Did Gil just put mergers back on the agenda?

[projectv]

Melbourne and Hawthorn are examples of why it can very rarely happen anymore under current clubs ownership structures. That didn't even get passed the first hurdle.

All of the Melbourne clubs are owned by the members.

They would have to vote in favor of it under their clubs constitution (Not happening)

The AFL commission can't ship a club off (As North showed), they don't own the game.

The clubs own the league essentially and has final say on it's ultimate structure.

I believe it's a 70% majority required.

Once Tassie comes in, that would mean 14 clubs need to vote for that club to be relocated, so you would need 5 Victorian clubs in additional to every other Non-Victorian club to vote to relocate one of the others.

Good luck.

I understand that the members would need to vote to support a merger or relocation, but playing devils advocate, is there anything stopping the AFL from railroading this by just not allowing the club to play in the AFL competition unless they agree to a merger or relocation.

ie, you keep your club, you just have no comp to play in.

Not suggesting it would ever happen, but I am not sure the argument of "members would never vote for it" would always hold up.

 

[sherb]

GWS and Canberra have a new 10 year deal that started this year and which expires in 2032 to play 3 afl and 2 AflW games annually. This is a deal that GWS, ACT and AFL agree works well for all parties. By the end of this deal GWS will have had a 21 year commitment and relationship with us in Canberra - more than Norths, Melbourne and Bulldogs combined who had previously sold games here.

GWS is part of Canberra just as Canberra is part of GWS’s remit. Almost 20% of GWS membership come from Canberra. The relationship that Canberra and GWS is the best for both sides as seen by the long term deal that was signed.

Hawthorn is still trying to sell a couple of games in Launceston, even after the entry of the Tasmanian team, as they have a 20 year relationship there and almost 10k Tasmanian members.

They marketed themselves as a Western Sydney side. (God I wish I could find that marketing document/brochure they put out). They had the whole GWS area to work with.

Instead what do they do? Show that they are not 100% committed to the area they were allegedly going to represent.

 

[Outtatym]

A merger would make zero sense- Tassie coming in means we must go to 20 and get the 10th game in or the league won't be getting the money they could from the tv deal whilst paying for another small market

 

[Colonial]

They marketed themselves as a Western Sydney side. (God I wish I could find that marketing document/brochure they put out). They had the whole GWS area to work with.

Instead what do they do? Show that they are not 100% committed to the area they were allegedly going to represent.

Pretty sure they are Western Sydney FC trading as Greater Western Sydney Giants strangely enough they have the Western Sydney FC name trade marked.

But they took the easy coin, and easier path with getting support/grassroots, of Canberra.

So much for hard yards.

 

[MelbourneGWS]

The constitution of the GWS specifically includes a focus on ACT as well as Western Sydney. GWS, or Giants as our branding has now been in recent years, sees both ACT and WS as its home region with Manuka and Giants Stadium are home grounds. The club, the ACT government and the AFL are all committed and supportive of the club’s relationship with Canberra, as evidenced by the legally binding deal till 2032, as it works for all parties and the code. What happens after 2032 is another question, but as a GWS member since inception, I hope there’s continued GWS involvement with Canberra post 2032.

 

[Colonial]

The constitution of the GWS specifically includes a focus on ACT as well as Western Sydney. GWS, or Giants as our branding has now been in recent years, sees both ACT and WS as its home region with Manuka and Giants Stadium are home grounds. The club, the ACT government and the AFL are all committed and supportive of the club’s relationship with Canberra, as evidenced by the legally binding deal till 2032, as it works for all parties and the code. What happens after 2032 is another question, but as a GWS member since inception, I hope there’s continued GWS involvement with Canberra post 2032.

Was a late inclusion.
Was never part of the original plan and setup. Government came in late and threw in some coin. Club also though it was an easy way to get some grassroots goingZ
They may all be a part of it but being part time is hurting what the club was originally intended for, growing the game in Western Sydney.

 

[sherb]

The constitution of the GWS specifically includes a focus on ACT as well as Western Sydney. GWS, or Giants as our branding has now been in recent years, sees both ACT and WS as its home region with Manuka and Giants Stadium are home grounds. The club, the ACT government and the AFL are all committed and supportive of the club’s relationship with Canberra, as evidenced by the legally binding deal till 2032, as it works for all parties and the code. What happens after 2032 is another question, but as a GWS member since inception, I hope there’s continued GWS involvement with Canberra post 2032.

It doesn't work well for the code in Western Sydney, that's the point.

Either they need to embrace Western Sydney fully, or drop the GWS pretence altogether. At the moment they want it both ways and it's showing.

 

[Obzerva]

Hawthorn is still trying to sell a couple of games in Launceston, even after the entry of the Tasmanian team, as they have a 20 year relationship there and almost 10k Tasmanian members.

I think the Hawks relationship with Launceston definitely seems stronger than NM’s relationship with Hobart.

Given North haven’t played all their home games in Melbourne since maybe the late 90s, Im curious as to where their 4 games are going to go.
Maybe one or two for Cairns?

