The REAL reasons we don't get finals at GMHBA Stadium

[xtatik222k]

Why should it stop? There is nothing wrong with the Geelong Football Club advocating for a fairer system. Your claim "If we are good enough we win regardless of the venue." is not shared by clubs like Collingwood and Richmond, if they had to travel to Geelong for a H&A game, let alone a final they will be up in arms, their fans and advocates will be on every media pushing their case. Do you really think we are a second-rate club, a poor cousin, that should not allow its leaders to speak up on behalf of fans in the interests of fairness? We should shut up and accept our lot.

Absolutely agree. There are so many inequities in the competition and our home ground (lack of) advantage is just one of them. If Richmond get to play all their home finals at the home ground they play on throughout the year, so should everybody else. When roles are reversed, opinions are too. Imagine the outcry if Collingwood finished first and had to come to Geelong to play us in this final? Madness.

 

[Captain chaos]

Why should it stop? There is nothing wrong with the Geelong Football Club advocating for a fairer system. Your claim "If we are good enough we win regardless of the venue." is not shared by clubs like Collingwood and Richmond, if they had to travel to Geelong for a H&A game, let alone a final they will be up in arms, their fans and advocates will be on every media pushing their case. Do you really think we are a second-rate club, a poor cousin, that should not allow its leaders to speak up on behalf of fans in the interests of fairness? We should shut up and accept our lot.

They would be up in arms for their members who would miss out, not out of fear of playing there like scott.

This weeks game is all but lost now with this ill timed campaign.

 

[JohnZ]

To those saying why didn't Scott ask for it in 2011:

Firstly, until 2013 we didn't have the precedence. Luck fell our way and the AFL had to schedule a final at Docklands or KP. Luckily for us it was a choice between our final and Collingwood's. Neither team were going to play a final at Docklands

Secondly, the capacity of our ground continues to grow. The capacity that year had just been bumped upto 30,000 people, in the next 3 years that will be 40,000. Before 2006 with the erosion of standing room, the capacity was only 22,000 (give or take). To the AFL, number of people attending finals is a consideration (GWS get true home finals, because they wouldn't fill 50% of the SCG, AFL don't want that embarrassment). On that note:

Thirdly, now that GWS and GC have been promised home finals at their ground, not their states biggest ground, the club has even more precedence to mount a case for finals being taken away from the G (Just as interstate clubs had to fight for their prelims to be taken away from the G). Remember, before 2004 (or so) at least one prelim had to be at the G, even if both home clubs were interstate.

Fourthly, The MCG was the home of finals for the VFL when it was the home ground of 1 club (Melbourne). Since the AFL has become national, the MCG has become the home ground of 6 clubs. All interstate clubs get true home finals, leaving 4 clubs who get their home finals moved to a ground they don't play at regularly. The tide is slowly shifting from finals being neutral, to finals being one-sided. I love it, but the Big4 hate it, because it erodes their advantage.

 

[cats_09]

They would be up in arms for their members who would miss out, not out of fear of playing there like scott.

This weeks game is all but lost now with this ill timed campaign.

So what does it say about the Collingwood members who failed to buy out their allocation of 27,500 seats for next week?

The idea of members being locked out is a joke, and it's not why the AFL schedules the game at the MCG. If it was about members then why aren't all finals played at the largest available venues to ensure maximum capacity?

The fact is with the early rounds of finals at the MCG, only 55k are actually allocated to competing members in the first place - the rest are for MCC, AFL members and corporate.

The other fact is that the AFL makes the money on the finals series - money doesn't go back to the clubs. If the AFL wasn't making the money on the finals then most likely happily schedule games at venues with smaller capacities because it wouldn't impact them as much - but they are wanting to line their own pockets & keep in the good books with the corporates which we get shafted to the MCG.

And as for the idea this is some ill timed campaign - the club requested to host finals at KP earlier in the season. At that stage the complaint was "need to qualify before you can request where to play them", but now it's finals time and the media continue to make it an issue, and yes it's the media who continue to raise it as an issue, the complaint is "the club needs to get on with things". So answer this, when is it a good time for the club to comment on the issue?

