Essendon can't live without pokies funding says David Barham

[boncer34]

"Other clubs have weaned themselves off them."

Indeed, by putting their hands out for more money from the AFL. Who of course get their funds from organisations like sportssafe? Nobet? Hmm... no... those don't sound right.

 

[Caligo]

"Other clubs have weaned themselves off them."

Indeed, by putting their hands out for more money from the AFL. Who of course get their funds from organisations like sportssafe? Nobet? Hmm... no... those don't sound right.

Hawthorn are getting even less from the AFL though since they weaned themselves off.

We waited far too long in my opinion.

 

[Gavin Excell]

Let's be honest, this is just another great reason to get rid of pokies.

I was over in WA for first time a few months back. Made for a pleasant surprise going to pubs and there being no pokies. Are they just at the casino in the west?

 

[bzparkes]

Epic.

Love these threads started by North supporters, of all clubs...

 

[blueboy25]

I was over in WA for first time a few months back. Made for a pleasant surprise going to pubs and there being no pokies. Are they just at the casino in the west?

Yep, casino only.

We got knocked for a lot of stuff in WA but not having our pubs and sports clubs full of pokies rooms is fantastic

 

[HirdyLannister]

The money is better in the clubs hand than those degenerates.

 

[HirdyLannister]

Any club that still has pokies is an absolute disgrace, and it's no surprise at all the big wealthy clubs like Richmond, Essendon and Carlton are still damaging local communities. Absolutely disgraceful and nothing you can try to say will deflect that fact

Clarry is propping up the Essendon funds as we speak

 

[CakeEater]

Time to fold Essendon & all other clubs that have pokies then.

 

[Bunk Moreland]

Why are you assuming that Essendon's obligation or constitution or reason for being as it relates to the harm caused by pokies in society goes beyond simply not directly partaking in it?

Not really relevant. The fact is we own them, we got into them like a helluva lot of sporting clubs with venues did.

Obviously they were allowed to get out of control in Victoria and there’s far too many of them, and they cause harm.

In hindsight we’d never have got into them or they’d have been strictly capped across the state.

But what now? Selling them isn’t going to make a lick of difference to the issue. They need to be closed, reduced, bought back. That’s something the government needs to do and the only thing that will make an actual impact.

 

[Handsome.B.Wonderful]

Not really relevant. The fact is we own them, we got into them like a helluva lot of sporting clubs with venues did.

Obviously they were allowed to get out of control in Victoria and there’s far too many of them, and they cause harm.

In hindsight we’d never have got into them or they’d have been strictly capped across the state.

But what now? Selling them isn’t going to make a lick of difference to the issue. They need to be closed, reduced, bought back. That’s something the government needs to do and the only thing that will make an actual impact.

Selling them and moving them out of Windy Hill would make a difference to the club's local community, it also makes a stand against them.

"The best thing you can do is the right thing, the worst thing you can do is nothing."
- Lou Richards.....probably.

 

[ApplecrossWC]

A despicable club

 

[Freomaniac]

"We aren't in a position to stop destroying our local community, as it makes us too much money at the moment"

How the hell does this work?

We are not destroying our local community. But the Local community is broke due to pokies.

Again, how does this make sense?

 

[threenewpadlocks]

Not really relevant. The fact is we own them, we got into them like a helluva lot of sporting clubs with venues did.

Obviously they were allowed to get out of control in Victoria and there’s far too many of them, and they cause harm.

In hindsight we’d never have got into them or they’d have been strictly capped across the state.

But what now? Selling them isn’t going to make a lick of difference to the issue. They need to be closed, reduced, bought back. That’s something the government needs to do and the only thing that will make an actual impact.

So your issue here with Essendon here isn't the ongoing complicity in ownership, but the admittedly with-hindsight culpability of building a venue a generation ago in the first place that contributed to its growth? I don't really see how that makes sense, even if you think its the pervasiveness of it rather than it in and of itself that's the issue here.

 

[terrybull]

Morals….

So it’s ok to earn money by sponsorships from fast food chains which harms the community with obesity, diabetes…

Sugar Sugar sugar….. no warning text on candy.

The treatment of animals in the meat industry is cruel, mentality insane…

What’s the difference with pokies and online gambling? For some gambling can be a disaster like a drug habit. But at least with pokies they get out and socialize and not just stay at home.

But everyone has their own standards, but I say if it’s legal then clubs can do what they want. I support the club that plays, don’t give hoots what they do or don’t do for the community. I mean if say your club go back or continue with pokies or become Chippendale dancers will you stop supporting them?

Just because I barrack for a club does not mean I need to agree or defend their actions.

There are many here on high horses, but nitpicking about one subject. But every club is supporting some thing that is seen as morally wrong, as well all clubs supports right things as well.

If it’s a big problem then why not make it illegal?

Like why are **** cigarettes still legal?

