Melbourne lost

[Adam BK]

So we are now 2 games + percentage safe from 3rd?

The challenge is for us to win and respond (4 points most important, but hopefully a good performance) tonight and then I believe we will be 3 games + percentage safe from 3rd

 

[knackers27]

If the AFC finish 2nd and win their first home final, is the prelim at aami?

 

[Alex99]

If the AFC finish 2nd and win their first home final, is the prelim at aami?

Yes

 

[kirky]

We wrapup a top two spot if we win tonight. Its that simple.

 

[*PAF]

If the AFC finish 2nd and win their first home final, is the prelim at aami?

Technically yes, however unless they have changed the rules the MCG rule might come into play.

 

[Quinz]

Technically yes, however unless they have changed the rules the MCG rule might come into play.

Nope. The Prelim Finals are hosted by the winners of the Qualifying Finals. The pointless MCG agreement is no longer in place i'm pretty certain.

 

[Crow-mo]

what? does Carlton not want Gibbs or something

 

[DaveW]

Nope. The Prelim Finals are hosted by the winners of the Qualifying Finals. The pointless MCG agreement is no longer in place i'm pretty certain.

Correct. Following last year's negotiations, the MCG relinquished their claim to preliminary finals unless actually earnt by Victorian based clubs.

http://afl.com.au/default.asp?pg=aflinfosheets&spg=display&articleid=240697

However, one sinister clause does remain in the MCG contract:

Allowing greater flexibility to bank finals in weeks one and two, with the clause amended to ensure 10 matches are played over five years.

2003 saw the AFL go into overdraft in it's 'banking' agreement, when only one final was staged at the MCG across the first two weeks. Parity was restored in 2004 when three games across the first two weeks were staged at the MCG.

But 2005 again only saw one MCG final across the first two weeks. So the AFL is one game behind its MCG obligation. (Strangely, last year's preliminary at the MCG - which they're not otherwise entitled to - doesn't consistute payback, at least not according to the above wording.)

Essentially it means the clause that forced us to play a home semi-final at the MCG in 2002 remains in place. Back then, the AFL opted not to use its newly negotiated flexibility.

I fear this may have been forgotten after last year's success in dumping the mandatory MCG preliminary. The non-Victorian clubs need to continue their push for a fairer finals system.

Thankfully, it's likely that this banking arrangement will return to parity this season with Victorian teams likely to earn three home finals.