Collingwood and Richmond request to play each other twice in 2013

[Groupie_]

Hawthorn/Richmond have no rivalry except on BF. They have never even played a final against each other- strange, but true.

True, but your rivalry with them is a nothing rivalry.

Before the 90s it was your biggest rivalry, and both Essendon and Hawthorn had no rivalries before this one was born in the 80s.

The big rivalries were between Collingood, Carlton and Richmond.

 

[Doss]

Essendon and Melbourne were big rivals back in the 1940s and 1950s. Also I think you'll find the rivalry with Carlton goes back quite a bit further than, say, 1993.

 

[Bazzar]

Hawthorn/Richmond have no rivalry except on BF. They have never even played a final against each other- strange, but true.

Hawks have never played the Pies in a Grand Final either.

 

[jakson68]

Collingwood want to play us twice because they know we are coming.. There is a huge rivalry there that will be resurrected. They would gladly drop a game vs Hawthorn for 2 games vs Richmond.

The crowds will be huge if both clubs are flying.

I would like the pies to play Richmond twice, not because we know they are coming but if it means not playing Hawthorn twice, then I would take it. Richmond are on the improve but the four points would still be easier to acheive against them than the hawks.
But hey, if the "rivalry" line works, then I will go with it.

 

[Groupie_]

Essendon and Melbourne were big rivals back in the 1940s and 1950s. Also I think you'll find the rivalry with Carlton goes back quite a bit further than, say, 1993.

Not according to older Blues fans:

Growing up, Essendon to me were just another club, it's not like my week was destroyed if we lost to them. It wasn't til the late 90s-early 00s that I heard of any "rivalry" Carlton had with them.

Just to add to my point. Nowadays, if it were a Collingwood/Essendon were playing off in a GF, I'd be so annoyed I don't think I'd even watch the game. However, in the lead up to the 1990 GF, because I didn't have any serious emotion about Essendon and had deep hate for the Pies, I was cheering for the Bombers and was annoyed Collingwood smashed them. Even 1993 doesn't piss me off like it would now. In fact, the only satisfaction in beating Essendon those days was because it meant Justin got one over Simon, even then, it was a light hearted thing.

 

[Final Siren]

I think you're getting confused between Richmond and Collingwood as your assertion that the Rich-Coll game is 'one of the better ones excluding special events' only rings true for Richmond.

We both have 2 "special event" games (Rich have the season opener and Dreamtime, Coll has ANZAC Day and QB). The difference is that while the Richmond - Collingwood game is the best of the rest for Richmond, on Collingwood's side we have the 2 games against Carlton, the 2 against Hawthorn, the 2 against Geelong, and the single games against St Kilda and WC all of which outdrew the Richmond game.

Our average attendance at the G excluding ANZAC Day and QB is still over 65K. On our list of home games excluding ANZAC Day, the Richmond game still comes in 6th out of 10. You're well below average this year whatever way you slice it.

Well, how about if I slice it very simply, like this:

Collingwood's average 2012 crowd: 54,822.
Collingwood vs Richmond 2012: 57,268.

The four highest-drawing teams in 2012 are Collingwood, Essendon, Carlton, and Richmond. It was like that in 2011 as well, excluding finals. It's silly to deny a Richmond vs Collingwood game will draw a big crowd.

 

[manicmagpie]

Well, how about if I slice it very simply, like this:

Collingwood's average 2012 crowd: 54,822.
Collingwood vs Richmond 2012: 57,268.

The four highest-drawing teams in 2012 are Collingwood, Essendon, Carlton, and Richmond. It was like that in 2011 as well, excluding finals.

It's quite possible that won't be true at the end of the round (and therefore the season), you know.

It's also great to think that there are Richmond supporters giving thanks to GWS for dragging our average down enough to make their own below par crowd seem vaguely decent.

It's silly to deny a Richmond vs Collingwood game will draw a big crowd.

Well I don't know about Richmond, but I don't consider crowds of under 60K against Melbourne sides to be big crowds. Going back more than a decade, Richmond have been more likely to draw less than 60K against Collingwood than they are to exceed it. So it's not silly at all.

Now, you can reasonably argue that this is because Richmond haven't been any good. Unfortunately you don't get to guarantee you will be in the future, either. Also unfortunate for Richmond is the fact that they don't even make it into the top half of Collingwood games against teams that didn't make the finals. (6th out of 11 in case you're wondering).

