Hawks and Cats shunted because of the Big Four?

[Pessimistic]

- They still get their advantage by being in front of a home crowd
- They still get their advantage by forcing Freo to travel interstate while Hawks don't
- They still get their advantage by having a double chance

They've won their last 8 at Etihad, so performance isn't an issue.

Why screw 30,000 fans so Hawks play at the G instead of Etihad, a negligent advantage?

Richmond v port would be 75,000 ? Your bandwaggining friends havent even seen how ticket prices have increased in 12 years either

 

[Top_4_Tiger]

I was actually thinking about Geelong. We play better football at the MCG.

If you deserve a flag you should be able to win anywhere, let alone a shift from Etihad and the G, which are very similar.

Edit: Besides, if you're good enough to make the Grand Final you'll have your game at the G anyway. If you're good enough, you should have no problem making the prelim from Etihad.

 

[Top_4_Tiger]

Richmond v port would be 75,000 ? Your bandwaggining friends havent even seen how ticket prices have increased in 12 years either

Since when were Port Adelaide part of the traditional Victorian big 4? That's what this thread is about. See thread title.

 

[Sttew]

If you deserve a flag you should be able to win anywhere, let alone a shift from Etihad and the G, which are very similar.

Does that mean we need to be charitable to Richmond because you'll only get one bite of the cherry?

 

[MC Extra Dollop]

I was actually thinking about Geelong. We play better football at the MCG.

Hawthorn makes even less sense. As if you can guarantee that Richmond v Port would get a bigger crowd (all other things being equal) than Hawthorn v Fremantle.

Fremantle actually looks like a pretty unlikely QF opponent for Hawthorn anyway, if the Hawks stay on top of the ladder (the Dockers are almost certain to finish either second or third). Unless Sydney defeats both Geelong and Hawthorn, the Swans will probably finish fourth and probably play Hawthorn at the MCG in a qualifying final. It's also possible that Geelong finishes on top of the ladder and I imagine they would also have a very strong claim for an MCG final if they had Sydney as their opponent.

 

[Pessimistic]

Since when were Port Adelaide part of the traditional Victorian big 4? That's what this thread is about. See thread title.

Richmond would likely post port in a final.

No ones arguing rich v carl should be at etihad

 

[MC Extra Dollop]

This game is for the fans! The fans come first.

Haha...so that's why they charge in the region of $80-150 for tickets to a half-full MCG for a game involving an interstate club in the early weeks of finals is it?

The argument is:

Richmond vs Carlton
Collingwood vs Essendon

Just before you get too nostalgic, clearly the most likely scenario is still Port Adelaide finishing in eighth position.

Both games would command 90k at the MCG in the first finals with all four since the mid 70's.

It's a dream finals weekend for football.

What if Essendon continues to get belted in their subsequent remaining games? Will they turn out in force for yet another finals humiliation?

I'm not sure why you're talking about Richmond vs Port Adelaide and MCC members to justify your position. Maybe there isn't a good argument for your position?

Well the MCC members, I would have thought, is self-explanatory. It's an extra 22,000-odd seats at the MCG that may or may not be filled up. And the vast majority of people sitting in them will not be club members of either of the teams playing in the finals. They get in for free. Why would anyone else care about them turning up or not? I'm an MCC member. If an elimination final is on at the MCG and I've got nothing else to do, I'll probably rock up. And I wouldn't even bother looking in to it, if the same game was played at Etihad. Thank God the AFL is going to do the right thing for die-hard fans like me, who are turning up because they had nothing better to do.

'...there isn't a good argument for your position...'

Fair dinkum, the sense of entitlement of the supporters of a team that will finish 5-7 on the ladder is amazing. I'm not denying that if Carlton joins the other teams that have clinched their elimination finals and if the top two remains the same, Geelong is the likely team to get shafted. But let's get it straight: your team doesn't deserve anything because of its membership to this imaginary 'big four'. I mean, this stuff predates the Essendon v Hawthorn classics by about a decade and the Essendon/Hawthorn rivalry is 30 years old. Any neutral under the age of about 40 doesn't care about Richmond v Carlton, Richmond v Essendon, or Richmond v Collingwood any more than Richmond v any other Victorian team.

 

[Top_4_Tiger]

Richmond would likely post port in a final.

No ones arguing rich v carl should be at etihad

An argument could be made against Richmond vs Port, but I believe this thread is about the likelihood of the big 4 finishing 5th-8th, resulting in the possibility of Hawthorn or Geelong playing at Etihad.

The AFL has hinted that Rich/Carl and Coll/Ess will be given the larger stadium to accommodate the larger crowd size.

Newbold has protested this possibility.

I think the AFL's indication of the bigger matches being given the MCG is a good thing for the game and comes at a negligent cost to one team that would already be receiving multiple advantages.

