Here's a question for you Hawthorn greatest team of all backers.

[The Cryptkeeper]

There is an advantage for sure. Not as much as a flight away from home and the disruption to your routine, not sleeping in your own bed etc

id be interested in how many games each team played at the g that year before i judged

Geelong 5, including a few blockbuster games.
St Kilda, once which was the last round against the wooden spooner.

 

[Josh_hawk]

No disagreements, one of the best teams ive ever seen, kicking skills the best ive seen. However, its no secret they had gone into all three grand finals with an advantage against their opponents, meanwhile teams like brisbane didn't have that.

We finished above Freo in 2013 so wipe that one out
2014 we would've beaten Sydney anywhere
2015 WCE crumpled under GF pressure so had it been at Domain I wouldn't have thought there would have been much difference
But hey its all hypotheticals so I'm as wrong as you are (except for 2013!)

 

[robs_drunk]

In 13 Freo came and played about as bad as they could and only narrowly lost. I remember that GF as being the worst in terms of skill that I've ever seen. If Freo had come and played only slightly below par they would have won easily and will perhaps never get a better opportunity to win a flag.

The last 2 years of course Sydney and West Coast have disgraced themselves, so that makes 3 GFs in a row where Hawthorn's opponents have basically failed to fire a shot. You can credit Hawthorn for much of that if you like but I think playing at home in a GF would have to increase one's chances of not being overawed by the sense of occasion.

Absolute rubbish,

For the last 3 years side's playing hawthorn have kicked a total of 9 goals in the first half of the game compared to 25

If you think that is all due to the other clubs not turning up your mad

 

[estibador]

$650,000 worth of advantage, back then that's the best player in the comp and then some.

And yes, I want my ******* cup back. 9 points. A shit call to rocca, another to lynch. $650,000 bought that cup, I have no doubt.

And the bummers were robbed the year before.

I bet the disparity between the media/endorsement deals of the Collingwood/Essendon and Brisbane players would have equalled that and then some.

 

[MinerBoy]

Its a shame that Geelong had to actually play good teams during our successful years. We could win 8 straight if we had opponents the quality of the Hawks had.

Imagine if you had to play the Hawks............

 

[MinerBoy]

Like Hawthorn in week 1 of the finals?

So Hawthorn weren't good enough then, but they suddenly were when it was on their home ground. And yet it's no advantage according to their fans.

Where did Freo finish after the H&A and how did their season end?

 

[kranky al]

Geelong 5, including a few blockbuster games.
St Kilda, once which was the last round against the wooden spooner.

Id call that an advantage to geelong then

 

[kranky al]

Absolute rubbish,

For the last 3 years side's playing hawthorn have kicked a total of 9 goals in the first half of the game compared to 25

If you think that is all due to the other clubs not turning up your mad

Sydney and us were garbage - you would have beaten us both at our home - but not freo - freo would have got over you at subi. Probably quite easily. Freo were unbelievable that year - a wrecking ball - they were overawed in the first quarter - but clicked as the game went on and reeled you in. They would never gave been that shellshocked at subi - be just another day at the office.

 

[Blue1980]

Hawthorn are the best team of the 21st century due to running more flags than anyone else in that period.

End thread

 

[YouBeauty]

OP, if you make basic kicking errors(priddis), can't mark the ball (darling) or cream your pants running into packs (wellingham). It won't matter if the game is at the MCG, Perth or Hawaii you won't win, especially against one of the best teams ever.

 

[The Cryptkeeper]

Sydney and us were garbage - you would have beaten us both at our home - but not freo - freo would have got over you at subi. Probably quite easily. Freo were unbelievable that year - a wrecking ball - they were overawed in the first quarter - but clicked as the game went on and reeled you in. They would never gave been that shellshocked at subi - be just another day at the office.

The only problem with that mate, is that Hawthorn finished on top that year so the game would never have been played in WA.

 

[eldorado]

Yes, their best is better than everyone else's best over the last 3 years. When this team needs to win, they win.

Nice one, mate...I'm pinching that as a sig.

 

[Chuckie357]

Would Hawthorn have their three-peat if their grand finals weren't played at their home ground????


There already is a thread about the grand final being at a neutral venue, or who is better Brisbane, geelong, hawthorn etc, however what about this....

Hawthorns three grand final wins have come against interstate teams who have had to play on a pitch which has different dimensions to their own, a stadium where they had only played minimal times during the year, and not to mention the significant crowd advantage and influence the hawks have.

Lets look at 2013 grand final. Hawks win by 15 points. Played against a team that had barely played a game at the MCG all year, and traveled from Perth, where they played over 50% of their games on a pitch with much smaller dimensions.

2014 Grand final. Hawks win by 63 points. Annihilation, and you'd have to be stupid to say that the MCG is a 10 goal advantage for the hawks, but had the game been played in Sydney with a majority of supporters being Sydney supporters would it had been Sydney who crumbled under pressure early on, and then were forced to chase the game, or would it potentially been the Hawks who crumbled under the pressure of playing on a foreign ground, with no home crowd support??

