Apple Isle Showdown: Tas Govt threatens to end Hawks, North deals if no plan for 19th side

[Tassie_Tiger]

Found out something interesting yesterday, it seems that it’s not that we need 3/4 of clubs to vote for a Tasmanian team inclusion but 3/4 need to vote against Tasmania’s inclusion. Might get some clarification later with a press release but that seems to be what the Tas push believe.

If this is the case then Tas team is all but guaranteed, with the current count of AFL presidents is 9-9.

If not the case then the Tas push is operating on a bad assumption and may lead to a lack of lobbying.

 

[Mr Taswegian]

Found out something interesting yesterday, it seems that it’s not that we need 3/4 of clubs to vote for a Tasmanian team inclusion but 3/4 need to vote against Tasmania’s inclusion. Might get some clarification later with a press release but that seems to be what the Tas push believe.

If this is the case then Tas team is all but guaranteed, with the current count of AFL presidents is 9-9.

If not the case then the Tas push is operating on a bad assumption and may lead to a lack of lobbying.

It has to get past the AFL commission as well and I fear that will be where it falls over.

 

[The_Wookie]

Found out something interesting yesterday, it seems that it’s not that we need 3/4 of clubs to vote for a Tasmanian team inclusion but 3/4 need to vote against Tasmania’s inclusion. Might get some clarification later with a press release but that seems to be what the Tas push believe.

If this is the case then Tas team is all but guaranteed, with the current count of AFL presidents is 9-9.

If not the case then the Tas push is operating on a bad assumption and may lead to a lack of lobbying.

I noted this on twitter some weeks ago. Its not constitutionally required for the clubs to vote on admission before the Commission does. The clubs only need to vote if they disagree. However, in actual practice, the clubs have always voted.

 

[Tassie_Tiger]

I noted this on twitter some weeks ago. Its not constitutionally required for the clubs to vote on admission before the Commission does. The clubs only need to vote if they disagree. However, in actual practice, the clubs have always voted.

what do you mean? Please expand.

 

[The_Wookie]

what do you mean? Please expand.

Essentially the constitution allows the clubs to overturn a league decision to expand, relocate mor fold a club. It does not specify them having to approve it.

 

[Mr Taswegian]

Essentially the constitution allows the clubs to overturn a league decision to expand, relocate mor fold a club. It does not specify them having to approve it.

That sounds too good to be true to me,if that is the case we are almost certain to pass the club's vote. I do still believe though we will see another twist and the AFL will still stop it from happening, definitely interesting times come next year.

 

[The_Wookie]

That sounds too good to be true to me,if that is the case we are almost certain to pass the club's vote. I do still believe though we will see another twist and the AFL will still stop it from happening, definitely interesting times come next year.

The issue is the AFL has almost never gone down this route. Clubs have always voted on admission.

 

[The_Wookie]

what do you mean? Please expand.

found my tweet on this

 

[Kappa]

It has to get past the AFL commission as well and I fear that will be where it falls over.

The AFL wouldn't be creating so much talk about a Tasmanian team and doing reviews if they weren't serious about it, turning it down now would just be a massive PR disaster for nothing.

 

[Walshawk]

The issue is the AFL has almost never gone down this route. Clubs have always voted on admission.

Is that true? Do you have any info about what the votes were for previous expansions.
I reckon they just go for consensus.

 

[The_Wookie]

Is that true? Do you have any info about what the votes were for previous expansions.
I reckon they just go for consensus.

Essentially if the majority of clubs agree then its all good.

Clubs voted for national expansion in 1986 - the vote to admit West Coast and Brisbane failed at the first hurdle, but got over the line with Fitzroy effectively being bribed into supporting it.

Clubs voted for Adelaide in 1991, Fremantles admission was unanimous IIRC, clubs voted in support of the Lions merger and Port got in despite at least one club objecting. Clubs unanimously supported the admission of GWS/Gold Coast. Ill try and get you more detail when i get home.

 

[Mr Taswegian]

Alistair Clarkson likely to join tasmania's AFL working group and it has be announced by the former AFL operations manager that Tassie will only require 7 teams to vote yes to a team.

 

[Mr Taswegian]

The AFL chief has said on AFL radio that a decision on a Tassie team will be made in July or August now instead of March,I can't believe they are already trying to delay it.

 

[Tassie_Tiger]

Any chance of just handing the job of setting up the club to Clarko? Make his next big challenge designing a club from scratch or at least the football operations.

 

[Aussie in exile]

The AFL chief has said on AFL radio that a decision on a Tassie team will be made in July or August now instead of March,I can't believe they are already trying to delay it.

Nothing surprises me I'm afraid to say

 

[Mr Taswegian]

Nothing surprises me I'm afraid to say

They might finally make a decision in 2030 after who knows how many more delays.

