Mega Thread VICBias - Genuine Discussion Part 2

[Bagger72]

The exception that proves the rule.

If Geelong, Hawthorn or Bulldogs win the GF against Sydney in the GF, I’m sure you’ll conveniently ignore the MCG advantage.

We dont even have a homeground. Some home games are played at the G and some are played at Docklands.

Both grounds have different dimensions and play different style of football.. this is no way a home ground advantage as it used to be when we played all our home games at Princes Park knowing how the game is played - that was a real home ground advantage,

 

[SC_Power]

1. How's the ladder position bias?
2. Dogs don't play at the G champ

Great, play the GF at Stadium Australia in Sydney, no home ground advantage to Sydney or GWS then

 

[RUNVS]

Great, play the GF at Stadium Australia in Sydney, no home ground advantage to Sydney or GWS then

I would actually be fine with it if the AFL introduced a rule saying we will rotate the Grand Final between any stadium that has 80,000 seats or more. I think the Perth stadium would be upgraded for that if it was a rule and then the MCG is the Grand Final every second or third year. That would be much fairer.

 

[Bont the Lord]

I would actually be fine with it if the AFL introduced a rule saying we will rotate the Grand Final between any stadium that has 80,000 seats or more. I think the Perth stadium would be upgraded for that if it was a rule and then the MCG is the Grand Final every second or third year. That would be much fairer.

Let it go mate. It's never going to happen anytime soon.

 

[SC_Power]

Let it go mate. It's never going to happen anytime soon.

No agreed
Have to protect the football heartland

 

[peetoo]

The exception that proves the rule.

If Geelong, Hawthorn or Bulldogs win the GF against Sydney in the GF, I’m sure you’ll conveniently ignore the MCG advantage.

Sydney. Interesting. Hawks are 1-1 with them in GFs (at MCG) but 4-1 in finals overall (MCG and docklands)

Sydney are 1-3 in GF at MCG. 5-12 in finals overall at MCG

Of course only in GF would Sydney have a claim to play as ‘home’ team ‘denied’ in these occasions

2005. Away team beat eagles
2006. Away team lost to eagles
2012. Away team beat Hawthorn
2014. Home team lost to hawthorn
2016. Home team lost to bulldogs
2022. Away team lost to Geelong

Interestingly the MCG is not the home ground of Geelong and Bulldogs either

 

[.Shotties.]

Do you mean neutral games with no significant advantage to each team?

I mean the away games played at their home ground. How many?

 

[Freomaniac]

Sydney. Interesting. Hawks are 1-1 with them in GFs (at MCG) but 4-1 in finals overall (MCG and docklands)

Sydney are 1-3 in GF at MCG. 5-12 in finals overall at MCG

Of course only in GF would Sydney have a claim to play as ‘home’ team ‘denied’ in these occasions

2005. Away team beat eagles
2006. Away team lost to eagles
2012. Away team beat Hawthorn
2014. Home team lost to hawthorn
2016. Home team lost to bulldogs
2022. Away team lost to Geelong

Interestingly the MCG is not the home ground of Geelong and Bulldogs either

Geelong is a weird one. Ok they have 11 home games a season. 8 in Geelong and 3 at the MCG. Been a while since they had a "home" game at Docklands.

When the AFL increase their fixture to each side playing 24 games in the regular season, 12 home games for the cats, they will at least keep their 8 Kardinia Park home games. Even when we get 2 more non Vic sides coming in.


Hawks is another weird case. They are a tenant at the MCG. Saying that, when they won those flags in 2013-5, the hawks played home games in Tassie, they got 3 or 4 home games in Tasmania each season.

 

[sr36]

I mean the away games played at their home ground. How many?

