Geelong's first final to be played at Simonds Stadium?

[Wooljay]

If Freo don't want to play there, see if the Bombers want to have a crack at finals instead.

Suck it up and win against the odds - will make the victory even sweeter.

 

[Freeeoo]

I don't care where it's played, if it's at SS then all the more commendable if we win. It's not the Cats fault, this is AFL driven and like I said it's fair enough. I do however think that it should have been aired as a possiblity at the start of the year though.

But make no mistake, the AFL's agenda here is to enhance the probability that there are two preliminary finals at the MCG. It's simply an exercise in maximising revenue.

 

[HR Roughnstuf]

And they will. You do realise we are supporters having a conversation here?

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/cats-likely-to-host-home-final-20130830-2suoz.html

Quotes in here from Steve Harris, you know your president. Pretty sure they are important members of the club.

 

[blktreacle]

Yep, that is the point. The home team does NOT get to play the final at its home ground (unless and only unless the final is against Fremantle). This is what we are all complaining about.

So fremantle should play their "home" finals at the 'G aswell then should they???

 

[Kaiser Powser]

As it should be.

 

[Mike I]

I would think most Fremantle supporters should have no problem playing Geelong at Simond's should it come to it. With a home final guaranteed for the second or third week, our allocation of tickets should be sufficient for our travelling/interstate supporters and it would be the Geelong fans that miss out at the smaller ground and providing the ground meets the appropriate standards for a professional sporting event why wouldn't we play there?

The problem lies in the fact that the AFL has openly said that, should Sydney be drawn to face Geelong instead that the game would not be played at Simond's. How is it acceptable for a national competition to openly and unashamedly practice prejudice and discrimination and in the same week find three individuals guilty of bringing the game in to disrepute?

 

[CF]

I don't care where it's played, if it's at SS then all the more commendable if we win. It's not the Cats fault, this is AFL driven and like I said it's fair enough. I do however think that it should have been aired as a possiblity at the start of the year though.

But make no mistake, the AFL's agenda here is to enhance the probability that there are two preliminary finals at the MCG. It's simply an exercise in maximising revenue.

Good on you for showing a bit of ticker with the first part of your comment. It's been sadly lacking from your kind. But then you lose all that good work with your conspiracy theory crap. Given the AFL said if we had to play Sydney it would be at the MCG your paranoid beliefs about the AFL fall down right there. If what you're saying is true then we'd play Sydney at Simonds too wouldn't we?

 

[MaccasNeighbour]

Mate - youve got a very short memory

1997 -Geelong finished 2nd and the Crows finished 5th at the end of the home and away season

2nd week of the finals Geelong played the Crows - have a guess where the game was -Football Park !!!

Wayne Jackson (a south australian) - said the game will be played at Football Park - no reason was ever given- even though Geelong finished 2nd on the ladder - the end result - the Crows won the premiership that year - do you think getting that home final against Geelong was pivotal - Id say YES

3 points to your argument:

1. Two wrongs don't make a right.
2. The finals series was different in 1997 to the current. Geelong played a home QF and lost, sending them I/S to play. Was it right? No. Had they beaten the Crows they would have had another home final against the Doggies.
3. The Crows have on at least 2 occassions played 'home finals' interstate.

My point is, let's get things right and equal for all teams.

 

[CF]

The problem lies in the fact that the AFL has openly said that, should Sydney be drawn to face Geelong instead that the game would not be played at Simond's. How is it acceptable for a national competition to openly and unashamedly practice prejudice and discrimination and in the same week find three individuals guilty of bringing the game in to disrepute?

If you can guarantee 30,000 people intend to fly over to Victoria for the match then I'm sure the AFL will be happy to put the game at a larger venue. A Geelong V Sydney game will be at the MCG because it will get 60,000 people to it. A Geelong V Freo game will only get 35,000 people without the MCC members.

The other fact is you'll only get 5000 people tops to fly over from Perth for this game so from a crowd point of view it's an acceptable option to use Simonds. The fact that Geelong are higher on the ladder and it's a home final makes it a viable option also.

The bottom line is if you're team is good enough then you should be able to beat us at any ground.

 

[Oneiros]

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/cats-likely-to-host-home-final-20130830-2suoz.html

Quotes in here from Steve Harris, you know your president. Pretty sure they are important members of the club.

