Don’t choose Carlton or Port, go where the future premiership lie!

MCG Tenant teams (Hawks/Pies/Tiger etc) just have to make the top four and it is equivalent to Minor Premiership advantages. Recent history shows that whoever is the best MCG tenant, they are more than likely to make or win the GF! So unless Carlton becomes a tenant, why not go where the odds are in your favour.

2008 – Hawks (Premiers)
2009
2010 – Collingwood GF (Premiers)
2011 – Collingwood GF (runners up)
2012 – Hawks (runners up)
2013 – Hawks (Premiers)
2014 – Hawks (Premiers)
2015 – Hawks (Premiers)
2016 –
2017 – Richmond (Premiers)

Being a Lions (and Hawks) fan, obviously the guru I love to listen to is Leigh Matthews. On the weekend broadcast he rated Trent Cotchin in the same class as Michael Voss. That says something!

The Tigers just have to make the top four next year (equivalent to Minor Premiership for MCG tenants) and they can do it all again… Recent history shows that whoever is the best MCG tenant, they are more than likely to make or win the GF!

2008 – Hawks (Premiers)
2009
2010 – Collingwood GF (Premiers)
2011 – Collingwood GF (runners up)
2012 – Hawks (runners up)
2013 – Hawks (Premiers)
2014 – Hawks (Premiers)
2015 – Hawks (Premiers)
2016 –
2017 – Richmond (Premiers)

Tigers were scintillating!! Crows were off. No-one is debating that. What this is about though is the MCG bias to MCG tenant clubs.

In last decade, 8/10 Grand Finalists have been MCG tenants. Why? Well if an MCG tenant makes the top four, that is equivalent to winning the minor premiership. All the home ground advantages apply.
And that Redb that is NOT fair, and not even close to being square. The dice is loaded.

2002 – Collingwood GF (runners up)
2003 – Collingwood GF (runners up)
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008 – Hawks (Premiers)
2009
2010 – Collingwood GF (Premiers)
2011 – Collingwood GF (runners up)
2012 – Hawks (runners up)
2013 – Hawks (Premiers)
2014 – Hawks (Premiers)
2015 – Hawks (Premiers)
2016 –
2017 – Richmond (Premiers)

Recent history shows that whoever is the best team at the MCG, they are more than likely to make or win the GF!

There are some looooooong waits there I’ll give you that. Does this justify Richmond finishing third and receiving three home finals?

Just did some fact checking of my own and uncovered a biggie.

In last decade, 8/10 Grand Finalists have been MCG tenants. Why? Well if an MCG tenant makes the top four, that is equivalent to winning the minor premiership. All the home ground advantages apply. And recent history shows that whoever is the best team at the MCG, they are more than likely to make or win the GF.

2002 – Collingwood GF (runners up)
2003 – Collingwood GF (runners up)
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008 – Hawks (Premiers)
2009
2010 – Collingwood GF (Premiers)
2011 – Collingwood GF (runners up)
2012 – Hawks (runners up)
2013 – Hawks (Premiers)
2014 – Hawks (Premiers)
2015 – Hawks (Premiers)
2016 –
2017 – Richmond (Premiers)

Also in terms of MCG itself, two spiritual homeland grounds in Australia include the MCG and Suncorp Stadium in Brisbane.

MCG = home of AFL
Suncorp Stadium = home of State of Origin.

State of Origin has been shared with our fellow Aussies from down south; MCG 4 times, and Docklands 3 times.
http://www.rugbyleagueproject.org/competitions/state-of-origin/venues.html

Melbourne is not a heartland Rugby state either, but the All Blacks v Wallaby Bledisloe Cup has been played x3 times at the MCG, and x1 at Docklands.

Richmond were scintillating in the GF, they were awesome to watch, and Hawks are my favourite Melbourne team. BUT…. recent history really highlights the bias!

One word. Merger. What happens after the Lions-Bear merger. The three peat.

anon, you’ve nailed it!

It goes beyond the GF also.

Cats should have had a home final. Doubt Tigers would have rolled Cats at Simonds Stadium.

Tigers then would have been forced to play at AO.

Seriously doubt they would have won both of these games.

