Once again we have a higher ranked team playing away gf - solution:

[JackOutback]

Like having less home games than every other team, you mean?

*which for the record, doesn’t bother me - it is what it is, and isn’t changing any time soon and doesn’t impact on what happens to our win loss record.


But again, can someone tell me what is the difference between playing at a non-home ground 7 times in a season, and playing there 3 times? How much more familiar are those 4 games going to make someone?


‘Brodie why is it that Stanley can tap it to his midfielders and you can’t?’
‘It’s because he played here four more times this year, Horse.’

Maybe seven times to three seems insignificant but over the course of five years, 42 to 15 absolutely could make a difference in terms of knowing how to play a ground better i.e. a real home ground advantage.

But I was referring to travel. Simply dismissing travel as not that a big a deal is easy enough but the players and coaches tend to disagree. We all know footy is a hard game, players leave the ground sore. Some players largely get to drive home, soak and have a sleep while others pack themselves into a plane for several hours. Do that across a season and is it a surprise if some teams are more worn down by the last Saturday in September, at which point they have to do it again while their opponents, who may have finished lower, don’t have to.

 

[PhatBoy]

Maybe seven times to three seems insignificant but over the course of five years, 42 to 15 absolutely could make a difference in terms of knowing how to play a ground better i.e. a real home ground advantage.

But I was referring to travel. Simply dismissing travel as not that a big a deal is easy enough but the players and coaches tend to disagree. We all know footy is a hard game, players leave the ground sore. Some players largely get to drive home, soak and have a sleep while others pack themselves into a plane for several hours. Do that across a season and is it a surprise if some teams are more worn down by the last Saturday in September, at which point they have to do it again while their opponents, who may have finished lower, don’t have to.

During the course of the back and forth of a home and away season when it’s week on week off and fairly relentless? Yeah maybe.

When it’s this scenario?

Sorry my sympathy dries up.

1. Every team gets a week off to start the finals anyway. So at worst, even if you had an interstate trip to finish the season, you get a week off, then you have to travel in week one of the finals - which would be a legitimate trip anyway no matter where you play because it’s cut and dried: higher team hosts in home state.

2. Teams 5-8 get a week off too, teams 5-6 get a home final then they’re always travelling regardless. That’s how it is.

3. A team like Port Adelaide has gone week off, home game, home game. A Friday game in Sydney then a trip to Melbourne should they make it: it hasn’t exactly been a full on month has it, travel wise. Sydney has gone week off, home game, week off, home game, travel for the grand final if the make it.

Yeah, I can see a circumstance where a team could really suffer: Eagles or Freo in particular finishing third or fourth and losing a first final, winning at home, then having to play their others away. But again they have the chance to keep that in their control by winning that first final - which they play AFTER a fortnight off.

As far as the sides in 7/8 go, who could theoretically fly 4 times in four weeks go, I don’t really care. You finish that low, you’re supposed to have to go the long way round.

 

[Seeds]

When you are on a forum you are swapping ideas all the time. How could you even debate rationally with someone who thinks Victoria is on the east coast? So if they are like that on a factual level I can’t imagine what they are like on more subjective subject.

You need to go look at a map again. There are parts of Victoria's coastline that are clearly on the east coast. Not that any of this matters as the poster was clearly refe referencing the east half of Australia.

 

[Freshwater]

You need to go look at a map again. There are parts of Victoria's coastline that are clearly on the east coast. Not that any of this matters as the poster was clearly refe referencing the east half of Australia.

No there is not.

 

[demondavey]

Another day, another West Coast sook thread.

2037

Another day, another pro Victorian bullshit post

 

[PhatBoy]

No there is not.

lol what? wtf direction do you think is just below Eden, on the border between NSW and Victoria?

 

[SC_Power]

Why do we have this thread?

Victorians have convinced us that there is no advantage on a MCG Grand Final venue, and they’ve written a white paper to explain to every sporting league in the world that they are all wrong. The venue and travel venue doesn’t help a player one iota. Playing at a venue 3/4/5/10 times more often than your opponent makes absolutely no difference to a player or a team. Asking one set of supporters to spend many thousands of dollars to see their team play is insignificant and barely discernible from the supporters that have been to 30 grand finals over the last 32 years.

Why is the world so stupid?