Guess what, the club is focused on next week, the players are focused on next week and the idea that Scott answering the questions from the media is distracting to the players or making an early excuse is a joke.

 

[steady2]

They would be up in arms for their members who would miss out, not out of fear of playing there like scott.

This weeks game is all but lost now with this ill timed campaign.

No. They would be complaining because of fear of losing. In contrast Scott and the Geelong Football Club are accustomed to playing away, we are the only club in the competition that does not even get 11 home games in a season.

Your snide and ignorant comment regarding the Geelong coach is typical of some of the hostile non-Geelong supporters who hate our club. We are used to it.

There is no campaign. Scott made a criticism of the AFL decision to grant the MCG the right to host the AFL Grand Finals for the next twenty years. Scott pointed out that the period is too long and suggested that the fairness question often raised by non-Victorian clubs regarding the GF venue is a valid one. The beat up by the media falsely suggested that the issue that Scott was raising was concerned with Geelong home finals. You are joining the witch hunt, good for you.

Regarding next weeks final, I guess a Geelong hater would also assume that Geelong players are so stupid that they are unable to focus on preparation while being blinded by a minor media beat-up. By all means continue to beat it up, perhaps it might work for you.

 

[Turbocat]

So what does it say about the Collingwood members who failed to buy out their allocation of 27,500 seats for next week?

The idea of members being locked out is a joke, and it's not why the AFL schedules the game at the MCG. If it was about members then why aren't all finals played at the largest available venues to ensure maximum capacity?

The fact is with the early rounds of finals at the MCG, only 55k are actually allocated to competing members in the first place - the rest are for MCC, AFL members and corporate.

The other fact is that the AFL makes the money on the finals series - money doesn't go back to the clubs. If the AFL wasn't making the money on the finals then most likely happily schedule games at venues with smaller capacities because it wouldn't impact them as much - but they are wanting to line their own pockets & keep in the good books with the corporates which we get shafted to the MCG.

And as for the idea this is some ill timed campaign - the club requested to host finals at KP earlier in the season. At that stage the complaint was "need to qualify before you can request where to play them", but now it's finals time and the media continue to make it an issue, and yes it's the media who continue to raise it as an issue, the complaint is "the club needs to get on with things". So answer this, when is it a good time for the club to comment on the issue?

Guess what, the club is focused on next week, the players are focused on next week and the idea that Scott answering the questions from the media is distracting to the players or making an early excuse is a joke.

Good post ..better than good. Id still stand by the comment Id prefer for Scott to neot hight light it now.. he has plenty on his plate and having the imagery of geelong being less than confident is not ideal imo. I though the comment earleir in the year was fine.. and from there a ref to that was all that was required.. thats our policy.. but we are happy to play within the system ..we have won8 0% this year at the G have beaten Pies an dTogers at the G etc.

The 55K thing is though provoking... I wonder if somene like CWilson who almost certainly is a MCC or AFL member is really talking ..on their behalf... im sure the MCC members would not be happy to miss out on two Vic teams playing etc.

 

[Nickoo]

The AFL get very little money, if any at all, from H&A gate takings, the clubs get it. The AFL's main money comes from TV.

And finals which is the main reason they want the ‘G’. They need it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[Landgraft]

They would be up in arms for their members who would miss out, not out of fear of playing there like scott.

This weeks game is all but lost now with this ill timed campaign.

You can't expect to be taken seriously while clowning around like that.

 

[steady2]

And finals which is the main reason they want the ‘G’. They need it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

I don't know how much of the takings they get from finals, but surely the participating clubs are getting a fair share! The AFL still get much more from the TV contracts, the last contract (2015) was worth 2.5 billion for six years.

 

[Turbocat]

This has to stop. If we are good enough we win regardless of the venue. It is what it is. Didn’t effect us in the glory years.

