West Coast Eagles 2021

[Tom_Thumb]

Could you highlight all the games where Richmond had a genuine home ground advantage in 2017, 2019 and 2020. Thanks in advance.

Forget all that, imagine having a list who over 4..5...6...7 years travel burn out because of it ? we have one 300+ game player and it was a Victorian who played the majority of his career in Victoria for Hawthorn - Sam Mitchell on 329. Our next is Dean Cox on 290, its not just a yearly thing travelling on a plane its an accumulation.

 

[BF Tiger]

Every time they play Geelongs home game at the MCG and avoided the hardest away fixture.

When was the last time Richmond played in Geelong?

Thanks in advance.

Edit. We all know the AFL allows a Geelong home to 'be sold' to make more money. The Cats then get scheduled to play Richmond at the MCG. Not exactly fair on the other clubs who are scheduled to play Geelong in Geelong.

Then on two occasions / years North requested to sell one of their home games to the Eagles and play at Optus in WA. The AFL refused the request twice, I understand, on the basis it was not fair on the rest of the competition.

Different rules for different teams / states it seems.

You mean that Cats team whose own website lists the MCG as a home ground, and who have played there eight times in each of 2018 and 2019? They must be so unfamiliar with the ground. Anyway we last played Geelong at KP in 2017. Btw, where were these concerns prior to the 2017 QF when Geelong were on a ump teen game winning streak against us?

 

[BF Tiger]

Mate most WCE fans would give up "genuine home ground advantage" in a heartbeat if it meant we only had to get on a plane as often as the big Vic clubs do.

Might also snag a couple of 300 gamers while we were at it, too.

Well move east or get six more clubs in Perth.

 

[LoungeLizard]

The old no 300 gamers has hit the light again.

Imagine being one of the oldest clubs in Australia and have just 1 300 game player.

Must be hard on the body playing at the MCG each week.

 

[Elton Johns Wig]

When was the last time Richmond played in Geelong?

2017

 

[Trahanas22]

Disingenuous my man.
You can't really have TRUE home ground advantage without also having TRUE away game disadvantage as a counterbalance.

I'm pretty sure everyone who claims the TRUE home game thang already knows that though despite attempting the argument - although I wouldn't put it past some posters to have genuinely not worked it out, this is Big Footy, some have shown they're not the sharpest tools in the shed.

Yeah mate, this the point most of you WC whingers do not get, apart form a few fair-minted ones. The counter-balance concept. You get disadvantages, travel, playing grand finals at the MCG etc, but you also get advantages, scandalously favourable umpiring at Perth, true home games, being a virtual footy monopoly at Western Australia etc.

At the end of the day, your advantages more than balance out your disadvantages. Says who? Second more successful club in AFL era. Four flags. Only Hawthorn have done better. What you are really saying is that you want to be even more successful, you want to have more premierships than anyone else. Well, guess what, this is what everyone else wants as well. Your problem, not ours...

 

[Elton Johns Wig]

I think it's completely real. I think that is is a major pointer as to why interstate clubs have over represented positions in finals. I don't think it's coincidence.

I mean, you all rightfully point out the extra travel. This is a disadvantage. If that's true, how do we explain the higher % of finals appearances? Surely if the travel was a disadvantage that wasn't balanced out, the representation would be below expected levels? Because the travel IS a factor. 100%.

It's not simply "the interstate clubs are consistently better". There must be more to it. That alone wouldn't offset travel disadvantage. It's now 30+ years of data and it's a comp where teams have ups and downs.

So their MUST be something, something, that is a reason as to why interstate clubs consistently over represent? If true, true HGA isn't a factor, what is it?

It balances out. Interstate clubs are more likely to make finals as they have buffed up home game records, but when it comes to a Grand Final against a Victorian club there is a disadvantage. In the end, it is what it is, but I'd prefer a typical Victorian club fixture. Which of the below do you prefer?

Club A: 10 home games against interstate clubs, 2 neutral at your home ground, 10 where you must fly out
Club B: 4 home games against interstate clubs, 14 neutral at your home ground, 4 where you must fly out

The one which qualifies me for finals more often, every time. Believe me, supporting Richmond from the 70s, I'd take the more finals option.
Sign me up to being in a 2 team town as well whilst you're at it.


