Autopsy The Stats Don’t Lie: VicBIAS By The Numbers - An Empirical Analysis

Do you agree there is inherent umpiring bias toward Vic based teams?

  • I barrack for a Vic based team: Yes, always has been, always will be. Suck it up.

  • I barrack for a Vic based team: Yes. It’s a disgrace. I demand a fairer comp.

  • I barrack for a Vic based team: No. It’s a myth. Stats are the work of the devil.

  • I barrack for a non-Vic based team: Lol. Tell me something I don’t know.

  • I barrack for a non-Vic team: I like to cry about anything to do with the AFL because they are just


Results are only viewable after voting.

Remove this Banner Ad

"Winning" the free kick count is a bit disingenuous though, isn't it?
I would say 7 of those counts are even enough that they shouldn't have made any difference to the result.
So 6 could be considered lopsided enough that they MAY have impacted the results, but that does nothing to prove whether or not those free kicks were genuinely there, or how many were missed both ways.
Out of the 6 lopsided counts, the team who lost the free kick count won 3 and lost 3.

The whole argument is pretty inconclusive really.

86% of free kick counts going to the Victorian side feels pretty conclusive to me. Also the fact that there are any games where the lopsided free kick count can affect the result is a massive stain on the AFL, and whenever there is a lopsided free kick count it is always against the non-Victorian team.
 
"Winning" the free kick count is a bit disingenuous though, isn't it?
I would say 7 of those counts are even enough that they shouldn't have made any difference to the result.
So 6 could be considered lopsided enough that they MAY have impacted the results, but that does nothing to prove whether or not those free kicks were genuinely there, or how many were missed both ways.
Out of the 6 lopsided counts, the team who lost the free kick count won 3 and lost 3.

The whole argument is pretty inconclusive really.
Even if we go with your logic it’s six lopsided counts towards a Victorian team and ZERO to a non-Victorian team. Must just be a coincidence though, right?
 

Log in to remove this ad.

The AFL couldn't sustain all the Victorian clubs without the interstate sides. We actually sell out games. Not sell off games.

This is part of your problem right there. You Crows and non Victorian supporters (at least in the traditional football states) keep going to games and giving the AFL and by association the SANFL your money, there is no doubt the AFL probably views the SA and WA as cash cows and none of those clubs ever will stand up to the AFL and the commission, so they are under no inclination to try appease your clubs (or address some of your concerns)
 
Oh, so you're saying you have a large geographical advantage then.

Seems like that'll even things out nicely then.
I'm saying Victoria has more footy teams than they can sustain without the interstate sides, and if the interstate sides left some of the victorian clubs would fold. North is a disaster and would be gone before you could say "north has no supporters".
 
This is part of your problem right there. You Crows and non Victorian supporters (at least in the traditional football states) keep going to games and giving the AFL and by association the SANFL your money, there is no doubt the AFL probably views the SA and WA as cash cows and none of those clubs ever will stand up to the AFL and the commission, so they are under no inclination to try appease your clubs (or address some of your concerns)

So because we pay money to support our clubs that means we deserve to be cheated?
 
I'm saying Victoria has more footy teams than they can sustain without the interstate sides, and if the interstate sides left some of the victorian clubs would fold. North is a disaster and would be gone before you could say "north has no supporters".

This is a thread about bias.

Interstate teams fans deflect when there's an advantage going their way.
 
This is a thread about bias.
Yeah, and Victorian supporters said if we don't like the bias leave the comp. Hence my reply as to what would happen if the interstate sides left the comp. Maybe don't argue that we should just leave the comp or put up with it?
 
I'm saying Victoria has more footy teams than they can sustain without the interstate sides, and if the interstate sides left some of the victorian clubs would fold. North is a disaster and would be gone before you could say "north has no supporters".
I've heard this before.

Could you explain which non-Vic clubs would survive without the help from the AFL?
In other words which clubs need the Vic clubs to survive, how many would survive if all the Vic clubs pulled the pin?
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

So because we pay money to support our clubs that means we deserve to be cheated?

