Mega Thread VICBias - Genuine Discussion Part 2

[Dogflogger]

And thats not taking into account the benefit of less travel which could potentally be a big part of a players longevity.
Look and Pendles for example, at 400ish games and 300 of them have been at MCG or Marvel I'm assuming quite close to his house. so he travels once a month if there arent any byes.

 

[doppleganger]

Yes but grounds like Tassie and Darwin are unofficial home grounds for clubs and if the AFL wont send MCG tennants there then its no different. it just means that certain clubs are rarely put in a situation where they have disadvantages from a football ground perspective.

They are "unofficial" home grounds, but not their actual home ground.

How many games do you need to play at a ground for it to be a genuine home ground? 3, 5, 7??

And what ground familiarity difference do you need to get an advantage over your opponent?

The full home ground advantage is when a team plays 10+ and their opponent plays less than 3. That is your traditional WC v a travelling opponent set-up.

But what happens when a side like Gold Coast play 4 or 5 games at Marvel...do they still face an equivalent disadvantage?

If both play 5 or more is their any real advantage / disadvantage? Ie StK had 13 Marvel games, Essendon 9...do we just accept BOTH teams are familiar, or do Saints get an advantage?

 

[iameviljez]

And thats not taking into account the benefit of less travel which could potentally be a big part of a players longevity.
Look and Pendles for example, at 400ish games and 300 of them have been at MCG or Marvel I'm assuming quite close to his house. so he travels once a month if there arent any byes.

Maybe, but we've started to see guys like Mundy and Pavlich play 350+.

 

[Dogflogger]

They are "unofficial" home grounds, but not their actual home ground.

How many games do you need to play at a ground for it to be a genuine home ground? 3, 5, 7??

And what ground familiarity difference do you need to get an advantage over your opponent?

The full home ground advantage is when a team plays 10+ and their opponent plays less than 3. That is your traditional WC v a travelling opponent set-up.

But what happens when a side like Gold Coast play 4 or 5 games at Marvel...do they still face an equivalent disadvantage?

If both play 5 or more is their any real advantage / disadvantage? Ie StK had 13 Marvel games, Essendon 9...do we just accept BOTH teams are familiar, or do Saints get an advantage?

Its not really about the advantage for any team on game day, its about the fairness of the fixture. I personally dont care that Collingwood play Geelong at home always because they have an advantage, i dislike the disadvantage it gives the rest of the league who have to pick up the slack.

 

[doppleganger]

And thats not taking into account the benefit of less travel which could potentally be a big part of a players longevity.
Look and Pendles for example, at 400ish games and 300 of them have been at MCG or Marvel I'm assuming quite close to his house. so he travels once a month if there arent any byes.

Focus on an outlier isnt the best approach when doing analysis.

Pendles is the exception, most Collingwood players drop off early.

And Freo have their own two outliers - Pav with 353 and Mundy with 376.

Burgoyne another 400 gamer and he played for Port and then Tassie Hawks, so had an avg of 10 flights per year across his career.

10 trips spread across a 6 month season

 

[Dogflogger]

Focus on an outlier isnt the best approach when doing analysis.

Pendles is the exception, most Collingwood players drop off early.

And Freo have their own two outliers - Pav with 353 and Mundy with 376.

Burgoyne another 400 gamer and he played for Port and then Tassie Hawks, so had an avg of 10 flights per year across his career.

10 trips spread across a 6 month season

It's just a good example of my point because he has not missed many games so it shows the teams spread of games at venues over the last 20 years basically. I'm not trying to shit on Collingwood because this is all the AFL's doing chasing the $$$ its just a demented way to equalize the league which does nothing but create animosity for everyone.

 

[doppleganger]

Its not really about the advantage for any team on game day, its about the fairness of the fixture. I personally dont care that Collingwood play Geelong at home always because they have an advantage, i dislike the disadvantage it gives the rest of the league who have to pick up the slack.

Even the statement "fairness" of fixture has many different elements.

Commercial perspective
Days break between games
Quality of your dbl up opponents
Do you sell "home" games
How many home ground advantage games
How many times you travel

It is usually the small Melbourne clubs / Marvel tenants copping the rough end of the pineapple, they get shit commercial fixture, so sell games, meaning more travel and less games with actual HGA.

