Should Interstate Clubs Sell Home Games To Play At The MCG?

Discussion in 'AFL - The Australian Football League' started by RIOLINWITPUNCHS, Oct 6, 2017.

Put it out there
  1. footyfan78

    footyfan78 Brownlow Medallist

    Carlton
    Other teams:
    there are no other teams worthy
    Joined:
    Aug 14
    Posts:
    10,220
    Location:
    spacetime

    Your assumption is totally wrong. My team has never been advantaged apart from 1945 when grand final at our homeground. In 1995 my club 4 wins clear on top of ladder. No homeground final advantage at Princes Park given and none asked for or expected. Finals are about winning wherever they are. None of this only expect to win at home. We have to earn our way into a grand final. Not get it on a silver platter like these soft Crowies do with so many games with distinct homeground advantage to get them there with easy paths.

    Anyway, back on topic as far as the number of games at MCG for all clubs.

    So Roos only one. Not enough there. So get Swans back to 2, Crows 2 and get GWS, North and Gold Coast on 2 each and we have all clubs in the league with at minimum 2 games at MCG each year.
    So we can see it can be done.
     

    (Log in to remove this ad.)

  2. slugger01

    slugger01 All Australian

    Collingwood
    Other teams:
    Joined:
    Sep 15
    Posts:
    713
    No, i think you have taken my comments wrong. I didn't say your club was advantaged. I said that any supporter trying to formulate a draft that they think is fair would most likely be "more" fair towards their team, and "less" fair to teams they don't like..

    Yep, on the face of it, shuffle a few games. But, is there an opportunity to do that, considering the AFL "equalisation" policy of dividing the teams into 3 groups based on ladder positions, and then each team playing teams in their group twice. There may not be an opportunity, as the other 5 teams in their group may not have the MCG as their home ground..

    Many rules, many considerations, not as easy as it sounds.
    The only solution is to play 34 H&A games.
     
  3. kreglze

    kreglze Brownlow Medallist

    Gold Coast
    Other teams:
    Arsenal
    Joined:
    Sep 11
    Posts:
    10,130
    Location:
    Manchester
    We sold a home game to China, but is it too much to ask that when we play Melbourne opposition, we play them in Melbourne, and not in TAS and NT.
     
    Bokonon_ likes this.
  4. greatwhiteshark

    greatwhiteshark Norm Smith Medallist

    West Coast
    Other teams:
    West Perth
    Joined:
    Oct 07
    Posts:
    7,752
    Location:
    Perth
    One would think so yes, but as so many Presidents of Victorian clubs signed up to poor stadium deals where they don’t make no money they play sides such as Gold Coast somewhere they can make a dollar.
    They don’t do it for the good of the game they do it to try and save face with their members for signing up to stupid deals.
     
  5. slugger01

    slugger01 All Australian

    Collingwood
    Other teams:
    Joined:
    Sep 15
    Posts:
    713
    Yes, it is a bit rich to ask that.
    "Yes, GC can sell home games, but you nasty Vic teams should not be allowed to do what we do!!"

    At least the games Vic clubs sell are in Australia!!!
     
  6. kreglze

    kreglze Brownlow Medallist

    Gold Coast
    Other teams:
    Arsenal
    Joined:
    Sep 11
    Posts:
    10,130
    Location:
    Manchester
    I have no issue with Victorian teams selling home games, but spread the teams out, don't make it us consistently. I can see us playing away games in NT, Bendigo and TAS next year.
     
    slugger01 likes this.
  7. sportsmaniac89

    sportsmaniac89 Persona Non Grata

    Fremantle
    Other teams:
    Dandenong Rangers, Man United
    Joined:
    Jan 08
    Posts:
    9,353
    Has to be 11 home and 11 away but that said, I would like to actually see Freo get more games in Melbourne so the Victorian Membership is a little more worthwhile.

    I mean, we can't get into Geelong without paying extra because that tinpot stadium allocates sweet **** all for opposition clubs (bunch of insecure pissants) oh and it would be great if we didn't get shafted to Tassie or ******* Darwin other years against MCG tenant clubs Melbourne and Hawthorn...that would be greatly appreciated.

    The reason we don't get games at the MCG is because Victorian clubs keep selling games interstate...why should we be penalised for that?
     
  8. slugger01

    slugger01 All Australian

    Collingwood
    Other teams:
    Joined:
    Sep 15
    Posts:
    713
    Umm, an NON VICTORIAN side organised to play GC in China. Nothing to do with Victorian clubs..
    And, if you believe the spin from Port, they did this for the "good of the game - to expand it internationally".

    And, the only poor stadium deal in Vic was with Etihad.. That issue has now been fixed.
     
