Preview The Home Ground Factor in Finals is hugely overrated

[LoungeLizard]

Nah, my money gets spent travelling and seeing the world the other 6 months of the year.

6 months traveling, 6 months crying, but here you are in the 6 months off still crying.

Edit: sorry i didn't quite get what you meant.
You travel during the footy season and cry during the off season?

 

[juss]

There's a very distinct difference between unfamiliar and less familair/less comfortable.

Unfamiliar is something you havent experienced before, and is totally new. For example non WA teams playing at Optus Stadium for the first time this year would have been completely unfamiliar surroundings. They have never done or experienced it before.

Less familiar would be Eagles playing at the MCG for example. It's not unfamiliar when players may have played 5, 10, 20 games at the venue before, it's just less familiar. Important difference psychologically for the players.

 

[bh90210fan]

Yeah that is what Melbourne ground rationalisation did, plonk Melbourne teams into the same venue this increasing all non-Melbourne teams familiarity.

You are almost there.


Yeah, and as a result of ground rationalisation the MCG tenants were forced out of home games...with ‘smaller’ fixtures shunted to Etihad.

Etihad that ground the Eagles play at as much as Collingwood, despite it being a Collingwood ‘home’ ground!


No.

Our biggest advantage was at VicPark.

Since 2000 when Etihad has come in

Collingwood has played 17 ‘home’ games against the Eagles - 8 at Etihad and 9 at the MCG

However, unlike at VicPark and the MCG where Collingwood enjoyed a substantial ground familiarity advantage, the Eagles have played the exact same number of ‘away’ games at Etihad as total games played there by Collingwood since 2010.

That is what Melbourne ground rationalisation did, previously for ALL of WC ‘away’ games in Melbourne they faced a huge ground familiarity disadvantage...after ground rationalisation this isn’t the case.

One day it might sink in, it is a simple logical concept.

Since 2010, Melbourne clubs vs Non Victorian clubs

Collingwood has won 17 / 25 at the mcg. They’ve won 68% of those matches.

Collingwood hosting non Victorian teams at Etihad have won 7 / 10 @ 70%

Ground rationalisation isn’t hurting you. It hasn’t cost Collingwood a top spot on the ladder.

Richmond 22 / 30 @MCG 73%

Richmond 4 / 7 @ Etihad 57%

You could argue ground rationalisation in Melbourne has cost Richmond a win over the course of the last 9 seasons.

Melbourne 19 / 38 @ mcg 50%

Melbourne in NT 6 / 14 43%

Ground rationalisation hasn’t cost the demons any wins.

Hawthorn 19 / 24 @ mcg. 79%

Hawthorn 22 / 25 in Tasmania @ 88%

Ground rationalisation hasn’t cost Hawthorn any wins.

North @ Etihad 22 / 36 61%

North in Tasmania 7 / 11 @ 64%

Ground rationalisation hasn’t cost north any wins vs non Victorian opposition.

OVERALL SINCE 2010, MELBOURNE CLUBS HAVE WON
99 out of 153 matches against non Victorian teams on their preferred home ground. At a win rate of 65%

Overall Melbourne clubs have won 46 out of 67 matches against non Victorian opposition on their non preferred home ground. AT A WIN RATE OF 69%

Melbourne clubs have actually performed better overall on their non preferred home grounds against non Victorian clubs since 2010.

You are the biggest sook on this website.

How has ground rationalisation in Melbourne cost Melbourne clubs a top spot on the ladder when they’ve performed better overall on their non preferred home grounds against non Victorian teams?

Then you combine this with the fact that 4 of the top 10 most successful h&a seasons in afl/vfl history have been achieved by Victorian clubs since 2000, in the period where Melbourne clubs are supposedly most disadvantaged.

How many non Victorian teams are in the top 10? Zero.

The most successful season by a non Victorian team was way back in 1991. When Melbourne teams were treated fairly apparently.

This doesn’t compute at all. What’s going on here?

It seems ground rationalisation has actually helped Melbourne teams, by now not facing anywhere near the disadvantage that they were copping before. In those good old days.

