Opinion AFL Moving Forward

[cleanhands]

What a clown, he just defended the Vic bias by admitting it is there but we need to get over it. Tosser.

Have you just realised this?

 

[Rabman]

So we shouldn't do something because it might ruffle a few feathers?

The AFL needs to grow a set and cop the backlash fair on the chin. Fitzroy was always going to cause backlash, if they thought it wasn't, then they were a bunch of idiots. That doesn't mean it wasn't the right decision, it absolutely was.

If the AFL is genuine about being professional, national competition. There simply cannot be 9 teams in Melbourne. How many other professional competitions in the world have half its teams based in one city, more than half in one state? Its utterly ridiculous. Would the wider football community ACTUALLY miss St Kilda? How about North Melbourne? The Bulldogs? Melbourne even? All four averaged below 30,000 fans at home games last year, North Melbourne barely made it to an average of 20,000.

Does a football team in AFL heartland really deserve to be in the competition if they can barely average 20000 fans to home games?

On the flipside, can Australia really support more professional AFL teams? More teams aren't the answer either.

My suggestions are even such that it be graduated. If you shift a team, they can still play 3-4 home games in Melbourne each year for the first few years or so, perhaps longer. They'd still get 8-10 games in Melbourne a year. Their fans barely attend as it is, might actually improve numbers to the games they do play in Melbourne and probably strengthen the other Melbourne based teams in the long term.

There'll be some short term pain involved, no doubt. Just like Gold Coast, just like GWS it is a 20-25 year investment. Possibly less though as you're not starting teams from scratch and in Tasmania's case, its already a strong football following.

Its not going to happen, the AFL is too Vic-centric to realise this and too influenced by "VFL Tradition".

Ruffling a few feathers? You mean dropping a nuke more like it.

What sporting competition strengthens itself by culling it's own. We knew full well what we were getting into by joining the competition, all of its biases and favoritism towards the Victorian clubs. It's rich to join and then start bitching and moaning about it, by the way the vic bias was 100 times worse when we joined than it is now.

Do you think culling clubs will seriously work, all you do is end up alienating a load of fans and not just fans to the respective club, all your doing is weakening the game. You also overestimate the power the AFL has, for a club to be removed or relocated the league would need the club itself to agree plus a 75% majority of support from the other 17 clubs in the competition. Good luck with that.

As I mentioned above, the time to move on clubs was back in the 80's, that time has passed we now deal with cards that we are dealt with.

 

[cleanhands]

Ruffling a few feathers? You mean dropping a nuke more like it.

What sporting competition strengthens itself by culling it's own. We knew full well what we were getting into by joining the competition, all of its biases and favoritism towards the Victorian clubs. It's rich to join and then start bitching and moaning about it, by the way the vic bias was 100 times worse when we joined than it is now.

Do you think culling clubs will seriously work, all you do is end up alienating a load of fans and not just fans to the respective club, all your doing is weakening the game. You also overestimate the power the AFL has, for a club to be removed or relocated the league would need the club itself to agree plus a 75% majority of support from the other 17 clubs in the competition. Good luck with that.

As I mentioned above, the time to move on clubs was back in the 80's, that time has passed we now deal with cards that we are dealt with.

Would have been stronger if West Coast didn’t break ranks, and gave us more time to negotiate terms

 

[hey shorty]

So Adam Simpson has weighed in on "Biasgate"

Says it's more difficult to win interstate.

Eddie to call him a sook tomorrow.

 

[Big Crow]

If the AFL is genuine about being professional, national competition. There simply cannot be 9 teams in Melbourne. How many other professional competitions

They're not about this at all, rather they're genuine about financially propping up the good old days of traditional Victorian clubs. "Interstate" sides are the Washington Generals to their Harlem Globetrotters.

Great sport, fake league masquerading as an actual professional sporting competition.

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

 

[1990crow]

View attachment 872113

Victorians are laughing because they know the AFL only care about their clubs.

