MCG vs non-MCG tenants

[Rotayjay]

This is another angle to the debate over the extent to which the grand final venue is an advantage for some clubs. Much has been said about Victorian versus non-Victorian teams in the grand final, but what about teams that play their home games there against ones that don't?

In the last 20 grand finals played at the MCG, we've seen an MCG tenant defeat a non-tenant 7 times, and a non-tenant defeat a tenant 5 times. I didn't count Geelong as an MCG tenant, and the rest were non-tenants against non-tenants, or at other grounds:

2002 Brisbane (non-tenant) def Collingwood
2003 Brisbane (NT) def Collingwood
2008 Hawthorn (T) def Geelong
2010 Collingwood (T) def St Kilda
2011 Geelong (NT) def Collingwood
2012 Sydney (NT) def Hawthorn
2013 Hawthorn (T) def Fremantle
2014 Hawthorn (T) def Sydney
2015 Hawthorn (T) def West Coast
2017 Richmond (T) def Adelaide
2018 West Coast (NT) def Collingwood
2019 Richmond (T) def GWS

Funnily enough, when I went back through the history I struggled to find a grand final played between two teams that both had the MCG as their primary home ground. In 1990, for example, Essendon and Collingwood were still playing home games at Windy Hill and Victoria Park.

Could we see Collingwood v Melbourne this year? Do we have any history or statistics buffs who can tally how many games each grand final team had played at the MCG in that season? That would give a picture of ground familiarity.

 

[Freomaniac]

This is another angle to the debate over the extent to which the grand final venue is an advantage for some clubs. Much has been said about Victorian versus non-Victorian teams in the grand final, but what about teams that play their home games there against ones that don't?

In the last 20 grand finals played at the MCG, we've seen an MCG tenant defeat a non-tenant 7 times, and a non-tenant defeat a tenant 5 times. I didn't count Geelong as an MCG tenant, and the rest were non-tenants against non-tenants, or at other grounds:

2002 Brisbane (non-tenant) def Collingwood
2003 Brisbane (NT) def Collingwood
2008 Hawthorn (T) def Geelong
2010 Collingwood (T) def St Kilda
2011 Geelong (NT) def Collingwood
2012 Sydney (NT) def Hawthorn
2013 Hawthorn (T) def Fremantle
2014 Hawthorn (T) def Sydney
2015 Hawthorn (T) def West Coast
2017 Richmond (T) def Adelaide
2018 West Coast (NT) def Collingwood
2019 Richmond (T) def GWS

Funnily enough, when I went back through the history I struggled to find a grand final played between two teams that both had the MCG as their primary home ground. In 1990, for example, Essendon and Collingwood were still playing home games at Windy Hill and Victoria Park.

Could we see Collingwood v Melbourne this year? Do we have any history or statistics buffs who can tally how many games each grand final team had played at the MCG in that season? That would give a picture of ground familiarity.

So had The crows had North Melbourne or Dogs or saints or any docklands tenant in 2017, the crows would of won the flag?

I was cheering hard for GWS to beat richmond at the MCG in the 2017 prelim final.

 

[nut]

So had The crows had North Melbourne or Dogs or saints or any docklands tenant in 2017, the crows would of won the flag?

I was cheering hard for GWS to beat richmond at the MCG in the 2017 prelim final.

Bad luck

 

[Freomaniac]

Bad luck

I know sadly. I wanted 2 non Vic clubs in that grand final.

 

[Freshwater]

I heard Cameron Ling on ABC radio just last week saying Geelong are the only team in the AFL who don’t get home finals. Just like every AFL expert or commentator, garbage comes out of their mouths when talking through their biases. Geelong actually have had home finals in Geelong. Despite being 80 km’s from the G for the past 20 years they have had 5-6 games at the MCG each home and away season, year in year out. The Docklands tenants like Dogs, Saints, North get 2 game there per year, year in year out, then not only getting a crappy financial deal at Docklands until the AFL owned it, didn’t get to play finals there when it would suit. In 2015 the Dogs got a ‘home’ elimination final against the crows. The Dogs requested Docklands, AFL said no, 60,000+ were there so probably correct decision? But we lost by a few points in easily the best final of the boring 2015 finals series. Would we have won at Docklands? Probably not, would we have won if Michael Talia

Michael Talia

Age

31

Ht

192cm

Wt

94kg

Pos.

