Remove this Banner Ad

Insightful Media Coverage

  • Thread starter Thread starter Wadsworth
  • Start date Start date
  • Tagged users Tagged users None

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

This is absolutely crazy. Unless they redo the round 7 fixture, that means round 8-12 (5 matches) to happen in about 21 days.




Going to be a great product when almost every club has lost half their B22 to soft tissue injury.
 
Going to be a great product when almost every club has lost half their B22 to soft tissue injury.
Flag 2020 = “Who has the most uninjured talent left on the playing list”
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

Well that would throw a spanner into the works for us getting a decent chunk of Perth games.
Going to be a great product when almost every club has lost half their B22 to soft tissue injury.

To be fair, a scenario like this is exactly why the introduced shorter quarters, and I have heard players say they feel they'd be right to play again after 4 days given the shorter game time.

I'm still confused about what this would mean for us.

By time round 7 is done we would have played all the Non Vic teams except GWS, we can't have a whole group of Victorian teams in the hub with us as the Non-Vic teams outside the hubs need to play the Vic teams too.

If it is shorter timeframes, there are only two possible solutions;

1) After round 9 we go back over to the East Coast and play 3 games in 12 days or

2) AFL has somehow convinced McGowan to allow teams to FIFO along the same lines as QLD did once the Vic teams have been outside of Victoria for 14 days.

It will be very interesting to see how this plays out over the next week or so.
 
To be fair, a scenario like this is exactly why the introduced shorter quarters, and I have heard players say they feel they'd be right to play again after 4 days given the shorter game time.

I'm still confused about what this would mean for us.

By time round 7 is done we would have played all the Non Vic teams except GWS, we can't have a whole group of Victorian teams in the hub with us as the Non-Vic teams outside the hubs need to play the Vic teams too.

If it is shorter timeframes, there are only two possible solutions;

1) After round 9 we go back over to the East Coast and play 3 games in 12 days or

2) AFL has somehow convinced McGowan to allow teams to FIFO along the same lines as QLD did once the Vic teams have been outside of Victoria for 14 days.

It will be very interesting to see how this plays out over the next week or so.
If we have to go back over east after 3 games, we'll end up with a huge chunk of home games to finish the season. I suspect this might be qhat happens.
 

South Melbourne's banishment to Sydney in 1982; the inclusion of West Coast and Brisbane in 1987; Adelaide Crows elbowing impertinent Port Adelaide out of the way in 1991 to give the competition a presence in every mainland state.

imageedit_32_2733543768-768x718.png


Geography obviously not a part of the journalism course these days.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Lol, the only reason they are talking Sydney is the Vic clubs are sh*t scared of handing west coast or port home ground advantage. Sydney wont come close to filling the stadium unless fans from football states can fly in - no guarantees. That would be massively embarrassing for AFL.

It’s the Sydney and Qld media who are driving the agenda to have the GF there (as they should, it would be a huge win). The Victorian media is taking the angle of ‘what a disaster it would be for the GF to go a non-football state’ - so they are reporting it but it doesn’t mean they are behind it.

I have not heard/read one opinion piece championing Sydney, they’ve all said Perth or Adelaide, with Perth the preference.
 
It’s the Sydney and Qld media who are driving the agenda to have the GF there (as they should, it would be a huge win). The Victorian media is taking the angle of ‘what a disaster it would be for the GF to go a non-football state’ - so they are reporting it but it doesn’t mean they are behind it.

I have not heard/read one opinion piece championing Sydney, they’ve all said Perth or Adelaide, with Perth the preference.

From someone who is in Melbourne there is a big split in opinion here.

You have people pushing the ANZ angle (Caro Wilson is the big one here) on the basis of Northern expansion, and then others (Whately/Gerard Healy) who are pushing Adelaide Oval and Optus on the basis of keeping the GF in footy heartland and better facilities/spectacle.
 
I’m also in Melbourne but missed Caro’s take. I try to avoid Footy Classified as it is clickbait telly.

Whateley, Healy, King, Robbo, Cornes etc and others are all pro SA/WA.

There’s no split in opinion in the fans here - they would all prefer a footballing state if they can get more fans there than the MCG.
 
I’m also in Melbourne but missed Caro’s take. I try to avoid Footy Classified as it is clickbait telly.

Whateley, Healy, King, Robbo, Cornes etc and others are all pro SA/WA.

There’s no split in opinion in the fans here - they would all prefer a footballing state if they can get more fans there than the MCG.

Caro had a pretty strong take in the age yesterday.

I think she makes some great points, however disagree that ANZ should host the GF. It's an abomination of a stadium.

 
Caro had a pretty strong take in the age yesterday.

I think she makes some great points, however disagree that ANZ should host the GF. It's an abomination of a stadium.



Thanks for the link. It’s a good read and some sensible points. But there’s an equally compelling article that we could all write to say that WA and SA need some love in compensation for the extended GF I’m Vic deal. Gil could then easily shut down the topic for many years by saying ‘we did you right when we could’.

I would be concerned Sydney might be considered if they had a decent stadium with a serious capacity.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top Bottom