 

[threenewpadlocks]

So it’s ok to earn money by sponsorships from fast food chains which harms the community with obesity, diabetes

Complicity through accepting sponsorship dollars and complicity through direct financial ownership are on different levels.

Publc harm of pokies addiction and public harm of fast food are also on different levels.

It's a false equivalency.

What’s the difference with pokies and online gambling? For some gambling can be a disaster like a drug habit. But at least with pokies they get out and socialize and not just stay at home.

But there's public health research on this. Socialising? Not even the pokies lobby tries to suggest that this is a benefit.

But everyone has their own standards, but I say if it’s legal then clubs can do what they want. I support the club that plays, don’t give hoots what they do or don’t do for the community. I mean if say your club go back or continue with pokies or become Chippendale dancers will you stop supporting them?

Just because I barrack for a club does not mean I need to agree or defend their actions.

There are many here on high horses, but nitpicking about one subject. But every club is supporting some thing that is seen as morally wrong, as well all clubs supports right things as well.

I mean, sure, but the clubs are all non-profit institutions, most are democratic with processes, all have constitutions that state their reason for being. You may have that view but the general viewpoint of wider society and membership bases doesn't tend to agree. It's why it's a discussion point ... in an AGM ...

Essendon's constitution literally says this:

3. Objects The objects of the Club are to: (a) promote the playing of Australian Rules Football in particular and sport in general, including by maintaining, providing, supporting and controlling a team or teams of Australian Rules Footballers bearing the name of the Essendon Football Club in the AFL Premiership competition and in any other competitions as determined by the Club from time to time; (b) promote, foster and develop sport in the community through promoting, supporting, or operating sporting teams or activities; (c) preserve, foster and promote the ideals and traditions of the Club; and (d) undertake and/or do all things or activities as are necessary, incidental or conducive to the advancement of these objects including providing services to Members and engaging in promotional and income generating activities

It's c that's the most relevant, because as the club is literally just the manifestation of the members that operate it, and if the ideals of the members is anti-pokies, it's not really fulfilling its constitution, why it exists. (Notwithstanding point d which is to make money).

If it’s a big problem then why not make it illegal?

Like why are **** cigarettes still legal?

Sure, but Essendon isn't in the business of wider public policy.

 

[terrybull]

Complicity through accepting sponsorship dollars and complicity through direct financial ownership are on different levels.

Publc harm of pokies addiction and public harm of fast food are also on different levels.

It's a false equivalency.

But there's public health research on this. Socialising? Not even the pokies lobby tries to suggest that this is a benefit.


I mean, sure, but the clubs are all non-profit institutions, most are democratic with processes, all have constitutions that state their reason for being. You may have that view but the general viewpoint of wider society and membership bases doesn't tend to agree. It's why it's a discussion point ... in an AGM ...

Essendon's constitution literally says this:

3. Objects The objects of the Club are to: (a) promote the playing of Australian Rules Football in particular and sport in general, including by maintaining, providing, supporting and controlling a team or teams of Australian Rules Footballers bearing the name of the Essendon Football Club in the AFL Premiership competition and in any other competitions as determined by the Club from time to time; (b) promote, foster and develop sport in the community through promoting, supporting, or operating sporting teams or activities; (c) preserve, foster and promote the ideals and traditions of the Club; and (d) undertake and/or do all things or activities as are necessary, incidental or conducive to the advancement of these objects including providing services to Members and engaging in promotional and income generating activities

It's c that's the most relevant, because as the club is literally just the manifestation of the members that operate it, and if the ideals of the members is anti-pokies, it's not really fulfilling its constitution, why it exists. (Notwithstanding point d which is to make money).

Sure, but Essendon isn't in the business of wider public policy.

I guess I left Australia when pokies wasn’t seen (or turned blind eye) on.

I remember a lot of old people sat at their machines playing away. Like lonely outcast members of our society that no-one would talk to. Their last exciment of their lives by inserting in their coin, don’t think they cared about winning it was just getting out to the pub, playing and maybe talk to someone that listen (I didn’t).

But you can do all that at home now, and get totally drunk without risk of being kicked out.

But getting rid of people’s crutches or vices won’t solve anything, they find something new. Because it’s not the machines, drugs, alcohol etc that it’s the problem (sure it makes it worse), but the problem is deeper down and most of us don’t want to dive in there (except giving a little to charity) and applauding those that do and snarling at those that don’t.

If soccer is banned in Europe do the hooligans disappear? They just find a new sport for their excuses for violence… like terrorists excusing religion for their actions… The problem is not sport or religion.

But back to the clubs, if it’s in their constitution they should either drop the pokies or change their constitution.

By the way how is it in the NRL in Sydney?

 

[Nugget 83]

Sounds like the Pokie Rattlers are dealing with their own addiction.

 

[GWT6]

View attachment 1874926
This is why.