 

[BF Tiger]

Technically, the Geelong coastline is east-facing.

 

[Seeds]

Why do we have this thread?

Victorians have convinced us that there is no advantage on a MCG Grand Final venue, and they’ve written a white paper to explain to every sporting league in the world that they are all wrong. The venue and travel venue doesn’t help a player one iota. Playing at a venue 3/4/5/10 times more often than your opponent makes absolutely no difference to a player or a team. Asking one set of supporters to spend many thousands of dollars to see their team play is insignificant and barely discernible from the supporters that have been to 30 grand finals over the last 32 years.

Why is the world so stupid?

Every other league?

Superbowl isn't played at highest ranked teams home ground. Either is world cup finals in cricket, soccer , rugby etc.

Fa cup is always played at Wembley london.

Tennis grand slams are always played at same 4 venues.

Us masters always played at same location.

 

[SC_Power]

Every other league?

Superbowl isn't played at highest ranked teams home ground. Either is world cup finals in cricket, soccer , rugby etc.

Fa cup is always played at Wembley london.

Tennis grand slams are always played at same 4 venues.

Us masters always played at same location.

Super Bowl is rotated precisely to remove not face the same issues as the AFL GF, and make a crap load more money by bidding it out.

World Cup finals are rotated as well, ditto on the bidding.

FA Cup at Wembley which is no one’s home ground. Couldn’t get more neutral.

US Masters is a restricted club, no events during the year, and very little opportunity to play even if you are a pro. Which is why having played there many times is a distinct advantage.

Tennis Grand Slams are for individuals, and there is a massive home advantage at play there as well. Not forgetting that there are 3 different surfaces across the 4 events. Well not really, Victorians will tell you that it not really there. Hence the white paper.

 

[PhatBoy]

Super Bowl is rotated precisely to remove not face the same issues as the AFL GF, and make a crap load more money by bidding it out.

World Cup finals are rotated as well, ditto on the bidding.

FA Cup at Wembley which is no one’s home ground. Couldn’t get more neutral.

US Masters is a restricted club, no events during the year, and very little opportunity to play even if you are a pro. Which is why having played there many times is a distinct advantage.

Tennis Grand Slams are for individuals, and there is a massive home advantage at play there as well. Not forgetting that there are 3 different surfaces across the 4 events. Well not really, Victorians will tell you that it not really there. Hence the white paper.

You still haven’t been able to explain why playing somewhere 7 times gives a team an advantage over a team playing somewhere 3 times, for guys paid to spent 9-10 months a year either playing or training to kick a football and deliver it to their teammates

A crowd noise of affirmation I get. No argument there.

The travel factor has, in a finals scenario, a lot less potential for impact than what is being made out, particularly for a top four side and it takes a unique set of circumstances for it to have a huge impact but it can if things unfold a certain way. At any rate, it won’t this year for the top four sides that are still going, and Brisbane forfeited its right to complain by not finishing in the top four.

3 weeks of travel after a weekend off, then a home game, isn’t going to kill them.

 

[Seeds]

Super Bowl is rotated precisely to remove not face the same issues as the AFL GF, and make a crap load more money by bidding it out.

World Cup finals are rotated as well, ditto on the bidding.

FA Cup at Wembley which is no one’s home ground. Couldn’t get more neutral.

US Masters is a restricted club, no events during the year, and very little opportunity to play even if you are a pro. Which is why having played there many times is a distinct advantage.

Tennis Grand Slams are for individuals, and there is a massive home advantage at play there as well. Not forgetting that there are 3 different surfaces across the 4 events. Well not really, Victorians will tell you that it not really there. Hence the white paper.

Rotating the superbowl through financial bidding or even randomly doesnt limit bias anymore then playing every superbowl at one ground.

Imagine if next year we chose adelaide as the grand final home and brisbane is the top team playing port adelaide who finished fourth that season. Brisbane would be massively at a disadvantage.

Mcg holds way more people then any other ground. Isnt the next most important thing (after removing all bias that can possibly be removed) is to get as many people to the match as possible?

 

[Freshwater]

lol what? wtf direction do you think is just below Eden, on the border between NSW and Victoria?

The border is exactly at the geographical divide between the Australian east coast and where it becomes the southern. That’s why it was even put there in the first place. As stated before, Victoria is not on the east coast of Australia, simple geography.

