Interstate sides at the MCG, against each other.

[juss]

The GF is at the MCG until 2057, this isn’t the thread to argue about that.

Could interstate sides benefit from selling a home game each to play each other at the MCG more often to try and lessen the impact of playing there in September?

Eg. Eagles v Adelaide 2019, Eagles sell home game to MCG, in 2020, Adelaide sell their vEagles to the MCG and so forth.

If the teams play each other twice, they each sell the game to the MCG and play there twice. Ditto for other clubs interstate or Etihad tenants if they wish.

Instead of building a list for the 2057 season, could this scenario make some sort of positive impact for other clubs?

 

[Rob]

 

[The_Reaper]

Or maybe just schedule matches like Hawthorn v West Coast to the MCG rather than Docklands or the usual Launceston.

 

[inbetween]

Just curious - who are they selling the game to?

 

[Cincinnatus]

Yeah no. Interstate sides already have to contend with playing a GF at someone else's home ground, they shouldnt have to compound that disadvantage by sacrificing their home matches which is apparently meant to offset that disadvantage.

AFL just needs to do the schedule so that interstate clubs play MCG tenants at the MCG.

Heck, schedule some Etihad tenants in there vs Interstate teams. Win win win. Every club who makes finals should get 5 games minimum at MCG following year.

Thats your incentive to make finals.

Not hard.

 

[Bluelegs]

Just curious - who are they selling the game to?

This. You would get 15k to the G tops unless you sold to victorian side and essentially gave them another home game. The cost of the game being put on would vastly outcost whatever you're reaping from 'selling' the game in the first place.

 

[radiojake]

Crows playing in Alice Springs next weekend because Melbourne decided to sell a game


Would've been nice to play at the MCG instead

 

[Acinath]

100% agree that if we are going to have finals at the MCG, interstate teams need to have more opportunity to play there. If teams like Melbourne, North, etc want to play home games interstate, it need to be against Melbourne clubs

 

[Rod Stroker]

Crows playing in Alice Springs next weekend because Melbourne decided to sell a game


Would've been nice to play at the MCG instead

If Melbourne just miss out on finals again, or a top 6 home final, they will rue the decision to play in the NT next week if they lose.

 

[Rod Stroker]

100% agree that if we are going to have finals at the MCG, interstate teams need to have more opportunity to play there. If teams like Melbourne, North, etc want to play home games interstate, it need to be against Melbourne clubs

We do. We've played Carlton, Melbourne and Richmond in Tassie over the last 2 years (and won them all).

 

[LukasTheGreat]

Heck we're from Melbourne and we don't even play the MCG.

 

[Acinath]

We do. We've played Carlton, Melbourne and Richmond in Tassie over the last 2 years (and won them all).

You played GWS there this weekend, correct?

 

[Rod Stroker]

You played GWS there this weekend, correct?

Yes. But we didn't fixture it. What's your point?

 

[VFL13]

Why dont we just base all clubs out of victoria. Make everyone bend to the need of the vfl instead of accept a national competition? Problem solved.

 

[Coaster2012]

Why WC arent playing Hawks at the G this Sunday is beyond me.

 

[The Joker]

100% agree that if we are going to have finals at the MCG, interstate teams need to have more opportunity to play there. If teams like Melbourne, North, etc want to play home games interstate, it need to be against Melbourne clubs

It's not Norths home ground so it makes no difference.

I wouldnt be against Freo paying Melbourne to have the game played at the G each year though. That's a much better option than what the OP has suggested!

 

[Acinath]

Yes. But we didn't fixture it. What's your point?

That GWS (being interstate) shouldn’t have to play in Tassie at the expense of playing in Melbourne.

As I type this, I suppose North isn’t a big issue due to not playing at the MCG that often yourself. Perhaps I should just limit my original post to Melbourne/Hawthorn.

 

[Isaac Cumming No 1]

The GF is at the MCG until 2057, this isn’t the thread to argue about that.

Could interstate sides benefit from selling a home game each to play each other at the MCG more often to try and lessen the impact of playing there in September?

Eg. Eagles v Adelaide 2019, Eagles sell home game to MCG, in 2020, Adelaide sell their vEagles to the MCG and so forth.

If the teams play each other twice, they each sell the game to the MCG and play there twice. Ditto for other clubs interstate or Etihad tenants if they wish.

Instead of building a list for the 2057 season, could this scenario make some sort of positive impact for other clubs?

Interstate clubs have members who expect home games to be at home. Do you really think we're going to abandon our supporters in Western Sydney or Canberra to play a home game in Melbourne against a tiny crowd?

 

[master bate]

100% agree that if we are going to have finals at the MCG, interstate teams need to have more opportunity to play there. If teams like Melbourne, North, etc want to play home games interstate, it need to be against Melbourne clubs

Sounds like a fair rule. So in the interest of great fairness do Melbourne get a fair share of Friday night games to make up for the lost revenue?

 

[Acinath]

Sounds like a fair rule. So in the interest of great fairness do Melbourne get a fair share of Friday night games to make up for the lost revenue?

I’d be happy to see Melbourne more on a Friday night tbh

 

[Cleavy]

Yeah no. Interstate sides already have to contend with playing a GF at someone else's home ground, they shouldnt have to compound that disadvantage by sacrificing their home matches which is apparently meant to offset that disadvantage.

AFL just needs to do the schedule so that interstate clubs play MCG tenants at the MCG.

Heck, schedule some Etihad tenants in there vs Interstate teams. Win win win. Every club who makes finals should get 5 games minimum at MCG following year.

Thats your incentive to make finals.

Not hard.

the computer that spits out the 'fixture' might catch fire though. OH&S.

 

[master bate]

I’d be happy to see Melbourne more on a Friday night tbh

If things go to plan this year then we've probably earnt it and will likely get it. I was being a bit silly but I think there's some validity to my point which is pretty much this:

There's a lot of inequity in the AFL created to maximise revenue. That's the reason the MCG hosts the grand final. It's the reason why clubs like Melbourne sell games. Giving interstate teams more MCG time is a reasonable idea to level the playing field but it shouldn't be done in a way that creates further inequity.

 

[Acinath]

If things go to plan this year then we've probably earnt it and will likely get it. I was being a bit silly but I think there's some validity to my point which is pretty much this:

There's a lot of inequity in the AFL created to maximise revenue. That's the reason the MCG hosts the grand final. It's the reason why clubs like Melbourne sell games. Giving interstate teams more MCG time is a reasonable idea to level the playing field but it shouldn't be done in a way that creates further inequity.

Agreed, it’s obviously more complicated than what I suggested, taking into account revenue, etc

 

[TiggerMan22]

Or just train and play on similar sized grounds

 

[BIRDBRAIN]

What I can't stand the most is playing the vic clubs not at their home ground. Playing Hawks on Sunday at Etihad is bad enough, but how about when clubs play Melbourne in the NT? Where is the limit to this, can a home club "sell" their home game to anywhere and the opposition just have to turn up? BRB selling game to Somalia, last one home is a rotten egg. Probably still get more crowd than a The GWS game.