Did anyone complain about our easy draw last year after 2020?

But yes, Cats were looked after this year....

17 minutes ago, layzie said:

There's no other major competition with a fixture as fundamentally flawed as this one. What do you expect?

There’s only one way to stop it. 
We the Members of Clubs must loudly oppose it. 
Jeelong get a free ride. They own that Stadium outright, but Government money pays for the renovations 

What a deal!!

20 minutes ago, layzie said:

There's no other major competition with a fixture as fundamentally flawed as this one. What do you expect?

See, I think the NFL’s divisional fixture in a 17 game season compromising. 6 games in a [censored] division and you can be the Tennessee Titans getting the number 1 seed and going out straight away. They have 32 teams so it’s hard of course. I think we should play each other once and then move to pools of 6 and fight for position within those pools. Really interesting way to make it fairer and get some excitement. 13th at Rd 17 is effed of course…

9 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

They own that Stadium outright,

The football club doesn't actually own the stadium, SWYL.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kardinia_Park_(stadium)

23 minutes ago, Demonstone said:

The football club doesn't actually own the stadium, SWYL.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kardinia_Park_(stadium)

I would dispute that DS

Brian Cook set it all up, so if it has changed it has been very quiet…

5 hours ago, CYB said:

With the information presented like this it really does put things into perspective. Would love Champion data to do some kind of weighted ladder taking into consideration the fixture degree of difficulty. Not sure how you would go about it, but i think it will show a very different top 4. Richmond probably miss top 8 and Carlton/Saints probably get in. 

Don’t you guys realise the fixture is deliberately weighted against the most successful teams from the previous year, hence our extraordinarily difficult fixture this year as the reigning premiers. Frankly l don’t mind that, it is part of the equalisation process. 
 

What l do mind is when unfair fixturing is built in permanently to the system aka Geelong. Their ground is substandard in terms of size, and gives the Cats an advantage like no other in the AFL where their win/loss record is over 80%. It would be far fairer to play these matches against us either at the “G” or at Marvel, or even Alice Springs or Darwin. Then there will be no permanent built in advantage irrespective of where we or they perform on the ladder. 

 

50 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

I would dispute that DS

Brian Cook set it all up, so if it has changed it has been very quiet…

SWYL, I fully understand and share your utter dislike for Geelong Football Club.

However, can you cite any evidence that they own the Kardinia Park ground?

You'll also find that the AFL and GFC helped fund the redevelopment and it's not just all Government money.

1 hour ago, rpfc said:

See, I think the NFL’s divisional fixture in a 17 game season compromising. 6 games in a [censored] division and you can be the Tennessee Titans getting the number 1 seed and going out straight away. They have 32 teams so it’s hard of course. I think we should play each other once and then move to pools of 6 and fight for position within those pools. Really interesting way to make it fairer and get some excitement. 13th at Rd 17 is effed of course…

Fair call, it does depend on how strong a division is at a given time in NFL. I take it back slightly.

10 minutes ago, Demonstone said:

SWYL, I fully understand and share your utter dislike for Geelong Football Club.

However, can you cite any evidence that they own the Kardinia Park ground?

You'll also find that the AFL and GFC helped fund the redevelopment and it's not just all Government money.

Back to the Early days of Cook and Costa. The entire stadium was restructured. Car parking, advertising, seats, food and Beverage 

The whole thing was restructured, before it they were almost broke. Cook did a great job. What the deal is NOW, maybe different. 
The State Government has put in over $140 Million so far.. I would be very interested to see the AFL and GFC Commitments. Nowhere near that figure 

I've been posting about this all week, probably ad nauseum.

It's not unfair. Unless we do a 34-game season where everyone plays everyone else home and away, every single model that is proposed is unfair. Even a 17-game season is unfair - some will get, say, Fremantle in Perth, others will get them at their home ground.

The 17-5 idea that gets bandied around creates different problems. Do we really want the last five weeks to be full of meaningless low-quality games involving the bottom 6 playing each other? Then there's tanking - why finish 6th after 17 games when you'll cop the five sides above you again when you could finish 7th and cop the five sides below you instead?

It's a bad idea for varying reasons.

The AFL tries to get it right by making good sides from one year play each other more often than not the next year. The obviously problem is that they don't have a crystal ball and so don't know what will happen the following year. For us, we were given Collingwood and Fremantle and they got much better. 

It's wrong to complain about Geelong getting North and West Coast twice. But it's right to point out that their fixture has ended up being easier than ours. So too Sydney and Richmond. Particularly in the second half of the season. So when you hear someone in the media say "Melbourne have only just been going in the second half of the year", or you see one of those "from Round 15" ladders, remember that as the fixture turned out, we had a much tougher second half of the season than everyone else.