 

[Liam Boy]

I think the Hawks relationship with Launceston definitely seems stronger than NM’s relationship with Hobart.

Given North haven’t played all their home games in Melbourne since maybe the late 90s, Im curious as to where their 4 games are going to go.
Maybe one or two for Cairns?

No, last time we played all our home games in Melbourne was 2011. We didn't sell any games interstate between 2008 when we'd rejected the push to relocate but still had a contract at Carrara, and 2012 when we started playing games in Hobart.

 

[Fire]

When asked about whether we would go to 20 teams he said “18 or 20”. I thought it was a slip of the tongue but he continued… “I think we will end up at an even number. The league has seen expansion and contraction and that will play out“

The league has never experienced contraction. Unless he is referring to University dropping out in 1914.

So technically correct. But still full of s**t.

 

[Walshawk]

The league has never experienced contraction. Unless he is referring to University dropping out in 1914.

So technically correct. But still full of s**t.

Perhaps he is referring to Brisbane and Fitzroy, which brought number down to 15 for a few days until Port’s entry was confirmed and back to 16.
Gil has back-pedalled a little on ’the even number could be 18’ by mentioning 20 in subsequent interviews.

 

[Madas]

Exactly. He is a lame duck. Nothing he says matters now.

He can now pretend to have been wanting to make a bunch of important decisions which he never would have actually done while he was CEO. Inventing his legacy, given his actual legacy is hundreds of millions of dollars wasted, local footy dying all across the country, and the game looking far worse than it did when he came in.

Exactly like his predecessor. And exactly like what his hand-picked replacement will do.

Good points about the death of local football . AFL genuinely don’t give a s**t .

Don’t forget selling the AFL’s soul to betting agencies

 

[The_Wookie]

Perhaps he is referring to Brisbane and Fitzroy, which brought number down to 15 for a few days until Port’s entry was confirmed and back to 16.
Gil has back-pedalled a little on ’the even number could be 18’ by mentioning 20 in subsequent interviews.

Technically Port were guaranteed the license 2 years before they entered the competition, but couldnt anyway because the Crows had a 5 year exclusion period (similar to West Coast). Port were advised their entry to the league was accepted 2 months before the merger was done.

• 1994 – December 13. Port Adelaide wins the tender for the second SA license over its various state rivals, however it cant enter the competition before 1996 (as stipulated in the Crows license agreement).
• 1995 – October 10. Port Adelaide appoints John Cahill as senior coach for the 1996 season if it enters the league.
• 1995 – October 27. Port Adelaide advised they wont be in the 1996 AFL competition. (from Port to a Power pg 137)
• 1996 – May 21. Port Adelaide advised they will be in the 1997 AFL competition. (from Port to a Power pg 146)
• 1996 – July 4. AFL Presidents’ Meeting rejects the Fitzroy-North Melbourne merger. After a meeting between the administrator of Fitzroy and the AFL commission, the AFL commission recommends a Bears-Fitzroy merger. North Melbourne withdraws from the merger race. A reconvened AFL presidents’ meeting endorses the AFL commission’s recommendation of a Brisbane Bears-Fitzroy merger.
• 1996 – November 1. Brisbane Lions officially launch.
• 1997 – Port Adelaide begin playing in the AFL.

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

Perhaps he is referring to Brisbane and Fitzroy, which brought number down to 15 for a few days until Port’s entry was confirmed and back to 16.
Gil has back-pedalled a little on ’the even number could be 18’ by mentioning 20 in subsequent interviews.

It was the other way round.

Port were given the go ahead to be the 17th team on the 21st May 1996 and would be in the AFL in 1997, merger or no merger between Fitzroy and North, which first held talks on 6th May and on the 11th May, heads of agreement documents were signed between the 2 clubs.

John Cahill stopped coaching Port in the SANFL on 22nd June to get ready for AFL entry, as the next week was a bye for the state game with the WAFL, which gave new coach Stephen Williams a bit of extra time to take over.

The merger between Fitzroy and Brisbane was ratified on 4th July 1996. "On the afternoon of July 4, 1996, the Administrator of Fitzroy, the AFL Commission and the majority of the AFL clubs voted in favour of a merger with Brisbane."

 

[Colonial]

Good points about the death of local football . AFL genuinely don’t give a s**t .

Don’t forget selling the AFL’s soul to betting agencies

He only gives a s**t about local footy if it’s Victorian.

 

[Fire]

Seriously tho, historically in global terms the AFL is remarkably continuous in global and historical sense. There has been a season played and finished, without fail, since 1897. And in the vast majority of those matches you'll see results of two teams that are still competing today.

There's only ever been two teams that have left the competion; university in 1914 and Fitzroy in 1996, who were replaced by Port so there was no contraction. All other teams are still running around in the comp.

I'd challenge anyone to find a comparably consistent league.

So for Gill to make the claim that it's contracted in the past... it's so ******* sleazy, and cheapens the competition as a whole. It's a lie, and one with an agenda.

 

[The Educator]

Seriously tho, historically in global terms the AFL is remarkably continuous in global and historical sense. There has been a season played and finished, without fail, since 1897. And in the vast majority of those matches you'll see results of two teams that are still competing today.