Well no, but as I say, unless the 4 SA and WA clubs try to get together and form a massive protest and or mass supporter led boycott against the AFL and home games, nothing is going to change/the status quo will remain .

I have been on record staying many times how I think it's time we abolish the arachic Grand Final at the MCG contract and let the team that finishes highest on the ladder who qualifies for it host it on their home city.

Also its actually the Swans and the Northern/Expansion state clubs that get the most preferential treatment and looked after by the AFL, it has to be said.
 
Yeah, and Victorian supporters said if we don't like the bias leave the comp. Hence my reply as to what would happen if the interstate sides left the comp. Maybe don't argue that we should just leave the comp or put up with it?

It's a two way street.

You joined our comp don't forget and we don't appreciate comments from many non Vic Club supporters wanting several Victorian clubs to fold/merge/relocate like North Melbourne etc
 
Royal Commission/Operation Heartland. How many times does this have to be explained?
Always Sunny Reaction GIF
 
I know you're just having a bit of a laugh, but I don't think anyone is claiming Geelong is not in Vic, but I think everyone except maybe Geelong supporters can accept that they are the one Vic team that has a genuine home ground advantage against other Vic teams.
For all intents and purposes, they may as well be counted as an interstate side.

If you asked all Vic team supporters if they'd prefer to play Geelong in Geelong, or any other interstate side at their home venue, I reckon Geelong would be one of the last ones chosen most times.
Of course I'm just having a laugh. The post from Dave Warner was pretty easy to follow. It's not news to me though.

It's an uneven playing field. Just like the draft, father/son, academy, travel and fixtures. But is this anything new?

Nope.

Just have to accept some things in footy are great, others are dodgy as ****. No need getting all worked up over it though. Seems like wasted energy to me.

People who have followed footy long enough understand that the AFL wasn't a planned competition. It's going to have flaws. It's a Frankenstein of two leagues going broke, a bit of Americana and one particular CEO who was way out of his depth.

It is what it is. I still like it though.
 
So they've played 5 away games, sold 1 home game and played North Melbourne, another Victorian team that sold a home game to play at a neutral venue because they aren't sustainable. + this week coming up which I didn't include. Sounds about right. 5 + 2 sold games + this week. Oh and Geelong if you are dumb enough to think Geelong isn't in Victoria.
In the context of home cooked umpiring which this whole sooky thread is about, yeah Geelong does count.
 
I am going to go with every Grand Final of the 21st century played at the MCG between a Victorian and non-Victorian side

2001 - Brisbane vs Essendon - 22 to 19
2002 - Brisbane vs Collingwood - 16 to 24
2003 - Brisbane vs Collingwood - 13 to 18
2007 - Port Adelaide vs Geelong - 25 to 28
2012 - Sydney vs Hawthorn - 12 to 21
2013 - Fremantle vs Hawthorn - 14 to 15

2014 - Sydney vs Hawthorn - 14 to 14
2015 - West Coast vs Hawthorn - 13 to 14
2016 - Sydney vs Bulldogs - 8 to 20
2017 - Adelaide vs Richmond - 19 to 24
2018 - West Coast to Collingwood - 13 to 20
2019 - GWS to Richmond - 13 to 20

2022 - Sydney vs Geelong - 18 to 17

So of the 13 Grand Finals between Victorian and Non-Victorian clubs at the MCG since the 21st century has begun the Victorian side has won the free kick count 10 times, with the non-Victorian clubs winning it twice, and there being one draw as well.

So the Victorian clubs win the free kick count 76.9% of the Grand Finals and the non-Victorian clubs win it 15.3% of the time.

Edited as I made a mistake with the Sydney/Geelong Grand Final.
Yep those 7 extra free kicks Richmond got in 2019 were the difference 🤦‍♂️
 
So because we pay money to support our clubs that means we deserve to be cheated?

You get gifted priority picks every year because the AFL knows the Swans can't afford to miss finals more than one season consecutively or they'll be back to the 1992 death rattle.

Tell me more about this "cheating" 🤣🤣
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Autopsy The Stats Don’t Lie: VicBIAS By The Numbers - An Empirical Analysis

Back
Top