 

[Pessimistic]

Why would newbold protest something unlikely to happen ?

No ones arguing a final between two victorian sides should go to etihad. Ironically this only happened to hawthorn v geelong

I gess in that case it would become hawthorn or geelong, and likely the one who plays freo, although hawthorn v sydney has also been played at etihad

All games in the lower half of the eight

 

[Top_4_Tiger]

Haha...so that's why they charge in the region of $80-150 for tickets to a half-full MCG for a game involving an interstate club in the early weeks of finals is it?

Supply and demand.

If they can sell 90k tickets for $80 then obviously the fans are happy to pay $80 to see a final.

Just before you get too nostalgic, clearly the most likely scenario is still Port Adelaide finishing in eighth position.

This thread is discussing the hypothetical of Carlton making finals resulting in Rich/Carl and Coll/Ess.

What if Essendon continues to get belted in their subsequent remaining games? Will they turn out in force for yet another finals humiliation?

Hird and Essendon's marketing consultants will generate massive hype for the finals. Bomber fans will come.

I'm an MCC member. If an elimination final is on at the MCG and I've got nothing else to do, I'll probably rock up.

If a game has a 90k atmosphere, many MCC members won't just "probably rock up" if they have nothing on - they will be looking forward to the game and are more likely to rock up.

But let's get it straight: your team doesn't deserve anything because of its membership to this imaginary 'big four'.

Forget the big 4 label of the 70's and look at the crowd figures for 2013 mate. Look at the numbers. You missed the point by making an argument against the definition of a 'big four' and overlooking why these teams are indicated to be given at MCG final over a top 4 team.

 

[MC Extra Dollop]

Supply and demand.

If they can sell 90k tickets for $80 then obviously the fans are happy to pay $80 to see a final.

But the example was a half full MCG where they are charging the same amount as they would for a so-called 'blockbuster'. Not exactly a good example of supply and demand.

If a game has a 90k atmosphere, many MCC members won't just "probably rock up" if they have nothing on - they will be looking forward to the game and are more likely to rock up.

Whatever. The point is, why would you or any supporter with a vested interest in the game give two hoots whether someone like me (and about 10,000 others just like me) is there at all?

Forget the big 4 label of the 70's and look at the crowd figures for 2013 mate. Look at the numbers. You missed the point by making an argument against the definition of a 'big four' and overlooking why these teams are indicated to be given at MCG final over a top 4 team.

I know why they would do it and I understand why they will probably do it. But like any other supporter would be if their team finished first or second on the ladder and was subsequently asked to bend over for a side that finished fifth or sixth, I don't have to be particularly happy about it.

 

[Top_4_Tiger]

I know why they would do it and I understand why they will probably do it. But like any other supporter would be if their team finished first or second on the ladder and was subsequently asked to bend over for a side that finished fifth or sixth, I don't have to be particularly happy about it.

I think this is my point of difference. I don't think the Hawks or Cats are getting bent over for anyone. I see it as a very minor, negligent difference to their fortunes, while benefiting tens of thousands of fans plus advertisers, sponsors, ratings, etc.

I think the top teams already receive their fair share of advantages as a reward for their excellent seasons.

The difference between a home state final and a home ground final is moot for Geelong anyway. For the Hawks, nowhere in the rules does the AFL guarantee a home ground final as far as I'm aware.

But they still receive a home state final with a double chance, they get a week rest if they win, and they get a one-sided crowd in their favour. It's a fair advantage in my opinion and like I said, they still get their home state final so technically they aren't receiving anything less than what the rules tell them to expect.

 

[Rioli magic]

- They still get their advantage by being in front of a home crowd
- They still get their advantage by forcing Freo to travel interstate while Hawks don't
- They still get their advantage by having a double chance

They've won their last 8 at Etihad, so performance isn't an issue.

Why screw 30,000 fans so Hawks play at the G instead of Etihad, a negligent advantage?

Why should it be Hawthorn or Geelong's problem Richmond weren't good enough to secure a home final for their fans?

 

[MC Extra Dollop]

I think this is my point of difference. I don't think the Hawks or Cats are getting bent over for anyone. I see it as a very minor, negligent difference to their fortunes, while benefiting tens of thousands of fans plus advertisers, sponsors, ratings, etc. I think the top teams already receive their fair share of advantages as a reward for their excellent seasons.

Well, there's the fact that both Sydney and Fremantle have better records at Etihad than the MCG, with our more likely opponents, Fremantle, being undefeated there since Ross Lyon took over as senior coach. Then there's the fact that the MCG is nearly 20m wider than Subiaco, but over 15m shorter...it is a completely different shape to the ground that Fremantle plays on. Then there's the chance of it being a wet weather game at the MCG, with Geelong generally being considered the best wet weather team in the league by a long way. Geelong has played its last 16 finals at the MCG. And while the opposition fans, advertisers, sponsors and ratings would come in to consideration for the people that make the decisions, you'll have to forgive the supporters of the affected teams for not giving a continental about any of them, when there's a final to win.

