2020 AFL fixture released

[FreeTK]

Firstly the article is behind a paywall; therefore I can't read it. But the fact you subscribe to AdelaideNow tells me plenty about you.

Secondly I have previously acknowledged that the article existed and gave you credit for it (even though it's still one a biased article)

Thirdly-- I didn't even respond to you; I responded to another one of you West Coast Whingers. I'm not sure WHY you still want argue the point with me. I think your view is stupid; doesn't align with that of the AFL or most of it's media. Can you accept that?

Calm down bunny, it's just a bit of banter.

I don't have a subscription to the Adelaidenow, I live in Melbourne. My work gives out free subscriptions to the herald sun which is good for footy coverage and super coach

That subscription gives me access to all sorts of papers, like Adelaidenow, Geelong advertiser (lol).

 

[FreeTK]

....the fact they give you a Herald Sun subscription means it can't be THAT good

Plus anyone that lives in Victoria and STILL chooses to go for a side like West Coast. What's wrong with you?

West Coast are very well supported in Victoria. Probably only behind Sydney and Brisbane in victorian members of interstate clubs.

I was born and went to primary school in Perth in the early to mid nineties. That is the time you choose your footy team. I lived in Perth and it was a great time to be an Eagle. I got to see my team's very first AFL Premiership in 1992.

Have been really blessed being an Eagle. I've seen my team win 4 Premierships in the AFL ERA.

On top of that, we are the team who most regularly makes finals. Unlike many other clubs, we've never missed out on finals more than 3 years in a row. We are a big club, and we always will be.

And the eagles are the coolest fan base.

So yeah, being an Eagle is pretty cool

 

[FreeTK]

So remind me why you couldn't find a Victorian article (as apparently your now a Victorian with a Herald Sun subscription at that) that refers to ONLY AFL premierships and not VFL/AFL premierships?

Or do you have to resort to other states?

Remembering that the RoCo Age article from 5 years ago is an Opinion piece (which he doesn't fully agree with your terminology).

How is where the newspaper from relevant to the conversation. That is unless you think that Victoria is the only thing that matters in a conversation about the AFL, its history and how it should be represented.

Sounds like Vicbias to me. You're doing a bit of gate keeping, Bunny.

To answer your question the age is a Victorian news paper. I posted that link to that page.

I also found numerous other articles that I didn't post as the 4 that I did post were a wide variety of sources and illustrated my point clearly, so there was no need to continue posting them.

 

[FreeTK]

VicBased supports a Victorian Club now?

Is this part of the West Coast Eagles way of overcoming their struggles at the MCG; by becoming a Victorian team?

LOL, what are you talking about! Vicbased was pointing out that you lost this argument long ago, but still carry on. Here's you daily dose of being a bunny. Quotes below

Comment to you in regards to losing our debate:

Your a nit picky fella aren't you. Must be a blast at the conversation table at dinnertime. Talk about unable to acknowledge or, worse still, lose a conversation.

Your reply:

What is it with West Coast Whingers fans coming out of the woodwork in 2019.... interesting that some of the biggest flogs on BigFooty only joined AFTER their team won a premiership.

Comment about you being desperate to save face:

Now you are just grasping at straws. See you in 2020.

Sorry bunny, you lose again

 

[muzhogg]

The headlines in questions are not about any particular club. They are a call to arms to all Victorians to get behind Victorian clubs to "keep the cup home in Victoria" type headlines. It's tribalism at it's finest and it is rooted in the idea that Victoria, and by extension, Victorian clubs are AFL gate keepers.

Its a really gross sentiment for a National competition.

LOL, no we wouldn't want Fremantle with a flag. We'd never hear the end of it, just like your lot are giving other vic clubs hell for the last 2 years. We would rather any other club win a flag over the dockers. That's not something we need to worry about for the foreseeable future anyway.

I know they're not about any particular club and, yes, they are entirely tribal.

