Mega Thread VICBias - Genuine Discussion Part 2

[Cleric]

To be fair it is only a tradition for Victoria and, with it now being a national comp, new traditions should be made.
Things change and so should the MCG underhanded deal .
There is a lot more changes coming for AFL and this should be one of them.
The day will come when WC meet Freo in a gf or Sydney v GWS and the AFL will relent.

They won't relent.
The money they GF brings into the Victorian economy is massive. No way the Victorian government would allow that to happen.
It will be sold as the best outcome as its neutral ground.
I think its horseshit, but the AFL don't.

Imagine how ridiculous it would be to have the Grand Final parade between Freo and WC, or Port and Adelaide, in Melbourne.
If it was a Sydney vs GWS final it would be more likely as it would bring big attention to the AFL in the Sydney market, and as we know, the AFL cares more about building the game in the Northern states than in either SA or WA. We are the Red haired step children of the AFL.

 

[Cleric]

So all of you non-Vic folks would also want Geelong and the Marvel tenants playing genuine home finals, including potentially grand finals? As really the fairest thing would be for the higher seed to host any final at their home ground.

Yes. If Geelong have learnt a Prelim at home then it should be played at Kardinia. Why should it be moved to the MCG to then give that home ground advantage to say Collingwood?

 

[Cleric]

Agree on this, the GF needs to be at the biggest venue and the G is that venue. While it provides an advantage to a Vic side against a non Vic side the AFL can fix attempt to fix this but still to this point they have not shown a willingness to do so.

That is to try and ensure non vic teams get as much support into the ground as possible.
I went to the 2018 GF and I was stunned how many genuine Collingwood fans/members had found a way to get tickets into the game. Both sides are allocated 16k I believe but there was genuinely 50k or more Collingwood fans in actual attendence. How did they get tickets? Did they buy them off Richmond fans who missed out? Obviously some are AFL members or MCC members but the number was way to much.
The AFL I would like to see put in place a system where only fans of competing sides that are MCC or AFL members can attend and are given a ticket. and all focus is put in to ensure the maximum amount of non vic sides supporters can attend which should be around 30-40k for a GF.
That is where we can sort it out in my opinion.

The Richmond vs Crows GF was basically a Richmond home ground. Speaking to people who were there, they said 70% of the crowd were Richmond supporters, and the ground was done up for Richmond.
It in no way felt like a neutral stadium, and was definitely a pro Richmond ground.

 

[Delisted]

The Richmond vs Crows GF was basically a Richmond home ground. Speaking to people who were there, they said 70% of the crowd were Richmond supporters, and the ground was done up for Richmond.
It in no way felt like a neutral stadium, and was definitely a pro Richmond ground.

How so?

 

[sr36]

Not really.
If three or four of the clubs are playing interstate ever week, and Geelong is at Kardinia every second week, that leaves three games each week between Vic clubs. I'm sure that Marvel should be able to handle the rest.

That'd be locking a heap of fans out of the footy.

 

[Cleric]

Don't disagree.

Attempting to get more tickets to competing club members, especially members of non Vic teams is something the AFL should look to fix.

But the the focus on GF is misplaced (as it is the one time when Vic teams are actually advantaged.

The AFL should look to fix the H&A season which favours teams who have a proper home ground advantage and don't sell home games.

It's more nuanced than that. Not all Victorian teams get the same preferential treatment by the AFL. Lower places teams like North or the Bulldogs do play interstate more than Collingwood do for instance.
Under the guise of maximising crowds, the AFL has given a big leg up to the big Victorian clubs by allowing them to play more at home than others.
To show how much of an advantage it is, with gather round in SA, Victorians have complained that it gives an advantage to the SA clubs who get to play in SA for another games, when the reality is that one of the two SA clubs will play one extra game at home a year. So just one extra home game for one of the clubs is considered an advantage.

The fact that they don't have to travel gives their sponsors better coverage, the players have to travel less, and it has been said by Victorian commentators that this is actually used by the big clubs as a sales pitch to get players to join their team.

