Are we seeing some traditional rivalries die out due to the nationalisation of the competition?
Carlton and Collingwood are the prime example. Nowadays, you wouldn't realise that there was any sort of rivalry unless you knew the history of the clubs, even though this was arguably the biggest rivalry in Australian sport. No real banter, no spite, no animosity, no twist and turns in match ups between the two. One can point out to the lack of success as being the reason for the rivalry to be very quiet, but Essendon-Carlton and Carlton-Richmond hasn't died down at all, no matter what the ladder looks like. In fact, it is probably immune to ladder position, similar to Adelaide-Port. So why has the Collingwood-Carlton one particularly died out? Is it a victim to the nationalisation of football? And will we see more Victorian teams lose traditional rivals as expansion goes on? Sure they haven't played each other in finals since the 80s, but for the biggest rivalry, that shouldn't be too much of a factor in comparison to their history.
I and many football fans probably agree with the notion that rivalries are important in keeping the interest in the game and maximising attendances, particularly in Victoria as the other states have cross-town rivalries to build on.
With the 6-6-6 policy in determining the fixture, we've seen traditional Victorian rivals play once for the first time since the 90s. It seems that rivalries in Victoria nowadays is shifting to ladder position as opposed to traditional rivals.
Would the re-introduction of rivalry round be a way to keep the traditional Victorian rivalries from being diluted?
Carlton and Collingwood are the prime example. Nowadays, you wouldn't realise that there was any sort of rivalry unless you knew the history of the clubs, even though this was arguably the biggest rivalry in Australian sport. No real banter, no spite, no animosity, no twist and turns in match ups between the two. One can point out to the lack of success as being the reason for the rivalry to be very quiet, but Essendon-Carlton and Carlton-Richmond hasn't died down at all, no matter what the ladder looks like. In fact, it is probably immune to ladder position, similar to Adelaide-Port. So why has the Collingwood-Carlton one particularly died out? Is it a victim to the nationalisation of football? And will we see more Victorian teams lose traditional rivals as expansion goes on? Sure they haven't played each other in finals since the 80s, but for the biggest rivalry, that shouldn't be too much of a factor in comparison to their history.
I and many football fans probably agree with the notion that rivalries are important in keeping the interest in the game and maximising attendances, particularly in Victoria as the other states have cross-town rivalries to build on.
With the 6-6-6 policy in determining the fixture, we've seen traditional Victorian rivals play once for the first time since the 90s. It seems that rivalries in Victoria nowadays is shifting to ladder position as opposed to traditional rivals.
Would the re-introduction of rivalry round be a way to keep the traditional Victorian rivalries from being diluted?