- Banned
- #101
How can you talk about football for a living and be like "yeah nah I only watch the Victorian teams"?
That is a failure.
Vic bias and the media
- Thread starter schmuttt
- Start date
- Tagged users None
That is a failure.
That's not the point of discussion, which is concentration of vic teams in the national media. Yeah I get that wc is bigger than stk or dogs but not nearly as large as the whole vic supporter base.
I agree but it's all we got unless you only watch the state based shows like Footy WA and SA. To be honest such is my thirst for footy that I watch them anyway and sometimes enjoy some of the analysis like behind the ball set ups that lead to a goal, mark etc. for example.
The King!
Chosen One
More coverage on one pies free than the endless stream of crap Sydney copped in 2016]
Underwhelming coverage of the eagles this year
If it’s to attack like they have with the crows it gets coverage, but meanwhile essendon are sure brave
Fox footy is a vfl channel mostly
Underwhelming coverage of the eagles this year
If it’s to attack like they have with the crows it gets coverage, but meanwhile essendon are sure brave
Fox footy is a vfl channel mostly
Have not seen the Victorian media talk much about the very very obvious holding the ball free kick to West Coast 15 metres out from goal that was not called either, a non-decision that would have definitely lead to a West Coast goal.
Mazza44
Here come the boys from old Fitzroy
Thank god we got Hodge this year because otherwise (apart from some love for Fagan) we would’ve been irrelevant in the media again.
There was nary a mention of the 2016 grand final umpiring in the media, surprisingly.
No you also got a bit of coverage when it looked like Dane Beams was going to move back to Victoria.....
- Banned
- #112
Oh Hodgey!
- Banned
- #113
[
Yea because channel 7 doesn't do that every year.
just look at the narratives of Jesse Hogan and Mitch McGovern's potential trades
both under contract
both looking at going to clubs that are lower than their current club
totally different analyses of the two
There was an article titled 'WHY WOULD HOGAN WANT TO GO TO FREMANTLE?' - Melbourne is on the up, Fremantle a basket care.. Why would he do it? and then it talks about how he is worth 2 first round draft picks
Meanwhile no one has questioned why McGovern would want to go to Carlton of all places in the same way - (and while yes Hogan has shown more than McGovern and thus demand a bigger trade) there is talk in the media of McGovern being only a 2nd round pick because he wants to leave and that's that.
There is only one real big difference between the two
The direction the players are wanting to move - One wants to leave Victoria - One wants to go there
Look how the narratives will always side with what ever deal is best for the Victorian team
both under contract
both looking at going to clubs that are lower than their current club
totally different analyses of the two
There was an article titled 'WHY WOULD HOGAN WANT TO GO TO FREMANTLE?' - Melbourne is on the up, Fremantle a basket care.. Why would he do it? and then it talks about how he is worth 2 first round draft picks
Meanwhile no one has questioned why McGovern would want to go to Carlton of all places in the same way - (and while yes Hogan has shown more than McGovern and thus demand a bigger trade) there is talk in the media of McGovern being only a 2nd round pick because he wants to leave and that's that.
There is only one real big difference between the two
The direction the players are wanting to move - One wants to leave Victoria - One wants to go there
Look how the narratives will always side with what ever deal is best for the Victorian team
A simple flow-on effect from the creation of a 'national' league that is really just the VFL with a few bits and pieces nailed on the sides.
What does it have to do with Vic bias though?
They showed Hardwick for a good 5 seconds on-screen after Collingwood eliminated Richmond. Multiple shots of dejected Richmond players before that. I agree the focus should be on the winning team and we shouldn't have to see shots of coaches in the losing box right after the siren. But this happens in a lot of games, especially close ones. In this case, the team who went in as favourites and led for the majority of the match threw the game away in the final minutes. It's understandable that Channel 7 would want to capture the shattered emotions of an under pressure and much maligned coach who got so close to the cup only to falter. I would have also preferred if West Coast's post-siren celebrations got centre stage, but it's a bit of a leap to say that the only reason that anonymous bloke in the Channel 7 control room went to a shot of Buckley post-siren is because of some anti-interstate team conspiracy.
Does always give me a laugh seeing supporters from outside of Victoria crying about it, though. The whole AFL world is against them apparently. Fight the power, boys... fight the power.