Do you mean the 5 games where Vic teams had a disadvantage at their home games against us, as they were outnumbered and out-noised in the crowd. Collingwood don't have to face it - like Sydney we're an advantaged club - but imagine not having an advantage at your home games. Although our advantage is often very small - nowhere near as big as the non-vic clubs get every second week. But you're not interested in that side of the story as it doesn't suit your victim agenda. We hear a lot about Non-Vic teams having a disadvantage every second week - but nada about them having an advantage every second week.

How many All Australian players did the AFL's sweetheart recruiting deal give Sydney? Was it just the 3 this year?

Poor disadvantaged Sydney. Get a big advantage at home every second week and to help you with the away games, here's a brace of All Australian players.

 

[kade]

Lol. Twaddle. Only 1 year since the Royal Commission has the top 4 been dominated by non Vic sides, 3 of the top 4 in 2015 were Non Victorian clubs, and guess what, the MCG Tennant ended up winning the Premiership.

What a stupid comment. That side is one of the best sides to ever play and went interstate to win finals

 

[Ambrose Burnside]

What a stupid comment. That side is one of the best sides to ever play and went interstate to win finals

So like every non-Vic premier ever?

Granted, there's only been two since 2005, but still.

 

[PenfoldsFan]

Do you mean the 5 games where Vic teams had a disadvantage at their home games against us, as they were outnumbered and out-noised in the crowd. Collingwood don't have to face it - like Sydney we're an advantaged club - but imagine not having an advantage at your home games. Although our advantage is often very small - nowhere near as big as the non-vic clubs get every second week. But you're not interested in that side of the story as it doesn't suit your victim agenda. We hear a lot about Non-Vic teams having a disadvantage every second week - but nada about them having an advantage every second week.

How many All Australian players did the AFL's sweetheart recruiting deal give Sydney? Was it just the 3 this year?

Poor disadvantaged Sydney. Get a big advantage at home every second week and to help you with the away games, here's a brace of All Australian players.

C'mon man, the H&A advantages are nowhere near the same.

Yes we get a genuine home advantage every 2 weeks but our away games, with the exception of the showdown, are all genuine away with travel.

You get a genuine diminished home ground advantage when playing fellow tenants, a slightly better advantage against other Vic clubs and a genuine home advantage against non Vics.
But when you play away in Vic you get a diminished disadvantage against fellow tenants, a slightly greater disadvantage at other Vic clubs home and little if any travel.
Then you get a handful of genuine away travel games like us and a home GF.

I'll be honest and admit its less #VICBIAS and more #certainvicclubbias but there is no doubt the advantage is in Vic clubs favour and therefore by default a #VICBIAS.

 

[peetoo]

Maybe fix it so all teams travel every second week for the latter half of the season.

 

[sr36]

C'mon man, the H&A advantages are nowhere near the same.

Yes we get a genuine home advantage every 2 weeks but our away games, with the exception of the showdown, are all genuine away with travel.

Yes. It balances out in terms of ratio of games with or without a genuine travel and home ground advantage. The only question is whether Port's extra 4 return flights to Melbourn spread out over a 25 week season has a cumulative negative impact. However, that would be weighed against you getting a bonus home game due to gather round.

You get a genuine diminished home ground advantage when playing fellow tenants, a slightly better advantage against other Vic clubs and a genuine home advantage against non Vics.
But when you play away in Vic you get a diminished disadvantage against fellow tenants, a slightly greater disadvantage at other Vic clubs home and little if any travel.
Then you get a handful of genuine away travel games like us and a home GF.

There's no doubt that Collingwood's huge supporter base is an advantage, meaning that we often have the crowd with us even in away games in Melbourne. But we're only one Vic club. This thread and you are trying to assert Vic vs Non-Vic - including the vic clubs who actually have a crowd disadvantage at some of their home games. So they get 5 away games with a genuine travel disadvantage, 5 home games with a genuine travel advantage and the last 13 they cop some disadvantage in more than half of them.

