Richmond's 7 Consecutive MCG Games

Is Richmond's 7 consecutive games at the MVG unfair?

  • Yes

    Votes: 156 45.3%
  • No

    Votes: 188 54.7%

  • Total voters
    344
Status
Not open for further replies.

CM9000

BigFooty Optimist
Aug 19, 2016
2,270
4,803
Perth, WA
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
East Fremantle
Does this undermine the integrity of the competition? Yes.

Richmond finished last year on top of the table with 18 wins. Their fixture as the reigning premier then looked unfair enough, but at least their games at the MCG weren't bunched together like this year. And yet, somehow, as the "best team" of 2018, they were somehow given 7 games in a row at the MCG to finish the season, and nothing is being made of it. If they didn't have such a dickride in terms of fixturing, they would not be in the Grand Final.

I made a thread earlier in the year before the run of games started, and it was promptly closed for some reason. According to Richmond fans, 7 consecutive games at their home ground was fair, because:
* They played 5 games outside of their state in the first 16 games.
* They had to walk across the road to Etihad to play 2 games.
* Games against co-tenants are the exact same as an away game, except they're still at their home ground, in their home state.

In reality, if we readjust the metrics to classify away games as those played outside your home state (as is the case for half th league), their fixture looks like this:
* 5 away games within 23 rounds, with one one those against a club who won 3 games for the year.
* 17 games in their home state, with 14 at their home ground.

So, the majority of their games were played in their home state, at their home ground.

This is the case for other MCG tenants, however. It's how the AFL usually fixtures. Collingwood once had 8 consecutive games at the MCG roughly a decade ago, though they didn't finish on top of the ladder the season before.

Given how Richmond went last year, why wasn't their fixture more punctuated with travel and non MCG games? How come they got 7 consecutive games at their home ground to compensate for their "increased travel" in the first half of the season? How is any of this fair for the rest of the competition?

What's more, for their interstate games, they played against sides that finished 17th (Gold Coast), 12th (Adelaide), 10th (Port Adelaide, 14th (Fremantle) and 7th (GWS) in the previous season - only a single top 8 side. In their MCG run, they played teams that finished 2nd (West Coast), 5th (Melbourne), 7th (GWS), and 3rd (Collingwood). They didn't play a single top 4 side away, and the majority of the toughest matches came in the 7 game run.

How did the AFL allow this fixture to eventuate in the first place?
 
Last edited:

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Grockadoc

Premium Platinum
Jul 25, 2008
18,349
31,165
Geelong
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
Fighting Furies, Man Utd, Cavaliers
Does this undermine the integrity of the competition? Yes.

Richmond finished last year on top of the table with 18 wins. Their fixture as the reigning premier then looked unfair enough, but at least their games at the MCG weren't bunched together like this year. And yet, somehow, as the "best team" of 2018, they were somehow given 7 games in a row at the MCG to finish the season, and nothing is being made of it. If they didn't have such a dickride in terms of fixturing, they would not be in the Grand Final.

I made a thread earlier in the year before the run of games started, and it was promptly closed for some reason. According to Richmond fans, 7 consecutive games at their home ground was fair, because:
* They played 5 games outside of their state in the first 16 games.
* They had to walk across the road to Etihad to play 2 games.
* Games against co-tenants are the exact same as an away game, except they're still at their home ground, in their home state.

In reality, if we readjust the metrics to classify away games as those played outside your home state (as is the case for half th league), their fixture looks like this:
* 5 away games within 23 rounds, with one one those against a club who won 3 games for the year.
* 17 games in their home state, with 14 at their home ground.

So, the majority of their games were played in their home state, at their home ground.

This is the case for other MCG tenants, however. It's how the AFL usually fixtures. Collingwood once had 8 consecutive games at the MCG roughly a decade ago, though they didn't finish on top of the ladder the season before.

Given how Richmond went last year, why wasn't their fixture more punctuated with travel and non MCG games? How come they got 7 consecutive games at their home ground to compensate for their "increased travel" in the first half of the season? How is any of this fair for the rest of the competition?

What's more, for their interstate games, they played against sides that finished 17th (Gold Coast), 12th (Adelaide), 10th (Port Adelaide) and 14th (Fremantle) in the previous season - not a single top 8 side. In their MCG run, they teams that finished 2nd (West Coast), 5th (Melbourne), 7th (GWS), and 3rd (Collingwood). They didn't play a single top 4 side away, and the majority of the toughest matches came in the 7 game run.

