Mega Thread VICBias - Genuine Discussion Part 2

[LoungeLizard]

Brownlows are individual awards, that a few blokes from WA have the ability firstly to win the award, have the mental attitude to get passed whatever this travel issue is. I am guessing thats the answer.

Players winning a brownlow from WA doesn't prove or even make any indent into their not being an issue for travelling teams to perform.
not sure why you keep mentioning brownlows, very individual thing.

Because people use recovery time as being the reason it's an issue, to me if recovery time was the issue, then there would not be so many brownlow medalists.
If some players can recover quick enough to be consistent enough to win brownlows, don't you think that asks questions whether it's a big issue?

 

[LoungeLizard]

Look at how many in WA based players have played 300 games, it is a lot less than other clubs over the same eras.


The advantage goes to all home teams, even in sports with the exact same size grounds.

The draw is currently not even close to being fair. The opening round bs and gather round has swung it further away and now the WA teams have to travel even further. Something needs to come back the other way to even it up & 1 extra away game for Melbourne based teams every 5 years to WA would do that. They can take all the gate takings and it'll generate more revenue for nearly all clubs compared to in Melbourne. Even if 1 Collingwood game every 5 years would be worse off.

Not the 300 game furphy again.

Freo have 2, West Coast have 1 in the short time in the AFL

Now that's not many you say?
Melbourne the oldest club have just had their 2nd.

 

[greatwhiteshark]

Because people use recovery time as being the reason it's an issue, to me if recovery time was the issue, then there would not be so many brownlow medalists.
If some players can recover quick enough to be consistent enough to win brownlows, don't you think that asks questions whether it's a big issue?

Yes it asks the question but again your recovery will be different to mine. Everyone is different.
Hey, I don't have the answer. I am only saying that the league itself is unanimous that the travel is an issue. It has been said at nauseum that it is and its very real. Every club agrees.

Not sure what else to say about it.

 

[doppleganger]

You still fighting this travel issue even when every person in the AFL be it a coach, players, administration believe it to be an issue?

Travel is an issue, but it is a minor one in the grand scheme of pros n cons in the league.

It is just an obvious one, hence the lazy people bang on about it.

The problem is they attempt to hijack home ground advantage and make it a travel or not travel issue, which is crap.

Home ground advantage existed in VFL, SANFL and WAFL when no teams travelled, and the advantage was actually bigger back then.

Collingwood playing away to Sydney at the SCG, or playing away against Carlton at Princes Park....sleeping in a hotel the night before a game doesn't make the away disadvantage any greater.

As Hawthorn show, by travelling to Tasmania and having a ground advantage despite travel disrupting their week and sleeping in a hotel away from family.

But that is when travel doesnt count, because they "choose" to travel!

 

[LoungeLizard]

Yes it asks the question but again your recovery will be different to mine. Everyone is different.
Hey, I don't have the answer. I am only saying that the league itself is unanimous that the travel is an issue. It has been said at nauseum that it is and its very real. Every club agrees.

Not sure what else to say about it.

Didn't the clubs get ridiculed for having a go at the 1st class seats or something like that?

I can't remember exactly, but I remember thinking they were taking the piss out of our WA friends. LOL.

And don't forget Jack Darling is about to play 300 as well, I hope I didn't just put the moz on him, (good luck Jack)

 

[sr36]

Look at how many in WA based players have played 300 games, it is a lot less than other clubs over the same eras.


The advantage goes to all home teams, even in sports with the exact same size grounds.

The draw is currently not even close to being fair. The opening round bs and gather round has swung it further away and now the WA teams have to travel even further. Something needs to come back the other way to even it up & 1 extra away game for Melbourne based teams every 5 years to WA would do that. They can take all the gate takings and it'll generate more revenue for nearly all clubs compared to in Melbourne. Even if 1 Collingwood game every 5 years would be worse off.

I think you completely missed my point.

 

[Cam Payne]

I bet Geelong's plane has enough water and sufficient stowage space for poo. #VICBIAS.