It seems the most advantaged clubs out of all of this are the ones who get to play 17 games a year on 2 familiar, local grounds and now face a minimal amount of disadvantage.

Your assumption that ground rationalisation in Melbourne is costing Melbourne clubs a top spot on the ladder is a myth.

The only assumption which has proven to be correct in all of this is my assumption that you are a bloody sook.

 

[doppleganger]

How has ground rationalisation in Melbourne cost Melbourne clubs a top spot on the ladder when they’ve performed better overall on their non preferred home grounds against non Victorian teams?

Melbourne ground rationalisation has now meant that according to your stats (with your record who knows if they are accurate), 67 matches against non-Victorian teams are now no longer played at the Melbourne teams preferred ground.

How many non-Melbourne teams play opponents from different states at non preferred grounds?

That is an obvious advantage to non-Melbourne teams.

Performance is always going to be skewed towards the non-preferred home ground as the AFL fixtures ‘better’ performing teams in the preferred slots, and it is the poorer performing teams that are shunted away from Melbourne.

Hawthorn have played Sydney in Tassie once, Eagles twice, Adelaide just once. They are the three best performed non-vic sides of the 2010s....yet have played Brisbane, Gold Coast the two worst performing teams 7 and 5 times.

It is like saying WC ‘lose’ their home ground advantage when they are not a good side.

It is pretty simple, if you actually think home ground advantage exists...Melbourne ground rationalisation has removed home ground advantage only for the Melbourne teams...but yeah losing home ground advantage is a benefit according to you.

 

[bh90210fan]

Melbourne ground rationalisation has now meant that according to your stats (with your record who knows if they are accurate), 67 matches against non-Victorian teams are now no longer played at the Melbourne teams preferred ground.

How many non-Melbourne teams play opponents from different states at non preferred grounds?

That is an obvious advantage to non-Melbourne teams.

Performance is always going to be skewed towards the non-preferred home ground as the AFL fixtures ‘better’ performing teams in the preferred slots, and it is the poorer performing teams that are shunted away from Melbourne.

Hawthorn have played Sydney in Tassie once, Eagles twice, Adelaide just once. They are the three best performed non-vic sides of the 2010s....yet have played Brisbane, Gold Coast the two worst performing teams 7 and 5 times.

It is like saying WC ‘lose’ their home ground advantage when they are not a good side.

It is pretty simple, if you actually think home ground advantage exists...Melbourne ground rationalisation has removed home ground advantage only for the Melbourne teams...but yeah losing home ground advantage is a benefit according to you.

Now it’s removed your advantage completely! You’re playing at a ground 5 minutes up the road ffs.

Teams are still flying from all over the country to play you there. You are advantaged. Your record against non Victorian teams is actually better at Etihad.

Hawthorn and north play a handful of games in Tasmania each year. They play there against sides which might be there once every few years.

They have got home ground advantage in Tasmania.

The numbers back it up. Your sob story is bs.

 

[kirky]

Now it’s removed your advantage completely! You’re playing at a ground 5 minutes up the road ffs.

Teams are still flying from all over the country to play you there. You are advantaged. Your record against non Victorian teams is actually better at Etihad.

Hawthorn and north play a handful of games in Tasmania each year. They play there against sides which might be there once every few years.

They have got home ground advantage in Tasmania.

The numbers back it up. Your sob story is bs.

Well done on the stats - can’t argue with facts. Again, well done.

 

[doppleganger]

Teams are still flying from all over the country to play you there. You are advantaged. Your record against non Victorian teams is actually better at Etihad.

What are you actually arguing?

You think a non-Melbourne team should be advantaged for an away game?!

Melbourne teams record at Etihad, where they are fixtured predominantly against the battling non-Victorian clubs is better than their record at the MCG where they are fixtured predominantly against the strong non-Vic teams.

Wow.

That tells you nothing about ground advantage, it says you win more against s**t teams.....no s**t.

I take it your aren’t an analyst by profession.

Hawthorn and north play a handful of games in Tasmania each year. They play there against sides which might be there once every few years.