There's only ever been two teams that have left the competion; university in 1914 and Fitzroy in 1996, who were replaced by Port so there was no contraction. All other teams are still running around in the comp.

I'd challenge anyone to find a comparably consistent league.

So for Gill to make the claim that it's contracted in the past... it's so ******* sleazy, and cheapens the competition as a whole. It's a lie, and one with an agenda.

It has contracted once (when University left). I agree it was clearly disingenuous.

 

[Coolangatta]

It implies that we might go to 18 teams before we see 20.

 

[MelbourneGWS]

It implies that we might go to 18 teams before we see 20.

Yes, when the most probable scenario is going to 20!

 

[Cunnington Cartel]

Will 100% be different.
That’s the point. Meanwhile they stick with the Victorian and Eastern Sydney viewpoints up here.

Tassie will be different because there are already plenty of Tasmanian people working within the industry as administrators or coaches at clubs. It won’t be too hard to entice some of these experienced people back home to be involved in the establishment of #19.

On the other hand, Western Sydney doesn’t have this luxury so they either bring in experienced outsiders who may not understand the nuances of Western Sydney or they could go for locals who have no background in footy, IMO that would probably produce a worse outcome. Who do you recommend for the Giants to target?

 

[Walshawk]

Technically Port were guaranteed the license 2 years before they entered the competition, but couldnt anyway because the Crows had a 5 year exclusion period (similar to West Coast). Port were advised their entry to the league was accepted 2 months before the merger was done.

• 1994 – December 13. Port Adelaide wins the tender for the second SA license over its various state rivals, however it cant enter the competition before 1996 (as stipulated in the Crows license agreement).
• 1995 – October 10. Port Adelaide appoints John Cahill as senior coach for the 1996 season if it enters the league.
• 1995 – October 27. Port Adelaide advised they wont be in the 1996 AFL competition. (from Port to a Power pg 137)
• 1996 – May 21. Port Adelaide advised they will be in the 1997 AFL competition. (from Port to a Power pg 146)
• 1996 – July 4. AFL Presidents’ Meeting rejects the Fitzroy-North Melbourne merger. After a meeting between the administrator of Fitzroy and the AFL commission, the AFL commission recommends a Bears-Fitzroy merger. North Melbourne withdraws from the merger race. A reconvened AFL presidents’ meeting endorses the AFL commission’s recommendation of a Brisbane Bears-Fitzroy merger.
• 1996 – November 1. Brisbane Lions officially launch.
• 1997 – Port Adelaide begin playing in the AFL.

It was the other way round.

Port were given the go ahead to be the 17th team on the 21st May 1996 and would be in the AFL in 1997, merger or no merger between Fitzroy and North, which first held talks on 6th May and on the 11th May, heads of agreement documents were signed between the 2 clubs.

John Cahill stopped coaching Port in the SANFL on 22nd June to get ready for AFL entry, as the next week was a bye for the state game with the WAFL, which gave new coach Stephen Williams a bit of extra time to take over.

The merger between Fitzroy and Brisbane was ratified on 4th July 1996. "On the afternoon of July 4, 1996, the Administrator of Fitzroy, the AFL Commission and the majority of the AFL clubs voted in favour of a merger with Brisbane."

In that case, there was still a contraction - from 17 to 16.

 

[The_Wookie]

In that case, there was still a contraction - from 17 to 16.

not really. license wasnt active until the lions takeover.

 

[10Dulkar]

It was the other way round.

Port were given the go ahead to be the 17th team on the 21st May 1996 and would be in the AFL in 1997, merger or no merger between Fitzroy and North, which first held talks on 6th May and on the 11th May, heads of agreement documents were signed between the 2 clubs.

John Cahill stopped coaching Port in the SANFL on 22nd June to get ready for AFL entry, as the next week was a bye for the state game with the WAFL, which gave new coach Stephen Williams a bit of extra time to take over.

The merger between Fitzroy and Brisbane was ratified on 4th July 1996. "On the afternoon of July 4, 1996, the Administrator of Fitzroy, the AFL Commission and the majority of the AFL clubs voted in favour of a merger with Brisbane."

Why did Port not come in in 96?

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

Why did Port not come in in 96?

Centenary season celebrations. AFL didn't want a bye in 1996. They had a lot on that year.

 

[Walshawk]

A merger would make zero sense- Tassie coming in means we must go to 20 and get the 10th game in or the league won't be getting the money they could from the tv deal whilst paying for another small market

Not really. The broadcast deal was likely done on the basic of the extra 11 games from the 19th team. The extra nine games from Gather round is making up for most of those extra games until Tas comes in.

P.s. Going back 15 years I was a massive fan of adding a second team in Sydney - my family is from NSW. I was on the start up database and had high hopes. The evidence of the past 12 years (primarily the lack of any cut through in Western Sydney) tells me that it simply isn’t going to work. Certainly not in its current form. I hope they (AFL) give it a real crack over the next few seasons but if nothing changes, then nothing changes.