 

[Eagleboy2011]

Commission meeting to rule on training protocols

AFL seeking clarity on whether three groups of 10 can train at the same time

www.afl.com.au

Victoria's premier Daniel Andrews effectively has full control of the AFL's movements, given 10 of the 18 teams are based in that state and the game's controlling body has ruled that no club can begin the Australian Institute of Sport's Stage B protocols until all 18 are capable of so doing.


Premier Andrews will on Monday make a public announcement relating to Victoria's COVID-19 enforced state of emergency, and given a disturbing cluster of coronavirus infections emanating from a meat plant, there is growing fear within the AFL industry that an easing of restrictions in Victoria may again be delayed.

 

[Mismatched]

They're not about this at all, rather they're genuine about financially propping up the good old days of traditional Victorian clubs. "Interstate" sides are the Washington Generals to their Harlem Globetrotters.

Great sport, fake league masquerading as an actual professional sporting competition.

Sad, but very true unfortunately

 

[BrissyCrow]

So we shouldn't do something because it might ruffle a few feathers?

The AFL needs to grow a set and cop the backlash fair on the chin. Fitzroy was always going to cause backlash, if they thought it wasn't, then they were a bunch of idiots. That doesn't mean it wasn't the right decision, it absolutely was.

If the AFL is genuine about being professional, national competition. There simply cannot be 9 teams in Melbourne. How many other professional competitions in the world have half its teams based in one city, more than half in one state? Its utterly ridiculous. Would the wider football community ACTUALLY miss St Kilda? How about North Melbourne? The Bulldogs? Melbourne even? All four averaged below 30,000 fans at home games last year, North Melbourne barely made it to an average of 20,000.

Does a football team in AFL heartland really deserve to be in the competition if they can barely average 20000 fans to home games?

On the flipside, can Australia really support more professional AFL teams? More teams aren't the answer either.

My suggestions are even such that it be graduated. If you shift a team, they can still play 3-4 home games in Melbourne each year for the first few years or so, perhaps longer. They'd still get 8-10 games in Melbourne a year. Their fans barely attend as it is, might actually improve numbers to the games they do play in Melbourne and probably strengthen the other Melbourne based teams in the long term.

There'll be some short term pain involved, no doubt. Just like Gold Coast, just like GWS it is a 20-25 year investment. Possibly less though as you're not starting teams from scratch and in Tasmania's case, its already a strong football following.

Its not going to happen, the AFL is too Vic-centric to realise this and too influenced by "VFL Tradition".

I have mentioned this before .....I was watching those FoxFooty Live programmes and on one occasion when the Tassie Premier said to get rid of one of the Melb teams all three commentators (one was Dunstall) got most indignant and said what lose one of the teams from the heart land of footy. The Vics wont give up a team. The only thing that will force their hand is money. If the other Vic teams had to directly support a struggling team like St Kilda then they would consider the idea of relocating them.

Now the history of Aussie Rules....I was under the impression that the game was created in the gold fields of Victoria. Not Melbourne. Perhaps I am wrong. But I do know that the South Australian competition is the oldest competition in Australia. So this bullshit about the Heart and Soul of footy is in Melbourne is a nonsense.

For me the only way we get a true genuine national competition would be to start afresh. Still 2 teams from NSW and QLD, 1 from Tassie, 2 from SA and WA and 5 from Vic. 14 teams that play each other twice per season. The MCG is no ones home ground but games would be played there just like now except interstate teams would get to play at the G more frequently. But with a new competition the grand final would be played at either a predetermined ground or preferably the home ground of the team that finished highest at the end of the minor round. It will never happen but if it does I'll never see it.

 

[GreyCrow]

No team should get more than 11 games at the MCG - if crowd fixturing needs to happen then accomodate that but keeping the 11 game rule in place - it can be done

It might mean Collingwood and Richmond play a game at Geelong every now and then

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

There are 80 games outside of Victoria each year where the away team travels from another state.

Eight non-Victorian teams who play 10 home games, 10 on the road and 2 against their local rival.

How should those 80 'away state games' be split among the 10 Victorian clubs and 8 non-Victorian clubs?

 

[Scorpus]

There are 80 games outside of Victoria each year where the away team travels from another state.