In previous eras .. geelog success was based on an attacking game plan... I feel that style is far more transferable ..while a style built around denial and the advantage of a compressed playing surface... just who we play might make a huge difference on whether we progress ..let alone where we play. I doubt id enjoy play at WA ground for their rabid crowds ..far better to play GWS away than them... Rich at the G will be tough but Id rather play them ina GF where tickets are far harder to get... I dont think its as simple as ..if we are good enough any more... as the whole comp as slanted based one who you play once or twice and where you play them...

I think Geelong have a very aweward situation now ..they have ploughed a lot of money into a ground that is a long way from the norm ..and has capacity that means finals there are probably impractical..

Distortions of equity abound everywhere in the afl .. after all most clubs get to play on their home ground..the actual surface that they call their home ground 11 times a year or more.. we don't get that.. it may or may not be in our interest.

 

[cats_09]

I don't know how much of the takings they get from finals, but surely the participating clubs are getting a fair share! The AFL still get much more from the TV contracts, the last contract (2015) was worth 2.5 billion for six years.

It's the AFL who gets the money from the sales of finals - this is a couple of years old:

“From an AFL perspective, the finals generate a profit of about $20 million per year which is the single largest source of revenue other than broadcasting rights,” the document states.
“Of the $20 million finals profit, ticket sales for the Grand Final generate some $9 million.

Where clubs do make money on ticket sales during finals is from selling packages that are made available to them - but they don't benefit from the general gate takings

No Cookies | Herald Sun

No Cookies

www.heraldsun.com.au

 

[Nickoo]

I don't know how much of the takings they get from finals, but surely the participating clubs are getting a fair share! The AFL still get much more from the TV contracts, the last contract (2015) was worth 2.5 billion for six years.

No not really. H&A clubs get most of the gate taking advert revenue. Finals it’s the opposite. That’s why advert is different during finals.
Players get paid more for each finals game than they do h&A and a large bonus for winning GF paid directly to them from the AFL. So finals is for players, members and the AFL, not so much clubs.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[Nickoo]

It's the AFL who gets the money from the sales of finals - this is a couple of years old:



Where clubs do make money on ticket sales during finals is from selling packages that are made available to them - but they don't benefit from the general gate takings

No Cookies | Herald Sun

No Cookies

www.heraldsun.com.au

Thank you.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[Captain chaos]

To those saying why didn't Scott ask for it in 2011:

Firstly, until 2013 we didn't have the precedence. Luck fell our way and the AFL had to schedule a final at Docklands or KP. Luckily for us it was a choice between our final and Collingwood's. Neither team were going to play a final at Docklands

Secondly, the capacity of our ground continues to grow. The capacity that year had just been bumped upto 30,000 people, in the next 3 years that will be 40,000. Before 2006 with the erosion of standing room, the capacity was only 22,000 (give or take). To the AFL, number of people attending finals is a consideration (GWS get true home finals, because they wouldn't fill 50% of the SCG, AFL don't want that embarrassment). On that note:

Thirdly, now that GWS and GC have been promised home finals at their ground, not their states biggest ground, the club has even more precedence to mount a case for finals being taken away from the G (Just as interstate clubs had to fight for their prelims to be taken away from the G). Remember, before 2004 (or so) at least one prelim had to be at the G, even if both home clubs were interstate.

Fourthly, The MCG was the home of finals for the VFL when it was the home ground of 1 club (Melbourne). Since the AFL has become national, the MCG has become the home ground of 6 clubs. All interstate clubs get true home finals, leaving 4 clubs who get their home finals moved to a ground they don't play at regularly. The tide is slowly shifting from finals being neutral, to finals being one-sided. I love it, but the Big4 hate it, because it erodes their advantage.

He hasnt memtioned anything about capacity.. he has simply said we should have a final to be consistent.. your argument still doesnt explain why he didnt bring it up in 2016 when gc/ gws were promised finals... he waited three years to have a whinge.

 

[cats_09]

He hasnt memtioned anything about capacity.. he has simply said we should have a final to be consistent.. your argument still doesnt explain why he didnt bring it up in 2016 when gc/ gws were promised finals... he waited three years to have a whinge.

