Mega Thread VICBias - Genuine Discussion

[doppleganger]

Still counts as an advantage

Being forced out of our home ground is an advantage?

Which is further balanced out when you are the lower ranked team facing a higher ranked mcg opponent. 50% of the time you lose, 50% you win.

So a balanced scenario is now also an advantage?

2006 - we played adelaide in adelaide and Sydney in melbourne

?
You lost your home QF to Sydney, by beating the minor premier Sydney then become the "highest ranked" team under the AFL finals system.

And finals….

Finals arent H&A games.

Finals in any Aussie Rules competition are league based games, not club games.

The league picks venues to maximise $$ and eyeballs for the games, just like happens in WAFL / SANFL etc.

 

[kranky al]

Being forced out of our home ground is an advantage?

Not playing in geelong ever is the advantage

Playing higher ranked etihad and geelong finalists at the g is the advantage

Playing higher ranked opponents at the g is the advantage

So a balanced scenario is now also an advantage?

?
You lost your home QF to Sydney, by beating the minor premier Sydney then become the "highest ranked" team under the AFL finals system.

But we played adelaide and Sydney away - you said we couldn’t conceive of being minor premier and playing away - theres two aways for one minor premier.

Meanwhile you could come 8th and never leave the mcg in finals.z

Finals arent H&A games.

Finals in any Aussie Rules competition are league based games, not club games.

The league picks venues to maximise $$ and eyeballs for the games, just like happens in WAFL / SANFL etc.

Then the 2020 gf would have been at optus with 60k. But regardless of money or whatever - it’s an unearned advantage - you could be getting it because god was a collingwood fan and demanded it as the 11th commandment, its still an advantage

On the advantage and disadvantage sides of the ledger - it counts as an advantage

 

[doppleganger]

But we played adelaide and Sydney away - you said we couldn’t conceive of being minor premier and playing away - theres two aways for one minor premier.

Your team lost the QF where you enjoyed a home ground advantage you muppet.

This is what I said, WC cant imagine being minor premier and not getting a home ground advantage. As it doesnt happen

Meanwhile you could come 8th and never leave the mcg in finals.

And could be minor premier and never enjoy any ground advantage.

Then the 2020 gf would have been at optus with 60k.

Not with the WA govt only allowing 50% capacity.

Your shite and lies are boring.

 

[kranky al]

Your team lost the QF where you enjoyed a home ground advantage you muppet.

This is what I said, WC cant imagine being minor premier and not getting a home ground advantage. As it doesnt happen

Well every single gf it happens.

And like I said while we are minor premier we are guaranteed at least one away match collingwood could finish 9th, be elevated to finals for another club sanction and play home for the whole finals.

When we come first it’s because we earned it- we win a bunch of games away to come first.

And could be minor premier and never enjoy any ground advantage.

Not with the WA govt only allowing 50% capacity.

Your shite and lies are boring.

The wa government offered 60000 conditional that there wasn’t an outbreak.

If there had been an outbreak in brisbane do you think the qld government would have gone - oh fine - just play it anyhoo?

<<<
Mr McLachlan confirmed WA's grand final bid did not include provisions for a capacity crowd at its $1.8 billion Optus Stadium.

"We didn't have a commitment for 60,000. Things may change ... but we could only make a decision on the 30-35,000 capacity (in Perth)," he said.>>>

Why WA missed out on hosting the 2020 AFL grand final

amp.theage.com.au

WA was the surest bet to NOT have an outbreak with the strongest restrictions.

Btw the crowd at the Gabba for gf day was 27000…..

 

[MickG88]

St.Kilda pick 27 - Matthew Allison

Gulden pick 32

pfffft - nuffsed

Completely missed what I was saying but continue being superior.

 

[PenfoldsFan]

Overall it's seems fairly even, Vics are getting a run on at the moment and if that trend keeps going, then that is a worry.

