Essendon's Home Ground

[eth-dog]

The place we played has nothing to do with why we lost yesterday

 

[bombersfan4000]

Honestly I'd love every home game at the MCG but the reality is we are stuck with Etihad Stadium for the next 10 years as our home but I do think the AFL could perhaps help us with the type of home games scheduled.

To me the following HOME games are perfect for Etihad:

Essendon v North
Essendon v St K
Essendon v WB
= Etihad

IF we could drop a home game at Etihad to the MCG and ensure the below fixtured HOME games are always at the G I could deal with it:

Essendon v Haw
Essendon v Melb
Essendon v Geel
= MCG

The deal was until 2025 but that was signed long time ago with the previous owners of Etihad. Now with the AFL taking ownership will be interesting to see if the contract does get changed. I know for a fact Essendon has requested more games at the mcg in recent years

 

[JayJ20]

The deal was until 2025 but that was signed long time ago with the previous owners of Etihad. Now with the AFL taking ownership will be interesting to see if the contract does get changed. I know for a fact Essendon has requested more games at the mcg in recent years

That was posted in 2011.

The place we played has nothing to do with why we lost yesterday

Most definitely wasn't. Still doesn't mean that we shouldn't be looking at the move

 

[JayJ20]

One of the most underrated problems.

The current arrangement is simply not sustainable. It's the basic fabric of sport internationally to have home ground advantage. It's always the way a team builds a good season. That's how you build confidence. To know your ground from front to back.

We literally play MCG tenants at the MCG, Etihad tenants at Etihad and interstate teams at Etihad, which is probably the most neutral ground in the competition.

When we play Sydney at Etihad, it'll be their 4th game there in 8 games. Meanwhile, we'd have played there once since round 6. That's messed up.
Playing 7-8 games at Etihad for the year is ludicrous when Sydney for example play there 4 times this year.

We need to start being a football club and stop chasing the dollars. We have to find a solution.

 

[Lore]

One of the most underrated problems.

The current arrangement is simply not sustainable. It's the basic fabric of sport internationally to have home ground advantage. It's always the way a team builds a good season. That's how you build confidence. To know your ground from front to back.

We literally play MCG tenants at the MCG, Etihad tenants at Etihad and interstate teams at Etihad, which is probably the most neutral ground in the competition.

When we play Sydney at Etihad, it'll be their 4th game there in 8 games. Meanwhile, we'd have played there once since round 6. That's messed up.
Playing 7-8 games at Etihad for the year is ludicrous when Sydney for example play there 4 times this year.

We need to start being a football club and stop chasing the dollars. We have to find a solution.

We aren't an international sport. We don't have play offs, we don't have a round ball, an off-side rule or a SuperBowl either.

It's not really a problem, it's a moot point. All teams are either in the exact same situation, or have to travel every other week because 16 other teams are in a different state.

Two additional points:
- Geelong is an exception, being that they play half their home games at the G and half in Geelong, play away at Etihad and interstate.
- This situation would be easily resolved if we had two Victorian teams, the same number that are in every other state. They'd have the same number of home and away games at their own home grounds, and would travel just the same as all the others. Will. Never. Happen.

 

[JayJ20]

We aren't an international sport. We don't have play offs, we don't have a round ball, an off-side rule or a SuperBowl either.

It's not really a problem, it's a moot point. All teams are either in the exact same situation, or have to travel every other week because 16 other teams are in a different state.

Two additional points:
- Geelong is an exception, being that they play half their home games at the G and half in Geelong, play away at Etihad and interstate.
- This situation would be easily resolved if we had two Victorian teams, the same number that are in every other state. They'd have the same number of home and away games at their own home grounds, and would travel just the same as all the others. Will. Never. Happen.

It's not a moot point because we simply cannot develop a game plan for our home ground that will win us enough games to host a final. We haven't hosted a final since 2002.

We're not an international sport, but we're competing with teams that do have home ground advantage. Every other Victorian team except Essendon and Carlton enjoy a decent home ground advantage in one way or another. either they play 11-12+ games at their home ground or they have an arrangement where they have at least 3-4 games of home ground advantage at another venue (North and Hawthorn)

Not sure what Melbourne's arrangement is since they sell home games.

 

[Bunk Moreland]

As a club we should have an ongoing policy to play as many games as possible at the MCG. Purely because that’s where 90% (probably 100% now) of our finals will always be played.

Pretty basic planning to play there as often as possible.

 

[Lore]

It's not a moot point because we simply cannot develop a game plan for our home ground that will win us enough games to host a final. We haven't hosted a final since 2002.

We have two training ovals which are the exact dimensions of the MCG and Docklands respectively. If we can't develop a game plan which can be adapted for those two, and the other 7? stadiums, then frankly that's on us. We play enough games at both (either home or away) for it to be necessary that we can play well at both.

 

[JayJ20]

We have two training ovals which are the exact dimensions of the MCG and Docklands respectively. If we can't develop a game plan which can be adapted for those two, and the other 7? stadiums, then frankly that's on us. We play enough games at both (either home or away) for it to be necessary that we can play well at both.

