News Grand Final at the Gabba - Formerly: Where will this years grand final end up if victoria cant have crowds?

[DaTBird187]

How many packed stadiums have there been in the 4 other states?

It's hard when every team that could host fans were sent to Queensland. Right this moment 30,000 could attend a game at Adelaide Oval, yet Adelaide will be playing Fremantle on the Gold Coast to three fans. They could fly there right now.

Once SA could host games with Crowds Port and the Crows should have been sent back to SA and a few Victorian teams should have replaced them in Queensland.

Mitigate the risk and minimise the situation the league finds itself in now. But the league has been rusted on to games in Victoria for two weeks too long.

 

[wal]

They won't, even if it makes sense to do so.

Because to sell it this year, means that it's an option to sell it every other season.

err no, force majeure would not be applicable in sebsequent years

 

[DaTBird187]

They won't, even if it makes sense to do so.

Because to sell it this year, means that it's an option to sell it every other season.

Heaven forbid.

 

[projectv]

No crowds at the G would likely invalidate the contract because MCG wouldn't be providing the service promised. There's a legal term that escapes me right now.

Force majure.

And that would only apply if the MCG was not fit for purpose. It is.

 

[Coaster2012]

Force majure.

And that would only apply if the MCG was not fit for purpose. It is.

If there is zero crowds, it isn't fit for purpose.

 

[wal]

Force majure.

And that would only apply if the MCG was not fit for purpose. It is.

wrong on both counts

 

[projectv]

Heaven forbid.

I don't disagree with you. I'm not some purist that expects it be held at the MCG every year.

However if the AFL wanted a bidding war each and every year about where it's played, they would not have signed a 40 year deal.

 

[The_Wookie]

If there is zero crowds, it isn't fit for purpose.

Thats not a venue issue, its a state health issue. And since the game is capable of going ahead on the day, I doubt it would change.

 

[Pykie]

No crowds at the G would likely invalidate the contract because MCG wouldn't be providing the service promised. There's a legal term that escapes me right now.

This is on the assumption that there was a specific requirement for crowds within the grand final contract.

Which I highly doubt.

Force Majeure could possibly be enforced by the AFL. But why would the AFL want to rescind a pre-covid lucrative contract like that?


They will never get that offer again. At least not for a few decades until all major ongoing infrastructure projects are completed and the state's debts as a result of Covid-19 are paid down.

 

[Coaster2012]

Thats not a venue issue, its a state health issue. And since the game is capable of going ahead on the day, I doubt it would change.

And yet, if the MCG can have zero people and everywhere else can have packed stadiums, I highly doubt the GF will be at the G. Lawyers will come into play and things will be manipulated.

 

[Roobs321]

Imagine if the Grand Final this year does get played in WA or SA and it's like a Richmond/Geelong/Collingwood Grand Final, the melts would be spectacular all round.

I don't really see the melt myself. Victorian teams both traveling. All three teams have a fairly recent history of Grand Final appearances (Bulldogs in 2016 might have been hard for older fans to swallow). The Grand Final visiting your state isn't really about your teams at all. And the crowd potential, well, Grand Finals will still always be full houses, and there are far bigger issues on people's minds this year. Only MCC members would likely have something to melt about, and they'd have to cop it if Victoria isn't up to the event that year. Waverly is a relatively recent precedent too.

I'd also rather a day GF somewhere else than a night GF at the MCG.

 

[_Mike_]

Force majure.

And that would only apply if the MCG was not fit for purpose. It is.

Frustrated contract is the term, where an event outside the contemplation of the parties prevents a party from fulfilling its obligations. If the competing teams were locked out of the state by the Chief Medical Officer on health grounds it would indeed trigger a frustrated contract, in my qualified opinion.

 

[projectv]

If there is zero crowds, it isn't fit for purpose.

wrong on both counts

Force majure would terminate the contract.

Do you honestly think the AFL would sacrifice a deal with 37 years remaining for a single impacted season?

 

[Coaster2012]

Force majure would terminate the contract.

Do you honestly think the AFL would sacrifice a deal with 37 years remaining for a single impacted season?

Do you honestly think the MCG would hold the AFL to ransom?

 

[projectv]

Frustrated contract is the term, where an event outside the contemplation of the parties prevents a party from fulfilling its obligations

I'm curious to know if having a crowd is an obligation of the contract though?

 

[Pykie]

err no, force majeure would not be applicable in sebsequent years

force majeure has nothing to do with the sub-tendering of the AFL grand final.

Any angling of Force majeure would be the cancellation of the complete contract.

 

[Pykie]

And yet, if the MCG can have zero people and everywhere else can have packed stadiums, I highly doubt the GF will be at the G. Lawyers will come into play and things will be manipulated.

On what basis?

The Victorian Government have an ironclad, paid contract, which almost certainly isn't dependent on any crowd figures.

 

[wal]

Force majure would terminate the contract.

Do you honestly think the AFL would sacrifice a deal with 37 years remaining for a single impacted season?

wrong again.
Force majeure would not terminate the contract, it is only applicable whilst the unforeseeable circumstances are there

 

[Pykie]

Do you honestly think the MCG would hold the AFL to ransom?

The Victorian Government would want their money back, yes.

 

[_Mike_]

I'm curious to know if having a crowd is an obligation of the contract though?

Crowd no, competing players/team/club yes

 

[wal]

The Victorian Government would want their money back, yes.

And they wouldn't have a leg to stand on

 

[Coaster2012]

On what basis?

The Victorian Government have an ironclad, paid contract, which almost certainly isn't dependent on any crowd figures.

You're acting like contracts are something set down by god, it doesn't actually work that way in reality. Contracts can be renegotiated. The MCC has already come out and said they wouldn't force the AFL to hold the GF at the G if the season was delayed, citing that common sense would prevail and they wouldn't live or die by legal contracts. I have no doubt that common sense would prevail again. Not everyone is a flog you know.

 

[Pykie]

wrong again.
Force majeure would not terminate the contract, it is only applicable whilst the unforeseeable circumstances are there

Sorry, you are wrong.

The Force Majeure event would be terminated under frustration.

Unless there were specific force majeure clauses within the contract.

 

[Pykie]

And they wouldn't have a leg to stand on

Exactly,

So the AFL Grand Final remains in Victoria, where it's contracted to be.

 

[Pykie]

You're acting like contracts are something set down by god, it doesn't actually work that way in reality. Contracts can be renegotiated. The MCC has already come out and said they wouldn't force the AFL to hold the GF at the G if the season was delayed, citing that common sense would prevail and they wouldn't live or die by legal contracts. I have no doubt that common sense would prevail again. Not everyone is a flog you know.

I work with them every day and the devil is in the detail. We are currently only speculating.

However, the facts remain, the Victorian government has paid a significant amount of money for every single one of the 40 years they are contracted to host the AFL GF.

The MCC Trust are controlled in reality by the Victorian Government.

I agree there is a scenario in which the contracts can be bent, however that's simply not going to happen just because it will look better with a crowd.

The SA and WA Governments are going to have to compensate the Vic Govt.

Or else it simply comes off the bottom line of the AFL's Etihad grants, in which the WA and SA governments are going to have to make up those short falls directly to the AFL.

The WA or SA governments aren't going to get a major event for nothing, the AFL grand final costs almost half of what the Vic Govt spends on the F1 Grand Prix, which is a bone of contention for Victorian tax payers every year and they aren't handing an event even 50% of that cost to another state for nix.