It's the fault of the league, or commission, that the Tas Gov't tourism department offers clubs $$$ to come down & play?
Interesting.
Interesting.
Australian National Football Council
- Thread starter EssendonNick
- Start date
- Tagged users None
The name of the council doesn't really matter, but the reality is that we do see a need for a seperate governing body to the league.
Whether it is called ANFL or ANFC or AFL Commission, isn't really the point.
All of that comes into it but you can't deny it was the VFL (& commission) who made the positive, forward thinking moves.
You can't deny it was out of self interest?
The VFL was broke, it needed cash so it decided to expand.
It had nothing to do with a vision for the game and everything to do with cash.
No doubt the demise of local sport is as much to do with social change (TV,computers, weekend work & shopping etc) as anything else. But the rise of the AFL as a professional sport/business HAS affected local footy. NOT having an AFL club in this state has led to the relative demise of footy here.
I note that Tassie cricket seems to be doing ok as it has a direct link to the professional level of the game.
Local footy has its infighting, no doubt. But they didnt just lie down. The AFL had two guys come down here to run the game(Roger Hampson & then Barry Breen). They had very little effect. How could they have an effect on social change & that we werent going to be part of the AFL. We have tried various times to enter the big league. Not having a team that interacts & generates $$ that can be used to assist redress some aspects of the imbalance that I suggested B4.
The sponsorship for two AFL (Hawthorn & StKilda)teams to play at AURORA stadium was politically inspired. I'm sure if the Pollies had the interests of the game at heart & had worked with local footy then we could have had a team & a healthy structure underpinning it. We dont now. Infact we have two AFL teams sucking on the state. A bloody disgrace.
So it's incumbent on the AFL to knock back deals that help their constituent sides, in order to - possibly - help the viability of the Tassie league?
What a joke of an attitude.
I remember when the Tassie North-South play-off had to be cancelled because neither league wanted to cover the cost of RENTING a BUS for the day.
So a pretty professional outfit all things considered, I'd love to see a couple of million sunk into those organisations.
What a joke of an attitude.
I remember when the Tassie North-South play-off had to be cancelled because neither league wanted to cover the cost of RENTING a BUS for the day.
So a pretty professional outfit all things considered, I'd love to see a couple of million sunk into those organisations.
NO I'm suggesting the AFL use money already sucked out of this state to support a team playing out of this state. Its bleedingly obvious that their are too many teams in Melbourne. Thats my point
You keep making comment showing how poor our local footy is & then saying thats why we cant have our own team. Thats a rediculous point of view.
I know how poor our footy is. My arguement is precisely that it has NOT been given a fair crack at the national level that it is the reason for being in such a poor state.
As for infighting, that exists all over. Carlton V Collingwood, Port Adelaide v everybody
, Vic v SA etc etc. Qld V NSW also, Dont just single Tassie out.
Of course a motivating factor, dunno about the main (or only) one.
I don't think it's (at all) fair to say that the only reason WA or SA footy is decent is they got granted a licence back when; or true at all to suggest a top-level team is a cure-all.
Or that Tourism board money, directed as sponsorships, is directly linked to funding for grass-roots sport. If it is, it shouldn't be.
Tas should be trying to have a side back in the VFL a couple of years before 2020, when the next licences will go up. I'd like to see them in.
The survival or otherwise of Tassie in the VFL is problematic at best. I've said B4, other VFL clubs survive on having AFL alignments or poker machines, not on crowd support. Despite the fact that Tassie crowds were way above the VFL average, Tassie is in the same boat when it comes to generating money to operate professionally in a secod tear competition. I dont think playing in the VFL has any value & doesnt prove anything. After a succession of premierships are North Ballarat going to get into the AFL? Or Centrals in SA?. Also how would say a North Melbourne or hawthorn go in the VFL? With no dfaft picks, no national sponsorship, no AFL of Tassie handouts. I'm sure they would come back to the pack pretty quickly.
Tassie always has to prove something, no VFL clubs given an AFL spot had to prove anything. Some of them were shaky when the AFL started & are only living on handouts or selling games now.