 

[doppleganger]

Not the 300 game furphy again.

Freo have 2, West Coast have 1 in the short time in the AFL

Now that's not many you say?
Melbourne the oldest club have just had their 2nd.

Why do they trot this crap out??

Freo have 2 350+ game players in a 30 year period.

How many Melbourne based teams have had two players get to 350 in the last 30 years?

WC have had 12 blokes play 250+ games

The big 3 Melbourne based clubs who dont travel - Coll, Carl and Ess - none have had 10 players make it to 250 games since the Eagles came in.

Collingwood only has had 12 players in our history play more than 250 games, which includes Coventry and Colliers from the 1920s!!

If people parrot the same crap enough, people must believe it.

 

[LoungeLizard]

Why do they trot this crap out??

Freo have 2 350+ game players in a 30 year period.

How many Melbourne based teams have had two players get to 350 in the last 30 years?

WC have had 12 blokes play 250+ games

The big 3 Melbourne based clubs who dont travel - Coll, Carl and Ess - none have had 10 players make it to 250 games since the Eagles came in.

Collingwood only has had 12 players in our history play more than 250 games, which includes Coventry and Colliers from the 1920s!!

If people parrot the same crap enough, people must believe it.

Remember years ago a few tried to tell us flying causes cancer, but it was only a danger to West Australian teams because they fly higher for longer?

Don't get too surprised, they will have a new one soon.

Something like, if you look out plane windows too long you will go blind.

 

[sr36]

Not the 300 game furphy again.

Freo have 2, West Coast have 1 in the short time in the AFL

Now that's not many you say?
Melbourne the oldest club have just had their 2nd.

Freo, in their short history, have twice as many hit 350 as the pies have had in 127 years in the VFL/AFL.

West Coast 11 players to 250. Pies 14 only 3 more in an extra 90 years. And obviously less than west coast in the same time frame.

 

[LoungeLizard]

Freo, in their short history, have twice as many hit 350 as the pies have had in 127 years in the VFL/AFL.

Yeah but mate, they haven't had any 400 game players, so it's gotta be true.

 

[Purple Suit]

Not the 300 game furphy again.

Freo have 2, West Coast have 1 in the short time in the AFL

Now that's not many you say?
Melbourne the oldest club have just had their 2nd.

It's not a Furphy, you are listing one outlier clubs as proof. Long range stats prove otherwise.

Looking at the list of 300 game players, I only included players who played in or after 1990 for the AFL era. Things has improved lately with sports science so I think we will see this list grow.

QLD based - 3
NSW based - 5
Vic Based - 52 (5.2 average per club)
SA Based - 7
WA Based - 3
Mixed - 13 (more than 50 games in another state, none of these were a mix with WA. Usually NSW & QLD).

Long range stats that the further away from Melbourne you go, the less likely you are to play 300 games. Travel is the main factor.

 

[Ambrose Burnside]

It's not a Furphy, you are listing one outlier clubs as proof. Long range stats prove otherwise.

Looking at the list of 300 game players, I only included players who played in or after 1990 for the AFL era. Things has improved lately with sports science so I think we will see this list grow.

QLD based - 3
NSW based - 5
Vic Based - 52 (5.2 average per club)
SA Based - 7
WA Based - 3
Mixed - 13 (more than 50 games in another state, none of these were a mix with WA. Usually NSW & QLD).

Long range stats that the further away from Melbourne you go, the less likely you are to play 300 games. Travel is the main factor.

Slow down egghead, you're talking to a couple of Collingwood fans.

 

[doppleganger]

Hey, I don't have the answer. I am only saying that the league itself is unanimous that the travel is an issue. It has been said at nauseum that it is and its very real. Every club agrees.

Yes every club agrees that travel is not equal between teams.

The WA fans seem to think that all teams should travel the same, a nonsense.

They campaign for extra games in WA to balance out the "travel".

Because they completely disregard that the biggest factor is not travel but ground advantage.

