We need to play more games at the G

[bombers_rock]

Ok, anyone can make a general comment like this. Now back it up...

Collingwood are the number one team in Vic re resources,

Explain...

training facilities,

What do the filth have that we don't?
How much of a benefit to them is it?
How do facilities really translate into on-field success?

Aren't the Kangaroos whinging about poor facilities. Remind me where they're sitting on the ladder.
What facilities do Geelong or Hawthorn have that Essendon doesn't? How is it any better than what Essendon has?

number of members, average attendances

Source??
You may be right, but show us some figures.

[CameronClayton]

Keep your head in the sand then. Ever heard of the Lexus Centre?

Teams like the Roos, Hawks & Cats are going through the cylical nature of being up atm & going down in a few years time. Mark my words, in 2020 the Pies will be regarded as the strongest Vic team year on year for the previous 20 years, purely because they have stability financially off field, plenty of resources (heard of high altitude training, Irish recruits, sports science - something we have just discovered etc), it's well known fact that they have the most members & crowds in Melb & they play all their home games at the home of footy, the place where finals are won & lost, the MCG.

The Pies may never win a flag in the next 13 years (I farkin hope not), but they are giving themselves the best possible opportunity of doing so. At the end of the day though, it all relies on the talent you have out on the paddock & atm they can't win it.

We, on the other hand (same as the Saints & Doggies), will continue to be nobbled by injuries that will give us no hope of ever winning a flag while we play on that artificial ground.

[Sismis]

What is the logic behind playing at the G will win you a flag? The strongest Victorian contenders of the last few years have been:

Interesting you have not replied to this. If playing at the G is so important in winning a flag explain why the interstate teams have dominated for so long?

Collingwood are the number one team in Vic re resources, training facilities, number of members, average attendances - all they lack is decent players & they are slowly fixing that with their influx of young blokes.

Yet you say these things don't matter. Plain and simple essendon make more money from the same crowd at the the dome.

St Kilda would have been more successful in the last few years if they had no gotten so many injuries from playing at the Phone Dome & had such a crap coach as Grant Thomas.

Speculation and heresay. You could use the same argument about the G and melbourne this year. There is no evidence to support this.

Believe it or not, Kardinia Park is almost identical in size to the 'G' & has a good soft surface. Geelong has the best playing list in the comp, the best coach & will more than likely break the drought this year (maybe).

I don't believe you, but only because I looked it up. Fence to fence:

MCG 170 x 149
Skilled 170 x 115
Dome 170 x 140

That extra 9 cm must make a massive difference.

With our soft tissue injuries, it's not just the hard packed sand that is causing damage, it's the shifting surface also

Possibly but this would also impact knees and ankles more. There is nothing to support this.

Sismis, I've never ever read one post from you that knocks the EFC - basically in your eyes they can do no wrong.

No they can do wrong I just think there are enough slaggers without me adding to it.

Well I'm of a different opinion & all I know is that throughout the 80's & 90's, we were the number one team in Vic & we owned the G - no one liked playing us there, whereas nowadays even crap teams like Ninthmond & the Scum reckon they are a good chance of knocking us off there.

Hawthorn might have a bit of a claim here...

If you are staisfied with us forever being the number 2 side in Vic & no chance of winning finals at the G, but are financially better off, good luck to you. We were doing nicely in the 90's before the move & were the Vic side that no-one liked playing. Now it's like let's just get them away from the cozy confines of the Phone Dome (or play against us in the 2nd or 3rd consecutive game when we are physically stuffed) to get our chance of beating them.

Do you honestly think we would have won more game sover the last 2 years if had played at the G?

[CameronClayton]

This argument is going around in circles. Both you blokes obviously think playing at the Dome has no effect on our performance, although no-one yet can explain to me why the Pies flogged us on Anzac Day in a canter (should have won by 10 goals if they kicked straight) though we had the same amount rest as them & talent wise we were pretty evenly matched. We were flat as tacks that day, like someone had let the air out of our tyres.

