View Full Version : St Kilda interested in playing on Gold Coast
Without Bias
3 Dec 2007, 22:20
St Kilda have approached the AFL to play games on the Gold Coast should the Kangaroos reject the offer to move there.
philhawk
3 Dec 2007, 22:54
Doubt it.
Source?
Try this: http://www.realfooty.com.au/news/news/saints-bid-for-coastal-retreat/2007/12/03/1196530577185.html
Doubt it.
Source?
On those terms we would
900 to 1,250K in the bank, 1 or 2 games 'away' and only have to travel a maximum 3 times elsewhere
Kildonan
4 Dec 2007, 09:30
Saints bid for coastal retreat (http://www.realfooty.com.au/news/news/saints-bid-for-coastal-retreat/2007/12/03/1196530577185.html)
The Age | Real Footy
Jake Niall | December 4, 2007
ST KILDA has held discussions with the AFL about playing games on the Gold Coast if the Kangaroos reject the league's bid for a permanent relocation.
The Saints have told AFL officials, including chief executive Andrew Demetriou and his offsider Gillon McLachlan, that they would be willing to play three or four games at Carrara from 2009 and until the league has a team permanently based on the Gold Coast.
But sources said that the Saints would only entertain playing games at Carrara — two or three most likely, but four would not be out of the question — on the proviso that they did not have to travel more than six times in the course of a 22-game season.
Their proposal is for a mix of home-and-away games at Carrara.
St Kilda is mindful that it has been drawn to play outside of Victoria six times in 2008 and does not want that number to increase. The Saints view the Gold Coast as an opportunity to get a better fixture and to maximise their strong supporter base in south-east Queensland.
Sources said the AFL was "very positive" about the prospect of St Kilda filling the breach, if the Kangaroos reject the massive financial and draft incentives and opt to remain a wholly Melbourne-based club.
The Saints envisaged playing games at Carrara until the AFL had a team permanently based there.
St Kilda's Gold Coast proposal follows a similar overture from Collingwood, which was also hoping to play games at Carrara while minimising its interstate travel to other states, and capitalising on the Kangaroos' reluctance to uproot themselves and compromise their identity.
It is understood that the Saints are interested in "back-to-back" games over a week, allowing the team to stay in the region for several days while supporters could spend a week in south-east Queensland and see the team play twice.
St Kilda's practical advantage over Collingwood is that the Magpies are the most requested "away" team, due to their drawing power, and Victorian clubs are loath to play home games against Collingwood outside of Victoria when they are guaranteed an excellent return in Melbourne.
St Kilda also has the game's highest profile ex-Gold Coaster in Nick Riewoldt, who was recruited from the powerhouse club of Southport, the same club that produced his teammate Sam Gilbert.
In 2008, the Saints have drawn the Kangaroos at Carrara and will also play the Brisbane Lions at the Gabba.
They visit Perth twice, play Port Adelaide away and the Swans in Sydney — a schedule that they believe would be much improved if half of those six interstate trips were at the Gold Coast, a region in which they wish to develop a greater presence.
The Gold Coast proposal follows the club's momentous decision to leave Moorabbin and establish Frankston as its new administrative and training base from 2009.
The club enjoyed a fruitful period of playing home games in Launceston before abandoning Tasmania — and leaving Hawthorn as the only club with a base in that state — in 2006.
St Kilda chief executive Archie Fraser would not comment on the issue last night.
bubblegoose
4 Dec 2007, 09:33
On those terms we would
900 to 1,250K in the bank, 1 or 2 games 'away' and only have to travel a maximum 3 times elsewhere
If the terms are alright that would be ok, wouldn't mind staying up there for a week see a couple of games - if we're going to have to travel anyway.
I wouldn't want to play brissy up there though.
If this pans out that wouldn't be too bad. They'd love the tourisim $ too.
Home games interstate. How is that helping us build a sustainable future?
Home games interstate. How is that helping us build a sustainable future?
It's not. That's why this whole damn thing is ridiculous. Let a club like Collingwood play games up there to build the goddamn SEQ market. At least Collingwood will not be in danger of being shafted by the AFL at the end of the day. We, on the other hand, as one of the lesser Melbourne clubs have every chance of being moved on when the time is right for the AFL.
