I Wish...

[eagleskickass]

I REALLY REALLY wish the National Comp NEVER stemmed from the VFL. This comp will NEVER EVER EVER go forwards, ever. Too many people live in the past, 2 many vic teams, 2 many vic centric supporters. I am jealou of the NSL, at least they have one thing right, better team gets ALL advantage as they EARN it, lower team EARNS NOTHING but the chance to play. At this point in time after the ALWAYS getting nowhere debate with a victorian over home finals. How can they not see the SEVERE raping interstate sides get when they are forced to play "home" finals in melb, and call the MCG a "neutraL' ground? I mean SERIOUSLY? I am so glad i have the WCE to follow but i wish there were NO VFL based teams, that just makes it impossible to have a fair comp. Right now im feeling like i wish it was still the VFL, WAFL and SANFL, and preferably another national comp NOT BASED ON ANY STATES LEAGUE.

Grr none of that makes sense, im too annoyed to convey how i REALLY feel.

 

[ozzult]

Yep. It was a mistake to make the AFL an "extension" of the VFL.

It should have been a whole new league, not a VFL with a few "blow ins".

 

[prized bitch]

That I didnt think maths lectures werent important....errr... I mean I wish that collingwood didnt exist

 

[KiNgCliVe26]

Apparently the the 30 year deal is made to pay fot the new stand at the MCG and they need the finals to be played there to help fund it.

I'd like to see how much funds they get at a:

Westcoast V Adelaide or Freo Vs Brisbane at the MCG i'm sure they'd pull a huge crowd

 

[jod23]

I seriously want a WC v Freo final at the MCG. Then watch how much money they lose when 20,000 people struggle to turn up to watch it. When if held at Subiaco...the ground would be bursting at the seams!!

One final every week at the G is THE most ridiculous rule I have ever seen in any sport.

 

[iceman]

The mistake has already been made and they cant fix it now. By deciding to add a few teams to the VFL and just changing its name was a huge error.

There'll always be finals at the MCG because a lot of Victorians still look at it as the VFL and that the interstate sides are playing "their" game

 

[Deepthroat]

Being a Melbourne based fan I welcome any "home" finals WCE are made to play at the G.

I reckon I have seen more finals involving the team over the years than most WA people.

If the side was decent enough they would win in Melbourne. I don't think playing at the G early in the finals series of 92 and 94 would have stopped the mighty premiers taking their crowns.

If anything, doing it the hard way means a premiership is even more deserved. When these current young guns have the right experience I can see them winning finals and flags in Perth, Melbourne, Brisbane, wherever necessary.

 

[Jabber]

Originally posted by Deepthroat
Being a Melbourne based fan I welcome any "home" finals WCE are made to play at the G.

I reckon I have seen more finals involving the team over the years than most WA people.

If the side was decent enough they would win in Melbourne. I don't think playing at the G early in the finals series of 92 and 94 would have stopped the mighty premiers taking their crowns.

If anything, doing it the hard way means a premiership is even more deserved. When these current young guns have the right experience I can see them winning finals and flags in Perth, Melbourne, Brisbane, wherever necessary.

Tend to agree with this - There can be no doubt about the superiority of the Eagles in 92 & 94, whereas a subi GF win would always have that "you only won because it was at home" excuse. I don't mind us having to do it tougher than the Melbourne teams or even the Adelaide teams for that matter.

 

[ScouseCat]

Originally posted by eagleskickass
I REALLY REALLY wish the National Comp NEVER stemmed from the VFL. This comp will NEVER EVER EVER go forwards, ever. Too many people live in the past, 2 many vic teams, 2 many vic centric supporters. I am jealou of the NSL, at least they have one thing right, better team gets ALL advantage as they EARN it, lower team EARNS NOTHING but the chance to play. At this point in time after the ALWAYS getting nowhere debate with a victorian over home finals. How can they not see the SEVERE raping interstate sides get when they are forced to play "home" finals in melb, and call the MCG a "neutraL' ground? I mean SERIOUSLY? I am so glad i have the WCE to follow but i wish there were NO VFL based teams, that just makes it impossible to have a fair comp. Right now im feeling like i wish it was still the VFL, WAFL and SANFL, and preferably another national comp NOT BASED ON ANY STATES LEAGUE.

There is no point talking about what has happened in the past, the bottom line is that finals should be played on grounds which hold the most people and at the moment, that ground is in Melbourne, the MCG... the people's ground. If we want to talk about home finals, then one could also build cases for Geelong and Carlton to play their home finals at Skilled Stadium and Optus Oval respectively. However, that isn't logical when you have a ground like the MCG or even Telstra Dome, (which hold more people and have better facilities) not being used, especially when finals is where the game is showcased and also where the AFL makes their money.

