You are distorting what I have said.
By ticketing I was referring to ticket allocations to clubs. I was not talking about venue allocation. So please keep up. Venue allocation has now been established for the final series for a while. I am not talking about the early days for WA and SA sides. Those anomalies are in the past so I'm not sure why you are bringing up something that occurred over 20 years ago as an example. Maybe you are just trolling yourself. The notion of home state finals has been working well. That is not to say they are not streamlining it further. I applaud the AFL with considering ANZ stadium for the possible GWS Sydney match. They are looking after the football public who pay their hard earned and want the opportunity to witness the game in person. I have stated several times without response that I'd be happy to travel to Geelong if they had a stadium that could hold both sets of members. They do not have anywhere near that and I do not think it is unreasonable that the game be played at the MCG so it gives both sets of members the best chance to see the game. As opposed to the idiots on here that think I just want it at the MCG because it advantages my team, I want to have it at the MCG just to give people like myself who have paid thousands of dollars in memberships for myself and my family the chance to see the game live. It's pretty simple really.
As for the ambassador question, you may have thought he answered it well but I didn't. Answering it well would have been to reject it as a possibility just like I would have expected him to reject a question about whether Richmond could get half of Dustin Martin's salary to be paid by the AFL with him working as a "Maori" ambassador. If you can't see this there is no point discussing it with you any further.
And if you think I'm in the minority who has this view, just look at the number of likes the OP has received and is still receiving.
Why would I not bring up something that happened 20 years ago in response to your claim that an issue has never been bought up before. Perfectly demonstrates just how long the AFL venue issue has been a source of complaint, yes for a variety of reasons as the so called policy has evolved.
I know what you have stated several times and I respectfully disagree with your point. I don't believe a ground should have to hold both sets of members to qualify for holding a final and certainly not at the expense of the competition's integrity, regardless of who is playing. I am all for members of football clubs being looked after and the amount of corporates getting GF tickets makes me want to vomit, but don't want to confuse that with having a right of some kind to attend a final. In this instance (and I take your point about it being not a Richmond tinted glasses view), I believe it should be as simple as Geelong earned the home final, so they choose where to play it. The only reason it's complicated in this instance, is because of geography making options available. Richmond couldn't fit all their members into Subiaco Oval if it was the Eagles (not to mention travel costs preventing many of your loyal supporters getting there), so I don't personally believe Geelong should be disadvantaged.
The ambassador question......again, sorry I disagree. If he'd rejected it out of hand as even a possibility, there'd be scorched earth if it then did eventuate. The same hypothetical discussion took place when everyone assumed Buddy was GWS bound. There is an article from Demetriou still online talking about how it wouldn't simply be an enticement payment to get Buddy to GWS, but he'd have to work to earn it. Look how that turned out. I actually agree with you, that the AFL should absolutely NOT be sticking their nose into propping up the Gold Coast by making up roles to entice a key talent to stay and if it was actually happening I'd be one of your likes on the OP. There's already enough inequities in a supposedly equalised competition (that are magnified due to the equalisation measures). Honestly, I just hate the fact that the same media who asked a question I believe was almost impossible to answer perfectly, then report his answer as breaking news. If you ask me if it's going to rain tomorrow and I shrug my shoulders then the front page of tomorrow's paper shouldn't scream "BK says storms on the way".