Maybe the new administration needs the cash after rolling the old administration on the promise to increase spending in the football department, but after making a loss this year, where will they get the money?
sauce_head
4 Dec 2007, 22:26
It is dodgy. the contract would have to be specific that we could not be force relocated. Although reducing the travel aspect through management is not a bad idea in theory.
I believe that the AFL will try to stub the Roos financially and then get them up there anyway. I hate the AFL.
Oh When the Saints
5 Dec 2007, 12:14
Maybe the new administration needs the cash after rolling the old administration on the promise to increase spending in the football department, but after making a loss this year, where will they get the money?
The loss was due to around $700k set aside for Aaron Hamill and Grant Thomas.
If St Kilda received Melbourne's CBF funding and did not have to pay those two individuals, we would have made $1.5m bucks.
Profits are a useless measure of things - if your revenue is increasing or large, then it's easy to make a profits by just cutting a few costs (which is what St Kilda has done in the past).
Sponsorships and examining a Gold Coast deal are designed to increase revenue.
I'd rather make a 500k loss and win a flag than vice-versa.
ChrisFooty
7 Dec 2007, 19:10
It does not sound too bad. The contract must be specifically stating that it will be only short term, and not involve a possible perm relocation.
It does not sound too bad. The contract must be specifically stating that it will be only short term, and not involve a possible perm relocation.
AFL will gladly put that in writing while they poison your supporter base in Melbourne with their propaganda machine.
What happens when they do enough damage to give your club the impression that your future in Melbourne is in peril? Should the premiership window be closed and supporters disenchanted with moves to Frankston and games on the Gold Coast they will not hesitate to sabotage your club with their media puppets.
I would not wish the garbage we had gone through the last twelve months on anyone. Be weary of snakes bearing golden apples. ;)
St.Kilda supporters as the AFL pulled the plug on North Melbourne to play remaining games on the Gold Coast. I am hoping out of the 4 games fixtured next year that they will transfer the game againt St.Kilda back here to Telstra Dome on a Friday night.(but I doubt it) It should have a crowd close to 40000 for sure.
What about you Saint fans? Would you's also prefer to transfer back the Saint's game here on a Friday night?
ChrisFooty
9 Dec 2007, 19:43
AFL will gladly put that in writing while they poison your supporter base in Melbourne with their propaganda machine.
What happens when they do enough damage to give your club the impression that your future in Melbourne is in peril? Should the premiership window be closed and supporters disenchanted with moves to Frankston and games on the Gold Coast they will not hesitate to sabotage your club with their media puppets.
I would not wish the garbage we had gone through the last twelve months on anyone. Be weary of snakes bearing golden apples. ;)
St.kilda aren't in debt currently. The AFL won't be forcing the saints up there perm, not unless things go terribly wrong financial wise in the next few years. It seems most supporters approve the move to Frankston, so that won't destroy the club.
I also think St.kilda could easily request in writing that these Gold Coast games are only temp. The AFL could not force north melbourne out, so they can't force st.kilda out of melbourne.
ChrisFooty
9 Dec 2007, 19:46
St.Kilda supporters as the AFL pulled the plug on North Melbourne to play remaining games on the Gold Coast. I am hoping out of the 4 games fixtured next year that they will transfer the game againt St.Kilda back here to Telstra Dome on a Friday night.(but I doubt it) It should have a crowd close to 40000 for sure.
What about you Saint fans? Would you's also prefer to transfer back the Saint's game here on a Friday night?
Make sence, as North Melbourne VS Melbourne would not attract a very high crowd at TD. The two interstate teams would be a lot harder to transfer back.
Ice-Wolf
9 Dec 2007, 20:04
St.Kilda supporters as the AFL pulled the plug on North Melbourne to play remaining games on the Gold Coast. I am hoping out of the 4 games fixtured next year that they will transfer the game againt St.Kilda back here to Telstra Dome on a Friday night.(but I doubt it) It should have a crowd close to 40000 for sure.