The system isn't totally fair, no doubt about that, but neither is the draw. (and I'm not just talking about interstate clubs when I say that!) Unfortunately, we aren't like the soccer where most grounds hold a similar amount of people and teams play each other the same number of times, so it's not really relevant to compare the 2 codes as they are totally different.

I agree that there's too many Victorian based teams, but try telling supporters who's team has been around for the best part of 100 years that their tean should merge or fold. We're not just talking about 16 years for the Eagles and 9 years for the Dockers, we're talking 100 years of tradition, of families supporting that club... it is very hard for some people to let go of that. I don't think anyone from interstate can fully appreciate that fact, although I do admit that we need to move with the times to a certain extent.

As for the so called "severe raping" given to interstate sides, has anyone seen the AFL ladder lately?? The top 6 spots are occupied by teams from interstate and as a proud Victorian who's country-based team struggles to compete with these bigger clubs at the best of times, it is very depressing. I also wont mention the concessions given to some interstate teams to allow them to be successful to attract supporters.... this at the expense of the Victorian clubs. I also wont mention that the then VFL allowed the Eagles and Brisbane to sign a maximum of 2 players from any VFL team when they first joined the league. Now who exactly was being "r*ped" ???

Now people may call me a Victorian-centric supporter and if that's the case then so be it. I don't think that's necessarilly a bad thing, just a different way of looking at this great game of ours.

 

[Sera]

There is a way to get around this but it would never happen. What they have to do is what the NSL are going to do and say: "We are abolishing the AFL and are starting a new league". Clubs would then have to apply for the new league and meet any new criteria the new administration sets. But like I said, it would never happen...

 

[Frodo]

What we needed was a Kerry Packer breakaway national competition. Just as he did with cricket.
I still think it's likely to happen. If the interstate clubs rebel and someone comes forward with a new league I can see the big four Vic sides joining up. Maybe we would have to be called the Perth Eagles and our jumpers changed a bit but the AFL would probably cave in before that anyhow. 14 team competition with everyone playing each other twice, home finals where earned, that's just fairness and we should be working towards that goal.

 

[ozzult]

Originally posted by Frodo
What we needed was a Kerry Packer breakaway national competition. Just as he did with cricket.
I still think it's likely to happen. If the interstate clubs rebel and someone comes forward with a new league I can see the big four Vic sides joining up. Maybe we would have to be called the Perth Eagles and our jumpers changed a bit but the AFL would probably cave in before that anyhow. 14 team competition with everyone playing each other twice, home finals where earned, that's just fairness and we should be working towards that goal.

Umm yeah, just like that super league success story.

 

[GoEagles]

Even if Stadium Australia/Telstra Stadium kept its attendance at over 100,000 the Grand Final would still be held at the MCG. I don't think having the biggest ground is an issue - the last Saturday in September will always be at the MCG, I just can't see that changing in my lifetime.

A Grand Final of the Eagles vs Dockers at the MCG would still get more than what Subiaco Oval can hold. Maybe the problem is Subiaco Oval should have been altered to hold more than 42,000 so we could at least argue that we could fill more bums on seats here.

 

[ozzult]

I got no problems with the GF being played at the MCG. Every other final should be awarded home ground advantage to the team who finished higher.

 

[Mr Eagle]

A national comp from scratch would never have worked. Too little unwavering support during its formative years - but now that the AFL has milked the VFL for its stability while it built up sides like West Coast and Adelaide, it proceeds to get rid of clubs like Fitzroy that can't handle the commerciality of the big time, and pave the way for a new era of nationalising the comp.

Building off the VFL will prove to be a very smart move in the long term. The MCC agreement will fall in time, just as several Vic clubs will. And they shall be replaced by Southport, western Sydney, and Hobart


Patience, my young apprentices

 

[daddy_4_eyes]

Originally posted by Frodo
What we needed was a Kerry Packer breakaway national competition. Just as he did with cricket.
I still think it's likely to happen. If the interstate clubs rebel and someone comes forward with a new league I can see the big four Vic sides joining up. Maybe we would have to be called the Perth Eagles and our jumpers changed a bit but the AFL would probably cave in before that anyhow. 14 team competition with everyone playing each other twice, home finals where earned, that's just fairness and we should be working towards that goal.