Like everything else, what makes a home ground effective is consistency. Every good team is good at home because they know how to play there through consistency and planning. Splitting that home into 2 is not a good idea unless it's a Hawthorn/North scenario.

Sure you have to be good at every ground, but that's unrealistic. West Coast and Richmond for example aren't that great away and they are the best 2 teams. What hope do we have if we're neither here nor there?

I really don't see how home ground is negligible when that's what puts you in the best position.

 

[citizen-erased]

As a club we should have an ongoing policy to play as many games as possible at the MCG. Purely because that’s where 90% (probably 100% now) of our finals will always be played.

Pretty basic planning to play there as often as possible.

that, plus its a pain in the arse to get tix to our games at etihad as an AFL member.
i don't mind Etihad. its easier to get to.
But with the members and attendances we get, we should be a G tenant.

 

[Lore]

Like everything else, what makes a home ground effective is consistency. Every good team is good at home because they know how to play there through consistency and planning. Splitting that home into 2 is not a good idea unless it's a Hawthorn/North scenario.

Sure you have to be good at every ground, but that's unrealistic. West Coast and Richmond for example aren't that great away and they are the best 2 teams. What hope do we have if we're neither here nor there?

I really don't see how home ground is negligible when that's what puts you in the best position.

Okay so I think you're actually conflating two arguments.

The first is some generic argument about home ground advantage, which is plainly flawed especially when you start referencing international sports, which are played on standardised fields and have a home ground system that makes vastly more difference to them than what West Coast's does to West Coast. If that was your argument, you'd be happy to play 12 games at Etihad, and 2 at the MCG all year, the same as West Coast do. I'll refute that one until the cows come home, as I see no real advantage to that scenario especially when any finals would be played at the G, which half of our likely opponents would call home and the other half would've played there more often than we would anyway.


The second version of the argument, which has more merit but has nothing to do with international sports, is the advantage that the MCG tenants may have, which is the ability to play on the MCG 14 games a year, like Richmond do, and then play 2/3 of the finals series there as well. That's not a home ground advantage in most senses, in that there's no requirement for someone else to be miles from home, 'on your turf' wondering around a city that's a one team town. The stadium isn't going to be filled 99% by your own team's supporters, and you couldn't doctor the pitch or turn the town white or any of that sort of thing that might throw the opponent off their game. It would merely be somewhat advantageous over interstate teams and full time Etihad teams, if you know how to play that ground better than they do. Given the amount of time our opponents spend at the MCG facing other opponents though, it's still not as advantageous as it might otherwise be.


Having said that, I can also see advantages to a split that allowed us to play 15 games across two ovals, giving no other Victorian team any significant advantage over us. Practicing on two very different ovals also makes it easier to adapt, with some being more the skinny oval shape of Etihad, and therefore being more adaptable to those strategies, while others are more round, like the MCG and adapt better to those.




From a purely selfish perspective, I like the atmosphere at the MCG much better. I'd prefer to have more games there. But that's not particularly relevant to the performance or success of the team.

 

[Phone]

As a club we should have an ongoing policy to play as many games as possible at the MCG. Purely because that’s where 90% (probably 100% now) of our finals will always be played.

Pretty basic planning to play there as often as possible.

couldn't you reverse that and say it doesn't make sense to play any interstate team at the MCG as it keeps them away from the MCG which would be an advantage in the finals. we would still get at least 7 or so games at the mcg anyway compared to their, like, three.

 

[Bunk Moreland]

couldn't you reverse that and say it doesn't make sense to play any interstate team at the MCG as it keeps them away from the MCG which would be an advantage in the finals. we would still get at least 7 or so games at the mcg anyway compared to their, like, three.

That’s extremely tenuous. We have no idea who we’d be playing in finals. We know one thing - there’s a 95% chance any final we play in will be at the G.

It’s simple afaic. If we want to achieve anything we have to win finals at the G. The more we play at the ground, the better we’ll play there. There’s subtleties like ground size, wind, rain, atmosphere etc. It mightn’t be an enormous factor, but I believe it is a factor.

I don’t expect it to happen at all, but that’s my view. The only way it’s happen is if we constantly sold out Etihad, and that’s never happened and won’t in the forseeable future - we don’t play high-drawing games there.

 

[yodellinhank]

I read somewhere that everytime Essendon has changed home venue we have won a flag within 2 years.

Time to move.

 

[gopies1981]

If I barracked for Essendon I would hope all home games against Victorian clubs be played at the mcg and all away games be played at Etihad. That would give you guys 7 home games at the mcg and 4 at Etihad.

 

[yaco55]

The MCG can only hold x number of games per week and per season - Don't see how logically EFC can play the majority of their home games at the MCG - It seems some are divorced from reality.

 

[boncer34]

The MCG can only hold x number of games per week and per season - Don't see how logically EFC can play the majority of their home games at the MCG - It seems some are divorced from reality.