 

[SC_Power]

You still haven’t been able to explain why playing somewhere 7 times gives a team an advantage over a team playing somewhere 3 times, for guys paid to spent 9-10 months a year either playing or training to kick a football and deliver it to their teammates

A crowd noise of affirmation I get. No argument there.

The travel factor has, in a finals scenario, a lot less potential for impact than what is being made out, particularly for a top four side and it takes a unique set of circumstances for it to have a huge impact but it can if things unfold a certain way. At any rate, it won’t this year for the top four sides that are still going, and Brisbane forfeited its right to complain by not finishing in the top four.

3 weeks of travel after a weekend off, then a home game, isn’t going to kill them.

And again, you the core questions are never answered.

Why shouldn’t Sydney have a home run through to a home GF?
Brisbane can’t complain apparently, but had Hawthorn won, they are allowed to have a GF at home whilst finishing lower than Brisbane.
Port Adelaide can’t complain, but had they won, Geelong are still allowed to qualify for a home state GF even after losing, potentially against a team they finished lower than and lost to in a final.

All there arguments never quite look so smart when reversed as it highlights the ridiculousness of the argument.

So you revert back to the “well, there’s no real advantage, you prove that there is” like it isn’t one of the most basically understood details of professional competition.

But of course, Victorians are right, there is no HGA advantage in the AFL, so who cares? It’s your comp, your money, why shouldn’t we ignore the obvious?

 

[PhatBoy]

And again, you the core questions are never answered.

Why shouldn’t Sydney have a home run through to a home GF?
Brisbane can’t complain apparently, but had Hawthorn won, they are allowed to have a GF at home whilst finishing lower than Brisbane.
Port Adelaide can’t complain, but had they won, Geelong are still allowed to qualify for a home state GF even after losing, potentially against a team they finished lower than and lost to in a final.

All there arguments never quite look so smart when reversed as it highlights the ridiculousness of the argument.

So you revert back to the “well, there’s no real advantage, you prove that there is” like it isn’t one of the most basically understood details of professional competition.

But of course, Victorians are right, there is no HGA advantage in the AFL, so who cares? It’s your comp, your money, why shouldn’t we ignore the obvious?

Oh for f**ks sake mate

Who is ‘you’ Victorians? I live in Bathurst and have been to Victoria about 5 times in my life hahahaha


Ive never said that Sydney shouldn’t.

I think that’s what you’ve missed.

I’m not actually arguing it.

I’m just trying to get my head around why people think it is such a colossal DISadvantage for teams: especially given the amount Cats fans cop whenever the mere suggestion of a final on our home ground is brought up, which most of us don’t really worry too much about anyway.


Over the course of a home and away season where you play back and forth week after week and a team might get 1 look at a venue every year, possibly even once every two years? Yeah I can see how that might play a role.
When the crowd is 90 per cent in favour of one team. Yeah I can see that too.


it’s finals.
It’s not supposed to be even for the first three weeks anyway because you play for rank so if you have to travel already, stiff shit: should have done something about that in the regular season, plus everyone has enjoyed a week off beforehand anyway.

It impacts on one game. And if a professional athlete can’t handle sleeping in a different bed then they are in the wrong business.

Move the game somewhere else, I don’t f**king care. Play it at Cazaly Stadium for all I care. Just stop moaning about factors within a small segment of the season, in a neutrally ticketed match, that come on the back of three weeks of footy where home ground and travel factors are pre-determined by how you’ve already performed throughout the season.

 

[demondavey]

You still haven’t been able to explain why playing somewhere 7 times gives a team an advantage over a team playing somewhere 3 times, for guys paid to spent 9-10 months a year either playing or training to kick a football and deliver it to their teammates

A crowd noise of affirmation I get. No argument there.

The travel factor has, in a finals scenario, a lot less potential for impact than what is being made out, particularly for a top four side and it takes a unique set of circumstances for it to have a huge impact but it can if things unfold a certain way. At any rate, it won’t this year for the top four sides that are still going, and Brisbane forfeited its right to complain by not finishing in the top four.

3 weeks of travel after a weekend off, then a home game, isn’t going to kill them.

If I asked you where Richmond won the majority of their games between 2017-2019 what would you say?