Basically, the Collingwood admin is treating a second Richmond game as an asset that they think is going to increase in value in the next few years. And, although I think the Collingwood admin generally do a terrific job, their judgment when it comes to when assets are going to increase in value is, shall we say, questionable.

 

[Final Siren]

It's also great to think that there are Richmond supporters giving thanks to GWS for dragging our average down enough to make their own below par crowd seem vaguely decent.

Mate, it's not a dick measuring contest to see who draws the biggest crowd. We know that's Collingwood. Nobody is "giving thanks" that you have to play GWS and that will bring down your crowd average. (You realize we all play them??)

It's an opportunity for two big-drawing clubs to play a second game per year, that's all. Common sense.

 

[Hawkk]

It's quite possible that won't be true at the end of the round (and therefore the season), you know.

It's also great to think that there are Richmond supporters giving thanks to GWS for dragging our average down enough to make their own below par crowd seem vaguely decent.



Well I don't know about Richmond, but I don't consider crowds of under 60K against Melbourne sides to be big crowds. Going back more than a decade, Richmond have been more likely to draw less than 60K against Collingwood than they are to exceed it. So it's not silly at all.

Now, you can reasonably argue that this is because Richmond haven't been any good. Unfortunately you don't get to guarantee you will be in the future, either. Also unfortunate for Richmond is the fact that they don't even make it into the top half of Collingwood games against teams that didn't make the finals. (6th out of 11 in case you're wondering).

Basically, the Collingwood admin is treating a second Richmond game as an asset that they think is going to increase in value in the next few years. And, although I think the Collingwood admin generally do a terrific job, their judgment when it comes to when assets are going to increase in value is, shall we say, questionable.

This is a seriously good post.

 

[manicmagpie]

Mate, it's not a dick measuring contest to see who draws the biggest crowd. We know that's Collingwood. Nobody is "giving thanks" that you have to play GWS and that will bring down your crowd average. (You realize we all play them??)

It's an opportunity for two big-drawing clubs to play a second game per year, that's all. Common sense.

I'm not trying to argue whether or not Collingwood are the best. I'm not even comparing Collingwood to anyone else, I'm only comparing Collingwood games against each other. And you'll notice I'm actually criticising our own crowd against Richmond by pointing out that it was below par.

I'm responding to the assertions that you and other Richmond fans have made a number of times in this thread which are: that the Collingwood-Richmond crowd from this year was in some way good; and that a Collingwood-Richmond game will automatically be a big crowd.

I think it's pretty clear that both of those assertions are completely wrong.

I only bring up GWS as their absolute suckiness (to make up a new word) together with the other low drawing venues interstate are the only things that keep Richmond's crowd above our overall average. As soon as you look at Collingwood games at the G or games between Collingwood and the other Melbourne teams you see how low that crowd ranks for us.

 

[Doss]

Hawks have never played the Pies in a Grand Final either.

Have played a small handful of finals, though.

Somehow, Hawthorn and Richmond have never come up against each other in a final. Only other combination of Victorian teams that is true for is Footscray/Richmond, Footscray/Fitzroy and Footscray/Carlton.

The other difference is that Hawthorn and Collingwood have spent significant amounts of time (most of the 70s and 80s, and now since the mid 00s) being up at the same time. Richmond and Hawthorn have only been up together between 1971 and 1982. And even then, results always conspired against them meeting in a final.

 

[Hawkk]

I would say the major reason for the discrepancy remains that you play 4 home games (at your request) in a stadium that you expect to get less than 20K at. If you played those exact 4 games in Melbourne rather than Tassie your home average would be around 40K.

Conversely your away average is significantly distorted because you play more away games in Melbourne than any other team, more away games at the MCG than any other team and are the only club not to visit either of the crowd black holes of GWS and GCS. For example with Collingwood, that one game at GWS drops our overall away average down from 53,800 to 49,300.

I don't disagree, but by the same token if we played more home games against higher drawing Victorian clubs (at the expense of two of Adelaide, GWS and the Gold Coast) our average would probably go closer to reaching parity (even when you include Tasmania). Take the discrepancy between home and away games since 2007;

Year h/a
2007 33,187/36,780 (90.23%)
2008 39,976/42,813 (93.37%)
2009 39,635/41,487 (95.55%)
2010 37,876/45,954 (82.42%)
2011 36,393/43,045 (84.54%)
2012 34,103*/46,897 (72.71%)

*Assuming the MCC is correct with their estimated attendance tonight.

