Richmond's struggle with interstate games

[Isaac Cumming No 1]

Nothing! The problem isn't a lack of research or analysis into home ground advantage. It's that the general public leap to wild conclusions by spotting patterns in tiny samples.

For years, Richmond had an excellent record away. In 2015, they went 6-5 at home and 9-2 away. Today the narrative has flipped around and people say they can't win away.

West Coast get mocked for being flat track bullies every time they put together a string of home wins and away losses, then everyone goes quiet when they reverse it, then the meme comes back again.

This isn't because of some mysterious grand force that nobody understands. It's that human beings like to spot patterns where none exist.

The effect of HGA is reasonably well-understood by people who care to investigate it. About 40% of it is likely to be umpire bias due to crowd influence. (This is the case in sports around the world.) The rest is likely to be related to travel and ground familiarity.

The only bit I'm a bit uncomfortable with is people correlate the H/A advantage with the GF, and assume it's the same.
The Hawks and Tigers have won certainly won flags as MCG tenants but the Dogs and Swans weren't.

Let's not mention the Cats.

 

[Run n Spread]

Nothing! The problem isn't a lack of research or analysis into home ground advantage. It's that the general public leap to wild conclusions by spotting patterns in tiny samples.

For years, Richmond had an excellent record away. In 2015, they went 6-5 at home and 9-2 away. Today the narrative has flipped around and people say they can't win away.

West Coast get mocked for being flat track bullies every time they put together a string of home wins and away losses, then everyone goes quiet when they reverse it, then the meme comes back again.

This isn't because of some mysterious grand force that nobody understands. It's that human beings like to spot patterns where none exist.

The effect of HGA is reasonably well-understood by people who care to investigate it. About 40% of it is likely to be umpire bias due to crowd influence. (This is the case in sports around the world.) The rest is likely to be related to travel and ground familiarity.

Richmond are 0-4 this year. That could be a problem if they lose top 2. WCE won on the G. Confidence for the GF. My response was the effect this year. Agree with the last para but wouldn't put umpire bias at 40%. It is just lots of tiny things adding up that give the home team a 2% advantage, away team a 2% disadvantage and in an even comp that is enough.

It is an interesting concept as it applies to all sports and most levels around the world. But no one in any code can come up with a real solution. Bit like the hamstring factor, no one really knows.

 

[VictorianCrow85]

Meh, you have two insane groups in this debate:

1. "There's no such thing as home ground advantage."
2. "Teams only win because of home ground advantage."

I think most people are #3, i.e. acknowledge HGA exists but debate how influential it is.

I think Richmond benefited from HGA in the Grand Final, but I don't think it was worth 48 points.

I agree completely with this and putting a points value on such a thing is tricky though scoreboard pressure is a very real thing so when a home ground side tends to pull away it's usually insanely hard to pull them back in and why it's such an issue. The main point has always been that its grossly unfair for EITHER/ANY side to have an advantage in the grand final. It really does a disservice to the sport & grand final itself which is meant to be a spectacle, the pinnacle, but lately when MCG tenants are involved the matches have been underwhelming. I don't really care to change past results whoever won, won but I would like to see things change in the future though I concede with the recent deal signed by the AFL it seems unlikely in the short term and thus I would imagine if the trend continues the noise will just continue to grow louder until eventually the AFL concedes what most already know and at least attempts to offset it and there is plenty of little things they could do which just may even things up a bit.

 

[Milanista28]

Richmond sit 1st having lost 4 interstate trips.

Essendon sit 12th having won 4 interstate trips.

Hmmm i wonder which one i would prefer.

Us us is it us??

 

[Sir_Loin]

That's a long bow to draw just because there is no standout team. Maybe just a more even comp.

Nearly every single senior coach I have heard speak has stated that the comp is the hardest and most even its ever been

 

[Final Siren]

The only bit I'm a bit uncomfortable with is people correlate the H/A advantage with the GF, and assume it's the same.
The Hawks and Tigers have won certainly won flags as MCG tenants but the Dogs and Swans weren't.

Let's not mention the Cats.

There are basically two ways you can go with the Grand Final:
1. Assume it's the same as any other game
2. Assume it's special

If you assume it's just another game, you can use a big data sample (thousands of games), and be fairly confident of your number, which will come out around 12 points for a game between an MCG tenant and a non-Victorian side.

