Interstate grand finals - where would you rather play an mcg tenant:

[bh90210fan]

We never had any trouble beating Freo over at Subiaco in 2015, if that's what you mean....A feat the Dogs achieved too when they knocked you blokes out in 2016.

Sydney should’ve beaten Freo in the first final. They lost by 9 points kicking 7.19 without Kieran Jack and Buddy Franklin.

Freo lost 3 of their final 4 h&a games and were cooked. On top of that Fyfe broke his leg in the game against you.

 

[doppleganger]

Lol ok we are going silly then.

Having an automatic home/city/state ground is an advantage. Hell you said so early in the post and posts previously.

I don’t think it is being silly. The whole argument is that it is an unfair advantage to Victorian clubs, or Melbourne based clubs, or MCG tenants only depending on your point of view.

Yes, Melbourne and then Richmond were MCG tenants in VFL days. So following that logic they must have had an advantage over Collingwood who played at VicPark in finals.

Sure the players may have played more games on the G, but the beauty is that once 100K+ people were all packed in it is a different environment to a normal game, so any advantage they had is minimal at best. Nobody cared,

Now with non-vic teams it is supposedly even more advantageous. Some people even think Etihad tenants are now disadvantaged.

Sleeping at a hotel with team dinners and breakfasts prepared by chefs is supposedly a disadvantage to doing it yourself at home.

Sitting on a plane for an hour on Thursday, whilst Melbourne based players sit in a meeting room is supposedly a disadvantage.

The size of the ground is supposedly another disadvantage, but only for non-vic teams...doesn’t matter that Geelong has the skinniest ground in the league.

I note you didnt mention the fans side of things. How Victorians automatically only have to pay for a ticket while all other states are lumped with airfares and hotels.

Yeah this is obviously a big plus for Victorian’s. Lucky to live in a sports mad city that hosts big sporting events.

But if you are worried about the fans...what happens if the Giants ‘earn’ a ‘home’ GF and what just 20K can go. Or do they move it to the SCG so that 40K can go?

Instead of having 34K tickets allocated to competing club members at cost price like when at the G, it would be a much smaller number and they would jack up prices to compensate.

Instead of paying 300 for your ticket and another 1000 on transport and accom (surely can just drive if want to keep cost down), the ticket will cost 750 and plenty of club members who would have got a ticket if at the G will be shafted and miss out.

Talk about cutting off the nose to spite those bloody Victorian’s!!

 

[Procrastinator35]

Sydney should’ve beaten Freo in the first final. They lost by 9 points kicking 7.19 without Kieran Jack and Buddy Franklin.

Freo lost 3 of their final 4 h&a games and were cooked. On top of that Fyfe broke his leg in the game against you.

Them the breaks.

We've been the best side in plenty of seasons, only to lose the big one or get knocked out in a preliminary final....1977, 1984, 1987 & 2012 come to mind right off the bat.....Having said that though, we got lucky in 1983, as there was no clear favorite that year, & of course, all the cards fell our way in 2015 to enable us to snaffle the 3-peat....There's no doubting that.

The point being, is that no side has a moratorium on the Flag....Just ask Geelong of 2008....Who assumed that all they had to do was rock up, tag Buddy, Mitchell & Roughy & then everything else would take care of itself....But we had other plans.

You have to win 3 tough finals at a minimum in order to win it...West Coast only won 2 in 2015.....You simply never played well enough on the day.

The slight on S/A & W/A teams is that you have always been highly skilled, but lacked that mental edge of toughness & grit necessary to win big finals....The times when West Coast, Adelaide & Port were able to win it, you had enough grit & mettle in order to do so.

 

[North Viking]

 

[Bearded Clam]

View attachment 456242

Ahhh... there always one isn’t there... the bloke who’s just not intelligent enough to join the conversation and put forward an arguement... so instead they throw in a unoriginal meme or one liner that everyone’s heard/seen a thousand times before...