What about you Saint fans? Would you's also prefer to transfer back the Saint's game here on a Friday night?
I very, much doubt that the AFL would move the St.Kilda game back, especially on a friday night, they aren't about to do North any favours.
Most likely it will be a the Melbourne game or one of the interstate ones.
Trio tipped to play on Coast
Caroline Wilson | August 2, 2008
COLLINGWOOD, Carlton and St Kilda have been nominated by the AFL as the three preferred Victorian clubs to fly the Australian football flag on the Gold Coast next season.
With North Melbourne tonight hosting its final Carrara game under the broken three-year agreement that has been cut short by one season and four games, fixturing boss Gillon McLachlan is close to reaching a deal for 2009 with the Magpies, Blues and Saints.
Although four home-and-away games had been earmarked for next season at Carrara, the AFL will underwrite three games and a pre-season clash on the Gold Coast at a cost of $1.2 million as part of its promotional strategy leading up to the introduction of the 17th club in 2011.
All three clubs have indicated they are prepared to relinquish one home game to travel to Carrara for $400,000 apiece — money that would have gone to the financially struggling Kangaroos, who have chosen instead to fight to secure their future in Melbourne.
Collingwood, whose president Eddie McGuire revealed late last year that he was looking at three or four Gold Coast games but was not prepared to give away those fixtures as home games, should prove the final piece in the jigsaw and is the only club of the three not to have officially agreed to the 2009 Gold Coast scheduling agreement.
But the club has shown enthusiasm to travel to the Gold Coast and help promote the code in its crucial lead-up to 2011.
The Magpies reportedly had looked at consecutive Queensland clashes against the Brisbane Lions over a three-week period, with the mid-season bye in between and one game at the Gabba and one at Carrara, a prospect AFL executives were lukewarm about.
Carlton chief executive Greg Swann confirmed last night that the Blues had spoken with the AFL regarding one home game at Carrara in place of one of the club's six contracted Telstra Dome clashes, which would mean the club played five games respectively at the Docklands and the MCG, with one at Carrara, probably against Adelaide.
St Kilda boss Archie Fraser said the Saints had been buoyed not only by their good form at Carrara against North Melbourne earlier this season but by the strong support their fans had shown for the fixture. Between 6000 and 7000 St Kilda supporters attended the game, according to the club.
Fraser said he would have welcomed two home games at Carrara over consecutive weeks, with a potential Gabba fixture in between, but would welcome one game against any rival, preferably immediately before the mid-season break.
The three-way split preferred by the AFL is expected to be confirmed next week as the competition works through a series of fixturing requests by clubs.
In the meantime, the competition's governing body has remained ultra-sensitive to the question of a home stadium for the new Gold Coast team, which is expected to be funded now in a three-way split between the competition itself along with both private and public money.
With four potential and as yet undeveloped sites on the AFL's long-term plan — all strategically placed near key railway stops — no stadium is expected to be developed in time for the new club's 2011 debut, meaning Carrara will remain the AFL's Gold Coast venue at least until 2013.
Several million dollars will potentially be invested into creating further infrastructure at Carrara. This will include training facilities and offices for the new club, which could ultimately retain the stadium as its home training base while playing its home games elsewhere.
http://www.realfooty.com.au/news/new...097534898.html (http://www.realfooty.com.au/news/news/trio-tipped-to-play-on-coast/2008/08/01/1217097534898.html) Looks to be set in stone. I actually like this, looks as though the club are going to try and benefit from the GC players we already have (Roo, Gilbo, Armo). $400,000 a game, seems like a fair deal.
Saints08
2 Aug 2008, 21:32
Looks to be set in stone. I actually like this, looks as though the club are going to try and benefit from the GC players we already have (Roo, Gilbo, Armo). $400,000 a game, seems like a fair deal.
Shh!
Rough_Edges
2 Aug 2008, 22:16
You must be kidding me.
Can't believe we don't want to play our home games at home.
Has cost us many a time @ Tassie and we are going down that road again.
What a joke.
