The AFL travel myth
Roar Pro If you listen to the pre game shows on the ABC radio station in Perth before an Eagles or Dockers game you will be lead to believe that they are getting a raw deal.
Callers will often state that the Western Australian teams are being treated unfairly because they have to travel so often.
There is a belief that this puts them at a significant disadvantage, that if they could stay home more often then they would be more successful.
What will follow is an analysis of teams from Melbourne and interstate, the distance they have to travel and average regular season finishing positions. There is also a brief discussion to show West Australian fans that there are far worse sports in the world in terms of travel.
The analysis was conducted as follows.
The kilometers travelled have been calculated using a distance calculator (http://www.geobytes.com/CityDistanceTool.htm?loadpage)
that calculates the strait line gap between each city.
The distances were based on round trips assuming that each team flew home after each game. For example a round trip to Hobart is 6,034 kilometers.
Geelong was included as part of Melbourne, I understand that you are separate entity but for this analysis you mas as well be the same place! If trips were repeated then these numbers were calculated together. All other teams located outside of Melbourne are declared as interstate.
The West Coast Eagles comparison with Collingwood is based on both teams regular season finishing positions from 1987
– 2011. 1987 was the year the Eagles first played in the AFL.
The comparison of the interstate v Melbourne based sides was conducted over a 10-year period from 2001 – 2011.
The conspiracy theory is that the footy Gods and administrators favor Collingwood and let them stay at home while rarely forcing them to travel interstate. This is seen to give them an advantage over interstate teams as they play at the same venue, in the same city, which somehow makes them fresher and more dominant. Collingwood travelled a mere 12,652km in 2011 while the Eagles clocked up a larger sum of 54,526km.
|
City |
Collingwood |
Eagles |
|
Adelaide |
1,308 |
8,544 |
|
Hobart |
0 |
6,034 |
|
Melbourne |
0 |
32,724 |
|
Brisbane |
0 |
7,224 |
|
Sydney |
1,426 |
0 |
|
Gold |
2,694 |
0 |
|
Perth |
5,454 |
0 |
|
Total |
9,704 |
54,526 |
This shows an obvious disparity in total travel but what may shock you is the teams average finishing position since the Eagles entered the AFL.
|
West |
Collingwood |
|
|
Average |
6.72 |
7.72 |
Your eyes do not deceive you. The team that travels the furthest during the regular season, the Eagles, finishes an average of 1 position higher on the ladder than the team that supposedly travels the least.
If this theory that the West Coast teams were at a distinct disadvantage because they have to travel so often then surely other interstate teams would suffer as well, but to a lesser degree. The Melbourne teams should have a significantly better winning record or finish higher on the table than their travelling foe, right?
However, this is not the case. It is the opposite!
| Melbourne Teams | |
| Average Regular Season Position |
8.95 |
| Interstate | |
| Average Regular Season Position |
7.42 |
From 2001 – 2011 interstate teams have finished an overall average of 1.5 positions better than the Melbourne teams.
This helps to prove the point but from a practical point of view the affect of travel being a non-event in the AFL is easily realised.
AFL sides get 6-7 days rest between each of their games, which allows teams to fly to the other side of the country and have time to shake off the effects of 4 hours of travel and the time difference of 2-3 hours.
The simple fact of the matter is the distances, time zones and time travelled for teams inside Australia is irrelevant. Think back to when you fly to anywhere else in the country, do you feel jetlagged, under the weather, disorientated? I think not.
Other sports have more trying distances too travel, Rugby Union and Basketball come to mind.
The Wellington Hurricanes started their 2012 Super Rugby season with games in Cape Town, Johannesburg, Perth then Wellington, in 4 weeks, with no break. That’s 3 countries with time differences of 10, 6 and 4 hours.
The NBA is even more extreme where games and travel is more regular and sporadic. Here is the Boston Celtics schedule for March 2012.
|
Boston |
|||
|
Mar-12 |
Opponent |
City |
Distance |
|
Fri |
vs |
Boston |
0 |
|
Sun 04 |
vs |
Boston |
0 |
|
Tue 06 |
vs |
Boston |
0 |
|
Wed 07 |
@ Philadelphia |
Philidelphia |
440 |
|
Fri 09 |
vs |
Boston |
440 |
|
Sun 11 |
@ LA Lakers |
LA |
4,176 |
|
Mon 12 |
@ LA Clippers |
LA |
0 |
|
Wed 14 |
@ Golden State |
Oakland |
549 |
|
Fri 16 |
@ Sacramento |
Sacramento |
109 |
|
Sat 17 |
@ Denver |
Denver |
1,424 |
|
Mon 19 |
@ Atlanta |
Atlanta |
1,952 |
|
Thu 22 |
@ Milwaukee |
Milwaukee |
1,075 |
|
Fri 23 |
@ Philadelphia |
Philidelphia |
1,116 |
|
Sun 25 |
vs |
Boston |
440 |
|
Mon 26 |
@ Charlotte |
Charlotte |
1,160 |
|
Wed 28 |
vs |
Boston |
1,160 |
|
Fri 30 |
@ Minnesota |
Minneapolis |
1,823 |
|
Total |
17 |
Total |
15,864 |
As you can see not only did they play 17 games in 28 days they travelled to 9 different cities for a monthly odometer reading of 15,864 kilometers. At one point they played a game in Sacramento, flew 1,400km to Denver that night and played the following day, now that’s travel son!
