Collingwood and Richmond request to play each other twice in 2013

[neroblack]

Err Tommy Hafey, 4 flags for Richmond, and of course none for Collingwood

Maybe you should get him back..

 

[Final Siren]

To borrow a classic parenting line: "I'm only so hard on you because I think you can do better."

Since the new stands at the G were completed, we've played 36 games there against the 'big 4' of Carlton, Essendon and Richmond. Only 3 of those crowds were smaller than our Round 2 game this year, and all of those were late season dead rubbers for at least one of the teams involved. It was a poor crowd.

I understand what you're getting at, it's just very circular to say that Richmond v Collingwood doesn't draw a big crowd considered from the point of view of what you expect from Richmond v Collingwood.

This year's Collingwood v Richmond game drew the 18th biggest crowd of the year.

I would also like to know what, in your opinion, constitutes a good timeslot if not Round 2 at the G against Collingwood. You'll no doubt keep your season opener against Carlton and Dreamtime against Essendon, what would you propose for the first Collingwood-Richmond game that would see better conditions for a big crowd than Round 2 at the G?

There's nothing wrong with Round 2. I just disagreed with your statement that it was already "a big matchup" that should be compared to the crowds of special blockbusters (like ANZAC Day, Queen's Birthday, GF replay, or even Friday night games).

If we get Round 2 next year, I wouldn't expect much over 60k again, because we're the 12th placed team. But if we get a return game in say Round 18 and the Tigers & Pies are both in the top 8, that will be massive.

Anyway, if there's two things we can agree on they are that it is well overdue for Collingwood to play Richmond twice and we hope that both games (if they happen) are both huge.

 

[Final Siren]

We beat Richmond, Essendon and Saints late in the year when a position for the 8 was in the balance, if any of these clubs deserved to be in the finals then they would have knocked us off. We also beat Adelaide, Geelong and Collingwood. I am comfortable with us earning our spot and it has absolutely nothing to do with the result this week. An away elimination final in Perth is a daunting task at the best of times, let alone a final.

What some offended supporters of other clubs think or feel is irrelevant to me. It is just irony that the fat cat clubs want to play eachother all the time and their supporters whine about a hard draw.

Yup. People also forget that before this year, North's fixture has been abysmal.

 

[Final Siren]

So, the game has been played, and Richmond v Collingwood drew 81,950, the 2nd-biggest crowd of the year so far.

Would those posters above who were pooh-poohing the idea of Richmond v Collingwood drawing big crowds please explain.

 

[Hawkk]

So, the game has been played, and Richmond v Collingwood drew 81,950, the 2nd-biggest crowd of the year so far.

Would those posters above who were pooh-poohing the idea of Richmond v Collingwood drawing big crowds please explain.

...and I'm sure the AFL will schedule return fixtures in next years draw on the back of this fact. Bare in mind that the corresponding fixture last year was one of Collingwood's lowest drawing home games for the season so its not surprising that the AFL opted for the single match this season.

That said, as pointed out in this thread, the Richmond-Collingwood fixture has enormous potential for future growth.

 

[gaelictiogar]

So, the game has been played, and Richmond v Collingwood drew 81,950, the 2nd-biggest crowd of the year so far.

Would those posters above who were pooh-poohing the idea of Richmond v Collingwood drawing big crowds please explain.

Attendances at ALL AFL match ups are form and expectation dependent.

Statisticians tell us about what they call "reversion to the mean". This essentially means that while the "par" statistical return for any event will have its ups and downs over time it will revert to a "mean" or "par" over time.

EG Carlton V Collingwood has its ups and downs but historically is probably the biggest grudge match in the game. It has 90K mega matchups when both going well and its sub 50K washouts when both flatlining but over time it will will trend high because "mean" or "par" is higher for it than for other fixtures. All the so called Big 4 match ups have very high "par" attendances compared to most other games. If one is trending high or low it is because of form and expectation.

Any sensible comment of turnouts must recognise the central relevance of the above point. Richmond V Collingwood being no more or less affected than other fixtures.

 

[The Passenger]

with the additional two teams squeezing the fixture even more, the AFL needs to make a stand as say only one blockbuster fixture guaranteed per club each season.

