Mega Thread VICBias - Genuine Discussion

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
So I guess there is a choice of 3 for non vic fans. As for fans of vic teams, we don't have this choice because our clubs are the same league your clubs joined.

  • Snub the league and its inequities you hate so much and in turn that'll grow and flourish your state leagues to be equal tier, like it used to be. (I like this one best)
  • Continue your whinging and toy throwing and be in perpetual misery knowing things will not go in your favour until the market demands it i:e your state market demands the product more than the other states. (no one likes this one except for those that are looking for something to be offended by types)
  • Just STFU and support your team.
 
H&A games at MCG over last 10 seasons (2014-2023)

gc 11
north 13
brisbane 15
adelaide 15
freo 15
dogs 18
eagles 18
gws 18
port 18
saints 21
sydney 23
 
Carringbush2010 said:
It can't be challenged, the reasons have been stated eleventy gazillion times on this thread and others

There's reasons certain clubs don't get mcg exposure, the reasons have been stated eleventy gazillion times on this thread and others

Well obviously that's coz vic govt. wants to keep the event at the mcg, make HQ an offer they couldn't refuse, in any case the bulk of the footy market is over there in vic, so for revenue it makes sense for both parties.

It wasn't a 'we hate any non vic so we'll do this'

It's literally the point of dozens of threads on bf alone, yet we're still here.

Non vics still unhappy yet refuse to turn their back on the league they despise so much.:shrug:

My suggestion makes sense, hit em where it hurts em, turn your backs on em, return to your state leagues and snub the afl.

We get our vfl back and you can all stop whinging. It's a win win.
Click to expand...
"make HQ an offer they couldn't refuse" and keep it a secret so no others can bid with a bigger offer.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Checksider said:
Ever notice how it’s only the supporters of clubs who benefit from the this ridiculous set up who push so hard whenever someone raises the fact that it might be a bit of a silly way to run a supposedly professional sporting league? Is that just a coincidence?
Click to expand...
I lived in Adelaide at the time and the chant was "We don't lose grand finals at the MCG".
But sure, the Crows completely outplayed Richmond in 2017. There's no way you're just a bad sport and sore loser trying to belittle the success of others because your team completely embarrassed itself with its psychobabble bullish*t on the big stage, and then went on to destroy itself with it's racist little boot camp.

Victorians didn't screw Adelaide. The Crows did that all by themselves. Ever since, their supporters have been trying to blame Victorians for their clubs laughable incompetence.
 
Grin said:
I lived in Adelaide at the time and the chant was "We don't lose grand finals at the MCG".
But sure, the Crows completely outplayed Richmond in 2017. There's no way you're just a bad sport and sore loser trying to belittle the success of others because your team completely embarrassed itself with its psychobabble bullish*t on the big stage, and then went on to destroy itself with it's racist little boot camp.

Victorians didn't screw Adelaide. The Crows did that all by themselves. Ever since, their supporters have been trying to blame Victorians for their clubs laughable incompetence.
Click to expand...
I didn’t say anything about belittling the success of other teams in the past, I just want a fair go for the future.

I can be happy for other footy supporters enjoying success while recognising a biased system inbuilt into the league. If you feel deep down that your team’s past successes are diminished due to unearned home ground advantage then that’s on you.
 
Checksider said:
I just want a fair go for the future.
Click to expand...
sad-sad-life.gif
 
Checksider said:
Oh what a coincidence. Another supporter of a club who recently won flags due to unearned home ground advantage.
Click to expand...

you were not crying about this in 97 and 98.

I don't know what you expect? a grand final in a 50k seated stadium in a retirement village city.

It is what it is. Kick more goals than the opposition in the best stadium in the country and stop crying.

Our best chance was when the GF was at the Gabba, we blew it. Not good enough bad luck, play on.
 