 

[sr36]

It's more nuanced than that. Not all Victorian teams get the same preferential treatment by the AFL. Lower places teams like North or the Bulldogs do play interstate more than Collingwood do for instance.
Under the guise of maximising crowds, the AFL has given a big leg up to the big Victorian clubs by allowing them to play more at home than others.
To show how much of an advantage it is, with gather round in SA, Victorians have complained that it gives an advantage to the SA clubs who get to play in SA for another games, when the reality is that one of the two SA clubs will play one extra game at home a year. So just one extra home game for one of the clubs is considered an advantage.

The fact that they don't have to travel gives their sponsors better coverage, the players have to travel less, and it has been said by Victorian commentators that this is actually used by the big clubs as a sales pitch to get players to join their team.

You might want to look at how this works. AFL ticks off deals to sell home games to other venues - deals negotiated by the club. It's the home team organising it and requesting it.

Pies wanted to sell one of our Docklands games into the Gold Coast this year - didn't work out financially, as the AFL don't want us to reduce our number of games at the stadium they own - Docklands - so there was a penalty price for us to pay to move the game.

 

[Cleric]

How so?

There was black and yellow everywhere.
Here is a photo of the 2019 GF.
Does it seem like a neutral venue?

 

[greatwhiteshark]

The Richmond vs Crows GF was basically a Richmond home ground. Speaking to people who were there, they said 70% of the crowd were Richmond supporters, and the ground was done up for Richmond.
It in no way felt like a neutral stadium, and was definitely a pro Richmond ground.

And this is the only problem with the GF at the G, who gets to attend it. The AFL should be pushing every available package and seat to Adelaide and Melbourne people that don't support Richmond should have zero chance of getting a ticket.
So it's fine to have the GF at the G, its the best stadium for it. But they must look after the two teams supporters equally.

 

[BigHuddo]

And this is the only problem with the GF at the G, who gets to attend it. The AFL should be pushing every available package and seat to Adelaide and Melbourne people that don't support Richmond should have zero chance of getting a ticket.
So it's fine to have the GF at the G, its the best stadium for it. But they must look after the two teams supporters equally.

Should just do away with the MCC stand for the grand final. People who don't care for either teams just watching because they can whilst they are taking away opportunities from people who just wanna watch their team play in the GF. The members can cry all they want about their 40 year waitlist but this is the right thing to do.

 

[Cleric]

You might want to look at how this works. AFL ticks off deals to sell home games to other venues - deals negotiated by the club. It's the home team organising it and requesting it.

Pies wanted to sell one of our Docklands games into the Gold Coast this year - didn't work out financially, as the AFL don't want us to reduce our number of games at the stadium they own - Docklands - so there was a penalty price for us to pay to move the game.

The AFL makes the initial fixture, and do so to maximise crowds and TV audiences, and not to have a fair competition.
Timeslots can effect teams attendances, which are often made so that the big clubs like Collingwood are in a time slot that makes it easier for them to fill the stadium.
There was a game that Collingwood played, I can't remember when exactly, but there was a poor crowd and Collingwood were furious at the AFL for the timeslot as it made it harder to fill the stadium. The amount of anger from them was amazing to see, meanwhile Adelaide was given games on mothers day, or Easter Sunday, which are notorious for having lower turnouts.
The attitude of Collingwood was that they were entitled to be put in the best times for their fans.

I realise that you can't make everyone happy, but the AFL does give preference to the bigger drawing Vic teams in their schedule, both for game and TV attendances.
The AFL will say that, yes, it does disadvantage some smaller teams, most notably Victorian ones, but the extra revenue they get from those blockbuster ones helps fund the AFL, which goes back to help those lesser clubs financially.
This however then keeps the smaller clubs smaller, as they don't get the opportunity to get more eyes on them. It means they can't get as much sponsorship money compared to those bigger clubs, as they don't get the same exposure.
It's a vicious cycle.

 

[OGeez]

Oh my goodness, just found this thread but I feel so strongly on this topic. Don't get me started as VICbias is one of the strongest and most ridiculous thing in the AFL. Protection of Clubs and players by the AFL in Victoria is so prominent that its getting rediculous. Umpires making calls to better vic clubs happens way more than any other club. They are also trying to stop people from knowing about the bias by adding Gather round and opening rounds putting non-vic clubs into the limelight to get people to stop thinking about victoria.

Although the AFL used to be the VFL and majority of fans and players are from Victoria. This bias needs to stop. Its critically affecting the game and protecting clubs with bigger support bases in melbourne.