AD, you make some good points, but there is one crucial fact to keep in mind. Park the must play at MCG rule for a moment…

Tigers did not earn the right to play at MCG against Geelong. Geelong earnt right to play at Simonds Stadium.
Tigers did not earn the right to play at MCG against Crows. Crows earnt right to play at Adelaide Oval.

The odds are pretty long against the Tigers winning both of these games on the road, compared to both of these at home at MCG as they did.

You are correct Stevo, Tigers have a fantastic defence, ESPECIALLY at the MCG. But would that defence have been as effective at the Adelaide Oval. The jury is out.

Like a State of Origin Series, but if a team wins in Game 2, the series is over.

I hear what you are saying. The problem is the MCG is like it’s own cities. Thousands of people have jobs there.

No, I think we need to keep the MCG as part of the finals, but expand to 3 games.

Is it time for a best of three grand final series?

Scroll/up down this thread for more details but basically.
Game 1. Highest finishes home deck.
Game 2. MCG
Game 3. Highest finishes home deck when playing an MCG opponent, or the ground of the lowest placed finalist for non-MCG teams.

MCC and AFL should think dollars signs. Every few years an MCG team will play an MCG team. That is three MCG grands finals. A cash bonanza like the Collingwood-St Kilda double final.

They would just need to cap distances players run from a player welfare perspective.

Why is he a sore loser? There is a genuine bias. Why should he be not able to highlight this? The finals system has no integrity or fairness.

A best of three series is the best answer. A final is still maintained at the MCG. And potentially more than one if Melbourne clubs face off. This means money for MCC, AFL, Victorian Tourism. Also removes the bias into the future and allows people to believe in the integrity of the AFL. Gives finals games to cities and teams who earn the right!

Is it time for a best of three grand final series?

Look closer though.

You can’t include the Lions in those statistics as they were a merged club. That was a big factor in winning three titles. Had the Bears and Fitzroy not merged, there is no 3-peat. So scratch out the Essendon and x2 Collingwood GFs.

So the record is 8-5.

Now you need to factor in the expansion of the competition and ground dimensions. Non-Victorian teams now play less games at the MCG than ever before. Princes Park was also changed to Docklands in 2000. Princes park had an MCG equivalent ground size. Docklands is a skinny ground. This meant that there was even less opportunity for teams from interstate (and Carlton/St Kilda/Essendon) to play on MCG equivalent ground dimensions.

So it is probably more like 8-2. Definetly a deciding factor.

This is far more than a normal home ground advantage. It is ALSO the MCG ground dimensions. No other code has such wildly different playing ground dimensions.

The MCG is a fat ground. The Adelaide Oval a skinny ground. Simonds Stadium is even skinnier.

You don’t need a ground with capacity. You can have a best of three that includes the MCG. That way everyone wins. The MCC, the AFL, and everyone else. The additional games give you cream on top in terms of gatetakings. The additional venues don’t need to be 100k venues.

Is it time for a best of three grand final series?

Game 1. Highest placed winners home deck.
Game 2. MCG
Game 3. IF required. Two scenarios.
1. No MCG home team. The game is played at the home of the lowest placed Grand Finalist.
OR
2. There is an MCG home team. The advantage goes to the highest placed winner home venue. They finish on top, they get the advantage.

Best of three Grand Finals series please!!

Is it time for a best of three grand final series?

Everyone is a winner then. The AFL, the MCC, the interstate teams and also teams like the Tigers. The Tigers will always have a question mark over their flag because of the MCG bias they received when they did not earn this right as other teams in competition must. Three home finals in a row when a team finishes third. Come on, what the hell is going on?

There was an unquestionable bias against the crows, and bias towards the Tigers.

Let’s flip the argument for a moment and restart the finals system without the MCG bias.

Would the Tigers have beaten the Cats had it been played at Simonds Stadium? Probably not.

So, they are forced to play a home final against the Swans. Would they have won? 50/50 I would say.

Then win and earn the right to play against the Crows at Adelaide Oval. Tough ask, crows are exceptional at home.

Suppose Tigers get up though, they must play in a Grand Final. But GF is not at the MCG, it is at Simonds Stadium, or Spotless Stadium.

Would the Tigers have been able to be successful and overcome all that adversity. Highly unlikely. The finals system is rigged.

Perhaps we go back a couple of years ago. West Coast smashed the Hawks in the first round in Perth. Then the results were reversed at the MCG in the GF, West Coast were smashed by the Hawks.