 

[demondavey]

Oh for f**ks sake mate

Who is ‘you’ Victorians? I live in Bathurst and have been to Victoria about 5 times in my life hahahaha


Ive never said that Sydney shouldn’t.

I think that’s what you’ve missed.

I’m not actually arguing it.

I’m just trying to get my head around why people think it is such a colossal DISadvantage for teams: especially given the amount Cats fans cop whenever the mere suggestion of a final on our home ground is brought up, which most of us don’t really worry too much about anyway.


Over the course of a home and away season where you play back and forth week after week and a team might get 1 look at a venue every year, possibly even once every two years? Yeah I can see how that might play a role.
When the crowd is 90 per cent in favour of one team. Yeah I can see that too.


it’s finals.
It’s not supposed to be even for the first three weeks anyway because you play for rank so if you have to travel already, stiff shit: should have done something about that in the regular season, plus everyone has enjoyed a week off beforehand anyway.

It impacts on one game. And if a professional athlete can’t handle sleeping in a different bed then they are in the wrong business.

Move the game somewhere else, I don’t f**king care. Play it at Cazaly Stadium for all I care. Just stop moaning about factors within a small segment of the season, in a neutrally ticketed match, that come on the back of three weeks of footy where home ground and travel factors are pre-determined by how you’ve already performed throughout the season.

It’s not about professionalism, it’s factual. Teams simply have advantages at home. It’s proven. It’s a fact.

 

[demondavey]

Rotating the superbowl through financial bidding or even randomly doesnt limit bias anymore then playing every superbowl at one ground.

Imagine if next year we chose adelaide as the grand final home and brisbane is the top team playing port adelaide who finished fourth that season. Brisbane would be massively at a disadvantage.

Mcg holds way more people then any other ground. Isnt the next most important thing (after removing all bias that can possibly be removed) is to get as many people to the match as possible?

At least we’d be rotating it. If it unfolded the way you suggested then it’s luck. You’ve also got to understand that with 10 Victorian clubs there will always be a higher chance of a Victorian club making a GF.

Honestly, the issue here is that Victorians just can’t hack the GF being moved because they know if it was Richmond, Hawthorn, Collingwood, Carlton, etc that they’d struggle big time on the road. Its so simple.

 

[demondavey]

Why just this century? You don’t set the parameters of my enjoyment. The flags Richmond won when I was a kid are still great memories (yes, I’m that old). And I’ll cherish the 2020 flag as much as any. Arguably the flag won in the most trying times.

Well if you talk to some supporters (Particularly WB) you’ll be told that it was a COVID flag. Some idiot trotted that out to me recently even they made a GF in 2021.

 

[Seeds]

At least we’d be rotating it. If it unfolded the way you suggested then it’s luck. You’ve also got to understand that with 10 Victorian clubs there will always be a higher chance of a Victorian club making a GF.

Honestly, the issue here is that Victorians just can’t hack the GF being moved because they know if it was Richmond, Hawthorn, Collingwood, Carlton, etc that they’d struggle big time on the road. Its so simple.

Premierships start and finish in one season. There is only one grand final in each season. Rotating grand finals each year does not reduce unfairness because premierships are one year events. If there were 3 grand finals in a season or the season was played over 3 years with grand finals each year then rotating the grand final across states would be fairer then playing all 3 at one ground. But that simply isnt the case. There is only one grand final for each premiership.

As a result of this fact, the fairest spot to put each grand final is in the same stadium each season. And that stadium is the one with the biggest capacity that can accomodate most neutrals and interstate supporters (reducing crowd bias effects) and the stadium which everyone plays at so each team has at least have some experience (play it in perth then there is a chance a grand final team hasnt played there once in the entire season). The stadium that matches the criteria best for minimal bias on grand final day is clearly the mcg. If we rotated the grand final across smaller stadiums in different states each year then the average amount of bias that may result from a grand finals location would be higher not lower.

Those supporting rotation of grand finals because of a belief its fairer have got the maths wrong.

 

[PhatBoy]

If I asked you where Richmond won the majority of their games between 2017-2019 what would you say?

The MCG where they play the majority of their games.


They were also 16-13 elsewhere before having to go into the Covid venues. They finished 29-17 afterwards as well. They quite obviously won mostly as a consequence of being the best team, not because of the patch of turf they were playing on.