 

[kranky al]

We never had any trouble beating Freo over at Subiaco in 2015, if that's what you mean....A feat the Dogs achieved too when they knocked you blokes out in 2016.

Hawthorn 2015 were a *ing good team that deserved to win a gf.

But you win over 70% on your home deck and we got one game there that year.

You remember those games won at subi because they go against the flow.

We win around 70% on our home deck too.

And if you were a higher ranked team who played a gf on our deck and lost you would understand.

The gf should be a fair game - as fair as we can make it.

 

[Procrastinator35]

Hawthorn 2015 were a ruddy good team that deserved to win a gf.

But you win over 70% on your home deck and we got one game there that year.

You remember those games won at subi because they go against the flow.

We win around 70% on our home deck too.

And if you were a higher ranked team who played a gf on our deck and lost you would understand.

The gf should be a fair game - as fair as we can make it.

As in life, there is politics in most things.

Interstate sides chose to join a fundamentally Victorian based competition.....They knew full-well what they were signing up for when they did that.

The AFL will always favor the M.C.G given it's crowd-capacity, traditions & contractual obligations....Which necessitates a minimum of 3 finals being played there every finals series, including the Grand Final.....That's just the way it is.

 

[kranky al]

That we finished top 4 & so earn't the right to a double-chance, is what it tells me....And we took it.

And incredibly luckily for you

Despite the fact that you lost and were lower ranked - you got to play the rematch on a ground where you won around 75 % of your games that year.

And where we have historically won around 20% of ours.

 

[kranky al]

As in life, there is politics in most things.

Interstate sides chose to join a fundamentally Victorian based competition.....They knew full-well what they were signing up for when they did that.

The AFL will always favor the M.C.G given it's crowd-capacity, traditions & contractual obligations....Which necessitates a minimum of 3 finals being played there every finals series, including the Grand Final.....That's just the way it is.

Yes
We should just give up and not even try.

These same arguments were made when we complained about travelling 6 weeks in a row.

We kept pushing - now we go week on week off.

Do you think its unfair that we dont travel 6 weeks in a row still.

Or do you think it was worth pushing for?

 

[Procrastinator35]

And incredibly luckily for you

Despite the fact that you lost and were lower ranked - you got to play the rematch on a ground where you won around 75 % of your games that year.

And where we have historically won around 20% of ours.

Yes
We should just give up and not even try.

These same arguments were made when we complained about travelling 6 weeks in a row.

We kept pushing - now we go week on week off.

Do you think its unfair that we dont travel 6 weeks in a row still.

Or do you think it was worth pushing for?

You had one interstate trip in the last 2 months of footy in 2015 against Adelaide in Adelaide....In the same time, we had to travel to Western Australia to play at Subiaco on 3 occasions.....No excuses really.

 

[kranky al]

You had one interstate trip in the last 2 months of footy in 2015 against Adelaide in Adelaide....In the same time, we had to travel to Western Australia to play at Subiaco on 3 occasions.....No excuses really.

You had to travel to wa 3 times in two months?

Zomg you mean in 8 weeks of footy 3 times.

The calumny.

You mean we earned 4 finals at home by finishing higher?

And were given 3

 

[doppleganger]

And incredibly luckily for you

Despite the fact that you lost and were lower ranked - you got to play the rematch on a ground where you won around 75 % of your games that year.

And where we have historically won around 20% of ours.

You can look these numbers up.

Hawthorn have won 57.7% of their MCG games in total.

West Coast have won 38.0% of their MCG games in total.

From 2010 onwards Hawthorn have won 69% of their games at the G...but have won 71% of all their games in total since 2010....what a huge home ground advantage!

Hawthorn have performed better away from the G during their dominant period.

 

[bh90210fan]

You can look these numbers up.

Hawthorn have won 57.7% of their MCG games in total.

West Coast have won 38.0% of their MCG games in total.

From 2010 onwards Hawthorn have won 69% of their games at the G...but have won 71% of all their games in total since 2010....what a huge home ground advantage!

