Mega Thread VICBias - Genuine Discussion Part 2

[Carringbush2010]

No, of course not.

Also, if Victorian supporters are going to unsub from Fox, simply because a 2 minute segment about WCE didn't include the hosts fellating themselves over Reid going to Geelong, then you people are way bigger bandwagoners than I thought.

Huh? Got no idea what you're talking about, sounds like you've been sucked into to some media or sm hyperbole.

Also, as a wa fan I wouldn't be throwing around bandwagoners, remember every wa fan and their dogs abandoned their wafl clubs like a toxic ex in favour of a brand new club in a league you all hate, still hate it now and won't stop you all complaining.

Wallow in your misery then.

 

[Mat Mann]

National AFL media bias towards Vics, yes.

so that must be why when we played Brisbane last week, Lynch and Brown prattling on about Brisbane this and Brisbane that, 40+ mins of pregame and I think the Saints got about 2 mins.

no different to telecasts coming back into vic from other states, very biased commentary teams

It's disgusting that the non-Victorian clubs have to finanically prop up the Victorian laggards.

Last year $204m (over half of the entire AFL club distributions) went to support Vic clubs, including over $70m to keep St Kilda, North and Footscray afloat. These clubs are not financially sustainable and should get out of the way of a sustainably national comp.

Approximate 10-year totals (2012-21)
Including 2021 estimates.


Team Amount
GWS $203,000,000
Gold Coast $198,000,000
Bris Lions $160,000,000
St Kilda $156,000,000
Western Bulldogs $139,000,000
North Melbourne $134,000,000
Melbourne $132,000,000
Port Adelaide $122,000,000

and what they don't mention is how much of that distribution is attributed to Marvel and its very different club earning structure, I mean saints have only put through 800k more ppl than the next team

 

[doppleganger]

Stop being a sook about the HG thing, that's not what I've even been talking about.

Now you're just being a complete wowser.

The bias is that AFL House has deliberately reduced home ground advantage for a subset of clubs, the Melbourne clubs.

On-field you sook about a "travel burden", but have now decided that the travel burden is actually post game not pre-game.

Off-field you sook that media dont talk about your club enough. Welcome the the world of a North, StK, WB, Hawks or Melbourne supporter.

You basically have nothing, apart from your "travel burden". But stats show WC are competing and in top4 more than most Melbourne based teams...so even that is overplayed.

The reality in ALL professional competitions is that some teams will always travel further than others, no evidence that they struggle to win titles.

 

[bzparkes]

so that must be why when we played Brisbane last week, Lynch and Brown prattling on about Brisbane this and Brisbane that, 40+ mins of pregame and I think the Saints got about 2 mins.

They're the home team. I've go no issue with the home team getting the most attention.

no different to telecasts coming back into vic from other states, very biased commentary teams

Rubbish. Maybe this is the case for your team but local commentary teams try too hard to be unbiased a lot of the time, whereas if the non-Vic games are being commentated by Melbourne based teams, then the cheerleading for the Vic side is unreal.

BT sounded like he was at a funeral last night.

 

[bzparkes]

The bias is that AFL House has deliberately reduced home ground advantage for a subset of clubs, the Melbourne clubs.

On-field you sook about a "travel burden", but have now decided that the travel burden is actually post game not pre-game.

Off-field you sook that media dont talk about your club enough. Welcome the the world of a North, StK, WB, Hawks or Melbourne supporter.

You basically have nothing, apart from your "travel burden". But stats show WC are competing and in top4 more than most Melbourne based teams...so even that is overplayed.

The reality in ALL professional competitions is that some teams will always travel further than others, no evidence that they struggle to win titles.

This would've been true, even with the shady MCG deal in the 90s, if there wasn't a 'Royal commission' into the state of Vic football after '07.

Nearly 20 years later and we've had 2 non-Vic premiers since then.

Don't piss in my pocket and tell me it's raining.

 

[doppleganger]

This would've been true, even with the shady MCG deal in the 90s, if there wasn't a 'Royal commission' into the state of Vic football after '07.

Nearly 20 years later and we've had 2 non-Vic premiers since then.

Don't piss in my pocket and tell me it's raining.

Marvel came in at end of 90s.

The outcome of the royal commission was to introduce a footy department soft cap, to level the playing field. And stop clubs like Melbourne from playing home games at the GABBA against Brisbane.

