Interstate sides in GFs

Remove this Banner Ad

Aggregated, hawks still win. Throw in the third meeting at subiaco
Well except for the fact that the granny - the one that counts - was at your home ground despite us being the higher ranked team.

Having said that - you lot have a much better claim to say you could have beaten us anywhere than richmond with adelaide.

Your away record had real scalps not just port and freo on your brag wall
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Aggregated, hawks still win. Throw in the third meeting at subiaco
Using aggregates now to deflect the obvious.
The grand final being played in your backyard is not a level playing field. It's downright bs if you haven't earnt it by finishing higher on the ladder. MCG tenants have a massive advantage in grand finals against interstate sides, you can't deny that fact
 
Using aggregates now to deflect the obvious.
The grand final being played in your backyard is not a level playing field. It's downright bs if you haven't earnt it by finishing higher on the ladder. MCG tenants have a massive advantage in grand finals against interstate sides, you can't deny that fact

By any objective measure the ladder is an approximation. There's all sorts of inequities in it

Hawks won two of the three games in 2015, two being at Subiaco

Just like 1991, when finishing top of the ladder meant something. I'll give you you were stiff having to play AFL park
 
so should we discount the 3peat of the team of champions in hawthorn?

seeing as we're allowed to chop and change what is relevant to the discussion :rolleyes:

In terms of discussions like this I think we can discuss up to the point of the oldest player in the league, and when they were drafted. Any further back than that and it just isn't relevant. I'd say 2001, maybe 2000 but nothing before then.
 
If winning grand finals at the MCG is such a big problem for interstate sides, then why didn't they make their grounds similar in dimensions to the MCG? I mean, I know cost is a big issue, but if it's gonna help them compete better in away games against Victorian sides in September then surely it's worth it, no? Too late for that, though.
 
In terms of discussions like this I think we can discuss up to the point of the oldest player in the league, and when they were drafted. Any further back than that and it just isn't relevant. I'd say 2001, maybe 2000 but nothing before then.

Actually before 87 teams did play each other twice so higher on the ladder meant something. It's steadily become more of a lottery and since 2012 teams finishing lower the year before get a much more favourable fixture

So higher on the ladder shouldn't be held up as the judge and jury, if fairness is the argument
 
The dogs did well

Hawthorn lost to us in perth but - dont leave that out - they got a footy lesson at our home ground - and returned the favour at their home ground
We copped some injuries that game, beat you a few weeks earlier at your home ground, don't leave that out. We also travelled interstate 11 times that year, the same as your team.
 
No other alternatives if the AFL want to ensure all the corporate sales go through and make the most money they can

They won't lose out on 40-50,000 possible seats by moving to AO/PS even if they are top of the line

I could see them maybe budging if there was an 80k stadium - but not 60k

In all honesty I don't mind it at the G - it's the best choice for it. The issue most have is the lopsided amount of games teams get there. Either get more Melbourne teams playing their home games there v non-Vic clubs or get non-Vic clubs to sell home games there (don't think that would stick at all)
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

We copped some injuries that game, beat you a few weeks earlier at your home ground, don't leave that out. We also travelled interstate 11 times that year, the same as your team.
Its part of the reason why you lot get more bragging rights than richmond. At leastvyou beat someone away.
 
The Dogs wouldn't have won he flag at home if they didn't win their interstate PF v GWS away (and EF v WCE in WA).

Same with Hawthorn the year before, PF v Fremantle away in WA. Still won.

Excuses.

Best team will win.
100%, u gotta get there and interstate sides have a big home ground advantage H&A and if they finish in a spot for a home final, it's the same on the run home. The fact is you gotta win at the gee, all the great interstate flag sides have won there before, crows back 2 back, brisbane 3peat, shit... even eagles have won 3 in the last 25 years. It doesn't come down to venue. If your good enough to actually make a grand final, then your beyond that. It comes down to the tactics, the pressure, taking your chances on the day and the football
 
100%, u gotta get there and interstate sides have a big home ground advantage H&A and if they finish in a spot for a home final, it's the same on the run home. The fact is you gotta win at the gee, all the great interstate flag sides have won there before, crows back 2 back, brisbane 3peat, shit... even eagles have won 3 in the last 25 years. It doesn't come down to venue. If your good enough to actually make a grand final, then your beyond that. It comes down to the tactics, the pressure, taking your chances on the day and the football
It comes down to platitudes?
 
They trained at ao 170 times this year?

Can you link this stat please - most clubs have training facilities
Apologies, didn't realise they also train at AAMI Park. Can you tell us how often the Crows (and Port for that matter) train at Adelaide Oval?
 
If winning grand finals at the MCG is such a big problem for interstate sides, then why didn't they make their grounds similar in dimensions to the MCG? I mean, I know cost is a big issue, but if it's gonna help them compete better in away games against Victorian sides in September then surely it's worth it, no? Too late for that, though.
By BigFooty logic that would give stronger Victorian teams an unfair advantage over weaker interstate teams on their own home ground and they'd then have to play in the dark to make it fairer
 
If winning grand finals at the MCG is such a big problem for interstate sides, then why didn't they make their grounds similar in dimensions to the MCG? I mean, I know cost is a big issue, but if it's gonna help them compete better in away games against Victorian sides in September then surely it's worth it, no? Too late for that, though.

Yeah I am sure the SCG Trust would be very accommodating with that.
 
Just means its correct
So what's ur suggestion?
My suggestion is that mcg dimensions should be changed as much as possible to the home teams ground and a minimum ticket allocation to the home teams fans.

When the contract runs out the granny to rotate
 
Last edited:
My suggestion is that mcg dimensions should be changed as much as possible to the home teams ground and a minimum ticket allocation to the home teams fans.
my suggestion is you should be grateful everyday we allowed you into the AFL and remember that if we woke up tomorrow and West Coast, or any of the other upstarts suddenly disappeared, none of us would give a flying ****
 
my suggestion is you should be grateful everyday we allowed you into the AFL and remember that if we woke up tomorrow and West Coast, or any of the other upstarts suddenly disappeared, none of us would give a flying ****
Oh no

Where would we get our easy on the road wins and coleman medallists from if we cant stay with the vfl
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Interstate sides in GFs

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top