How did the AFL allow this fixture to eventuate in the first place?
We had the lowest number of home games of any side in the competition, with a total of 6 homes games played up until round 16, including our obligatory 1 at Marvel.

No one complained about our fixture prior to the 7 games at the 'G.
 

Jedi Tiger

🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆
Sep 18, 2015
280
1,063
AFL Club
Richmond
What's more, for their interstate games, they played against sides that finished 17th (Gold Coast), 12th (Adelaide), 10th (Port Adelaide) and 14th (Fremantle) in the previous season - not a single top 8 side. In their MCG run, they teams that finished 2nd (West Coast), 5th (Melbourne), 7th (GWS), and 3rd (Collingwood). They didn't play a single top 4 side away, and the majority of the toughest matches came in the 7 game run.
GWS round 3. You absolute turnip.
 

Attachments

Mister M

All Australian
Oct 16, 2016
904
1,051
AFL Club
Richmond
What's more, for their interstate games, they played against sides that finished 17th (Gold Coast), 12th (Adelaide), 10th (Port Adelaide) and 14th (Fremantle) in the previous season - not a single top 8 side. In their MCG run, they teams that finished 2nd (West Coast), 5th (Melbourne), 7th (GWS), and 3rd (Collingwood). They didn't play a single top 4 side away, and the majority of the toughest matches came in the 7 game run.
Your argument would hold more water if it was accurate.

GWS (who finished 7th in 2018) hosted Richmond in Round 3 in Sydney; which Richmond then had to back up and travel to Adelaide to play Port in Round 4. These two back to back games early in the season when we were still trying to get into the season and during the start of our 'injury crisis' (Remembering that Richmond was missing Rance, Riewoldt, Cotchin & Martin in Round 4) could also be an example of where the fixture disadvantaged us.

The AFL should've had one of the Giants or Power games away late in the season instead of playing both teams away early in the year and at home later in the season; but that's the way the fixture works.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

CM9000

BigFooty Optimist
Aug 19, 2016
2,270
4,803
Perth, WA
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
East Fremantle
Pretty big call given they won an away game a fortnight ago.
No offence to Brisbane, but I think your side was quite a bit off due to the lack of finals experience. It made you a bit easier to beat then the other top 4 sides.

We had the lowest number of home games of any side in the competition, with a total of 6 homes games played up until round 16, including our obligatory 1 at Marvel.

No one complained about our fixture prior to the 7 games at the 'G.
Must be difficult having to play against co tenants, when half the competition have to travel interstate every second week. Must be hard walking across the road to Etihad.
 

Grockadoc

Premium Platinum
Jul 25, 2008
18,349
31,165
Geelong
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
Fighting Furies, Man Utd, Cavaliers
No offence to Brisbane, but I think your side was quite a bit off due to the lack of finals experience. It made you a bit easier to beat then the other top 4 sides.



Must be difficult having to play against co tenants, when half the competition have to travel interstate every second week. Must be hard walking across the road to Etihad.
We had also travelled the most of any Victorian side up until that point too (Including Geelong).
 

CM9000

BigFooty Optimist
Aug 19, 2016
2,270
4,803
Perth, WA
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
East Fremantle
GWS round 3. You absolute turnip.
Your argument would hold more water if it was accurate.

GWS (who finished 7th in 2018) hosted Richmond in Round 3 in Sydney; which Richmond then had to back up and travel to Adelaide to play Port in Round 4. These two back to back games early in the season when we were still trying to get into the season and during the start of our 'injury crisis' (Remembering that Richmond was missing Rance, Riewoldt, Cotchin & Martin in Round 4) could also be an example of where the fixture disadvantaged us.

The AFL should've had one of the Giants or Power games away late in the season instead of playing both teams away early in the year and at home later in the season; but that's the way the fixture works.
Fixed. A single away game against the side that finished 7th last year more than makes up for the fixture.
 

Sterge

Moderator
Jun 3, 2009
35,620
57,964
Melbourne
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
Avs/Pats/Chelsea
fu** this is a load of dross

We didn't get a proper home game until round 12 go make a thread about that.

Afl fixturing has always been shit, you know what would have happened if we got more home games earlier in the season when we had half a team out with injuries we would have won even more games.

No one gave a shit when we were outside the 8 at the bye and looking like missing finals but now it's a big deal.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top Bottom