It could almost going to get to the point where collingwood has the same fixture every year.

before where there were 7 additional games and 15 potential opponents you could probably squeeze upto 3 blockbusters for a team like the pies. but now it's just too much. leave's the draw to rigid if teams like richmond, carlton and essendon are all playing well or playing poorly.

im happy for the afl to cash in a bit on blockbusters with one fixture per club - all the interstate derby's, probably hawks-geelong too (for the next 4-5 years anyway), and collingwood-essendon or maybe the "big four" could rotate and play a different big four team twice every three years... and lock that one additional game in per season.

beyond that, the last additional four games each team plays has to be randomised - tally up the amount of premiership points each team has won over the previous three seasons, and you play two teams from the top nine at random and you play two teams from the bottom nine at random. do it as a pool on tv, during the draft or something like that ala the world cup draw... there's decent enough odds you'll else end up with some additional blockbuster matches which the AFL wouldn't have to count towards the "locked in" blockbusters from above.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

with the additional two teams squeezing the fixture even more, the AFL needs to make a stand as say only one blockbuster fixture guaranteed per club each season.

I assume you mean one return game guaranteed?

In which case I disagree. Bring in a complete rolling draw.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

...and I'm sure the AFL will schedule return fixtures in next years draw on the back of this fact. Bare in mind that the corresponding fixture last year was one of Collingwood's lowest drawing home games for the season .

It was a bigger crowd than our return game against Essendon.

 

[The Passenger]

I assume you mean one return game guaranteed?

In which case I disagree. Bring in a complete rolling draw.

yes return game was the word i was looking for.

i agree rolling draw would be the ideal scenario but in a world driving by $$$$, i'd be willing to compromise for one return game blockbuster per club per season. no more than that though. draw is getting too tight.

for your rolling draw would you 1) completely randomise the return games each year, 2) have the randomised in pools (i.e. top 9, bottom 9 and you play 3 from the other half of the draw and 2 from your half), or 3) have them done in advance (17 opposition teams, 5 return games, play each club in a return match every 3 or 4 years)?

There are still problems with each:
1 - you can still end up with very uneven return games, also from a financial perspective you could go a long time without playing another team
2 - still have the issue where you keep missing a team for an extended period
3 - can end up in a position where a team hasn't played 3 teams for 4 years, so you pretty much locked into play them but those teams could either be right up the top or right down the bottom of the ladder, thus given one team a very biased draw.

i guess bottom line is 18 teams across 5 states in a country about the size of continental europe, where 10 of those teams are based in one city, and trying to fit them into a 22 game season.... well that's about as nightmare scenario as you can get for preparing an even draw.

i would certainly support a complete rolling draw long long long before i supported a blockbuster orientated draw which could see teams like collingwood, essendon, carlton and richmond end up having virtually the same draw year in year out. i get the feeling the afl would be happy to head down the latter path no matter how much resistance was given.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

yes return game was the word i was looking for.

i agree rolling draw would be the ideal scenario but in a world driving by $$$$, i'd be willing to compromise for one return game blockbuster per club per season. no more than that though. draw is getting too tight.

for your rolling draw would you 1) completely randomise the return games each year, 2) have the randomised in pools (i.e. top 9, bottom 9 and you play 3 from the other half of the draw and 2 from your half), or 3) have them done in advance (17 opposition teams, 5 return games, play each club in a return match every 3 or 4 years)?

Option 3 most definitely.

If you luck out on a good draw well then its luck. If you luck out on a good draw two years running then its amazing luck. If you luck out on a good draw three years running then its a farnakling miracle.

I tentatively agree with you that one guaranteed return game might be a neccessity...mostly for interstate sides though to maximise derbies and minimise travel. Not so important for Vic teams. If Collingwood loses a return game against Essendon and instead gets an extra one against Hawthorn Geelong or Richmond, the financial impacts will be negligible.

 

[NUFC Tiger]

Saturday was the first time I've been to a Collingwood game - the amount of noise they generate was something else. Wouldn't complain to play them (and Carlton and Essendon) twice

 

[The Passenger]

Option 3 most definitely.

fair enough, if it was done like that it would be much better for the afl to announce the return games 2 or 3 years in advance imo. that way everyone knows what their draw is gonna be like in the upcoming years, and if a team lucked out or got unlucky it would be purely because the teams went better or worse than one would expect them to have gone over the following years. you can't have any of this they just keep giving you soft draws or we get hard draws stuff.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

fair enough, if it was done like that it would be much better for the afl to announce the return games 2 or 3 years in advance imo..

Not neccessy to announce in advance...., as long as you have no return games this year against teams you had return games against in the previous two years, then all is good.

 

[fabulousphil]

So let me get this right, the AFL are accused of rigging the draw to maximise crowds and Collingwood and Richmond don't play each other twice.