Hawthorn have performed better away from the G during their dominant period.

Take out their home games at Aurora (they have home ground advantage there too)

 

[doppleganger]

Take out their home games at Aurora (they have home ground advantage there too)

Y would you take them out? They are games where the actually have a significant home advantage.

North are the same

Blundstone they have won 77% of games since 2010, but at their actual ‘home’ Etihad they are 56%.

If a vic based team wants an actual home ground advantage, sell games to Tassie!!

Hawthorn should request to play GF at ‘home’ in Tassie, much better record there...And yes West Coast are 1 from 4 in Tassie too, just as sh1tful as they are at the G so you blokes can still bleat.

 

[Procrastinator35]

You had to travel to wa 3 times in two months?

Zomg you mean in 8 weeks of footy 3 times.

The calumny.

You mean we earned 4 finals at home by finishing higher?

And were given 3

Half a game the difference & we had a superior percentage....Which certainly told in the end, on the last game in September....The best % of the comp in fact.

Once you make the Grand Final then you make your own luck.....If you don't like it being played at the M.C.G then join another competition....Like I keep saying, stop blaming the Gee for your blokes spudding it up on the day.

Problem solved.

 

[Kirkswan]

Must be nice supporting a team knowing that even if you finish 8th you'll still have the GF at your home ground if you make it. For teams not based in Melbourne, it's top four or no chance pretty much. But how dare anyone try to put the 'A' into the AFL!

Name another competition in the world where the premiership / championship decider is automatically at a team's home ground...

• Super Bowl is bid on and rotates.
• A-League, NBA, NBL, Super Rugby, MLS - all based on higher ranked team.
• FA Cup is at a neutral, national stadium.

Name another country in the world as large as Australia and as sparsely populated.

There is absolutely no point comparing AFL facilities to the Super Bowl. The USA have over 300 million people, we have 20 million, in roughly the same area. Which means that they are likely to be able to support more 80 - 100k facilities than we can. Currently they have 24 stadiums with capacity for 80k or more, we have 3 (MCG, ANZ and Perth).

Europe has approximately 700 milllion people living in an area small than Australia, so is even less comparable. It only has 7 stadiums of 80K capacity or more.

I agree that the situation is not ideal, but the issues faced are uniquely Australian. There is no point using comparisons to the rest of the world, when their circumstances are nothing like ours.

 

[Bearded Clam]

Name another country in the world as large as Australia and as sparsely populated.

There is absolutely no point comparing AFL facilities to the Super Bowl. The USA have over 300 million people, we have 20 million, in roughly the same area. Which means that they are likely to be able to support more 80 - 100k facilities than we can. Currently they have 24 stadiums with capacity for 80k or more, we have 3 (MCG, ANZ and Perth).

Europe has approximately 700 milllion people living in an area small than Australia, so is even less comparable. It only has 7 stadiums of 80K capacity or more.

I agree that the situation is not ideal, but the issues faced are uniquely Australian. There is no point using comparisons to the rest of the world, when their circumstances are nothing like ours.

Again... the size of the ground shouldn’t really be taken into consideration... more people watch the game away from the actual ground anyway, that’s where the real money is at and most often the crowd on the day aren’t even supporters of either side, they are MCC membership toffs... 100,000 at the ground compared with 8 million watching on TV.
The only consideration that should be taken into account is which side finished higher on the ladder.. and that team whether it be in the finals series or the grand final should get their games played on their home ground... unless of course they lose their first game of the finals at their home ground thus forgoing their right to the home final.

 

[Kirkswan]

Again... the size of the ground shouldn’t really be taken into consideration... more people watch the game away from the actual ground anyway, that’s where the real money is at and most often the crowd on the day aren’t even supporters of either side, they are MCC membership toffs... 100,000 at the ground compared with 8 million watching on TV.
The only consideration that should be taken into account is which side finished higher on the ladder.. and that team whether it be in the finals series or the grand final should get their games played on their home ground... unless of course they lose their first game of the finals at their home ground thus forgoing their right to the home final.

