Mega Thread VICBias - Genuine Discussion

[Carringbush2010]

Perhaps the thread should be called #$$$bias.

Probably more appropriate.

What annoys a lot of interstate fans is not the perceived Vic bias of the league (not me anyway), it's the horse trading, personal agendas and egos and bargaining points that are not transparent to the fan base when deals like these are struck.

You mean like just about everything that the powers that be do in life, like govt. policy etc.? Well yeah agreed.

In the case of an unequal, not national, expanded vfl it's the same, it's driven by market forces so those in power can trade their horses.

For mine, I don't reckon a proper national comp can ever be, not in our lifetimes anyway because you'd have to do away with clubs that are more than 100 yo and have 100's of thousands of paying fans (the market) would follow wherever their club went, or if their club folded (unlikely given there's market demand) they'd snub the game.

The eternal question I'd have for literally years on these boards is.............

Why do non vic fans persist with following this league? The state leagues are still going with the same clubs before the vfl expanded.

I mean you can see the disdain in every single thread on this topic, yet all the non vic clubs, which all but one are new franchises, are growing.

I know if I were a non vic, I'd definitely be voting with my feet and remote.

 

[Farang83150]

Maybe that's required due to the large AFL tax of Vic home games that subsidise the rest of the league.

 

[Cleric]

The 10 Vic clubs outnumber the Interstate clubs in any vote or push for change.
The fact that non Vic clubs are actually referred to as the "Interstate" clubs should give you an idea of where things sit.
The AFL funds the entire Victorian jrs program instead of the local state league as happens in SA and WA. Why would the AFL consider local Victorian kids as their kind?
The AFL GF is held in Melbourne every year. It has to be noted that the AFL actually extended the contract with the MCG well after the expansion teams entered.
When the Crows played Richmond in the GF, the ground was decked out like it was a Richmond home game. It was far from a neutral venue. This just should not be.
If the Crows were to play Port in a GF, the game would be held in Melbourne, the GF parade would be held in Melbourne, and that is an absolute disgrace. One day this, or a similar scenario (Freo vs WC) will happen, and the outrage is going to be massive.
The entire national AFL media is located in Victoria. The majority of talking heads are Victorian, and parochial ones at that.
The fact that you hear "if x player was playing in Melbourne he would be alot more regarded by the media" tells you that there is a major bias in the media.
The way Adelaide was treated for Tippet, compared to what happened to Melbourne when they got caught match fixing, and Essendon for doping was pathetic.

I could go on, but it is what it is.

 

[bomberclifford]

If the Crows were to play Port in a GF, the game would be held in Melbourne, the GF parade would be held in Melbourne, and that is an absolute disgrace. One day this, or a similar scenario (Freo vs WC) will happen, and the outrage is going to be massive.

Everything you wrote is on point, but I don't agree with this bit.

It would be awesome heading to Melbourne for a Showdown GF, or a Western Derby.

 

[Elmer_Hauser]

Bias doesn't need malicious intent to exist. It can also be the result of systemic and structural advantages that have come about through happenstance.

It seems to me that almost all posters here agree that there is bias towards Victorian based teams but the disagreement comes from the reasons behind it. To me the reasons are academic, it's the actions to remove it that should be the focus.

The removal of bias should be a key focus of the governing body of the sport. Any equalisation measures need to be weighed against the benefits and advantages created by the historical and inbuilt bias towards some teams. If the latter continues to outweigh the former, then questions have to be asked about the agenda of the governing body.

The MCG deal and how it was done is the biggest red flag that there are elements within the AFL machine that want the bias to continue. Now I'm all for the GF to remain at the MCG, but that requires some balancing to give all teams appropriate access to the ground each season. It's never going to be purely equal but it needs to be a lot better than it is.

Everything else, unbalanced travel, home ground advantage, selling home games to regional grounds, crowd splits, etc are nothing in the grander scheme of things. These tend to ebb and flow over the years.

The constant though is the MCG deal. Having a potential Grand Final played at the MCG where one team has home ground advantage and 10+ games there a season, where the other only plays 3 or 4 games there over two years, is a massive advantage to one team.

I certainly agree with your point about the MCG, non Victorian clubs (least those in flag contention) should be fixtured there more often instead of away games in Vic to Marvel and worsen, Tassie or Alice Springs
The fact West Coast was not allowed to train there once during the week leading up to the 2018 is 100 % textbook Vic Bias and should never happen again

 

[Cleric]

Everything you wrote is on point, but I don't agree with this bit.