But overall there are a few clubs from both Vic and non-Vic that could cry poor, and Sydney is certainly not 1 of them.

A run on, please.
Between 1990 when the AFL was rebranded and 2007 when you held your Royal Commission Vic clubs won 7 of 17 flags, since you Royal Commission Vic clubs have won 14 of 16 flags.
Genuine question, at what point does it become a worry as it seems well past it on historical data.

 

[btdg]

A run on, please.
Between 1990 when the AFL was rebranded and 2007 when you held your Royal Commission Vic clubs won 7 of 17 flags, since you Royal Commission Vic clubs have won 14 of 16 flags.
Genuine question, at what point does it become a worry as it seems well past it on historical data.

What Royal Commission? That didn't happen

 

[PenfoldsFan]

What Royal Commission? That didn't happen

Lol, no, you just got good and we just got bad is a much more likely scenario.

Thank goodness for Vic football that non Vic clubs 'shit the bed' is all I can say then.

 

[blue harvest]

A run on, please.
Between 1990 when the AFL was rebranded and 2007 when you held your Royal Commission Vic clubs won 7 of 17 flags, since you Royal Commission Vic clubs have won 14 of 16 flags.
Genuine question, at what point does it become a worry as it seems well past it on historical data.

The 2007 "royal commission" was not just about flags, it was a look at why Vic sides were performing badly back then with a dearth of Vics near the top of the ladder. They had no grand finalists for 3 years running and in the 5 years prior Vic sides made up just 5 of the 20 top 4 positions. That's 25% even though they made up 62% of the comp at that time, a massive under representation.

But in recent times even though interstaters haven't won many flags they have still been finishing near the top and making grand finals. If you go back 5 years from today they have filled 8 of the 20 top 4 positions. That's 40% when they make up 44% of the comp.

And I still haven't seen anyone say what it is that the "royal commission" implemented, and how it got Geelong the flag the same year, set up their dynasty and got the Hawks the flag the next year?

 

[RUNVS]

The 2007 "royal commission" was not just about flags, it was a look at why Vic sides were performing badly back then with a dearth of Vics near the top of the ladder. They had no grand finalists for 3 years running and in the 5 years prior Vic sides made up just 5 of the 20 top 4 positions. That's 25% even though they made up 62% of the comp at that time, a massive under representation.

But in recent times even though interstaters haven't won many flags they have still been finishing near the top and making grand finals. If you go back 5 years from today they have filled 8 of the 20 top 4 positions. That's 40% when they make up 44% of the comp.

And I still haven't seen anyone say what it is that the "royal commission" implemented, and how it got Geelong the flag the same year, set up their dynasty and got the Hawks the flag the next year?

It didn't implement anything because Geelong won the 2007 flag before much happened, but the fact the AFL wanted to introduce a commission for it is telling, considering they clearly don't want to do the same thing for non-Victorian clubs despite winning very few flags from 2007 onwards.

 

[blue harvest]

It didn't implement anything because Geelong won the 2007 flag before much happened, but the fact the AFL wanted to introduce a commission for it is telling, considering they clearly don't want to do the same thing for non-Victorian clubs despite winning very few flags from 2007 onwards.

But as I said, the interstate clubs have been performing well up near the top of the ladder and playing in GFs during that period. And they have been investigating/helping GWS/Suns a lot of this period too.

 

[kranky al]

It didn't implement anything because Geelong won the 2007 flag before much happened, but the fact the AFL wanted to introduce a commission for it is telling, considering they clearly don't want to do the same thing for non-Victorian clubs despite winning very few flags from 2007 onwards.

If they did institute one I wonder how they would tiptoe around the elephant in the room.

Lol as if they would give a tinkers toss.

The VFL has interstate teams predicated on the same rationale for a Perth room mate wanted ad that specifies FIFO only.

They want the money that comes with a national comp, they don’t actually want us.

