I consider relying on data a perfectly cromulent way to made decisions, but no-one on here knows what that data is, how it's calculated, where on the spectrum Perth Stadium is and whether that spectrum is accurate. Even the clubs and the stadium operators seem to be on a different page about that.
What we do know is that coaches and players from a number of teams and codes have commented on how hard the ground is, for very little gain. When a group of elite athletes whose careers could be affected by the standard of the grounds they play on speak up, it would be foolish to ignore them.
Freo are one of the only clubs not to mention it, but it would be fair to say that for the better part of a decade the club has pursued an approach of acquiecence when it comes to the AFL - or just about anyone.
To suggest that either there is no issue or the players are soft based on the unseen data from the stadium operators and AFL might be a perfectly reasonable position to take if the AFL didn't have history on this front. On their data Dockland's surface has always been within the acceptable range for AFL stadia. Anyone who watched AFL football there in the early 2000s knows that was bunkum.
It's reasonable to suggest that the data or range within it is acceptable might not be unassailable when it conflicts with the players' accounts.