It would be awesome heading to Melbourne for a Showdown GF, or a Western Derby.

Sure you may, but most wouldn't be. Adelaide would be dead when both teams are playing in Melbourne for their entertainment. There would be a GF parade in Melbourne for both teams, when it should have been here.

 

[blue harvest]

The fact West Coast was not allowed to train there once during the week leading up to the 2018 is 100 % textbook Vic Bias and should never happen again

That is a myth that KrankyAl keeps putting on here.
Below is footage of the Eagles training at the G during 2018 GF week.

 

[Grand Uncle Horace]

The title of the OP is a misnomer. It is really Melbourne bias.

Geelong gets snookered in not being able to choose which home games are played at the Litter Box. Ditto in home finals, inc PFs.

The welcome introduction of a Tassie team means 19 teams - one too many in my opinion. And that is one too many teams in Melbourne. This can be fixed by removing financial props for St.Kilda, Footscray and North to encourage an amalgamation or failing that, the first to go bust is dispensed with.

AO and Optus are terrific but under used venues. Ultimately WA and SA have large enough markets to support a third team. This will probably happen in the 30’s but will coincide with dropping the number of Melbourne teams to 6.

H and A fixturing is Melbourne biased. Equalisation of travel demands must be addressed in the next decade. The WA clubs in particular should have more home games- maybe 4, QLD teams - maybe two and the SA, NSW and TAS teams - maybe 1. This means the Melbourne teams would have fewer games in Melbourne. This can be balanced by non Melbourne teams having additional games at the G.

Anywaythese are my thoughts.

As for the media, a minimum requirement should be Fox and 7 commentators should learn the names of non Melbourne players. Pig ignorant commentators like Brian Taylor, Darcy etc should be retired.

 

[The 747]

The 10 Vic clubs outnumber the Interstate clubs in any vote or push for change.
The fact that non Vic clubs are actually referred to as the "Interstate" clubs should give you an idea of where things sit.
The AFL funds the entire Victorian jrs program instead of the local state league as happens in SA and WA. Why would the AFL consider local Victorian kids as their kind?
The AFL GF is held in Melbourne every year. It has to be noted that the AFL actually extended the contract with the MCG well after the expansion teams entered.
When the Crows played Richmond in the GF, the ground was decked out like it was a Richmond home game. It was far from a neutral venue. This just should not be.
If the Crows were to play Port in a GF, the game would be held in Melbourne, the GF parade would be held in Melbourne, and that is an absolute disgrace. One day this, or a similar scenario (Freo vs WC) will happen, and the outrage is going to be massive.
The entire national AFL media is located in Victoria. The majority of talking heads are Victorian, and parochial ones at that.
The fact that you hear "if x player was playing in Melbourne he would be alot more regarded by the media" tells you that there is a major bias in the media.
The way Adelaide was treated for Tippet, compared to what happened to Melbourne when they got caught match fixing, and Essendon for doping was pathetic.

I could go on, but it is what it is.

Amusing. In Victoria we refer to other states as "interstate", as in I am going interstate. This is apparently #VICBIAS!; this thread is a good laugh.

And Adelaide volunteered the Tippett penalty.

So basically all this thread has got is that the GF is played in Melbourne. Everything else has been bullshit.

 

[GWT6]

The 10 Vic clubs outnumber the Interstate clubs in any vote or push for change.
The fact that non Vic clubs are actually referred to as the "Interstate" clubs should give you an idea of where things sit.
The AFL funds the entire Victorian jrs program instead of the local state league as happens in SA and WA. Why would the AFL consider local Victorian kids as their kind?
The AFL GF is held in Melbourne every year. It has to be noted that the AFL actually extended the contract with the MCG well after the expansion teams entered.
When the Crows played Richmond in the GF, the ground was decked out like it was a Richmond home game. It was far from a neutral venue. This just should not be.
If the Crows were to play Port in a GF, the game would be held in Melbourne, the GF parade would be held in Melbourne, and that is an absolute disgrace. One day this, or a similar scenario (Freo vs WC) will happen, and the outrage is going to be massive.
The entire national AFL media is located in Victoria. The majority of talking heads are Victorian, and parochial ones at that.
The fact that you hear "if x player was playing in Melbourne he would be alot more regarded by the media" tells you that there is a major bias in the media.
The way Adelaide was treated for Tippet, compared to what happened to Melbourne when they got caught match fixing, and Essendon for doping was pathetic.