Def

Career

Season

Last 5

D

16.4

4star

K

8.8

3star

HB

7.6

5star

M

4.9

5star

T

1.2

3star

MG

191.5

3star

No current season stats available

D

15.0

4star

K

8.6

4star

HB

6.4

4star

M

4.0

4star

T

1.0

3star

, had not spill playing secrets to his brother because he got dropped? That’s another funny story that the AFL, to appease gambling industry decided there was nothing to see!? But a couple more regular season games at the MCG for all teams would be fairer especially for Dogs, Saints, North who will never get the benefit of a ‘home’ final like Perth, Adelaide, NSW, QLD teams.

 

[Walshawk]

I heard Cameron Ling on ABC radio just last week saying Geelong are the only team in the AFL who don’t get home finals. Just like every AFL expert or commentator, garbage comes out of their mouths when talking through their biases. Geelong actually have had home finals in Geelong. Despite being 80 km’s from the G for the past 20 years they have had 5-6 games at the MCG each home and away season, year in year out. The Docklands tenants like Dogs, Saints, North get 2 game there per year, year in year out, then not only getting a crappy financial deal at Docklands until the AFL owned it, didn’t get to play finals there when it would suit. In 2015 the Dogs got a ‘home’ elimination final against the crows. The Dogs requested Docklands, AFL said no, 60,000+ were there so probably correct decision? But we lost by a few points in easily the best final of the boring 2015 finals series. Would we have won at Docklands? Probably not, would we have won if Michael Talia, had not spill playing secrets to his brother because he got dropped? That’s another funny story that the AFL, to appease gambling industry decided there was nothing to see!? But a couple more regular season games at the MCG for all teams would be fairer especially for Dogs, Saints, North who will never get the benefit of a ‘home’ final like Perth, Adelaide, NSW, QLD teams.

And I bet no one challenged Ling. Not will they if he says it again. Media is useless.

 

[CarnTheScray]

I heard Cameron Ling on ABC radio just last week saying Geelong are the only team in the AFL who don’t get home finals. Just like every AFL expert or commentator, garbage comes out of their mouths when talking through their biases. Geelong actually have had home finals in Geelong. Despite being 80 km’s from the G for the past 20 years they have had 5-6 games at the MCG each home and away season, year in year out. The Docklands tenants like Dogs, Saints, North get 2 game there per year, year in year out, then not only getting a crappy financial deal at Docklands until the AFL owned it, didn’t get to play finals there when it would suit. In 2015 the Dogs got a ‘home’ elimination final against the crows. The Dogs requested Docklands, AFL said no, 60,000+ were there so probably correct decision? But we lost by a few points in easily the best final of the boring 2015 finals series. Would we have won at Docklands? Probably not, would we have won if Michael Talia, had not spill playing secrets to his brother because he got dropped? That’s another funny story that the AFL, to appease gambling industry decided there was nothing to see!? But a couple more regular season games at the MCG for all teams would be fairer especially for Dogs, Saints, North who will never get the benefit of a ‘home’ final like Perth, Adelaide, NSW, QLD teams.

It’s annoying we are shipped off to UTAS to play Hawthorn and away at Marvel to play Essendon when the crowds v those sides have always been solid.

 

[Rotayjay]

As noted above, the record of non-MCG tenants against tenants in grand finals is not that bad.

However, I think non-tenants desperately need to get more games at the MCG for practise.

 

[FreddyTwoShoes]

I heard Cameron Ling on ABC radio just last week saying Geelong are the only team in the AFL who don’t get home finals. Just like every AFL expert or commentator, garbage comes out of their mouths when talking through their biases. Geelong actually have had home finals in Geelong. Despite being 80 km’s from the G for the past 20 years they have had 5-6 games at the MCG each home and away season, year in year out. The Docklands tenants like Dogs, Saints, North get 2 game there per year, year in year out, then not only getting a crappy financial deal at Docklands until the AFL owned it, didn’t get to play finals there when it would suit. In 2015 the Dogs got a ‘home’ elimination final against the crows. The Dogs requested Docklands, AFL said no, 60,000+ were there so probably correct decision? But we lost by a few points in easily the best final of the boring 2015 finals series. Would we have won at Docklands? Probably not, would we have won if Michael Talia, had not spill playing secrets to his brother because he got dropped? That’s another funny story that the AFL, to appease gambling industry decided there was nothing to see!? But a couple more regular season games at the MCG for all teams would be fairer especially for Dogs, Saints, North who will never get the benefit of a ‘home’ final like Perth, Adelaide, NSW, QLD teams.