 

[Rob]

Alistair Clarkson likely to join tasmania's AFL working group and it has be announced by the former AFL operations manager that Tassie will only require 7 teams to vote yes to a team.

I think it's more that they need the AFL commission to vote yes, and the clubs would need better than a 2/3rds majority to overturn it. But as Wookie has said, it's extremely unlikely that the AFL would go ahead with it if there is so much opposition from the clubs.

 

[The_Wookie]

I think it's more that they need the AFL commission to vote yes, and the clubs would need better than a 2/3rds majority to overturn it. But as Wookie has said, it's extremely unlikely that the AFL would go ahead with it if there is so much opposition from the clubs.

which Anderson also said

 

[Mr Taswegian]

The AFL chief has come out and basically ruled out a team relocating to tasmania and said that a new licence or a hybrid model are the only two options for Tasmania, interesting times ahead.

 

[BringBackTorps]

"Hawks legend Alastair Clarkson to join Tasmania’s AFL push as state closer to joining the league than previously thought

Carlton and Collingwood both came calling, but Tasmania has won out in the race for the AFL’s most sought-after man – and the state’s push to join the league is closer than first believed.

The Mercury 18.9.21

THE biggest name in the AFL will help Tasmania’s push to join the big league.
The most sought-after man in the game, four-time premiership coach Alastair Clarkson is on board and is almost certain to be part of Tasmania’s lobbying of the AFL Commission and the club presidents to win the support required to earn the heartland state entry to the league.
Clarkson has a long affiliation with the state via his time as Hawks coach and is managed by prominent agent Tasmanian James Henderson, a key member of the state’s AFL Taskforce.

Mr Henderson confirmed Clarkson’s interest to the Sunday Tasmanian
“We are having regular conversations about Tasmania and our bid,” Mr Henderson said.
“He is very interested in getting involved and would add enormous value to our next steps.”

Clarkson left the Hawks at the end of this season and despite strong attempts from Carlton and Collingwood to lead those clubs, said he would take a year off from coaching and it now appears he will set his sights on joining Tasmania’s campaign.

It comes as momentum continues to grow behind the push, with the state closer to joining the league than previously believed.
Tasmania would need as few as seven votes from AFL clubs to join the AFL in what could be a game changer for the state’s campaign.
And Tasmania could be as little as just two votes away from reaching this goal.
It has been widely believed and reported that for the AFL to expand past its 18 teams, it must have the support of at least two-thirds (12) of the clubs.

But the Sunday Tasmanian can reveal this is a misinterpretation of the AFL constitution.
The constitution actually states if the Commission recommends expansion, it takes two-thirds of the member clubs to reverse the Commission’s decision, not two-thirds to support it.
This means if just seven clubs supported the state’s inclusion, Tasmania would become the league’s 19th licence in the near future.

This week, grand finalists Western Bulldogs joined Hawthorn, North Melbourne, Richmond and Adelaide in publicly backing the state’s campaign in principle, while outspoken Suns president Tony Cochrane is the only one to have voiced his disapproval to expansion.

Bulldogs president Kylie Watson-Wheeler threw the club’s conditional support behind a Tasmanian team.
“At the Bulldogs, we’re supportive of a truly national competition, including Tasmania,” Ms Watson-Wheeler said.
“However, this needs to be done in a commercially responsible way that does not put any existing teams at risk.”

Western Bulldogs president Kylie Watson-Wheeler. Picture: WESTERN BULLDOGS

The AFL has set a timeline of early next year for a decision to be made on Tasmania’s entry.

Prominent sports barrister and former AFL football operations general manager Adrian Anderson confirmed the votes required for Tasmania to finally achieve its dream.
“The widely held view that Tasmania requires the votes of at least 12 of the club presidents is incorrect,” Anderson said.
“The AFL constitution says if the Commission decides to grant a licence to a new club, it would take two-thirds of the existing clubs to overturn that decision. So, under the AFL constitution, Tasmania could join the competition with the support of seven clubs.”
However, entering the competition without most of the clubs on board could result in a backlash.
“Politically, it would obviously be preferable to have the support of at least the majority of clubs,” he said.

But first and foremost the state must secure the support of the Commission.
The AFL’s report from Colin Carter, the former Geelong president and AFL commissioner, stated a Tasmanian team would be viable as the 19th licence – the state’s preferred option.

Tasmanian AFL Taskforce chairman Brett Godfrey said if the clubs voted against the state’s entry after the Commission recommended expansion, it would be more of a slap in the face for the Commission than for Tasmania.
“The AFL Commission is not just responsible but best placed to assess the affordability question,” Godfrey said.
“Its own review (the Carter Report) was clear that the case for a Tasmanian team was strong.
“If the Commission – post its funding review – supports a proposition to the presidents that the league can sustain a Tasmanian 19th team, without detriment to the other to 18 clubs, it would take a particularly hard heart or closed mind to reject.”