21st century flags (ignoring COVID) - 21 in total

Geelong, a non-Melbourne club who have a home ground = 4 flags

Hawks, the Melbourne club who plays outside of Melbourne (travels and sleeps in hotels more than any Melbourne teams) to get a ground advantage = 4 flags

Brisbane, a non-Melbourne club = 3 flags
WC, a non-Melbourne club = 2 flags
Sydney, a non-Melbourne club = 2 flags
Port, a Non-Melbourne club = 1 flag

16 of the 21 21st century flags won by teams who play majority of their games outside of Melbourne.

That leaves 5 flags from Melbourne based clubs.

Rich, a Melbourne club = 2 flags
Pies, a Melbourne club = 2 flags
Dogs, a Melbourne club = 1 flag

Ess, Carl, NM and Melboure aint even played in a non-Covid GF in the 21st century, and the poor Saints ran into the Pies.

It is obvious that Melbourne based clubs are the battlers, AFL House policy removed their home ground advantage.

Something about a "travel burden" and it being unfair.

 

[JackOutback]

Oh, don't forget sometimes they are just better, so they can overcome travel, that's more proof.

You point at non-Victorian success as proof that disadvantage doesn’t exist, which is lazy and shows you have a fundamental misunderstanding of how elite sports works. If I raced Usain Bolt over 100m, but was given a 90m head start, I’d win every time. I guess that’s proof the disadvantage didn’t exist.

In elite sports, particularly team sports, the differences between the best and next best is small and small advantages can make all the difference. In 2001-03, Brisbane were clearly that bit better overall than their opponents that they were able to overcome the disadvantages. Other times, the best team all season hasn’t been able to overcome the disadvantages. Sometimes the best team and the team with the advantages are the same. Sometimes it’s the opposite.

 

[Mat Mann]

They're the home team. I've go no issue with the home team getting the most attention.



Rubbish. Maybe this is the case for your team but local commentary teams try too hard to be unbiased a lot of the time, whereas if the non-Vic games are being commentated by Melbourne based teams, then the cheerleading for the Vic side is unreal.

BT sounded like he was at a funeral last night.

nah, not at all, heard some WA games be so bias in their commentary, no different to when P.Roos gets on a Sydney game or and EX Adeleaide player is on a Crows game. it happens everywhere, even in a Vic v Vic game.


I think you are mistaking bias for just shitness BT is the most inept commentator in the game, only have to scroll socials during his games to see that, more object to BT than they do Kelly Underwood!!!

 

[LoungeLizard]

Marvel came in at end of 90s.

The outcome of the royal commission was to introduce a footy department soft cap, to level the playing field. And stop clubs like Melbourne from playing home games at the GABBA against Brisbane.

21st century flags (ignoring COVID) - 21 in total

Geelong, a non-Melbourne club who have a home ground = 4 flags

Hawks, the Melbourne club who plays outside of Melbourne (travels and sleeps in hotels more than any Melbourne teams) to get a ground advantage = 4 flags

Brisbane, a non-Melbourne club = 3 flags
WC, a non-Melbourne club = 2 flags
Sydney, a non-Melbourne club = 2 flags
Port, a Non-Melbourne club = 1 flag

16 of the 21 21st century flags won by teams who play majority of their games outside of Melbourne.

That leaves 5 flags from Melbourne based clubs.

Rich, a Melbourne club = 2 flags
Pies, a Melbourne club = 2 flags
Dogs, a Melbourne club = 1 flag

Ess, Carl, NM and Melboure aint even played in a non-Covid GF in the 21st century, and the poor Saints ran into the Pies.

It is obvious that Melbourne based clubs are the battlers, AFL House policy removed their home ground advantage.

Something about a "travel burden" and it being unfair.

They must have got better those years and overcome the travel burden.
Some teams overcome it you know.

 

[bzparkes]

nah, not at all, heard some WA games be so bias in their commentary, no different to when P.Roos gets on a Sydney game or and EX Adeleaide player is on a Crows game. it happens everywhere, even in a Vic v Vic game.

Pav is a struggle to listen to, I'll agree with that.

Papalia just calls it as it is and Schofield goes out of his way to pot WCE and praise the oppo as not to appear biased.

I think you are mistaking bias for just shitness BT is the most inept commentator in the game, only have to scroll socials during his games to see that, more object to BT than they do Kelly Underwood!!!

Ok so BT is biased and shit.

You'll get no argument from me there.

 

[doppleganger]

They must have got better those years and overcome the travel burden.
Some teams overcome it you know.

Yeah, when Melbourne teams were travelling and sleeping in hotels (covid years) they went 2 for 2 for flags.

