Mega Thread VICBias - Genuine Discussion

[doppleganger]

I find it ironic that in a thread asking for a genuine discussion about the issue it is being dominated by Collingwood fans saying "na ah, you are wrong, you are not disadvantaged, we are disadvantaged"

A few Collingwood supporters just point out how moronic it is to try and just lump groups into Vic v non-vic, as they aint the same.

With respect to travel, it is WA vs the rest.

With respect to winning games, it is clear that retaining a home ground advantage is a huge advantage.

Of your selected era.

Melbourne based Docklands teams - StK, NM and WB - have won just 1 flag. And to win it the Dogs came from 7th and had to win 4 away finals. No bias here.

Melbourne based "Co-tenants" - Essendon and Carlton - have barely won a final let alone a GF. The two clubs have been shite for 20 years, not having a home ground a big part of that. No bias here.

Melbourne based MCG teams - Coll, Melb, Rich - the supposed advantaged teams who have won 6 flags (but 33% of them were won away from the G). Slightly higher than expected, but the result of Richmond finally coming good after being shit for 30 years.

Then you have the teams who win.

4 flags have been won by the Tassie Hawks, they face a similar travel impost to that of Sydney or the SA teams. They only play 8 or 9 games at their home ground each year, and then are away for the other 13. Hawks have used the fact that you can get an advantage if travelling to a ground that you have a familiarity advantage over your opponent.

4 flags have been won by Geelong, a non Melbourne team who retains a home advantage. Like Tassie, they play 8 or 9 games at their actual home ground, but then play away heaps. But they play "away" at the same ground heaps, so develop strong familiarity with these grounds, so again no real disadvantage. Geelong never get home finals, instead copping the familiar away ground aka a neutral game.

The bias is clear, you dont want to be a team that plays 15 or 16 games in Melbourne with no home ground advantage.

The ideal scenario is to have a unique home ground outside of Melbourne to get a home ground advantage during H&A season, and then get your 5+ games at the G during the so you are familiar with thr G come finals time.

 

[bzparkes]

FMD this bloke still not understanding the clear difference between comparisons and analogies

 

[RUNVS]

A few Collingwood supporters just point out how moronic it is to try and just lump groups into Vic v non-vic, as they aint the same.

With respect to travel, it is WA vs the rest.

With respect to winning games, it is clear that retaining a home ground advantage is a huge advantage.

Of your selected era.

Melbourne based Docklands teams - StK, NM and WB - have won just 1 flag. And to win it the Dogs came from 7th and had to win 4 away finals. No bias here.

Melbourne based "Co-tenants" - Essendon and Carlton - have barely won a final let alone a GF. The two clubs have been shite for 20 years, not having a home ground a big part of that. No bias here.

Melbourne based MCG teams - Coll, Melb, Rich - the supposed advantaged teams who have won 6 flags (but 33% of them were won away from the G). Slightly higher than expected, but the result of Richmond finally coming good after being s**t for 30 years.

Then you have the teams who win.

4 flags have been won by the Tassie Hawks, they face a similar travel impost to that of Sydney or the SA teams. They only play 8 or 9 games at their home ground each year, and then are away for the other 13. Hawks have used the fact that you can get an advantage if travelling to a ground that you have a familiarity advantage over your opponent.

4 flags have been won by Geelong, a non Melbourne team who retains a home advantage. Like Tassie, they play 8 or 9 games at their actual home ground, but then play away heaps. But they play "away" at the same ground heaps, so develop strong familiarity with these grounds, so again no real disadvantage. Geelong never get home finals, instead copping the familiar away ground aka a neutral game.

The bias is clear, you dont want to be a team that plays 15 or 16 games in Melbourne with no home ground advantage.

The ideal scenario is to have a unique home ground outside of Melbourne to get a home ground advantage during H&A season, and then get your 5+ games at the G during the so you are familiar with thr G come finals time.

So you are basically arguing that if anything the 15 of 17 flags is not enough for Victoria, and if there was no bias against Victorian clubs then it would be 17 of 17 flags.

 

[LoungeLizard]

WOW, now the Oxford dictionary doesn't know what it's talking about, Macquarie dictionary also, maybe they should be rewritten, because these geniuses on BF know better.

 

[RUNVS]

WOW, now the Oxford dictionary doesn't know what it's talking about, Macquarie dictionary also, maybe they should be rewritten, because these geniuses on BF know better.

You clearly need to look up the word "nuance" too.

 

[bzparkes]

WOW, now the Oxford dictionary doesn't know what it's talking about, Macquarie dictionary also, maybe they should be rewritten, because these geniuses on BF know better.

A 'Comparison' is comparing similar things against each other, to see what's the same and what's different.