I could go on, but it is what it is.

Simple fix - get your team to join the SANFL instead of the VFL/AFL, then maybe you can stop whinging. Otherwise, suck it up.

 

[Cleric]

Amusing. In Victoria we refer to other states as "interstate", as in I am going interstate. This is apparently #VICBIAS!; this thread is a good laugh.

And Adelaide volunteered the Tippett penalty.

So basically all this thread has got is that the GF is played in Melbourne. Everything else has been bullshit.

Not quite, but good try.
When the AFL "National" media is referring to non Victorian teams, they refer to them as Interstate clubs. Same goes for When they say "If Rory Laird was playing for a Victorian team he would get more plaudits for his performances" meaning that when a super player plays for an "Interstate" side, they are out of sight, out of mind. Without a doubt there is a massive Victorian bias in the media, which dictates the agenda in the public.

Adelaide volunteered it? The Victorian media were demanding that Adelaide lose two years of draft picks, and the AFL told Adelaide that it would be in their best interests to "volunteer" them because they were going to lose them.
Adelaide went to the AFL and self reported the issues around Tippet. Essendon on the other hand was shredding paperwork.
On 5AA, Andrew D, when asked why Adelaide lost more draft picks than Adelaide, made the comment that Essendon self reported and Adelaide hid it.
Melbourne had meetings in the shed at the back of their clubrooms hatching their plan to throw matches to get a priority draft pick. That's match fixing. This is one of the worst things a club has done. How many draft picks did Melbourne lose for match fixing to get a priority pick? None. Not one.
If you don't see the downright corruption in that, then you are just clowning.

Yeah, the AFL isn't biased at all.

 

[Elmer_Hauser]

One could theoretically say that more Victorian clubs in the comp makes it 'harder' for 'interstate' clubs to win flags, which is why so many of these Johnny Come Lately expansion club fans (except for The Swans and Port Adelaide, whom I think are the same club in all respect as their historical SANFL Magpies) want several Vic club booted in order so they can 'win a flag' and stop choking in finals, esp prelim home finals

Also more teams = more games per weekend and greater TV rights and consolidate for all teams, so all Vic clubs are here to stay.

Finally I find it hilarious that some 'interstate' club fans seem to blame Ron Barrassi for calling an investigation into the state of Vic AFL football after the grand finals of the 00 (an investigation that never actually happened)

 

[Cleric]

Simple fix - get your team to join the SANFL instead of the VFL/AFL, then maybe you can stop whinging. Otherwise, suck it up.

Lol. The VFL and half of their teams were bankrupt, and if it wasn't for the SA and WA clubs it would have been wound up. The AFL and the VIc teams are only still there thanks to us.
Suck that up.

 

[Papa G]

One could theoretically say that more Victorian clubs in the comp makes it 'harder' for 'interstate' clubs to win flags, which is why so many of these Johnny Come Lately expansion club fans (except for The Swans and Port Adelaide, whom I think are the same club in all respect as their historical SANFL Magpies) want several Vic club booted in order so they can 'win a flag' and stop choking in finals, esp prelim home finals

Also more teams = more games per weekend and greater TV rights and consolidate for all teams, so all Vic clubs are here to stay.

Finally I find it hilarious that some 'interstate' club fans seem to blame Ron Barrassi for calling an investigation into the state of Vic AFL football after the grand finals of the 00 (an investigation that never actually happened)

Um.....

Demetriou: Victorian clubs need help

VICTORIAN football is seriously sick and in need of assistance, AFL chief executive Andrew Demetriou admitted yesterday. Demetriou puzzled by policy

www.perthnow.com.au

 

[GWT6]

Lol. The VFL and half of their teams were bankrupt, and if it wasn't for the SA and WA clubs it would have been wound up. The AFL and the VIc teams are only still there thanks to us.
Suck that up.

So that's why all of the Vic teams went and joined the SANFL was it?? What's that - it didn't happen because SANFL was a minor league in a glorified country town???

You follow a team that joined the Victorian Football league, and you complain about it. Go support Norwood or some other country football team.

