Mega Thread VICBias - Genuine Discussion Part 2

[skinnyP]

The argument generally goes, you can’t have Collingwood play WC and Freo away every year, regardless of whether they meet once or twice because it’s not fair. You have to balance the home and away games between individual teams. But when you point out it’s unfair for West Aussie teams to travel 10 times to their four, then the response is ‘geography dude’.

If teams like Collingwood and Richmond, who traditionally get as many as 16 games at home, we’re forced to travel twice to WA and SA regardless of whether they played once or twice, it would go some way to evening the travel burden, given smaller clubs tend to be shunted around anyway. And as a bonus, the economics support it.

Vic teams aren't responsible for you guys building your city so far away from everyone else.

 

[Carringbush2010]

think you might be forgetting that Interstate supporters are just as invested in their clubs as you are in your teams.

Like I said, if one doesn't like the inequities, then vote with your feet and remotes.

Just coz non vic fans are invested in their clubs created to compete in this league doesn't give them the right to demand detriment to foundation clubs in the name of equity.

Foundation clubs and their fans were here first.

Probably a lot of Interstate supporters have been supporting their teams longer than a lot of people supporting Vic teams.

Well that's just speculation, seems likely there's more foundation club fans given it's the biggest market.

I have been supporting WC since inception so that is 36 years, ,,,,how long have you been supporting Collingwood?

Since the mid 70s, so about or near on 50 years, which is irrelevant anyway.

 

[JackOutback]

Getting a bit personal this thread, and I'm guilty of being snarky.

Apologies to bzparkes and SC_Power, no excuses for that.

Non vic fans must understand though, as fans of our clubs we didn't want the vfl expansion, none of us did.

Yeah you could argue we needed the wafc to buy a competition licence and we now have non vic clubs.

By and large most vic club fans understand the inequities of travel and the GF at the G, but that doesn't mean you can all just walk in and demand mechanisms that are detriment to vic clubs and their fans in the name equity.

Remember we were here first, so you don't have the right to just demand mergers / culling / extra travel for vic clubs (which means less those club fans can see their team play, and that's why it's not popular).

What we have is an expanded vfl, we all have it, I'd rather just a vic competition, but we don't and my club is in it, so I accept it. It's an impasse.

Non vic fans have choice, you can still snub this league that you all hate so much and follow your original clubs in their top tier competitions, vic fans don't have that choice.

So if you really really hate this league so much vote with your feet and remotes and follow your original clubs or just accept what we have, coz it ain't gonna change for the purposes of equity at the detriment of foundation clubs.

Peace out.

We absolutely can call for mechanisms that are to the detriment of Victorian clubs in the name of equality. That’s how equality works. Women didn’t get the vote without the value of men’s votes diminishing from 100 per cent to 50 per cent. That’s why I keep repeating the phrase ‘equality looks like discrimination to those accustomed to privilege’. You see being treated the same as others to your detriment.

Now, I know your comeback will be, ‘you joined an expanded Victorian league, deal with it’. To which I would say, you follow a team in an national league, deal with it’.

 

[SC_Power]

Getting a bit personal this thread, and I'm guilty of being snarky.

Apologies to bzparkes and SC_Power, no excuses for that.

Non vic fans must understand though, as fans of our clubs we didn't want the vfl expansion, none of us did.

Yeah you could argue we needed the wafc to buy a competition licence and we now have non vic clubs.

By and large most vic club fans understand the inequities of travel and the GF at the G, but that doesn't mean you can all just walk in and demand mechanisms that are detriment to vic clubs and their fans in the name equity.

Remember we were here first, so you don't have the right to just demand mergers / culling / extra travel for vic clubs (which means less those club fans can see their team play, and that's why it's not popular).

What we have is an expanded vfl, we all have it, I'd rather just a vic competition, but we don't and my club is in it, so I accept it. It's an impasse.

Non vic fans have choice, you can still snub this league that you all hate so much and follow your original clubs in their top tier competitions, vic fans don't have that choice.

So if you really really hate this league so much vote with your feet and remotes and follow your original clubs or just accept what we have, coz it ain't gonna change for the purposes of equity at the detriment of foundation clubs.

Peace out.

Agree to disagree, but kudos for the post.

