Update: As Kenno pointed out in his comment, the AFL may let Sydney play a home final after all.

There's still a round to go, so it's all conjecture, but if the dominoes fall as expected the AFL may let Sydney play their home final, and hope that Brisbane and Port Adelaide win their first games. This will mean that two Melbourne teams will play at the MCG on the second week.

If one of the top teams lose, then the AFL will have to decide if they force that team play at the MCG the next week. Not very fair on a team that has finished near the top of the ladder. If they don't, then they'll be two MCG games behind for next season, and the problem will be all the worse.

This still doesn't solve the big problem with the AFL / MCG agreement, and that is if two higher ranking interstate teams qualify for each of the preliminary finals held in week three, then one will have to play in Melbourne.

The only real solution is that the AFL / MCG agreement has to go.


Although born and bred in Sydney, I've been a follower of the Australian Football League (AFL) since the former South Melbourne team moved here to become the Sydney Swans during the early 80s. My interest in the game springs from my late father, a Western Australian who, despite living here for 50 years, never lost his passion for the game.

Being a Swans follower in the early days was not easy. Sydneysiders were generally ambivalent to the team and code. The authorities had the naive view that the game would flourish in Sydney without much support. How wrong they were. Apart from a short period in the mid 80s, the Swans were unsuccessful financially and on the field. They almost folded in the early 90s.

The AFL belatedly came to the rescue of Sydney by providing financial support and assistance with concessional draft picks and coaching. In the following years the team turned around, climaxing in 1996 when the team played in their first grand final in over 40 years. The Swans have been competitive on the field and financially secure ever since.

The AFL successfully did what the Rugby League tried to do and failed; they set up a viable national competition. Besides Sydney, the AFL set up teams in Perth, Adelaide and Brisbane. So successful has it been that seven of the past 10 competions have been won by interstate clubs.

So why is it that the AFL tollerates an arcane agreement with the Melbourne Cricket Club (MCC), the body that runs the Melbourne Cricket Ground (MCG), that forces interstate clubs who have earned the right to stage home ground finals to play at the MCG?

Quoting from the AFL website:

Sydney and West Coast are set to clash in the first ever final between two non-Victorian clubs in Melbourne as the AFL finals picture began to take shape after a thrilling round 21.

With just one round remaining every spot in the top eight is still up for grabs heading into next weekend's season climax but the most likely scenario for the four first week finals has emerged following this weekend.

And it involves three non-Victorian clubs all earning the right to host finals in the first week, in a year in which the AFL has already declared it will play two finals at the MCG in the first week of September.

This is because the AFL 'owes' the MCG an extra final after playing just one final at the ground in the first week of the finals last year, under its finals agreement with the Melbourne Cricket Club.

[That would] leave the AFL still one final short of fulfilling its requirements to the MCC meaning sixth-placed Sydney would have to host seventh-placed West Coast at the MCG in week one - even though both teams hail from outside Victoria - if the ladder remains as it is.

The AFL has 'tried' to get the MCC to renegotiate the deal, but apparently they won't budge. As the AFL is Victorian based, the amount of effort they've put into the problem is a moot point.

The deal was originally designed to guarantee funds to pay for a new grandstand, but I suspect it now comes down to protecting the viewing rights of MCC members. The ironic thing about the current situation is that the MCC is going to host a game that has limited local interest.

More that half the teams in the AFL competition come from Victoria, so the MCG should, by law of averages, host most of the finals. It's shouldn't be the interstate teams' problem that Victorian teams can't make the grade.

This agreement is a blight on the national competition. It's about time that the AFL started to put real pressure on the MCC to give up this ridiculous and unfair situation, one that has in the past, given Victorian teams an unearned advantage in critical finals games.