Hahaha, great imagination there. few problems with that theory:

1) What grounds would teams play on? MCG is contracted to the AFL, Telstra Dome is owned by the AFL, Subi and Footy park are owned by their respective state bodies (too influenced by the AFL to allow breakaway league to play on their grounds). So its back to suburban grounds, ey?

2) No financial security.

3) A large portion of revenue (note, not profit) comes from Victoria. Take victoria out of the equation and you lose corporate sponsorship, media sponsorship (TV rights deal would be heavily dependant on Vic viewers), etc.

4) How many AFL grade players would make the switch? None of the top liners I would imagine (due to contract and sponsorship commitments for example).

The list goes on mate. It is an interesting concept, but it definately is not likely to happen, as you suggested.

 

[Voice of Reason]

Originally posted by ozzult
I got no problems with the GF being played at the MCG. Every other final should be awarded home ground advantage to the team who finished higher.

Exactly.

Without fairness, sport is as nothing.

 

[jod23]

Originally posted by Voice of Reason
Exactly.

Without fairness, sport is as nothing.

And fairness is nowhere to be found once the finals roll round every year.

 

[Mr Q]

Re: Re: I Wish...

Originally posted by ScouseCat
There is no point talking about what has happened in the past, the bottom line is that finals should be played on grounds which hold the most people and at the moment, that ground is in Melbourne, the MCG... the people's ground. If we want to talk about home finals, then one could also build cases for Geelong and Carlton to play their home finals at Skilled Stadium and Optus Oval respectively. However, that isn't logical when you have a ground like the MCG or even Telstra Dome, (which hold more people and have better facilities) not being used, especially when finals is where the game is showcased and also where the AFL makes their money.

Sorry, Scousey, I'm just not going to let you get away with this. Firstly, on the numbers game, the Essendon v West Coast final in Melbourne last year drew 37,000 - I am almost certain it would have drawn 43,000 in Perth (and more if the stadium could fit them).

Secondly, you could build a case for Geelong playing at Kardinia Park (and I would fully support that) as Geelong is not Melbourne. I refute the argument about Carlton as they are still playing in Melbourne and not 10km from their home ground - and one they don't even want to play at. On this issue, you could also remember that travelling 100km for a game is a little less of a strain on the team and supporters alike compared to travelling 3000km.

Originally posted by ScouseCat
The system isn't totally fair, no doubt about that, but neither is the draw. (and I'm not just talking about interstate clubs when I say that!) Unfortunately, we aren't like the soccer where most grounds hold a similar amount of people and teams play each other the same number of times, so it's not really relevant to compare the 2 codes as they are totally different.

Noones really comparing soccer and Australian Rules (at least not the Australian version). Traditionally outside of Australia soccer leagues don't even have finals - but none of us want that (except perhaps Dan - but on this sort of thing he is an idiot anyway).

Anyway, in almost every soccer league the grounds do not always support the same number of supporters. If you go to London in a few years you will see that Arsenal will have a huge new (60,000+ seat) stadium, while Chelsea have a big ground (40,000) yet Fulham, another Premiership team play at Loftus Road at the moment, and I can assure you that doesn't fit anywhere near those numbers (I'd guess 25,000 tops). And that's not mentioning a potential new Wembley stadium of over 100,000.

In England (and many other nations) its possible to solve the problem of home venues by playing at neutral venues - however given the size of Australia that's not practical in Australia.

Originally posted by ScouseCat
I agree that there's too many Victorian based teams, but try telling supporters who's team has been around for the best part of 100 years that their tean should merge or fold. We're not just talking about 16 years for the Eagles and 9 years for the Dockers, we're talking 100 years of tradition, of families supporting that club... it is very hard for some people to let go of that. I don't think anyone from interstate can fully appreciate that fact, although I do admit that we need to move with the times to a certain extent.

This is where Vics lose any support from outside Victoria. "We have 100 years of history, so we are so much better" is how that comes across. And its complete bollocks. There have been Australian Rules leagues in all states for over 100 years, and the SANFL and WAFL have existed since 1879 and 1885 respectively - longer than the AFL/VFL (yes I do know about the VFA). Yet it was fine to decimate and almost destroy the teams that were supported in Perth and Adelaide before the late 80s and early 90s to prop up Victorian teams.

The club I supported as a kid (East Perth) is no longer anything like the club it was in 1985 - although it is quite successful these days, a WAFL premiership now doesn't mean anything like pre-1987. Everyone else's traditions have been poured down the toilet (look at how Port's history is treated), yet we are supposed to respect Victorian club history. It ain't gonna happen.

