Ahead of the 2012 AFL fixture launch last Friday, the AFL corrected reports that Collingwood wouldn’t travel to Perth next year and, in the process, boasted about the travel demands of all Victorian clubs next year.
“All Victorian clubs will have at least five matches outside the state,” reported AFL.com.au.
While that statement would’ve been met with the approval of many seeking more fairness in the AFL fixture – our own Ben Somerford was campaigning for such a stance last week – we would find out on Friday that the devil was unfortunately in the detail.
When the fixture was finally released it was apparent that for one club, five matches outside Victoria did not, evidently, mean five away matches outside Victoria.
In fact, Hawthorn ended up with a mere three away games outside of Melbourne.
Yep, that’s right. Despite the introduction of Gold Coast and GWS in the past two years, the AFL have still – in 2012 – managed to give a club three interstate away games for an entire season. It was almost impossible to fathom.
Of course, Hawthorn still qualify for having “at least five matches outside the state” because four of their home games will take place at Launceston’s Aurora Stadium. But as we all know, those games are very much home games. Certainly, they don’t present the same challenge as travelling interstate to another club’s home ground.
The Hawks will travel to play West Coast at Patersons Stadium, Port Adelaide at AAMI Stadium and Sydney at the SCG next year. Beyond that, though, every other game will be in either Melbourne or Tasmania. (Worse, all bar two of the Melbourne games will be at the MCG.)
While the AFL obviously didn’t lie with its proclamation last week, it’s safe to say what they put out was at the very least misleading. To compare the Hawks playing a game in Tassie with another club heading to Perth, as one of their six proper interstate trips, is ludicrous – especially when it’s used to talk up the fairness of the fixture, as was the case last week.
It’s all very unfortunate. When you exclude Hawthorn from the equation, every Victorian club travels five or six times – a wonderful thing considering the discrepancies of the past.
But, of course, all that means nothing if there’s one club that’s excluded, and excluded not just by one game but two.
Now sure, anyone can pick up on a quirk of the AFL fixture and make a big song and dance about it. And admittedly, outgoing Hawks president Jeff Kennett wasn’t in a mood to gloat about his club’s fixture last week.
“(The list of negatives) includes playing five of our seven home games at the MCG against interstate teams, the majority of which will be on a Sunday, and all at varying times,” Kennett wrote to members. “The impact of this will be two-fold. Firstly; our attendances, which have averaged in excess of 50,000 at home games … will drop to around 30,000 at best.”
However, that was looking at Hawthorn’s draw from a commercial perspective. From an on-field perspective, even if they do face Collingwood and Geelong in the first two weeks, the lack of true interstate matches is a huge advantage.
The question, though, is why have Hawthorn been given this advantage when no other club has?
Maybe the AFL are rewarding them for the “sacrifice” they make by playing in Tasmania. Then again, surely the income Tasmania generates for the club is reward enough – and how could that be if North Melbourne, the other part-time Tassie team, will be making twice as many interstate trips as the away team?
Sadly, once again the release of the fixture has been plagued by questions over its fairness.
Ruprinkt
Guest
Im not sure how this equates to 'protection'. Its obvious to everyone that the fixture is inadeaquate and unfair, no matter how you work it. The mere fact that clubs get to submit a 'wishlist' requiring the AFL to tinker it will always mean that the clubs and the AFLs agenda will dictate the draw. However for you to isolate the interstate trips as the single point for wether a club is 'protected' or not is way too simplistic. 5 away trips to GCS, GWS, Port, Brisbane and anyone else (for example) would be clearly better than 3 trips to Sydney, WC and Adelaide. Playing away interstate doesnt in and of itself make it difficult. Unless, you are thinking of the travel factor in isolation. If you do, then the trips to Tassie are just as valid as trips to GWS or GC from a recovery point of view. You also must consider the other 5 teams you play twice. The bottom line is, when you look at the draw as a whole, then no, Hawthorn have not had an easy ride..
BringOn2012
Guest
Why is the AFL protecting Hawthorn? Because Hawthorn freakin' rule!
