Why did West Coast have to play in Hobart?

[blue harvest]

It was probably another team's home ground. I didn't say which team.

Wrong again.

 

[kaiserchief13]

That's a fair point. It's not like Collingwood or Essendon play there.

Richmond did until a few years ago, but not likely to happen now they're good.

It's almost like the AFL manage their schedule to maximise revenue...

Everything comes back to 'maximise revenue'.

If that was the case then why are clubs like North and Bulldogs in the league? They lose money and have to be propped up by the clubs that actually make a profit.

The AFL would 'maximise revenue' by getting rid of them

 

[HTT]

North’s regular home ground is Etihad stadium, so you weren’t getting played at the G anyway. Plus we don’t choose to play home games in Tasmania, why the heck would we have to give up a home game?

 

[captain blood 17]

That's a fair point. It's not like Collingwood or Essendon play there.

Richmond did until a few years ago, but not likely to happen now they're good.

It's almost like the AFL manage their schedule to maximise revenue...

We played Geelong at GMHBA stadium last year.


Sent from my iPad using righteous Bhodi manpower

 

[kaiserchief13]

How is the ground not AFL standard?

Wind has too much of an effect, which occurs at no other stadium around the country. How can teams be used to it when they play in those conditions once every 2 years compared to North multiple times each season?

 

[Brunswick Trap King]

Wrong again.

I'll keep trying

 

[Brunswick Trap King]

Wind has too much of an effect, which occurs at no other stadium around the country. How can teams be used to it when they play in those conditions once every 2 years compared to North multiple times each season?

What? They showed a wind sock and it wasn't moving

 

[projectv]

Everything comes back to 'maximise revenue'.

If that was the case then why are clubs like North and Bulldogs in the league? They lose money and have to be propped up by the clubs that actually make a profit.

The AFL would 'maximise revenue' by getting rid of them

Such a disingenuous post.

Both North and Bulldogs are making profits. North are also making profits without the cancer that is pokies. They're doing really well.

Try again.

 

[Ned_Flanders]

Wind has too much of an effect, which occurs at no other stadium around the country. How can teams be used to it when they play in those conditions once every 2 years compared to North multiple times each season?

Your objection is..... wind?

You are aware this is an outdoor sport, played in winter?

What's next, venues are not AFL grade if it rains?

 

[projectv]

We played Geelong at GMHBA stadium last year.


Sent from my iPad using righteous Bhodi manpower

I know. I was talking about Tassie.

 

[blue harvest]

What? They showed a wind sock and it wasn't moving

From horizontal?

 

[captain blood 17]

I know. I was talking about Tassie.

I think we played there last year or year before off memory. OP seems frustrated and angry.


Sent from my iPad using righteous Bhodi manpower

 

[Boxhead_31]

Per the title, as we as a club (alongside Freo) travel more then then any other, why did we have to play in Hobart this year?

This isn't just because we lost - many on the West Coast board were expressing the same thing before the game. Richmond, as the reigning premiers, have travelled interstate four times this season. The question I have is why couldn't they forgo one MCG game to play North in Tasmania, rather than us having to travel even more? Why couldn't we have the extra game at the MCG?

Surely, as a national competition, interstate sides should get extra games at the MCG, rather then just adding to the already massive travel load for teams not in Vic?

Why did West Coast have to play in Hobart this:

This what?

 

[Brunswick Trap King]

From horizontal?

Lol it was deflated and looked like there was no wind at all today

 

[BobbyMorri]

Wind has too much of an effect, which occurs at no other stadium around the country. How can teams be used to it when they play in those conditions once every 2 years compared to North multiple times each season?

It wasn't windy today.

Stop sooking. You have it better than Freo or Brisbane in terms of Tassie games. Brisbane, especially with the Fitzroy connection, gets ripped off by the AFL by always having to play Launny v Hawks

Bit funny you picked on Richmond. They have the record attendance for both Hobart and Launny for AFL games. Essendon and Collingwood have NEVER travelled here for an H&A match. I don't think Geelong have been down here since 2007/8. No surprise, the AFL is all about $$$$ and hence will never schedule the big teams down here.