  9. slugger01

    slugger01 All Australian

    Collingwood
    Other teams:
    Joined:
    Sep 15
    Posts:
    713
    Yep, i can see your point. Your team is in the unfortunate situation that you don't have a large supporter base, particularly in Melb. So, clubs will not make money playing you at the MCG. There are fixed costs to pay for the use of the stadium, and it is unlikely a sufficient amount of supporters will attend and pay the entrance fee, for them to make a profit.
    Also the fact that your results have been poor, and the games are not on the "must see" list for the home team, or for GC supporters.

    Yep, i can see your club gets burdened with this quite a lot.
     
  10. footyfan78

    footyfan78 Brownlow Medallist

    Carlton
    Other teams:
    there are no other teams worthy
    Joined:
    Aug 14
    Posts:
    10,220
    Location:
    spacetime
    Nah, I took you ill conceived comments that were incorrect assumptions by you, in the manner they were delivered.

    Anyway, not that important as the main thing here is simply tweak it so all clubs get at least 2 games at MCG this year. The figures you presented show it is so close to being the case already that is easier to do than you realise.

    You are just complicating things in your mind with some proposed ideas in media that likely to never come into being. Two games for each clubs minimum is close to being done already. North, GWS and Gold Coast only needed 1 more game each at MCG this season and it was done. With Sydney having 2 more away games at MCG than minimum 2 and Crows 1 more, there is the 3 re-distributed to GWS, North and Gold Coast to make it so without even needing to program more games at the MCG than already on the schedule.
     
  11. slugger01

    slugger01 All Australian

    Collingwood
    Other teams:
    Joined:
    Sep 15
    Posts:
    713
    What? I think it's more you comprehension that's ill conceived. I never said you team has had advantages in the past. What i said was

    "Try to formulate a fixture with all your wishes, with the constraints we have (22 games, 18 teams, etc etc). I'll bet you find that your fixture is compromised, and the question is, which team is it compromised in favour of. I'm betting it is towards the team you support, and the disadvantage is towards the team you don't care much for.?

    Where did i say your team was advantaged in 1945? or in 1995. Or any other year for that matter? My only assumption to my bet was that if a supporter tries to formulate a fixture under the constraints and rules we have, that fixture will be more sympathetic to the team they support, rather than the team they don't like most.
     

    (Log in to remove this ad.)

  12. footyfan78

    footyfan78 Brownlow Medallist

    Carlton
    Other teams:
    there are no other teams worthy
    Joined:
    Aug 14
    Posts:
    10,220
    Location:
    spacetime
    Exactly!!!

    lol

    Just stick to the very very very simple point of 2 games minimum, for each club at MCG is really one step away from being there already.

    It is really not that hard to get.

    Common sense
    R.I.P
     
    Bokonon_ likes this.
  13. slugger01

    slugger01 All Australian

    Collingwood
    Other teams:
    Joined:
    Sep 15
    Posts:
    713
    Perhaps look at the first part of your original reply, and the part that i am questioning you on as far as comprehending my post.
    We can then move to the second point of how many MCG games.

    Anyway, no point continuing this discussion with any meaningful dialogue, so have a good day, sir/madam.
     
  14. footyfan78

    footyfan78 Brownlow Medallist

    Carlton
    Other teams:
    there are no other teams worthy
    Joined:
    Aug 14
    Posts:
    10,220
    Location:
    spacetime
    I don't need to as it was the unimportant stuff that already dealt with. You just did not like it and cannot get over it.

    The so called second point to you is the only meaningful point to me that matters here and thanks to you pointing out how many games each club played at MCG in 2017 you actually have been helpful showing them all playing a minimum games of 2 each at MCG each season can been done.

    Thanks for your help looking it up in first place. Despite you getting your knickers in a knot over stuff that does not matter I really appreciate the actually meaningful stuff you contributed of how many games each played at the MCG this year to show how possible it is to be done. Have a good day and do not sweat the small stuff.
     
  15. 99cents

    99cents Club Legend

    Geelong
    Other teams:
    Joined:
    Dec 11
    Posts:
    1,471
    Might have been a different result at the Adelaide oval
     
  16. 99cents

    99cents Club Legend

    Geelong
    Other teams:
    Joined:
    Dec 11
    Posts:
    1,471
    West Coast Eagles would go broke if they didn't have the AFL
     
  17. 99cents

    99cents Club Legend

    Geelong
    Other teams:
    Joined:
    Dec 11
    Posts:
    1,471
    Haven't seen too many Adelaide fans complaining about the MCG, but the top team deserves the advantage not the lower ranked one.
     
  18. OutofTownCrow

    OutofTownCrow Premium Platinum

    Adelaide
    Other teams:
    New York Excelsior, Redlegs
    Joined:
    Oct 12
    Posts:
    8,457
    It's not a fair and even competition.

