Mega Thread VICBias - Genuine Discussion Part 2

[doppleganger]

So can anyone explain the rational of where North is playing its home game in WA?

Bulldogs sell a home game to maximise revenue. They play a home game at the MCG against Collingwood.

Justified by a bigger stadium and all the Pies supporters attending to make money for the Bulldogs etc.

The MCG game was a once off.

The more appropriate comparison is Bulldogs selling home games to Mars Stadium in Ballarat.

Bulldogs have entered into a deal with City of Ballarat to play a couple of games at a much smaller stadium. They actually make money from the games, compared to losing money playing at Marvel.

All good. We get it.

So why is it that North sell a home game into WA but instead of maximising earnings playing the game at the biggest stadium and attracting the biggest crowd possible. The AFL schedule the game to be played 3 hours south of Perth at a 3rd rate country ground after temporary upgrades only holds 12,000 people?

Why the two different models?

Isn't the point of selling home games to make money?

Not sure you do get it.

It ain't about gate receipts, it is the agreement with WA government, Tourism WA that will provide the majority of extra revenue for North.

It is the same model they were doing down in Tassie, and Bulldogs do in Ballarat. The government / council effectively buys the games, and they hope to get a spike in tourism $$ coming in as a result.

They have direct flights Melbourne to Bunbury now, so will be plenty of spruiking of the region as part of match coverage.

 

[Underarm]

So can anyone explain the rational of where North is playing its home game in WA?

Bulldogs sell a home game to maximise revenue. They play a home game at the MCG against Collingwood.

Justified by a bigger stadium and all the Pies supporters attending to make money for the Bulldogs etc.

All good. We get it.

So why is it that North sell a home game into WA but instead of maximising earnings playing the game at the biggest stadium and attracting the biggest crowd possible. The AFL schedule the game to be played 3 hours south of Perth at a 3rd rate country ground after temporary upgrades only holds 12,000 people?

Why the two different models?

Isn't the point of selling home games to make money?

North Melbourne are getting a fixed amount, some of which is paid for tourism WA.

Bulldogs would be getting a Variable amount based on crowd size.

 

[sr36]

So can anyone explain the rational of where North is playing its home game in WA?

Bulldogs sell a home game to maximise revenue. They play a home game at the MCG against Collingwood.

Justified by a bigger stadium and all the Pies supporters attending to make money for the Bulldogs etc.

All good. We get it.

So why is it that North sell a home game into WA but instead of maximising earnings playing the game at the biggest stadium and attracting the biggest crowd possible. The AFL schedule the game to be played 3 hours south of Perth at a 3rd rate country ground after temporary upgrades only holds 12,000 people?

Why the two different models?

Isn't the point of selling home games to make money?

When they sell home games the financial advantage isn't usually the gate receipts, they're getting paid to play the game there. WA government are probably paying to promote tourism there.

 

[oak79]

Yep. The ladder of privilege isn't close to Vic vs Non-Vic.

It's more like:
Syd, Bris
GC, GWS
Collingwood
Other MCG tenants
Geelong/SA clubs
WA clubs
Docklands tenants.

I would rate it:

Geelong
Collingwood
Other MCG tenants
Dockland tenants
SA
QLD, NSW
WA*

*the North deal evens WA teams a little with SA, NSW, QLD

Geelongs true home ground + a few games at MCG is pretty much the perfect mix.

 

[Underarm]

I would rate it:

Geelong
Collingwood
Other MCG tenants
Dockland tenants
SA
QLD, NSW
WA*

*the North deal evens WA teams a little with SA, NSW, QLD

Geelongs true home ground + a few games at MCG is pretty much the perfect mix.

Genuinely would love to hear the argument how St kilda and North Melbourne have it better than West Coast.

 

[sr36]

What Cats request is an interesting one in terms of how they view the various advantages.

They request 11 games at Kardinia Park and home finals at Kardinia Park. This would have them playing as many games at the MCG leading into Grand Finals as the non-Vic teams and turn the MCG into a genuine away venue for them.

I get that this thread is full of people with airplane phobias so they're still benefitting in terms of flying less, but it shows how they equate the accumulating benefit that occurs far more frequently of home ground advantage games and home final advantage games against the MCG home ground granny benefit that occurs infrequently. They'd give up their occasional GF advantage that they get by playing at the G more often to have more home ground advantage games and home final games like the Non-Vic clubs get ...

 

[doppleganger]

Genuinely would love to hear the argument how St kilda and North Melbourne have it better than West Coast.

Or better than SA teams too.

Saints spend more time in the air than Port, Hawks and North play as many games outside VIC.

SA teams get it easy.

 

[LOLchie Schultz]

WA teams having to start a game of league football at 1030am AWST is a piss take!