Let's be clear here, I'm trying to acknowledge your point about Vic media -- I'm not arguing with you on that point.

I'm just asking why anybody would be surprised.

I also think that you're drawing an entirely illegitimate conclusion about the idea that Victorian clubs are the AFL gatekeepers.

Seriously, I could argue that because WA newspapers preference reportage of, and even support for, WA clubs during finals, it evidences that there's some notion abroad that WA clubs are the AFL gate keepers. But just as the attitudes of the WA media don't determine the policies of the national competition neither do the attitudes of the Vic media.

You're confusing the commercial interests of state based businesses (Vic media) with the strategic interests of a national body (AFL) and, as far as I can see, the only reason you're doing it is because of precisely the same sort of tribalism you're complaining about.

I just add that it didn't feel to Richmond supporters that the AFL showed much in the way of Vic bias when they let Fitzroy go to the wall, and did nothing to help either us or Footscray/Western Bulldogs when we needed it. Or much concern for Hawthorn/Melbourne when talk of a merger was rampant. And then there's the preferential treatment given to the expansion clubs -- I'm not complaining about that, it was necessary to establish the extended competition, but the idea that the AFL share some sort of desire to see Victorian clubs win flags just isn't borne out by the evidence.

 

[HTT]

Good to see Richmond playing almost every interstate game off 5 or 6 day breaks to make it as hard as possible fro them, but mystifying why they got Carlton twice instead of Geelong or ever the Dogs.

Not sure if serious
We have to play one bottom 6 team twice, this year it’s Carlton and they don’t even look like being a bottom 6 team next year anyway.

 

[Tiger Toffee]

Not sure if serious
We have to play one bottom 6 team twice, this year it’s Carlton and they don’t even look like being a bottom 6 team next year anyway.

Yes they do.

 

[manicmagpie]

Not sure if serious
We have to play one bottom 6 team twice, this year it’s Carlton and they don’t even look like being a bottom 6 team next year anyway.

The top 6 don’t have to play a bottom 6 team and vice versa - the criteria is either 0 or 1 games between them.

This year though the AFL did make it so that every team does play at least 1 from the top 6 and bottom 6, so you’re correct that Richmond haven’t been favourited in any way in this regard.

 

[VicBased]

I seriously don't get interstate supporters complaining about Victorian media bias -- as though the media in other states were absolutely impartial.

How does it not make complete sense that Victorian media are biased toward Victoria when they're selling newspapers to Victorians?

It's the same in every state: WA papers are biased toward WA, Sydney papers are biased toward Sydney, SA papers are biased toward SA.

There's nothing even remotely remarkable here and I don't get why people keep banging on about it.

Have you not heard of electronic media, you know airwaves and such? Fox is based in the eastern seaboard but goes to all of Australia. The footy show, 360, on the couch etc, etc, etc. All favouring Victorian teams. Channel 7 and i could go on.

 

[VicBased]

Agree with everything you say and good analysis. The only thing i would point out is that when afl were doing this (see your quote re afl letting teams go to the wall) they were a wholly different entity than what they are now.

I know they're not about any particular club and, yes, they are entirely tribal.

Let's be clear here, I'm trying to acknowledge your point about Vic media -- I'm not arguing with you on that point.

I'm just asking why anybody would be surprised.

I also think that you're drawing an entirely illegitimate conclusion about the idea that Victorian clubs are the AFL gatekeepers.

Seriously, I could argue that because WA newspapers preference reportage of, and even support for, WA clubs during finals, it evidences that there's some notion abroad that WA clubs are the AFL gate keepers. But just as the attitudes of the WA media don't determine the policies of the national competition neither do the attitudes of the Vic media.

You're confusing the commercial interests of state based businesses (Vic media) with the strategic interests of a national body (AFL) and, as far as I can see, the only reason you're doing it is because of precisely the same sort of tribalism you're complaining about.