The main issue here is that if your team is underperforming in the AFL it is easy to find excuses. The unfair travel or other conspiracy theories are a far simpler scapegoat to lead to the slaughterhouse, much easier than fighting with reality.
The simple fact is, as proven above, travel is not a factor in the AFL due to the short distances, and marginal differences in time zones coupled with extended recovery periods.
I hope West Australian and other interstate fans can now believe that travel does not have a negative effect on their team. Administration, player exodus and general sporting fluctuations are the things that influence your club the most.
There is no conspiracy or disadvantage.
Kirk Dalziell is one player at www.sportspolygamy.com
- Explore:
- AFL
July 11th 2012 @ 10:04am
Matt F said | July 11th 2012 @ 10:04am | Report comment
The “travel factor”, especially these days with all the money put into player management and sports science is a non-issue. However most of the whinging about travel seems to come from some fans of Victorian teams who occasionally have to travel to Perth a “massive” two times during the season rather than the fans of non-Victorian teams.
Also I have to take issue with the average finishing positions of Victorian teams compared to non-Victorian sides. Surely the real reason for such a disparity is because the Victorian number includes teams like Richmond
July 11th 2012 @ 10:16am
Nathan of Perth said | July 11th 2012 @ 10:16am | Report comment
It’s because interstate teams are more talented – if it weren’t for the travel factor you Vics wouldn’t be within cooee
:D:D:D
July 11th 2012 @ 11:26am
Christo the Daddyo said | July 11th 2012 @ 11:26am | Report comment
+1
July 11th 2012 @ 11:33am
Redb said | July 11th 2012 @ 11:33am | Report comment
Yeah OK, Perth has a population of 2 million, Melbourne 4 million.
You blokes need to add 3 more teams to WA then see what happens.
July 11th 2012 @ 11:40am
Nathan of Perth said | July 11th 2012 @ 11:40am | Report comment
How is that going to change things in an AFL that uses the draft?
July 12th 2012 @ 9:11am
Redb said | July 12th 2012 @ 9:11am | Report comment
Lets see how thin the sponsorship dollars become to support and pay for bulging football dept’s for the main WA club if it were to be split with 3 other clubs in WA.
July 12th 2012 @ 9:41am
Nathan of Perth said | July 12th 2012 @ 9:41am | Report comment
Change the salary cap to the luxury tax like the AFLPA wants and we’ll see how many sponsorship dollars there are for AFL in this two horse town, haha.
And like I said, we didn’t make that bed for you guys
July 11th 2012 @ 11:46am
Nathan of Perth said | July 11th 2012 @ 11:46am | Report comment
And remind us whose idea was it to keep all the old VFL teams in the same league and then add super-clubs from other states?
July 11th 2012 @ 11:56am
GCS said | July 11th 2012 @ 11:56am | Report comment
The travel factor is interesting isn’t it, as I guess the average supporter thinks that it shouldn’t be an issue. John Barnes recently picked Freo to beat Essendon over in Perth just because of the travel factor. He said, you sleep in a different bed, eat different foods, and that is enough to put you out of kilter.
July 11th 2012 @ 12:02pm
Nathan of Perth said | July 11th 2012 @ 12:02pm | Report comment
To be fair, Freo really should have closed out that game, it was a terrible last quarter performance they put in.
July 11th 2012 @ 12:19pm
Kev said | July 11th 2012 @ 12:19pm | Report comment
I don’t know about that. I would have thought that in the day and age of players being tracked with GPS devices on the field to see how many kilometres they rack up and whether it’s at jogging pace or all out sprinting, clubs would have all of that planned out in detail long before the match ever came along and that’s not including a player’s own night before the game routine.
The other excuse that’s often drummed up for losses is a shorter break between games. Again fixtures come out long before the season starts and if you see that there is a 5 day break between matches surely the onus is on you to manage your players appropriately in the lead up to that match.
