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

[YES! YES! YES!]

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?

Hey, trolling the main board is my job.

And no if it was at Subi, Hawks would still have won it. They already had a 2-1 record at the ground this year anyways.

 

[citizen-erased]

Hawks won 2/3 games in Perth this year.
The difference wasn't the ground. An experienced and hungry Hawks team turned up. An overawed and relatively inexperienced Eagles outfit were outclassed.
Eagles will be better for the run. Hawks clearly one of the greatest teams

 

[Watsclarkosmob]

Had an EPL follower telling me that there should be no grand final or finals series...each team plays twice and winner is the team on top after the 34 weeks would be a fair competition.

 

[Adelaide Hawk]

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

Yes. Couldn't be bothered reading the rest.

 

[DrEvil_]

Had an EPL follower telling me that there should be not grand final or finals series...each team plays twice and winner is the team on top after the 34 weeks would be a fair competition.

 

[HawkMongrel]

Getting embarrassing now

 

[Adelaide Hawk]

What is this no foreign support bullshit? For the Grand Final, the AFL allocates the same amount of tickets to members from both clubs, with the majority of tickets going to the neutral MCC/AFL members and lots of corporate boxes/sections. There is a home state advantage, sure, but for all intents and purposes, the Grand Final is in a neutral atmosphere. Get over it. The Grand Final is the biggest game of the year, and should be played at the best ground, which is and always will be the MCG, just as it has been since 1897.

I agree. This "issue" makes me laugh. Anyone would think West Coast got to the Grand Final and suddenly realised they had to play at the MCG. They knew that going in, so if they haven't developed their style of play to cope with the wider oval, then whose fault is that? It's just an excuse. West Coast had no problems at the MCG when they were the best team going around in the early 90s and mid-2000s.

 

[Schache It Off]

It is a mute argument. But In my eyes it is what makes Brisbanes achievement greater than hawthorns.

If hawthorn win four there will be no comparison

Exactly. Hawthorn have the luxury of a biased Victorian media, favorable umpiring, expansion teams to dilute the talent pool making it harder for rival clubs to get the players they need to build upon, not having Fascist Eddie Maguire up your ass all the time and having more resources than us while reducing the go home factors since they have plenty of players from...Victoria.

We had to combat homesickness, Eddie, less resources etc. We also had to travel so many times during the finals series, alot more than Hawthorn...Would love the GF to be played up at the Gabba yeah?

Oh yeah, they got PP. Hawthorn IS not the greatest, they have been unbelievably spoilt and privileged.

 

[kranky al]

I think you can make a decent case for freo winning

But nah - hawks on those days would have monstered us at subi and swans in sydney - we had horror stage fright and shit the bed. Swans were just horrid.

What also needs to happen is no more 1 game a year at mcg - id want at least 3 - tiges, hawks, collingwood. No more of this bullshit sending interstaters to tassie - send vic teams to even up the travel a bit.

The reason you lot need tassie is because theres too many teams in melbourne - thats not our ****ing problem - thats a vic problem - when collingwood have to fly to north antarctica and play in a ****ing blizzard in a hovel eddie mcfatface will start hurling gout at the afl.

Vic problem - vics should suffer the consequences till they man up and fix it

 

[Watsclarkosmob]

Exactly. Hawthorn have the luxury of a biased Victorian media, favorable umpiring, expansion teams to dilute the talent pool making it harder for rival clubs to get the players they need to build upon, not having Fascist Eddie Maguire up your ass all the time and having more resources than us while reducing the go home factors since they have plenty of players from...Victoria.

We had to combat homesickness, Eddie, less resources etc. We pulled off three in a row first and built THE best team I have ever seen. We are the better team and there is no question about it.

Oh yeah, they got PP. Hawthorn IS not the greatest, they have been unbelievably spoilt and privileged.

The extra $1M you had to spend on players cancels out all the points you have made.

 

[kranky al]

What is this no foreign support bullshit? For the Grand Final, the AFL allocates the same amount of tickets to members from both clubs, with the majority of tickets going to the neutral MCC/AFL members and lots of corporate boxes/sections. There is a home state advantage, sure, but for all intents and purposes, the Grand Final is in a neutral atmosphere. Get over it. The Grand Final is the biggest game of the year, and should be played at the best ground, which is and always will be the MCG, just as it has been since 1897.

Were you not aware of the $2000 airfares from perth and back

I know your mob are more public transport oriented - but hiw many hawthorn fans were 2k down before they bought their tickets?

 

[NarniMagic]

Were you not aware of the $2000 airfares from perth and back

I know your mob are more public transport oriented - but hiw many hawthorn fans were 2k down before they bought their tickets?

That's irrelevant though. You still sold out your allocation. Every team always sells out their allocation, so the fans were still there, the same amount of fans as Hawthorn.