 

[LoungeLizard]

We absolutely can call for mechanisms that are to the detriment of Victorian clubs in the name of equality. That’s how equality works. Women didn’t get the vote without the value of men’s votes diminishing from 100 per cent to 50 per cent. That’s why I keep repeating the phrase ‘equality looks like discrimination to those accustomed to privilege’. You see being treated the same as others to your detriment.

Now, I know your comeback will be, ‘you joined an expanded Victorian league, deal with it’. To which I would say, you follow a team in an national league, deal with it’.

You are not going to stop are you?
Explain something to me, how can a club that is so hard done by, be the 2nd most successful club in the league?

Do you think you maybe just be sooking about nothing, or you have an inferiority complex.

Because it sounds to me West Coast are not doing too bad, Sydney do ok, Brisbane do ok, so maybe you just like to have a sook and maybe it's you who want the unfair advantages and it's not the Vics.

 

[Carringbush2010]

Now, I know your comeback will be, ‘you joined an expanded Victorian league, deal with it’. To which I would say, you follow a team in an national league, deal with it’.

Well it seems the league is in my favour, because it's and expanded vic league, and it ain't gonna change anytime soon, so yeah deal with it.

OR

You could all vote with your feet and remotes, enjoy your original club and league and we get to enjoy ours (except me coz I live in Perth, not alone, but there's not many of us)

 

[Lockyer24]

Only 4 interstate teams fly in a plane to play away to us each season, but the Eagles have up to 10 teams have to travel all the way over there for their home games. What a leg up.

Hopefully this is fixed up in future

 

[Carringbush2010]

Agree to disagree, but kudos for the post.

Like I said, the league is at an impasse.

Vic fans and their clubs aren't gonna compromise and they shouldn't, and there are inequities that favour the big vic clubs.

It's what we have and that doesn't give anyone the right to demand detriment to foundation clubs.

Look forward to the next 100 pages I guess.

 

[sr36]

We absolutely can call for mechanisms that are to the detriment of Victorian clubs in the name of equality. That’s how equality works. Women didn’t get the vote without the value of men’s votes diminishing from 100 per cent to 50 per cent. That’s why I keep repeating the phrase ‘equality looks like discrimination to those accustomed to privilege’. You see being treated the same as others to your detriment.

Now, I know your comeback will be, ‘you joined an expanded Victorian league, deal with it’. To which I would say, you follow a team in an national league, deal with it’.

The irony of you repeating that phrase is that it applies to West Coast who have been a privileged club.

 

[SC_Power]

Like I said, the league is at an impasse.

Vic fans and their clubs aren't gonna compromise and they shouldn't, and there are inequities that favour the big vic clubs.

It's what we have and that doesn't give anyone the right to demand detriment to foundation clubs.

Look forward to the next 100 pages I guess.

100 pages of Equality vs loss of privilege interpreted as Detriment.

I’m tapping out.

 

[The_Wookie]

Getting a bit personal this thread, and I'm guilty of being snarky.

Apologies to bzparkes and SC_Power, no excuses for that.

Non vic fans must understand though, as fans of our clubs we didn't want the vfl expansion, none of us did.

The only reason it even happened is because the league bribed fitzroy to get it over the line - fans, media and even the Vic Sports minister had come out against it.

• 1986 – October 1. VFL Board of Directors approves teams from Western Australia and Queensland to join the VFL in 1987. Hawthorn, Collingwood, Melbourne and Essendon vote against, but all other clubs vote for. Fitzroy initially opposed, but Leon Wiegard is convinced by the dollar signs drawn by the commission. (Football Limited pg. 159)

Yeah you could argue we needed the wafc to buy a competition licence and we now have non vic clubs.

And its also worth noting that it was predicted that the VFL would go west with or without the WAFC getting a licence.

• 1986, July 10. A report by Richard Colless, Peter Fogarty and John Walker is presented to the WAFL stating that 1) an expanded VFL was inevitable. 2) a composite team was the way forward. 3) Control of the team should rest with the WAFL. 4) The VFL would expand to WA by other means if the WAFL teams didnt support the composite option.

 

[VicBased]

The only reason it even happened is because the league bribed fitzroy to get it over the line - fans, media and even the Vic Sports minister had come out against it.