Checksider said:
I didn’t say anything about belittling the success of other teams in the past, I just want a fair go for the future.
Click to expand...
Great. For the integrity of the comp, all teams should be able to play all of their home games on their home ground not just the Non Vic ones. Where the AFL wants to play games elsewhere, eg Darwin and Cairns etc, all teams bear the home game burden, not just the Melbourne based ones. The 2 derbies a year for Non Vic clubs need to be dumped. The Grand Final at the G, which as far as we can measure gives the Vic club a maximum 5 point advantage (and even then only if it is an MCG Tennant playing against a club travelling from WA, of course it's an even smaller advantage if the Vic club isn't an MCG Tennant or the non Vic club is travelling from closer than WA) is the least of the bias and the only one that benefits Melbourne based clubs (not that there's any evidence that it benefits Melbourne based clubs)

Obviously the bias to non Melbourne based clubs is backed up by the facts. Non Melbourne based clubs have been over 250% more likely to make the to 2 this century, whilst non Melbourne based clubs are no less likely to win finals against Melbourne based teams at the G.

If non Victorian based clubs were truely interested in fairness, they'd lobby hard for all the unsporting advantages they get to be neutralised. But we all know you're not at all interested in integrity, you just want even more unsporting advantages than you already get because you feel inferior, and that there is no way you can compete without them.

Unlike you, I don't think you're inferior to me just because I'm from Melbourne and you're not. I wish you and all the other whingers on this thread could develop a bit of self esteem.
 
Grin said:
Great. For the integrity of the comp, all teams should be able to play all of their home games on their home ground not just the Non Vic ones. Where the AFL wants to play games elsewhere, eg Darwin and Cairns etc, all teams bear the home game burden, not just the Melbourne based ones. The 2 derbies a year for Non Vic clubs need to be dumped. The Grand Final at the G, which as far as we can measure gives the Vic club a maximum 5 point advantage (and even then only if it is an MCG Tennant playing against a club travelling from WA, of course it's an even smaller advantage if the Vic club isn't an MCG Tennant or the non Vic club is travelling from closer than WA) is the least of the bias and the only one that benefits Melbourne based clubs (not that there's any evidence that it benefits Melbourne based clubs)

Obviously the bias to non Melbourne based clubs is backed up by the facts. Non Melbourne based clubs have been over 250% more likely to make the to 2 this century, whilst non Melbourne based clubs are no less likely to win finals against Melbourne based teams at the G.

If no Vic based clubs were truely interested in fairness, they'd lobby hard for all the unsporting advantages they get to be neutralised. But we all know you're not at all interested in integrity, you just want even more unsporting advantages than you already get because you feel inferior, and that there is no way you can compete without them.

Unlike you, I don't think you're inferior to me just because I'm from Melbourne and you're not. I wish you and all the other whingers on this thread could develop a bit of self esteem.
Click to expand...
The Grand Final at the G, which as far as we can measure gives the Vic club a maximum 5 point advantage (if it is an MCG Tennant playing against a club travelling from WA,


How did you come to this statement? Genuinely interested.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

The Kings Ransom said:
The Grand Final at the G, which as far as we can measure gives the Vic club a maximum 5 point advantage (if it is an MCG Tennant playing against a club travelling from WA,


How did you come to this statement? Genuinely interested.
Click to expand...
Supporters of non-Melbourne based clubs like to compare the Adelaide Richmond games in 2017 where, in April the Crows won by 80 odd points and in September Richmond won by 40 odd. They use this to insist that the advantage for Melbourne based clubs in grand finals at the G is 120 points o_O

Reasoning with them that grand finals are won in September, not April has no affect on the delusional but infernal whinging

There is an example of a MCG based club twice playing the same non Victorian base club in September. That's West Coast and Collingwood in 2018 where West Coast won it's final by 16 points and Collingwood lost its by 5. that's an 11 point difference. 1/2 of that is 5.5 points. So the one example we have of a club travelling from WA to play a MCG Tennant in a grand final at the G is less than a goal. One would assume that the advantage would be even less if the non Victorian club was located closer than WA or the Melbourne based club wasn't an MCG Tennant. But I don't like to make assumptions and present them as facts as so many of the bad sports and whinging sore losers like to do in this, and other threads. So let's agree that, as far as we know, the advantage to Melbourne based clubs is slightly less than a goal, at the very most.