 

[kranky al]

That's irrelevant though. You still sold out your allocation. Every team always sells out their allocation, so the fans were still there, the same amount of fans as Hawthorn.

Are you simple?

The fans get allocated 15k each or suchlike

Then youve got the packages - including air tickets they were around 3-3500 per person from perth vs 1-1500 for hawthorn supporters

Then youve got the random tickets sold from everywhere else - what do you reckon is the percentage that hawthorn supporters get compared to wc

 

[FuManchu]

It is a mute argument. But In my eyes it is what makes Brisbanes achievement greater than hawthorns.

If hawthorn win four there will be no comparison

Moot, not mute, just saying.....

 

[Gold Member]

would love to crystal ball were the Eagles would have finished without 12 h&a games at subiaco...

 

[NarniMagic]

Are you simple?

The fans get allocated 15k each or suchlike

Then youve got the packages - including air tickets they were around 3-3500 per person from perth vs 1-1500 for hawthorn supporters

Then youve got the random tickets sold from everywhere else - what do you reckon is the percentage that hawthorn supporters get compared to wc

Maybe a slight percentage more Hawthorn, but the vast majority of supporters at the Grand Final are neutral MCC/Afl Members and Corporate. That's why the prelims are known as the "true" finals weekend for the fans, because hardly any get to go to the Grand Final. And whether or not that's right, it does end up producing an atmosphere that isn't really bias one way or another. Look at the all interstate Grand Finals in the mid 00's. They got 90k+ to those games, maybe 30/40% max of the crowd were actual supporters from either team.

 

[Back One Out]

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

Yes.

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?

tl;dr

 

[TiggerMan22]

Anytime, anywhere. If you're good enough it doesn't make a difference.

 

[Banker]

would love to crystal ball were the Eagles would have finished without 12 h&a games at subiaco...

Have you looked how many home games the Hawks had?

 

[kranky al]

Anytime, anywhere. If you're good enough it doesn't make a difference.

Bet if it was changed so all gfs were played in perth you would have a differrnt take on it

 

[SSSSSS]

Exactly. Hawthorn have the luxury of a biased Victorian media, favorable umpiring, expansion teams to dilute the talent pool making it harder for rival clubs to get the players they need to build upon, not having Fascist Eddie Maguire up your ass all the time and having more resources than us while reducing the go home factors since they have plenty of players from...Victoria.

We had to combat homesickness, Eddie, less resources etc. We also had to travel so many times during the finals series, alot more than Hawthorn...Would love the GF to be played up at the Gabba yeah?

Oh yeah, they got PP. Hawthorn IS not the greatest, they have been unbelievably spoilt and privileged.

Technically you had more resources not less.

 

[Magpie Monopoly]

So just out of curiosity, are interstate fans (predominantly WA fans) complaining about having to play the Grand Final at the MCG, or having to travel interstate during the year?

Sure, the argument for both points is valid, until you take into consideration that Victorian teams dont get a homeground advantage for 20+ games a year. Hawthorn had 1 MCG game against and interstate team, Collingwood, 1, Essendon, 0. For every other game during the season there is no homeground advantage.

You cant on one hand argue the value of playing GF's at the MCG and how Victorian teams have some massive advantage because of a home ground, then ignore the fact that for the other 21, 22, 23 games in a season for some Victorian teams, they dont get the obvious advantage of playing at their own home ground.

Dumb argument

 

[kranky al]

So just out of curiosity, are interstate fans (predominantly WA fans) complaining about having to play the Grand Final at the MCG, or having to travel interstate during the year?

Sure, the argument for both points is valid, until you take into consideration that Victorian teams dont get a homeground advantage for 20+ games a year. Hawthorn had 1 MCG game against and interstate team, Collingwood, 1, Essendon, 0. For every other game during the season there is no homeground advantage.

You cant on one hand argue the value of playing GF's at the MCG and how Victorian teams have some massive advantage because of a home ground, then ignore the fact that for the other 21, 22, 23 games in a season for some Victorian teams, they dont get the obvious advantage of playing at their own home ground.

Dumb argument

Im more pissed about playing vic teams in tassie instead of the g tbh - if we are going to play grannies there at least let us play at that ground at least three games a season

 

[TiggerMan22]

Bet if it was changed so all gfs were played in perth you would have a differrnt take on it

And if the ball was round I bet evey game would be different.
If, if, if. I don't give a shit about if. It's not, so its irrelevant.
Brisbane 3peated it because they were good enough.
If freo, swans and west coast didn't play like absolute garbage and make simple skill errors all game they might have actually won.
That's how swans won in 12

 

[Bunk Moreland]

Oh ffs

The crew from the west really not covering themselves in glory these last couple of weeks.