Won't even be strongly considered until bigger stadiums are built in different states.
-
AFLW 2024 - Round 9 - Indigenous Round - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
The Grand Final should be hosted at a neutral venue
- Thread starter Nile
- Start date
- Tagged users None
Without being given the opportunity to host an AFL GF will make this unviable, there are not that many events in Australia that can yield 100k people. At the moment that event is locked to one venue.
Yes, some of the superficial calls by one eyed fans wanting the security blanket like comfort of the distinct home ground advantage is laughable when you consider how clubs like Dogs, Saints, Carlton, Essendon and North have never and will never enjoy such rewards if they finish top 4.
A few of the more sensible and thinking posters have suggested more creative ideas such as Passenger of those clubs finding ways of playing at G once or twice more a season.
I certainly know in premierships of 1979, 81, 82, and 1987 my club would have played at the G probably only twice in home and away rounds. Never at any stage did we expect anything apart from grand final being at the home of football at the G. We never got given home ground advantages for a final. Imagine 1995 playing Bears in week one at Princes Park which would have been like Freo getting home finals this year as a leg up. Never happened. If we played a team that played home games at the G well, so be it, we still can get enough of our own fans in there to give it the feel of no home crowd advantage for Richmond when we played them in 1982.
As we just saw on weekend the Eagles would have had not far off the number of Hawks fans at the ground cheering for them. I believe something like 20,000 Eagles fans were at the grand final. There is no other venue where you will get 20,000 fans from another state fly across the nation to be at the home of football for a grand final. It should not be hard for the clubs and AFL to program a minimum of two games at G for all clubs.
vonn
Bigfooty Legend
10k Posts
Pokemon is Life
Meet-Up Master
Pantskyle
Podcaster
WCE Wings Guernsey
Casey Tutungi Future Fund
- Sep 29, 2008
- 20,495
- 12,341
- AFL Club
- Sydney
You're prioritising the present fan day experience over what many think is fairness. In reality the grand final is just another game, there is a winner, there is a loser, and fans attend it. The logistics of that should be simple enough. Pre/mid/post game entertainment is not hard to organize at all. All stadiums are capable of erecting a stage and connecting that with the stadium sound system.
What other logistics are relevant? It's already a logistical nightmare for interstate fans financially and in regards to travel, so it's not as though the current system isn't inherently flawed.
As for attendance for fans, families and officials, that will obviously result in a reduction which would be a shame but not the reason to forego fairness. The only stakeholders to lose out from this is MCG and AFL, and they maximize revenue in a lot other areas to forego the money obtained from GF day. Moreover, why should Melbourne's economy alone benefit from the capital influx simply for tradition? Ridiculous.
I personally could not care less about winning the GF at the MCG. It's the grand final for gods sake, I'd be stoked winning it from Mars. However it's simply unfair that if my team finished on top or higher than my opponent, that I have to be the one to take out $1000.00. On top of that, would I love to see the Swans win a GF on the SCG? Yes, a million times. More than the MCG. Am I happy to have them travel to Perth if they finished above us? Sure - it's more fair and logical than both sets of fans shelling out thousands to watch a game at a ground we don't care about.
ManWithNoName
TheBrownDog
"Fairness" is all well and good. But the rest of us live in the real world.
Players families matter. Prematch stuff matters. Officials being able to attend matters. You need to work all that out first.
vonn
Bigfooty Legend
10k Posts
Pokemon is Life
Meet-Up Master
Pantskyle
Podcaster
WCE Wings Guernsey
Casey Tutungi Future Fund
- Sep 29, 2008
- 20,495
- 12,341
- AFL Club
- Sydney
That's not even relevant to the point. It has nothing to do with Hawthorn. It is simply no coincidence that the lowest crowds have been when two interstate teams are involved. I really don't think Victorians understand the financial implications involved here. It's a lot of money, and for what? So certain supporter groups can constantly harp on about the nauseating line of 'it's the spiritual home of football'? No other final in our system does this. If Hawthorn finished 1st and Sydney 3rd, by all means, let's have it at the MCG. However if my team earnt the right to host the GF then fantastic. Let Victorians see what it's like over extending yourself for one weekend.
On another note - people are saying we simply don't have the capacity. Tell me one city that wouldn't erect a 80,000+ stadium if they had the chance to host the GF. You're talking a serious economic boost. Even if the capacity isn't like the MCG - so what? When did people start caring about the revenue of the AFL? Fans will miss out? Too bad - so many interstate fans already miss out because of the Melbourne travel cost.
vonn
Bigfooty Legend
10k Posts
Pokemon is Life
Meet-Up Master
Pantskyle
Podcaster
WCE Wings Guernsey
Casey Tutungi Future Fund
- Sep 29, 2008
- 20,495
- 12,341
- AFL Club
- Sydney
I am living in the real world. You aren't if you think that it's a logistical nightmare or even halfway difficult. It's really not. Pre match organisation is not rocket science. The families of players will of course be able to attend. Do you think that the MCG is the only ground with a capacity above 15,000? That's more than sufficient for player families and officials. That's even presuming they want to come - which outside of the immediate teams playing the group isn't many of them given they're holidaying or not invested enough to make a weekend out of it.