Also grand finals at the MCG played between Melbourne and non Melbourne based clubs is approximately equal. There is no evidence that non Melbourne based clubs are significantly disadvantaged against Melbourne based clubs. It's totally imagined, but ultimately delusional. And is used by bad sports and sore losers and people with low self esteem to whinge about and denigrate the hard work and success of others.
 
Grin said:
Supporters of non-Melbourne based clubs like to compare the Adelaide Richmond games in 2017 where, in April the Crows won by 80 odd points and in September Richmond won by 40 odd. They use this to insist that the advantage for Melbourne based clubs in grand finals at the G is 120 points o_O

Reasoning with them that grand finals are won in September, not April has no affect on the delusional but infernal whinging

There is an example of a MCG based club twice playing the same non Victorian base club in September. That's West Coast and Collingwood in 2018 where West Coast won it's final by 16 points and Collingwood lost its by 5. that's an 11 point difference. 1/2 of that is 5.5 points. So the one example we have of a club travelling from WA to play a MCG Tennant in a grand final at the G is less than a goal. One would assume that the advantage would be even less if the non Victorian club was located closer than WA or the Melbourne based club wasn't an MCG Tennant. But I don't like to make assumptions and present them as facts as so many of the bad sports and whinging sore losers like to do in this, and other threads. So let's agree that, as far as we know, the advantage to Melbourne based clubs is slightly less than a goal, at the very most.

Also grand finals at the MCG played between Melbourne and non Melbourne based clubs is approximately equal. There is no evidence that non Melbourne based clubs are significantly disadvantaged against Melbourne based clubs. It's totally imagined, but ultimately delusional. And is used by bad sports and sore losers and people with low self esteem to whinge about and denigrate the hard work and success of others.
Click to expand...
Ok
So based on a single pair of games..

When you said best measure I thought there was a bit more effort and analysis than that.
 
The Kings Ransom said:
Ok
So based on a single pair of games..

When you said best measure I thought there was a bit more effort and analysis than that.
Click to expand...
See that's the thing. The only evidence we have is that there is no bias towards Melbourne teams. In fact all the evidence is that Melbourne based clubs are significantly disadvantaged.

The whingers here insist that they're the victims of unbearable injustice, but can produce no evidence. Not only can they produce no evidence, they insist that any evidence that exposes their delusions is never sufficient whilst the lack of evidence they produce for their delusion is absolute proof.

So whilst all the evidence we do have points to very significant, unsporting advantages for non Melbourne based clubs, I accept that facts, no matter how basic and plentiful, will never get in the way of the deluded. Ask any climate science denier, anti-vaccer or Vic-Bias conspiracy theorist.

Is there any point arguing with the bat shit crazy? Even if they insist on constantly berating and boring us with their endless whinging, wining, moaning, entitled demands and abuse? Probably not. But none of us should be under any illusion that their delusions and conspiracy theories have no basis in fact.

I do think we can be kind to them by trying to convince them that they're not inferior, needing to be carried all the time, just because they're not from Melbourne.
 
Checksider said:
If you feel deep down that your team’s past successes are diminished due to unearned home ground advantage then that’s on you.
Click to expand...
On the contrary, I feel that my teams success is enhanced for a number of reasons.
1/ The added difficulty for non Melbourne based clubs making the finals, especially the to 2. As has been clearly proven in this thread.
2/ The number of rules changed to "Bring Richmond back to the field" eg. the Grig rick rule (no prior advantage). The 6:6:6 to stop Richmond playing behind the ball at centre bounces. Of course the kicking in after a behind rule changes, to undermine Richmond's forward press. Ultimately, when all else failed, the stand rule. Whilst it destroyed the look and character of the game, it achieved what it set out to.
3/ The 2020 Premiership. Probably the most against the odds premiership in VFL/AFL history, played in QLD at out opponents home ground after Richmond travelled more than any other club in the comp that year.
4/ The now universally recognised umpiring bias against Richmond, which consistently since 2017 has seen all other teams, as if by magic, play their most disciplined football against Richmond, giving away less free kicks to Richmond than all others.