They have got home ground advantage in Tasmania.

North play 3 ‘home’ games in Tasmania, WC average more than 3.25 ‘away’ games per year at Etihad since 2000.

North have to actually sell a home game to try and get some ‘home’ advantage.

WC get more familiarity just as the away team at Etihad!!

LOL

The numbers back it up. Your sob story is bs.

Your numbers are woeful, it appears that your ability to contextualise numbers is on a par with your knowledge of AFL in the 90s.

Melbourne teams find it harder to beat good non-Melbourne teams...no sh1t.

That has nothing to do with home ground advantage.

 

[bh90210fan]

What are you actually arguing?

You think a non-Melbourne team should be advantaged for an away game?!

Melbourne teams record at Etihad, where they are fixtured predominantly against the battling non-Victorian clubs is better than their record at the MCG where they are fixtured predominantly against the strong non-Vic teams.

Wow.

That tells you nothing about ground advantage, it says you win more against s**t teams.....no s**t.

I take it your aren’t an analyst by profession.


North play 3 ‘home’ games in Tasmania, WC average more than 3.25 ‘away’ games per year at Etihad since 2000.

North have to actually sell a home game to try and get some ‘home’ advantage.

WC get more familiarity just as the away team at Etihad!!

LOL

Your numbers are woeful, it appears that your ability to contextualise numbers is on a par with your knowledge of AFL in the 90s.

Melbourne teams find it harder to beat good non-Melbourne teams...no sh1t.

That has nothing to do with home ground advantage.

You’re an absolute goose.

Hawthorn haven’t just played s**t teams in Tasmania.

They were playing against the Dockers, port and gws in seasons just after they had play in prelims, finals, a grand final and finished top of the ladder.

You can’t deal with the numbers, so you start arguing in hypotheticals.

What if Hawthorn had played the eagles and crows another half a dozen times since 2010 in Tasmania?

Hawthorn are the most successful team this decade you ****.

We’d be lucky to win a couple of those.

Which wouldn’t change anything.

The numbers would still hold firm.

We won the flag this year and are playing in Alice Springs next year. Where our players have never been before.

So no, you’re wrong again. As usual. Still can’t feel sorry for poor Collingwood.

 

[kirky]

North have to actually sell a home game to try and get some ‘home’ advantage.

I’m calling out this bullshit - they don’t sell games to get home advantage, they sell games for $$$$. They do get a home advantage by playing in Tasmania however that isn’t the principal reason.

By the way, Adelaide has never beaten the Kangaroos in Tasmania (small sample however this would strengthen argument as Roos play 3-4 games each year in Tasmania, we play there every know and again) and we have been a reasonable and competitive side the last decade. But why don’t Collingwood ever play there, you know perhaps once every 5 years just to demonstrate some integrity in the comp?

 

[bh90210fan]

I’m calling out this bullshit - they don’t sell games to get home advantage, they sell games for $$$$. They do get a home advantage by playing in Tasmania however that isn’t the principal reason.

By the way, Adelaide has never beaten the Kangaroos in Tasmania (small sample however this would strengthen argument as Roos play 3-4 games each year in Tasmania, we play there every know and again) and we have been a reasonable and competitive side the last decade. But why don’t Collingwood ever play there, you know perhaps once every 5 years just to demonstrate some integrity in the comp?

The Roos have tended to play the Swans, eagles, crows and gws in Tasmania.

The more successful non Victorian clubs over the course of this decade. On their non preferred home ground.

His assumption that better non Victorian sides get fixtured more games against Victorian clubs on their main home ground is just another myth.

 

[Isaac Cumming No 1]

I’m calling out this bullshit - they don’t sell games to get home advantage, they sell games for $$$$. They do get a home advantage by playing in Tasmania however that isn’t the principal reason.

By the way, Adelaide has never beaten the Kangaroos in Tasmania (small sample however this would strengthen argument as Roos play 3-4 games each year in Tasmania, we play there every know and again) and we have been a reasonable and competitive side the last decade. But why don’t Collingwood ever play there, you know perhaps once every 5 years just to demonstrate some integrity in the comp?

