Tasmania ? Advantages for the AFL if Tassie gets a team.

BringBackTorps

Club Legend
Jan 5, 2017
1,416
784
AFL Club
GWS
ACT so the Giants concentrate on Western Sydney?
I suspect the AFL would want to follow the money & the population & the power when it chooses a 20th team -therefore South Sydney Canberra Cannons (or Kookaburras - abbreviated to Burras, similar to Pt Melb. VFA). GWS becomes WS only, departs ACT. ABS estimates population of Sydney will be c. 7,000,000 by 2040 -with most growth in the west/SW.
7 games in SW/Sth Sydney, 4 in Canberra, 1 in Wollongong -or more? There will probably always be some Melb. AFL Clubs happy to sell 1 or 2 Home games for some moolah.

Sydney is the HQ of all media & most advertising companies in Aust. Over 60% of advertising in Aust. $ is spent by Sydney-based companies.
About 50% of the top 200 ASX listed companies are based in Sydney. Sydney is Aust.'s wealthiest city by far, based on real estate/lots of high paid jobs = an affluent, concentrated demographic "loved" by advertisers. Canberra has the highest mean wage earners.

GR AF is generally weak in SW/Sth. Sydney, but is growing. It is interesting & surprising that, for 2018, far SW Camden (where GR AF is strong, but Div.1 2017 Snr. Club not the best) was chosen for the new entry to the Sydney Premier Division. In 2018 in Premier Div., however, Camden has generally been competitive - many new good players came to the club (& money!?).

I don't think the ACT could financially support a Club on its own -not enough big. private companies there.

EDIT:

GWS & GC would have to be financially reasonably self sufficient before new Clubs are added -unless the AFL slashes its funding to the 18 clubs, by significantly capping & cutting the $180,000,000+ pa AFL Clubs spend/waste on their VERY bloated Football Depts. (No cuts to players' wages though).

I would prefer that AFL Clubs have only two players on the bench, subs only (to help eradicate the ugly congestion)- the traditional bench for over 100 years was nil, one, or two only. The AFL needs to revert to the traditional game of 18 v. 18, not 22 v. 22. This would release 36 extra players -and make it easier to find new, skilled players for 2 new teams.
 
Last edited:

(Log in to remove this ad.)

speedpeck23

All Australian
Jul 20, 2008
848
202
Melbourne
AFL Club
Hawthorn
The advantages to the AFL for a Tas. AFL team are very obvious: Restore the Tas. VFL/AFL recruitment goldmine. Thhe carpetbaggers have almost destroyed it.
The AFL is paying now a MASSIVE (in economic terms alone) Opportunity Cost for not having players of this quality regularly coming out of Tas. A significant part of the VFL/AFL's "glory, status, and mythology" derives from Tas. -imagine how poorer the premier competition would be without these players:-



AFL recruitment from Tas has virtually dried up -and we are not getting the champions we once did. In 1986, 14 Tasmanians were drafted.

Another advantage of a Tas. AFL team is that the AFL would probably want not a bye -so a 20th team would be needed. This extra game pw would bring in extra, very valuable broadcasting Rights -particularly if there was a permanent Thursday night game.

I suspect the 20th team would come from NSW or Qld., which would greatly help promote AF where 52% of the population live. Thus, a Tas. team would help the AF "spread the gospel".
Agree that a Tassie team would promote the interest in AFL in Tassie significantly more than Hawthorn or North could do in the future...
Also agree that the AFL would want a 20th team if Tassie gets in....the flow on effect for expansion would be great....provided it was commercially viable.
 

speedpeck23

All Australian
Jul 20, 2008
848
202
Melbourne
AFL Club
Hawthorn
ACT so the Giants concentrate on Western Sydney?
IMO Giants in WSydney/ACT works well...gotta give it time. I know it's radical but I would make the 20th team NT. This clearly would have to be a unique model to make it commercially viable. Boutique " roofed" stadium..used year round (AFL + AFLW) Main revenue would have to be thru Broadcast rights....opportunity for Monday or Thursday night footy. The main reasons for including NT and Tassie IMO is that through this the AFL clearly aligns itself with the Australian culture across the nation.

Both those clubs would initially have a small but instantly rusted on supporter base..(unlike GWS or GC).

IMO the profile of all AFL clubs (incl GWS and GC) would be raised as being part of competition that truly represented the whole of Australia. Irrespective of whether other sports have a higher global image.....AFL would be optomizing its position as the nations own game.

Provided the game could commercially accommodate Tassie and NT...the AFL would be uniquely placed to be a significant contributor to the Australian community across multiple levels of society.

Not wishing to get carried away but it's just a game...the only way you can justify the amount of time and money spent on a sport or any enterprise is that it gives back to the community.
 

BringBackTorps

Club Legend
Jan 5, 2017
1,416
784
AFL Club
GWS
Agree that a Tassie team would promote the interest in AFL in Tassie significantly more than Hawthorn or North could do in the future...
Also agree that the AFL would want a 20th team if Tassie gets in....the flow on effect for expansion would be great....provided it was commercially viable.
Another major advantage for the AFL of a Tas. AFL team is to avoid a major PR disaster: severe reputational damage & political "blowback"!

It is now a bipartisan formal public position of both the Federal LNP & ALP that Tas. should have its own team in the AFL.
B. Shorten said this month that Tas. should have its own team; & promised that, should Tas. be granted a licence, a Federal ALP govt. would donate $25,000,000 to assist with initial establishment costs (in addition to an immediate $5,000,000 to assist GR AF in Tas -which is in a parlous situation due to VFL/AFL neglect).