Then all the commentators dare to say Fremantle, West Coast, Sydney and Adelaide all chocked? Perhaps it is more than that and the dices are loaded against them in favour of teams which are very good at the MCG.

Sorry, for a bit of history. The Brisbane Lions were dudded in 2004 when they were forced to travel to the MCG when they earnt a right to play a home game at the Gabba. After an uproar, this eventually changed.

Basically if an MCG team makes the top four, it is the equivalent of winning the minor premiership.

It is more than a home ground advantage as it is in other codes. At least in the NRL, the ground dimensions are consistent.

Not so in the AFL. The MCG is fat. Adelaide Oval is skinny. And Simonds Stadium is VERY skinny.

I believe we need a best of three series. This is a potential profit bonanza for the AFL and MCC. Every few years they will get multiple grand finals at the MCG. Good for Victoria for tourism. Good for a fair system and opportunity for other teams also.

Is it time for a best of three grand final series?

True, but this would be paid for through broadcast rights, sponsors, and gatetakings for the additional finals.

For players association. I mentioned earlier in the thread. The AFL needs cardiologists and an investigation into the 15-20km marathon players run. If they can cap the distance players are allowed to clock during a game, then there should be no barriers from a player welfare perspective when it comes to a best of three finals series.

Further I have a strong suspicion that AFLPA, particularly those from the Fremantle, West Coast, Adelaide and Sydney and Port Adelaide would support moves that gives them a fairer and more equitable opportunity to win a flag.

Say channel 9 or 10 secured Broadcast rights, which team are you suggesting form the nucleus?
I’m assuming you are suggesting an 10-12 team NFL along the lines of;
– West Coast Eagles WA
– Fremantle Dockers WA
– Adelaide Crows. ADL
– Port Power. ADL
– Brisbane Lions BNE
– Sydney Swans SYD
– x3 Victorian Teams VIC

And then add to this list;
– Tasmania TAS
– 3rd WA team WA
– 3rd SA team SA

The beauty of a best of three series means the MCG would be filled to capacity in game 2. All other gate takings are just cream on top. Hosting a Grand Final should only be open really to the two teams playing in the Grand Final Series. They should be entitled to take part of that stadium revenue.

I would be inclined to leave stadium sizes alone. Grand Finals in each city wouldn’t occur in every year and you don’t want empty stadiums. Only Docklands might be in need to a rethink. Get rid of the roof, increase the playing dimensions, and add extra crowd capacity.

What are there plans for Docklands anyway? There was talk of upgrading Princes Park at one point as I understand.

For mine, perhaps the AFL should look at the feasibility of redeveloping Docklands by removing the roof, increase the playing dimensions to replicate MCG dimensions, and then looking at ways to increase crowd capacity.

I think a big part of the problem for Carlton, St Kilda, Essendon and the Bulldogs is Docklands Park itself. It has skinny playing dimensions, it is indoors, teams play in front of smaller crowd sizes than the MCG.

Docklands Stadium opened in 2000. That year Essendon won the flag. Since then, the only club playing out of Docklands to have won a Premiership were the red hot Western Bulldogs of 2016.

For the combined clubs of Carlton, St Kilda, Essendon or Bulldogs, since Dockland opened, they have won 2/18 potential premierships. Now look at the MCG residents who have won 6/18 premierships since Docklands opened. Odds seem to be remarkably higher if you are an MCG team instead of a Docklands team. Yes there are other factors as well.

Before Docklands, from my understanding, Carlton played at Princes Park where the dimensions of the ground are VERY close to the dimensions of the MCG.

This is more than a hypothetical… The MCG stands to make a heck of a lot of money from a best of 3 series.

In the years when two Melbourne Teams meet in the GF, the revenue generated will be very similar to the revenue generated from the 2010 Collingwood – St Kilda double Grand Final. It could even be higher should the series go to a decider.

Gil Mclachlan administration will very quickly release a best of three has tremendous financial upside for the MCG and the AFL. It also extends to interstate clubs and cities.

Does the contract outlaw additional grand final games played at other venues, and potentially also at the MCG. Surely the MCG members would see a benefit in the years when multiple Melbourne clubs make the GF. Lots of money for the MCG and extra work for it’s workforce army.