No Oppo Supporters General AFL and other clubs discussion thread. **Opposition fans not welcome** Part 7

[CliffMcTainshaw]

9 have it all covered. No wonder Hird's applying for the job.

 

[Ned Ryerson]

The biggest advantage Geelong are granted is their games at Kardinia Park.

They're the only Victorian side with their own ground. Meaning they're the only side in the competition with their own ground that doesn't fly interstate for most of their away games. And on top of that the ground is an irregular shape compared to the others. This kind of set-up is unprofessional at best, and wouldn't be allowed in any other league in the world.

Jesus mate - have a cry. They’re a side based in Geelong so it’s unfair that they play their games in Geelong?

And unprofessional to have differing ground sizes? Spare me. MLB has 30 ballparks and every one of them is different in terms of outfield dimensions and wall heights.

We were all laughing about the Kardinia thing exposing Geelong each September at the MCG when they continually shit the bed in prelims but now they finally crack a flag again and it’s another injustice?

Again - this kind of infantile tantrums about all things Geelong must just be mana from heaven for Cats lurkers on here.

 

[CliffMcTainshaw]

And on top of that the ground is an irregular shape compared to the others. This kind of set-up is unprofessional at best, and wouldn't be allowed in any other league in the world.

You're joking aren't you. You could measure every ground in Victoria and be hard pressed to find 2 with the same dimensions. There are no set dimensions for footy grounds.

From the SCG to Kardinia Park — do ground sizes contribute to the end result in AFL games?

 

[TylerDurden]

 

[BIGHAWK23]

Not our problem anymore
Tom Mitchell can jog on

 

[Leather Poisoning]

100% guaranteed that he's in their best 22 and quite likely will poll most brownlow votes for them.

 

[KermitJagger]

Jesus mate - have a cry. They’re a side based in Geelong so it’s unfair that they play their games in Geelong?

And unprofessional to have differing ground sizes? Spare me. MLB has 30 ballparks and every one of them is different in terms of outfield dimensions and wall heights.

We were all laughing about the Kardinia thing exposing Geelong each September at the MCG when they continually s**t the bed in prelims but now they finally crack a flag again and it’s another injustice?

Again - this kind of infantile tantrums about all things Geelong must just be mana from heaven for Cats lurkers on here.

AFL ground sizes being different is fine, provided they're roughly the same dimensions. Kardinia is missing almost an entire wing.

It does stand out as a pretty extreme outlier in terms of dimensions.

 

[Lethality]

Jesus mate - have a cry. They’re a side based in Geelong so it’s unfair that they play their games in Geelong?

And unprofessional to have differing ground sizes? Spare me. MLB has 30 ballparks and every one of them is different

Playing in Geelong would be OK if other sides had the ability to play in their designated stadiums, but they don't.

As for park dimensions, MLB doesn't vary much. They also have 30 teams for those 30 stadiums.

AFL just isn't up to scratch by comparison, as a professional league the set-up is a joke.

 

[Lethality]

You're joking aren't you. You could measure every ground in Victoria and be hard pressed to find 2 with the same dimensions. There are no set dimensions for footy grounds.

From the SCG to Kardinia Park — do ground sizes contribute to the end result in AFL games?

Nevertheless KP is an outlier. Other clubs have tried to more or less conform with the dimensions of the G, whereas KP has moved further away.

 

[Ned Ryerson]

AFL ground sizes being different is fine, provided they're roughly the same dimensions. Kardinia is missing almost an entire wing.

It does stand out as a pretty extreme outlier in terms of dimensions.

It's a dicey strategy though given the MCG is where you have to win the flags, outside of pandemics. I am fairly sure that's why Optus Stadium is more similar to the MCG than Subiaco used to be. If anything you could argue that it has hindered Geelong given the amount of times they were minor premiers or preliminary finalists and failed to win the flag. There is not rules about the overall ground dimensions of an AFL oval - they are all fairly different. Personally I love this fact. Even in games with regimented dimensions you can still exploit them. I remember when the Melbourne Storm entered the NRL back in the day they deliberately had the shortest permissible in-goal touch lines. Worked a treat for them because visiting teams would try their usual short kicking game when attacking but would frequently put it in touch and the Storm would get the ball back on their 20 metre line. The Melbourne halves however trained with these dimensions so knew how to use them better. Was a genius tactic and worked for them for quite a while.

 

[Ned Ryerson]

Playing in Geelong would be OK if other sides had the ability to play in their designated stadiums, but they don't.