The issue was bought up in 2017 & 2019 - years we were eligible to host home finals, AFTER the AFL declared that GWS & GC would be eligible to host their home finals on their home ground

 

[JohnZ]

He hasnt memtioned anything about capacity.. he has simply said we should have a final to be consistent.. your argument still doesnt explain why he didnt bring it up in 2016 when gc/ gws were promised finals... he waited three years to have a whinge.

Cats demand home finals at Kardinia Park - InDaily

Geelong have demanded the right to host its finals at Simonds Stadium from next year, after the AFL controversially granted a home final to GWS on the Giants\' home deck at Spotless Stadium.

indaily.com.au

You can search for more, plenty of noise in 2016 was made about it.

 

[Captain chaos]

No. They would be complaining because of fear of losing. In contrast Scott and the Geelong Football Club are accustomed to playing away, we are the only club in the competition that does not even get 11 home games in a season.

Your snide and ignorant comment regarding the Geelong coach is typical of some of the hostile non-Geelong supporters who hate our club. We are used to it.

There is no campaign. Scott made a criticism of the AFL decision to grant the MCG the right to host the AFL Grand Finals for the next twenty years. Scott pointed out that the period is too long and suggested that the fairness question often raised by non-Victorian clubs regarding the GF venue is a valid one. The beat up by the media falsely suggested that the issue that Scott was raising was concerned with Geelong home finals. You are joining the witch hunt, good for you.

Regarding next weeks final, I guess a Geelong hater would also assume that Geelong players are so stupid that they are unable to focus on preparation while being blinded by a minor media beat-up. By all means continue to beat it up, perhaps it might work for

Not true about being the only team not getting 11 home games-Richmond have to play one at marvel every year (this year against Sydney) and hawthorn and North play at Tassie, Gaints at Canberra etc etc, we simply have more than one home venue like the tigers do (they don't choose to have a game at Marvel) and many sides spread their home games across.
Also, this is a forum and I don't appreciate being called "snide and ignorant" just because you can't make sense of my argument. At least get your facts right when you say we are the only team that doesn't get 11 home games-simply wrong.

 

[Captain chaos]

Cats demand home finals at Kardinia Park - InDaily

Geelong have demanded the right to host its finals at Simonds Stadium from next year, after the AFL controversially granted a home final to GWS on the Giants\' home deck at Spotless Stadium.

indaily.com.au

You can search for more, plenty of noise in 2016 was made about it.

Sorry=Cook not Scott carrying on about it twice per week.

 

[cats_09]

Not true about being the only team not getting 11 home games-Richmond have to play one at marvel every year (this year against Sydney) and hawthorn and North play at Tassie, Gaints at Canberra etc etc, we simply have more than one home venue like the tigers do (they don't choose to have a game at Marvel) and many sides spread their home games across.
Also, this is a forum and I don't appreciate being called "snide and ignorant" just because you can't make sense of my argument. At least get your facts right when you say we are the only team that doesn't get 11 home games-simply wrong.

We only have 1 home ground, that's KP or GMHBA stadium (depends what you want to call it) - the MCG isn't a home ground by choice but by force as the AFL make the decision to schedule our home games there.

As for teams like North, Giants, Bulldogs, & Hawks - that's there choice to play home games at alternative venues, they have made the choice to sell games to other venues and hence why they play at those grounds, and thus those grounds are a second home ground for them.

But, did you know for the games they sell to other venues, their members get free entry to what would normally be an away match - so it's not uncommon when we play the Hawks in our home game, that there's a portion of their members who get entry to that game on the back of it being a "make-up" game to replace one of their home games in Launceston.

 

[Captain chaos]

We only have 1 home ground, that's KP or GMHBA stadium (depends what you want to call it) - the MCG isn't a home ground by choice but by force as the AFL make the decision to schedule our home games there.

As for teams like North, Giants, Bulldogs, & Hawks - that's there choice to play home games at alternative venues, they have made the choice to sell games to other venues and hence why they play at those grounds, and thus those grounds are a second home ground for them.

But, did you know for the games they sell to other venues, their members get free entry to what would normally be an away match - so it's not uncommon when we play the Hawks in our home game, that there's a portion of their members who get entry to that game on the back of it being a "make-up" game to replace one of their home games in Launceston.