• 1986 – October 1. VFL Board of Directors approves teams from Western Australia and Queensland to join the VFL in 1987. Hawthorn, Collingwood, Melbourne and Essendon vote against, but all other clubs vote for. Fitzroy initially opposed, but Leon Wiegard is convinced by the dollar signs drawn by the commission. (Football Limited pg. 159)

And its also worth noting that it was predicted that the VFL would go west with or without the WAFC getting a licence.

• 1986, July 10. A report by Richard Colless, Peter Fogarty and John Walker is presented to the WAFL stating that 1) an expanded VFL was inevitable. 2) a composite team was the way forward. 3) Control of the team should rest with the WAFL. 4) The VFL would expand to WA by other means if the WAFL teams didnt support the composite option.

If true then the VFL are the culprits and brought it on themselves.

 

[peetoo]

Hasn’t ‘gather round’ meant nsw qld and wa clubs have extra travel?

Maybe we need 3 more gather rounds.. when we get to 20 teams, each one only 10 home games each

 

[Bulldog1954]

Good to see Cleary, who has been with the Swans since he was 10 years old kick a goal.

 

[scoman]

Harris Andrews

31

Harris Andrews

Age

27

Ht

202cm

Wt

98kg

Pos.

Def

Career

Season

Last 5

D

12.8

3star

K

7.4

3star

HB

5.4

4star

M

5.6

5star

T

1.6

4star

MG

151.7

2star

D

17.0

4star

K

9.0

4star

HB

8.0

4star

M

4.0

4star

T

2.0

3star

D

9.8

3star

K

5.0

2star

HB

4.8

4star

M

3.4

4star

T

1.6

4star

MG

94.0

2star

played his 200th today. No before game feature. No half time feature. Barely mentioned. No AFL.com article.
No switch back at quarter time of the Swans v GWS games to watch him leave the field or interview him.

 

[The Feeder Club]

Harris Andrews played his 200th today. No before game feature. No half time feature. Barely mentioned. No AFL.com article.
No switch back at quarter time of the Swans v GWS games to watch him leave the field or interview him.

Who?

 

[Roylion]

Who?

Brisbane Lions captain. 2 x All-Australian. Reigning Brisbane Lions B&F.

 

[Mat Mann]

reat to see the AFL is not half as biased as most of the Vics on the forum. Now we just need them to change it.


https://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/...s/news-story/a3dd3bd761924d41c67081389ac9d827

AFL's summary of advantage v disadvantage (compiled by Mark Evans)​

Draft Acquisition

Trade/FA Acquisition

Contracting/Retention

Non FB Earnings

Rental Costs

Father-Son

NGA

Northern Academy

Fixture & Marquee

Venue & Crowd

Travel Load

Grand Final @MCG

Second Tier

Soft Cap/Staffing

Facilities

Higher Placed Clubs

Disadvantaged

Advantaged

Advantaged

Advantaged

Advantaged

Advantaged

Lower Placed Clubs

Advantaged

Disadvantaged

Disadvantaged

Disadvantaged

Disadvantaged

Disadvantaged

Larger Clubs

Advantaged

Advantaged

Advantaged

Advantaged

Advantaged

Advantaged

Smaller Clubs

Disadvantaged

Disadvantaged

Disadvantaged

Disadvantaged

Disadvantaged

Disadvantaged

Victorian Clubs

Advantaged

Advantaged

Advantaged

Advantaged

Advantaged

Very Advantaged

Very Advantaged

Advantaged

Advantaged

Non-Victorian Clubs

Disadvantaged

Disadvantaged

Disadvantaged

Disadvantaged

Disadvantaged

Disadvantaged

Disadvantaged

Established Clubs

Advantaged

Advantaged

Advantaged

Advantaged

Advantaged

Disadvantaged

Advantaged

Advantaged

Advantaged

Advantaged

Advantaged

Expansion Clubs

Disadvantaged

Disadvantaged

Disadvantaged

Disadvantaged

Disadvantaged

If you assume all advantages are equal, and very advantaged is worth 2.

Here is the table of the most advantages clubs.