As for park dimensions, MLB doesn't vary much. They also have 30 teams for those 30 stadiums.

AFL just isn't up to scratch by comparison, as a professional league the set-up is a joke.

View attachment 1538016

Yes - so unprofessional to not force clubs to entirely rebuild their stadiums to fit into the same dimensions as one another. The league can't claim to be professional until we completely bulldoze Kardinia and the SCG to make them align with the MCG.

The competition has existed like this, with Geelong involved, for 125 years. I don't think it has ever been bemoaned as being unprofessional throughout that time except when the occasional Hawthorn fan has a cry about it when Geelong is doing well. Personally I think it is deranged and petty to be hung up about it - the same way I think Geelong fans are petty when they have a cry about having to play home finals at a ground that seats predominantly more people than their little regional stadium.

But yes, Kardinia must be such a huge unfair advantage - so much so that before 2007 Geelong had managed to win a mammoth 3 flags in 67 years while playing there. Now do you think that their flags since have resulted in this same home ground advantage or is it perhaps that they are just a well run football club that has done a fairly good job at managing their list over the last 15 years. As much as we don't like the bastards - I am sorry to say that it might just be the latter.

 

[CliffMcTainshaw]

Nevertheless KP is an outlier. Other clubs have tried to more or less conform with the dimensions of the G, whereas KP has moved further away.

If you go to the end of the analysis I linked to, it summarizes the most important aspects about the article.

"The roar of the local crowd has a small effect, with teams generally doing better with a loud, passionate crowd supporting them and intimidating umpires.
The lack of impact of ground sizes speaks to the intent of the founders of the game — that the players make the game, and not where they play it. A good team will be a good team no matter the size or shape of the ground, which is how footy should be."

 

[KermitJagger]

It's a dicey strategy though given the MCG is where you have to win the flags, outside of pandemics. I am fairly sure that's why Optus Stadium is more similar to the MCG than Subiaco used to be. If anything you could argue that it has hindered Geelong given the amount of times they were minor premiers or preliminary finalists and failed to win the flag. There is not rules about the overall ground dimensions of an AFL oval - they are all fairly different. Personally I love this fact. Even in games with regimented dimensions you can still exploit them. I remember when the Melbourne Storm entered the NRL back in the day they deliberately had the shortest permissible in-goal touch lines. Worked a treat for them because visiting teams would try their usual short kicking game when attacking but would frequently put it in touch and the Storm would get the ball back on their 20 metre line. The Melbourne halves however trained with these dimensions so knew how to use them better. Was a genius tactic and worked for them for quite a while.

They have the advantage of training on that ground and an MCG shaped ground.

Part of the difficulty in winning finals is getting there, guaranteed wins on a ground that unique is going to be an advantage that Geelong will always have. I'm not that bothered by it, but it's the one ground where the game changes significantly in terms of play style for pretty much every side - the makeup of stoppages changes and the method of defending the ground changes.

 

[CliffMcTainshaw]

They have the advantage of training on that ground and an MCG shaped ground.

Part of the difficulty in winning finals is getting there, guaranteed wins on a ground that unique is going to be an advantage that Geelong will always have. I'm not that bothered by it, but it's the one ground where the game changes significantly in terms of play style for pretty much every side - the makeup of stoppages changes and the method of defending the ground changes.

 

[H00t]

View attachment 1538143

Stats are reasonably similar. But they don’t tell the full story. At GMHBA you have to play the corridor. As opposed to playing the wings.

The cats force opposition teams into dead pockets or on the wings where they can kill the ball.

Then they throw everyone into the corridor when attacking because teams defend too wide and you can’t generate quick attacks out wide on the turnover like you would at a normal ground.

A lot of it is about teams adjusting but when teams play at most 1 game there a year.

And on the same boat it’s massively held them back as they have been exposed on the MCG and the bigger grounds in finals.

It’s only been this year they got a dream run and didn’t get exposed like they have in the past.

 

[KermitJagger]

View attachment 1538143

Yes, a graph that uses certain statistics to "prove" Geelong play roughly the same way at Kardinia as they do everywhere else - but the game is different. It would be stupid for Geelong to play a different style of football irrespective of where they're playing, so the contention isn't that Geelong play differently at other grounds, just that Kardinia forces other clubs to play differently. It does. Hence why the article providing these statistics used Goals against Per I50 as it standardises it, but it hardly means anything considering Geelong average 12 more inside 50s compared to their opponents at GMHBA than they do at all other grounds.