I dont mind playing North in Tassie, it's a great weekend to go down for it. Interesting to note that Richmond draw 17,5k there and we've had 8k and 6k the last two years though.

 

[doppleganger]

You’re an absolute goose.

Hawthorn haven’t just played s**t teams in Tasmania.

Your comprehension is terrible.

How do you get only playing s**t teams from what I said?

The games Melbourne clubs sell are based on commercial decisions, they are primarily against poorer teams that they know they will lose money on if played at Etihad.

Makes logical sense...

They were playing against the Dockers, port and gws in seasons just after they had play in prelims, finals, a grand final and finished top of the ladder.

You can’t deal with the numbers, so you start arguing in hypotheticals.

LOL

Good that three of there 25 games were against strong teams.

Yet they consistently play BL and Gold Coast there, 12 of the 25 games against those two who have been worst performed teams since 2010!

What if Hawthorn had played the eagles and crows another half a dozen times since 2010 in Tasmania?

Hawthorn are the most successful team this decade you ****.

We’d be lucky to win a couple of those.

Which wouldn’t change anything.

The numbers would still hold firm.

LOL

The Hawks have lost to Eagles at Etihad and the Crows have beaten them at the G and lost by a kick there

Sydney have beaten Hawthorn 3 of the last 4 games at the G.

But yeah playing good teams in Tassie wouldn’t change the numbers.

We won the flag this year and are playing in Alice Springs next year. Where our players have never been before.

So no, you’re wrong again.

You get 3 games on the G in 2019 after being good in 2018...same happened in 2016 after you made the GF in 2015.

When there is no expectation on WC you tend to get 2 or just 1 game at the G.

And that is all you really care about yeah?

 

[bh90210fan]

Your comprehension is terrible.

How do you get only playing s**t teams from what I said?

o

Here’s what you said

Performance is always going to be skewed towards the non-preferred home ground as the AFL fixtures ‘better’ performing teams in the preferred slots, and it is the poorer performing teams that are shunted away from Melbourne.

Not sure how I could’ve interpreted it any other way.

Good that three of there 25 games were against strong teams.

Yet they consistently play BL and Gold Coast there, 12 of the 25 games against those two who have been worst performed teams since 2010!




The Hawks have lost to Eagles at Etihad and the Crows have beaten them at the G and lost by a kick there

Sydney have beaten Hawthorn 3 of the last 4 games at the G.

But yeah playing good teams in Tassie wouldn’t change the numbers.

You really think Hawthorn would’ve lost a heap of games against us in Tasmania? Lol

What about north? They’ve played the majority of their matches in Tasmania against us, Adelaide, Sydney, gws and port.

Guess what? Their record in Tasmania is better than at Etihad against non Victorian clubs!

They haven’t played a majority of poorly performed teams in Tasmania.

When there is no expectation on WC you tend to get 2 or just 1 game at the G.

And that is all you really care about yeah?

There’s a big difference between expectations and reality. All you’ve got is assumptions, hypotheticals and expectations.

The reality is that when we won the flag North pumped us in Tasmania.

We didn’t lose a single game in Melbourne last year.

When Adelaide finished on top last year, north flogged them there too.

Same as Hawthorn flogging Freo in Tasmania, when they made a grand final and again when Freo finished on top of the ladder.


Sorry but ground rationalisation hasn’t cost you a top spot on the ladder. No one should feel sorry for poor Collingwood.

 

[doppleganger]

Here’s what you said

Not sure how I could’ve interpreted it any other way.

That wasn’t the quote you went off dribbling about sh1t teams from.

You really think Hawthorn would’ve lost a heap of games against us in Tasmania? Lol

Perhaps not against the Eagles, as they were the Hawks biatches.

But if they were playing Sydney or Adelaide in Tassie and GC and Brisbane at the G...I reckon all of a sudden the MCG win rate looks much better.

What about north? They’ve played the majority of their matches in Tasmania against us, Adelaide, Sydney, gws and port.