As you appear to be uninterested in discussing any view but your own, I'll leave you to it.

 

[Heisenberg_]

And the good of the game is turning the league into a truly national competition and having it decentralised from Victoria... and to be honest the grand final venue is not the biggest change that needs making..

I may have misread this due to the early hour, but are you advocating that non bic teams get even more games at home so vic teams have to travel more, when outside of Geelong you guys get the only true home ground advantage outside of the odd game at the MCG against interstate teams we get, which often gets shifted to Etihad which takes away any home ground advantage we get, where as most home games are effectively at a neutral ground.

To use your own words the home and away fixture is already "artificially skewed" in favour of interstate teams due to the massive advantages they receive throughout the year and often results in teams who aren't up to it making finals such as Port and WC last year or teams finishing higher on the ladder then they probably should have when you look at record away from its home fortress like Adelaide last year.

Until the day comes that each team plays each other twice in a true home and away format nobody can truly lay claim to being more deserving of taking a huge home ground advantage into the finals series and grand finals and should remain at the most neutral ground in the league and home of football as it is at the moment.

 

[muzhogg]

A team that comes third on the ladder shouldn’t get three home finals... they haven’t earnt it and thus don’t deserve it. Basically what the league is effectively saying is is that some teams need to aim to come first or second after the minor round to get home finals but others can simply aim for third or fourth..

Effectively rewarding the underachievers...In what way is this Australian???...

FFS.... It’s like the AFL are the teachers and we’re all back at the school athletics carnival where the special kid gets a 20m head start in the 100m sprint!!.... the name of last season’s special kid* was “Richmond”... and he’s been an underachiever for decades!. Better give him a leg up eh...

Putting aside the fact that the rules don't entitle teams to home ground games (the ruling is games in the state where the team is based), there's just no way that anybody can reasonably argue that home ground advantage had THAT much of an influence in the outcome of the Richmond v Geelong final.

We beat Geelong by 51 points, so unless you're trying to suggest that home ground advantage is worth over 8 goals, then you're going to have to concede that Richmond earned the win fair and square.

I have some sympathy with the argument that the GF should be moved around a bit -- although given that after the MCG the next largest football stadium has a capacity of 60k I doubt there's any way it will happen.

That aside, I think you massively overstate the advantage that Richmond gained from playing at the G.

 

[I_Love_Thee_V]

Ultimately it’s not a national league until the Melbourne Cricket Ground has its monopoly on the Grandfinal ripped from its greedy little hands.

Of the two teams that make the grand final.. the one who finished higher on the ladder should have the grandfinal held at their home ground and who gives a flying fig how big that ground is... it should be about the football occurring on the grass not the size of the crowd. The great majority of viewers of the Final are doing so from lounge rooms, pubs and backyards around the world. They are gonna watch it no matter where it’s played and regardless of how many bums on seats there are at the ground.

A team that comes third on the ladder shouldn’t get three home finals... they haven’t earnt it and thus don’t deserve it. Basically what the league is effectively saying is is that some teams need to aim to come first or second after the minor round to get home finals but others can simply aim for third or fourth..

Effectively rewarding the underachievers...In what way is this Australian???...

FFS.... It’s like the AFL are the teachers and we’re all back at the school athletics carnival where the special kid gets a 20m head start in the 100m sprint!!.... the name of last season’s special kid* was “Richmond”... and he’s been an underachiever for decades!. Better give him a leg up eh...

Is this the crap the AFL are gonna dish up???...

Now que all the commenters ignoring my arguement because they haven’t got an answer and simply pointing out I’m a disheveled crows supporter.. Crows won it in 97/98 and deserved to play most of their finals games interstate in 97/98 because they underperformed during the minor rounds. They ended up winning because they had the guts and determination, not because the league said “awe, you guys haven’t earnt it but we’ll give you home finals”..

