Travel Increase for Vic Clubs

[The Punter]

It is possible to have a draw with every Victorian team travelling interstate for five away games (not counting moved home games and their opponents). I've proved it with my draw for next year, posted on my blog about a month ago.

The fact that the AFL is using the word minimum does not fill me full of faith that the draw, in this respect, will be equitable. Some will travel five times, others may travel eight times.

It can be done - five interstate away trips for all Victorian teams, with at least one visit to each state.

 

[THE EQUALIZER]

Now that this (5 away games interstate for Victorian clubs) non-negotiable has been locked in, perhaps the AFL should ensure that every team plays in every state where teams are.

It shouldn't be the case that of your 5 interstate games that you play 2 in Queensland and New South Wales, but none in W.A.

Every team playing in every state should be the next non-negotiable to be ticked off.

 

[EB&W Pieman]

In the wake of the thrashings occrring late last season (and I'm not including the last quarter of the Grand final) the AFL discussed a graded draw. So GWS and GCS might play the top teams only once, with lots of double-bungers against each other, Port, Brisbane, Richmond and [Carlton and Essendon] (just kidding).

This needs to be factored in as well.

 

[MarkT2]

Now that this (5 away games interstate for Victorian clubs) non-negotiable has been locked in, perhaps the AFL should ensure that every team plays in every state where teams are.



It shouldn't be the case that of your 5 interstate games that you play 2 in Queensland and New South Wales, but none in W.A.



Every team playing in every state should be the next non-negotiable to be ticked off.

Isn't that just the same argument as an evenly split draw in general? We all know that won't happen due to fixture lock-ins like ANZAC Day, Collingwood V Carlton x 2, Showdown x 2, etc. There os no more or less reason to evenly split travel destinations as there is oponents in general and as soon as you have guaranteed fixture events and return matches you can't have an even schedule.

In any case, Hawthorn doesn't want to play Collingwood or Essendon in Tassie. Why would the AFL schedule it?

 

[legend166]

If you asked every sporting club in the world whether they'd rather hop on a plane and travel 50% of the season; or travel 20% of the season but only have genuine 'home advantage' for 20% of the season, I guarantee the vast majority would take the latter option.

 

[PTizzle]

Interstae clubs are pretty much gifted a finals berth if they are anywhere near half decent.

Nice troll.

The only Vic club with a distinct homeground advantage is Geelong, apart from that it's just a heap of neutral games vs some games swayed in a teams favour due to the crowd.

It's a national game and with so many Vic clubs it's the only fair way to have it really. I think having 5 interstate games a year for Vic clubs is very fair, the only thing they need to do now is try to get a few more interstate games at the MCG for interstate clubs who can never seem to get them. Don't want a repeat of 2010's Freo situation (not like they would have beaten the Cats regardless, but it was still a bit of a farce).

Good clubs can and will have to win interstate to be in the upper echelon of the ladder. Vic or not.

 

[yibbida]

I read an interesting book recently. It's called 'Scorecasting', and it explains a lot of the influences on winning and losing in sport. It didn't touch on AFL but most of its conclusions were valid across numerous other team sports (NFL, basketball, baseball, soccer, hockey) so it's not such a stretch to apply them to AFL.

Home ground advantage is primarily a result of unconscious bias on the part of umpires. Umpires are affected by the crowd. If the crowd is larger or closer to the pitch, the bias is increased. Travel and scheduling are also relevant, but exercise a much smaller influence.

In AFL, the biggest question isn't whether each team has to travel an equal number of times. The question is whether, because of the way the teams are distributed across Australia, some teams get a better run with the umpires, on average, than others.

As others have pointed out, matches between Victorian teams are more likely to be 'neutral', whereas interstate teams have a genuine home ground advantage. But interstate teams also have a genuine away ground disadvantage. It'd be an interesting exercise to see which teams come out ahead.

Good post. Be interested to see the follow up.

 

[Dumpstar]

The 'who travels where, when, how many times, against who' is so overplayed it's not funny. If you are good you will win if you played on the ****ing moon.

 

[MarkT2]

Once again the best 2 teams made the GF and the best 8 teams made the finals. Injuries can derail a team but travel hasn't assisted or hindered anyone from making the finals yet. Injuries may have kept Freo from the finals but travel didn't put WCE out of the top 4 and it didn't stop Sydney finishing in the the spot appropriate to their ranking. Nor did a lack of travel help Collingwood finish on top and it wasn't games at Skilled that made Geelong the best team of the lot.

As for evening the burden, whatever it may be, I am all for it but it wont change anything at all - not even the complaining.

 

[Hipster Doofus]

We travelled 6 times this year anyway so i don't see how making it 5 is a bad thing??

 

[manicmagpie]

Now that this (5 away games interstate for Victorian clubs) non-negotiable has been locked in, perhaps the AFL should ensure that every team plays in every state where teams are.

It shouldn't be the case that of your 5 interstate games that you play 2 in Queensland and New South Wales, but none in W.A.

Every team playing in every state should be the next non-negotiable to be ticked off.

To be fair to the AFL, they have already been doing this, only with little fanfare.

Going back ten years, there are only two examples of a team not being fixtured in Perth at least once, the most recent of which being Hawthorn back in 2004.

Similarly, there are only two examples of teams skipping an Adelaide game, with the most recent St Kilda in 2005.

This year was the first time there were 2 Qld teams, and everyone played in Qld at least once.

So we have had 6 seasons in a row with every team playing at least once in every state that has at least two teams.