2015 Grand Final. Hawks win by 46 points. No excuses for the Eagles here but an embarrassment really. Many fumbles, easy mistakes, made Hawthorn look like they couldn't do no wrong. However, just 3 weeks back at the Eagles home ground we saw the complete opposite occur?? Is it just a coincidence the Hawks had a bad game 3 three weeks ago, and three weeks later the Eagles just happen to have a bad game?? Or could it be similar reasons to 2014. Early on pressure of a grand final, playing on a ground which they are not used to, infront of an intimidating home crowd. Meanwhile the hawks had the advantage of playing on their home ground, infront of their home crowd, and were able to settle quicker, and hence get out to a marginal advantage and force their opponents to try and chase for the rest of the game??

Firsly before i get criticized like i said the game could have been played at Pattersons and the way the eagles played, and the way the hawks played their wouldnt have been much difference, but for all those saying Hawthorn is the greatest team of all, bar their 2013 season, they haven't been the best team throughout the home and away seasons of 2014, and 2015 yet were fortunate enough to play the grand final on their home ground, in front of their home crowd.

Had all three of these three finals been played in Perth, and Sydney would the hawks still be 3-0?

Seriously what is this rubbish people keep coming up with?? The whole competition is aware that the last day in September is played at the MCG. This thread is an absoloute waste of time and stinks off another sooky West Coke fan. You choked, deal with it!

 

[Blue1980]

Seriously what is this rubbish people keep coming up with?? The whole competition is aware that the last day in September is played at the MCG. This thread is an absoloute waste of time and stinks off another sooky West Coke fan. You choked, deal with it!

Hmm also interstate sides have winning record in GFs over Vic sides


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Chuckie357]

Hmm also interstate sides have winning record in GFs over Vic sides


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Exactly it has been done and can be done

 

[kidkenobi]

Yes, you might very well be the idiot.

I was just wondering, and you are yet to respond to my actual point, do you believe that Geelong had an unfair advantage in 2009 given they finished 2nd yet played the GF against the minor premier at the MCG when the minor-premier's home ground is Etihad?

Perhaps you can address this for me.

I don't think the GF should be played at an 'earnt' venue, ideally it should be a neutral venue, and since the MCG is neither sides home ground, (and I don't consider being forced into playing 2 'home games' against MCG tenants in Collingwood and Hawthorn as meaning we are a MCG tenant) I don't think it was an unfair advantage it was played there in 2009. Do you?

 

[The Cryptkeeper]

I don't think the GF should be played at an 'earnt' venue, ideally it should be a neutral venue, and since the MCG is neither sides home ground, (and I don't consider being forced into playing 2 'home games' against MCG tenants in Collingwood and Hawthorn as meaning we are a MCG tenant) I don't think it was an unfair advantage it was played there in 2009. Do you?

As a matter of fact, yes I do. You are a co-tenant of the MCG. To say that it wasn't an advantage is ludicrous.

In any event, it is all very well to say that the GF should be played at a neutral venue but as yet nobody has come up with a workable solution as to what that looks like. Firstly the ground has to have a decent capacity and secondly, setting a neutral venue would mean deciding where the GF is to be played at very short notice, leaving fans high and dry. This year, for example the only state not represented in the finals was QLD. Would you have advocated a GF played at the GABBA or at Southport? They were the only two places that could have hosted the game under your premise, allowing for neutrality and the time needed to set up everything that goes with the GF as well as affording fans the time to plan their travel.

People can come on here all they like and denigrate Hawthorn's achievement. But unless you have a viable alternative, the MCG will and should be the venue for the GF.

 

[MinerBoy]

Sydney and us were garbage - you would have beaten us both at our home - but not freo - freo would have got over you at subi. Probably quite easily. Freo were unbelievable that year - a wrecking ball - they were overawed in the first quarter - but clicked as the game went on and reeled you in. They would never gave been that shellshocked at subi - be just another day at the office.

Freo were outplayed all day. Scoreboard flattered them. Hawks did enough and then held them at arms length all day.

 

[robs_drunk]

Hawthorn were the best side this year all year, Home and Away is very much not a straight forward indicator of how good a side is. Just look at the sides each team play's twice?

The only thing that's generally the same is all sides play the same amount of games allowing you to work out points For and Against. The hawks were the best in both this year and have figured as the most attacking side for the last 4 years with the defense in the top handful.

To argue we cherry picked via free agency is BS, Frawley is the only player we got and when Franklin left we got pick 19 collingwood did better for Daisy Thomas in the same year

The grand final is going to be played at the MCG til 2037 play games there by selling a home game.

Hawthorn would currently have four straight premierships if they had kicked straight in 2012 but they didn't instead of complaining about the size of the oval and thickness of the goal post's they went about becoming deadly accurate in front of goal this has lead to them winning the next three flags.

 

[TexanKnights]

Thread is sour grapes, GFs are played at the G and the Hawks earnt every flag by beating not only interstaters but vic clubs on that ground in other finals

 

[kidkenobi]

As a matter of fact, yes I do. You are a co-tenant of the MCG. To say that it wasn't an advantage is ludicrous.