If you assume it's special, then you're limited to a very small data sample (only 1 game per year), from which it's difficult to conclude anything -- especially if you want to classify MCG tenants as different to Victorian non-MCG tenants. But from that sample, you'll find that HGA seems to be small or non-existent, because of all the non-MCG sides who won upset Grand Finals before 2014.

What people believe now, of course, is that HGA is a big deal in Grand Finals... but the data only supports this if you limit the sample to a mere four points: the most recent four Grand Finals, where a Victorian team won in an upset, or by more than expected. The conclusion will change if you count the GFs before that, or if you count non-GF games. Which isn't justifiable, imo. I mean, who knows, maybe something changed in modern AFL and suddenly MCG-specific Grand Final HGA ballooned to new proportions, but that's a hunch or an opinion, not something you can support today without extreme cherry-picking.

 

[VictorianCrow85]

If you assume it's just another game, you can use a big data sample (thousands of games), and be fairly confident of your number, which will come out around 12 points for a game between an MCG tenant and a non-Victorian side.

The thing with that analysis is its way too simplistic. To be far more accurate you need to look at the top 4 sides and the HGA they have as the top tier sides tend to become so elite on their home deck its far larger and historically it comes in more like 5-6 goals which is a HUGE advantage for a side to have on the grand final! Even 12 points is still grossly unfair, why should one side have to conquer a handicap?

 

[footyfan1978]

That's a long bow to draw just because there is no standout team. Maybe just a more even comp.

Not really long bow. Fairly obvious. Indeed more even , of lower standard comp.
When you go from 12 league comp to 14 it happened, when it jumped to 16 happened again and once again jump to 18 , each time it is obvious the comp drops a bit as a result. In time population growth will raise the standard again across the board of the comp but for now we getting used to the standard drop again.

 

[Final Siren]

The thing with that analysis is its way too simplistic. To be far more accurate you need to look at the top 4 sides and the HGA they have as the top tier sides tend to become so elite on their home deck its far larger and historically it comes in more like 5-6 goals which is a HUGE advantage for a side to have on the grand final! Even 12 points is still grossly unfair, why should one side have to conquer a handicap?

I'm not sure why you say it's simplistic or what you're using to derive your 5-6 goal number. I'm familiar with a lot of good models and I've never seen any of them calculate a 36-point HGA.

But I do agree the MCG Grand Final arrangement is unfair. The GF should be hosted by the highest-finishing team.

 

[Sir_Loin]

There are basically two ways you can go with the Grand Final:
1. Assume it's the same as any other game
2. Assume it's special

If you assume it's just another game, you can use a big data sample (thousands of games), and be fairly confident of your number, which will come out around 12 points for a game between an MCG tenant and a non-Victorian side.

If you assume it's special, then you're limited to a very small data sample (only 1 game per year), from which it's difficult to conclude anything -- especially if you want to classify MCG tenants as different to Victorian non-MCG tenants. But from that sample, you'll find that HGA seems to be small or non-existent, because of all the non-MCG sides who won upset Grand Finals before 2014.

What people believe now, of course, is that HGA is a big deal in Grand Finals... but the data only supports this if you limit the sample to a mere four points: the most recent four Grand Finals, where a Victorian team won in an upset, or by more than expected. The conclusion will change if you count the GFs before that, or if you count non-GF games. Which isn't justifiable, imo. I mean, who knows, maybe something changed in modern AFL and suddenly MCG-specific Grand Final HGA ballooned to new proportions, but that's a hunch or an opinion, not something you can support today without extreme cherry-picking.

The only conclusion you can draw from the data is that HGA in a GF is marginally advantageous to an MCG “tenant”. I’d argue that its so marginal its not even worth debating.

 

[Final Siren]

The only conclusion you can draw from the data is that HGA in a GF is marginally advantageous to an MCG “tenant”. I’d argue that its so marginal its not even worth debating.

Easy to say when you're the one it's marginally benefiting, though. I totally get why it pisses people off.

 

[Sttew]

I don’t know why people are cracking Richmond, they are top of the ladder and hardly struggling. I never understood the cracking of the Eagles about interstate record either. It’s bloody hard to win on the road in this comp. whenever you play away from your home it is harder to win, it has been that way at all levels of footy forever.
There is an advantage playing at home that is real and it stands up far more often than not. It makes no difference whether it’s round 1, a semi or preliminary final or a grand final, it is there.
Plenty of good sides go interstate and lose, Richmond are no different.