North have played what 16 games in total in Tassie, they have played Richmond and StKilda there as often as Adelaide and Sydney.

But again funnily enough Sydney are 2-0 in Tassie...yet you don’t think they would play well against Hawthorn if they played games there?

Guess what? Their record in Tasmania is better than at Etihad against non Victorian clubs!

How does that validate home ground advantage!?

Sydney have a better win rate at Marvel than at the SCG...are you saying the Swans have a bigger home ground advantage at Marvel?

There’s a big difference between expectations and reality. All you’ve got is assumptions, hypotheticals and expectations.

??

Top2 finishes in the 90s v top2 finishes once Etihad came in.

In the 90s it was close to the expected figure considering the spread of competing teams.

Post 2000, nonMelbourne teams over represented.

Almost as if something changed in melbourne in 2000!

Sorry but ground rationalisation hasn’t cost you a top spot on the ladder. No one should feel sorry for poor Collingwood.

You again with your dribble about Collingwood, why would anybody feel sorry for Collingwood?

It is the smaller Melbourne clubs who have been shafted, and the beneficiaries are the non-Melbourne teams.

 

[bh90210fan]

That wasn’t the quote you went off dribbling about sh1t teams from.


Perhaps not against the Eagles, as they were the Hawks biatches.

But if they were playing Sydney or Adelaide in Tassie and GC and Brisbane at the G...I reckon all of a sudden the MCG win rate looks much better.

North have played what 16 games in total in Tassie, they have played Richmond and StKilda there as often as Adelaide and Sydney.

But again funnily enough Sydney are 2-0 in Tassie...yet you don’t think they would play well against Hawthorn if they played games there?


How does that validate home ground advantage!?

Sydney have a better win rate at Marvel than at the SCG...are you saying the Swans have a bigger home ground advantage at Marvel?

??

Top2 finishes in the 90s v top2 finishes once Etihad came in.

In the 90s it was close to the expected figure considering the spread of competing teams.

Post 2000, nonMelbourne teams over represented.

Almost as if something changed in melbourne in 2000!

You again with your dribble about Collingwood, why would anybody feel sorry for Collingwood?

It is the smaller Melbourne clubs who have been shafted, and the beneficiaries are the non-Melbourne teams.

Since 2010, melbourne clubs have a better overall winning percentage on their non preferred home ground against non Victorian teams.

Ground rationalisation in Melbourne is not costing Melbourne clubs a top spot on the ladder.

Just because Geelong have finished top 2 on numerous occasions since 2000 does not mean it’s easier for non Victorian teams to finish above Melbourne clubs on the ladder.

Give it up.

 

[doppleganger]

Since 2010, melbourne clubs have a better overall winning percentage on their non preferred home ground against non Victorian teams.

You are using results since 2010 (what happened in 2010 by the way) to try to demonstrate home ground advantage hasn’t been reduced compared to the early 90s?

The argument is that Melbourne ground rationalisation, culminating with Etihad introduction, has basically meant that the concept of a ‘home ground’ for Melbourne clubs became redundant.

Carlton is ‘home’ at Etihad or MCG?

To find a ‘home’ ground teams actually have to sell games.

Hawthorn’s ‘home’ is MCG, Tassie or Etihad?

Your stats agree with that.

The stats you should be comparing are Collingwood at VicPark v Collingwood at Etihad

Western bulldogs at Whitten Oval v Dogs at Etihad

Saints at Moorabbin/Waverley v Saints at Etihad.

Carlton at Princes Park v carlton at Etihad.

These are the impacts of ground rationalisation.

Ground rationalisation in Melbourne is not costing Melbourne clubs a top spot on the ladder.

Melbourne ground rationalisation has made it easier for non-Melbourne teams to finish top2.

That is what happens when a select group of teams are forced to give up home ground advantage and the other group maintained theirs!

 

[bh90210fan]

You are using results since 2010 (what happened in 2010 by the way) to try to demonstrate home ground advantage hasn’t been reduced compared to the early 90s?