As for your patronising 'excellent season' comment, if you don't think a huge majority of Richmond supporters would be outraged if the shoe was on the other foot, I'm sorry, but you're kidding yourself.

The difference between a home state final and a home ground final is moot for Geelong anyway. For the Hawks, nowhere in the rules does the AFL guarantee a home ground final as far as I'm aware.

That's simply not true. It is irrefutable that Fremantle over the last two years (and Ross Lyon teams for as long as most people can remember) play Etihad as well as anyone, if not better. And that they're a lot more iffy at the G.

 

[gaelictiogar]

Hawks and Cats should let the other four play at the MCG it's like their Grandfinals they won't be moving far past there

Probably true.....tht said however the likelihood is that none of them will die and be relocated either.

 

[Citizen Erazed]

Going by this thread, I must be in the minority of people thinking Geelong will finish top...

Geel v Syd (MCG)
Haw v Fre (Etihad)
Rich/Coll v Port (MCG)
Rich/Coll v Ess (MCG)

Sucks for Hawthorn fans in that case (going by the reactions of this thread) but they seem to play pretty bloody well at Etihad every time I watch them.

Whatever Vlad has to do to ensure a Geelong v Hawthorn grand final I am happy with. No offence to Sydney (but plenty of offence to Freo)

 

[MC Extra Dollop]

Going by this thread, I must be in the minority of people thinking Geelong will finish top...

Definitely a chance, but I'd say second or even third for Geelong is much more likely.

 

[walken79]

...also spare a thought for Fremantle! They are effectively denied access to the Grand Final venue despite a top 4 finish, and are up against teams that play there regularly in the H&A once they finally get to the MCG.

Now you're just being silly

 

[walken79]

Unlikely as it may seem, there is still a decent chance at least one of these games might end up at Subi or in Sydney.
Still, we'll play wherever we're sent. As a non Vic team you're always going to have to accept the fact that if you want to win a flag, you're going to have to do it at the MCG and therefore, are always going to be up against in comparison to the 10 local teams. No one's really got a problem with this, it is what it is.
We've got good form at the Dome but we also demolished Geelong at the G in a final last year. Let the chips fall where they may...

 

[Herne Hill Hammer]

I can definitely see why Hawthorn and Geelong fans would be upset at the prospect of being sent packing to Etihad - it's a tough one for the AFL. If it was my club being talked about having its home final moved, I'd also be pretty upset.

Being a tiger fan though, I have to admit I don't really care about other clubs and just want to see my team play a final at the MCG again. Might be selfish but my heart bleeds yellow and black and I'm sure I wouldn't be the only fan guilty of putting their club ahead of others. Reading the article, I think Hawthorn have actually won something like 8 in a row at Etihad? Sure it would be an inconvenience but in some ways, it might help them secure a win.

I think ultimately we will see if the AFL value the integrity of the comp or if they put money higher on the agenda...will be interesting to see

when did they decide to move Geelong's game out of Victoria. (assuming they finish second of course)

 

[Herne Hill Hammer]

lol, watch all the Richmond supporters splinter when Port finish 8th and they play the Tiges at Etihad. Their supporters could do a North and cause BF to shutdown.

 

[WWSD]

Hawthorn are 4-0 at Etihad this year. The Hawks have also won their past 9 matches at Etihad Stadium by an average winning margain of 44 points. The last time we lost at Etihad was way back in Round 3 2010 to the Western Bulldogs. We do have a very good record at that Venue it must be said. The only way Hawthorn plays at Etihad in week one is if it's against Fremantle. It's highly likely though that our opponent will be Sydney in Melbourne, which is certain to be at the MCG on a Friday Night.

 

[Off The Couch]

This game is for the fans! The fans come first.

No it's not - not one iota - it's about the dollar never about the fans
If it was about the fans then why do so many miss out on seeing the big dance live

 

[Top_4_Tiger]

If you don't think a huge majority of Richmond supporters would be outraged if the shoe was on the other foot, I'm sorry, but you're kidding yourself.

Depends on the reason - if it was due to us being the lowest drawing team out of 4 different matches then fair enough.

But a top 4 Richmond would absolutely command an MCG final, unlike Geelong or the Hawks, according to the boss.

There's already several advantages by finishing top 4 and I have pointed them out.

Moving to a similar stadium within your home state is just about the most trivial thing I've heard supporters whinge about this season.

 

[KrakFiend]

Any neutral under the age of about 40 doesn't care about Richmond v Carlton, Richmond v Essendon, or Richmond v Collingwood any more than Richmond v any other Victorian team.

Who cares about the neutrals? Should those sides face off in a final, the only neutrals getting in to the ground will be sitting in a box.