 

[RUNVS]

But as I said, the interstate clubs have been performing well up near the top of the ladder and playing in GFs during that period. And they have been investigating/helping GWS/Suns a lot of this period too.

Doesn't matter as no one is in the competition to finish second, third, fifth or eigth. The premiership is what matters and it is becoming statisticially significant that non-Victorian teams are not winning premierships.

 

[PenfoldsFan]

The 2007 "royal commission" was not just about flags, it was a look at why Vic sides were performing badly back then with a dearth of Vics near the top of the ladder. They had no grand finalists for 3 years running and in the 5 years prior Vic sides made up just 5 of the 20 top 4 positions. That's 25% even though they made up 62% of the comp at that time, a massive under representation.

But in recent times even though interstaters haven't won many flags they have still been finishing near the top and making grand finals. If you go back 5 years from today they have filled 8 of the 20 top 4 positions. That's 40% when they make up 44% of the comp.

And I still haven't seen anyone say what it is that the "royal commission" implemented, and how it got Geelong the flag the same year, set up their dynasty and got the Hawks the flag the next year?

Hang on btdg just said it didnt happen and now you're saying it did, what is it..lol

Im sure it did happen but not so sure it was conveniently about h&a finishing position that conveniently gives you an out when looking at results 10-15yrs later.
So lets look closer to the event.
From 2008 to 2011 inclusive Vic sides had 75% representation in the final 8.
In 2012 it was 50/50
In 2013, 2014 it then went back to 37.5/62.5 to Vic
In 2015, 2016 50/50
In 2017 it was amazingly the only year since the Royal Commission that Non Vics had a greater representation with 5 of 8 at 62.5/37.5 yet Vic still won the flag.
Then back to 62.5/37.5 for Vics from 2018 to 2020
50/50 in 21
62.5/37.5 in 22
And 50/50 in 23.
So the pendulum since 2007 has well and truely swung the other way in finishing places AND flags yet its all good because we still make the 8.

And we'll consider the AFL overlooking The Weapons great mate Dank, who he thanked moments after the 07 GF, for fast tracking the Vic revival yeah?

 

[blue harvest]

Hang on btdg just said it didnt happen and now you're saying it did, what is it..lol

Im sure it did happen but not so sure it was conveniently about h&a finishing position that conveniently gives you an out when looking at results 10-15yrs later.
So lets look closer to the event.
From 2008 to 2011 inclusive Vic sides had 75% representation in the final 8.
In 2012 it was 50/50
In 2013, 2014 it then went back to 37.5/62.5 to Vic
In 2015, 2016 50/50
In 2017 it was amazingly the only year since the Royal Commission that Non Vics had a greater representation with 5 of 8 at 62.5/37.5 yet Vic still won the flag.
Then back to 62.5/37.5 for Vics from 2018 to 2020
50/50 in 21
62.5/37.5 in 22
And 50/50 in 23.
So the pendulum since 2007 has well and truely swung the other way in finishing places AND flags yet its all good because we still make the 8.

And we'll consider the AFL overlooking The Weapons great mate Dank, who he thanked moments after the 07 GF, for fast tracking the Vic revival yeah?

50/50 is also an over representation for interstaters, especially back when GWS/Suns were new.

Are you saying a result of the "royal commission" was getting The Weapon to Geelong? Big call.

 

[PenfoldsFan]

50/50 is also an over representation for interstaters, especially back when GWS/Suns were new.

Are you saying a result of the "royal commission" was getting The Weapon to Geelong? Big call.

Dank has been implemented in multiple codes cheating, he was working with Robinson in 07 as declared by Robinson.
The AFL might not have 'got' Dank to Geelong but knowing how they tried to sweep the Essendon doping scandal under the carpet, they definitely didnt object..

 

[btdg]

Lol, no, you just got good and we just got bad is a much more likely scenario.

Thank goodness for Vic football that non Vic clubs 's**t the bed' is all I can say then.