Originally posted by ScouseCat
As for the so called "severe raping" given to interstate sides, has anyone seen the AFL ladder lately?? The top 6 spots are occupied by teams from interstate and as a proud Victorian who's country-based team struggles to compete with these bigger clubs at the best of times, it is very depressing.

And I'm a proud West Australian, and my family goes back over 100 years supporting football in this state. As I said before, the team I supported as a kid doesn't even get to compete in the big league, so I do find it hard to be sympathetic. I was forced to change the team I supported, and while I am an enthusiastic and passionate supporter of the Eagles (and would never change, not matter what), I still feel a little sad that the Royals proud history is now effectively irrelevant.

Originally posted by ScouseCat
I also wont mention the concessions given to some interstate teams to allow them to be successful to attract supporters.... this at the expense of the Victorian clubs. I also wont mention that the then VFL allowed the Eagles and Brisbane to sign a maximum of 2 players from any VFL team when they first joined the league. Now who exactly was being "r*ped" ???

Not true - the Eagles were in fact taken to court by Hawthorn for approaching Gary Buckenara. The Eagles did however have the right to acquire out of contract players from Victoria (I'm not sure whether they had to be West Australian though). However if you look at early Eagles teams they were almost all West Australian and recruited out of the WAFL.

Brisbane were allowed to select from a list of players that the other clubs put forward - and none of the Vic clubs put forward anyone they actually wanted to keep. IIRC Carlton put forward noone at all.

Anyway, we're not talking about ancient concessions to clubs - you've gone back 15 years for that, but about finals in the current day. You have to remember that there are supporters, passionate supporters who don't live in Victoria who literally can't get to games in Melbourne - I've just been to a game in Melbourne and to do it cost me over $500 - and had I had to pay accommodation it would have been much more.

Now work it out if I hadn't bought a plane ticket a month before (as would happen if I decided to go to a final in Melbourne), and didn't have friends in Melbourne - it could cost $1000 easy to go to a game that quite justifiably should be in Perth. And you wonder why we get ****ty about this. Anyway you should know this - weren't you just over here for a game?

Originally posted by ScouseCat
Now people may call me a Victorian-centric supporter and if that's the case then so be it. I don't think that's necessarilly a bad thing, just a different way of looking at this great game of ours.

Problem with being Victoria-centric is that its not the VFL any more. Its the AFL, and we outside Victoria should have just the same rights as folks inside Victoria to go to the game.

 

[The Passenger]

I dont mind the game being based in Victoria and having the Grand Final always played there, but the interstate clubs shouldn't have let the VFL rape them so fiercely and should've stood up for their own rights.


If the game were structures properly there would've been 6 Vic teams, 3 WA Teams, 3 SA Teams, 1 Qld Team and 1 NSW team, who were all seperate identities to the VFL, SANFL and WAFL teams.

But then we just have a Super League war and this may have killed the game big time. Although admittedly pre 1990's there wasn't as much money in the game so maybe it could've worked then.

This would approximately show be proportional to the amount of players and interest in the country.

Played over 26 rounds.

The problem is they started with struggling clubs in the competition and now it would do no good for the competition to get rid of them.

 

[Syd]

Originally posted by Frodo
What we needed was a Kerry Packer breakaway national competition. Just as he did with cricket.
I still think it's likely to happen. If the interstate clubs rebel and someone comes forward with a new league I can see the big four Vic sides joining up. Maybe we would have to be called the Perth Eagles and our jumpers changed a bit but the AFL would probably cave in before that anyhow. 14 team competition with everyone playing each other twice, home finals where earned, that's just fairness and we should be working towards that goal.

Sorry to intrude on your board, but this same tactic was also tried by Rupert Murdoch under the name of "Super League" and look where that went!

Couldn't help but comment as I was a North Sydney Bears fan before SL, and would hate to see the AFL travel that path..

 

[ScouseCat]

Re: Re: Re: I Wish...

Originally posted by Mr Q
Firstly, on the numbers game, the Essendon v West Coast final in Melbourne last year drew 37,000 - I am almost certain it would have drawn 43,000 in Perth (and more if the stadium could fit them).

Secondly, you could build a case for Geelong playing at Kardinia Park (and I would fully support that) as Geelong is not Melbourne. I refute the argument about Carlton as they are still playing in Melbourne and not 10km from their home ground - and one they don't even want to play at. On this issue, you could also remember that travelling 100km for a game is a little less of a strain on the team and supporters alike compared to travelling 3000km.