Why would player families and officials not be able to attend if the game is played interstate???
Prematch stuff mattering is very, very arguable
- Jul 5, 2012
- 26,208
- 43,391
- AFL Club
- Sydney
- Other Teams
- Kidding, right?
I don't know how many of you folks watched the NRL Grand Final last night?
Incredible! Somehow, against all odds, 82,758 people managed to navigate their way to a stadium in the heart of Sydney.
And even more incredibly, stayed there to enjoy a sporting spectacle that most would agree was not exactly lacking in atmosphere.
But yeah, soulless hole, no-one goes there...
Incredible! Somehow, against all odds, 82,758 people managed to navigate their way to a stadium in the heart of Sydney.
And even more incredibly, stayed there to enjoy a sporting spectacle that most would agree was not exactly lacking in atmosphere.
But yeah, soulless hole, no-one goes there...
The South Melbourne Football club was more than happy to play GF's at the G, then they relocated to Sydney, now they are not happy?
- Jul 5, 2012
- 26,208
- 43,391
- AFL Club
- Sydney
- Other Teams
- Kidding, right?
I'm not speaking as a Swans fan. I'm speaking as an AFL fan. Australian Football League.
I've already said, I have no attachment to ANZ. But I have no attachment to the MCG either.
It seriously should not be a difficult exercise to fixture every club a minimum of 3 games at the MCG.
Then you will probably hate september and october for another 20 years at least.
- Jul 2, 2012
- 4,152
- 6,909
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
No one wants to go to Western Sydney. Lets be honest
This is bigger than city rivalries. Yes, it's a "national" competition, but the MCG is the best stadium in the country (by far, and always will be), and is the spiritual home and cultural home of sport in this country.
This goes well beyond "tradition". There's a romantic affiliation that Melburnians have with the stadium, the sport was born here, and so it should be respected as such as hosting the final game between the two best clubs of the season.
It shouldn't be about "home" vs "away".
Winning on the MCG on Grand Final day is the absolute best thing you can do. Hawthorn has mastered the stadium because it plays there so often, but interstate teams have played and won there many times.
Sydney in 2012? Brisbane x3. Adelaide x2. West Coast x2.
If you want to beat the best, you have to beat them at the cauldron. That's how it is, and how it always should be.
Hosting the Grand Final in Perth or Adelaide would be an indictment on what it actually means to win a Grand Final.
To win a flag, you need to win in Melbourne. Winning an AFL premiership goes hand-in-hand with winning in Melbourne. It's the ultimate honour.
I get that people who didn't grow up in Melbourne don't understand that, but it's astonishing how much some of you are undervaluing how important the sport is to this city. I'm sure it's important to other cities, but AFL is *ours*.
Interstate fans should embrace this and take it head-on, not have a winge that their towns don't host the final match of the year.
If you want to be the best, you need to come to the emerald city and snatch it away from us. We'll happily give it to you.
Made me laugh seeing people from Perth make up fake stories about how Victoria couldn't handle an all-interstate GF. That's just bullshit. We *want* to see the two best teams play, irrespective of where they're from.
Come here and we'll embrace it. Just don't have a cry that it should have been played in your small little city because you finished higher on the ladder.
Want the premiership cup? COME AND TAKE IT!
That's what it's about.
WOWEEEEEE
This goes well beyond "tradition". There's a romantic affiliation that Melburnians have with the stadium, the sport was born here, and so it should be respected as such as hosting the final game between the two best clubs of the season.
It shouldn't be about "home" vs "away".
Winning on the MCG on Grand Final day is the absolute best thing you can do. Hawthorn has mastered the stadium because it plays there so often, but interstate teams have played and won there many times.
Sydney in 2012? Brisbane x3. Adelaide x2. West Coast x2.
If you want to beat the best, you have to beat them at the cauldron. That's how it is, and how it always should be.
Hosting the Grand Final in Perth or Adelaide would be an indictment on what it actually means to win a Grand Final.
To win a flag, you need to win in Melbourne. Winning an AFL premiership goes hand-in-hand with winning in Melbourne. It's the ultimate honour.
I get that people who didn't grow up in Melbourne don't understand that, but it's astonishing how much some of you are undervaluing how important the sport is to this city. I'm sure it's important to other cities, but AFL is *ours*.
Interstate fans should embrace this and take it head-on, not have a winge that their towns don't host the final match of the year.
If you want to be the best, you need to come to the emerald city and snatch it away from us. We'll happily give it to you.
Made me laugh seeing people from Perth make up fake stories about how Victoria couldn't handle an all-interstate GF. That's just bullshit. We *want* to see the two best teams play, irrespective of where they're from.
Come here and we'll embrace it. Just don't have a cry that it should have been played in your small little city because you finished higher on the ladder.