The argument is that Melbourne ground rationalisation, culminating with Etihad introduction, has basically meant that the concept of a ‘home ground’ for Melbourne clubs became redundant.

Carlton is ‘home’ at Etihad or MCG?

To find a ‘home’ ground teams actually have to sell games.

Hawthorn’s ‘home’ is MCG, Tassie or Etihad?

Your stats agree with that.

The stats you should be comparing are Collingwood at VicPark v Collingwood at Etihad

Western bulldogs at Whitten Oval v Dogs at Etihad

Saints at Moorabbin/Waverley v Saints at Etihad.

Carlton at Princes Park v carlton at Etihad.

These are the impacts of ground rationalisation.


Melbourne ground rationalisation has made it easier for non-Melbourne teams to finish top2.

That is what happens when a select group of teams are forced to give up home ground advantage and the other group maintained theirs!

Melbourne ground rationalisation has made it easier for a strong Melbourne team to finish top of the ladder.

This is what happens when a select group of teams have their disadvantage cut in half.

 

[doppleganger]

Melbourne ground rationalisation has made it easier for a strong Melbourne team to finish top of the ladder.

Have already given you top2 finishes, which you ignore...so how bout 16 win seasons, strong teams should win 70+% of games

In the 90s - 11 Melbourne teams finished with 16 or more wins, 8 for non-Melbourne teams...you would expect their to be more Melbourne teams as they made up majority of the teams.

The 00s - only 6 Melbourne teams finished with 16 or more wins, 14 for non-Melbourne teams....once Etihad introduced all of a sudden it became fecking hard for Melbourne teams to win 16 games and make the top of the ladder.

The 10s to date - need one more season for the full decade, but at present it is 10 Melbourne teams who have made 16 wins, 19 for non-Melbourne teams.

Since Etihad was introduced there has been 33 seasons from non-Melbourne teams where they have won 16 or more games, compared to just 16 from Melbourne based clubs.

Despite their being more Melbourne based teams, non-Melbourne teams have achieved 16+ win season more than double Melbourne teams.

That is what happens when you retain your home ground advantage, but see away ‘disadvantage’ reduced.

This is what happens when a select group of teams have their disadvantage cut in half.

Yeah three Melbourne teams have gone nuts and pulled off 20+ win seasons, that can happen if you are a really strong Melbourne team who in the past may have dropped a few away games at the suburban grounds against their stronger competition.

But you don’t need a 20 win season to make top 2...usually 16-17 gets it done.

And it is pretty clear that it is non-Melbourne teams, who retained a home advantage whilst having their disadvantage cut, (unlike the Melbourne teams who had their home advantage cut in half as the trade-off for having the away disadvantage cut in half), that the non-Melbourne teams are making out like bandits and chalking up 16+ win seasons at more than double the rate of the Melbourne teams!

 

[bh90210fan]

Have already given you top2 finishes, which you ignore...so how bout 16 win seasons, strong teams should win 70+% of games

In the 90s - 11 Melbourne teams finished with 16 or more wins, 8 for non-Melbourne teams...you would expect their to be more Melbourne teams as they made up majority of the teams.

The 00s - only 6 Melbourne teams finished with 16 or more wins, 14 for non-Melbourne teams....once Etihad introduced all of a sudden it became fecking hard for Melbourne teams to win 16 games and make the top of the ladder.

The 10s to date - need one more season for the full decade, but at present it is 10 Melbourne teams who have made 16 wins, 19 for non-Melbourne teams.

Since Etihad was introduced there has been 33 seasons from non-Melbourne teams where they have won 16 or more games, compared to just 16 from Melbourne based clubs.

Despite their being more Melbourne based teams, non-Melbourne teams have achieved 16+ win season more than double Melbourne teams.

That is what happens when you retain your home ground advantage, but see away ‘disadvantage’ reduced.


Yeah three Melbourne teams have gone nuts and pulled off 20+ win seasons, that can happen if you are a really strong Melbourne team who in the past may have dropped a few away games at the suburban grounds against their stronger competition.

But you don’t need a 20 win season to make top 2...usually 16-17 gets it done.