If Richmond wins the premiership this year, which they almost certainly will on present form, we'll say, "What did it matter that they couldn't win interstate?"

But it is still a weakness in their armour.

Between 2007 and 2011 (5 seasons) Geelong only lost interstate 5 times, i.e, an average of once a season.

Between 2012 and 2015 Hawthorn lost a total of 6 interstate games.

In its back-to-back grand final years (2010 & 2011) Collingwood lost just the one interstate game.

The point is good sides should win anywhere

 

[VictorianCrow85]

I'm not sure why you say it's simplistic or what you're using to derive your 5-6 goal number. I'm familiar with a lot of good models and I've never seen any of them calculate a 36-point HGA.

But I do agree the MCG Grand Final arrangement is unfair. The GF should be hosted by the highest-finishing team.

I'll see if I can dig up an article that dissected it all last year and post but effectively it covered the fact that elite teams have the strongest home ground advantages. I am taking it at face value plus just what I've personally observed. I mean my own side is a great example, we were easily a 5-6 goal better side at home last year, maybe even more!

I'm not sure I agree that the higher ranked side should get to host as I really believe it should be flat out neutral for fairness and will help ensure better GF's being fought out imo. Anyway I respect your posting a lot, you're capable of looking at things very objectively and fairly. It's entirely possible this is a shorter term trend in the game due to it just being so close that any advantage gets amped up as a result. I'm sure eventually there is going to be a true powerhouse team emerge that just dominates away and at home but I think the issue with waiting for that is in the short term the best side may not win. (Fyi I'm not saying Richmond don't win last years GF at a neutral venue it's entirely possible, probably even likely they still run out premiers just think it would have been a much better fought out contest.)

 

[Ceehook]

have the GF in New Zealand

 

[Grrr]

Not really long bow. Fairly obvious. Indeed more even , of lower standard comp.
When you go from 12 league comp to 14 it happened, when it jumped to 16 happened again and once again jump to 18 , each time it is obvious the comp drops a bit as a result. In time population growth will raise the standard again across the board of the comp but for now we getting used to the standard drop again.

Yes and no. Footballers today are so much more professional and athletic. Football has changed and whilst some of the natural talent may have gone, I can remember plenty of footballers who played in Premiership teams that would no way make it in today's sides. Richmond's 1980's side had Greg Straughan and Emmett Dunne as their tall backs, no way would they get a gig today.
The game is so fast these days, if you are slow by foot or mind you are gone. The skills are fine, just sometimes when players are fatigued the speed of the game makes them look ordinary. Because of that I think todays sides would match if not beat sides of years ago. Of course we will never know.

 

[Ceehook]

you might get an angry reaction if you got in the face a GWS player and said you only beat Richmond because of a home ground advantage

 

[kranky al]

Richmond are 0-4 this year. That could be a problem if they lose top 2. WCE won on the G. Confidence for the GF. My response was the effect this year. Agree with the last para but wouldn't put umpire bias at 40%. It is just lots of tiny things adding up that give the home team a 2% advantage, away team a 2% disadvantage and in an even comp that is enough.

It is an interesting concept as it applies to all sports and most levels around the world. But no one in any code can come up with a real solution. Bit like the hamstring factor, no one really knows.

Actually they have come up with solutions


From having dedicated neutral arenas (premier league)
Along with the ladder at the end of the season is as valued a prize as the fa cup.
To multiple games at each others ground (basketball)
To playing at the higher ranked teams ground (a league)
To rotating it so the likelihood of a team having hga is minimal (nfl)

Aussie rules and nrl are outliers in the sense that we have two very parochial cities that like to think they are larger than the sport itself.

 

[footyfan1978]

Yes and no. Footballers today are so much more professional and athletic. Football has changed and whilst some of the natural talent may have gone, I can remember plenty of footballers who played in Premiership teams that would no way make it in today's sides. Richmond's 1980's side had Greg Straughan and Emmett Dunne as their tall backs, no way would they get a gig today.
The game is so fast these days, if you are slow by foot or mind you are gone. The skills are fine, just sometimes when players are fatigued the speed of the game makes them look ordinary. Because of that I think todays sides would match if not beat sides of years ago. Of course we will never know.