    Every team has advantages and disadvantages.

    The h&a fixture is completely rooted.

    The finals series fairness is undermined by the fact the GF is played at the MCG and some finals forced to the wrong grounds based on crowd size.

    The player movement is angled towards Victoria, just because that is where most of the players come from. They are the biggest football state.

    The solutions to these are not something the AFL is seeking.

    - have a state based academy for all teams outside of Victoria, and a Victorian Academy for all vic teams. Use the existing system so that teams can match bids on draft day ... like Father-Son draft picks (without the discount)
    - have less teams in the AFL so that a 22 round season includes playing every team home and away OR play a fairer fixture system using conferences based on maths not the whims of a few blokes in suits.
    - play all finals at the home ground of the team that has earned it, no matter the lost $
    - play the GF at the home ground of the highest ranked team OR play a 3 game series for the Grand Final where the top team gets H-A-H if required.

    Never. Gonna. Happen.

    So as a non-Vic club, you just suck it up and get on with it. No use in crying about it to Vic-based supporters on BF ... not surprisingly most of this group are happy with how it's setup. To win the GF in the current AFL you need a lot to go your way ... to win one as a non-Vic team you need a bit more.

    Now, onto 2018 :)
     
  19. Underdog

    Underdog Brownlow Medallist

    West Coast
    Other teams:
    Swan Districts
    Joined:
    Jul 05
    Posts:
    22,799
    Location:
    Perth
    Its not the same thing.

    GC sold a home game to PA who decided to host it in China.
    NM retains a home game but stages it in Tasmania.
     
  20. Underdog

    Underdog Brownlow Medallist

    West Coast
    Other teams:
    Swan Districts
    Joined:
    Jul 05
    Posts:
    22,799
    Location:
    Perth
    What a bizarre statement. All clubs would go broke if not for the AFL. If they were admitted to a state league then they would be able to function in a massively reduced capacity.
     
  21. The_Reaper

    The_Reaper Hall of Famer

    West Coast
    Other teams:
    East Fremantle
    Joined:
    Jan 06
    Posts:
    39,119
    Location:
    Perth
    VFL would have gone broke if it weren't for West Coast.
     
  22. VictorianCrow85

    VictorianCrow85 Club Legend

    Adelaide
    Other teams:
    Joined:
    Jul 16
    Posts:
    1,261
    I said a while back on BF that I would do that in a heartbeat, it's not crowd sizes, dimensions but simply the familiarity and some may come to the travel factor too. Watching Adelaide on grand final day it was apparent to me we always would take an extra couple seconds to pull the trigger or spot up the next target which in turn meant the link up gets covered, the flow on effect is by the time you look for the next alternative the opposition defence is fully set up so for me the only real way to combat this is by getting as many games there as possible and feel comfortable. Unfortunately for most clubs it's not really an option due to their members at home getting the shaft and being forced to do even more travel to enjoy their side play. It's a bloody tricky problem the AFL has here, home ground advantage is more important than ever with a more even comp so it's just not fair to have it exist for the grand final. I mean is it fair that one states supporters have to travel and the others do not for a grand final too? I really don't know how to address the issue fully, I love the MCG as the grand final location but at some point competition integrity has to trump 'tradition' or getting 100k to the game.
     
    Bone71 and RIOLINWITPUNCHS like this.
  23. 99cents

    99cents Club Legend

    Geelong
    Other teams:
    Joined:
    Dec 11
    Posts:
    1,471
    It's a symbiotic relationship between an the teams...
     
  24. 99cents

    99cents Club Legend

    Geelong
    Other teams:
    Joined:
    Dec 11
    Posts:
    1,471
    This is often said, but I think we can safely assume that a top flight football competition is something that will never die.
     
    slugger01 likes this.
  25. slugger01

    slugger01 All Australian

    Collingwood
    Other teams:
    Joined:
    Sep 15
    Posts:
    713
    GC was listed as the home team (a point the AFL even supported the GC with the rule that as the home team, they would wear their home strip)..

    Nevertheless, even if the difference is in semantics, the result is the same. GC received money by selling their home game, to be played elsewhere than their home ground.

    Put it another way, if you believe the home game was PA's, PA played their home game in China. NM played their home game in Tas.
    So, why demand that Vic teams should not be allowed to play their home games on grounds other than their home ground, but non-Victorian teams (whether it is PA or GC in this case) are allowed to.

    My statement stands.. "Yes, GC can sell home games, but you nasty Vic teams should not be allowed to do what we do!!"

    Or, if you want to change it to suit your change in semantics, "Yes, non Vic teams can play their home games anywhere they like, but you nasty Vic teams should not be allowed to do what we do!!"