The way the game is played changes, one wing is almost entirely unusable and results in a disproportionate amount of stoppages from ball in, it results in a large amount of turnovers and facilitates their ability to use help defence. As h00t posted above, it forces play into the corridor and allows them to force other teams to play their way.

As the saying goes - there are lies, damn lies and statistics. I have a feeling that the person who wrote that article had a conclusion and fit the stats to it, they didn't come to a conclusion from the stats.

 

[TylerDurden]

Jed.

 

[theiaofseed]

Jed.

0% Anderson would ever consider coming to Hawthorn.

 

[BurnaHawks]

0% Anderson would ever consider coming to Hawthorn.

Trouble maker. No thanks

 

[Ned Ryerson]

They have the advantage of training on that ground and an MCG shaped ground.

Part of the difficulty in winning finals is getting there, guaranteed wins on a ground that unique is going to be an advantage that Geelong will always have. I'm not that bothered by it, but it's the one ground where the game changes significantly in terms of play style for pretty much every side - the makeup of stoppages changes and the method of defending the ground changes.

Subiaco used to have the same advantages also. Absolutely ruined us in that final against West Coast in 2015.

 

[Ned Ryerson]

As the saying goes - there are lies, damn lies and statistics. I have a feeling that the person who wrote that article had a conclusion and fit the stats to it, they didn't come to a conclusion from the stats.

Both the journos are Canberra based and at least one of them is a GWS or Swans supporter from what I have seen on their Twitter in the past. However I don't think they wrote the article based on being Cats tragics with a point to prove - they are sports statisticians who were interested in the constant cries of the advantages of KP.

 

[RIOLINWITPUNCHS]

I'd imagine it must be very deflating for the 4 players being delisted by North.

 

[KermitJagger]

Both the journos are Canberra based and at least one of them is a GWS or Swans supporter from what I have seen on their Twitter in the past. However I don't think they wrote the article based on being Cats tragics with a point to prove - they are sports statisticians who were interested in the constant cries of the advantages of KP.

Not claiming bias at all, it's just a common thing with statistics. Have conclusion, find statistics that fit it - there are plenty that don't support their contention so they've gone uber specific to say "Well Geelong structure up relatively equally in terms of contested possessions, how they move the ball and how they defend inside 50s regardless of where they play" but it conveniently ignores the main issue which is how opposition teams play. Geelong averaged 8 inside 50s more than their opponent at games away from KP, they averaged 20 at home. Geelong force more turnovers, concede less, average significantly more Tackles I50 at home etc. etc. These are all products of a narrow ground, shallow pockets and greater ability for a bigger, stronger and older team to play a game which best suits their makeup.

Geelong are a good team, particularly this year, so they win everywhere - but they win more often and heavier at home which facilitates them actually making the finals. Again, I'm not particularly bothered by it - we have enjoyed a similar advantage in Tassie - but it is a contributor.

 

[Mitchell Madness]

It's a dicey strategy though given the MCG is where you have to win the flags, outside of pandemics. I am fairly sure that's why Optus Stadium is more similar to the MCG than Subiaco used to be. If anything you could argue that it has hindered Geelong given the amount of times they were minor premiers or preliminary finalists and failed to win the flag. There is not rules about the overall ground dimensions of an AFL oval - they are all fairly different. Personally I love this fact. Even in games with regimented dimensions you can still exploit them. I remember when the Melbourne Storm entered the NRL back in the day they deliberately had the shortest permissible in-goal touch lines. Worked a treat for them because visiting teams would try their usual short kicking game when attacking but would frequently put it in touch and the Storm would get the ball back on their 20 metre line. The Melbourne halves however trained with these dimensions so knew how to use them better. Was a genius tactic and worked for them for quite a while.

Subiacco is also why the wa teams were more successful in Geelong than other teams. The dimensions were very similar

 

[Lethality]

Yes - so unprofessional to not force clubs to entirely rebuild their stadiums to fit into the same dimensions as one another.

There is no need to be silly. The AFL can standardise field sizes without bulldozing stadiums.

The competition has existed like this, with Geelong involved, for 125 years.

The Melbourne clubs only all lost their home stadiums around 2001.
Prior to that it was very much a competition where clubs all had a comparable home ground advantage.

Ironically we've become less of a professional league in the sense of having a serious competition, once we became professional in terms of money.