July 11th 2012 @ 12:03pm
Hamish said | July 11th 2012 @ 12:03pm | Report comment
I remember the NFL New Orleans quarterback Brees? saying that the travel schedule was rigged against them the season after they won the Super Bowl where they had to travel everywhere the next season I guess in an attempt to spread the titles around. So that would be a better comparison with weekly games and possible short turnarounds. WA teams – 11 home games with a massive advantage and 11 games where they are up against it sounds better than a lowly Melbourne team who has no home advantage per se when playing in Melbourne plus 2-4 interstate trips……
July 11th 2012 @ 12:34pm
Nathan of Perth said | July 11th 2012 @ 12:34pm | Report comment
But also no disadvantage playing in Melbourne away for the Melbourne team, which is part of why the top Vic teams go way up the ladder and the bottom Vic teams really hit the doldrums.
July 11th 2012 @ 3:00pm
Bayman said | July 11th 2012 @ 3:00pm | Report comment
Nathan,
I agree with you. A lot of Victorian fans say that no team in Melbourne has a home ground advantage because all games are played at the MCG or Etihad. The point they fail to mention is that there is no disadvantage either.
The only times they may be disadvantaged is playing interstate – maybe three to five times a year depending on the team. This is not the case with the interstate teams who all travel ten or eleven times on average.
As for the comparison above concerning the Boston Celtics it is just another case of lies, damn lies and statistics. Yes, they travel a lot but so does every team in the NBA. Very few cities, if any, have more than one team so they all have to do that amount of travelling. No advantage but no disadvantage either.
Melbourne, on the other hand, has nine teams which all have a home ground advantage over their interstate rivals and, as we said, no disadvantage when they play each other. Even Geelong is hardly disadvantaged when it plays in Melbourne given the Cats play there so often.
Adelaide, for example, get two games each at the “G” and Etihad this season. They’ve had three of those games already and from here there is just one left, Melbourne at the MCG in round 22. They did, however, get 12 home games for 2012.
July 12th 2012 @ 9:23am
Hamish said | July 12th 2012 @ 9:23am | Report comment
Exactly my point
July 11th 2012 @ 12:11pm
Greggy Dee said | July 11th 2012 @ 12:11pm | Report comment
I have had this discussion with mates & collegues previously.
The travel factor for non Victorian teams is a very poor excuse for results. Generally speaking, if you do something more often than the next guy, you will be better at it. The non Vic teams travel interstate 10 times during the Home & Away season as opposed to the vic teams that travel, at most, 5-6 times (generally it is only about 4 times per year). By travelling more often, teams like West Coast, are more experienced and know the best formula for preparation & recovery. It can still be a little hit & miss with the Victorian teams eg. Essendon very rarely win on the road and in fact haven’t beaten Port Adelaide in Adelaide since 2000 or West Coast in Perth since 2001.
July 11th 2012 @ 12:27pm
Matt F said | July 11th 2012 @ 12:27pm | Report comment
I’d say that has more to do with a genuine home ground rather then travel. When Essendon go interstate their fans are vastly outumbered and they get booed everytime they touch the ball. Subiaco in particular can have a very intimidating atmosphere. If the victorian sides still played at their own seperate home grounds, where the home fans would greatly outnumber the opponents and the ground shape/size would be different, dressing rooms etc then home ground advantage would probably be more significant for the Victorian sides (Geelong excluded.) Because they share the same 2 grounds there really isn’t a major home ground factor when the Victorian sides play each other.
For example home ground advantage is more significant between sydney based NRL sides then melbourne based AFL sides because the NRL clubs still use their own individual home grounds, for the most part. A genuine home ground advantage is a consistant and significant influence on matches in almost all sports, no matter the travel issues. The EPL is another example even though many sides are located very close to each other and England is much smaller then Australia.
July 11th 2012 @ 12:44pm
Vanilla Gorilla said | July 11th 2012 @ 12:44pm | Report comment
Matt F you raise an interesting point and I am writting my next piece on debunking this rumour as well. After another member of http://www.sportspolygamy.com had an in depth interview with the creators of http://www.ruckinggoodstats.com (who are employed by numerous Super Rugby teams) it would seem that there is no real advantage to playing at home. This too is a myth created by media in an attempt to increase interest in games. Put it this way in recent seasons Geelong has been dominant at home, they have also been incredibly dominant overall. The Dockers are not a very good team on the road because they are not a very good team in general. They have been historically bad. So look out for this one!
July 12th 2012 @ 9:26am
Hamish said | July 12th 2012 @ 9:26am | Report comment
In the NRL the home crowd factor is less if for example Wests are playing at the SFS against Souths say. But true there are few Penrith fans when they travel to Manly home game…
July 12th 2012 @ 4:39pm
Matt F said | July 12th 2012 @ 4:39pm | Report comment
True. Like the AFL, if NRL clubs all move to bigger stadiums ie SFS and ANZ then home ground advantage will be negated to a degree. When the Bulldogs play Souths these days, given they both play out of ANZ, the only difference is that the ground announcer goes “Go Souths” at one game and “Go Bulldogs” at the other
July 11th 2012 @ 12:36pm
Nathan of Perth said | July 11th 2012 @ 12:36pm | Report comment
Not really, it’s not something like a skill where you practice and improve. Yes you learn some mitigation techniques, but it doesn’t stop being a drag to performance just because you encounter it a lot.