Eight non-Victorian teams who play 10 home games, 10 on the road and 2 against their local rival.

How should those 80 'away state games' be split among the 10 Victorian clubs and 8 non-Victorian clubs?

I think there's actually 90 games, including 8 in Tasmania and 2 in the NT.

So the split should be:

Non-Vic Teams
6 standard matches against interstate, non-Vic teams. 3 of 6 away. Total 3.
5 double up matches, minus 1 for in-state rivalry. 6/16 of the 4 double-ups are interstate non-Vic, equaling 1.5. Away half the time, total 0.75
10 matches in Tasmania/NT with Victorian team the home side, of those, 47% (8/17) of the time the away team would be non-Vic, for ~5 matches. Total 0.59

Grand total: 4.34 per non-Victorian team (total ~35)

4 per year plus a 5th every 3 years

Victorian Teams
8 standard matches against interstate teams. 4 of 8 away. Total 4.
5 double up matches, minus 1 for in-state rivalry. 8/16 of the 4 double-ups are interstate, equaling 2. Away half the time, total 1
Rest of the matches in Tasmania/NT, ~5 matches, total 0.53

Grand total: 5.53 per non-Victorian team (total ~55)

5 per year plus a trip to Tasmania/NT every 2 years

 

[Vhaluus]

I think there's actually 90 games, including 8 in Tasmania and 2 in the NT.

So the split should be:

Non-Vic Teams
6 standard matches against interstate, non-Vic teams. 3 of 6 away. Total 3.
5 double up matches, minus 1 for in-state rivalry. 6/16 of the 4 double-ups are interstate non-Vic, equaling 1.5. Away half the time, total 0.75
10 matches in Tasmania/NT with Victorian team the home side, of those, 47% (8/17) of the time the away team would be non-Vic, for ~5 matches. Total 0.59

Grand total: 4.34 per non-Victorian team (total ~35)

4 per year plus a 5th every 3 years

Victorian Teams
8 standard matches against interstate teams. 4 of 8 away. Total 4.
5 double up matches, minus 1 for in-state rivalry. 8/16 of the 4 double-ups are interstate, equaling 2. Away half the time, total 1
Rest of the matches in Tasmania/NT, ~5 matches, total 0.53

Grand total: 5.53 per non-Victorian team (total ~55)

5 per year plus a trip to Tasmania/NT every 2 years

If the Victorian teams sell one of their home games to Tasmania and or the NT they should absolutely not count as a home game. They can't have their cake and eat it too.

I've seen way too many people discussing travel for Vic sides to these locations as if they were proper away games.

Not referring to you Scorpus, you just got me thinking about it.

In fact I think all matches played in Tas and NT should be Victorian team vs Victorian team. That would free up more slots for interstate clubs to get a chance to play on the MCG for experience rather than the lesser Victorian grounds.

 

[Mismatched]

I have mentioned this before .....I was watching those FoxFooty Live programmes and on one occasion when the Tassie Premier said to get rid of one of the Melb teams all three commentators (one was Dunstall) got most indignant and said what lose one of the teams from the heart land of footy. The Vics wont give up a team. The only thing that will force their hand is money. If the other Vic teams had to directly support a struggling team like St Kilda then they would consider the idea of relocating them.

Now the history of Aussie Rules....I was under the impression that the game was created in the gold fields of Victoria. Not Melbourne. Perhaps I am wrong. But I do know that the South Australian competition is the oldest competition in Australia. So this bullshit about the Heart and Soul of footy is in Melbourne is a nonsense.

For me the only way we get a true genuine national competition would be to start afresh. Still 2 teams from NSW and QLD, 1 from Tassie, 2 from SA and WA and 5 from Vic. 14 teams that play each other twice per season. The MCG is no ones home ground but games would be played there just like now except interstate teams would get to play at the G more frequently. But with a new competition the grand final would be played at either a predetermined ground or preferably the home ground of the team that finished highest at the end of the minor round. It will never happen but if it does I'll never see it.

I doubt the AFL are going to reduce the number of teams in the comp, less teams, less games per round and I doubt there'll would ever be an extension of the competition.