An example: Comparing 2 different toothbrushes to see which one's better.

An 'Analogy' is using one thing(usually a scenario) against something that may be totally different as a reference to reinforce a point you are making/

An example: "She's as blind as a bat" "Cool as a cucumber", etc.

They're very different things, not really difficult to understand tbh.

 

[Forward Press]

Have I wandered into BigFooty or BigDictionary?

 

[greatwhiteshark]

Id prefer a completely random fixture.

Scrap the 6-6-6 handicapping.
Scrap the double Derby, dbl Pies v Ess etc
Scrap the ANZAC day is Pies v Dons
Scrap trying to play BLOCKBUSTERS on Friday night

If it remains at 23 games (including gather round) so for Collingwood 11 home games at the G and 11 away games wherever they fall plus the gather round game.

Just pick the six teams clubs will double up against and the remaining away v home piece completely at random.

But I am aware that the commercial impacts will mean that doesnt eventuate, especially as the WA teams wont give up the locked in double derby.

I think the next best option is to expand to 20 teams, and then create smaller geographic based divisions that end up having the exact same fixture. You are then primarily ranked against your division and finals is top from each division and then work out an approach to determine the next best if wanting to go to a finals consisting od 8 / 10 teams.

I would prefer simply a rolling fixture that just keeps going around in circles year after year after year.
I don't think WA people give two hoots whether or not we play one derby or two derby's.
This would also open up the opportunity for the broadcasters to choose on a weekly basis what games they put on national FTA. Hopefully they would choose the games of the round.

 

[doppleganger]

So you are basically arguing that if anything the 15 of 17 flags is not enough for Victoria, and if there was no bias against Victorian clubs then it would be 17 of 17 flags.

You do realise that if you toss a coin 10 times, if it gives you 9 heads and 1 tail it isnt proof of bias.

The argument is Vic teams are not equal.
Non-vic teams are also not equal.

So anybody that runs with a VICBias position immediately gives themselves away as being a bit simple.

It is an irrelevant grouping, much like grouping by team logos and then claiming bias.

Team logos have two groups - animals (10 teams) and non-animals (8teams)

Of the last 17 flags, the animals have won 16 and the non-animals have only won 1.

Clear "evidence" of bias against the non-animals.

The non-animal teams - Bombers, Blues, Power, Giants, Suns, Saints, Dockers and Demons - should change their logo to a strong animal based logo if they want to be a better chance of being premier as there is a clear bias to animal teams.

 

[RUNVS]

You do realise that if you toss a coin 10 times, if it gives you 9 heads and 1 tail it isnt proof of bias.

The argument is Vic teams are not equal.
Non-vic teams are also not equal.

So anybody that runs with a VICBias position immediately gives themselves away as being a bit simple.

It is an irrelevant grouping, much like grouping by team logos and then claiming bias.

Team logos have two groups - animals (10 teams) and non-animals (8teams)

Of the last 17 flags, the animals have won 16 and the non-animals have only won 1.

Clear "evidence" of bias against the non-animals.

The non-animal teams - Bombers, Blues, Power, Giants, Suns, Saints, Dockers and Demons - should change their logo to a strong animal based logo if they want to be a better chance of being premier as there is a clear bias to animal teams.

A coin flip is a chance based activity. If football was just a chance based game, with no skill or other determining factors I don't think it would be anywhere near as popular.

 

[doppleganger]

A coin flip is a chance based activity. If football was just a chance based game, with no skill or other determining factors I don't think it would be anywhere near as popular.

You clearly miss the point, which was that selecting a small specific sample size doesn't confirm bias.

So you are using a dodgy sample, and then inane groupings (pretending Sydney face the same travel disadvabtage as WC, and that StK and Carl are the same as Collingwood)just to push a stupid position.

Especially when the numbers show the real disadvantaged teams are those with non-animal logos.

When is the AFL going to address the bias towards animal teams?

 

[RUNVS]

You clearly miss the point, which was that selecting a small specific sample size doesn't confirm bias.

So you are using a dodgy sample, and then inane groupings (pretending Sydney face the same travel disadvabtage as WC, and that StK and Carl are the same as Collingwood)just to push a stupid position.

Especially when the numbers show the real disadvantaged teams are those with non-animal logos.

When is the AFL going to address the bias towards animal teams?

Sydney don't have the same travel disadvantages but they still have disadvantages.

Sydney players have to 11 times a season at minimum leave their familes, possibly flying out the day before the match, staying at a hotel, and then due to it being a night game and being unable to get back to Sydney would have to fly out the day after.

So lets say Sydney have a Friday night game. They may arrive in Melbourne on Thursday, play on Friday and return on Saturday. That is almost 3 days away from their families, something a team based in Melbourne would not have to experience anywhere near as much.