Still maintain they're rabble-rousing to try and get leverage to either take the friday night semi-final slot or else force a Sunday match at Subiaco over top of Eddie McGuire's objections. Playing a longer game than just as concerns Kardinia.

 

[NicoNicoNico]

So fremantle should play their "home" finals at the 'G aswell then should they???

Nope - Fremantle Oval would be convenient though. Am sure they will make us play it at a larger ground in the city next door though.

 

[Freeeoo]

Good on you for showing a bit of ticker with the first part of your comment. It's been sadly lacking from your kind. But then you lose all that good work with your conspiracy theory crap. Given the AFL said if we had to play Sydney it would be at the MCG your paranoid beliefs about the AFL fall down right there. If what you're saying is true then we'd play Sydney at Simonds too wouldn't we?

Not really, I think ANZ holds 80,000 plus whereas Subi only holds 40,000. Their first preference would be two MCG prelims potentailly 90,000 plus crowds. It's not a conspiracy theory it's just business AFL style.

 

[Dudley Leopard]

To be honest I am not fussed either way. Geelong have finished 2nd( probably ) and SS is their home ground. It is still just a big paddock with 4 sticks at either end like the rest of them.

Cats will start raging favourites and Freo will come over with a nothing-to-lose attitude. Should be a cracker of a game.

Freo to win with a goal to Ballantine after the siren after he goaded Stevie J to knee him in the nads. Geelong fans to burn the stadium down.

 

[CF]

Not really, I think ANZ holds 80,000 plus whereas Subi only holds 40,000. Their first preference would be two MCG prelims potentailly 90,000 plus crowds. It's not a conspiracy theory it's just business AFL style.

You keep telling yourself that and add to that how it's OK for 3rd place to dictate to 2nd place too. I know it'll make you feel better. That or medication.

 

[Danny Cullen]

The bottom line is if you're team is good enough then you should be able to beat us at any ground.

I'm mad as hell about this shit.

Throughout our history people have been bleating about our carp record in Melbourne. You know "You need to learn to win at the 'G' (or Etihad) if you want to progress in the finals" etc etc.

Our whole travelling strategy in our Melbourne trips is adapting to playing at those grounds with our style of footy. We are starting to get pretty damn good at it too.

Now with the big dance nearing we are told we now need to learn to win at Arctic Park??

**** you AFL. **** you Victoria.

 

[FunkyFreo2]

I must say that I'm surprised Geelong has so few fans that they are only expecting 32k turnout. It's a pretty piss poor effort for finals tbh.

 

[pavilion103]

IF Geelong beat Brisbane this week, Chris Scott will be saying to his men. "Look at the Dockers. They are running scared. They are trying to do whatever it takes to move this game. Any team, any time, anywhere pfffttt. They have already shown weakness before the bounce. The game has been lost this week. Now go out and smash them"

Last time we played at SS it was 4 goals in total to Freo IIRC. They had some outs and so did we.

It may be a big suggestion, but if this is the case, would the Dockers rest another 5 or 6 players to get them 100% right for the home semi at Subi?

 

[FunkyFreo2]

Geelong fans to burn the stadium down.

At least that solves this conundrum for future years.

 

[mcgarnacle]

I'm mad as hell about this shit.

Throughout our history people have been bleating about our carp record in Melbourne. You know "You need to learn to win at the 'G' (or Etihad) if you want to progress in the finals" etc etc.

Our whole travelling strategy in our Melbourne trips is adapting to playing at those grounds with our style of footy. We are starting to get pretty damn good at it too.

Now with the big dance nearing we are told we now need to learn to win at Arctic Park??

**** you AFL. **** you Victoria.

wasn't Waverly, Arctic Park?

 

[pavilion103]

The thing I find hilarious also is because Freo have only been in a position like this once before (2006), they actually think it's a huge deal making the top 4 and think anyone who does it a huge premiership chance.

Newsflash... one of Geelong or Hawthorn WILL win this premiership. Sure you've had a cute little run and should be proud for making top 4, but lets get serious here. You won't actually win the flag or probably even make the GF.
Plenty of top 4 teams over the years, maybe only half of them contenders. Take the blinkers off and get serious.

 

[FrancisX]

What happens if Freo beat Cats and then Hawks lose to Sydney but either of those teams make the GF and Freo likwise make GF - how does allocation of tickets work in that scenario because it would be a technically be a Freo home final right?

