. History shows us that not a single interstate club without concessions has beaten a Vic club at home.

That sort of data goes beyond anomalies. So im not sure what statistics say the ground doesnt matter. Because the GF stats say otherwise big time.

Go ask the bookies how they think HGA factors in.


And yet again you are misisng the biggest, and most overarching point, there is a systemic disadvantage.

So perhaps we could settle this with one simple question: do you think there is an advantage for Victorian clubs being able to play the GF at home vs a travelling interstate club?

 

[HTT]

Hawthorn has 2 things going for it-

They built a list to rival Brisbane's which was insanely good (although its been confirmed they had several concessions so they are no longer able to be used for this purpose)

They are an MCG tenant so they are not up against the disadvantage.

Clubs usually win their home finals. Thats how interstate clubs USUALLY get there. They use their home ground advantage. No different to Vic clubs. History shows us that not a single interstate club without concessions has beaten a Vic club at home.

That sort of data goes beyond anomalies. So im not sure what statistics say the ground doesnt matter. Because the GF stats say otherwise big time.

Go ask the bookies how they think HGA factors in.


And yet again you are misisng the biggest, and most overarching point, there is a systemic disadvantage.

So perhaps we could settle this with one simple question: do you think there is an advantage for Victorian clubs being able to play the GF at home vs a travelling interstate club?

I do not think there is no advantage - I think it is too minimal to move the game to an inferior venue.

Home teams winning finals is a poor statistic to use - Home teams get those home finals because they are generally better than their opposition anyway.

And for the concessions - how do they help you in any way other than helping you get more talent in?

 

[Cincinnatus]

I do not think there is no advantage - I think it is too minimal to move the game to an inferior venue.

Home teams winning finals is a poor statistic to use - Home teams get those home finals because they are generally better than their opposition anyway.

And for the concessions - how do they help you in any way other than helping you get more talent in?

Essentially as soon as you see there is an advantage, the competition is no longer equal.

Concessions help build a list that is so good it overcomes inqueality.

Sorta seee what I mean?

 

[estibador]

But what if we were just better on the day?

Do you not think home ground advantage contributes to which team is better on the day?

Do you think it's all just a coincidence that you're better on the day when you play at home and then the other team is suddenly better on the day when you play them at their home?

 

[Gizza]

Never heard of this issue before the Tigers won the flag. The whole competition is Richmond obsessed.

Try paying more attention then. It was raised in 15 when the Hawks hosted the Eagles despite finishing lower. It was raised again in 16 when the Bulldogs "kinda" hosted the Swans despite finishing lower. And then again in 17 when Richmond hosted despite finishing lower.

 

[Cincinnatus]

I do not think there is no advantage - I think it is too minimal to move the game to an inferior venue.

Home teams winning finals is a poor statistic to use - Home teams get those home finals because they are generally better than their opposition anyway.

And for the concessions - how do they help you in any way other than helping you get more talent in?

If there had been even 1 or 2 interstate sides without concessions that had won the debate around impact mighr be less severe but you cant name a single example.

 

[juss]

Try paying more attention then. It was raised in 15 when the Hawks hosted the Eagles despite finishing lower. It was raised again in 16 when the Bulldogs "kinda" hosted the Swans despite finishing lower. And then again in 17 when Richmond hosted despite finishing lower.

The game has been set at the MCG forever. Richmond didnt "host" as such. Its not as if the venue wasnt decided and they suddenly put it at the G. Its got nothing to do with higher or lower. That is not a construct of our Grand Final, like the FA cup at Wembley for example.

 

[Gizza]

Its got nothing to do with higher or lower.

It's got everything to do with higher or lower. This whole debate is centred around the fact that Melbourne teams get to host it even when they don't deserve it.

 

[pjcrows]

Its got nothing to do with higher or lower.

It's got everything to do with it!