Not buying it. Just get better and learn to win away again and will gain credit.

 

[Sir_Loin]

Easy to say when you're the one it's marginally benefiting, though. I totally get why it pisses people off.

Did playing the GF at the MCG last year provide a 48 point advantage to Richmond?

The PF a 36 point advantage?

The QF a 51 point advantage?

The marginal discussion only really applies if the win is marginal. If its a 12 point advantage to an MCG tenant, how many times has an MCG tenant won a GF within the margin over a non-tenant?

Should the AFL start handicapping games for MCG tenants? Like they do with the draw? Would seem like a complete overreaction for something so marginal. Betting markets for example factor things like this in. What were the odds for last years GF?

 

[mcgarnacle]

The only bit I'm a bit uncomfortable with is people correlate the H/A advantage with the GF, and assume it's the same.
The Hawks and Tigers have won certainly won flags as MCG tenants but the Dogs and Swans weren't.

Let's not mention the Cats.

I don't think home ground has anything to do with it.

Big issue for interstate clubs and GF is all the shit around it. They get to Melbourne on Thursday and it's fairly difficult to switch off. Parade and hotel and seeing players and coaches for the entire time. probably mentally draining by time they get to GF. Do the VIC clubs put up players in a hotel or anything? I think it would be easier to go home to your own bed, see your family and friends and switch off mentally when not at functions.

 

[Grrr]

Not buying it. Just get better and learn to win away again and will gain credit.

So your sole reason for believing that the standard of football has gotten worse... is because Richmond have failed the last 4 games to win away. Okay.

 

[JackOutback]

The only conclusion you can draw from the data is that HGA in a GF is marginally advantageous to an MCG “tenant”. I’d argue that its so marginal its not even worth debating.

When you have the two best teams playing, marginal advantages mean everything. Overall home ground statistics will be influenced by games between top and bottom placed teams where even home ground advantage isn't enough to overcome the gaps in skill. In a game of inches, centimetres count.

 

[VictorianCrow85]

Did playing the GF at the MCG last year provide a 48 point advantage to Richmond?

The PF a 36 point advantage?

The QF a 51 point advantage?

The marginal discussion only really applies if the win is marginal. If its a 12 point advantage to an MCG tenant, how many times has an MCG tenant won a GF within the margin over a non-tenant?

Should the AFL start handicapping games for MCG tenants? Like they do with the draw? Would seem like a complete overreaction for something so marginal. Betting markets for example factor things like this in. What were the odds for last years GF?

Did it provide a 48 point advantage? No probably not, but you're still over looking the ridiculousness that any side has to get a handicap and that's what people have an issue with not that Richmond won per say.

Since 2017 Richmond have scored an average of around 97 points at the MCG, conceding an average of 65 points. Then you look at their averages at say Etihad where they score an average of 88 and concede 87 which sums up in a nutshell how much better Richmond are on their home deck. Most elite sides would be somewhat similar.

Play the game at a neutral venue, win and then no one can say anything at all.

 

[Sir_Loin]

When you have the two best teams playing, marginal advantages mean everything. Overall home ground statistics will be influenced by games between top and bottom placed teams where even home ground advantage isn't enough to overcome the gaps in skill. In a game of inches, centimetres count.

Is there an actual example where it has counted? Using last year as an example, AFC had the better H&A record, the better % and the the better total points winning margin in the finals (although the latter RFC was comparable).

So knowing all of this is a supposed 12 point advantage to the lesser of the teams really a something to quibble about? If anything it evened the odds out between the teams.

 

[kranky al]

Is there an actual example where it has counted? Using last year as an example, AFC had the better H&A record, the better % and the the better total points winning margin in the finals (although the latter RFC was comparable).

So knowing all of this is a supposed 12 point advantage to the lesser of the teams really a something to quibble about? If anything it evened the odds out between the teams.

If the game had have been played at ao - richmond would have had its arse beat as hard as adelaide had theirs beat.

Theres no escaping that. Nothing richmond have done away from their home ground against decent teams even comes close to refuting that.

NOTHING

NOT
ONE
SINGLE
GAME.


Its one of the worst examples of a higher ranked team losing to a lower ranked tenant as unlike hawthorn vs eagles in 2015 you simply cannot point to away victories against good opposition.

This is going to continue to fester.