I have no issues with that, but the AFL will. Like the Swans, you'll play somewhere you have 3 home games at.
-
LIVE: GWS Giants v Brisbane Lions - 7:30PM Sat
Squiggle tips Lions at 65% chance -- What's your tip? -- Team line-ups »
-
AFLW 2024 - Round 3 - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
Hawks and Cats shunted because of the Big Four?
- Thread starter Bazzar
- Start date
- Tagged users None
I have no issues with that, but the AFL will. Like the Swans, you'll play somewhere you have 3 home games at.
Because Etihad is not their home ground. This is all hypothetical until 2 weeks time but if you finish 1 and 2 you deserve priority over teams that finish 5-8. Simple as that
I don't understand - why is it the 'right' thing for Hawthorn or Geelong to get a game at Etihad? No matter what, they'll have a game in their home state against at team travelling from interstate, which is a huge advantage. Those games (say, Hawthorn-Sydney and Geelong-Fremantle) will draw roughly 50,000 people, which fits Etihad nicely.
On the other hand, Collingwood-Essendon and Richmond-Carlton are likely to draw 70,000 plus, so they fit better at the MCG. IT doesn't really fit as a 'big 4' thing either. If by some miracle you swapped Hawthorn and Carlton (giving 1-Carlton vs 4-Sydney and 5-Richmond vs 8-Hawthorn) I'd expect the Carlton game to be at Etihad and the match between 2 Victorian teams at the MCG.
On the other hand, Collingwood-Essendon and Richmond-Carlton are likely to draw 70,000 plus, so they fit better at the MCG. IT doesn't really fit as a 'big 4' thing either. If by some miracle you swapped Hawthorn and Carlton (giving 1-Carlton vs 4-Sydney and 5-Richmond vs 8-Hawthorn) I'd expect the Carlton game to be at Etihad and the match between 2 Victorian teams at the MCG.
DardySingh360
Premiership Player
- Banned
- #29
Whoever plays us should play at Etihad. Richmond/Collingwood vs Port would still get more than Hawthorn/Geelong vs Freo. It's a home state advantage not home ground, tough t***ies if you have to play at Etihad.
Having said that hopefully we'll be playing at Subiaco.
Having said that hopefully we'll be playing at Subiaco.
We earned the right by finishing top 2 to play at the ground the Grand Final will be played on, in a prime time slot during the first week of finals, the other 6 clubs in the top 8 however, did not. This is important for our clubs sponsors and the clubs exposure to the public and its member's. You are being allowed an advantage you haven't earned purely because you will draw a higher crowd number. Its an example of the AFL's preference for its own bottom line rather than worrying about whats best for all the clubs involved. If you are going to create a system that is supposed to reward a higher ladder position, and then say to those clubs that have earned it that they wont get that reward only because a team placed 5-8 will draw a bigger crowd. Then those clubs would rightly feel aggrieved by that decision.
Still, a lot of water to go under the bridge before finals, lets all hope Carlton do the right thing and lose shall we?
Why dont we have a Thursday night final ?
- Mar 23, 2007
- 34,930
- 23,534
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
- Other Teams
- Man U, Canucks and 49ers
Nothing would surprise me with that clown Demetriou in charge.
- May 8, 2007
- 48,686
- 71,373
- AFL Club
- Richmond
- Thread starter
- Banned
- #33
At the end of the day any combination of Collingwood, Carlton, Essendon and Richmond would be the biggest crowd pullers with the most media hype and general public interest.
Wonder if same pov if afl said ok free you fin second and get home state advantage ... You are playing at the Waca a ground you don't train or play at and doesn't match your game style?
DardySingh360
Premiership Player
- Banned
- #35
Well that is completely ridiculous as the WACA is no longer an AFL venue and it has a smaller capacity than Subiaco anyway.
- May 8, 2007
- 48,686
- 71,373
- AFL Club
- Richmond
- Thread starter
- Banned
- #36
think i need google translate
No one is disagreeing with that. What people are saying is that it should be based on ladder positioning. Of course Richmond and Essendon and whatnot would get in more people, but if they wanted to reap the rewards they should finish higher. Geelong is already being shafted by not allowing finals at Skilled, now they potentially shafted again by being forced to play at a ground where they are basically shit at? Its the principle of the matter; it shouldnt make any difference here.
But being the AFL of course it does.
- Feb 13, 2011
- 11,361
- 14,276
- AFL Club
- Richmond
Geelong want to play finals at KP? then they should have no problem playing at Etihad which has more seats allowing more fans in.
Ok how about we turn it around. How would you (or any other Pies, Tigers or Bombers fan beating their chest about how big they are) like to play a qualifying final against Freo after you finished first or second because the sides 5 to 8 are Collingwood, Richmond, Essendon and Hawthorn? Don't pretend like you would be ok with it.
Yet another Richmond supporter posturing with a "big 4" thread.
The top team (which may not be Hawthorn) should be awarded the grand final venue as the home ground no matter the opposition. This should be non-negotiable.
I can understand (although it is unfair) if the team finishing second is scheduled to etihad if they are playing a non-victorian low drawing team and the bottom half of the top 8 are all victorian teams (ANY combination).
The top team (which may not be Hawthorn) should be awarded the grand final venue as the home ground no matter the opposition. This should be non-negotiable.
I can understand (although it is unfair) if the team finishing second is scheduled to etihad if they are playing a non-victorian low drawing team and the bottom half of the top 8 are all victorian teams (ANY combination).
I think Geelong should be trying hard to get a final at their redeveloped home ground. Since Essendon is going to get trounced the team that plays them should play at Etihad. I doubt a Richmond Essendon game will even pack it at present. Carlton wont make it, it will most likely be Collingwood V Port. Should be at Etihad as well.
- May 8, 2007
- 48,686
- 71,373
- AFL Club
- Richmond
- Thread starter
- Banned
- #43
Imagine the outcry from the Cats supporters if a Skilled final was on the cards and they had to share it with at least half the opposition supporters.
So long as it's at Simmonds Stadium it's fine by us. Never will be anyhow so why ask the stupid, provocative, hypothetical question?
We can try all we like. Fact is the AFL is contractually obliged to play any Victorian final at the MCG or Etihad stadium and that's it.
- May 8, 2007
- 48,686
- 71,373
- AFL Club
- Richmond
- Thread starter
- Banned
- #46
Fair call. so whats wrong with Etihad?
Everyone knows finals wont realistically be at Skilled. However, teams who finish top 2 should get a choice, simple as that. It should be their right to play where they want. And if Geelong wants to play at the MCG, then they should play at the MCG. If Hawthorn wants to play at frigging subiaco, then the AFL should have no problem allowing it. Because it is there right. AT this point in time, Geelong would probably prefer to play at ANZ then the Dome.
...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.
- May 8, 2007
- 48,686
- 71,373
- AFL Club
- Richmond
- Thread starter
- Banned
- #49
No, their reward is a "home" final and double chance. Do you want a 12 point head start as well.
Sttew
Brownlow Medallist
If Geelong is shunted to Etihad, Brian Cook should demand the game be played at Simond Stadium and donate the proceeds to the AFL so they are not "short changed".
Similar threads
- Poll
- Poll