 

[sr36]

Should just do away with the MCC stand for the grand final. People who don't care for either teams just watching because they can whilst they are taking away opportunities from people who just wanna watch their team play in the GF. The members can cry all they want about their 40 year waitlist but this is the right thing to do.

AFL has no chance of making that happen. Plus it's not usually a particularly parochial voice for any team.

AFL members is what should go. It is heavily slanted to the Vic team's fans. Get rid of it.

 

[greatwhiteshark]

Should just do away with the MCC stand for the grand final. People who don't care for either teams just watching because they can whilst they are taking away opportunities from people who just wanna watch their team play in the GF. The members can cry all they want about their 40 year waitlist but this is the right thing to do.

Agree, if they are going to do a ground deals and GF deals so that large amount of games are at the G and the GF stays at the G forever then thats fine but the offset must be that MCC and AFL members lose their right to the GF unless they have nominated the club they support when they joined and that club is in the GF. The MCC members might be hard to change but the AFL membership can be dumped tomorrow morning.
No problem looking after the MCG and the tourism for Melbourne doing these deals but on GF day the Fans of the two competing sides must come first above everyone else.

 

[Delisted]

There was black and yellow everywhere.
Here is a photo of the 2019 GF.
Does it seem like a neutral venue?View attachment 2262712

Hmm you could be onto something. There’s a lot of empty seats though. Maybe it was towards the end of the game when most of the Crows supporters left?

 

[sr36]

The AFL makes the initial fixture, and do so to maximise crowds and TV audiences, and not to have a fair competition.
Timeslots can effect teams attendances, which are often made so that the big clubs like Collingwood are in a time slot that makes it easier for them to fill the stadium.
There was a game that Collingwood played, I can't remember when exactly, but there was a poor crowd and Collingwood were furious at the AFL for the timeslot as it made it harder to fill the stadium. The amount of anger from them was amazing to see, meanwhile Adelaide was given games on mothers day, or Easter Sunday, which are notorious for having lower turnouts.
The attitude of Collingwood was that they were entitled to be put in the best times for their fans.

I realise that you can't make everyone happy, but the AFL does give preference to the bigger drawing Vic teams in their schedule, both for game and TV attendances.
The AFL will say that, yes, it does disadvantage some smaller teams, most notably Victorian ones, but the extra revenue they get from those blockbuster ones helps fund the AFL, which goes back to help those lesser clubs financially.
This however then keeps the smaller clubs smaller, as they don't get the opportunity to get more eyes on them. It means they can't get as much sponsorship money compared to those bigger clubs, as they don't get the same exposure.
It's a vicious cycle.

No doubt on some of that stuff, but that's not what you were talking about - you were suggesting the AFL decides which clubs will play their home game's interstate.

 

[Cleric]

Oh my goodness, just found this thread but I feel so strongly on this topic. Don't get me started as VICbias is one of the strongest and most ridiculous thing in the AFL. Protection of Clubs and players by the AFL in Victoria is so prominent that its getting rediculous. Umpires making calls to better vic clubs happens way more than any other club. They are also trying to stop people from knowing about the bias by adding Gather round and opening rounds putting non-vic clubs into the limelight to get people to stop thinking about victoria.

Although the AFL used to be the VFL and majority of fans and players are from Victoria. This bias needs to stop. Its critically affecting the game and protecting clubs with bigger support bases in melbourne.

It's something that actually effects the smaller Vic clubs like North and WBs as well, and even more to be frank.
It's not that the AFL are supporters of Collingwood or Essendon, but they makes decisions that by default preference those bigger clubs.
As I said in a different post, if Geelong have earnt a home final against Collingwood, it should be played at Kadinia and not the MCG. The AFL will say its about maximising the crowd, but the reality is it went from Geelong having earnt a home ground advantage to giving that home ground advantage to Collingwood.

 

[Cleric]

Hmm you could be onto something. There’s a lot of empty seats though. Maybe it was towards the end of the game when most of the Crows supporters left?

That's the game against GWS, but I got your jibe.