 

[PenfoldsFan]

Yes. It balances out in terms of ratio of games with or without a genuine travel and home ground advantage. The only question is whether Port's extra 4 return flights to Melbourn spread out over a 25 week season has a cumulative negative impact. However, that would be weighed against you getting a bonus home game due to gather round.

There's no doubt that Collingwood's huge supporter base is an advantage, meaning that we often have the crowd with us even in away games in Melbourne. But we're only one Vic club. This thread and you are trying to assert Vic vs Non-Vic - including the vic clubs who actually have a crowd disadvantage at some of their home games. So they get 5 away games with a genuine travel disadvantage, 5 home games with a genuine advantage and the last 13 they cop some disadvantage in more than half of them.

I guess if you look at the final 8 over the past decade and a half the fact that its been a 50/50 split of Vic v non Vic suggests that the advantages/disadvantages across the league balance out.
We have Freo and GC underperforming, you have North and Essendon.

When you look beyond the H&A it becomes obvious that come GF day there is no question that the advantage swings heavily to Vic clubs when playing a Non Vic and its those Vic teams that get watered down advantages/disadvantages that have benefitted the most.
Geelong with its unique home ground with MCG familiarity thrown in, Hawthorn with its Tassy fortress and MCG familiarity.
Collingwood/Richmond with their large supporter base and MCG home ground.
All dominant teams in that period.

So the question needs to be asked, if fixturing with all its advantages/disadvantages leads us to a balanced final 8, the finals through its balanced pathways leads to often Vic v non Vic GF's, why do Vic clubs lead the way 13-2.
Surely you can conceed that if non Vic clubs can make the GF via a balanced system that the GF is an issue that non Vics cant overcome to any worthwhile extent and something needs to be done.

 

[kade]

So like every non-Vic premier ever?

Granted, there's only been two since 2005, but still.

All I’m saying is that the 2015 Hawthorn side is one of the greatest teams of all time and would of won no matter where the gf was played

 

[sr36]

I guess if you look at the final 8 over the past decade and a half the fact that its been a 50/50 split of Vic v non Vic suggests that the advantages/disadvantages across the league balance out.
We have Freo and GC underperforming, you have North and Essendon.

When you look beyond the H&A it becomes obvious that come GF day there is no question that the advantage swings heavily to Vic clubs when playing a Non Vic and its those Vic teams that get watered down advantages/disadvantages that have benefitted the most.
Geelong with its unique home ground with MCG familiarity thrown in, Hawthorn with its Tassy fortress and MCG familiarity.
Collingwood/Richmond with their large supporter base and MCG home ground.
All dominant teams in that period.

So the question needs to be asked, if fixturing with all its advantages/disadvantages leads us to a balanced final 8, the finals through its balanced pathways leads to often Vic v Vic GF's, why do Vic clubs lead the way 13-2.
Surely you can conceed that if non Vic clubs can make the GF via a balanced system that the GF is an issue that non Vics cant overcome to any worthwhile extent and something needs to be done.

I agree that the GF is a definite advantage for Vic clubs - I don't think it's as big as is made out though. I think most of the 13-2 comes down to the fact that Hawks, Cats and Tigers had periods with the best lists and tactics and neither Victorian or Non-Victorian opponents could beat them in a big game.

 

[PenfoldsFan]

Lets consider that H&A fixturing balances out as evident in the even split of Vic v non Vic final 8 over the past 10yrs.
Lets also consider finals are also fairly balanced over the past 10yrs.

So its the GF that needs addressing.
The venue isnt changing anytime soon so what can be done to bring some balance.
I think the first thing is to create an equal GF week, so both teams who make it should travel.

An example, lets say Port meet Hawthorn in the 2024 GF, we've come via a home Prelim, Hawthorn via an away Prelim in NSW.
As it is now, Hawthorn fly home Saturday night/Sunday morning.
We have to fly Thursday.
Why not hold Hawthorn in Sydney until Thursday, we fly to Sydney Sunday.
Both teams fly into Melbourne Thursday, both teams get put up in hotels, both teams do the parade.
Neither team has been at home for a week leading up to GF day.