In those years the non-Melbourne teams had their normal home ground advantage removed.

 

[LoungeLizard]

You point at non-Victorian success as proof that disadvantage doesn’t exist, which is lazy and shows you have a fundamental misunderstanding of how elite sports works. If I raced Usain Bolt over 100m, but was given a 90m head start, I’d win every time. I guess that’s proof the disadvantage didn’t exist.

In elite sports, particularly team sports, the differences between the best and next best is small and small advantages can make all the difference. In 2001-03, Brisbane were clearly that bit better overall than their opponents that they were able to overcome the disadvantages. Other times, the best team all season hasn’t been able to overcome the disadvantages. Sometimes the best team and the team with the advantages are the same. Sometimes it’s the opposite.

Sometimes teams can do things like overcome travel, yes they can.
When a team does it enough to be one of the better teams is the comp, tells me, maybe there is nothing to overcome.

11 brownlow medalist also seems like this disadvantage you like to go on about doesn't exist, 1 or 2 maybe, but 11, that's regular.

I will change my tune if you can at least dispute these facts with something of meaning, not such and such said this, or SOMETIMES a team can overcome it.

 

[bzparkes]

Marvel came in at end of 90s.

The outcome of the royal commission was to introduce a footy department soft cap, to level the playing field. And stop clubs like Melbourne from playing home games at the GABBA against Brisbane.

21st century flags (ignoring COVID) - 21 in total

Geelong, a non-Melbourne club who have a home ground = 4 flags

Hawks, the Melbourne club who plays outside of Melbourne (travels and sleeps in hotels more than any Melbourne teams) to get a ground advantage = 4 flags

Brisbane, a non-Melbourne club = 3 flags
WC, a non-Melbourne club = 2 flags
Sydney, a non-Melbourne club = 2 flags
Port, a Non-Melbourne club = 1 flag

16 of the 21 21st century flags won by teams who play majority of their games outside of Melbourne.

You're seriously counting Geelong in there? That's just laughable.

Hawks are an MCG tenant, who have given themselves a 'true' HGA(according to you) so they have the best of both worlds.

Also, 2 non-Vic sides have won the flag since the Vics shit their pants at the thought of non-Vic sides regularly winning the flag.

That leaves 5 flags from Melbourne based clubs.

Rich, a Melbourne club = 2 flags
Pies, a Melbourne club = 2 flags
Dogs, a Melbourne club = 1 flag

Ess, Carl, NM and Melboure aint even played in a non-Covid GF in the 21st century, and the poor Saints ran into the Pies.

It is obvious that Melbourne based clubs are the battlers, AFL House policy removed their home ground advantage.

Something about a "travel burden" and it being unfair.

Melbourne clubs aren't battlers. This is a lie/myth you are pushing.

 

[doppleganger]

You're seriously counting Geelong in there? That's just laughable.

Geelong have their own home ground.

Home ground advantage is what is important.

Hawks are an MCG tenant, who have given themselves a 'true' HGA(according to you) so they have the best of both worlds.

Hawks only play 9 games at the MCG, this year they play outside of Melbourne 11 times.

They cop the "travel burden" and "sleeping in hotels" more than Melbourne teams who actually play in Melbourne.

Melbourne clubs aren't battlers. This is a lie/myth you are pushing.

The stats show that in tge 21st century the only Melbourne ckub that has actually done ok has been Collingwood.

The rest have barely even managed to finish top4, let alone make and win GFs.

If you want to be successful in the AFL, having a home ground advantage is what is important.

Travel and sleeping in hotels is not as important as actually having a ground advantage.

But keep sooking that WC are hard done by because of their "travel burden".

 

[bzparkes]

Geelong have their own home ground.

Home ground advantage is what is important.

Yep, they're a Vic side who can come and go from their own homes and have no impact to their recovery when they play in Melbourne

Hawks only play 9 games at the MCG, this year they play outside of Melbourne 11 times.

They cop the "travel burden" and "sleeping in hotels" more than Melbourne teams who actually play in Melbourne.

Their choice. They are still an MCG tenant and get to play any Vic finals at their home ground, regardless of opponent.

The stats show that in tge 21st century the only Melbourne ckub that has actually done ok has been Collingwood.

The rest have barely even managed to finish top4, let alone make and win GFs.

If you want to be successful in the AFL, having a home ground advantage is what is important.

Travel and sleeping in hotels is not as important as actually having a ground advantage.