No doubt that our home average has been deflated and our away average inflated by our schedule of matches, with balanced schedule of home and away matches the parity would probably be around the 40-42,000 mark.

Kennett was pretty famous about advocating this whilst he was in Launceston. When the time came to put in the fixture requests to the AFL this always seemed to slip his mind.

Perhaps you’re right but clearly the Hawks haven’t used Launceston as a haven for their lower drawing matches, you’ve only got to look at the matches we’ve played at the MCG and in Launceston this season.

 

[Hawkk]

Why do all these threads end up getting hijacked by Hawks supporters who think they're a bigger club than Collingwood, Richmond, Essendon, Carlton.

Fact is big clubs don't have to think about merging, a decade after they've had one of the most successful periods in history. Fact is, big clubs don't have to play home games in Tassy.

Just be happy that your driving a Holden and not a beaten up Datsun like North and the Demons are

Whatever this has to do with classification of club size I've got no idea, perhaps we should but an * against Carlton and Essendon given they play the majority of their home games at a sub 55,000 stadium (as ridiculous an assertion as that maybe)

Fact is, every club (with the exception of Essendon (thank god for those war bounds!)) flirted with merger during the 1980s and 1990s; Melbourne/Richmond, Collingwood/Fitzroy, Carlton/North Melbourne…take your pick. Even the behemoth Richmond and Collingwood both fell into troubled times just 5-6 years after they were vying as the giants of the league (namely 1970s and early 1980s)

The 1980s and 1990s was a completely different time than today, to single out Hawthorn as the only club that was struggling financially at some point during that era is extremely naive.

 

[gaelictiogar]

It's quite possible that won't be true at the end of the round (and therefore the season), you know.

It's also great to think that there are Richmond supporters giving thanks to GWS for dragging our average down enough to make their own below par crowd seem vaguely decent.



Well I don't know about Richmond, but I don't consider crowds of under 60K against Melbourne sides to be big crowds. Going back more than a decade, Richmond have been more likely to draw less than 60K against Collingwood than they are to exceed it. So it's not silly at all.

Now, you can reasonably argue that this is because Richmond haven't been any good. Unfortunately you don't get to guarantee you will be in the future, either. Also unfortunate for Richmond is the fact that they don't even make it into the top half of Collingwood games against teams that didn't make the finals. (6th out of 11 in case you're wondering).

Basically, the Collingwood admin is treating a second Richmond game as an asset that they think is going to increase in value in the next few years. And, although I think the Collingwood admin generally do a terrific job, their judgment when it comes to when assets are going to increase in value is, shall we say, questionable.

You are one of the better posters on this site but you are coming across very self regarding here Manic.

Richmond don't get to guarantee to be finalling in the future. True. Guess what. Neither do you but in supporting your request to jump on the Tiger Train we are betting that you will stay competitive.....not that all our bets pay off either.

 

[neroblack]

Looks like the Pies are trying to balance the inevitable 2 losses against the Blues.

Wont happen. Ratten was the mastermind behind that

 

[manicmagpie]

You are one of the better posters on this site but you are coming across very self regarding here Manic.

Richmond don't get to guarantee to be finalling in the future. True. Guess what. Neither do you but in supporting your request to jump on the Tiger Train we are betting that you will stay competitive.....not that all our bets pay off either.

Apologies if that's the way it's coming off.

"No guarantees" is basically what all my previous waffle boils down to. This of course includes Collingwood's form as a variable. I'm just pointing out that recent history shows that it's completely possible for Richmond-Collingwood to draw ordinary crowds.

I would also hazard a guess (and it's just a guess) that the Collingwood admin have identified our crowds against Richmond as being among the few that have underperformed for us in recent years and this is part of a concerted effort to rectify that and further boost our numbers. After all, why is this request public knowledge? Collingwood would seem to have made it public in an attempt to get the hype building already.

 

[MightyHawks]

I can see why clubs put requests in with financial considerations in mind, considering the amount of clubs in the red across the league. As it's been said it imbalances the draw though ,more than is necessary and from my point of view it devalues the rivalries by contriving to have them twice. If you draw a rival twice a year then great a little something to look forward to, but every year it becomes a little ho hum.

I was hanging out for the dreamtime game but once the second one rolled around I stayed home because it was cold and windy and there was nothing on the line. So my point is the second fixture is just a game like any other, if both teams have something riding on it and are paying well the crowds will come, if both teams are poo then they won't. It about time we let the draw throw up it's own blockbusters. Sydney v Geelong on Sunday being one, the season has conspired to make this game a crucial one for home finals aspirations for two top 8 teams.