 

[SirJimi05]

Stop trolling jimi

Trolling? wtf.

One can't have an opinion anymore?

Melbourne teams play mostly neutral games with no advantage.

Interstate clubs play 8-11 games with a pronounced hom ground advantage.

This is before getting into the ridiculous amount of bias interstae teams get from the umpires.

If they are any good they should win most of those games.

Sounds like you are upset because you follow Brisbane and don't like anyone having this opinion about them.

 

[JapanFootball]

What's the big deal with traveling in this day and age anyway? Airlines these days are very comfortable, especially if you have money.

 

[Cousin Jed]

Incorrect. You need to lear about tone of phrase Jimi.

Interstae clubs are pretty much gifted a finals berth if they are anywhere near half decent.

Can be interpreted as trolling

The home ground/state advantage interstate teams have is greater than the advantage of only travelling 5 times

Cannot.

 

[Redlight]

Will this be the end of the pathetic 'Pies never travel' myth that's so common on Big Footy?

Apparently not.

Already I see a couple of early entries in the new "The Pies will get all the soft interstate games" theory.

 

[NYJetsfor2029]

Trolling? wtf.

One can't have an opinion anymore?

Melbourne teams play mostly neutral games with no advantage.

Interstate clubs play 8-11 games with a pronounced hom ground advantage.

This is before getting into the ridiculous amount of bias interstae teams get from the umpires.

If they are any good they should win most of those games.

Sounds like you are upset because you follow Brisbane and don't like anyone having this opinion about them.

or disadvantage, meaning if the Vic clubs are only half decent they should win half of these (~8) and then they should be fine picking off a few of the weaker non-Vic clubs, and Bingo! Vic clubs are pretty much handed a finals place!

 

[Syd]

The only Vic club with a distinct homeground advantage is Geelong, apart from that it's just a heap of neutral games vs some games swayed in a teams favour due to the crowd.

Depends, say Collingwood are playing North Melbourne at the G

Crowd of say 60,000 so 40,000 pies fans vs 20,000 North fans
Ergo, the point regarding crowds affecting umpiring would give an advantage to the Pies

Collingwood train at the ground and play the majority of their games at the ground. North, not so much.
Again, another partial advantage to the pies.

Both clubs have no dislocation regarding travel.
Thats a neutral.

So while not an absolute home ground advantage, the idea that all games in Melbourne between Melbourne teams are 'neutral' isn't exactly right either.

 

[Rohan25]

Works well for Collingwood. An extra interstate game at the expense of a Melbourne game works well for us. I wonder which Melbourne based club will miss out on their home game bonanza against us.

 

[tazaa]

Hawks, Roos, Deez and Tigers sell games interstate. How will this affect them?

 

[Kwality]

Will this be the end of the pathetic 'Pies never travel' myth that's so common on Big Footy?

Apparently not.

Already I see a couple of early entries in the new "The Pies will get all the soft interstate games" theory.

The myth is a tangent but:
Going to be hard to ignore when your club offers an 18 game package, mine only offers 11 .. maths not a strong suit!

How big an advantage is that, +65%, & still you put your money into pubs & pokies whilst we support WA footy - got any WA footy recruits on the list? That'd be thanks mate.

The end of the myth can only happen when you travel a min of 7 games every year.

 

[TheGhostOfJohnBelushi]

We travelled 6 times this year anyway so i don't see how making it 5 is a bad thing??

Technically, you had 4 away games interstate and another 2 home games you flogged off to Darwin and Cairns.

 

[pavilion103]

Stuff all your whining and complaining.

As someone said
Vic teams = almost all neutral games
Interstate teams = home advantage/away disadvantage

If your team is good enough you will win games. End of story.

Do you think Geelong gives a stuff who they play and where? They just get on with it and win.

Stop your pathetic complaining.

 

[Connoisseur]

If you asked every sporting club in the world whether they'd rather hop on a plane and travel 50% of the season; or travel 20% of the season but only have genuine 'home advantage' for 20% of the season, I guarantee the vast majority would take the latter option.

And?

What do you propose we do about it?

Schedule games between Richmond and Melbourne up in Sydney at the SCG to ease your sense of injustice?

It is what it is, you don't like it you can always opt to join another league that is to your liking.

 

[magic_johnson!]

Technically, you had 4 away games interstate and another 2 home games you flogged off to Darwin and Cairns.

I dislike how the AFL 'help' those who sell games interstate. Richmond had just 4 away interstate matches, Hawthorn the same (if not 3?), i can't be bothered looking it up but i doubt WB had more than 4 interstate away games. Geelong had 6 interstate matches, so Victorian supporters only got to see them play 16 times, the same amount as Richmond supporters got to see Richmond in Victoria, even after they whored themselves out.

If they want to sell games interstate, good for them, but they shouldn't be given any less interstate away games because of it.

 

[Connoisseur]

I dislike how the AFL 'help' those who sell games interstate. Richmond had just 4 away interstate matches, Hawthorn the same (if not 3?), i can't be bothered looking it up but i doubt WB had more than 4 interstate away games. Geelong had 6 interstate matches, so Victorian supporters only got to see them play 16 times, the same amount as Richmond supporters got to see Richmond in Victoria, even after they whored themselves out.

If they want to sell games interstate, good for them, but they shouldn't be given any less interstate away games because of it.

I whole heartedly concur with this post.

It's a joke that teams like Hawthorn are able to set up a 'Second Home' away from home -which is also a nice little earner to boot- and count it as an 'Interstate Match'.

Joke, an absolute joke.