In any event, it is all very well to say that the GF should be played at a neutral venue but as yet nobody has come up with a workable solution as to what that looks like. Firstly the ground has to have a decent capacity and secondly, setting a neutral venue would mean deciding where the GF is to be played at very short notice, leaving fans high and dry. This year, for example the only state not represented in the finals was QLD. Would you have advocated a GF played at the GABBA or at Southport? They were the only two places that could have hosted the game under your premise, allowing for neutrality and the time needed to set up everything that goes with the GF as well as affording fans the time to plan their travel.

People can come on here all they like and denigrate Hawthorn's achievement. But unless you have a viable alternative, the MCG will and should be the venue for the GF.

We're hardly a co-tenant in the same way Collingwood/Melbourne/Hawthorn/Richmond are. The AFL only gave us 7 games in Geelong per year and they were hardly going to send Hawthorn or Collingwood down to Geelong, you're effectively getting extra home games, not to mention that we also have to play home games at Etihad to make up for Hawthorn going to Tasmania. But if you think it's so obvious that by playing two 'home games' at the G', Geelong had an advantage over St. Kilda, imagine the advantage an ACTUAL tenant like Hawthorn would have over an interstate side. I never said the GF should be played anywhere else, currently there isn't an alternative and it needs to stay at the G. I just meant that ideally it should be a neutral venue, or at least a predetermined one like the NFL or UEFA Champions League, and if the home team happens to get to the final at their own ground then good luck to them.

But there's no doubt the current system benefits MCG tenant teams, which was my only point, and which you agree with.

 

[The Cryptkeeper]

We're hardly a co-tenant in the same way Collingwood/Melbourne/Hawthorn/Richmond are. The AFL only gave us 7 games in Geelong per year and they were hardly going to send Hawthorn or Collingwood down to Geelong, you're effectively getting extra home games, not to mention that we also have to play home games at Etihad to make up for Hawthorn going to Tasmania. But if you think it's so obvious that by playing two 'home games' at the G', Geelong had an advantage over St. Kilda, imagine the advantage an ACTUAL tenant like Hawthorn would have over an interstate side. I never said the GF should be played anywhere else, currently there isn't an alternative and it needs to stay at the G. I just meant that ideally it should be a neutral venue, or at least a predetermined one like the NFL or UEFA Champions League, and if the home team happens to get to the final at their own ground then good luck to them.

But there's no doubt the current system benefits MCG tenant teams, which was my only point, and which you agree with.

I asked the question of Cats fans and whether or not they felt they had an advatage over St Kilda in 2009 given the number of games the respective sides played at the MCG, their opposition and the fact that St Kilda finished on top that year and play home games at Etihad. You gave a reasoned response which is fair enough.

Now let's look at the sole purpose of this thread after you cut away the bullshit. It's only purpose is to denigrate what is a great achievement. And if you look more closely, it wouldn't have mattered if each of the last three GF's were played on the home ground of the higher ranked team, Hawthorn would have won all of them. The last two were blowouts where Hawthorn categorically showed they were the best team in it and the win over Fremantle in 2013 is a moot point because Hawthorn finished above them anyway.

Furthermore, the MCG "advantage" whilst probably there to a minor degree, is really not that great as evidenced by the record of non-Victorian teams in Grand Finals. In my opinion the advantage an MCG tenant gets over playing a team that plays almost exclusively at Etihad is more pronounced.

 

[kranky al]

No, I don't agree. I only asked the question of Cats fans and whether or not they felt they had an advatage over St Kilda in 2009 given the number of games the respective sides played at the MCG, their opposition and the fact that St Kilda finished on top that year and play home games at Etihad.

Now let's look at the sole purpose of this thread after you cut away the bullshit. It's only purpose is to denigrate what is a great achievement. And if you look more closely, it wouldn't have mattered if each of the last three GF's were played on the home ground of the higher ranked team, Hawthorn would have won all of them. The last two were blowouts where Hawthorn categorically showed they were the best team in it and the win over Fremantle in 2013 is a moot point because Hawthorn finished above them anyway.

I agree 100% that hawthorn would have won those last two if they were played anywhere ok.

I think most serious people would - what bothers interstate fans more is that one day there will be a close tussle - and homeground will be enought to get a team over the line.

Furthermore, the MCG "advantage" is negligible as evidenced by the record of non-Victorian teams in GrandFfinals.

Basing a theory on a tiny subset of results is fundamentally flawed. Look at the eagles overall record at the g and its woeful. We historically havnt played that ground well.

We have won two flags there against vic teams - geelong - in years that we were so dominant that the result was a lot more likely than not.

 

[The Cryptkeeper]

Basing a theory on a tiny subset of results is fundamentally flawed. Look at the eagles overall record at the g and its woeful. We historically havnt played that ground well.

We have won two flags there against vic teams - geelong - in years that we were so dominant that the result was a lot more likely than not.

Mate, I agree but that is all we have right now.

 

[kranky al]

Mate, I agree but that is all we have right now.

If you have a tiny subset try looking for a larger one