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 "raped" ???
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.