I bet you are the type that buys a house near a pub then demands live music be stopped. Or moves near an airport and complains about the noise. Just be thankful that you don't have to tune into that pathetic local league and can support top level football.

Absolute whingeing flog.

 

[Cleric]

So that's why all of the Vic teams went and joined the SANFL was it?? What's that - it didn't happen because SANFL was a minor league in a glorified country town???

You follow a team that joined the Victorian Football league, and you complain about it. Go support Norwood or some other country football team.

I bet you are the type that buys a house near a pub then demands live music be stopped. Or moves near an airport and complains about the noise. Just be thankful that you don't have to tune into that pathetic local league and can support top level football.

Absolute whingeing flog.

That's a strange way to reply. If it wasn't for the interstate clubs the VFL wouldn't exist, and you would be barracking for a VFA team.

 

[GWT6]

That's a strange way to reply. If it wasn't for the interstate clubs the VFL wouldn't exist, and you would be barracking for a VFA team.

So you are saying without Adelaide joining, I would be watching the best payers in the country play in a Victorian based league, much like today?

Not sure this is the witty comment you think, more like a massive self own.

Log off champ, you've embarrassed yourself enough for today.

 

[The 747]

Not quite, but good try.
When the AFL "National" media is referring to non Victorian teams, they refer to them as Interstate clubs. Same goes for When they say "If Rory Laird was playing for a Victorian team he would get more plaudits for his performances" meaning that when a super player plays for an "Interstate" side, they are out of sight, out of mind. Without a doubt there is a massive Victorian bias in the media, which dictates the agenda in the public.

Adelaide volunteered it? The Victorian media were demanding that Adelaide lose two years of draft picks, and the AFL told Adelaide that it would be in their best interests to "volunteer" them because they were going to lose them.
Adelaide went to the AFL and self reported the issues around Tippet. Essendon on the other hand was shredding paperwork.
On 5AA, Andrew D, when asked why Adelaide lost more draft picks than Adelaide, made the comment that Essendon self reported and Adelaide hid it.
Melbourne had meetings in the shed at the back of their clubrooms hatching their plan to throw matches to get a priority draft pick. That's match fixing. This is one of the worst things a club has done. How many draft picks did Melbourne lose for match fixing to get a priority pick? None. Not one.
If you don't see the downright corruption in that, then you are just clowning.

Yeah, the AFL isn't biased at all.

The majority of their audience is in Victoria. Can you keep to some sort of argument? At present it seems to be AFL=Victorians=media; we are not a hive mind and unlike those from interstate we tend to have independent and non-State based thoughts.

So Adelaide volunteered the punishment because the Vic "national' media" were targeting Adelaide. Then some whataboutism with Essendon and Melbourne, who did not volunteer penalties because the Vic "national' media" apparently didn't target them, is that right?

Just throwing things at the thread and nothing sticks except for the GF is in Melbourne. What a let down this thread and our #VICBIAS! posters are.

 

[Engimal v3]

The welcome introduction of a Tassie team means 19 teams - one too many in my opinion. And that is one too many teams in Melbourne. This can be fixed by removing financial props for St.Kilda, Footscray and North to encourage an amalgamation or failing that, the first to go bust is dispensed with.

So you'd remove AFL distribution from just these 3 clubs, or all AFL clubs?

 

[LoungeLizard]

Lol. The VFL and half of their teams were bankrupt, and if it wasn't for the SA and WA clubs it would have been wound up. The AFL and the VIc teams are only still there thanks to us.
Suck that up.

SA had nothing to do with it so stop blowing your trumpet.

Brisbane and WC I think you mean.

Also by joining the VFL, WC saved the WAFL clubs who were also broke.

But you keep dreaming on.

 

[Outtatym]

The 10 Vic clubs outnumber the Interstate clubs in any vote or push for change.
The fact that non Vic clubs are actually referred to as the "Interstate" clubs should give you an idea of where things sit.
The AFL funds the entire Victorian jrs program instead of the local state league as happens in SA and WA. Why would the AFL consider local Victorian kids as their kind?
The AFL GF is held in Melbourne every year. It has to be noted that the AFL actually extended the contract with the MCG well after the expansion teams entered.
When the Crows played Richmond in the GF, the ground was decked out like it was a Richmond home game. It was far from a neutral venue. This just should not be.
If the Crows were to play Port in a GF, the game would be held in Melbourne, the GF parade would be held in Melbourne, and that is an absolute disgrace. One day this, or a similar scenario (Freo vs WC) will happen, and the outrage is going to be massive.
The entire national AFL media is located in Victoria. The majority of talking heads are Victorian, and parochial ones at that.
The fact that you hear "if x player was playing in Melbourne he would be alot more regarded by the media" tells you that there is a major bias in the media.
The way Adelaide was treated for Tippet, compared to what happened to Melbourne when they got caught match fixing, and Essendon for doping was pathetic.