As an aside Hawthorn fans throwing shit is a little ridiculous considering the fixture requests put in by them to get games moved to tasmania and those games to be against lower drawing interstate teams. I'd imagine they wouldn't be so rational if their home game against Collingwood was moved to Tasmania!

Yes playing Hawthorn v Geelong twice these last few years has been a little ho hum

None of the games have reached any heights, nor drawn a crowd either

Maybe the AFL need to look at actual and current rivals.

There's no question that Geelong and Fremantle currently have a bigger rivalry than Collingwood and Richmond.

I'd love to see the Cats and the Dockers play each other twice next year

 

[NZ_Tiger]

Yes playing Hawthorn v Geelong twice these last few years has been a little ho hum

None of the games have reached any heights, nor drawn a crowd either

Maybe the AFL need to look at actual and current rivals.

There's no question that Geelong and Fremantle currently have a bigger rivalry than Collingwood and Richmond.

I'd love to see the Cats and the Dockers play each other twice next year

Sarcasm?

 

[MightyHawks]

Sarcasm?

Obviously the Hawthorn v Geelong matches of recent times stand out above any other combination in the last few years...

But my point on Geelong v Fremantle is deadly serious.

They've generally been far more spirited and entertaining than Essendon v Richmond, Carlton v Richmond, Collingwood v Richmond recently

 

[smasha]

Pies ask.Pies get what they want.
More cash for Andy D.

 

[Ron The Bear]

But my point on Geelong v Fremantle is deadly serious.

They've generally been far more spirited and entertaining than Essendon v Richmond, Carlton v Richmond, Collingwood v Richmond recently

When viewed on TV, perhaps. The fact that one or the other's supporter base will always be 2700km away limits its potential for establishing a lasting rivalry.

Too many people forget this sport was built on the live experience.

 

[MightyHawks]

When viewed on TV, perhaps. The fact that one or the other's supporter base will always be 2700km away limits its potential for establishing a lasting rivalry.

Too many people forget this sport was built on the live experience.

Interstate rivalries can certainly flourish, they just need some encouragement

In fact it's critical for our league

The following matchups all have potential

Sydney v West Coast
Essendon v West Coast
Port Adelaide v Brisbane
Essendon v Brisbane
Collingwood v Brisbane
St Kilda v Fremantle
Geelong v Fremantle
Hawthorn v West Coast
Hawthorn v Adelaide
Geelong v West Coast

Not a definitive list as I'm sure I've missed some obvious ones

Interestingly none of these have been given the exposure of Sydney v Collingwood which the AFL have tried to give good exposure to

 

[Ron The Bear]

Interstate rivalries can certainly flourish, they just need some encouragement

In fact it's critical for our league

The following matchups all have potential

Sydney v West Coast
Essendon v West Coast
Port Adelaide v Brisbane
Essendon v Brisbane
Collingwood v Brisbane
St Kilda v Fremantle
Geelong v Fremantle
Hawthorn v West Coast
Hawthorn v Adelaide
Geelong v West Coast

Not a definitive list as I'm sure I've missed some obvious ones

Interestingly none of these have been given the exposure of Sydney v Collingwood which the AFL have tried to give good exposure to

None will ever have the allure of a traditional clash. Or a Derby or Showdown, for that matter.

 

[_RT_]

This thread is a laugh, Hawk fans whinging why not us. Yet if they were given the Pies twice a year they would be in another thread whinging about how its not fair they they get the hard teams twice while others get to play the easy beats.

All clubs put forward requests that best suit their ability to make money. Every year every club asks to play the likes of Collingwood twice, fact of the matter is that unless the league goes to a 34 week H&A season its never going to happen. So each year the AFL asks clubs to put forward their requests and it then does its best to accomodate all requests.

Speaking as a Richmond fan now, personally I want to see us play more return games against top 8 sides, because if we're going to be a finals side in the next few years we need to be able to beat these sorts of sides to do just that. In fact from a 22 round fixture I would love to see us with 12 games against top 8 opposition from the previous year.

 

[manicmagpie]

Interstate rivalries can certainly flourish, they just need some encouragement...

Interestingly none of these have been given the exposure of Sydney v Collingwood which the AFL have tried to give good exposure to

The AFL are seemingly only interested in using this clash to try to boost crowds in Sydney and have refused to give this potential rivalry the exposure that 60K+ crowds at the G would bring. Two games at the 'G in thirteen seasons and counting.