 

[greatwhiteshark]

The AFL makes the initial fixture, and do so to maximise crowds and TV audiences, and not to have a fair competition.
Timeslots can effect teams attendances, which are often made so that the big clubs like Collingwood are in a time slot that makes it easier for them to fill the stadium.
There was a game that Collingwood played, I can't remember when exactly, but there was a poor crowd and Collingwood were furious at the AFL for the timeslot as it made it harder to fill the stadium. The amount of anger from them was amazing to see, meanwhile Adelaide was given games on mothers day, or Easter Sunday, which are notorious for having lower turnouts.
The attitude of Collingwood was that they were entitled to be put in the best times for their fans.

I realise that you can't make everyone happy, but the AFL does give preference to the bigger drawing Vic teams in their schedule, both for game and TV attendances.
The AFL will say that, yes, it does disadvantage some smaller teams, most notably Victorian ones, but the extra revenue they get from those blockbuster ones helps fund the AFL, which goes back to help those lesser clubs financially.
This however then keeps the smaller clubs smaller, as they don't get the opportunity to get more eyes on them. It means they can't get as much sponsorship money compared to those bigger clubs, as they don't get the same exposure.
It's a vicious cycle.

This is where the AFL are hoodwinked about big Vic clubs, if you are a big club the timeslot will never matter, you could play Man United at 2am and it will be a full house. By Pandering to the big Vic clubs with special timeslots their fans grow lazy and won't attend when they feel it's not their preferred time.
Big clubs fans attend no matter what.
Collingwood could own Sunday twighlight and should play in front of full houses, but the AFL have said to their fans basically don't attend then and we will put you on Friday night.
The AFL have no idea. to be honest

 

[Cleric]

No doubt on some of that stuff, but that's not what you were talking about - you were suggesting the AFL decides which clubs will play their home game's interstate.

They do. Why has historically Collingwood played less interstate games than North or Western Bulldogs? (Not taking into account sold games interstate like Tassie)

 

[Cleric]

This is where the AFL are hoodwinked about big Vic clubs, if you are a big club the timeslot will never matter, you could play Man United at 2am and it will be a full house. By Pandering to the big Vic clubs with special timeslots their fans grow lazy and won't attend when they feel it's not their preferred time.
Big clubs fans attend no matter what.
Collingwood could own Sunday twighlight and should play in front of full houses, but the AFL have said to their fans basically don't attend then and we will put you on Friday night.
The AFL have no idea. to be honest

I remember when Collingwood was given games to play at Docklands, and they were poorly attended, and the Pies blamed the AFL because their supporters didn't like to go to Marvel, and much preferred to watch games at the MCG.

 

[BigHuddo]

Agree, if they are going to do a ground deals and GF deals so that large amount of games are at the G and the GF stays at the G forever then thats fine but the offset must be that MCC and AFL members lose their right to the GF unless they have nominated the club they support when they joined and that club is in the GF. The MCC members might be hard to change but the AFL membership can be dumped tomorrow morning.
No problem looking after the MCG and the tourism for Melbourne doing these deals but on GF day the Fans of the two competing sides must come first above everyone else.

Couldn't agree more, if you elect a club that is in the GF you deserve to watch it of course. But I just hate the idea of a Melbourne fan for example watching a GF between Collingwood and Brisbane just because they can. Also with the AFL memberships. 100%. If they're going to keep it they might as well just call it a VFL membership. No respect or consideration for interstate clubs whatsoever with those memberships.

 

[sr36]

They do. Why has historically Collingwood played less interstate games than North or Western Bulldogs? (Not taking into account sold games interstate like Tassie)

Historically is right. Hasn't been the case for ages. It's 6 unless you sell home games to make it more. Although Saints cop a 7th this year - however it's a neutral one against the Dees.

AFL fixture: How many interstate trips does your club have in 2025? | Sporting News Australia

www.sportingnews.com

 

[doppleganger]

Really good well thought out post mate. Why are the AFL not looking at these types of things?

Probably because there are too many noises and distractions wanting AFL to change Australian geography so that can have equal distance travelled by all teams.

 

[Cleric]

Historically is right. Hasn't been the case for ages. It's 6 unless you sell home games to make it more. Although Saints cop a 7th this year - however it's a neutral one against the Dees.

AFL fixture: How many interstate trips does your club have in 2025? | Sporting News Australia

www.sportingnews.com

I know it was said that it was a disadvantage for them to stay in Victoria as much because they were never able to get used to travelling for finals. Didn't stop you from beating us in a Prelim at Football Park.