But the VICBias wowsers dont like people pointing out that it is StK, WB, NM, Carl, Ess who are disadvantaged.

 

[Dogflogger]

how many televised games you get, how many avenues you get to increase your membership tally and attract high paying sponsors, How those things affect your team at the trade table, How it affects your FA recruitment. All very important but it all begins with the fixture which is a absolute headache to create because of marquee games and games that are guaranteed to be played at a certain place.

 

[VicBased]

Where you're wrong is that your looking at it as a supporter. WCE footy club aren't going to care where Hawks and Collingwood play each other - why would they? It has absolutely no impact on WCE. Any gain or loss from them playing in Tassie would go to or come from Hawthorn and Collingwood only.

If there is a disadvantage for Collingwood in playing Hawks in Tassie , it'd be Hawthorn that get the equal sized advantage. Why would WCE be campaigning to get Hawthorn an advantage at Collingwood's expense? The same with the Cats in Geelong. WCE campaigning to give the Cats an advantage?

Why are you campaigning to give the Cats and Hawks an advantage. I'd be more worried about them if I was you.

The way you guys carry on, you'd think that Collingwood are an unstoppable powerhouse that all other clubs are trying to stop to take away our fantastic advantages and give them to another team - when you look closer - it would generally go to another Vic team Meanwhile, we've won 3 flags in 64 years...

Sorry , but you don't understand my argument and I don't understand yours so I will leave it there.
Probably sums up most of this thread. See ya.

 

[sr36]

It's just a good example of my point because he has not missed many games so it shows the teams spread of games at venues over the last 20 years basically. I'm not trying to shit on Collingwood because this is all the AFL's doing chasing the $$$ its just a demented way to equalize the league which does nothing but create animosity for everyone.

This one is club caused - not the AFL. Afl are happy as it's spreading the game to regional places without a club, but it's the clubs making the call on who and where.

The AFL is simply giving clubs what they want by allowing them to sell home games, which are not their big earning home games. It's the Hawks and North's wishes in terms of them playing Saints and Freo in Tassie, but not Collingwood there.

 

[peetoo]

We won’t even goto ports failed trips to China

 

[JackOutback]

Whether Collingwood plays North at Marvel or Hobart has no impact on WCs travel.

If WC are fixtured to play an away game v North, they travel basically the same whether it is in Hobart or Marvel.

The team dudded with extra travel are North themselves, who travel for a home games, and a small Melbourne team like the Dees or StK who would normally have no travel for an away game against North at Marvel, but end up in Tassie.

As usual, it is the small Melbourne teams who are dudded....but a WC fan thinks it helps strenghten their "VICBias" argument.

Whether other teams should have to bear some travel burden to narrow the gap between West Coast's travel absolutely does have an impact on West Coast. If we make a grand final on the home ground of our opponents, them having travelled less and being less fatigued is another advantage on the day.

 

[sr36]

We won’t even goto ports failed trips to China

You mean when Port sold other teams home games to another country?

I went to them - they were great.

 

[My_Username]

If there isn't, the next best is one where the higher ranked team hosts.

So you'd be happy for the GF to be played at Cararra?

25,000 seats, all going to meet AFL contracts (no fans allowed) and costing millions due to the contracts that can't be met?

Or would you set a minimum size that (just happened) to be around the size of your team's home ground?

 

[Ambrose Burnside]

So you'd be happy for the GF to be played at Cararra?

25,000 seats, all going to meet AFL contracts (no fans allowed) and costing millions due to the contracts that can't be met?

Or would you set a minimum size that (just happened) to be around the size of your team's home ground?

Not sure what will happen in the scenario of Gold Coast hosting a grand final. We probably have to wait for the MCG agreement to expire before they're in a position to based on the idea of highest ranked team hosting

 

[My_Username]

Not sure what will happen in the scenario of Gold Coast hosting a grand final. We probably have to wait for the MCG agreement to expire before they're in a position to based on the idea of highest ranked team hosting

So you want it to happen, but when faced with the scenarios you don't like (not just Suns hosting, but GWS, and Tas), you retreat behind how we'll just have to wait?

What would you want/expect to happen?