The problem with Essendon having to play West Coast at Docklands last year instead of the MCG, (where they'd have gotton around 60,000) was that Melbourne vs Kangaroos game needed to be played somewhere and the MCG was the most appropriate venue for that game to draw a decent crowd.

Geelong still have to travel an hour by bus for their Melbourne games, so although it's not quite the same travel as you guys would have to do, I can understand where you're coming from with this point.

Originally posted by Mr Q
In England (and many other nations) its possible to solve the problem of home venues by playing at neutral venues - however given the size of Australia that's not practical in Australia.

The MCG is the closest thing Australia has to a neutral ground, it just happens to be located here in Victoria.

Originally posted by Mr Q
This is where Vics lose any support from outside Victoria. "We have 100 years of history, so we are so much better" is how that comes across. And its complete bollocks. There have been Australian Rules leagues in all states for over 100 years, and the SANFL and WAFL have existed since 1879 and 1885 respectively - longer than the AFL/VFL (yes I do know about the VFA). Yet it was fine to decimate and almost destroy the teams that were supported in Perth and Adelaide before the late 80s and early 90s to prop up Victorian teams.

The club I supported as a kid (East Perth) is no longer anything like the club it was in 1985 - although it is quite successful these days, a WAFL premiership now doesn't mean anything like pre-1987. Everyone else's traditions have been poured down the toilet (look at how Port's history is treated), yet we are supposed to respect Victorian club history. It ain't gonna happen.

This is my point though.... the AFL is an extension of the VFL, not the SANFL or the WAFL. There are teams from Victoria who have been playing in this league since 1897, so of course they are going to have history and tradition attached to them. Unless you were brought up on the game here in Victoria, you wouldn't fully understand or appreciate that fact.

The problem in your case is that we're taking about 2 different teams. The West Coast Eagles and Fremantle Dockers are different to say East Perth or any other side playing in the WAFL. The WAFL has become secondary to the Eagles and Dockers over there, you just need to look at your local crowds to realise that.

The other difference here in Victoria is that my team, (Geelong) are also part of the VFL. (our league down here, similar to WAFL) This league has replaced the old "reserves" league that the old VFL used to have in place, so unlike yourself, I have only ever supported one team, that being Geelong.

I never followed the old VFA.

Originally posted by Mr Q
You have to remember that there are supporters, passionate supporters who don't live in Victoria who literally can't get to games in Melbourne - I've just been to a game in Melbourne and to do it cost me over $500 - and had I had to pay accommodation it would have been much more.

Now work it out if I hadn't bought a plane ticket a month before (as would happen if I decided to go to a final in Melbourne), and didn't have friends in Melbourne - it could cost $1000 easy to go to a game that quite justifiably should be in Perth. And you wonder why we get ****ty about this. Anyway you should know this - weren't you just over here for a game?

I was over there for a holiday to visit one of my best mates, it just happened to be good timing with the Eagles vs Geelong game. I do see your point about the cost of going to the games when your team plays interstate, however what can you do about it??

How about expanding Subiaco to hold more then 50,000 people?? What is your membership figures... 35,000?? 40,000?? You wouldn't have any problems filling that ground for a finals match, and the AFL would be able to justify playing one there as opposed to in Melbourne where they can get these crowds easilly, especially at the MCG.

And before you bring up the capacity at Telstra Dome, I dont think finals should be played there if the MCG is available.

Originally posted by Mr Q
Problem with being Victoria-centric is that its not the VFL any more. Its the AFL, and we outside Victoria should have just the same rights as folks inside Victoria to go to the game.

As I said before, whether you like it or not, the AFL is an extension of the VFL and we just have to accept it. I think this was why EKA was frustrated in his initial post... there isn't any easy answers to resolving any of these issues.

We cant help it if the MCG, (the home of football) is located in Victoria. Of course if it was located in WA, you guys would be in our position and we'd be the ones wanting the chance to attend the games... you just can't win either way!!

 

[eagleskickass]

Re: Re: Re: Re: I Wish...

Originally posted by ScouseCat
The problem with Essendon having to play West Coast at Docklands last year instead of the MCG, (where they'd have gotton around 60,000) was that Melbourne vs Kangaroos game needed to be played somewhere and the MCG was the most appropriate venue for that game to draw a decent crowd.

LMAO there is NO WAY there would have been an extra 23,000 people at that game just because it was at the MCG.

 

[daddy_4_eyes]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: I Wish...

Originally posted by eagleskickass
LMAO there is NO WAY there would have been an extra 43,000 people at that game just because it was at the MCG.

I think you may have got your numbers mixed up...

 

[eagleskickass]

same

i meant 23,000 lol