Thoughts?

 

[PenfoldsFan]

I agree that the GF is a definite advantage for Vic clubs - I don't think it's as big as is made out though. I think most of the 13-2 comes down to the fact that Hawks, Cats and Tigers had periods with the best lists and tactics and neither Victorian or Non-Victorian opponents could beat them in a big game.

But that could continue on, Hawthorn appear to be on the up, Geelong rarely slump, the next decade could see Hawthorn win another 2 or 3, Geelong the same, throw in Carlton who are in the equation without their injuries, the Dogs too.
In 10yrs time it could easily be another 8-2 split to Vic clubs because 2 or 3 of the above have had 'the best list and or tactics'.
I dont think its fair to simply say we're just better, without addressing the imbalance that it results in.

 

[JackOutback]

All I’m saying is that the 2015 Hawthorn side is one of the greatest teams of all time and would of won no matter where the gf was played

 

[peetoo]

View attachment 2098822

2-1 to the hawks for the season, including 2 games at subiaco

 

[JackOutback]

2-1 to the hawks for the season, including 2 games at subiaco

Sure, but the suggestion Hawthorn would have won "no matter where the gf was played" was overegging the pudding. If the grand final had been at Subi, there's no reason to suggest the Eagles couldn't have won, given they did so three weeks prior.

 

[Lunchtime]

So like every non-Vic premier ever?

Granted, there's only been two since 2005, but still.

Why pick out a certain period (2005 onwards). Best to look at the entire history.

Grand Finals: Vic Teams vs Non Vic Teams at the MCG

Victorian Teams: 10
Non Victorian Teams: 9

Grand Finals: Vic Teams vs Non Vic Teams at all Grand Final Grounds

Victorian Teams: 11
Non Victorian Teams: 9

1991 Grand Final was played at Waverley Park (Hawthorn vs West Coast)

MCG Tennants vs Non Victorian Teams in Grand Finals at the MCG

MCG Tennats: 6
Non Victorian Teams: 4

MCG Tennants: Richmond, Collingwood, Hawthorn & Melbourne

Hardly lopsided towards Victorian teams. The team who wins the Grand Final, whether they are a Vic team or non-Vic team, they win it because they are good enough. It's as simple as that.

 

[PenfoldsFan]

Why pick out a certain period (2005 onwards). Best to look at the entire history.

Grand Finals: Vic Teams vs Non Vic Teams at the MCG

Victorian Teams: 10
Non Victorian Teams: 9

Grand Finals: Vic Teams vs Non Vic Teams at all Grand Final Grounds

Victorian Teams: 11
Non Victorian Teams: 9

1991 Grand Final was played at Waverley Park (Hawthorn vs West Coast)

MCG Tennants vs Non Victorian Teams in Grand Finals at the MCG

MCG Tennats: 6
Non Victorian Teams: 4

MCG Tennants: Richmond, Collingwood, Hawthorn & Melbourne

Hardly lopsided towards Victorian teams. The team who wins the Grand Final, whether they are a Vic team or non-Vic team, they win it because they are good enough. It's as simple as that.

So what youre basically saying is, ignore the outcry in 07 and the supposed inquest that is perfectly timed between the period of non Vic domination and Vic domination and instead look at the big picture which is 'balanced'.
Then in 10yrs time when Vic teams have continued their recent form you get to either say oh well there obviously was an imbalance but the horse has bolted or but if non Vics dominate from 2035 to 2045 and things again balance, then the almost 30yrs of Vic dominance is justified.

Please, not even the most 1 eyed Victorian could accept that logic with a straight face.

 

[peetoo]

We’re any changes made free the 2007 ‘outcry’?

I cant remember any but the cycle since has seen more vic teams win.


Does that not suggest nothing needs to be done? Maybe abandon the gather round as it’s extra travel for teams already complaining of too much