I’d be embarrassed to wear their colours out in public if my team won because they got a leg up that they never earnt.

Richmond should’ve played their first final in Geelong and the granny if they made it after that in Adelaide

Until this happens the league doesn’t deserve to have the word “Australian” in its name and should be refered to as the VFL again.

* to clarify... by “special kid” I not refering to the mentally or physically disabled kids. They should always be given a helping hand when they want or need it..
I’m referring to the lazy, useless underachieving kids that were perfectly fine pysically and mentally.

Those tears are delicious

 

[kranky al]

Name another country in the world as large as Australia and as sparsely populated.

There is absolutely no point comparing AFL facilities to the Super Bowl. The USA have over 300 million people, we have 20 million, in roughly the same area. Which means that they are likely to be able to support more 80 - 100k facilities than we can. Currently they have 24 stadiums with capacity for 80k or more, we have 3 (MCG, ANZ and Perth).

Europe has approximately 700 milllion people living in an area small than Australia, so is even less comparable. It only has 7 stadiums of 80K capacity or more.

I agree that the situation is not ideal, but the issues faced are uniquely Australian. There is no point using comparisons to the rest of the world, when their circumstances are nothing like ours.

Challenge accepted

Canada - canadian football.
Larger country - more spread out population
Acceptance that a national sport should be treated like one.

 

[Heisenberg_]

Challenge accepted

Canada - canadian football.
Larger country - more spread out population
Acceptance that a national sport should be treated like one.

Lol
Scraping the bottom of the barrel a 9 team league that's second rate at best.

 

[doppleganger]

Challenge accepted

Canada - canadian football.
Larger country - more spread out population
Acceptance that a national sport should be treated like one.

That is another battle between conferences - East champion plays off against West.

Split the AFL into two conferences, then get the Vic champion playing the non-vic in a rotating SuperBowl.

 

[cub]

Ultimately it’s not a national league until the Melbourne Cricket Ground has its monopoly on the Grandfinal ripped from its greedy little hands.

Of the two teams that make the grand final.. the one who finished higher on the ladder should have the grandfinal held at their home ground and who gives a flying fig how big that ground is... it should be about the football occurring on the grass not the size of the crowd. The great majority of viewers of the Final are doing so from lounge rooms, pubs and backyards around the world. They are gonna watch it no matter where it’s played and regardless of how many bums on seats there are at the ground.

A team that comes third on the ladder shouldn’t get three home finals... they haven’t earnt it and thus don’t deserve it. Basically what the league is effectively saying is is that some teams need to aim to come first or second after the minor round to get home finals but others can simply aim for third or fourth..

Effectively rewarding the underachievers...In what way is this Australian???...

FFS.... It’s like the AFL are the teachers and we’re all back at the school athletics carnival where the special kid gets a 20m head start in the 100m sprint!!.... the name of last season’s special kid* was “Richmond”... and he’s been an underachiever for decades!. Better give him a leg up eh...

Is this the crap the AFL are gonna dish up???...

Now que all the commenters ignoring my arguement because they haven’t got an answer and simply pointing out I’m a disheveled crows supporter.. Crows won it in 97/98 and deserved to play most of their finals games interstate in 97/98 because they underperformed during the minor rounds. They ended up winning because they had the guts and determination, not because the league said “awe, you guys haven’t earnt it but we’ll give you home finals”..

I’d be embarrassed to wear their colours out in public if my team won because they got a leg up that they never earnt.

Richmond should’ve played their first final in Geelong and the granny if they made it after that in Adelaide

Until this happens the league doesn’t deserve to have the word “Australian” in its name and should be refered to as the VFL again.

* to clarify... by “special kid” I not refering to the mentally or physically disabled kids. They should always be given a helping hand when they want or need it..
I’m referring to the lazy, useless underachieving kids that were perfectly fine pysically and mentally.

And the toys are out of the cot