I Wish...

[ScouseCat]

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

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

West Coast and Essendon have met 2 times in finals at the MCG. Here are the games and crowd figures... very interesting!!

1993 - First Semi Final, MCG
Essendon vs West Coast
Crowd: 75,453

1996 - First Semi Final, MCG
Essendon vs West Coast
Crowd: 85,656

 

[Mr Q]

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

I'd dispute bringing anything forward from those games: the 1993 game was in a final six, so there were less finals played, and this was a second week final anyway being played for a spot in the Preliminary final

The 1996 final was the very first disputed final, when Kevin Sheedy went on a successful anti-Eagles drive - something much easier to do in '96 when memories of Eagles dominance were much fresher. It was also a second week final rather than a first week elimination final.

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.

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.

I don't think you really do understand. I've been a fanatical Eagles supporter since probably 1990, and a member since 1992. And last weekend was the first ever away game I have attended (derbies excluded). Because it is absolutely too expensive to consider normally. It might cost you $50 to go to Melbourne from Geelong. That is nothing compared to over $500 the average trip from Perth will set a footy supporter back. And for finals the amount is going to be much larger with increased airline costs and higher ticket prices.

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

As for the MCG being the closest to a neutral venue, that's true when Vic team meets Vic team (or non-Vic v non-Vic). However in any other case, its a clear home venue for the Vic team, no more or less than Subi, Football Park etc.

In fact as many Vic teams play more games at Subi or Football Park than the Eagles or Adelaide do at the MCG this year in the H&A you could even make a case for it being less neutral.

Originally posted by ScouseCat
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.

Exactly why would I not appreciate that? East Perth have existed since about 1905 and have a history and tradition at least as rich as any old VFL side had. This is exactly the point that most Vics fail to realise. WE HAD OUR OWN TRADITION AND HAD IT FLUSHED DOWN THE TOILET. Just because Victoria was richer and bigger in football terms.

Originally posted by ScouseCat
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.

This sort of argument really shi.ts me. We get Vic after Vic saying "I'll give up football if my team folds or has to play in a lesser league." That's already happened in Perth and Adelaide. We've had to give up our football traditions way more than any Victorian (except Fitzroy supporters), in exchange for crap rules such as the MCG finals rule that just screw us non-Vics over again and again. For a Victorian to truly understand you would have had to have had your teams relegated to a secondary competition and new teams replace them. Our teams represent our 100 odd years of tradition - IMO no less than Geelong or Collingwood or any other ex-VFL team does in Victoria.

No offence, but quite frankly you can stick your tradition argument right up your arse.

Originally posted by ScouseCat
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 know exactly what the VFL is - and I know it originated as the VFA

Originally posted by ScouseCat
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??

That's exactly it. My team plays interstate ten times a year - so I can practically see them 12 times a year (H&A) without incurring huge additional expense. Yet when finals come around, supporters in Victoria get a better chance of seeing their team than I do, yet they get a minimum of 16 games - and probably 18 - they can go to during the H&A season. And they're cheaper during the H&A anyway.

Originally posted by ScouseCat
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.

As for extending Subiaco's capacity, it pretty much can't happen due to the confines of the ground along the wings. IMO a new stadium built from scratch with a capacity of 60,000 would have been a good idea when Subi was redeveloped, but its too late now.

Anyway, why should the fact we don't have a 50,000 seat stadium mean we are second-class AFL supporters? Because that's pretty much how I see it.

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

That's very noble - but Docklands gets a finals contract, which pretty much stymies the "banking" system anyway. Certainly screwed it up last year.

Originally posted by ScouseCat
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!!

This shi.ts me too. We admit that the MCG is the home of football (although I doubt the MCG had much significance to WA footy prior to 1987 except SOO), and we nearly universally don't want the GF moved. We just want a fair run in the lead up to the GF, and a chance to see our team in action in the finals live, just like Victorians. Remember the Eagles have not played a home final since the first week of the finals in 1996 - despite playing in all but two series and earning two finals since then (Week 2 of 1996 and 1999).