Michael DiFabrizio
Expert
I never said Jeff's criticisms weren't valid. I just said they weren't relevant to the issue of fairness from an on-field perspective, which is what we're talking about here. The Hawks probably did get a rough deal in a commercial sense, but that is an entirely different matter to the deal they got in an on-field sense. Unless you honestly think the AFL should compensate teams with a poor draw financially by giving them an easier run in terms of where they play? That's just silly. Ask any fan what they'd take - extra gate takings or on-field success - and you'll know they shouldn't go hand in hand.
allblackfan
Guest
On a sidenote, I just want to thank Hawthorn (and Melbourne and Swans) for producing Mick Byrne who really sharpened the All Blacks aerial skills at the recent RWC. The ABs' strength under the high ball came from the no-doubt constant use of AFL skills at practice (Tonga's players also showed some useful AFL-style marking skills during their upset win over France at the RWC as well!)
Jack Russell
Roar Guru
Gotta laugh at Kennett: "our attendances, which have averaged in excess of 50,000 at home games … will drop to around 30,000 at best.” Basically an admission that their 'membership' of over 50,000 is a complete fabrication. 55,000 members + AFL members + MCC members + opposition fans + occasional Hawthorn fans = 30,000 at best?
Trust Me
Roar Rookie
The AFL's objective is to maximise attendances and maximise profits. AFL is basically a Melbourne game and Melbourne gets the most attendances. They bias the draw so that Melbourne teams with a big following play most of their games at the MCG which acts as both their "home and "away" ground. That's why all of the recent grand finals have been between Melbourne suburban teams. If the AFL continues with this policy the GF will be between two Melbourne suburban teams once again and interest in AFL outside Melbourne will continue to fall.
Brian
Guest
I am sure the AFL and the state govt put in to the redevelopment around 2004-2005
Australian Rules
Guest
In a very real way, the fixture can impact the on-field AND off-field performance of clubs. Kennett complained that Hawthorn has its work cut-out on both fronts. There are 3 things to take into consideration for a fixture: what teams you play twice, how often you travel interstate, and how many big revenue home games (blockbusters) do you get. I agree that Collingwood have a slightly tougher fixture in terms of the teams they play twice. They travel interstate 5 times, compared with Hawthorn's 3 (as well as 4 in Tassie). I won't wade into that argument. But... the Pies will host home game blockbusters which include Richmond, Essendon, Geelong, Melbourne, Carlton, Hawthorn and St Kilda...all on Friday or Saturdays (with the exception of the ANZAC and Mothers Day games, which draw big crowds on their own anyway). This adds up to massive gatetakings for the Pies in 2012. The Hawks have 2 Friday home games against the Cats and Pies, that's it. Their remaining MCG home games are against the smaller clubs, mostly on Sundays. This adds up to a huge shortfall in gatetakings for the Hawks in 2012. I think Jeff's criticisms are fair enough. Also, the AFL don't hide from the fact that they do find ways to compensate or "even out" the fixture, so I don't agree it's a "cop out". They will give GWS a favourable draw if poss...just like the Suns.
me, I like football
Guest
I have worked out mathematically that The AFL could of made it the draw so much fairer with the 18 teams. the 11 Home and also 11 Away games for non-vic sides would be made up of 1 game against state rival 6.25 games (av) against Vic clubs and 3.75 games (av) aginst non-Vic interstate side sides. And that would of fitted in nicely for the 11 Home and also 11 Away games for Vic sides which would of be made up of 6 games against Vic sides and 5 games against interstate sides.
me, I like football
Guest
The only advatage WRT Geelongs home ground are to the teams that don't have to play against them there. Geelong have to play "home" against Hawthorn and Collingwood at their home ground. talk about gaining an advatage for those teams
JStar55
Guest
"play the strongest sides twice " yeah so, geelong dose aswell
Brendan
Guest
Brian when did the afl pay for Kardinia Park'? I agree with Micheal that including Hawthorns Afl games in Tassie as interstate matches is a bit much.Hawthorn and all Melbourne based sides can chose to field Vfl sides but dont so if those that do prosper que sera sera.Whatever advantages perceived or otherwise wont make much difference to the Hawks until they get some decent tall defenders.
