There is a general refusal by fans of AFL clubs to acknowledge the advantages their own clubs hold whilst crying poor at everyone else's. The AFL is not a level playing field for many reasons, but WA fans whinging that Vic clubs rarely have to travel but refusing to listen to the idea that their teams get 10 true home games (soon to be 11) is disingenous - as for SA fans who can't acknowledge that Gather Round is a big leg up for them. The same goes on the flipside for Victorian clubs like ours, where we are lucky to have just 6 of 23 games outside of our home state (but far fewer non-neutral games).Don't let the propagandising of the WA teams get to you.
- It's fine that they travel that much because it's just the geographic realities of being in an isolated city that makes it appealing that can make their team stronger. Perth is further away but it's also the closest city to half our countries' natural resources, which makes Perth a bigger city, which makes them big enough to have a team in the first place. Can't separate one for another
- What evidence is there that the travel disadvantage is stronger than the net crowd-driven home ground advantages? West Coast certainly aren't as disadvantaged by playing at Docklands vs. us where they still have some fans in the crowd, fewer Dogs fans and somewhat of a familiarity with the ground, compared to when we travel there, hardly ever play at the ground, virtually nil fans in the stand and 50,000 rabid fans there.
I commented on the main board thread that the AFL should be actively doing what it can to remove inequalities rather than add to them, and the whataboutism replies from WA fans was predictable.
Having a small/poor club selling home games - not to a neutral venue (Bunbury) but to their opposition's home venue (Optus) - flies in the face of equalisation, as it was when we sold games to Sydney, Melbourne selling them to Brisbane etc (and having Collingwood 'host' us at Marvel this year).