And it is pretty clear that it is non-Melbourne teams, who retained a home advantage whilst having their disadvantage cut, (unlike the Melbourne teams who had their home advantage cut in half as the trade-off for having the away disadvantage cut in half), that the non-Melbourne teams are making out like bandits and chalking up 16+ win seasons at more than double the rate of the Melbourne teams!

Again, your lopsided stats are the result of the success of Geelong.

Geelong makes up half of those 16 win seasons. They don’t face the same disadvantages as a non Victorian side.

It doesn’t prove anything.

 

[kirky]

Again, your lopsided stats are the result of the success of Geelong.

Geelong makes up half of those 16 win seasons. They don’t face the same disadvantages as a non Victorian side.

It doesn’t prove anything.

Agree.

He is just using them to justify his shaky proposition.

Geelong get to play 9 games on their home ground (against weaker Vic teams and obviously non-Vic sides), 5 games at the G, 2 at Marvel and then only 6 away games. Wow, no wonder they can finish top 2 so often. Not even close to the disadvantages of a non-Vic side.

Again, Collingwood never have to go to Geelong. Collingwood have got it made together with Geelong, Richmond and Hawthorn.

 

[doppleganger]

Again, your lopsided stats are the result of the success of Geelong.

Geelong makes up half of those 16 win seasons. They don’t face the same disadvantages as a non Victorian side.

It doesn’t prove anything.

Geelong are the one Victorian team who retained their home ground advantage, and unsurprisingly they haven’t suffered

90s - 3 seasons 16+ wins, and 3 GFs
00s - 3 seasons 16+ wins, and 3 GFs
10s - 5 seasons 16+ wins, just 1 GF

Their are other threads where people are questioning whether Geelong’s home ground advantage is actually hindering them as it helps them finish higher on the H&A ladder despite not really being a premiership challenger.

So excluding Geelong

90s- 11 Melbourne teams v 5 non-vic teams had 16+ win seasons
00s - 6 Melbourne teams v 11 non-vic teams had 16+ win seasons
10s - 10 Melbourne teams v 14 non-vic teams had 16+ win seasons

Since Etihad came in 16 Melbourne based clubs seasons with 16+ wins compared to 25 from non-vic

Non-vic teams are massively over represented in teams that have strong seasons.

Almost as if teams that maintained their home ground advantage are now advantages during H&A season...who would have guessed!

 

[doppleganger]

Agree.

He is just using them to justify his shaky proposition.

Geelong get to play 9 games on their home ground (against weaker Vic teams and obviously non-Vic sides), 5 games at the G, 2 at Marvel and then only 6 away games. Wow, no wonder they can finish top 2 so often. Not even close to the disadvantages of a non-Vic side.

Geelong is much closer to a non-vic team than a Melbourne team

They get 9 games at the Caterry with a full advantage, compared to 10-11 for non-vic teams and 5ish for Melbourne teams

They get 5ish away games against Melbourne teams like ALL teams, and just like non-vic fans a Geelong fan will tell you this is a disadvantage...but Melbourne teams are not disadvantaged here.

They get 5ish away games at the at other non Victorian venues, but ALL teams cop this.

The difference between Geelong and non-vic teams is that instead of the two derby/showdown cross city games Geelong play some marquee games always at the G - country game, Easter Monday where they alternate who is home and away. But if Geelong fans had their way these would be played at Cat Park when it was their turn to host.

Geelong were not negatively impacted by Melbourne ground rationalisation, they play 9 games at Cat Park just like they did in the 40s, 60s, 70s and 80s but instead of coming up the highway and playing Melbourne teams at 7-8 different venues, they now are very familiar with the G and Etihad.

Have seen their away disadvantage reduce, with no reduction in home advantage....

 

[bh90210fan]

Geelong are the one Victorian team who retained their home ground advantage, and unsurprisingly they haven’t suffered

90s - 3 seasons 16+ wins, and 3 GFs
00s - 3 seasons 16+ wins, and 3 GFs
10s - 5 seasons 16+ wins, just 1 GF

Their are other threads where people are questioning whether Geelong’s home ground advantage is actually hindering them as it helps them finish higher on the H&A ladder despite not really being a premiership challenger.