If you think that the MCG couldn't handle 3 extra games a year then I dont think its everyone else that's divorced from reality mate.

 

[Bunk Moreland]

The MCG can only hold x number of games per week and per season - Don't see how logically EFC can play the majority of their home games at the MCG - It seems some are divorced from reality.

Moving our games from Etihad to the G would def require games to go the other way, you’d think.

Who’s gonna move games to Etihad? Collingwood? Richmond? Melbourne? Hawthorn? Absolutely no chance.

The only way it can happen is if we absolutely force the issue by selling the joint out every time we play there. Which is a long way from ever happening.

 

[boncer34]

Moving our games from Etihad to the G would def require games to go the other way, you’d think.

Who’s gonna move games to Etihad? Collingwood? Richmond? Melbourne? Hawthorn? Absolutely no chance.

The only way it can happen is if we absolutely force the issue by selling the joint out every time we play there. Which is a long way from ever happening.

Not necessarily Bunk.

The argument used to be that Etihad had to have a number of games so that's why we couldn't move. Well the AFL now owns the stadium and lets pretend for a second they care about maximizing attendances and not the TV dollar we could easily have had.

Adelaide Round 1 at the G.
Freo pushed to the Sunday at the G.
Sydney at the G.
St Kilda at the G.

Even if you argue Freo game can't be moved that is still 3 games we could've had at the G with no impact on other clubs.

Personally I prefer Etihad because it is much easier for me to reach but it is possible for us to increase our home games at the G without needing to switch and if we switched all the above we'd give 3 interstate teams a look at the G.

 

[Bunk Moreland]

Not necessarily Bunk.

The argument used to be that Etihad had to have a number of games so that's why we couldn't move. Well the AFL now owns the stadium and lets pretend for a second they care about maximizing attendances and not the TV dollar we could easily have had.

Adelaide Round 1 at the G.
Freo pushed to the Sunday at the G.
Sydney at the G.
St Kilda at the G.

Even if you argue Freo game can't be moved that is still 3 games we could've had at the G with no impact on other clubs.

Personally I prefer Etihad because it is much easier for me to reach but it is possible for us to increase our home games at the G without needing to switch and if we switched all the above we'd give 3 interstate teams a look at the G.

The AFL do own it but there’s still contracts around catering etc, people buying Medallion Club memberships, they’re not just going to move games to the G without some coming the other way. And they’ll want to keep the load on the surfaces even as possible, it’s a big issue in Melbourne with nine clubs and only two grounds.

 

[VelvetSledge]

I read somewhere that everytime Essendon has changed home venue we have won a flag within 2 years.

Time to move.

SEE THE BOMBERS FLY UP AT KARDINIA PARK

Or even better, Pakenham City Oval.

 

[boncer34]

The AFL don’t own it but there’s still contracts around catering etc, people buying Medallion Club memberships, they’re not just going to move games to the G without some coming the other way. And they’ll want to keep the load on the surfaces even as possible, it’s a big issue in Melbourne with nine clubs and only two grounds.

The AFL do own Etihad? I see your point but caters can be reimbursed, though given they aren't guaranteed anything until the fixture is set I'm not sure it'd be a problem. Medallion club doesn't specify the amount of games as far as I'm aware so also a non-factor in my opinion.

As for surface loads 3/4 games shifting won't be an issue mate. The MCG sometimes holds 3 games in a row, it'll handle a few extra games.

Is it a perfect solution? Not at all but is it doable? Absolutely.

 

[Bunk Moreland]

The AFL do own Etihad? I see your point but caters can be reimbursed, though given they aren't guaranteed anything until the fixture is set I'm not sure it'd be a problem. Medallion club doesn't specify the amount of games as far as I'm aware so also a non-factor in my opinion.

As for surface loads 3/4 games shifting won't be an issue mate. The MCG sometimes holds 3 games in a row, it'll handle a few extra games.

Is it a perfect solution? Not at all but is it doable? Absolutely.

Typo sorry, they do own it.

Of course it's possible - anything is - but is it likely in a commercial and practical sense? Not really. We've hitched our float to Etihad and I think it suits everybody - the league (who control the fixture) - that we continue to play the majority of our home games there.

I really think the only chance we make a meaningful move to the G is if we start selling out Etihad. Our home games since the start of 2017 have been

Melbourne 44k
Eagles 36k
Port 34k
Brisbane 41k
North 40k
Crows 38k
Dockers 43k
Crows 43k
Power 31k
Melbourne 36k

We really don't present any realistic reason as to why we need to move. The highest crowd we've pulled there in the last 12 months+ has been 10k or nearly 20% below capacity.

 

[boncer34]

Yeah I agree practically there isn't any real reason to do it Bunk. But we could absolutely get a couple of extra games there a year with minimal impact to others.

 

[Pweter]

How long is our contract at Etihad for with respect to the ridiculous financial gain we get from it, or was that a honeymoon period that's already over (i.e. making money off non-Essendon games played there etc).