I'm no supporter of CLing the commentator, but was he wrong to say Geelong don't get home finals? (last one was 10 years ago -ish)

Is your contention that Geelong DO get finals at Kardinia park, or that Geelong's home ground is the MCG?

 

[Freshwater]

I'm no supporter of CLing the commentator, but was he wrong to say Geelong don't get home finals? (last one was 10 years ago -ish)

Is your contention that Geelong DO get finals at Kardinia park, or that Geelong's home ground is the MCG?

No, he said “Geelong are the only team that doesn’t get home finals” which is patently wrong on two fronts. Not only that, they actually get more games at the MCG in the home and away season, and have done year on year, than three of the Marvel tenants. Linguine may be a good commentator except if Geelong is anywhere near the conversation.

 

[Sentinel]

I'm no supporter of CLing the commentator, but was he wrong to say Geelong don't get home finals? (last one was 10 years ago -ish)

Is your contention that Geelong DO get finals at Kardinia park, or that Geelong's home ground is the MCG?

I would say both. Geelong have played multiple home games at the MCG for years, it's insincere to claim that GMHBA Stadium is their only home ground (even if that is what the club ultimately desires, being 11 home games + finals in Geelong).

 

[Rabish Binney]

I heard Cameron Ling on ABC radio just last week saying Geelong are the only team in the AFL who don’t get home finals. Just like every AFL expert or commentator, garbage comes out of their mouths when talking through their biases. Geelong actually have had home finals in Geelong. Despite being 80 km’s from the G for the past 20 years they have had 5-6 games at the MCG each home and away season, year in year out. The Docklands tenants like Dogs, Saints, North get 2 game there per year, year in year out, then not only getting a crappy financial deal at Docklands until the AFL owned it, didn’t get to play finals there when it would suit. In 2015 the Dogs got a ‘home’ elimination final against the crows. The Dogs requested Docklands, AFL said no, 60,000+ were there so probably correct decision? But we lost by a few points in easily the best final of the boring 2015 finals series. Would we have won at Docklands? Probably not, would we have won if Michael Talia, had not spill playing secrets to his brother because he got dropped? That’s another funny story that the AFL, to appease gambling industry decided there was nothing to see!? But a couple more regular season games at the MCG for all teams would be fairer especially for Dogs, Saints, North who will never get the benefit of a ‘home’ final like Perth, Adelaide, NSW, QLD teams.

Yeah right.

And you still believe the Dogs don't get an armchair ride by the Umps?

 

[Notoneeyedpie]

There is no home ground advantage at the MCG .................full stop

 

[doppleganger]

As noted above, the record of non-MCG tenants against tenants in grand finals is not that bad.

Almost as if something different about GF compared to a rd12 game in June?

However, I think non-tenants desperately need to get more games at the MCG for practise.

Do you want to further compromise an already dodgy H&A FIXture?

Would a non-tenant choose to give up a Home game to play a fellow non-tenant at the G?

 

[FreddyTwoShoes]

No, he said “Geelong are the only team that doesn’t get home finals” which is patently wrong on two fronts. Not only that, they actually get more games at the MCG in the home and away season, and have done year on year, than three of the Marvel tenants. Linguine may be a good commentator except if Geelong is anywhere near the conversation.

I'll try again. This year we have 2 home games at the G.
Separately, 4 other Melbourne-based clubs have fixtured THEIR HOME games against us at the G.

This apparently makes the MCG OUR home ground??

 

[Freshwater]

Yeah right.

And you still believe the Dogs don't get an armchair ride by the Umps?

I'll try again. This year we have 2 home games at the G.
Separately, 4 other Melbourne-based clubs have fixtured THEIR HOME games against us at the G.

This apparently makes the MCG OUR home ground??

I never said that, but 6 games every year to our 2 is a hell of lot more advantageous.

 

[Sentinel]

I'll try again. This year we have 2 home games at the G.
Separately, 4 other Melbourne-based clubs have fixtured THEIR HOME games against us at the G.

This apparently makes the MCG OUR home ground??

It's a home ground to Geelong as much as Ballarat is for the Bulldogs, only you also play a bunch of away games there too. The advantage of a ground as a 'home' venue is largely due to familiarity of a venue, playing at least 6 games a year there means Geelong are definitely familiar with it compared to other clubs who might be lucky to play 2 games per year there.

And playing 2 games per year there as the home club objectively makes it a home venue for Geelong.

 

[FreddyTwoShoes]

I never said that, but 6 games every year to our 2 is a hell of lot more advantageous.