The competition will never be 100% fair as long as the AFL wants to make money. That is at the heart of the issue. It just gets silly with these discussions when some people (not counting this convo) on both sides of the argument just won't admit there are advantages, but will point and yell at what others are getting. What advantages you'd prefer, well, that's subjective, and answers will vary.

I'd hazard a guess and say most Melbourne based fans would say give us one sided crowds, and most interstate fans would say give our side less travel. That suggests to me that both sides have their positives.

In a perfect world, clubs would play all finals up until Prelims at their home ground, and the GF was hosted on a rotational basis like the Superbowl. And I say this as an MCC member who would miss out!! I'm all for it though.

 

[LoungeLizard]

Forget all that, imagine having a list who over 4..5...6...7 years travel burn out because of it ? we have one 300+ game player and it was a Victorian who played the majority of his career in Victoria for Hawthorn - Sam Mitchell on 329. Our next is Dean Cox on 290, its not just a yearly thing travelling on a plane its an accumulation.

Explain Freo, one of the youngest clubs in the comp having 2 X 300 game players and Melbourne, one of the oldest clubs in the comp having just 1 X 300 game player?

Is it travel that's bad, or is playing at the MCG for all of your history bad?

What i think is, bringing up the 300 game argument happens when you know there is no proof, so you make it up as you go.

 

[Obeanie1]

You mean that Cats team whose own website lists the MCG as a home ground, and who have played there eight times in each of 2018 and 2019? They must be so unfamiliar with the ground. Anyway we last played Geelong at KP in 2017. Btw, where were these concerns prior to the 2017 QF when Geelong were on a ump teen game winning streak against us?

Thanks.

So up to 2017 Tigers were playing and losing to Geelong in Geelong. And then the Tigers started winning these Geelong 'home game's when played at the MCG.

What a fortunate change in fixturing.

Almost as if Geelong are more familiar and confident playing in Geelong v Richmond. Massive benefit to the opposition giving up home ground advantage to play where the Tigers are very comfortable v playing somewhere they rarely win.

Tough away game that Geelong trip.

Some teams just get a leg up from AFL fixturing and avoid playing in Geelong. Lucky Tigers. Just like being gifted an early kill against Carlton when they were rebuilding.

 

[BF Tiger]

Thanks.

So up to 2017 Tigers were playing and losing to Geelong in Geelong. And then the Tigers started winning these Geelong 'home game's when played at the MCG.

What a fortunate change in lecturing.

Almost as if Geelong are more familiar and confident playing in Geelong v Richmond. Massive benefit to the opposition giving up home ground advantage to play where the Tigers are very comfortable v playing somewhere they rarely win.

Tough away game that Geelong trip.

Some teams just get a leg up from AFL fixturing and avoid playing in Geelong. Lucky Tigers. Just like being gifted an early kill against Carlton when they were rebuilding.

To use your phrase... what a fortunate change in lecturing.

Entering the July 1997 Geelong v Richmond game both teams had 81 wins against each other, with 3 draws. At the end of August 2017 game the record stood at 103-3-85, in Geelong's favour. So across 20 years Geelong amassed a 22-4 record against the Tigers. What might surprise is that not all 20 Geelong wins were at KP and not all four Richmond wins were at the MCG.

Geelong won nine games at KP, Richmond won one.
Geelong won eight games at the MCG, Richmond won two.
Geelong won six games at Docklands, Richmond won zero.

Almost as if Geelong were just a better side. Basically no benefit to the opposition playing at home or away.

Maybe... just maybe... Richmond got better.

If you'd like I could back another decade or two, but you'll just look like more of an idiot.

 

[Forward Press]

The one which qualifies me for finals more often, every time. Believe me, supporting Richmond from the 70s, I'd take the more finals option.
Sign me up to being in a 2 team town as well whilst you're at it.

I also agree with the rotational GF but that's not going to be an option for a while.

Would you seriously prefer the 2 team town fixture? It means Richmond travelling to Perth, Adelaide, Sydney and Brisbane 10 times a year. There's a reason why the WA clubs often request to minimise travel during the season (the AFL has often done this by scheduling pre-season games entirely in WA, for example).

There are advantages to both but I'd prefer to be in Club B's position than Club A's.