Digby
Guest
Michael, Hawthorn would love to play more away games against interestate sides. That way they wouldnt play 7 home games against them. When you have 11 home games in total and 8 of them are against low drawing non-melbourne based teams - Freo, Port Adelaide, Adelaide, Brisbane, Gold Coast, Greater Western Sydney, Sydney, and Geelong - your profits are cut by $1mil+. Collingwood will make a bigger profit than Hawthorn this year because they travel interstate more and therefor dont have to play home games against as many interstate teams. That money goes straight into the football department and gives them a massive advantage over the hawks. Money is everything and the hawks draw is designed to punish them financially. Your article stating that this big financial disadvantage is in fact an unfair advantage makes me think that you are really David King.
Brian
Guest
Actually unlike Hawthorn those 2 played off in the GF. There are many holes to pick the AFL fixture and Hawthorn do not deserve special treatment. However Collingwood marquee games and Geelong home ground as well as having their own "VFL teams" are much bigger advantages than the Hawks only travelling to Tasmania. Geelong by the way only have a home ground because the AFL helped them pay for it, unlike Princess Park, Victoria Park, Whitten Oval etc. Picking on the AFL for giving Hawthorn special treatment is kind of like picking on Gillard for not doing the courtsey - maybe its right maybe its wrong but there sure are other issues going on.
Michael DiFabrizio
Expert
Digby, the AFL would get more such submissions for teams wanting home games against Collingwood. That's always been the case. Yet even Collingwood this year will be making five away interstate trips. So, while there may be some truth in what you say, the AFL have shown it's possible to work around that with a club that is even more affected by that problem.
NeeDeep
Roar Pro
Thanks Big Steve. Having another look, I'd probably swap the 2 Adelaide teams around and perhaps the Bulldogs with Melbourne. If you recognise Hawthorn as an interstate team, it would be due to them playing some of their home games at Launceston, which would increase the travel requirements for the other teams in their "conference", to as close to the other "conferences" as possible. It still gives the AFL its big teams in Melbourne and would probably mean the Hawks would take their home Sydney & Brisbane games to Tassie each year and a coupel of the other interstate home games from the other "conferences". It can be tinkered with in a number of ways - just an initial framework.
Digby
Guest
Michael, Your venom should be directed at the 8 other Melbourne clubs who all put submissions to the AFL asking for big drawing home games agianst hawthorn. The AFL have gone out of their way to give these clubs a home game agianst hawthorn, leaving hawthorn to play their home games against interstate clubs. The only way the hawks could play more interestate away games would be if they played less Melbourne away games. Unfortuantely the AFL props up the other Melbourne clubs by giving them all big drawing blockbuster marquee home games against hawthorn.
Brendan
Guest
Brian Geelong get to play at there home ground because they have a home ground (unlike most clubs).The draw doesnt win you a flag that is done on Grand Final day and we dont know who will be playing yet.Maybe all this draw advantage people talk off actually hinders a sides chances as they cut hack the tough stuff when it counts.Collingwood has been in 23 Grand Finals since they went back to back in 1935/1936 for four premierships hardly a good record so maybe the soft draw people speak of gets you to the big game but in the long road doesnt bring success.
Michael DiFabrizio
Expert
Brian, see my comment re: who Collingwood and Geelong play twice. These are the two Vic teams that finished top four like Hawthorn and after you compare the situation for all three teams, there's nothing to suggest the teams Hawthorn play twice should entitle them to special treatment. Their list of two-time opponents falls in between those two teams if you were rating them by difficulty, yet Collingwood have five interstate away games and Geelong six.
Michael DiFabrizio
Expert
Australian Rules, this isn't directed solely at you as a few people have brought this point up and I wanted to respond to all. Sorry, but saying Hawthorn's draw is so tough they deserve to be compensated in other ways is a cop out. This argument simply falls apart when you compare the Hawks to the teams that finished around them. How does the mentioned five teams the Hawks will be playing twice compare to the teams Collingwood plays twice -- Geelong, Hawthorn, West Coast, Carlton and Essendon? ALL of these teams were finalists last year. All BAR ONE finished top five. That is clearly worse than Hawthorn's five, so why aren't the AFL giving them three interstate away trips too? Geelong, admittedly, get to play two bottom eight teams twice, compared to Hawthorn's one, but they have SIX interstate away trips, or twice as many as Hawthorn.