I ask this since AD says Geelong should get preference finishing higher. I get that, but to what extent will the AFL be consistent on this statement?

I will be interested to see how much leverage Collingwood get - already Eddie is quick to cry foul but there is no way Collingwood should be getting special treats over the top four teams if they finish anywhere from 6th - 5th. I would think if they lose a day in prep over the next team for the next scheduled game - well tough. I am not suggesting a resolution should not be sort to make things as even as possible. But in finals, where complications arise some teams should be 'more even' than others (which is what AD is suggesting with Geelong). It should definitely not come down to which president is best able to bully the AFL because of membership numbers nor what would be in the best interests of the AFL (ie two prelims in MCG). And if Geelong get Skilled - fair enough, but the message and acts need to be consistent from there on in.

The AFL has just had trips to the US over equalisation and made statements about the 'integrity of the game' with the latest youknowwhat saga. Well consistency, when organising finals fixturing is crucial that the AFL is living up to its message. If its not, the AFL in part adds to creating the paranoia of fans.

It concerns me the AFL is ready suggesting 33 thousand which is significantly less than the previous year between the same two teams in an elimination final. It sounds a bit like bending the truth a bit. Again if Geelong get skilled, fair enough - they earned it and good team needs to be good enough to beat them. But you follow through on the logic - it would only be fair say Freo lose - a team which wins the prelim - if fixturing is difficult they do so on a 6 day break.

 

[Scotland]

Wayne Jackson (a south australian) - said the game will be played at Football Park - no reason was ever given- even though Geelong finished 2nd on the ladder - the end result - the Crows won the premiership that year - do you think getting that home final against Geelong was pivotal - Id say YES

This is incorrect. The system employed at the time was 4 QFs, 2 SFs, 2 PFs then a GF. In the 4 QFs it was 1 v 8, 2 v 7, 3 v 6 & 4 v 5.

The two highest ranked winners went through to week 3 and hosted PFs - 'MCG rule' notwithstanding.

The two lowest ranked losers were eliminated.

In week two the winning QF sides hosted the SFs. Geelong were 'screwed' in having to travel to Adelaide after finishing 2nd, but so were West Coast in having to travel to Melbourne after finishing 5th. It's not like separate rules were applied to each SF that year. Had the AFL rewarded ladder position Geelong would've hosted Adelaide at the MCG and West Coast would have played North in Perth.

If you want to see a team being screwed, look at 1999. 6th placed Carlton were smashed by 3rd placed Brisbane. 5th placed West Coast beat 4th placed Western Bulldogs at the MCG. Brisbane rightfully hosted Western Bulldogs at the Gabba. West Coast vs Carlton was played at the MCG - the MCG rule rewarding the team which finished lower on the ladder and lost first up. 1996 not much better.

We no longer use the McIntyre final 8 system, and additionally the rules regarding home finalists have been changed to reward ladder position - both changes for the better. Unfortunately while getting rid of the MCG finals clauses has made the finals fairer the contractual obligations have just been pushed onto the H&A fixture which is unbalanced enough with 18 teams and 22 rounds.

 

[FrancisX]

The thing I find hilarious also is because Freo have only been in a position like this once before (2006), they actually think it's a huge deal making the top 4 and think anyone who does it a huge premiership chance.

Should we forfeit then - given Essendon have already, why not us?

 

[CF]

I'm mad as hell about this shit.

Throughout our history people have been bleating about our carp record in Melbourne. You know "You need to learn to win at the 'G' (or Etihad) if you want to progress in the finals" etc etc.

Our whole travelling strategy in our Melbourne trips is adapting to playing at those grounds with our style of footy. We are starting to get pretty damn good at it too.

Now with the big dance nearing we are told we now need to learn to win at Arctic Park??

**** you AFL. **** you Victoria.

We play at "Arctic Park" as you call it many times a year and have won 3 flags in the last 7 years. It hasn't done us any harm. Mate, all this trepidation about playing at Simonds is above the shoulders.

 

[blue harvest]

But Sydney always play at Simonds during home and away, just like Fremantle. Why is there suddenly a new rule invented on the eve of the finals?

There is a lot more demand for a final.
For a H&A game a lot of the Melbourne based Swan supporters don't bother going but for a final they want to go. Also people don't bother flying/driving down from Sydney or southern NSW for a H&A game, but for a final they do - much more so than Freo supporters because of the short distance and low cost.