 

[LOLchie Schultz]

Genuinely would love to hear the argument how St kilda and North Melbourne have it better than West Coast.

Selling games to support your club is a way of life for those clubs, thats not a secret.

 

[sr36]

WA teams having to start a game of league football at 1030am AWST is a piss take!

What time do players train?

And in these games, what time do their opponents start?

Probably shit for fans. Vic fans definitely get it much better in general with lots more opportunity to watch games and better start times than WA. But it's not an disadvantage for the team.

 

[LOLchie Schultz]

What time do players train?

And in these games, what time do their opponents start?

Probably shit for fans. Vic fans definitely get it much better in general with lots more opportunity to watch games and better start times than WA. But it's not an disadvantage for the team.

Surely that's not a point to raise in a VicBias thread!

WA clubs effectively setting a 6am alarm, 630/7am breakfast, 800am on the bus, 830am arrive at the ground, 1035am start.

Just because their clock reads 135 in the state they have been in, for maybe 36 hours, doesnt mean they have become accustomed to the time difference!

And on Sunday, it was in a place one ALF game had ever been played, and that was the day before.

1030am AWST = 130pm AEDST, this will help you work out what times the opponents started!

Never change VaFL!

 

[sr36]

Surely that's not a point to raise in a VicBias thread!

WA clubs effectively setting a 6am alarm, 630/7am breakfast, 800am on the bus, 830am arrive at the ground, 1035am start.

Just because their clock reads 135 in the state they have been in, for maybe 36 hours, doesnt mean they have become accustomed to the time difference!

And on Sunday, it was in a place one ALF game had ever been played, and that was the day before.

1030am AWST = 130pm AEDST, this will help you work out what times the opponents started!

Never change VaFL!

No doubt Vic fans have it better. 17 games in home city if your club doesn't sell any games and game times designed to be the most convenient for the East Coast fans.

But a football advantage due to start times? A team bus for home games? It'd be their weekday routine. What time do they train?

 

[Underarm]

Selling games to support your club is a way of life for those clubs, thats not a secret.

St Kilda don't sell any games, and are still worse off than West coast.

 

[LOLchie Schultz]

No doubt Vic fans have it better. 17 games in home city if your club doesn't sell any games and game times designed to be the most convenient for the East Coast fans.

But a football advantage due to start times? A team bus for home games? It'd be their weekday routine. What time do they train?

Sorry, I thought bringing up Sundays start time would have wiped clear the notion it was a home game for WA teams.

But as it didn't, Fremantle played in the Barrosa Valley on Sunday and just so there in no further confusion, they didn't sleep at their own homes!

They train 2, sometimes 3, hours after Victorian clubs do!

 

[LOLchie Schultz]

St Kilda don't sell any games, and are still worse off than West coast.

Holding onto 1 club in a state of 10 isnt the strongest argument!

 

[Underarm]

Holding onto 1 club in a state of 10 isnt the strongest argument!

Doesn't stop everyone only ever comparing their fixture to Collingwood or West Coast though.

 

[sr36]

Holding onto 1 club in a state of 10 isnt the strongest argument!

Most of the thread is about Collingwood's advantages.

 

[LOLchie Schultz]

Most of the thread is about Collingwood's advantages.

Not even sure that is an argument. Collingwood has been taking the piss since inception!

 

[sr36]

Not even sure that is an argument. Collingwood has been taking the piss since inception!

Read your post and then join the dots and then you might be sure that it's an argument.

 

[LOLchie Schultz]

Read your post and then join the dots and then you might be sure that it's an argument.

Rhode Scholars all over BF now days!

 

[Obeanie1]

The MCG game was a once off.

The more appropriate comparison is Bulldogs selling home games to Mars Stadium in Ballarat.

Bulldogs have entered into a deal with City of Ballarat to play a couple of games at a much smaller stadium. They actually make money from the games, compared to losing money playing at Marvel.


Not sure you do get it.

It ain't about gate receipts, it is the agreement with WA government, Tourism WA that will provide the majority of extra revenue for North.

It is the same model they were doing down in Tassie, and Bulldogs do in Ballarat. The government / council effectively buys the games, and they hope to get a spike in tourism $$ coming in as a result.

They have direct flights Melbourne to Bunbury now, so will be plenty of spruiking of the region as part of match coverage.

So Geelong selling a home game and playing Coll8ngwood at the MCG is about tourism?

Or gate takings?

Its gate takings.


So Collingwood is used by opposition clubs to land a big game and gate takings. Pies get another game at their home g..round.

But the Eagles and Optus arent utilised for the same reason. The teams go to a 3rd rate ground 3 hours south of Perthand play infront of 12,000 fans and WA tourism pays.

Obviously the AFL signs off on all fixtures.