There literally was no royal commission. That is a very specific thing run by the government. You can look up the list of eoyal commissions thay have been run but they are for serious things. Not footy.

The AFL did investigate whether expanding the league had put former VFL teams at a disadvantage, back in 2007.

As others have noted, by the time the investigation was complete Geelong had wiped the table with everyone and Hawthorn's next dynasty was 12 months away. The AFL's general conclusion was that it was just a bit of luck really.

To leap from that timing to some sort of conspiraxy that 16 years later involves the goal unpires is just ludicrous.

 

[LoungeLizard]

A run on, please.
Between 1990 when the AFL was rebranded and 2007 when you held your Royal Commission Vic clubs won 7 of 17 flags, since you Royal Commission Vic clubs have won 14 of 16 flags.
Genuine question, at what point does it become a worry as it seems well past it on historical data.

It becomes a worry when clubs like Port stop crapping their pants and get to play in Grand Finals and keep losing, it is not bias they can't make a Grand Final, they have had plenty of chances and maybe, if they took them chances the score would be very different, SOOK.

 

[kranky al]

50/50 is also an over representation for interstaters, especially back when GWS/Suns were new.

Are you saying a result of the "royal commission" was getting The Weapon to Geelong? Big call.

That’s fine but on the other side we need to allow for melbourne and carlton tanking, carlton being stripped of picks and sent into the wilderness for ten years as well as essendon being caned for peds.

 

[kranky al]

It becomes a worry when clubs like Port stop crapping their pants and get to play in Grand Finals and keep losing, it is not bias they can't make a Grand Final, they have had plenty of chances and maybe, if they took them chances the score would be very different, SOOK.

That has to be the richest bit of irony coming out of a pie supporters pie hole in footy history…..

I mean……Really?

 

[PenfoldsFan]

There literally was no royal commission. That is a very specific thing run by the government. You can look up the list of eoyal commissions thay have been run but they are for serious things. Not footy.

The AFL did investigate whether expanding the league had put former VFL teams at a disadvantage, back in 2007.

As others have noted, by the time the investigation was complete Geelong had wiped the table with everyone and Hawthorn's next dynasty was 12 months away. The AFL's general conclusion was that it was just a bit of luck really.

To leap from that timing to some sort of conspiraxy that 16 years later involves the goal unpires is just ludicrous.

You know what I meant.
We call it a royal commission to add emphasis to the fact we made you look shit in your own league and you had to investigate how to save face.
My club may never win another flag but I take great solace knowing we made you lot blink..lol

 

[bomberclifford]

There literally was no royal commission. That is a very specific thing run by the government. You can look up the list of eoyal commissions thay have been run but they are for serious things. Not footy.

The AFL did investigate whether expanding the league had put former VFL teams at a disadvantage, back in 2007.

As others have noted, by the time the investigation was complete Geelong had wiped the table with everyone and Hawthorn's next dynasty was 12 months away. The AFL's general conclusion was that it was just a bit of luck really.

To leap from that timing to some sort of conspiraxy that 16 years later involves the goal unpires is just ludicrous.

Jesus Christ, they don't mean a literal Royal Commission.

 

[kranky al]

You know what I meant.
We call it a royal commission to add emphasis to the fact we made you look s**t in your own league and you had to investigate how to save face.
My club may never win another flag but I take great solace knowing we made you lot blink..lol

It’s going to get bad I feel, the stats are trending that teams that get substantially more games on the mcg win gf’s at 2:1

As teams get more and more professional and there be some less and less between top teams after the gf deal is done I feel the stats will skew even more.

If you are an interstate team you would be hoping another interstate team or at worst an etihad team is your opponent.

 

[LoungeLizard]

Jesus Christ, they don't mean a literal Royal Commission.

So would you agree, there are a few in here that like to exaggerate things?

 

[PenfoldsFan]

Jesus Christ, they don't mean a literal Royal Commission.

I guess you have to save face somehow when one of your own contradicts you moments later.