Did have to laugh when after completely ignoring them in the run into prelim week the Vicco's suddenly decided that maybe they did have to throw some coverage WC way considering they'd actually, y'know, made a GF and were in with a fair shot at winning it. I'm sure they were all probably pretty peeved that their Melbourne fairy-tale was spoiled.
Pretty telling that you've got no-one from a non-Victorian background in AFL 360's team of Richo, Scott, Dermie, Dunstall Nick, Jack, Lewis, Bob, Mclure and King. Maybe they get a bit of an out considering the non-Vicco's probably aren't in Victoria but impossible for them to argue there isn't a massive Victorian leaning there.
Pretty telling that you've got no-one from a non-Victorian background in AFL 360's team of Richo, Scott, Dermie, Dunstall Nick, Jack, Lewis, Bob, Mclure and King. Maybe they get a bit of an out considering the non-Vicco's probably aren't in Victoria but impossible for them to argue there isn't a massive Victorian leaning there.
- Jun 5, 2004
- 9,224
- 6,921
- AFL Club
- West Coast
This.
We're 30 years and change into this "national competition" but the crux is it was borne out of the VFL.
It was a massive ego slap when the Eagles won in 1992 and despite a few Vic sides getting up through to the turn of the century, there was a glut of non-Vic sides taking flags. There was the clinging on to the Fitzroy and South Melbourne portions of 4 flags but understand that for a decade and a half there were 10 cups that left Victoria. Remember the Victorian football crisis?
Then Geelong turned up and the fairytale from the Lions and Bloods could now be lived through the Cats. And while Sydney snagged one in the middle, the next decade is about Victorian dominance and then the Bulldogs/Richmond fairytales. Melbourne and then Collingwood then become this year's versions and rightfully so. We're still a national comp in its formative years and we've only in the last decade had the first push back to "VFL/Vic pride" after the non-Vic dominance.
The media just go where they think the numbers are. After so many non-Vic clubs shitting their pants in GFs, why would they take another one (with history of it) seriously?
It'd be great to have all encompassing unbiased coverage but we're not there yet. It will take time. Hell, it took close to 20 years for the league to change its MCG final each week rule.
The non-Vic clubs need to pull their fingers out. It's tough but the Eagles have shown you can do it (once again, leave it to us to show the way). Dominate the comp again and we'll be out of this current Vic love push and get things back to where if should be -cups all around Australia and only the occasional one in Victoria. Then the media can either evolve with it or retread the crisis mode talk, and sooner or later that'll get old.
Gralin
Admin
- Admin
- #120
Half the Vic clubs wouldn't agree with you.
They'd say most of the coverage goes to the big four, plus Geelong, Swans and then whoever the biggest basket case is.
I gave up on all the footy shows years ago when I realised you don't get real post game analysis or discussion, you can tell they don't watch half the games, they kick their topics for the week or season and just rehash every week.
When you get guys like Robbo and Whatley and Healey and Roos as hosts they talk about their teams as much as possible
I find I enjoy the footy more the less attention I pay to the media
You said vfl360 thats where you list me.
The King!
Chosen One
I agree with your last point
I would say it’s more about the pies, dons, tigers, blues than anyone else and yeah basket case a little bit]
I just find out coverage is so inaccuarate that’s what shits me
You are right I’m sure every fans thinks their own club is hard done by
- Banned
- #123
And now we give alms to the Victorian minnows to keep them afloat. Fair enough, I guess.
Maybe it’s all part of the plan so non Vic sides hate the Vics?
Like a post above says, non Vic clubs start winning a few flags then they will have no choice.
3 non Vic sides made the 8 this year, for it to turn their focus you need 5-6 non Vic sides in the 8 and that is bloody hard to achieve.
Like a post above says, non Vic clubs start winning a few flags then they will have no choice.
3 non Vic sides made the 8 this year, for it to turn their focus you need 5-6 non Vic sides in the 8 and that is bloody hard to achieve.
- Banned
- #125
The "Big Story" seems to be always filtered through a Victorian prism.
I'm not sure critiquing is the same as "crying". After all, WC just won a flag so how much do you think we're crying? It does however shine a light on the weird blindspot of the Victorian media. Even as a Victorian, don't you expect them to know something about how the premiership side won it? Isn't that a pretty low bar?
Similar threads
- Poll