Club	Advantage
Carlton	27​
Collingwood	27​
Essendon	27​
Geelong Cats	27​
Hawthorn	27​
Melbourne	27​
Richmond	27​
North Melbourne	15​
St Kilda	15​
Western Bulldogs	15​
Adelaide Crows	5​
Fremantle	5​
Port Adelaide	5​
West Coast Eagles	5​
Sydney Swans	-15​
Brisbane Lions	-27​
Gold Coast SUNS	-27​
GWS GIANTS	-27​

The data I used. Big club vs small club was subjective. Obviously West coast is bigger than freo, and Collingwood is larger than Melbourne. In reality, this should be a sliding scale between 100 and 0.

Hawks, Melbourne, Port, Freo should probably be added as a medium club with no advantage or disadvantage.

You could argue Sydney and maybe Brisbane are established clubs. I don't think they have the same disadvantages as GWS and GC, especially Sydney.

Anyone, the above tables give you a basic idea.

	Larger Clubs	Smaller Clubs	Victorian Clubs	Non-Victorian Clubs	Established Clubs	Expansion Clubs
Adelaide Crows	TRUE​			TRUE​	TRUE​
Brisbane Lions		TRUE​		TRUE​		TRUE​
Carlton	TRUE​		TRUE​		TRUE​
Collingwood	TRUE​		TRUE​		TRUE​
Essendon	TRUE​		TRUE​		TRUE​
Fremantle	TRUE​			TRUE​	TRUE​
Geelong Cats	TRUE​		TRUE​		TRUE​
Gold Coast SUNS		TRUE​		TRUE​		TRUE​
GWS GIANTS		TRUE​		TRUE​		TRUE​
Hawthorn	TRUE​		TRUE​		TRUE​
Melbourne	TRUE​		TRUE​		TRUE​
North Melbourne		TRUE​	TRUE​		TRUE​
Port Adelaide	TRUE​			TRUE​	TRUE​
Richmond	TRUE​		TRUE​		TRUE​
St Kilda		TRUE​	TRUE​		TRUE​
Sydney Swans	TRUE​			TRUE​		TRUE​
West Coast Eagles	TRUE​			TRUE​	TRUE​
Western Bulldogs		TRUE​	TRUE​		TRUE​

Not sure you can claim the Lions and Swans are not established clubs and the WA and SA teams are?
and are Sydney and Brisbane still considered expansion clubs after 30+ years?
rental costs are an advantage in the 2nd most expensive market in the country?

It's a very broad look at things and tbh , more of a deflection piece away from the sun's academy than a real effort at seeing where advantages/disadvantages lye.

Dude you are the King of excuses. It is as simple as 2 vic clubs travel I extra game a year to WA and we travel 2 less games, which is a little fairer.
Bloody hell not rocket science.

except we all know those 2 clubs wont be the Vic Big 4, who play each other more than any other clubs in the comp, it'll be the small clubs who already travel the most(of vic teams) and to top it off we'll also get less game against said 4 clubs further disadvantaging us more.

Fremantle has only had 1 nationwide free to air game and that's because Collingwood got on a plane and played then in Perth. North Melbourne's match against Melbourne is their 2nd free to air game for the year.

except Freo has every H&A game on FTA, every round. Plus Friday/Sat night games are shown on 7mate in Perth
SA viewers get the National games and Crowa/Port H&A games, in fact, every interstate side can be seen on FTA every week in their own state, except Victoria.
whereas North has genuinely only 2 games on FTA(to date)

Vic teams and esp the smaller Vic teams have it far worse for exposure than any interstate side
not sure this is a bone to pick tbh.

It's 2024. Your 'foundation' league no longer exists.

Not would it have, if non-Vic clubs didn't join it.

You're welcome.

it would have survived, no issues what so ever, the most popular sport in a state and arguably the best comp in the country would have zero issues surviving. It was only ever around how that survival looked and strings attached.

That's a sample year - the AFL and broadcasters try to grow the game through blockbusters - hence Collingwood play Carlton and Essendon twice every year - ditto showdowns. Collingwood currently plays 5 of the other away games interstate leaving 4 other games in Melb which get rotated through the other 7 Vic clubs - last year it was the 4 listed. This year it's Saints, North, Haw and Melb. So you're right, these clubs don't get the cash cow that often - but it's better than them not getting it at all.