The AFL/clubs are contractually obligated to provide ~50,000 seats to the GF.

 

[Ambrose Burnside]

So you want it to happen, but when faced with the scenarios you don't like (not just Suns hosting, but GWS, and Tas), you retreat behind how we'll just have to wait?

What would you want/expect to happen?

The AFL/clubs are contractually obligated to provide ~50,000 seats to the GF.

The idea of the highest ranked team hosting would require any existing contracts to be re-written anyway. And I know it's unlikely to happen. But I've been to a Grand Final that wasn't hosted at the MCG and it was amazing. I doubt I'll be able to see one again, unless Victoria gets locked down again, and that's a shame. More random Victorians have seen the Eagles win premierships than Eagles members, and I've seen more Melbourne premierships than pretty much any living Melbourne supporter. That's nuts.

I have nothing against Gold Coast/GWS/Tassie hosting. Would be great.

While I'm on the topic of things unlikely to happen, I'd like the grand final to have a crowd like the Prelim finals rather than the corporate crowd or members of other clubs that get allocated tickets for some reason that do attend.

 

[Dogflogger]

This one is club caused - not the AFL. Afl are happy as it's spreading the game to regional places without a club, but it's the clubs making the call on who and where.

The AFL is simply giving clubs what they want by allowing them to sell home games, which are not their big earning home games. It's the Hawks and North's wishes in terms of them playing Saints and Freo in Tassie, but not Collingwood there.

It's the AFL's Equalization model that maximises profit by putting big clubs in as many primetime slots as possible through out the year, would these clubs need to sell as many home games if they themselves were given a fair share of primetime slots? we sold home games to China and NZ in years we were half a chance of making finals and I cannot believe that if we werent riddled by debt that we would do something so fking stupid.

 

[Dogflogger]

This one is club caused - not the AFL. Afl are happy as it's spreading the game to regional places without a club, but it's the clubs making the call on who and where.

The AFL is simply giving clubs what they want by allowing them to sell home games, which are not their big earning home games. It's the Hawks and North's wishes in terms of them playing Saints and Freo in Tassie, but not Collingwood there.

after the Adam goodes situation how many games in a row did you play Sydney in Sydney? thats the kinda shit im talking about. no club should be playing another club up to 10+ times in a row at their home ground because of any reason.

 

[Ambrose Burnside]

after the Adam goodes situation how many games in a row did you play Sydney in Sydney? thats the kinda shit im talking about. no club should be playing another club up to 10+ times in a row at their home ground because of any reason.

Optus Stadium opened in 2018 and 2024 was the first time the Eagles hosted Brisbane.

 

[Dogflogger]

Optus Stadium opened in 2018 and 2024 was the first time the Eagles hosted Brisbane.

yeah there are alot of weird shit like that happening in the fixture year on year, how hard is it to have 1 home/ 1 away either over 1 year or two.

 

[Ambrose Burnside]

yeah there are alot of weird shit like that happening in the fixture year on year, how hard is it to have 1 home/ 1 away either over 1 year or two.

Don't worry, there will be about 10 pages coming up listing all the reasons why it doesn't actually affect anyone.

 

[sr36]

after the Adam goodes situation how many games in a row did you play Sydney in Sydney? thats the kinda shit im talking about. no club should be playing another club up to 10+ times in a row at their home ground because of any reason.

Was that Goodes related?

I always assumed it was an AFL thing to promote footy in Sydney. But yes, we play Sydney in Sydney nearly every year. A home game against the Pies is a cash cow that most clubs are really keen to have. Add in Carlton and Essendon always getting one too and there aren't that many left to go around. It's bollocks.

 

[sr36]

Optus Stadium opened in 2018 and 2024 was the first time the Eagles hosted Brisbane.

Isn't there reciprocal less games between QLD and WA teams to reduce travel?

 

[sr36]

Don't worry, there will be about 10 pages coming up listing all the reasons why it doesn't actually affect anyone.

No. I'll just point out that Collingwood travelling to Sydney every year advantages Sydney, and Brisbane barely travelling to WCE advantages Brissy (I think it's part of a good initiative to reduce travel). So not sure where vicbias comes into it, other than suggest that these sort of things aren't Vic only.