 

[Tom_Thumb]

Explain Freo, one of the youngest clubs in the comp having 2 X 300 game players and Melbourne, one of the oldest clubs in the comp having just 1 X 300 game player?

Is it travel that's bad, or is playing at the MCG for all of your history bad?

What i think is, bringing up the 300 game argument happens when you know there is no proof, so you make it up as you go.

Pav was a freak of nature no doubt and played 16 seasons. The answer to the other question is because both are crappy clubs with zero culture, its easy to just rock up and play without putting your body on the line. Shawny Mac is the exception to that and look at how many games he played in 13 seasons - 228.

 

[LoungeLizard]

Pav was a freak of nature no doubt and played 16 seasons. The answer to the other question is because both are crappy clubs with zero culture, its easy to just rock up and play without putting your body on the line. Shawny Mac is the exception to that and look at how many games he played in 13 seasons - 228.

Pardon?
Freo have 2, not just Pav, read that again, 2 players that have played 300 games.

Are you saying the Melbourne Football Club has no culture?
They were a powerhouse until they sacked Norm Smith.

So we have Freo with 2 300 game players and Melbourne with 1, show us why this is so, because to me it seems you like bring this up because you have nothing.

Brisbane also have a few 300 game players, why is this so?

 

[Tom_Thumb]

Pardon?
Freo have 2, not just Pav, read that again, 2 players that have played 300 games.

Are you saying the Melbourne Football Club has no culture?
They were a powerhouse until they sacked Norm Smith.

So we have Freo with 2 300 game players and Melbourne with 1, show us why this is so, because to me it seems you like bring this up because you have nothing.

Brisbane also have a few 300 game players, why is this so?

Oooh touchy, Melbourne are crap lets be honest. Freo are worse, end of story.

 

[mcfazza28]

Thanks.

So up to 2017 Tigers were playing and losing to Geelong in Geelong. And then the Tigers started winning these Geelong 'home game's when played at the MCG.

What a fortunate change in lecturing.

Almost as if Geelong are more familiar and confident playing in Geelong v Richmond. Massive benefit to the opposition giving up home ground advantage to play where the Tigers are very comfortable v playing somewhere they rarely win.

Tough away game that Geelong trip.

Some teams just get a leg up from AFL fixturing and avoid playing in Geelong. Lucky Tigers. Just like being gifted an early kill against Carlton when they were rebuilding.

Don’t forget Alice Springs, Darwin and Tassie. Interstate or small Victorian usually get them.

The AFL showed an appetite to schedule a final in Geelong when it was against a smaller club. West Coast got MCG in both finals against Geelong as a bigger club, which reinforces the revenue imperative.

I think it isn’t as simplistic as being interstate. The two criteria for beneficial fixtures are club size and location.

The best way to even up the fixtures is decentralisation and that requires moving or replacing small Victorian clubs. However, this needs to include revenue optimisation.

I have stated earlier that the only way to achieve fixture fairness and revenue optimisation is grouping the big Victorian and Interstate together in a league, conference or division.

The revenue comes from:
Big Victorian v Big Interstate
Big Victorian v Big Victorian
Big Interstate v Big Interstate

This compensates:
Big Victorian v Small Interstate

Fixture fairness is via more true home games for Big Victorian as there are no small Victorian clubs as they have been moved or replaced. Therefore, these games are now against the small Interstate that replaced them or not at all.

There is always another way if people are willing to compromise for the greater good. Unfortunately, the problem I keep coming back to is small Victorian clubs skewing the fixture.

The key to success is encouraging supporters of small Victorian to move to Big Victorian. Children tend to start with the big clubs anyway and they effectively cannibalise the small Victorian over time.

Survival of the fittest.

 

[Sweet Jesus]

Explain Freo, one of the youngest clubs in the comp having 2 X 300 game players and Melbourne, one of the oldest clubs in the comp having just 1 X 300 game player?

Is it travel that's bad, or is playing at the MCG for all of your history bad?

WC were good enough at the MCG to beat Collingwood in a GF.

We beat you twice at the MCG that season.

Did you forget?