ChrisFooty
3 Aug 2008, 07:37
I'm happy to give up one home game for 400k. If we are good enough, we should still win the game. Winning against North Melbourne there will give the team great confidence.
bubblegoose
3 Aug 2008, 11:34
I wouldn't want to play Brisbane up there though, they still go in with an advantage, even though not at their home ground. I'd also want it later in the season, not at the start when we need to be winning & selling memberships at home. Will it make any difference how many people turn up or do we just the flat $.
Look2Me4Guidance
3 Aug 2008, 13:30
You must be kidding me.
Can't believe we don't want to play our home games at home.
Has cost us many a time @ Tassie and we are going down that road again.
What a joke.
I see where you're coming from there mate, but it has merit. If Collingwood of all teams are interested, it must be worth a go. I'd play Freo or WCE there in a heartbeat. Long flight from WA to the coast.
HoldenMCaulfield
3 Aug 2008, 18:54
I want to be there for as many games as I can - hence my optimum would be 22 games in Melbourne (I have enough trouble explaining 16 games in Melbourne, my wife would not show too much sympathy if I wanted to travel with the team...).
I don't care too much about the $400K (but I suppose that this would be a good financial deal, especially if against one of the less interesting teams), I mainly about care about our team winning (we didn't do too well down in Tassie...).
Apparently there were quite a few Saints supporters there for the game against North, I guess they deserve a game in Queensland, too (I wouldn't mind if we're spared of a trip to Brisbane to play the Lions instead...).
Squizzy1970
3 Aug 2008, 19:02
L2M4G - if you could get an assurance of who you play then it might work, but the AFL could not give a rat's toss-bag about the Saints. I've got no doubt they would schedule us against Brisbane and Sydney.
We won't get free-to-air coverage down here, so the local sponsors will miss out.
Our travel record is appauling, and I was thankful we were able to extract ourselves from the Launny deal. Do you really think we would have beaten Port down there (or at Cararra) today?
Look2Me4Guidance
3 Aug 2008, 19:33
L2M4G - if you could get an assurance of who you play then it might work, but the AFL could not give a rat's toss-bag about the Saints. I've got no doubt they would schedule us against Brisbane and Sydney.
We won't get free-to-air coverage down here, so the local sponsors will miss out.
Our travel record is appauling, and I was thankful we were able to extract ourselves from the Launny deal. Do you really think we would have beaten Port down there (or at Cararra) today?
I agree, but we've hardly been unbeatable at the Dome this year. 400k would have been nice to take home from today's game.
Looks to be set in stone. I actually like this, looks as though the club are going to try and benefit from the GC players we already have (Roo, Gilbo, Armo). $400,000 a game, seems like a fair deal.
Great time to go up there and show the good people of the Gold Coast their first CHF, CHB and onballer.
Persevering Saint
4 Aug 2008, 14:22
I don't mind us going up there - to put it in perspective, we won a pre-season comp and got $350k (is that right?), we could play up there and, win or lose, get $400k. Nice.
Carrara isn't Tassie. And if we CAN get to play a team like one of the WA teams there, ooh baby!
_Interpol_
4 Aug 2008, 16:05
Silly, silly move.
If St Kila thinks the AFL will do us any favors by us playing a game there, we are blind
we'll cop a home game there, and still go to subi twice, and gabba and everywhere else
i'd onyl be happy with the offer if we go i/s for only 4 other games, NO MORE, i./e 17 games in melb.
we win 1 game there and all of a sudden we think it's a safehouse
we are the most successful team @ the dome, why put $$ ahead of points??
Persevering Saint
4 Aug 2008, 17:01
Ah (hopeful glance skyward!) if we CAN get a game moved from Subi to Carrara or something, wouldn't that be lovely? what I mean is, play Freo once in the year, and make it up north.
sauce_head
5 Aug 2008, 00:29
It seems fairly obvious what will happen. We will play a home game up there vs the pies and we will both get $400k for it. Not worth the loss of a Dome game, unless we have a definate against the pies at the G with free entry to StKilda supporters.
Perhaps we could then play the Lions up there the other side of the bye and the dockers as an away game (like somebody suggested). In effect it would be a triple header between the three clubs involved (Lions, Pies, Saints) and whoever else is flown in i.e. the dockers.