I think the key is to reduce the costs involved in running an AFL team (ie salary cap reductions etc) so that its more viable to run teams from GWS, GC, Tasmania + possibly Canberra or somewhere similar. I think you also solve the retention issues that these clubs (and the Crows) have because there's simply less list spots based in Melbourne.

But yeah, the only way Victoria give up teams are if there's financially no choice. Even then, they'd rather ditch non-victorian teams (even though they present far greater future potential in growth of the game and potential to actually be able to support themselves one day) than give up one of their own...

 

[Scorpus]

If the Victorian teams sell one of their home games to Tasmania and or the NT they should absolutely not count as a home game. They can't have their cake and eat it too.

I've seen way too many people discussing travel for Vic sides to these locations as if they were proper away games.

Not referring to you Scorpus, you just got me thinking about it.

In fact I think all matches played in Tas and NT should be Victorian team vs Victorian team. That would free up more slots for interstate clubs to get a chance to play on the MCG for experience rather than the lesser Victorian grounds.

They should definitely count as home games. They shouldn't be getting 11 home Victorian games plus those they sell.

For the numbers I only included a team that has to travel "away" for those games. But I agree they generally should only be Vic vs Vic when they are clearly not

 

[Mismatched]

No team should get more than 11 games at the MCG - if crowd fixturing needs to happen then accomodate that but keeping the 11 game rule in place - it can be done

It might mean Collingwood and Richmond play a game at Geelong every now and then

I think this is a very sensible suggestion, especially if they insist on the MCG holding the GF for the next 3 thousand years...

Max 11 games per club, minimum 4-5 games.

 

[Rabman]

People are ignoring clubs like Richmond and Collingwood are contractually obligated to play 14 games each at the MCG every year. Eddie was smart back in 2004 by giving the MCG 14 Collingwood matches in return getting rid of rule of having a final at the MCG every week which clubs like us and West Coast got screwed over by. So we replace a Vic bias rule with another one and when clubs like Richmond and Collingwood are averaging 60,000 to there matches, you can guarantee it wont be changing anytime soon.

 

[Vhaluus]

No team should get more than 11 games at the MCG - if crowd fixturing needs to happen then accomodate that but keeping the 11 game rule in place - it can be done

It might mean Collingwood and Richmond play a game at Geelong every now and then

Nah * making Collingwood or Richmond travel to Geelong.

They can travel to Hobart or Canberra to play the 'Home' games other Vic sides play there.

 

[hey shorty]

No team should get more than 11 games at the MCG - if crowd fixturing needs to happen then accomodate that but keeping the 11 game rule in place - it can be done

It might mean Collingwood and Richmond play a game at Geelong every now and then

To their minor credit, Richmond and Carlton have done lately.

Eddie sucks off Gil so Collingwood NEVER will.

 

[cleanhands]

To their minor credit, Richmond and Carlton have done lately.

Eddie sucks off Gil so Collingwood NEVER will.

Is Eddie being unfaithful to Bucks, that’s a bigger story than what’s going on up the Barossa

 

[Vhaluus]

People are ignoring clubs like Richmond and Collingwood are contractually obligated to play 14 games each at the MCG every year. Eddie was smart back in 2004 by giving the MCG 14 Collingwood matches in return getting rid of rule of having a final at the MCG every week which clubs like us and West Coast got screwed over by. So we replace a Vic bias rule with another one and when clubs like Richmond and Collingwood are averaging 60,000 to there matches, you can guarantee it wont be changing anytime soon.

Contracts can be renegotiated and the new Covid19 world gives us the perfect opportunity to do so while everything else is changing as well.

What value does the MCG give us as a venue when it may be a few years before we can even put fans into it more than 1.5 meters apart?

 

[crows dude]

News this morning. Afl to return June 11. No crowds probably fir the year

 

[hey shorty]

News this morning. Afl to return June 11. No crowds probably fir the year

That's great.

Our players will barely be out of quarantine by then, same with the WA clubs.

 

[1990crow]

That's great.

Our players will barely be out of quarantine by then, same with the WA clubs.

But our disadvantage is acceptable.