I could go on, but it is what it is.

Who pays for the VFL?

 

[Brasher]

SA had nothing to do with it so stop blowing your trumpet.

Brisbane and WC I think you mean.

Also by joining the VFL, WC saved the WAFL clubs who were also broke.

But you keep dreaming on.

Brisbane and WC certainly helped out the VFL with the cash injection from the licensing fees to keep the debt collectors away.

However, in the 4 years between Brisbane and WC entering the league and the Crows we saw:

• IPL who held the licenses for WC went broke
• Cronin's holding group for the Bears went broke
• Edelston and PowerPlay went broke
• Footscray was broke and nearly merged with Fitzroy
• Richmond lost $1.4M and had to ask for an advance on their allowance to pay their bills over the offseason
• Half of the Vic clubs continue to record operating losses.

Brisbane and WC's entry to the league and the payment of their license fees helped the VFL settle existing debt but it did not turn around the existing business model into a successful, profitable one.

In fact the VFL contributing to the license holders early financial problems by demanding the license fees paid upfront instead of staged over multiple years as initially proposed. So they could settle their own debts.

It was not until the the competition achieved national coverage and the resulting tv deals did they achieve a sustainable competition.

 

[LoungeLizard]

Brisbane and WC certainly helped out the VFL with the cash injection from the licensing fees to keep the debt collectors away.

However, in the 4 years between Brisbane and WC entering the league and the Crows we saw:

• IPL who held the licenses for WC went broke
• Cronin's holding group for the Bears went broke
• Edelston and PowerPlay went broke
• Footscray was broke and nearly merged with Fitzroy
• Richmond lost $1.4M and had to ask for an advance on their allowance to pay their bills over the offseason
• Half of the Vic clubs continue to record operating losses.

Brisbane and WC's entry to the league and the payment of their license fees helped the VFL settle existing debt but it did not turn around the existing business model into a successful, profitable one.

In fact the VFL contributing to the license holders early financial problems by demanding the license fees paid upfront instead of staged over multiple years as initially proposed. So they could settle their own debts.

It was not until the the competition achieved national coverage and the resulting tv deals did they achieve a sustainable competition.

You might want to read the post I replied to, he said the VFL would have been wound up, crap.

 

[Brasher]

You might want to read the post I replied to, he said the VFL would have been wound up, crap.

Well it was close. Only a handful were solvent.

But my response focuses on your SA had nothing to do with it claim.

 

[doppleganger]

The title of the OP is a misnomer. It is really Melbourne bias.

Agree.

Geelong gets snookered in not being able to choose which home games are played at the Litter Box. Ditto in home finals, inc PFs.

But the flip side to that is that during H&A they are the only Vic team who have retained their home ground advantage.

So have a FIXture that is beneficial, just like the other nonMelbourne teams.

H and A fixturing is Melbourne biased.

It is biased in favour of teams that retain a home ground advantage.

How about some stats, to see which teams tend to dominate

Since 2000

Top2 after H&A - 32 non Melbourne to 14 Melbourne.

It really is obvious, the H&A season is biased towards teams who kept their home ground advantage.

Equalisation of travel demands must be addressed in the next decade.

Pffft, Hawthorn travel 9-10 times per year during their 3 peat.

How are you meant to address geography?

Teams in isolated remote cities will always face a larger travel load compared to those based in closer proximity to major population hubs.

The WA clubs in particular should have more home games

They already have more home advantage games than all Melbourne based clubs.

Why give them more?

As for the media, a minimum requirement should be Fox and 7 commentators should learn the names of non Melbourne players. Pig ignorant commentators like Brian Taylor, Darcy etc should be retired.

You think their lack of knowledge is solely non Melbourne teams...LOL.

They are just ignorant full stop.

Be interesting to see balance of AA squads / brownlow medalists...do non Melbourne players get these gongs more often too?