Mr Carter was also unaware of the constitutional requirement until contacted by the Sunday Tasmanian.
“I had thought 12 of the 18 clubs had to support a new club but the AFL Constitution says something different,” Carter said.
“That said, it would be better to proceed with the support of most of the clubs.”

It is understood the AFL is aware of the votes required but is yet to publicly correct the commentary, while a request from the Sunday Tasmanian to speak to the AFL’s general counsel Andrew Dillon received no response from headquarters.

The Tasmanian government is putting together a small working group to work with the AFL on funding and stadium deals and lobby the clubs, and will most likely include key Taskforce members Mr Godfrey, Mr Henderson, ex-Woolworths chief executive Grant O’Brien and former St Kilda captain Nick Riewoldt — and now possibly Clarkson.

Tasmanian Premier Peter Gutwein will also be heavily involved and said he had started talks with the club presidents.
“I’ve already spoken to some of the club presidents and I’ve had some really positive feedback from them,” Mr Gutwein said.
“As we put together the program, and there will be a program we work through over the period until we get the opportunity to put the option to them, I’m certain that I’ll have more to do with the AFL club presidents around the country.”

Hawks president Jeff Kennett, left, with coach Alastair Clarkson after the round 1 win this year. Kennett is one of five AFL presidents to have expressed support for a Tasmanian AFL team. Picture: Michael Klein

WHAT THE CLUBS HAVE TO SAY

FOR
Adelaide Crows chairman John Olsen: “The in-principle position is for Tasmania to have its own licence. We take the view that like South Australia, Tasmania is a traditional Aussie rules state and with Western Australia, South Australia and Victoria being the traditional Aussie rules football states that Tasmania is entitled to join the national competition with a licence.”
Western Bulldogs president Kylie Watson-Wheeler: “At the Bulldogs we’re supportive of a truly national competition, including Tasmania.”
Hawthorn president Jeff Kennett: “We have always said to Tasmania we have supported its ambition.”
Richmond president Peggy O’Neal: “My view would be ‘yes’, but I haven’t read everything or received all the information yet. Overall, I’m a big fan of Tasmania and what it has brought to football over all these years so, from that perspective, they should (grant a licence).”
North Melbourne Football Club statement: “We hold firm that we are supportive of Tassie having its own team.”

AGAINST
Gold Coast Suns president Tony Cochrane: “The money is not there, the depths of playing group is not there, and at the end of the day, thank God, that decision has to go to the 18 existing presidents. I doubt there would be anybody who would move a motion. At best there might be somebody who moves a motion and seconds it. It will not get more than three votes out of 18. It will not get up.”

UNDECLARED
Brisbane, Carlton, Collingwood, Essendon, Fremantle, Geelong, GWS, Melbourne, Port Adelaide, St Kilda, Sydney, West Coast".
brett.stubbs@news.com.au


It should also be noted that E. McGuire, when he was Coll. FC President earlier this year, supported Tas. joining as the 19th team (on the basis that the Bid was financially sustainable).

 

[Aussie in exile]

They might finally make a decision in 2030 after who knows how many more delays.

I wouldn't put anything past them

 

[Mr Taswegian]

Did anyone hear anything about the AFL meeting in Perth today where they discussed Tasmania's bid with all the team presidents?

 

[Aussie in exile]

Did anyone hear anything about the AFL meeting in Perth today where they discussed Tasmania's bid with all the team presidents?

Probably done the try and tested AFL policy of broom, sweep, rug, if he doesn't suit their agenda.
It's really beyond me and all intellgebt people why the AFL doesn't want a AFL club in a heartland state

 

[Bjo187]

Clarko being on board the promotion of the tassie side indicates it will get over the line imo. Him and gillon get along well and gill has been talking to him a lot lately trying to get him over to gc. I reckon gill has offered him this little side gig for a year to keep him busy before gc coach in 2023.

 

[Professor Knowall]

There's no doubt Gil (who according to Caro has long favoured the admission of a Tasmanian team) along with the rest of the Commission are now engineering the intro of the Tassie club (otherwise they would never have commissioned a well known AF evangelist like Colin Carter to evaluate the bid) he was always going to find in its favour - and now it seems they've roped in Clarkson to help steer it over the line. The only thing is - they'll probably negotiate to have a formal agreement with the Tasmanian Gov't about the necessary stadium upgrades (or maybe a new Hobart stadium?) as well
as funding guarantees - before the final go-ahead is given.

After that is done, Clarkson will be shipped up to the Gold Coast ... but that another topic altogether.