 

[Do the Dew]

Forget all that, imagine having a list who over 4..5...6...7 years travel burn out because of it ? we have one 300+ game player and it was a Victorian who played the majority of his career in Victoria for Hawthorn - Sam Mitchell on 329. Our next is Dean Cox on 290, its not just a yearly thing travelling on a plane its an accumulation.

You can't just say "forget all that", and move on because it doesn't suit your argument. The crux of the argument is HGA and Richmond, like most Vic teams with the exception of Geelong, play a lot of neutral games.

Interestingly in 2020, we were the only club to go through an entire season with 0 games with HGA. But yep our fixture was easy

As others have pointed out, non-Vic sides get an advantage with 10-11 genuine home games compared to Vic sides, and a disadvantage because of the genuine away games. This tends to balance itself out. Additionally, non-Vic sides have a higher chance of making top 8 or top 4 based on numbers since 2000. So the claim that non-Vic sides, especially the Perth-based ones, have to do it really tough compared to everyone else just doesn't make sense based on actual finals appearances.

 

[Trahanas22]

Thanks.

So up to 2017 Tigers were playing and losing to Geelong in Geelong. And then the Tigers started winning these Geelong 'home game's when played at the MCG.

What a fortunate change in lecturing.

Almost as if Geelong are more familiar and confident playing in Geelong v Richmond. Massive benefit to the opposition giving up home ground advantage to play where the Tigers are very comfortable v playing somewhere they rarely win.

Tough away game that Geelong trip.

Some teams just get a leg up from AFL fixturing and avoid playing in Geelong. Lucky Tigers. Just like being gifted an early kill against Carlton when they were rebuilding.

Really, does it bother you that much that Richmond haven’t played at Geelong since 2017? Do you know that the Bombers will play the Cats in Cardinia Park this season, for the first time since 1993? That was twenty eight years ago. Do you know that Collingwood haven’t played a single game at Geelong since 1999?

Why is that my uninformed friend? It is because the AFL does not send successful big clubs to Geelong. And the Tigers are a big and successful club now. So, Essendon and Cartlon will see quite a lot of Cardinia the next few years. Us, not that much. Collingwood haven’t played there for almost 22 years now. But for you, it's only Richmond that receive preferential treatment, no-one else! You little conspiratorial devil! I suppose you can’t keep up with being informed, it’s because of all the travel and its effect on your recovery...

 

[Gavin Excell]

Really, does it bother you that much that Richmond haven’t played at Geelong since 2017? Do you know that the Bombers will play the Cats in Cardinia Park this season, for the first time since 1993? That was twenty eight years ago. Do you know that Collingwood haven’t played a single game at Geelong since 1999?

Why is that my uninformed friend? It is because the AFL does not send successful big clubs to Geelong. And the Tigers are a big and successful club now. So, Essendon and Cartlon will see quite a lot of Cardinia the next few years. Us, not that much. Collingwood haven’t played there for almost 22 years now. But for you, it's only Richmond that receive preferential treatment, no-one else! You little conspiratorial devil! I suppose you can’t keep up with being informed, it’s because of all the travel and its effect on your recovery...

I was just about to post this. AFL over last 10 years are seemingly fixturing the poorer performing Vic big4 clubs at Geelong. Tigers were there regularly around 2010 onwards, then Carlton started coming and now as Trahanas points out Essendon are scheduled there this year. Collingwood the outlier.
As a Geelong fan believe me we love seeing different Vic teams coming down but understand the $$$ decision behind it all. Geelong also have home games in Melb (the hawthorn Easter Monday the common one) where club has made the call to effectively give up home advantage for the revenue.

 

[Wallaby]

Explain Freo, one of the youngest clubs in the comp having 2 X 300 game players and Melbourne, one of the oldest clubs in the comp having just 1 X 300 game player?

Is it travel that's bad, or is playing at the MCG for all of your history bad?

What i think is, bringing up the 300 game argument happens when you know there is no proof, so you make it up as you go.

If you look at all who made their debut since 1987 (West Coast's first year in the AFL), and played 300+ games there are 48.

33 of those played 300 with one club. The club with the the most of these players is Bulldogs - who have 5.
Those with 4 are North, Adelaide and Sydney. So it obviously depends on which plane you jump on (Brisbane have 2 - for this purpose playing for the Bears and then the Lions qualifies asa one-club, Freo have 2 and Port - who only started in 1997 - have 1).