No. I'm extremely proud of my clubs success. If any interstate club had to face even a tiny fraction of the barriers to success Richmond has, your heads would explode. You lot even infernally whinge because despite all the unsporting advantages you insist you are entitled to even more.
 
Grin said:
On the contrary, I feel that my teams success is enhanced for a number of reasons.
1/ The added difficulty for non Melbourne based clubs making the finals, especially the to 2. As has been clearly proven in this thread.
2/ The number of rules changed to "Bring Richmond back to the field" eg. the Grig rick rule (no prior advantage). The 6:6:6 to stop Richmond playing behind the ball at centre bounces. Of course the kicking in after a behind rule changes, to undermine Richmond's forward press. Ultimately, when all else failed, the stand rule. Whilst it destroyed the look and character of the game, it achieved what it set out to.
3/ The 2020 Premiership. Probably the most against the odds premiership in VFL/AFL history, played in QLD at out opponents home ground after Richmond travelled more than any other club in the comp that year.
4/ The now universally recognised umpiring bias against Richmond, which consistently since 2017 has seen all other teams, as if by magic, play their most disciplined football against Richmond, giving away less free kicks to Richmond than all others.

No. I'm extremely proud of my clubs success. If any interstate club had to face even a tiny fraction of the barriers to success Richmond has, your heads would explode. You lot even infernally whinge because despite all the unsporting advantages you insist you are entitled to even more.
Click to expand...
This might be the most deluded passages of text I’ve ever read.
 
Checksider said:
I didn’t say anything about belittling the success of other teams in the past, I just want a fair go for the future.

I can be happy for other footy supporters enjoying success while recognising a biased system inbuilt into the league. If you feel deep down that your team’s past successes are diminished due to unearned home ground advantage then that’s on you.
Click to expand...

I assume you are happy for the Crows and Port to not get an extra home game next year then?

Perhaps the clearest example of direct compromise to the fixture (rather than a GF deal that advantages 4/18 clubs if they make the GF) that advantages two clubs only.
 
The 747 said:
I assume you are happy for the Crows and Port to not get an extra home game next year then?

Perhaps the clearest example of direct compromise to the fixture (rather than a GF deal that advantages 4/18 clubs if they make the GF) that advantages two clubs only.
Click to expand...
Haha! So we play an 13 games in SA for a few seasons and you’re outraged, but Victorian clubs play 18 or so in their home state year in year out and there’s no problems.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Similar threads

Rory Walkerfield
  • Poll
Autopsy The Stats Don’t Lie: VicBIAS By The Numbers - An Empirical Analysis
16 17 18 19 20
Replies
494
Views
14K
longdonkey
longdonkey
Geoff
The AFL - An Honest Discussion
Replies
19
Views
969
HairyO
HairyO
Purple7x08_24
Coaches discussing umpiring in conferences. Is it, or should it be allowed?
2
Replies
44
Views
2K
geelong_crazy26
G
Chief
Kayo: A balanced and reasoned intellectual discussion
7 8 9 10 11
Replies
253
Views
15K
Giant YoYo
Giant YoYo
HairyO
Umpiring The Purpose Of Boundary Lines - Pies v Cats Game Discussion
3 4 5 6 7
Replies
161
Views
7K
Doc Hattori
Doc Hattori
faible
  • Locked
NO TROLLS Hawthorn Racism Review - Sensitive issues discussed.
391 392 393 394 395
Replies
10K
Views
388K
Gralin
Gralin
faible
  • Locked
NO TROLLS Hawthorn Racism Review - Sensitive issues discussed. Part 2
397 398 399 400 401
Replies
10K
Views
311K
Gralin
Gralin

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top