Carlton playing 17 games in Melbourne doesnt give them a home advantage in 17 games. This year Carlton only has 4 games where they get any real ground advantage against their opponent, and they cop 5 where they face a ground disadvantage.

But WC fans think that Carlton should be forced to play an extra game in WA against Freo or WC to make it "fair".

 

[LoungeLizard]

It's not a Furphy, you are listing one outlier clubs as proof. Long range stats prove otherwise.

Looking at the list of 300 game players, I only included players who played in or after 1990 for the AFL era. Things has improved lately with sports science so I think we will see this list grow.

QLD based - 3
NSW based - 5
Vic Based - 52 (5.2 average per club)
SA Based - 7
WA Based - 3
Mixed - 13 (more than 50 games in another state, none of these were a mix with WA. Usually NSW & QLD).

Long range stats that the further away from Melbourne you go, the less likely you are to play 300 games. Travel is the main factor.

So tell us why you have so many 250 gamers?

And do you think West Coasts drug era might also have a tiny effect?

Nothing about games played screams hinders careers yet, it may do down the track, but not yet.

 

[Purple Suit]

So tell us why you have so many 250 gamers?

And do you think West Coasts drug era might also have a tiny effect?

Nothing about games played screams hinders careers yet, it may do down the track, but not yet.

Why not yet? Is 35 years of data not enough to make a decision?

Do you work for Big Tobacco?

 

[sr36]

So tell us why you have so many 250 gamers?

And do you think West Coasts drug era might also have a tiny effect?

Nothing about games played screams hinders careers yet, it may do down the track, but not yet.

I just edited my previous post. WCE only 3 less 259 gamers in their history than Collingwood in our much longer history...

 

[Purple Suit]

I just edited my previous post. WCE only 3 less 259 gamers in their history than Collingwood in our much longer history...

Ignore games before the professional era, I took 1990 as a reference point. Things have changed recently and players can play longer so 150 years vs 40 isn't really that much of a stretch. The other thing is to not compare single clubs, the more data the better. WA only has two reference points compared to 10 in Melbourne so it could be a coincidence but it seems to track roughly in line with distance from Melbourne.

It's a factor.

 

[LoungeLizard]

Why not yet? Is 35 years of data not enough to make a decision?

Do you work for Big Tobacco?

Yet you dismiss data about Melbourne.

It seems to me you are using anything that helps your argument, but it really doesn't, I also think you fudged a bit on Queensland, but I really couldn't be bothered checking, but I think you may have said a couple that played nearly all their carreer at Brisbane are not counted, but surely you wouldn't fudge the figures would you?

And 35 years for 2 350 games is pretty good, don't you think?

Not many clubs have 2 350 gamers.

 

[sr36]

It's not a Furphy, you are listing one outlier clubs as proof. Long range stats prove otherwise.

Looking at the list of 300 game players, I only included players who played in or after 1990 for the AFL era. Things has improved lately with sports science so I think we will see this list grow.

QLD based - 3
NSW based - 5
Vic Based - 52 (5.2 average per club)
SA Based - 7
WA Based - 3
Mixed - 13 (more than 50 games in another state, none of these were a mix with WA. Usually NSW & QLD).

Long range stats that the further away from Melbourne you go, the less likely you are to play 300 games. Travel is the main factor.

You might need to do a better analysis than that.

Eg. Don't start it at 1990. Anyone who hit 300 between then and 2000 would include games from the vfl so only vics or Sydney. For Freo the earliest you could get there was about 2010. GC and GWS probably still impossible maybe just possible.

 

[sr36]

Ignore games before the professional era, I took 1990 as a reference point. Things have changed recently and players can play longer so 150 years vs 40 isn't really that much of a stretch. The other thing is to not compare single clubs, the more data the better. WA only has two reference points compared to 10 in Melbourne so it could be a coincidence but it seems to track roughly in line with distance from Melbourne.

It's a factor.

Read my post above. Youre using dates that will significantly weight it to Vic clubs and Sydney. You can really only look at whose hit 300 in the last about 12-15 years if you want to include Freo and Port and view it as only one club in nsw and Qld.