You said that Ling was wrong when he said Geelong don't get home finals. He was obviously talking about "home ground", not "home state" because it's obvious we DO get home state finals.
I'll say again I'm no supporter of commentator Ling (loved him as a player/captain), but I don't think he's told the big lie you think he has.

 

[doppleganger]

I'll try again. This year we have 2 home games at the G.
Separately, 4 other Melbourne-based clubs have fixtured THEIR HOME games against us at the G.

This apparently makes the MCG OUR home ground??

This year eight clubs will play "home" games at the MCG

Carlton
Collingwood
Essendon
Geelong
Hawthorn
Melbourne
Richmond
St Kilda

How many games at a ground do you need to play for it to be familiar? How many make you a tenant? Are Carlton with 9 MCG games a tenant?

The MCG is no teams sole home ground.

It predominantly hosts large neutral BLOCKBUSTERS where both sets of supporters have ample access to seats and the normal factors that generate an advantage to the "home" team dont hold true.

 

[FreddyTwoShoes]

It's a home ground to Geelong as much as Ballarat is for the Bulldogs, only you also play a bunch of away games there too. The advantage of a ground as a 'home' venue is largely due to familiarity of a venue, playing at least 6 games a year there means Geelong are definitely familiar with it compared to other clubs who might be lucky to play 2 games per year there.

And playing 2 games per year there as the home club objectively makes it a home venue for Geelong.

That's a bad comparison. Do other clubs play more games in Ballarat than the Bulldogs?

 

[spenze]

Almost as if something different about GF compared to a rd12 game in June?

Do you want to further compromise an already dodgy H&A FIXture?

Would a non-tenant choose to give up a Home game to play a fellow non-tenant at the G?

If the Crows had 3 games at the MCG and the AFL offered us a game against a non tenant as one of our home games I'd hope we'd take it. Have always believed that we need 4 games at the MCG each year to help with playing on that ground in September*

*Of course, it has been so long since we played a finals match, last time we did it was probably at Waverley

 

[FreddyTwoShoes]

This year eight clubs will play "home" games at the MCG

Carlton
Collingwood
Essendon
Geelong
Hawthorn
Melbourne
Richmond
St Kilda

How many games at a ground do you need to play for it to be familiar? How many make you a tenant? Are Carlton with 9 MCG games a tenant?

The MCG is no teams sole home ground.

It predominantly hosts large neutral BLOCKBUSTERS where both sets of supporters have ample access to seats and the normal factors that generate an advantage to the "home" team dont hold true.

I agree with this to a point, but it doesn't factor in crowd sizes. I think big clubs like Collingwood and Richmond get the advantage of bigger crowd support but that's due mainly to their bigger memberships, and fair play to them for that.

 

[Sentinel]

That's a bad comparison. Do other clubs play more games in Ballarat than the Bulldogs?

The MCG is more of a home ground to Geelong than Ballarat is to the Bulldogs given the Dogs play 2 designated home games there (as Geelong do at the G) but without the 4 additional away games. 2 games doesn't allow for much familiarity with the venue, certainly not compared to 6+ games.

Geelong don't have an advantage at the MCG against other tenant clubs (I would argue they also dont really have a much of a disadvantage since they play there often enough that they know it well), but they definitely do against interstate sides or against NM, WB and StK when it comes to Grand Finals or other finals, as per the OP.

 

[Freshwater]

Cant

You said that Ling was wrong when he said Geelong don't get home finals. He was obviously talking about "home ground", not "home state" because it's obvious we DO get home state finals.
I'll say again I'm no supporter of commentator Ling (loved him as a player/captain), but I don't think he's told the big lie you think he has.

Can’t you remember Freo v Cats home final at Kardinia Park a few years back. That’s a home final, one more than Saints and Bulldogs ever got.

 

[FreddyTwoShoes]

The MCG is more of a home ground to Geelong than Ballarat is to the Bulldogs given the Dogs play 2 designated home games there (as Geelong do at the G) but without the 4 additional away games. 2 games doesn't allow for much familiarity with the venue, certainly not compared to 6+ games.

Geelong don't have an advantage at the MCG against other tenant clubs (I would argue they also dont really have a much of a disadvantage since they play there often enough that they know it well), but they definitely do against interstate sides or against NM, WB and StK when it comes to Grand Finals or other finals, as per the OP.

I don't disagree with any of that. I was just pointing out that the Dogs Ballarat situation isn't the same thing.
But back to what Ling said - your assertion seems to be that Geelong has 2 home grounds, and they play finals at one of them (the MCG) so Ling was incorrect. Is that it in a nutshell?