55 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

Back to the Early days of Cook and Costa. The entire stadium was restructured. Car parking, advertising, seats, food and Beverage 

The whole thing was restructured, before it they were almost broke. Cook did a great job. What the deal is NOW, maybe different. 
The State Government has put in over $140 Million so far.. I would be very interested to see the AFL and GFC Commitments. Nowhere near that figure 

You've cited nothing to support your memory of what happened.  The footy club don't own the stadium.

As far as funding goes, check the link I posted.  The City of Geelong has also tipped in.  You're correct when you say other parties haven't contributed as much as the Government, but the money hasn't just come from one source.

50 minutes ago, titan_uranus said:

I've been posting about this all week, probably ad nauseum.

It's not unfair. Unless we do a 34-game season where everyone plays everyone else home and away, every single model that is proposed is unfair. Even a 17-game season is unfair - some will get, say, Fremantle in Perth, others will get them at their home ground.

The 17-5 idea that gets bandied around creates different problems. Do we really want the last five weeks to be full of meaningless low-quality games involving the bottom 6 playing each other? Then there's tanking - why finish 6th after 17 games when you'll cop the five sides above you again when you could finish 7th and cop the five sides below you instead?

It's a bad idea for varying reasons.

The AFL tries to get it right by making good sides from one year play each other more often than not the next year. The obviously problem is that they don't have a crystal ball and so don't know what will happen the following year. For us, we were given Collingwood and Fremantle and they got much better. 

It's wrong to complain about Geelong getting North and West Coast twice. But it's right to point out that their fixture has ended up being easier than ours. So too Sydney and Richmond. Particularly in the second half of the season. So when you hear someone in the media say "Melbourne have only just been going in the second half of the year", or you see one of those "from Round 15" ladders, remember that as the fixture turned out, we had a much tougher second half of the season than everyone else.

Have no problem having a harder draw or hardest actually…it’s where we play those games …travelling to Geelong when I think

we were 1 & 2 on the ladder & also not being at the G for 6 games in a row. Don’t think we’ve been respected as reigning premiers …

9 minutes ago, Demonstone said:

You've cited nothing to support your memory of what happened.  The footy club don't own the stadium.

As far as funding goes, check the link I posted.  The City of Geelong has also tipped in.  You're correct when you say other parties haven't contributed as much as the Government, but the money hasn't just come from one source.

It is weighed fairly in the Governments Court.
My information came from listening to Brian Cook interviews when he was the CEO. Things may have changed since he moved on. But I doubt the template would be much different. It was too good!!

8 hours ago, Jaded No More said:

Absolute joke that Geelong who finished2nd and made a prelim last year, had a significantly softer draw than the remaining prelim finalists.

I totally understand the top 4 and premiers from the previous year getting the harder draw, but WTF is with the dream run that Geelong, Brisbane and Sydney got?

Hopefully it catches up with them in finals. We would have finished 1st if we also got to play North and West Coast twice, including two games at the MCG. 

 

It's not as if those sooks got an easy draw because it was supposed to be harder according to AFL Board gurus having weak leading in to finals games.

1 hour ago, Demonstone said:

SWYL, I fully understand and share your utter dislike for Geelong Football Club.

However, can you cite any evidence that they own the Kardinia Park ground?

You'll also find that the AFL and GFC helped fund the redevelopment and it's not just all Government money.

There is never any such thing as government money: it is taxpayers’ money.

1 hour ago, titan_uranus said:

I've been posting about this all week, probably ad nauseum.

It's not unfair. Unless we do a 34-game season where everyone plays everyone else home and away, every single model that is proposed is unfair. Even a 17-game season is unfair - some will get, say, Fremantle in Perth, others will get them at their home ground.

The 17-5 idea that gets bandied around creates different problems. Do we really want the last five weeks to be full of meaningless low-quality games involving the bottom 6 playing each other? Then there's tanking - why finish 6th after 17 games when you'll cop the five sides above you again when you could finish 7th and cop the five sides below you instead?

It's a bad idea for varying reasons.

The AFL tries to get it right by making good sides from one year play each other more often than not the next year. The obviously problem is that they don't have a crystal ball and so don't know what will happen the following year. For us, we were given Collingwood and Fremantle and they got much better. 

It's wrong to complain about Geelong getting North and West Coast twice. But it's right to point out that their fixture has ended up being easier than ours. So too Sydney and Richmond. Particularly in the second half of the season. So when you hear someone in the media say "Melbourne have only just been going in the second half of the year", or you see one of those "from Round 15" ladders, remember that as the fixture turned out, we had a much tougher second half of the season than everyone else.

It's not as if they the AFL would have done it on purpose. And blind Nellie didn't know that Freo and Woods were going to be better.

Just one point though, I think that the brains trust at MFC took a fair wack of this into account when designing our run.

21 minutes ago, Deestar9 said:

Have no problem having a harder draw or hardest actually…it’s where we play those games …travelling to Geelong when I think

we were 1 & 2 on the ladder & also not being at the G for 6 games in a row. Don’t think we’ve been respected as reigning premiers …

Yes these are separate issues.