 

[gaelictiogar]

It was a bigger crowd than our return game against Essendon.

Simply makes the point I have been making Timmy. Every match up in the game is susceptible to the attendance being undermined by one or other or both teams going in in poor form with low expectations. Collingwood v essendon trends as a massive massive draw but the relatively low turnout at your return game V Essendon last year was simply a result of Essendon having low expectations. Indeed relatively low expectations at one or other club means that hte return game hasn't hit 80,000 for 20 years and averages about 65,000......great but not exceptional.

If we were able to design a computer model to predict attendance and we were able to correct for differing form, ladder position and levels of expectations we would find all 6 Big 4 games trending within 2 to 3,000 of each other with Carlton V Collingwood ( huge ancient rivalry ) and Collingwood V Essendon ( biggest modern fanbases ) probably trending a couple of thousand ahead of the other 4.

Its difficult to tell with modern rivalries such as Geelong V Collingwood or Geelong V Hawthorn. How much of the attraction of those fixtures is now locked in and how much is predicated on high expectations and good form onfield. we simply don't know. Probably a bit of both.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

Simply makes the point I have been making Timmy.

Never said I was arguing with you.

 

[Chief Ten Beers]

with the additional two teams squeezing the fixture even more, the AFL needs to make a stand as say only one blockbuster fixture guaranteed per club each season.

Agreed, sick of every team having their grand final of the H&A season against Collingwood.

 

[pies1958]

Agreed, sick of every team having their grand final of the H&A season against Collingwood.

Absolutely. It seems like the pies have nine grand finals in a row at the start of this season.

 

[Collingwood 4 eternity]

yes return game was the word i was looking for.

i agree rolling draw would be the ideal scenario but in a world driving by $$$$, i'd be willing to compromise for one return game blockbuster per club per season. no more than that though. draw is getting too tight.

for your rolling draw would you 1) completely randomise the return games each year, 2) have the randomised in pools (i.e. top 9, bottom 9 and you play 3 from the other half of the draw and 2 from your half), or 3) have them done in advance (17 opposition teams, 5 return games, play each club in a return match every 3 or 4 years)?

There are still problems with each:
1 - you can still end up with very uneven return games, also from a financial perspective you could go a long time without playing another team
2 - still have the issue where you keep missing a team for an extended period
3 - can end up in a position where a team hasn't played 3 teams for 4 years, so you pretty much locked into play them but those teams could either be right up the top or right down the bottom of the ladder, thus given one team a very biased draw.

i guess bottom line is 18 teams across 5 states in a country about the size of continental europe, where 10 of those teams are based in one city, and trying to fit them into a 22 game season.... well that's about as nightmare scenario as you can get for preparing an even draw.

i would certainly support a complete rolling draw long long long before i supported a blockbuster orientated draw which could see teams like collingwood, essendon, carlton and richmond end up having virtually the same draw year in year out. i get the feeling the afl would be happy to head down the latter path no matter how much resistance was given.

And the 2012 Grand Final would still have been Haw v Syd , with Syd winning

like wise for the teams and winners of 2011 , 2010 , 2009 , 2008 , 2007 , 2006 , 2005 etc

 

[MightyHawks]

Agreed, sick of every team having their grand final of the H&A season against Collingwood.

Our match against you was the third most important of our first three

 

[Final Siren]

Agreed, sick of every team having their grand final of the H&A season against Collingwood.

Gosh you guys rate yourselves. You always think when a team plays against you, it's their biggest game ever. It's not, you know. It's a good game. But it's not a grand final (or "Richmond's biggest game in 30 years," as your president put it).

 

[go team]

Agreed, sick of every team having their grand final of the H&A season against Collingwood.

BLOCKBUSTER FATIGUE! Easy way around it - rally the Magpie army not to turn up! Finals like atmosphere removed with half the crowd gone. Opposition don't have the motivation of playing in their "grand final". Face it Pies fans, you're giving the other team an advantage just by showing up!

 

[Parquet Court]

Gosh you guys rate yourselves. You always think when a team plays against you, it's their biggest game ever. It's not, you know. It's a good game. But it's not a grand final (or "Richmond's biggest game in 30 years," as your president put it).

they are just trying to catch up on all the other actual grand finals / finals they have lost over the years.

 

[Groupie_]

Agreed, sick of every team having their grand final of the H&A season against Collingwood.

2 flags in 50 years and a million gf losses

You aren't that great.