July 12th 2012 @ 9:24am
Hamish said | July 12th 2012 @ 9:24am | Report comment
Remember intestate teams travel for trials as well although so do melb teams but not as far…
July 11th 2012 @ 1:21pm
ChrisW said | July 11th 2012 @ 1:21pm | Report comment
The whole travel thing is AFL commentators trying to give the game a talk point which simply doesnt exist.
July 11th 2012 @ 1:59pm
TW said | July 11th 2012 @ 1:59pm | Report comment
Off topic sort off – Here we have 2 teams travelling away from their home bases – Richmond and the Gold Coast. So who gets the advantage.
They will be playing in Cairns on Saturday to a likely full house of about 16,000 at Cazaly. Both lunches and all corporate boxes sold out.
The article below discusses at least 3 AFL games a year and very long term a AFL team. (Demitriou mentioned it again last week)
Short term a NEAFL side from up there is planned – That is a big step forward for our game in that region.
http://www.cairns.com.au/article/2012/07/11/227861_local-news.html
July 11th 2012 @ 7:08pm
Australian Rules said | July 11th 2012 @ 7:08pm | Report comment
Interesting article VG, and great use of stats.
Hats off to the teams from the West…I’d hate to be on a Virgin flight every 2 weeks…esp Sandilands, Cox et al!
July 11th 2012 @ 8:33pm
Lroy said | July 11th 2012 @ 8:33pm | Report comment
Im sorry, if you expect me to believe that there is no home ground advantage in the AFL then someone is living in a parallel universe.
The S15 rugby competition cannot be used as a comparison given the 5 New Zealand teams are significantly better than most of the Australian teams year in year out. Same for the NBA.. they have 30 odd teams who all travel the same amount.
So according to your analysis, if Collingwood and West Coast ended up in the grand final, the Pies would happily play it at Paterson’s because the Eagles home ground advantage is a myth… pfft…
July 11th 2012 @ 10:33pm
Vanilla Gorilla said | July 11th 2012 @ 10:33pm | Report comment
I think that home ground advantage is more noticeable in a competition like Super Rugby as the teams all play in separate locations rather than the situation in Melbourne where all of their teams play in two stadiums separated by the CBD. If the West Coast teams have such a home ground advantage then why does Fremantle stink so badly no matter where they play?
July 12th 2012 @ 9:22am
Matt F said | July 12th 2012 @ 9:22am | Report comment
probably because West Coast are better than Freo. Home ground advantage isn’t going to make a bad team beat a good team but it does improve the chances of the home side. I’m prepared to state that Freo win far more games at home then they do away
July 12th 2012 @ 9:43am
Nathan of Perth said | July 12th 2012 @ 9:43am | Report comment
The key component missing out of the analysis here. Fremantle are a serial basket case of a club and tomes could be written about Why They Are The Way They Are
July 11th 2012 @ 9:37pm
John said | July 11th 2012 @ 9:37pm | Report comment
It is an interesting issue that could be debated for ever. I’d be interested to know what followers of the WA teams think of this proposal:
Each team takes turns on going on a ‘tour’ of the East Coast (similar to how Super XV teams go on ‘tours’ of other countries.
For example:
For rounds 1-4, Fremantle play at home while West Coast do 4 games in Melbourne/Sydney/Brisbane (maybe a match in Adelaide on the 4th week). Then in weeks 5-8 Freo do the ‘East Coast tour’ while West Coast play at home. Derby matches could be played in the first or last week of the cycle (e.g. Freo play WC in Rd 4 or 5). East Coast tours could include a match in Sydney or Brisbane when required.
THe upside of this is less travel which may lead to better results. The downside isying to keep up player morale for long periods of time away from family/friends (especially hard when a player and/or the team is struggling. The money side would also be difficult as the costs of saving money on travel would be outweighed by the cost of extra accommodation in Melbourne. Crowd figures may also decrease.
What does everyone think of this idea? I’m especially interested in what fans of Freo or WC think. I’d like to see it trialled for one year to see how it goes. I doubt it will ever happen but I think it could possibly work.
July 12th 2012 @ 10:45am
Nathan of Perth said | July 12th 2012 @ 10:45am | Report comment
From what I recall the Eagles management specifically opted for the alternating home-away model because it actually helped the team out more being able to return to familiar surroundings or something like that. But basically the tours was harder on the team.