The AFL - a national competition? (split thread)

[goswannies]

Remeber Eddie complaining that Collingwood had one day less to prepare for the preliminary final. He won't say anything about West Coast having one day less to prepare for the Grand Final. So much for his level playing field.

I’d love a journo to bring that to Chins’ attention in a well publicised interview!

[barry]

It's not silly talk. If you don't take a stand, injustice will prevail. Bad things happen when good men do nothing.
Sure, the AFL could schedule non-Vic to play each other, but imagine the political fall out. It would be huge.

[goswannies]

It's not silly talk. If you don't take a stand, injustice will prevail. Bad things happen when good men do nothing.
Sure, the AFL could schedule non-Vic to play each other, but imagine the political fall out. It would be huge.

Ok, sorry, in my opinion it’s silly talk. 4 point behind in a competition where every win counts. Lost revenue. And I think you overrate the political fall out (or I don’t rate it). And the league could easily fine every participating club for bringing the game into disrepute. So, IMO silly talk

[barry]

They could fine them all, they could bankrupt them, but aren't they then spiting themselves by then. And for what, to protect one particular venue ?
The reputation damage to AFL outside victoria would be monumental. The Vic biased would be laid bare. No journo could ignore it. Strikes on sport happen all over the world. It's not uncommon.

[Blood Fever]

They could fine them all, they could bankrupt them, but aren't they then spiting themselves by then. And for what, to protect one particular venue ?
The reputation damage to AFL outside victoria would be monumental. The Vic biased would be laid bare. No journo could ignore it. Strikes on sport happen all over the world. It's not uncommon.

In the USA, for example, no sporting organisation would dare let this situation arise. If perchance they did, there would be player strike action and a massive court action threat. The integrity of the AFL in this instance is a laughing stock, similar to our politics and change of PMs.

[stevoswan]

In the USA, for example, no sporting organisation would dare let this situation arise. If perchance they did, there would be player strike action and a massive court action threat. The integrity of the AFL in this instance is a laughing stock, similar to our politics and change of PMs.

Good post. I like Australia's 'she'll be right' attitude generally but not when sporting and political organizations have the same slackish attitude to integrity and fairness.....

.....but also, we in Australia are in the unique (or uniquely stupid) position of our footy league having more than half the teams and therefore, more than half the players happily at home in the state that controls the league.....the US does not have this impediment, so the player strike will never happen here unfortunately. Let's face it, the AFLPA is Vic based as well.

While he did deliver some 'silly talk', I like Barry's combative attitude on this topic and I reckon the interstate clubs should definitely do something collectively to address the obvious and tangible imbalances that exist.

[U.S. Swan]

Players don't strike over venue...believe me. They strike over $$$$.

[Blood Fever]

Players don't strike over venue...believe me. They strike over $$$$.

OK, but MLB, NBA, NHL etc would never deny home field/court entitlement. NFL at least has neutral venue.

[Markwebbos]

Michael Gleeson from the Age is one Melbourne journo who sees the non-Melbourne POV. He wrote this about the Grand Final venue: https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/...23-p505jd.html

A home away from home

This notionally national competition had a chance to right a wrong and didn’t.

The MCG is the best ground in the country, but it is also Collingwood’s home ground, not West Coast’s. The Eagles, the higher finishing, higher qualifying team will play on the other side of the country at the MCG as the ‘home’ team.

That is illogical and it is unfair - but it is also a complete waste of breath to argue about now because that argument was shelved when the AFL signed to play the Grand Final at the MCG until at least 2057. Now is just the moment when attention turns back to that decision.

The AFL is more likely to be able to fix its other more vexed problems like the utterly compromised fixture before it can get the Grand Final away from the MCG.

[barry]

Michael Gleeson from the Age is one Melbourne journo who sees the non-Melbourne POV. He wrote this about the Grand Final venue: https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/...23-p505jd.html

A home away from home

This notionally national competition had a chance to right a wrong and didn’t.

The MCG is the best ground in the country, but it is also Collingwood’s home ground, not West Coast’s. The Eagles, the higher finishing, higher qualifying team will play on the other side of the country at the MCG as the ‘home’ team.

That is illogical and it is unfair - but it is also a complete waste of breath to argue about now because that argument was shelved when the AFL signed to play the Grand Final at the MCG until at least 2057. Now is just the moment when attention turns back to that decision.

The AFL is more likely to be able to fix its other more vexed problems like the utterly compromised fixture before it can get the Grand Final away from the MCG.

The victorian argument follows a well trodden path:
1) "No ground is big enough outside MCG", despite only 30,000 club members getting access.
2) "You joined out comp, so suck it", despite the A in AFL not being an upside down V.
3) "The MCG on Grand final day is no ones home ground". By devine intervention all previous home advantages just magically disappear.
and now we have moved on to
4) "The MCG deal is signed for next 50 years", so cant be changed.

At least when they get to (4), they have admitted there is a problem.
Contracts get changed all the time. When finals were first played outside of vic, the MCG contract had to be changed.

Hopefully we get to (5) one day.
5) Ok, fair enough. Lets see what we can do.

[crackedactor]

Michael Gleeson from the Age is one Melbourne journo who sees the non-Melbourne POV. He wrote this about the Grand Final venue: https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/...23-p505jd.html

A home away from home

This notionally national competition had a chance to right a wrong and didn’t.

The MCG is the best ground in the country, but it is also Collingwood’s home ground, not West Coast’s. The Eagles, the higher finishing, higher qualifying team will play on the other side of the country at the MCG as the ‘home’ team.

That is illogical and it is unfair - but it is also a complete waste of breath to argue about now because that argument was shelved when the AFL signed to play the Grand Final at the MCG until at least 2057. Now is just the moment when attention turns back to that decision.

The AFL is more likely to be able to fix its other more vexed problems like the utterly compromised fixture before it can get the Grand Final away from the MCG.

Watched the Sunday morning footy show and Leigh Matthews did raise this question and suggesting it was unfair, Josh Jenkins from Adelaide also asked why Richmond plays on home ground last year but Adelaide finished on top of ladder. Of course the host ..Gil M brother Hamish, quickly crushed the conversation.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Markwebbos]

The victorian argument follows a well trodden path:
1) "No ground is big enough outside MCG", despite only 30,000 club members getting access.
2) "You joined out comp, so suck it", despite the A in AFL not being an upside down V.
3) "The MCG on Grand final day is no ones home ground". By devine intervention all previous home advantages just magically disappear.
and now we have moved on to
4) "The MCG deal is signed for next 50 years", so cant be changed.

At least when they get to (4), they have admitted there is a problem.
Contracts get changed all the time. When finals were first played outside of vic, the MCG contract had to be changed.

Hopefully we get to (5) one day.
5) Ok, fair enough. Lets see what we can do.

Gleeson doesn't think the AFL should have done the deal.