You've got it back the front champ.

Have a look at the fixtures. Richmond, Collingwood and Cartlon have had an unfair commercial advantage with the fixtures they have been given over the past 20 years, whether they are winning or losing. Hawthorn and Geelong also, but not to the same extent.
Clubs can't generate enough revenue to survive playing at lunchtime on Sunday, that's why they need an additional distribution of AFL revenue.

I'm sure every Vic club near the top of that list would swap the AFL distribution revenue received for the past 20 years with those at the bottom if it also meant changing the fixture.

 

[Bunk Moreland]

So your issue here with Essendon here isn't the ongoing complicity in ownership, but the admittedly with-hindsight culpability of building a venue a generation ago in the first place that contributed to its growth? I don't really see how that makes sense, even if you think its the pervasiveness of it rather than it in and of itself that's the issue here.

I don't think EGMs are inherently evil, like some do - to the extent that some think all gaming is evil. They're really not hugely different to a lottery.

I'm happy for them to have a place in our society. What I think the info shows is there is simply far too many of them in Victoria and the numbers need to be reduced, perhaps quite drastically.

That's a decision the government needs to take and fund - they got the state into them (largely for tax purposes) and will have to extract it. Did Essendon contribute to the situation by putting them in their venues? Maybe I guess, but I highly doubt it made any discernible difference to the situation whatsoever.

If they exist then I'm not really fussed about them funding sporting clubs like Essendon, which are largely a fairly positive force - footy provides a very popular form of entertainment for the masses and, relative to many other elite sports, is still very accessible in terms of cost. That's in some significant part because it's subsidised by gambling, including EGMs (though sports betting is the big meal ticket for footy now).

The alternative is the money just goes to Woolworths or Coles' bottom lines - organisations that I think don't provide a whole lot of good - in fact, their size and financial might probably lessens competition and increases prices for a lot of basic necessities, such as food.

 

[windyhill]

A despicable club

Now now little brother.

 

[blueboy25]

Time to fold Essendon & all other clubs that have pokies then.

Same for anyone sponsored by a mining or oil and gas company.

And yes I know Carlton are now sponsored by Ampol

 

[ferball]

I don't think EGMs are inherently evil, like some do - to the extent that some think all gaming is evil. They're really not hugely different to a lottery.

I'm happy for them to have a place in our society. What I think the info shows is there is simply far too many of them in Victoria and the numbers need to be reduced, perhaps quite drastically.

That's a decision the government needs to take and fund - they got the state into them (largely for tax purposes) and will have to extract it. Did Essendon contribute to the situation by putting them in their venues? Maybe I guess, but I highly doubt it made any discernible difference to the situation whatsoever.

If they exist then I'm not really fussed about them funding sporting clubs like Essendon, which are largely a fairly positive force - footy provides a very popular form of entertainment for the masses and, relative to many other elite sports, is still very accessible in terms of cost. That's in some significant part because it's subsidised by gambling, including EGMs (though sports betting is the big meal ticket for footy now).

The alternative is the money just goes to Woolworths or Coles' bottom lines - organisations that I think don't provide a whole lot of good - in fact, their size and financial might probably lessens competition and increases prices for a lot of basic necessities, such as food.

The issue with gaming machines is that they're designed to elicit addictive responses in people vulnerable to particular electronic stimuli.

Ie they put people in a trance that encourages repetitive behaviour and alters their state of consciousness to make them less aware and considerate of the consequences of their actions. That's why they get referred to as electronic heroin frequently.

 

[Danw0w]

You've got it back the front champ.

Have a look at the fixtures. Richmond, Collingwood and Cartlon have had an unfair commercial advantage with the fixtures they have been given over the past 20 years, whether they are winning or losing. Hawthorn and Geelong also, but not to the same extent.
Clubs can't generate enough revenue to survive playing at lunchtime on Sunday, that's why they need an additional distribution of AFL revenue.

I'm sure every Vic club near the top of that list would swap the AFL distribution revenue received for the past 20 years with those at the bottom if it also meant changing the fixture.

We had to sell home games to Darwin and Cairns

Champ

 

[Bunk Moreland]

The issue with gaming machines is that they're designed to elicit addictive responses in people vulnerable to particular electronic stimuli.

Ie they put people in a trance that encourages repetitive behaviour and alters their state of consciousness to make them less aware and considerate of the consequences of their actions. That's why they get referred to as electronic heroin frequently.

Yep, recognise that - and think it’s a part of responsible gambling that isn’t regulated well enough. Because it’s complex and governments don’t understand it.

I don’t think they’re inherently like that however - it’s a design feature that can be neutralised.

 

[Elmer_Judd]

Epic.

Love these threads started by North supporters, of all clubs...

Given the fact they are the only Vic club that has never owned or profited off Pokies revenue, North fans have every right to claim the moral high ground here.