Richmond and West Coast have 0. Brisbane, Carlton, Collingwood, Essendon, Melbourne and Port each have only 1.

In fact, the non-vic clubs have a higher average number of 300-one club players than the vics.

And of the victorian clubs, it seems to be ana advantage to play most of your games at notoriously hard-on-the-body Dockands (Saints, North, Dogs,) rather than the lush MCG (6 clubs - Tigers, Pies, Blues, Dons, Hawks, Dees). Even Geelong (who have to get on a bus every 2nd week) have 3.

There are another 15 multi-club 300 gamers since 1987 (who didn't reach 300 with any one club). Of these 4 played for just Victorian clubs, 1 played exclusively for non-victorian clubs and 10 played for a mixture.

Basically there seems to be no relationship between plane travel and career longevity.

 

[BF Tiger]

If you look at all who made their debut since 1987 (West Coast's first year in the AFL), and played 300+ games there are 48.

33 of those played 300 with one club. The club with the the most of these players is Bulldogs - who have 5.
Those with 4 are North, Adelaide and Sydney. So it obviously depends on which plane you jump on (Brisbane have 2 - for this purpose playing for the Bears and then the Lions qualifies asa one-club, Freo have 2 and Port - who only started in 1997 - have 1).

Richmond and West Coast have 0. Brisbane, Carlton, Collingwood, Essendon, Melbourne and Port each have only 1.

In fact, the non-vic clubs have a higher average number of 300-one club players than the vics.

And of the victorian clubs, it seems to be ana advantage to play most of your games at notoriously hard-on-the-body Dockands (Saints, North, Dogs,) rather than the lush MCG (6 clubs - Tigers, Pies, Blues, Dons, Hawks, Dees). Even Geelong (who have to get on a bus every 2nd week) have 3.

There are another 15 multi-club 300 gamers since 1987 (who didn't reach 300 with any one club). Of these 4 played for just Victorian clubs, 1 played exclusively for non-victorian clubs and 10 played for a mixture.

Basically there seems to be no relationship between plane travel and career longevity.

It's almost like they're professional sportsmen playing for professional sports organisations with professional sports scientists advising on professional recovery techniques.

Having a look at who got close for the Eagles...
Dean Cox, 290 games, nearly 20 when he debuted.
Shannon Hurn, 286 games, will get to 300 this year barring injury. 6, 24, and 6 games in his first three years.
Glenn Jakovich, 276 games. Knee injury mid-career missing close to a season. Six games in his final year. Retired at 31.
Ben Cousins, 270 games (32 at Richmond), sat out most of 2007 and all of 2008. Other issues may have impacted longevity.
Darren Glass, 270 games.14, 12, 12, 15, 18 games in his first five seasons. 8 game seasons in 2010 and 2014 (final year).
Peter Matera, 253 games, debuted days short of his 21st birthday, only played five games that year.

 

[Obeanie1]

[/QUOTE]

To use your phrase... what a fortunate change in lecturing.

Entering the July 1997 Geelong v Richmond game both teams had 81 wins against each other, with 3 draws. At the end of August 2017 game the record stood at 103-3-85, in Geelong's favour. So across 20 years Geelong amassed a 22-4 record against the Tigers. What might surprise is that not all 20 Geelong wins were at KP and not all four Richmond wins were at the MCG.

Geelong won nine games at KP, Richmond won one.
Geelong won eight games at the MCG, Richmond won two.
Geelong won six games at Docklands, Richmond won zero.

Almost as if Geelong were just a better side. Basically no benefit to the opposition playing at home or away.

Maybe... just maybe... Richmond got better.

If you'd like I could back another decade or two, but you'll just look like more of an idiot.

The only idiots here are those who don't accept that not playing Geelong in Geelong is a massive benefit and advantage over other teams who do actually travel to Geelong.

You can go back as many years as you like, the entire 30 years Richmond spent in the wilderness achieving SFA if need be.

It doesn't change the bleeding obvious. Playing a Geelong "home game" at Richmond's home ground instead of in Geelong is a MASSIVE advantage over others who do play in Geelong.

How anyone can argue otherwise is either one eyed or doesn't have a brain. Actually Tigers fans have proven you can be both.