The $400k would be handy to offset against our injury management system that got footy first voted in and has been a waste of money.
Well I think it's great because I get to see the boys in action :) and if the North game is anything to go by, the support was phenomenal. The roar from the crowd was worthy of any home game. :thumbsu: Some extra $ in the bank and a pseudo home crowd advantage is all good.
One Eyed Sainter 66
6 Aug 2008, 23:56
Silly, silly move.
If St Kila thinks the AFL will do us any favors by us playing a game there, we are blind
we'll cop a home game there, and still go to subi twice, and gabba and everywhere else
i'd onyl be happy with the offer if we go i/s for only 4 other games, NO MORE, i./e 17 games in melb.
we win 1 game there and all of a sudden we think it's a safehouse
we are the most successful team @ the dome, why put $$ ahead of points??
Totally agree - I like the idea of having a game on the GC and grabbing some handy cash for it (especially with our support base there) but ONLY if we don't get shafted in the interstate stakes. IN 2006, we had SEVEN interstate games (2 in tassie and one everywhere else except v Adelaide in adelaide)
but I like to keep our games in melbourne too.
Also, If we asked for it make it against a fellow Vic team. Not Brisbane or Sydney who travel well anywhere they play, not port and freo who we ALWAYS get at neutral interstate venues.
The $400k would be handy to offset against our injury management system that got footy first voted in and has been a waste of money.
a waste of money. round 18 and how many players are injured?
6 maybe. certainly better than last year!
Persevering Saint
7 Aug 2008, 15:58
From the Hun (http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/sport/afl/story/0,26576,24139890-19742,00.html)today:
St Kilda keen on one-game Gold Coast deal
Jon Ralph | August 07, 2008 12:00am
ST KILDA is happy to play one home game on the Gold Coast for the next two years, but only if its interstate travel burden can be lessened.
St Kilda chief executive Archie Fraser confirmed yesterday the club was keen to help the AFL promote the game on the Gold Coast in the absence of North Melbourne.
But as a pay-off the Saints are prepared to play only six interstate games, one of those being the Gold Coast fixture.
The club has repeatedly been forced to play six interstate fixtures a year in past seasons, often with a pair of Perth trips.
The Carrara game would see the Saints retain their 16 Melbourne games, and reap the club $400,000 from the AFL.
Carlton, Collingwood and St Kilda are all prepared to play a home game at Carrara, and the Saints would be happy to play there for two seasons.
Fraser said the club was still negotiating with the AFL but hoped to lock in a deal.
"The option of a Gold Coast game is predicated on one less interstate travel and one more additional game somewhere in Melbourne," he said.
"We are happy to help out but we would like some relief because we tend to play six interstate games every year."
The AFL is prepared to use the $1.2 million it was to pay the Kangaroos for at least three games a year on the Gold Coast to continue to promote the game until the Coast's own team starts in 2012.
Collingwood and the Brisbane Lions had considered playing back-to-back fixtures around the split round, but that is unlikely to eventuate.
Fraser backed the AFL's new fixturing flexibility, which removes the requirement of clubs to play all 15 rivals within the first 15 rounds.
"I think it has worked out beneficially from a player welfare point of view. There have been a lot less six-day breaks and a lot more flexibility. That's been a positive," Fraser said.
"This year there has been a real improvement in our player welfare and recovery. Why do we need to play each other once in the first 15 rounds? Is it just tradition?"
The Saints will also push hard to improve their stadium deal at Telstra Dome, which expires at year's end.
Fraser indicated the club expected a vast improvement in its returns, after averaging nearly 41,000 fans at the ground this season.
"Our deal has been only just passable. In essence, it is substantially less than what we think it should be, so we will be pushing for a better deal," Fraser said.
"We continue to draw crowds and have been in the top two or three clubs in TV ratings in the last two or three years."
The AFL tops up St Kilda's stadium returns. The issue of stadium returns is increasingly seen as a key issue for the league to address.
"It's an OK deal for us, but in comparison to West Australia, or Queensland, or even a South Australian deal, it pales into insignificance," Fraser said.