Eastern Rangers
2015 Worsfold Medalist - Rowen Powell
When the AFL starts asking for state league name changes and for a share in the licenses of the Eagles and Dockers then I've got serious problems with the AFL controlling the game.
In WA the WAFC controls the sport, is resposible with the WAFL for the development of top line talent within a completely separate system to AFL. Auskick or not.
The licenses that Westcoast and Fremantle hold are essential to the sports standing in the community but they belong to the people of this state and are run as such. Now if the AFL want supreme control over all clubs and competitions then they need to be governed by a separate power. Period.
In WA the WAFC controls the sport, is resposible with the WAFL for the development of top line talent within a completely separate system to AFL. Auskick or not.
The licenses that Westcoast and Fremantle hold are essential to the sports standing in the community but they belong to the people of this state and are run as such. Now if the AFL want supreme control over all clubs and competitions then they need to be governed by a separate power. Period.
Even though you may be right, pointing at why other clubs are lucky to be in, or that they're not profitable, but still putting the hand out, is not a compelling case, IMHO.
The only value of a VFL club is to show a club can be run to a professional level, to convince the commission that Tassie wants & can support a high level football club.
Beg to differ.
D) The Tassie Tigers cricket has had interstate coaches & players, like other states do. An AFL team in Tassie would attract the best available playing & coaching & management talent. Just like all other clubs, thats how the system works. My point is that demonstrably their are too many teams in Melbourne, the Tassie brand would add to the AFL's national character, more so than some suburban Melbourne names. & that it would be sustainable for reasons I've put on here B4.
sherb
Hall of Famer
I am not trying to suggest that.
The individual leagues would still maintain their own records, as, say the Sydney AFL competition does for senior footy where I live.
What I am talking about is the collection, classification and collation of all those records from the individual leagues.
At the very least, this should be done for the state leagues around the country.
Either the governing body (the AFL) should do it or it should set up and fund a body to do it.
Yeah not a bad call.
AFL has it's own historians; but they are (pretty definitely) AFL historians. There should be at least state-by-state, if not more; and as you say they should be separate from the AFL, ie reporting (eventually) to the commission/"Not the commission"
- Moderator
- #66
When the VFL changed its operating name to the AFL - and thats all it was a name change - those clubs were already in the league and had been since 1961 when the last victorian teams were added. When it became the AFL those clubs werent given a spot because it was the same league.
Tell me more?
And that's the closest you've ever had to a professional football club?Beg to differ.
My point is that demonstrably their are too many teams in Melbourne, the Tassie brand would add to the AFL's national character, more so than some suburban Melbourne names. & that it would be sustainable for reasons I've put on here B4.
A state-funded team in a completely different sport?
I'm interested in why 1961 was such a watershed year.
Please dont make this a silly argument. The point was that if you are in a professional league then you attract professional people to run the thing. LIKE the Tassie tigers do, & like what will happen in Western Sydney. I mean how many people experienced & qualified to run an AFL club live in Western Sydney? Non until they got the job & moved there, I would bet.
1924 actually
But the point remains, is that ideally a set up AFL would not have being an expanded VFL. Many of the Victorian teams (big four, hawthorn, geelong- possibly Melbourne for historic reasons) would have made it.
The AFL should have being created from scratch.
It is possible that the "Wookie" was trying to explain something about the Victorian Football Association (VFA) splitting into two divisions in 1961. Initially with 10 teams in Division 1 and 8 teams in Division 2.
Teams listed here.
The 1876 season saw St Kilda re-emerge as a discrete club and sufficient improvement was shown for it to be accorded first class status (along with seven others) when the Victorian Football Association was formed in 1877.
By 1879, however, the club was in dire straits with repeated poor performances on the field causing the cancellation of the final few fixtures of the season. Between 1880 and 1885 the precise history of the club is difficult to trace, although it is clear that for at least some of that period St Kilda competed in junior ranks. By 1886, however, the club had consolidated, and was re-admitted to the VFA with full senior status.
More St Kilda History