 

[bh90210fan]

Great to see a WC thread on the Mb for all the Richmond supporters to continue their obsession with us. You guys really are a weird bunch.
As far as advantages goes, having 10 games at Optus against traveling sides might help us limp into the 8, but that is pretty useless when you have to win multiple finals on the road from there to win a flag. If we don’t finish top 2 we’re cooked. And you need to overcome a hell of a lot of disadvantage and win on the road to finish top two when you’re not based in Victoria.
The most advantaged teams are the ones which get gifted home finals regardless of ladder position. The mcg tenants.

 

[BF Tiger]

Great to see a WC thread on the Mb for all the Richmond supporters to continue their obsession with us. You guys really are a weird bunch.
As far as advantages goes, having 10 games at Optus against traveling sides might help us limp into the 8, but that is pretty useless when you have to win multiple finals on the road from there to win a flag. If we don’t finish top 2 we’re cooked. And you need to overcome a hell of a lot of disadvantage and win on the road to finish top two when you’re not based in Victoria.
The most advantaged teams are the ones which get gifted home finals regardless of ladder position. The mcg tenants.

Really, seems like Whinge Coast supporters took the first opportunity to complain and propagate Richmond.

Here's where I first entered the conversation

Let me guess how this thread has petered out...

Travel factor massive, really unfair for Eagles to have jump on a plane 10 times a year. No solution forthcoming as to how to solve the problem.

Nothing should be mentioned of the Eagles HGA.

Richmond, Collingwood, etc get 15 home games a year, even if they are playing a co-tenant.

Something something vic bias something.

And then Obeanie responded by making it all about Richmond...

You forgot to mention the undisputed advantages of being an AFL pet.

Avoiding playing in Geelong again. The current toughest away venue in the comp instead played at your home ground. Massive advantage over other top four teams who pay Geelong in Geelong.

No trips to Tasmania. Let others do the extra travel.

Eagles fans accept they need to travel. It's a given challenge we know can't be avoided.

We don't accept pampered fixturing that gives the best team for the past 3-4 years a soft draw.

Not hard to understand but Tiger fans don't handle facts and basic logic. Easier to just ignore it totally hey Tigers!

Typical stupid reply from a Richmond nuff nuff..

Totally avoided the issue......And the obvious.

Only time will tell if Richmond are good enough to win in a Perth hub v Eagles.

To date Tigers have played once there in three seasons. A 47 point thumping.

Finally in 2021 Richmond have a challenging draw worthy of being the premier team. Multiple interstate trips and no super soft run at home leading into finals. If they win this season I will 'tip my hat'.

Every time they play Geelongs home game at the MCG and avoided the hardest away fixture.

When was the last time Richmond played in Geelong?

Thanks in advance.

Edit. We all know the AFL allows a Geelong home to 'be sold' to make more money. The Cats then get scheduled to play Richmond at the MCG. Not exactly fair on the other clubs who are scheduled to play Geelong in Geelong.

Then on two occasions / years North requested to sell one of their home games to the Eagles and play at Optus in WA. The AFL refused the request twice, I understand, on the basis it was not fair on the rest of the competition.

Different rules for different teams / states it seems.

Thanks.

So up to 2017 Tigers were playing and losing to Geelong in Geelong. And then the Tigers started winning these Geelong 'home game's when played at the MCG.

What a fortunate change in fixturing.

Almost as if Geelong are more familiar and confident playing in Geelong v Richmond. Massive benefit to the opposition giving up home ground advantage to play where the Tigers are very comfortable v playing somewhere they rarely win.

Tough away game that Geelong trip.

Some teams just get a leg up from AFL fixturing and avoid playing in Geelong. Lucky Tigers. Just like being gifted an early kill against Carlton when they were rebuilding.

And that's in only the last few pages. Seems like some WCE fans talk about Richmond as much as anyone.

 

[Forward Press]

Really, seems like Whinge Coast supporters took the first opportunity to complain and propagate Richmond.

Here's where I first entered the conversation



And then you responded by making it all about Richmond...







And that's in only the last few pages. Seems like you talk about Richmond as much as anyone.

They aren't the same poster.

And Whinge Coast? Well, that's a new one, I've heard of 'Whine Coast' and 'Weak Coast' before.