 

[shniko11]

Wind has too much of an effect, which occurs at no other stadium around the country. How can teams be used to it when they play in those conditions once every 2 years compared to North multiple times each season?

Why don't you stop making excuses and take it on the chin like other Eagles supporters.
Maybe you lost because the Eagles didn't play the best today.

Travelling,G.F's at the G, training at grounds, playing in Bellrieve.

There is a pattern here and its getting old stop embarrassing other Eagles supporters ffs.

 

[Bojangles17]

Per the title, as we as a club (alongside Freo) travel more then then any other, why did we have to play in Hobart this year?

This isn't just because we lost - many on the West Coast board were expressing the same thing before the game. Richmond, as the reigning premiers, have travelled interstate four times this season. The question I have is why couldn't they forgo one MCG game to play North in Tasmania, rather than us having to travel even more? Why couldn't we have the extra game at the MCG?

Surely, as a national competition, interstate sides should get extra games at the MCG, rather then just adding to the already massive travel load for teams not in Vic?

We’d did forgo an MCG game to play them at their Home ground at Etihad

 

[kaiserchief13]

Why don't you stop making excuses and take it on the chin like other Eagles supporters.
Maybe you lost because the Eagles didn't play the best today.

Travelling,G.F's at the G, training at grounds, playing in Bellrieve.

There is a pattern here and its getting old stop embarrassing other Eagles supporters ffs.

It's not about today's game, it's about another disadvantage that is not shared by every team to make it an even competition

 

[Andrew Mc]

The problem is the stadium is not AFL standard as the wind plays too much havoc which results in a massive advantage to North as they play there regularly.

This problem as an away team should be given to every team in the league, not just certain teams, that is the problem

Considering there was close to zero wind today, you can lose this as an excuse.

 

[The Final Word]

Home teams should be able to play home games wherever they want. No right to request where to play away

Unless you want to build the game in China, then you can demand the AFL take your opponent's home game away.

 

[Tony Harrison]

As I said no problem with the ground (even though it is not AFL standard and should not be used) just that not every team is forced to play there regularly

How do you define regularly?
Of the 18 AFL games played at Bellerive, which started in 2012.
Games played by teams as follows:
18 - North Melbourne
3 – GWS, West Coast
2 – Adelaide, Melbourne, Richmond, St Kilda, Sydney,
1 – Carlton, Port Adelaide

GWS and West Coast were the first two opposition teams in 2012, so not that remarkable that they reached 3 games before any other teams is it?

 

[JackOutback]

It's a fair question and it's raised every time we are scheduled there. In isolation, it doesn't seem much worse than travelling to Melbourne. But when a team already travels 10 times a year, every added mile is significant. It was interesting hearing NN be asked recently what the first thing he looks for when the fixture is released is. It's not derbies or other big games, it's how many times they travel and where. Vic fans like to play down the issue but the players know.

 

[Senor M]

It's not about today's game, it's about another disadvantage that is not shared by every team to make it an even competition

Then why was this thread only made after West Coast had already played there and lost?

I'd understand if this thread was created in Oct/Nov. when the fixture gets released, but when it gets created straight after a game and includes a rant about Richmond and the MCG (the two favourite topics of hate for West Coast supporters) that has NOTHING to do with the reasons why the West Coast Eagles played in Hobart today.

As I said earlier in this thread-- Richmond & North Melbourne haven't even played a H&A game at the MCG since 2012, it's not like that combination is getting MCG games over the Eagles anyway.

 

[B4Bear]

Under the roof marks would have been marked rather than dropped and wind would not be a problem

There was no wind.

 

[DarkPhoenix]

As I said no problem with the ground (even though it is not AFL standard and should not be used) just that not every team is forced to play there regularly

You're aware Blundstone is one of the best maintained grounds in Australia right? It's very much AFL standard.

Wind was almost dead in Hobart today also.

West Coasts home ground advantage with the umpires being sucked in is far better than what any other team receives at their home ground. North has played at Blundstone twice where wind has been above "normal" and it worked against us just as much as the other team.