So excluding Geelong

90s- 11 Melbourne teams v 5 non-vic teams had 16+ win seasons
00s - 6 Melbourne teams v 11 non-vic teams had 16+ win seasons
10s - 10 Melbourne teams v 14 non-vic teams had 16+ win seasons

Since Etihad came in 16 Melbourne based clubs seasons with 16+ wins compared to 25 from non-vic

Non-vic teams are massively over represented in teams that have strong seasons.

Almost as if teams that maintained their home ground advantage are now advantages during H&A season...who would have guessed!

Over represented? The fact that 16 win seasons aren’t split 50/50 again proves nothing.

Melbourne clubs have had only one fewer 16 win season this decade so far than they did in the 90’s you twit!

How does that support your case?

The only over representation seems to be from mcg tenants and Geelong.

Smaller Melbourne clubs are the ones not featuring in your oddball stats.

 

[doppleganger]

Over represented? The fact that 16 win seasons aren’t split 50/50 again proves nothing.

It doesn’t prove anything, but it is funny how post 2000 all of a sudden Melbourne teams battle to finish at the top end of the H&A ladder...indicative of some external intervention may have occurred in 2000!

Melbourne clubs have had only one fewer 16 win season this decade so far than they did in the 90’s you twit!

How does that support your case?

Context is something that escapes you innit!

In 90s there were only 19 teams that chalked up 16+ win seasons...it was a much more competitive period, rarely more than two trash teams going around...could finish 2nd last with 7 or 8 wins in the 90s.

The 00s to date it is 29 with one season to go. Expansion has diluted the talent pool and competitiveness of the league compared to the 90s. There is a bigger gap and more uncompetitive teams these days...7 or 8 wins now often avoids bottom four!

But it is the non-Melbourne teams who are franking their advantage.

The only over representation seems to be from mcg tenants and Geelong.

Smaller Melbourne clubs are the ones not featuring in your oddball stats.

In the 00s it was

Ess x2, StK x 2 and Carlton who did it...none of them MCG tenants.

Hawks only managed it once 2008 when they started selling 4 games to Tassie.

In the 10s

Pies x 3, Hawks x 6 and Tigers x 1

So apart from Hawthorn who have done it 7 times since starting to sell four games and travel 8-9 times per year, it really needs a special performance from a Melbourne club to chalk up 16 wins.

Yet the non-Melbourne teams chalk it up easily, but despite this you try maintain your dribble of how hard you all have it.

 

[bh90210fan]

It doesn’t prove anything, but it is funny how post 2000 all of a sudden Melbourne teams battle to finish at the top end of the H&A ladder...indicative of some external intervention may have occurred in 2000!

Context is something that escapes you innit!

In 90s there were only 19 teams that chalked up 16+ win seasons...it was a much more competitive period, rarely more than two trash teams going around...could finish 2nd last with 7 or 8 wins in the 90s.

The 00s to date it is 29 with one season to go. Expansion has diluted the talent pool and competitiveness of the league compared to the 90s. There is a bigger gap and more uncompetitive teams these days...7 or 8 wins now often avoids bottom four!

But it is the non-Melbourne teams who are franking their advantage.


In the 00s it was

Ess x2, StK x 2 and Carlton who did it...none of them MCG tenants.

Hawks only managed it once 2008 when they started selling 4 games to Tassie.

In the 10s

Pies x 3, Hawks x 6 and Tigers x 1

So apart from Hawthorn who have done it 7 times since starting to sell four games and travel 8-9 times per year, it really needs a special performance from a Melbourne club to chalk up 16 wins.

Yet the non-Melbourne teams chalk it up easily, but despite this you try maintain your dribble of how hard you all have it.

You’re comparing 16 win seasons from a single decade to almost 2 decades worth of seasons.

In the two decades since the 90’s, there hasn’t been close to double the number of 16 win seasons.

The competitiveness of the league seems to have increased then by your logic.