Let's just say if we outscore the Pies in the 2nd half in tomorrow's game, you are right & if we get run over in the 2nd half (like I expect) then I am right.

The only way this discussion can ever be solved would be if some AFL boffin did an injuries per game ratio on this ground versus other grounds PLUS a win/loss ratio the week after a Dome game to see if it is exactly 50%. I would bet my house on all teams succumbing to more injuries on this ground then any other PLUS an overall winning ratio of about 40-45% for ALL teams the week after they play at the Dome.

[bombers_rock]

Keep your head in the sand then.

My head's not in the sand. I'm just asking for you to back up your comments with fact rather than just opinion and what you think. If you can't back it up with facts - then I guess I'll take it as a grain of "sand".

Ever heard of the Lexus Centre?

Yep, what makes it so much better than what Essendon has at, and around, Windy Hill? And, is it really that much more beneficial to them than what we have?

Mark my words, in 2020 the Pies will be regarded as the strongest Vic team year on year for the previous 20 years, purely because they have stability financially off field, plenty of resources (heard of high altitude training, Irish recruits, sports science - something we have just discovered etc), it's well known fact that they have the most members & crowds in Melb & they play all their home games at the home of footy, the place where finals are won & lost, the MCG.

"Strongest team" means diddly-squat if you don't win flags - as has been said many a time on here. A "strong team" is one that wins flags, not has everything under the sun off field. Off-field status/success doesn't necessarily translate into on-field success - look at us, prime example. Essendon is right up there financially and with facilities. You can't tell us ours are second rate. Does it show on the field? At the moment, no, not really. Does it mean we'll never win another flag? Of course not. The way the AFL works now is that every team is going to have their ups and downs - EXACTLY as you've said in your post. The Filth are up at the moment (not the top though), we're somewhere around the middle. We'll go up, the filth will go down, and vica versa. It's the way it works now.

You make it out like the filth are so much better and have so much more than we do. Maybe so, explain to me what and how. We have everything we need and more. The filth can have everything they need and more. It's not what you have, it's how you use it. If the Filth don't win a flag (always seems to be someone better than them), they'll be remembered as nothing. Personally, I don't think the filth are that much better off. If you think I'm wrong, you're right, that's all good and fine - explain how and why.

The Pies may never win a flag in the next 13 years (I farkin hope not),

That we can agree on.

but they are giving themselves the best possible opportunity of doing so.

Right, and everyone at Essendon are just sitting there twiddling their thumbs, hoping a flag falls in their lap.

At the end of the day though, it all relies on the talent you have out on the paddock & atm they can't win it.

Thank god for that!

We, on the other hand (same as the Saints & Doggies), will continue to be nobbled by injuries that will give us no hope of ever winning a flag while we play on that artificial ground.

That's utter rubbish. Where was our home ground in 2000 when we, arguably, had the BEST TEAM OF ALL TIME and WON THE FLAG?? Where was our home ground in 2001 when we made the Grand Final? Yeah, injuries happen, but last time I checked it wasn't exclusive to Essendon and, in fact, ours injury list has been a lot shorter than some other club's lists.

And remind me, where are the Kangaroos on the ladder??

--

This has made me rethink my position on Phone Dome vs the G. We don't have to play more games there, maybe a couple more if anything. We play pretty darn well at Phone Dome - so as long as we're winning there, who cares? What we need to do is capitalise on and win the games we DO play at the 'G.

This season:
9 games at Phone Dome - 5 wins from 8 so far. Not a bad return considering our position this time last year and that 2 of these losses were against teams that were or are above us on the ladder.
8 games at the MCG - 1 win from 4 so far. Another, of which, should've been a win. The 3 losses have been against teams above us on the ladder - obviously.

That indicates to me its not a matter of playing more games there, it's just a matter of winning the ones we do play there. Does playing at Phone Dome have an impact? Maybe, maybe not. Let's see how we go tomorrow.