We had 7 interstate games (1 we sold) and Geelong.

To compare with the other Victorian finalists:

1. Melbourne - 7 interstate games, 1 Geelong
2. Bulldogs - 6 interstate, 1 Geelong
3. Geelong - 6 interstate
4. Collingwood - 5 interstate
5. Richmond - 5 interstate

Yet to look into 5 and 6 day breaks, or relative breaks to opponents. And no one else got close to having six games in a row at different venues across four states/territories.

Rarely would I disagree with Binman’s views. On the Monday night ‘podcast’ he said this year we are better of than last year being guaranteed all our finals will be played at the MCG. I sadly disagree. There is no doubt in my mind Melbourne  ended up having a distinctive advantage by playing its finals in WA? Why? Crowd support.

Last year our finals in WA in particular, had unbelievable one sided support (I’d say a 70 / 30 spilt) coming our way.  It was loud, unbelievably loud. The noise was louder than what the pies got from their supporters the other week when they played and beat us (and I personally feel that helped Collingwood get over the line). Our players in WA thrived on thr support they received over there.

This year when we come up against bigger Melbourne sides in the other finals there is a fair chance we will be outnumbered and ‘out noised’. Sad but very likely. Our team will therefore not have the advantage it had last year.

However, bit like  the industry super funds marketing tag line, it’s never too late to change. It doesn’t have to be this way.  I know I’m repeating myself so I’ll try and be brief.  We have 60k members and many more supporters. Pretty much everyone I suspect were upset not being able to attend the finals last year. So bloody well turn up. Help our lads. 

After last year’s premiership our players said they were going to try and do it for us this year. Anything under 80k at the G next Friday to me will be disappointing. Need I say anymore?

You are preaching (again and again and again) to the converted. 

14 minutes ago, Wodjathefirst said:

Rarely would I disagree with Binman’s views. On the Monday night ‘podcast’ he said this year we are better of than last year being guaranteed all our finals will be played at the MCG. I sadly disagree. There is no doubt in my mind Melbourne  ended up having a distinctive advantage by playing its finals in WA? Why? Crowd support.

Last year our finals in WA in particular, had unbelievable one sided support (I’d say a 70 / 30 spilt) coming our way.  It was loud, unbelievably loud. The noise was louder than what the pies got from their supporters the other week when they played and beat us (and I personally feel that helped Collingwood get over the line). Our players in WA thrived on thr support they received over there.

This year when we come up against bigger Melbourne sides in the other finals there is a fair chance we will be outnumbered and ‘out noised’. Sad but very likely. Our team will therefore not have the advantage it had last year.

However, bit like  the industry super funds marketing tag line, it’s never too late to change. It doesn’t have to be this way.  I know I’m repeating myself so I’ll try and be brief.  We have 60k members and many more supporters. Pretty much everyone I suspect were upset not being able to attend the finals last year. So bloody well turn up. Help our lads. 

After last year’s premiership our players said they were going to try and do it for us this year. Anything under 80k at the G next Friday to me will be disappointing. Need I say anymore?

You are forgetting the Crowd numbers and noise level of the 2018 Finals Series 

The ‘G will be rocking loud when the Riegning Premiers take the field. We will sell our allocated tickets 

41 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

My information came from listening to Brian Cook interviews

I'm just trying to sort the facts from the BS here, mate. 

The football club have never owned the stadium contrary to your claim.

We can all agree that Geelong get a leg up from training and playing (lesser teams) on their home ground.

6 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

You are forgetting the Crowd numbers and noise level of the 2018 Finals Series 

The ‘G will be rocking loud when the Riegning Premiers take the field. We will sell our allocated tickets 

91k for Geelong and 90k for Hawthorn. Both were 50k+ MFC. The Geelong game was 60k MFC. 

If we don’t have 75k I would be disappointed that after so much pain, we are actually too damaged to enjoy the good times, regardless of all the excuses.

Edited August 22, 20223 yr by rpfc

Just now, Demonstone said:

I'm just trying to sort the facts from the BS here, mate. 

The football club have never owned the stadium contrary to your claim.

We can all agree that Geelong get a leg up from training and playing (lesser teams) on their home ground.

It may not have OWNED the Stadium on Paper.

BUT it was a Clean Stadium, as in all revenue streams from the Stadium on Match Days: Car Parking, Food and Beverage Sales, Advertising Space, Seating, Corporate Box Foods and Beverage sales, All went back to Jeelong.  (Between $600-800,000 profit for a match day) This all came out whilst other Clubs were trying to “break even” at   Marvel Stadium  Jeelong cleaned up very nicely, and I suspect they still do

 

Would have thought the MCG is very much "taxpayer funded".

8 hours ago, monoccular said:

Let's see if Geelong having had training runs basically the past fortnight will be match hardened in their QF.   

Conversely our guys will be very much ready to roll  so maybe the Cats' easy run will do them no good - one can only hope so.

Peaking too early as usual..