 

[go_the_dockers]

How many times do articles on AFL com.au call non Vic sides, interstate teams.

They are so Vic centric it is a joke. Maybe they should employ people outside of Victoria. Based outside of Victoria, not born.

 

[go_the_dockers]

Sydney don't have the same travel disadvantages but they still have disadvantages.

Sydney players have to 11 times a season at minimum leave their familes, possibly flying out the day before the match, staying at a hotel, and then due to it being a night game and being unable to get back to Sydney would have to fly out the day after.

So lets say Sydney have a Friday night game. They may arrive in Melbourne on Thursday, play on Friday and return on Saturday. That is almost 3 days away from their families, something a team based in Melbourne would not have to experience anywhere near as much.

Wa club head over two days before.

So for Friday night, they head out Wednesday, and fly back Saturday.

4 days away from home , plus limited training.

 

[RUNVS]

Wa club head over two days before.

So for Friday night, they head out Wednesday, and fly back Saturday.

4 days away from home , plus limited training.

Yes, it makes a real difference as players like their families, and obviously flying, staying in a hotel and training away from their club facilities are not ideal either.

 

[Checksider]

How many times do articles on AFL com.au call non Vic sides, interstate teams.

They are so Vic centric it is a joke. Maybe they should employ people outside of Victoria. Based outside of Victoria, not born.

They can’t help themselves. It’s the most cooked “professional” sporting league in the world.

 

[doppleganger]

Sydney don't have the same travel disadvantages but they still have disadvantages.

Sydney players have to 11 times a season at minimum leave their familes, possibly flying out the day before the match, staying at a hotel, and then due to it being a night game and being unable to get back to Sydney would have to fly out the day after.

So lets say Sydney have a Friday night game. They may arrive in Melbourne on Thursday, play on Friday and return on Saturday. That is almost 3 days away from their families, something a team based in Melbourne would not have to experience anywhere near as much.

The Tassie Hawks are the Victorian team that has travelled 9-10 times per year during your selected period.

They are the closest Vic team to Sydney in terms of travel, and they have won 4 flags in your select period.

The successful "Vic teams", Tassie Hawks and Geelong, are the teams who play the least games in Melbourne but instead enjoy a significant ground based advantage outside of Melbourne.

 

[ncehlondon]

I went to a function last friday where Don explained in detail how taxing it is the travel for a side from WA. He never mentioned Adelaide.

Mate treat me as you like, I simply don't care. It's seems easy to have good debate with Carringbush and Doppleganger but you just want to argue time after time. No answer you can accept and just say fair enough thats your view. You seem to be the exact same sook as the ones you keep claiming are sooks at West Coast.
Such a shame as it is an opinion board and for the most part I reckon you have a pretty good grasp on the game.
Anyway carry on.

Can not be too taxing. Don is also lobbying to make the same "mistake" and is requesting West Coast joins the VFL again..i mean come on..talk about history repeating.

 

[sr36]

That is just wrong. These stats are a bit old now but still relevant.

Not sure what you're talking about or how you think that disproves my point.

That shows which teams are much better at home than away. It doesn't show how the draw balances out over the season. Eg. Geelong had a clear home ground advantage, as did wce and many of the other mon Vic teams. Meanwhile most of the mcg tenants performed more similarly at home as away as often the MCG is a neutral venue.

The point I'm making is that ladder positions suggest that the advantage and disadvantage balances out. And in fact vic teams don't seem to have been advantaged in home and away at all - if they finished artificially higher, they would have been more likely to lose home finals against the better Non-vic teams - but that hasn't occured - lots of the non-vic teams have lost home finals, even though most of them are more advantaged by a home final, according to your chart.

 

[Carringbush2010]

More and more a state conference model is a win win for every club.

Until then, enjoy the footy everyone

 

[RUNVS]

The Tassie Hawks are the Victorian team that has travelled 9-10 times per year during your selected period.

They are the closest Vic team to Sydney in terms of travel, and they have won 4 flags in your select period.

The successful "Vic teams", Tassie Hawks and Geelong, are the teams who play the least games in Melbourne but instead enjoy a significant ground based advantage outside of Melbourne.

Geelong do not need to stay at a hotel when travelling to Melbourne, they do not need to arrive the day before the game and do not need to leave the day after the game. They can just travel up the highway in a bus that has likely been designed to give them even more leg room than a usual bus.

Also not sure about Hawthorn, but I don't think they played many night games in Tasmania, so they could be back in their own beds the same day as the game.

Also just checked, even with selling home games to Tasmania the Hawks still played 13 games in Victoria during the 2015 H&A season, so even with the Tasmanian games they played more games in their home city than the non-Victorian clubs do.