[dom_105]

I wouldn't think that the Lexus Centre is all that different to what we have at Windy Hill. At the end of the day, their weights weigh the same as our weights.

If the club thought it was beneficial to throw away it's heritage to move to a central location, it would have already done so. Don't get me wrong, the Glasshouse is an impressive building, but that's all it is.

[CameronClayton]

Geez the Doggies are looking flat tonight. I wonder what nthe cause of that could be???

[bombers_rock]

Oh yes, its that reason alone. Of course. :roll:

[CameronClayton]

Oh & by the way, calf injury to Gilbee & Mooney may have done his hammy in the 3rd (usually a 1st qtr injury)

[jimmyc1985]

Guys, if you want to settle this argument proper, i suggest someone with a bit of spare time on their hands do a little statistical analysis of how teams pull up after playing at the Dome. This could actually be pretty interesting.

What you do is this:
- Take note of every match played at the Dome since 2000 (when it first was used);
- Note down the results of the teams in the week after they played at the Dome. For example, if 2 matches were played at the Dome in round 10 of a given season, note down how each of the 4 teams in those two matches performed in round 11 (did they win or lose)?
- Collate those statistics over the course of the 8 years the Dome has been in use.
- Then, compare those results with a team's win/loss record throughout the season. For example, if a team went 13-9 throughout the 22 rounds, their winning percentage is 59%. Say they played at the Dome 6 times throughout the year (i.e. in rounds 4, 5, 9, 12, 15 and 18), and in the 6 matches the week after they played at the Dome (i.e. rounds 5, 6, 10, 13, 16 and 19) that team's record was 2-4, you could conclude that paying at the Dome does materially affect a team's performance the following week.

If you did that for 8 years, you'd build up a big data set and you'd get a pretty good idea of whether playing at the Dome materially affects a team's performance the following week.

Someone should seriously do this! If no one else volunteers, i'll do it sometime over the weekend.

[CameronClayton]

Jimmy it's exactly what I mentioned although I think yours is overly complicated. In theory the win/loss ratio for all teams OVERALL is 50%, as long as you don't count draws. Someone has to win & someone has to lose.

Because of so many variables like interstate teams, who generally play at the Dome in Melb & then at home the following week where they have a strong home ground advantage, it might be not so clear cut (although the other side of the argument is the Melb based side who played against the interstaters the first week, are the ones I think are disadvantaged the next week).

Personally, as this is a G versus Dome argument, i think you need to compare the win/loss ratio of teams the week after a Dome game versus the win/loss ratio of teams the week after a G game. Even if you do it for the last 5 seasons, it should make pretty interesting reading - but it will never be conclusive because of the interstaters, whose strong home ground advantage could skew the result.

Maybe just do it for Vic based teams?

[Sismis]

Oh & by the way, calf injury to Gilbee & Mooney may have done his hammy in the 3rd (usually a 1st qtr injury)

Where do you get this stuff?

[Sismis]

Let's just say if we outscore the Pies in the 2nd half in tomorrow's game, you are right & if we get run over in the 2nd half (like I expect) then I am right.

.....

[j-mac31]

What is the logic behind playing at the G will win you a flag? The strongest Victorian contenders of the last few years have been:

Interesting you have not replied to this. If playing at the G is so important in winning a flag explain why the interstate teams have dominated for so long?

Just my thoughts on this:

Geelong hasn't been great the past few years, its only now that they've really started to played well every week.

St Kilda? How many grand finals did they make? What about that year when they won 10 in a row and then not long afterwards lost to the Doggies at the G in a bit of rain I think, when they were expected to thrash them?

I noticed you also said that interstate team dominated, while (obviously) not playing at the MCG much. It's not the G specifically that helps. It's not playing at the Dome - bigger ground, open to the elements so can be better prepared for anything, easier on the body.

[CameronClayton]

Well Sismis, we did get beaten 3 quarters out of 4, make of that what you will. If you want to hang on your hat on us playing 1 good quarter out of 4, then that explains fully why you think Sheedy can do no wrong.