In the two grand finals they won there, one was against Adelaide, who came out and actually stuck it to them for a big chunk of the first half. I doubt it got to the 25 minute mark of the second term when Richmond finally hit the front and Adelaide realised where they were or something.

I don’t really think any venue would have mattered against the Giants.

 

[PhatBoy]

It’s not about professionalism, it’s factual. Teams simply have advantages at home. It’s proven. It’s a fact.

let’s have a look at it in AFL grand final terms, since the first time an interstate side made it:

By my count 19 times a Victorian team has met an interstate side.
The ledger stands at 10-9 in favour of the Victorian teams.

Doesn’t exactly seem incredibly conclusive, does it, in this particular argument, and it was 9-9 until a year ago when a kick put the Victorian teams ahead 10-9.

Consider also that the 3 biggest hidings - and thus theoretically the 3 least likely to be reversed if played anywhere else - results were all dished out by Victorian sides, then really the ledger is basically about as level as it can possibly be.


Now granted, in those cases not all Victorian teams were MCG tenants (in 1991 Hawthorn I believe were a Waverly tenant so I counted it) but the majority of times they have, and at any rate the point has been stressed by many that playing at the MCG even a little bit more often is an advantage so that’s how it’s been counted.

 

[demondavey]

let’s have a look at it in AFL grand final terms, since the first time an interstate side made it:

By my count 19 times a Victorian team has met an interstate side.
The ledger stands at 10-9 in favour of the Victorian teams.

Doesn’t exactly seem incredibly conclusive, does it, in this particular argument, and it was 9-9 until a year ago when a kick put the Victorian teams ahead 10-9.

Consider also that the 3 biggest hidings - and thus theoretically the 3 least likely to be reversed if played anywhere else - results were all dished out by Victorian sides, then really the ledger is basically about as level as it can possibly be.


Now granted, in those cases not all Victorian teams were MCG tenants (in 1991 Hawthorn I believe were a Waverly tenant so I counted it) but the majority of times they have, and at any rate the point has been stressed by many that playing at the MCG even a little bit more often is an advantage so that’s how it’s been counted.

I’d probably argue Geelong wasn’t an MCG tenant team in 92 and 94.

Also, in 1998 Adelaide won courtesy of awful goal kicking and in 2012 Sydney won in the same fashion. The last 15 years have been far more professional than prior years as well, so so much more comes into play re performance. The game now is nowhere the game 20 years back.

 

[demondavey]

The MCG where they play the majority of their games.


They were also 16-13 elsewhere before having to go into the Covid venues. They finished 29-17 afterwards as well. They quite obviously won mostly as a consequence of being the best team, not because of the patch of turf they were playing on.

In the two grand finals they won there, one was against Adelaide, who came out and actually stuck it to them for a big chunk of the first half. I doubt it got to the 25 minute mark of the second term when Richmond finally hit the front and Adelaide realised where they were or something.

I don’t really think any venue would have mattered against the Giants.

My point is though that you’re simply going to have an advantage at the MCG. Adelaide were unstoppable at home. The crowd and noise was all Richmond I might add.

There was also some horrendously one sided umpiring going Richmond’s way in that game.

 

[demondavey]

Premierships start and finish in one season. There is only one grand final in each season. Rotating grand finals each year does not reduce unfairness because premierships are one year events. If there were 3 grand finals in a season or the season was played over 3 years with grand finals each year then rotating the grand final across states would be fairer then playing all 3 at one ground. But that simply isnt the case. There is only one grand final for each premiership.

As a result of this fact, the fairest spot to put each grand final is in the same stadium each season. And that stadium is the one with the biggest capacity that can accomodate most neutrals and interstate supporters (reducing crowd bias effects) and the stadium which everyone plays at so each team has at least have some experience (play it in perth then there is a chance a grand final team hasnt played there once in the entire season). The stadium that matches the criteria best for minimal bias on grand final day is clearly the mcg. If we rotated the grand final across smaller stadiums in different states each year then the average amount of bias that may result from a grand finals location would be higher not lower.

Those supporting rotation of grand finals because of a belief its fairer have got the maths wrong.

That is all so wrong. You’ve literally got more than a 50% chance every year of a Victorian club making a GF. We’ve had 3 non Victorian GF. It is absolutely not the fairest place to put the GF at the G each year. The ground should be rotated each year.

Your points are very convoluted, sorry.