Just another example of different rules / policies that create inequities that advantage some clubs but disadvantage others.

No surprise Collingwood gets the rub of the green from the AFL and fixturing and other clubs do not.

Years ago North asked to sell a home game to Optus v Eagles. The AFL said no. Reason was it was unfair to the comp for the Eagles to get to play an away game at Optus.

Hypocracy at its finest.

And the AFLs favourite cash cow Collingwood gets another home game at the MCG. That isnt unfair to the rest of the competition is it?

 

[kaiserchief13]

What time do players train?

And in these games, what time do their opponents start?

Probably shit for fans. Vic fans definitely get it much better in general with lots more opportunity to watch games and better start times than WA. But it's not an disadvantage for the team.

It's known worldwide that travelling to different time zones impacts performance. Why do you think in NFL an American west coast team that plays at 1pm Eastern on the Eastern coast traditionally struggles?

 

[sr36]

It's known worldwide that travelling to different time zones impacts performance. Why do you think in NFL an American west coast team that plays at 1pm Eastern on the Eastern coast traditionally struggles?

Yeah. I didn't realise it was gather round and assumed it was a game in WA to make it a 1pm start for east coast tv.

However they were playing Richmond and won by 11 goals. Oh the humanity. How Freo suffered.

The teams that actually got the wrong end of the fixturing stick in Gather Round were Victorian. The two teams that got an additional away game against the Adelaide teams.

 

[Underarm]

It's known worldwide that travelling to different time zones impacts performance.

West Coast play more games against teams that change timezones than any other.

 

[doppleganger]

There are a few different scenarios, it ain't the same in every circumstance.

When a VIC team sells a home game on a long term deal it is the result of a sponsor arrangement with councils, govt buying games.

But there are then also Stadium arrangements that the AFL determines for Melbourne games.

So Geelong selling a home game and playing Coll8ngwood at the MCG is about tourism?

Or gate takings?

Its gate takings.

Geelong has never been granted 11 games at Cat Park, has varied from 7 up to 10 now. Geelong also actually has a large group of fans that live in Melbourne.

The only MCG home game Geelong play in 2025 is Easter Monday v Hawthorn, which is all about gate takings.

Geelong are part of two big BLOCKBUSTER games at the G each year now - Essendon for City v Country game and Easter Monday.

If Geelong don't want to be involved in the BLOCKBUSTERS then they don't need to play a home game at the G.

So Collingwood is used by opposition clubs to land a big game and gate takings. Pies get another game at their home g..round.

Correct, Collingwood get 14 games at the G every year - 9 home and 5 away.

The AFL also forces us to play 2 home games at Marvel, one v a Non-Vic club and 1 v a Marvel tenant, that would get bigger crowds if at the G.

This year Pies play our home game v StK at Marvel, so there is no net advantage to Collingwood by having the Dogs playing their home game at the G.

Dogs get extra gate receipts, Pies miss out.

But the Eagles and Optus arent utilised for the same reason. The teams go to a 3rd rate ground 3 hours south of Perthand play infront of 12,000 fans and WA tourism pays.

North aren't selling the game for gate receipts, they have entered into a long term contract with WA govt and tourism WA.

They are just replacing their Tasmania arrangement.

Obviously the AFL signs off on all fixtures.

Just another example of different rules / policies that create inequities that advantage some clubs but disadvantage others.

Correct
The disadvantage is never to WA clubs, as they never sell any of their home games.

They benefit from playing Melbourne based teams at alternate venues, but then still sook about VICBias.

No surprise Collingwood gets the rub of the green from the AFL and fixturing and other clubs do not.

Years ago North asked to sell a home game to Optus v Eagles. The AFL said no. Reason was it was unfair to the comp for the Eagles to get to play an away game at Optus.

Hypocracy at its finest.

Correct it is an unfair advantage to WC.

WA fans sooking about VICBias when they are getting the advantage is hilarious.

Pies are only advantaged by playing Dogs at G, because you ignore us playing a home game at Marvel against the Saints.

Collingwood have it best compared to the other 9 Melbourne based clubs, but trail teams who don't sell games and get extra home ground advantage games...like SA and WA teams.

And the AFLs favourite cash cow Collingwood gets another home game at the MCG. That isnt unfair to the rest of the competition is it?

Collingwood play 14 games at the G each season, 9 "home" and 5 "away".

We should get all 11 of our home games at the G.

And as there are 6 teams who call the MCG home, avg 2-3 away games would be normal considering the AFL does the fixture to promote geographic rivals.

So if in a completely random fixture Collingwood would play 13 or 14 games at the G every year.

In a completely random fixture WC would usually only get 11 games on WA, but the AFL ensures they now get 13 and their fans complain about it.

I would love a completely random fixture, but the WA fans would sook it up as they would travel more.