But keep sooking that WC are hard done by because of their "travel burden".

Utter tripe.

 

[doppleganger]

Yep, they're a Vic side who can come and go from their own homes and have no impact to their recovery when they play in Melbourne.

They are the only vic team with a home ground.

1.5 hours in a car is hardly ideal "recovery".

Their choice. They are still an MCG tenant and get to play any Vic finals at their home ground, regardless of opponent.

Yes, their choice to take on more travel, sleeping in hotels and impost to recovery to actually get a ground advantage.

Home ground advantage is the important factor, teams that have a home ground dominate H&A ladder and win the flags.

It is pretty obvious that travel and sleeping in hotels aint really that much of a burden when clubs choose to do it, and players also choose to do it during the byes.

But keep beating your poor Eagles "travel burden" drum.

 

[LoungeLizard]

They are the only vic team with a home ground.

1.5 hours in a car is hardly ideal "recovery".

Yes, their choice to take on more travel, sleeping in hotels and impost to recovery to actually get a ground advantage.

Home ground advantage is the important factor, teams that have a home ground dominate H&A ladder and win the flags.

It is pretty obvious that travel and sleeping in hotels aint really that much of a burden when clubs choose to do it, and players also choose to do it during the byes.

But keep beating your poor Eagles "travel burden" drum.

Apparently they have some proof that shows travel hinders careers or some such.

 

[blinkd]

They are the only vic team with a home ground.

1.5 hours in a car is hardly ideal "recovery".

Yes, their choice to take on more travel, sleeping in hotels and impost to recovery to actually get a ground advantage.

Home ground advantage is the important factor, teams that have a home ground dominate H&A ladder and win the flags.

It is pretty obvious that travel and sleeping in hotels aint really that much of a burden when clubs choose to do it, and players also choose to do it during the byes.

But keep beating your poor Eagles "travel burden" drum.

We have both players and coaches of past and present, who have experienced both sides of the coin, that state otherwise.

 

[CarterS]

Caro Wilson was saying on the radio that Collingwood coaching staff's families got to come to the GF last year free while Brisbane had to pay (out of their soft cap), and there wasn't an equal number of training sessions on the MCG in the week leading up to it.

I think including travel and hotels for coaching staff's family to the GF for interstate clubs is a fairly reasonable request as is 2xminimum training sessions on the MCG which is what Fagan has apparently asked for and the interstate clubs have agreed.

Flowing on from the above Fagan also said he'd like to spend the entire week in Melbourne if we were to make another GF.

 

[LoungeLizard]

We have both players and coaches of past and present, who have experienced both sides of the coin, that state otherwise.

Surely you have some data that backs these players and coaches up?
Because other players and coaches seem to go and be let to go overseas during the bye, they don't seem to care.

 

[CarterS]

Apparently interstate clubs have to book their own hotels for GF week and it's a logistical nightmare on short notice? Help with little stuff like that would go a long way.

Not exactly asking for the game to be moved.

 

[doppleganger]

Apparently interstate clubs have to book their own hotels for GF week and it's a logistical nightmare on short notice? Help with little stuff like that would go a long way.

Not exactly asking for the game to be moved.

Players and coaching staff are all ok, it is next layer.

Families of coaching staff, club admin etc.

But yes, an easy one for the AFL to sort out well in advance. They should have an entire hotel locked away.

 

[CarterS]

Players and coaching staff are all ok, it is next layer.

Families of coaching staff, club admin etc.

But yes, an easy one for the AFL to sort out well in advance. They should have an entire hotel locked away.

It shouldn't come out of the soft cap either which it does at the moment apparently.

 

[doppleganger]

It shouldn't come out of the soft cap either which it does at the moment apparently.

Agree. That is ridiculous.

 

[VicBased]

The bias is that AFL House has deliberately reduced home ground advantage for a subset of clubs, the Melbourne clubs.

On-field you sook about a "travel burden", but have now decided that the travel burden is actually post game not pre-game.

Off-field you sook that media dont talk about your club enough. Welcome the the world of a North, StK, WB, Hawks or Melbourne supporter.

You basically have nothing, apart from your "travel burden". But stats show WC are competing and in top4 more than most Melbourne based teams...so even that is overplayed.

The reality in ALL professional competitions is that some teams will always travel further than others, no evidence that they struggle to win titles.

And that is why the Vafl keep on with the travelling bias for interstaters.
Otherwise it would even up the comp and most GF,s would be won by interstaters.
It is in place to keep vic teams relevant.