So the question is, did he actually ignore what I said about Richmond playing home games at marvel or just hoped we wouldn't notice?

Collingwood, Richmond and Hawthorn all play Marvel home games and is not their choice. BTW, originally you never said anything about it being a choice you simply said we are the only club not to get 11 home games....again it is simply an untruth.

Ask Coll or Richmond if they want to play home games there...they do so we are not the only club who doesn't get 11 home games at our ground.

These games are not sold.

 

[cats_09]

So the question is, did he actually ignore what I said about Richmond playing home games at marvel or just hoped we wouldn't notice?

Collingwood, Richmond and Hawthorn all play Marvel home games and is not their choice. BTW, originally you never said anything about it being a choice you simply said we are the only club not to get 11 home games....again it is simply an untruth.

Ask Coll or Richmond if they want to play home games there...they do so we are not the only club who doesn't get 11 home games at our ground.

These games are not sold.

1st: Who is he?

2nd: I never raised that as a point, I replied to your post where that point was made

3rd: how many games per season do the likes of Richmond & Collingwood get to play on the MCG? Add in the away games they also get on their home ground.
Now, how many away games do we get on our home ground?

Are you starting to see in inequality in things and hence why the club has been pushing for home finals on our home ground over recent seasons?

 

[steady2]

Not true about being the only team not getting 11 home games-Richmond have to play one at marvel every year (this year against Sydney) and hawthorn and North play at Tassie, Gaints at Canberra etc etc, we simply have more than one home venue like the tigers do (they don't choose to have a game at Marvel) and many sides spread their home games across.
Also, this is a forum and I don't appreciate being called "snide and ignorant" just because you can't make sense of my argument. At least get your facts right when you say we are the only team that doesn't get 11 home games-simply wrong.

Those examples are hardly comparable. Richmond v Sydney at Marvel is still a home game against an interstate side. Hawthorn and North playing in Tassie are still playing home games against clubs who are playing away. The Giants are the same. In Geelong's case we play 'home' games at the MCG against Hawthorn, Richmond and Collingwood, their home ground; we are playing alleged 'home games' at our opponents home ground. Did you not understand this?

You seem to have a problem with reading comprehension. I did not call you "snide and ignorant", I called your comment "snide and ignorant", which it was.

 

[Captain chaos]

1st: Who is he?

2nd: I never raised that as a point, I replied to your post where that point was made

3rd: how many games per season do the likes of Richmond & Collingwood get to play on the MCG? Add in the away games they also get on their home ground.
Now, how many away games do we get on our home ground?

Are you starting to see in inequality in things and hence why the club has been pushing for home finals on our home ground over recent seasons?

You never replied to the tigers (and pies and hawks) playing at marvel in response to your silly claim that we are the only side that doesn't play 11 home games . The away games they get are not the point as you claimed it is only us who don't get 11 home games....it simply isn't true. Admit you got that wrong.

them playing away games there is a separate argument.

 

[Captain chaos]

Those examples are hardly comparable. Richmond v Sydney at Marvel is still a home game against an interstate side. Hawthorn and North playing in Tassie are still playing home games against clubs who are playing away. The Giants are the same. In Geelong's case we play games at the MCG against Hawthorn, Richmond and Collingwood, their home ground; we are playing alleged 'home games' at our opponents home ground. Did you not understand this?

You seem to have a problem with reading comprehension. I did not call you "snide and ignorant", I called your comment "snide and ignorant", which it was.

Not it wasn't .

The claim was about home games not the advantages of playing an interstate side or not.

 

[Nebula1971]

... and you have 9 likes for this drivel.. lol.

Like everything in life, there is a hierarchy and whether you like it or not, your stadiums capacity simple doesn’t hold the numbers to satisfy the vested interests.

Sad reality. I don’t think the clubs are scared to play you. You make yourself look extremely childish with this statement.

I would have been grateful for a close and entertaining final on Friday. Now after reading your garbage, all I would love is to demolish you guys.