I don't care if Collingwood travel more without it impacting teams that need it like that. I think it's a heap of carry on. It doesn't matter in the years youre good as you're good enough to win on the road. And it doesn't matter in the years you aren't any good - because you're not good enough. Ladder positions haven't been skewed towards less travelled teams over the last 20 years. It being a big disadvantage is just a theory that isn't supported by outcomes.

Blockbusters have ruined the sport, Pies Saints pulled multiple 80K plus crowds, North during the ninety's regularly featured in the top 10 attended games. It took years for Pies/Melb Queens/Kings b'day game to out attend games previously held on that day.

I'd even go further and say that the fixturing of those 4 clubs double-ups has had a bigger negative effect on the competition than it has a positive.

I have genuine concerns about my clubs ability to not only contend but survive, like I never have before, even during the tin-rattling days.

We absolutely can call for mechanisms that are to the detriment of Victorian clubs in the name of equality. That’s how equality works. Women didn’t get the vote without the value of men’s votes diminishing from 100 per cent to 50 per cent. That’s why I keep repeating the phrase ‘equality looks like discrimination to those accustomed to privilege’. You see being treated the same as others to your detriment.

Now, I know your comeback will be, ‘you joined an expanded Victorian league, deal with it’. To which I would say, you follow a team in an national league, deal with it’.

and what about your advantages?
2 team market
FTA all games
Ground Advantage

it's not all doom and gloom

Harris Andrews played his 200th today. No before game feature. No half time feature. Barely mentioned. No AFL.com article.
No switch back at quarter time of the Swans v GWS games to watch him leave the field or interview him.

How much do Melb clubs get on Perth TV or papers?
Did the Saints get a mention in the media when we played up there last week? we barely got a mention in the pre-game on the TV

not sure who you are referring to who got the above treatment but that's not Vicbias, that's Clubbias

 

[MelbourneGWS]

The WA teams don't seem to want to explore the ones you'd start with though: a third team in WA and interstate double headers to cut out travel (which is already being done this year by a couple of other teams.) WA clubs some to prefer to whinge about travel. Travel just looks to being used as leverage to try to gain advantages to me.

The WAFC seems to be against a third WA team, and AFL CEO Dillon also seems to agree with this. A WA3 team will increase the derby matches.

 

[peetoo]

The answer could come with 20 teams and 19 rounds

Play each other team home or away over 2 years

WA teams for example travel to SA QLD NSW and TAS or NT once each Travel to Victoria 5 times could be reduced to 4 if they stay over a week in AFL managed apartments with an extra training centre for visiting teams
Vic teamtravel could be in the last 10 rounds to make the run up to finals more equal
Vic teams travel 5 times, but another 3 rounds could be gather round or neutral type games managed by AFL. Not in Victoria

That would make it 11 trips for non vic 8 for vic approx. there will always be more travel

 

[peetoo]

The WAFC seems to be against a third WA team, and AFL CEO Dillon also seems to agree with this. A WA3 team will increase the derby matches.

There will be 20 teams tough so need to play 19 teams including wa2 and wa3. Only leaves 3-4 games for second meetings

 

[doppleganger]

I suggested they travel eight times and the complaining began immediately.

Exactly

WC fans sook about doing a road trip that would cut down the amount of travel they do too.

 

[LoungeLizard]

Exactly

WC fans sook about doing a road trip that would cut down the amount of travel they do too.

Mate don't bother with them, even when we agree with them they say we are complaining.

We all know no matter what they are given, it will never be enough, they will keep sooking for more.

Very insecure.

 

[go_the_dockers]

Not sure you can claim the Lions and Swans are not established clubs and the WA and SA teams are?
and are Sydney and Brisbane still considered expansion clubs after 30+ years?
rental costs are an advantage in the 2nd most expensive market in the country?

Not a deflective piece on the suns.

Just outlines all the advantages and disadvantages in the league, so Vic's can't just target 1 thing and forget the rest.

 

[cartwright]

Eventually the penny will drop that the Victorian clubs, their members keep this competition going.

Keep deluding yourselves there’s a chance of reducing these clubs in the league’s biggest market.