I just add that it didn't feel to Richmond supporters that the AFL showed much in the way of Vic bias when they let Fitzroy go to the wall, and did nothing to help either us or Footscray/Western Bulldogs when we needed it. Or much concern for Hawthorn/Melbourne when talk of a merger was rampant. And then there's the preferential treatment given to the expansion clubs -- I'm not complaining about that, it was necessary to establish the extended competition, but the idea that the AFL share some sort of desire to see Victorian clubs win flags just isn't borne out by the evidence.

 

[VicBased]

How is it dished out in a problematic way for you?

The comp has 18 teams with ten of them being in Vic. So that is 8 / 10 split. Every argument is about ten in Vic but there are only 2 more in Vic compared to national. So to be a national comp (which won't happen in my lifetime) the travel has to be allocated equally. Why cannot the Vics travel more and the Interstaters travel less? Organise the fixture so WA teams only travel every third game. Money and blockbusters is the underlying problem here and it can be fixed.....but won't.

 

[Do the Dew]

The comp has 18 teams with ten of them being in Vic. So that is 8 / 10 split. Every argument is about ten in Vic but there are only 2 more in Vic compared to national. So to be a national comp (which won't happen in my lifetime) the travel has to be allocated equally. Why cannot the Vics travel more and the Interstaters travel less? Organise the fixture so WA teams only travel every third game. Money and blockbusters is the underlying problem here and it can be fixed.....but won't.

So every non-Vic club gets roughly 15 home games and 7 away. Yeah that’s an equal fixture lmao


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[telsor]

Have you not heard of electronic media, you know airwaves and such? Fox is based in the eastern seaboard but goes to all of Australia. The footy show, 360, on the couch etc, etc, etc. All favouring Victorian teams. Channel 7 and i could go on.

Commercial organisation favors largest market in it's area.

Wow, what an amazing revelation!

Next you'll be telling me the WA media favors WCE over Freo.

 

[Senor M]

Commercial organisation favors largest market in it's area.

Wow, what an amazing revelation!

Next you'll be telling me the WA media favors WCE over Freo.

Especially a shock when FoxFooty’s main market is Victorian’s because Victoria is the only state where the home clubs aren’t on FTA every week— who woulda thunk it!

 

[Kwality]

AFL fixture 2020: Finding the real winners & losers | Footyology

footyology.com.au

"And the Eagles are also one of just two teams (Essendon the other) which will have to cope with not just one, but two lots of consecutive six-day breaks throughout the course of the season."

Forget the "hardness" crap, which is simply a ridiculous conversation to be having in a professional sporting comp. Much more importantly, a team that does by far the most travel (with Freo of course), simply shouldn't be getting these consecutive 6 day breaks.

That is completely avoidable

See the Eagles cross country to Q in the last couple of weeks of the H&A remains on FIXture.

 

[Kwality]

Commercial organisation favors largest market in it's area.

Wow, what an amazing revelation!

Next you'll be telling me the WA media favors WCE over Freo.

The WA media are that, those claiming to cover the game nationally should be true to themselves OR accept its a show out of Melbourne that goes national, e.g 360.
When spent your whole life living/working in one city ...

 

[Lsta062]

The comp has 18 teams with ten of them being in Vic. So that is 8 / 10 split. Every argument is about ten in Vic but there are only 2 more in Vic compared to national. So to be a national comp (which won't happen in my lifetime) the travel has to be allocated equally. Why cannot the Vics travel more and the Interstaters travel less? Organise the fixture so WA teams only travel every third game. Money and blockbusters is the underlying problem here and it can be fixed.....but won't.

OK so if you put it that way your point makes a little more sense. I agree, we can have more travel and less blockbuster games. Having said that, how are we going to tackle the inequity that arises with home ground advantage or lack of it between Victorian sides?

The reason why I ask is because a lot of the supporters of non-Victorian clubs want to address the inequalities their team faces, but I think inequality needs to be addressed league wide

 

[telsor]

The WA media are that, those claiming to cover the game nationally should be true to themselves OR accept its a show out of Melbourne that goes national, e.g 360.
When spent your whole life living/working in one city ...