 

[Purple Suit]

Yet you dismiss data about Melbourne.

It seems to me you are using anything that helps your argument, but it really doesn't, I also think you fudged a bit on Queensland, but I really couldn't be bothered checking, but I think you may have said a couple that played nearly all their carreer at Brisbane are not counted, but surely you wouldn't fudge the figures would you?

And 35 years for 2 350 games is pretty good, don't you think?

Not many clubs have 2 350 gamers.

Mixed Players		Vic	Qld	Nsw	SA
Gavin Wanganeen	300	127			173
Shannon Grant	301	243	58
Paul Williams	306	189		117
Alastair Lynch	306	120	186
Callan Ward	310	60		250
Roger Merrett	313	149	164
Heath Shaw	325	173		152
Jason Akermanis	325	77	248
Patrick Danagerfield	332	178			154
Eddie Betts	350	218			132
Lance Franklin	354	182		172
Paul Roos	356	269		87
Gary Ablett Jn	357	247	110
Shaun Burgoyne	407	250			157

These are the mixed players. There is 14 there so my numbers are out by 1 but I was doing it manually. The bulk of games is still in Vic.

Read my post above. Youre using dates that will significantly weight it to Vic clubs and Sydney.

The interstate teams would show this thread though. WA has more games than SA, NSW & QLD but less players to 300 games. My reference point might affect Vic teams but not 3-4 times that of WA.

One thing I have noticed is the amount of players who change clubs. These do not show up in the 300 game list for clubs but if you play 150 games for two vic teams, you have still done it. No one has played more than 50 games for a WA club and played 300 games besides Pav, Mundy & Hurn.

 

[doppleganger]

It's not a Furphy, you are listing one outlier clubs as proof. Long range stats prove otherwise.

Looking at the list of 300 game players, I only included players who played in or after 1990 for the AFL era. Things has improved lately with sports science so I think we will see this list grow.

QLD based - 3
NSW based - 5
Vic Based - 52 (5.2 average per club)
SA Based - 7
WA Based - 3
Mixed - 13 (more than 50 games in another state, none of these were a mix with WA. Usually NSW & QLD).

Long range stats that the further away from Melbourne you go, the less likely you are to play 300 games. Travel is the main factor.

Would check your numbers.

There are 104 300 gamers, 24 of them retired in the 80s of earlier.

So only 80 played any footy in the 1990s, you list 83.

And of the 80 that includes guys like Tuck, Madden (s), Watson, T.Shaw who barely played any footy in the 90s but you would include in your VIC numbers.

Obvious inflation considering they had retired before Port and Freo even joined the competition.

If doing any sensible comparison you would only bother to include players who debuted 1987 or later, when WC and Brisbane came in.

There have been 33 players reach the 300 game mark who only played for Vic teams since 1897 (an average of 3.3) per club.

Myth busted, it appears if you want a long career travelling every second week has no impact.

 

[Ambrose Burnside]

There have been 33 players reach the 300 game mark who only played for Vic teams since 1897 (an average of 3.3) per club.

So on average over three times as many as have for the Eagles?

 

[Purple Suit]

Would check your numbers.

There are 104 300 gamers, 24 of them retired in the 80s of earlier.

So only 80 played any footy in the 1990s, you list 83.

And of the 80 that includes guys like Tuck, Madden (s), Watson, T.Shaw who barely played any footy in the 90s but you would include in your VIC numbers.

Obvious inflation considering they had retired before Port and Freo even joined the competition.

If doing any sensible comparison you would only bother to include players who debuted 1987 or later, when WC and Brisbane came in.

There have been 33 players reach the 300 game mark who only played for Vic teams since 1897 (an average of 3.3) per club.

Myth busted, it appears if you want a long career travelling every second week has no impact.

33 players who were 1 club people. What about someone who moved between Vic clubs? Did you count those?

I'd check your numbers, we have had a few players hit 300 games this year so it is increasing.