Want the premiership cup? COME AND TAKE IT!
That's what it's about.
WOWEEEEEE
- Sep 5, 2007
- 16,277
- 13,189
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
- Other Teams
- Liverpool, Nashville predators
If you look at official home grounds, only Hawthorn, Collingwood, Richmond and Melbourne call it home. That is less than 25% of the competition, therefore the likelihood is that it will be a neutral venue for most GFs
Either that or we just play it in Launceston and be done with it.
Either that or we just play it in Launceston and be done with it.
How do we guarantee a neutral venue each year? The location needs to be determined well before the prelims are decided. Rotated location, sure. But guaranteed neutral - realistically not sure how that can happen.
- Mar 25, 2003
- 35,681
- 28,341
Teams that are legitimately in contention need to lobby the AFL hard to get 3 games a year at the MCG. Wouldn't have helped the Eagles in 2015 as we weren't considered a chance. There is no doubt the wide expanses of the G offer a very unique playing field. I noticed in 2015 interstate teams played Etihad 23 times and MCG 13 times. More games in Melbourne (not getting sent to Tassie, Darwin, Cairns etc.) is what the interstate teams should be pushing for, and in particular more games at the MCG.
If that doesn't work, or if it doesn't work well enough, then interstate teams might have to get a bit inventive at the moment. If that means moving a home game to the G to get more match time on the ground then so be it. I know in the past it hasn't been much of an issue, and in the future it might not be, but what we have at the moment is a team (Hawthorn) who are very good, and have a game plan that is very effective on the MCG and teams like mine need to plan for that.
Every team should have a training venue which has the exact dimensions of the MCG. I'm pretty sure the Eagles are in the process of ensuring this for us.
As for moving the GF.... The GF will be at the G for some time to come. Contractually I think it's there till 2035 (?) and contracts aside, the logistics of a GF being played at the home teams venue on a weeks notice is just stupid. Not even worth considering. I don't think the AFL is very interested in a rotational system for the GF, and even if it were 10 out of 18 GF's would be expected to be played on the G anyway.
If that doesn't work, or if it doesn't work well enough, then interstate teams might have to get a bit inventive at the moment. If that means moving a home game to the G to get more match time on the ground then so be it. I know in the past it hasn't been much of an issue, and in the future it might not be, but what we have at the moment is a team (Hawthorn) who are very good, and have a game plan that is very effective on the MCG and teams like mine need to plan for that.
Every team should have a training venue which has the exact dimensions of the MCG. I'm pretty sure the Eagles are in the process of ensuring this for us.
As for moving the GF.... The GF will be at the G for some time to come. Contractually I think it's there till 2035 (?) and contracts aside, the logistics of a GF being played at the home teams venue on a weeks notice is just stupid. Not even worth considering. I don't think the AFL is very interested in a rotational system for the GF, and even if it were 10 out of 18 GF's would be expected to be played on the G anyway.
TBH, I'd feel a bit funny about us winning a GF if it was held in Perth, unless it was a Derby GF.
Last edited:
I can't be bothered wading through 16 pages so it may have been said, but...
The AFL runs a business. The AFL have a contractual obligation until 2032 to play the Grand Final at the MCG, so nothing will change before then.
I doubt it will change after then as:
1. The AFL has poor leverage with the MCC since selling off Waverley. If the MCC double the rent the AFL can't play 90 games at the Docklands, and supporters of Melbourne-based clubs won't want to travel to Geelong for home games. So a compromise will be met and the GF will be non-negotiable for the MCC.
2. Playing a GF in a smaller stadium means reduced revenue to the AFL and potentially reduces the value and subscriptions of AFL memberships.
3. Old boys political networks will hold sway. It was the decisive factor in killing off Waverley. Both the MCC and Victorian Government will fight tooth and nail for the status quo.
4. The AFL won't revert to the MCG being a more neutral venue as it has been a deliberate policy to rationalise stadiums in Melbourne.
The AFL will do what is good for bu$ine$$.
The AFL runs a business. The AFL have a contractual obligation until 2032 to play the Grand Final at the MCG, so nothing will change before then.
I doubt it will change after then as:
1. The AFL has poor leverage with the MCC since selling off Waverley. If the MCC double the rent the AFL can't play 90 games at the Docklands, and supporters of Melbourne-based clubs won't want to travel to Geelong for home games. So a compromise will be met and the GF will be non-negotiable for the MCC.
2. Playing a GF in a smaller stadium means reduced revenue to the AFL and potentially reduces the value and subscriptions of AFL memberships.
3. Old boys political networks will hold sway. It was the decisive factor in killing off Waverley. Both the MCC and Victorian Government will fight tooth and nail for the status quo.
4. The AFL won't revert to the MCG being a more neutral venue as it has been a deliberate policy to rationalise stadiums in Melbourne.
The AFL will do what is good for bu$ine$$.
Robco
Team Captain
Maybe there wouldn't be an advantage if Weste
So change every other field because West Australians didn't think to make theirs wide enough?
Similar threads