Commercial organisation tries to market itself to a larger area..

Wow, that's another shocker.


Don't tell me, in the 'perfect world' that is WA, the WA media are completely open about their focus on WCE...or do they perhaps pretend to include Freo in order to expand their market share?

 

[Kwality]

Commercial organisation tries to market itself to a larger area..

Wow, that's another shocker.


Don't tell me, in the 'perfect world' that is WA, the WA media are completely open about their focus on WCE...or do they perhaps pretend to include Freo in order to expand their market share?

YES, WA media concentrate on WA, so do VIC, no problem, its those who pose a national commentators, particularly TV ...

 

[telsor]

YES, WA media concentrate on WA, so do VIC, no problem, its those who pose a national commentators, particularly TV ...

You missed my point.

'national' AFL media is really Vic AFL media (their largest market segment), but they try to sell themselves to a broader market by calling themselves national and making token efforts elsewhere..
'WA' media, is really WCE media (their largest market segment), but they try to sell themselves to a broader market by calling themselves statewide and making token efforts elsewhere..

Same deal, different scale. Basic business practice.

 

[JohnZ]

They could play the Hawks or Roos in Tasmania or the Cats in Geelong. I would be happy to see the Cats play in Tassie if the AFL then gave them 11 home games in Geelong like they request every year but never get

Idgaf where the cats play our away games. Send us interstate if that's what the AFL wants, but each club should get the right to choose where their 11 home games are played. Geelong gets 11 games in Geelong, Richmond gets 11 games at MCG, Hawthorn gets 11 games in Launceston etc.

 

[HTT]

The comp has 18 teams with ten of them being in Vic. So that is 8 / 10 split. Every argument is about ten in Vic but there are only 2 more in Vic compared to national. So to be a national comp (which won't happen in my lifetime) the travel has to be allocated equally. Why cannot the Vics travel more and the Interstaters travel less? Organise the fixture so WA teams only travel every third game. Money and blockbusters is the underlying problem here and it can be fixed.....but won't.

So you want to give some teams more-significantly more home games than others? Seems a bit suss but anyway.

 

[Kwality]

You missed my point.

'national' AFL media is really Vic AFL media (their largest market segment), but they try to sell themselves to a broader market by calling themselves national and making token efforts elsewhere..
'WA' media, is really WCE media (their largest market segment), but they try to sell themselves to a broader market by calling themselves statewide and making token efforts elsewhere..

Same deal, different scale. Basic business practice.

Possibly the view from inside the bubble v outside.

 

[Forward Press]

I don't have a problem with Victorian based sources focusing a majority of their time on Victorian clubs which comprise over half of the clubs in the competition - the reality is that if all 18 clubs were covered equally, majority of coverage would be Victorian anyway. The media simply do what makes the most money for them. Don't like it? Don't watch/read/listen to it. There are sources that cater for all clubs in the competition.

 

[muzhogg]

Have you not heard of electronic media, you know airwaves and such? Fox is based in the eastern seaboard but goes to all of Australia. The footy show, 360, on the couch etc, etc, etc. All favouring Victorian teams. Channel 7 and i could go on.

I was responding to criticisms of Victorian media so the electronic media you mention weren't really in focus.

That said, I don't know that their bias (if there is any) is quite as overt as outlets like the Herald-Sun. Have any of them ever done a segment where they talk about "us" winning the flag when it's a Victorian team or "them" winning when it's interstate? I can imagine that Victorian clubs get better exposure but I put that down to pragmatics rather than bias. Simply put, if you're making a footy show in Melbourne, then it's not going to be easy getting players from WA or QLD to sit in on your segments.

And even then, I'm still not remotely convinced that a bias in the media translates to a bias at the AFL. I just don't see the legitimacy of appealing to media bias to prove something about the attitude of the AFL.