Interesting that the Doggies have lost their 2nd game of 3 in-a-row at the Dome & are due to play the Weagles there this week. You would put your house on the Weagles winning this week, which then means the Doggies won their 1st, & then lost their next 2 at the Dome - sound familar?

Oh & Gilbee did his calf & Ricky Olarenshaw said during the 3rd qtr that Mooney was off for the rest of the game due to hamstring tightness - I can only go by the call of a bloke who was right there.

Let's see how many Doggies don't play this week or get injured in the Weagles game.

[CameronClayton]

Well Sismis, we did get beaten 3 quarters out of 4, make of that what you will. If you want to hang on your hat on us playing 1 good quarter out of 4, then that explains fully why you think Sheedy can do no wrong.

Interesting that the Doggies have lost their 2nd game of 3 in-a-row at the Dome & are due to play the Weagles there this week. You would put your house on the Weagles winning this week, which then means the Doggies won their 1st, & then lost their next 2 at the Dome - sound familar?

Oh & Gilbee did his calf & Ricky Olarenshaw said during the 3rd qtr that Mooney was off for the rest of the game due to hamstring tightness - I can only go by the call of a bloke who was right there.

Let's see how many Doggies don't play this week or get injured in the Weagles game.

My prediction came true. Doggies are dropping games like flies after successive games at the Dome, just like we did. They will probably get done next week by the Sainters, to make it 1 win followed by 3 losses at the Dome.

You can get away with 1 game on, 1 game away, but I reckon teams will be asking for next year's fixtures to not have anymore successive games at the Dome. Believe you me, the clubs will be well aware of these losing patterns that can develop for whatever reason (sore legs?) playing on this ground in successive weeks, & they will be well pissed off.

[boncer34]

Phfft not saying your wrong CC overall in your theory CC but I'd think the Doggies losing has much more to do with running into a red hot Eagles who have their true leader back in red hot form.

[bombers_rock]

CC: keep living in your simplistic little world. There's too many factors involved, you can't say it's the ground alone. If you do, then it's nothing more than ignorance.

Geelong? don't see them losing. Phone Dome factor - gone missing??
Kangaroos? don't see them losing either. Phone Dome factor - seems to have gone missing again.

The couple of times Collingfilth has played at Phone Dome, they may have lost, but they backed it up with a win the following week. Where's the Phone Dome factor there?

The ground is 1 factor, yes. But it's not the only factor, nor the major factor. Form and consistency are bigger factors in my book.

You seem to be pointing out the teams that are sitting on the knife edge. Us, Western Bulldogs, St Kilda. If we ever get back to the lofty heights of the top 4, I somehow doubt you'll be singing the same tune.

[CameronClayton]

Geelong? Never played consecutive games on the Dome, so COMPLETELY IRRELEVANT to topic. Collingwood & the Roos the same. None of them have got C-O-N-S-E-C-U-T-I-V-E (there I've spelt it, can I make it any easier on you???) games at the Dome

I live in a simplistic little world & you live in cold miserable Ballarat - go lick my salty balls, moron.

Essendon = play 3 in a row at the Dome, win the first, LOSE the next 2

Doggies = play 4 in a row at the Dome, win the first, LOSE the next 3 (no chance against the Saints this week - FFS the Dees or Tigers would beat the Doggies this week).

No correlation whatsoever? Who much easier can I make this for you? Who is the simple one now?

If I could find a Bulldogs chat room, I'm sure they would be all over this story.

And maybe when you see next year's fixture & see no club has consecutive games at the Dome any more, you will need to ask yourself why? The AFL needs the Dome to work & if the premier club decides to pull out & go back to the G, there would be hell to pay.

[Sismis]

It would help if once again you got your facts straight.

Dogs won their first 2. Beating us and Port.

They then lost their next 2 versus.......

GEELONG

WESTCOAST

So surely you can see why some people might consider your theory to be over simplistic.