 

[Checksider]

Lets look at Grand Finals shall we:

2023 - Team finished on top of the ladder won the GF
2022 - Team finished on top of the ladder won the GF
2021 - Team finished on top of the ladder won the GF
2020 - Non Vic team finished 1 and 2. Neither qualified for GF despite having home finals
2019 - 3rd best team beat the 6th best team
2018 - non Vic Premiership - finished 2nd after H&A beat 3rd best team
2017 - Non Vic team finished 1st, lost to 3rd best team (Vic Bias confirmed with Richmond home game)
2016 - Non Vic team finished 1st, lost to 7th best team (Vic team's home ground is Marvel) - no Vic Bias
2015 - Non Vic team finished 1st and 2nd. 2nd finishing team lost to 3rd best team (Vic Bias - maybe, but also Hawthorn were an unbelievably good team)
2014 - Non Vic team finished 1st, lost to 2nd best team (Vic Bias - maybe, but also Hawthorn were an unbelievably good team)

You can argue Hawthorn (2014 and 2015) and Richmond (2017) were favoured by a GF at their home ground.

We can then dissect those 3 games and I'd say those teams win regardless of where they play the game given they absolutely dominated their opponent on the day.

This is the problem though, in a system where one match determines the outcomes of the entire season and it is locked to the home ground and home state of one set of teams, that compromises the whole league.

For example, towards the end of the minor round Sydney host Collingwood in what will likely be a top of the table clash. An exciting match on a Friday night, which should have heaps on the line. Instead, the outcome will be basically meaningless - Sydney could belt them by ten goals and go undefeated from now through September and still have to travel to play on the Pies home deck in the decider.

In any other professional league worth its salt, the Swans would stand to gain something by beating their premiership rivals.

This completely devalues the season, it’s a 23 round charade.

 

[Elixuh]

A few Collingwood supporters just point out how moronic it is to try and just lump groups into Vic v non-vic, as they aint the same.

With respect to travel, it is WA vs the rest.

With respect to winning games, it is clear that retaining a home ground advantage is a huge advantage.

Of your selected era.

Melbourne based Docklands teams - StK, NM and WB - have won just 1 flag. And to win it the Dogs came from 7th and had to win 4 away finals. No bias here.

Melbourne based "Co-tenants" - Essendon and Carlton - have barely won a final let alone a GF. The two clubs have been shite for 20 years, not having a home ground a big part of that. No bias here.

Melbourne based MCG teams - Coll, Melb, Rich - the supposed advantaged teams who have won 6 flags (but 33% of them were won away from the G). Slightly higher than expected, but the result of Richmond finally coming good after being s**t for 30 years.

Then you have the teams who win.

4 flags have been won by the Tassie Hawks, they face a similar travel impost to that of Sydney or the SA teams. They only play 8 or 9 games at their home ground each year, and then are away for the other 13. Hawks have used the fact that you can get an advantage if travelling to a ground that you have a familiarity advantage over your opponent.

4 flags have been won by Geelong, a non Melbourne team who retains a home advantage. Like Tassie, they play 8 or 9 games at their actual home ground, but then play away heaps. But they play "away" at the same ground heaps, so develop strong familiarity with these grounds, so again no real disadvantage. Geelong never get home finals, instead copping the familiar away ground aka a neutral game.

The bias is clear, you dont want to be a team that plays 15 or 16 games in Melbourne with no home ground advantage.

The ideal scenario is to have a unique home ground outside of Melbourne to get a home ground advantage during H&A season, and then get your 5+ games at the G during the so you are familiar with thr G come finals time.

lol what. You want to distinguish between clubs in a more detailed way than vic v non vic but then in the same breath say travel is WA vs the rest. Like Collingwood has the same travel disadvantages as the Lions.

 

[doppleganger]

Geelong do not need to stay at a hotel when travelling to Melbourne, they do not need to arrive the day before the game and do not need to leave the day after the game. They can just travel up the highway in a bus that has likely been designed to give them even more leg room than a usual bus.

Also not sure about Hawthorn, but I don't think they played many night games in Tasmania, so they could be back in their own beds the same day as the game.

Also just checked, even with selling home games to Tasmania the Hawks still played 13 games in Victoria during the 2015 H&A season, so even with the Tasmanian games they played more games in their home city than the non-Victorian clubs do.

13 v 12 is pretty similar.

As said, Tassie Hawks fixture is closer to Sydney than Collingwood.

 

[Cuzz09]

I still think if you're good enough on the day anyone can win.

The fixture is the more annoying thing.

Ideally we played everyone twice, home and away, if that means a really long year then so be it.

Get professional AFL.

If the top 8 at the end of H&A is all non Vic teams then this thread is a non issue

On SM-S908E using BigFooty.com mobile app