frankc
9 Dec 2007, 15:57
With the debate surrounding the future of the NMFC, it got me thinking as to what power the AFL actually has to revoke or force a club to do its bidding.
In this case, the AFL allowed the NMFC to make its own decision and they have indicated they will respect that. However could the AFL have made the NMFC's license to play in the AFL conditional upon them accepting the offer.
Furthermore, can the AFL now consider withdrawing additional funding it provides the NMFC or making that funding conditional upon the NMFC relocating?
I feel the situation with the roos is going to be a watershed and the AFL will start making more demands in clubs who require funding over above what is due to them. Could it get to the stage where the AFL revoke the license of a club given its poor financial health?
The AFL is talking about bringing in 17th and 18th teams - I feel this will be a disaster for those Melbourne clubs who are struggling as the AFL will divert funds to the new clubs to the detriment of those who are struggling and they may be forced to merge as Fitzroy did.
In this case, the AFL allowed the NMFC to make its own decision and they have indicated they will respect that. However could the AFL have made the NMFC's license to play in the AFL conditional upon them accepting the offer.
Furthermore, can the AFL now consider withdrawing additional funding it provides the NMFC or making that funding conditional upon the NMFC relocating?
I feel the situation with the roos is going to be a watershed and the AFL will start making more demands in clubs who require funding over above what is due to them. Could it get to the stage where the AFL revoke the license of a club given its poor financial health?
The AFL is talking about bringing in 17th and 18th teams - I feel this will be a disaster for those Melbourne clubs who are struggling as the AFL will divert funds to the new clubs to the detriment of those who are struggling and they may be forced to merge as Fitzroy did.