PM Turnbull is also publicly keen for Tas. to have its own team, & requested that G. McLachlan keep him informed of progress on this issue.

The Tas. State LNP & ALP are, obviously, very keen for Tas. to have its own team -& are willing to provide significant long term funding.

Luckily for Tas., there now appears only the remotest possibility that the LNP or ALP will ever obtain a majority in the Senate -Tas. has 12 Senators!
It is also lucky for Tas. that the LNP or ALP obtaining a clear majority in the House Of Reps. is not automatically guaranteed -and Tas. has swinging H of R seats!

The AFL has tax free status as it is a Not For Profit organisation -it is the self appointed promoter & custodian of GR AF. The AFL 11 person Executive team happily pays itself $8,000,000+ pa, easily the biggest remuneration for a NFP in Australia -& it has been losing GR AF male marketshare in Tas. to soccer & basketball. AFL Club Football Departments spend $180,000,000 pa (not including player wages) on a small army of c.9 coaches per team, other hangers-on in the "football industry" (sic), & other Dept. costs.

The political & public opprobrium will only worsen for the AFL, whilst the malaise continues; & Tas. does not have a self-funded AFL team (which it can self-fund, as shown by its previous business case). The stench for the AFL is inescapable. It would be totally idiotic & dangerous for the AFL to ignore the very powerful political forces now arraigned against it. It will need to "call in favours" from Canberra one day.
 
Last edited:

speedpeck23

All Australian
Jul 20, 2008
848
202
Melbourne
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Another major advantage for the AFL of a Tas. AFL team is to avoid a major PR disaster: severe reputational damage & political "blowback"!

It is now a bipartisan formal public position of both the Federal LNP & ALP that Tas. should have its own team in the AFL.
B. Shorten said this month that Tas. should have its own team; & promised that, should Tas. be granted a licence, a Federal ALP govt. would donate $25,000,000 to assist with initial establishment costs (in addition to an immediate $5,000,000 to assist GR AF in Tas -which is in a parlous situation due to VFL/AFL neglect).

PM Turnbull is also publicly keen for Tas. to have its own team, & requested that G. McLachlan keep him informed of progress on this issue.

The Tas. State LNP & ALP are, obviously, very keen for Tas. to have its own team -& are willing to provide significant long term funding.

Luckily for Tas., there now appears only the remotest possibility that the LNP or ALP will ever obtain a majority in the Senate -Tas. has 12 Senators!
It is also lucky for Tas. that the LNP or ALP obtaining a clear majority in the House Of Reps. is not automatically guaranteed -and Tas. has swinging H of R seats!

The AFL has tax free status as it is a Not For Profit organisation -it is the self appointed promoter & custodian of GR AF. The AFL 11 person Executive team happily pays itself $8,000,000+ pa, easily the biggest remuneration for a NFP in Australia -& it has been losing GR AF male marketshare in Tas. to soccer & basketball. AFL Club Football Departments spend $180,000,000 pa (not including player wages) on a small army of c.9 coaches per team, other hangers-on in the "football industry" (sic), & other Dept. costs.

The political & public opprobrium will only worsen for the AFL, whilst the malaise continues; & Tas. does not have a self-funded AFL team (which it can self-fund, as shown by its previous business case). The stench for the AFL is inescapable. It would be totally idiotic & dangerous for the AFL to ignore the very powerful political forces now arraigned against it. It will need to "call in favours" from Canberra one day.
For the AFL's part, it is imperative to work out how inclusion of a Tassie team can be a win/win for both the Tasmanian community and the AFL.
The marketing of such a club is virtually already done. I think the AFL are not so concerned about Tassie having the numbers it just doesn't want to compromise the financial input from the Tas govt to the AFL via Hawthorn and North..

You would have to think the purchase of Etihaad will give AFL clubs a much better deal in the long run compared to the last 17 years or so.....in addition the Vic Govt has stated it will help fund upgrades to Etihaad.... this may make a return to more Victorian home games for North and Hawthorn more attractive.
 

robbieando

Moderator
Oct 9, 2001
16,198
8,766
Spitting Bars
AFL Club
Sydney
1) Raises profile of the AFL and therefore(in effect) all clubs by having another Australian state represented in the AFL competition.
How does having a team in Tasmania raise the profile of the AFL or its club anymore than say adding a team in elsewhere is Australia would? Having another state represented is just something to boast about not an overall benefit. It won't lead to a rush for other codes to do likewise.
 

robbieando

Moderator
Oct 9, 2001
16,198
8,766
Spitting Bars
AFL Club
Sydney
GWS & GC would have to be financially reasonably self sufficient before new Clubs are added -unless the AFL slashes its funding to the 18 clubs, by significantly capping & cutting the $180,000,000+ pa AFL Clubs spend/waste on their VERY bloated Football Depts. (No cuts to players' wages though).

I would prefer that AFL Clubs have only two players on the bench (to help eradicate thee ugly congestion)- the traditional bench for over 100 years was nil, one, or two only. This would release 36 extra players -and make it easier to find new, skilled players for 2 new teams.
and you've been told time and again this will not happen as cuts funding club and caps on football departments like you suggest without the clubs agreeing to it will never be agreed. Be realistic and move out of the 1970's
 

robbieando

Moderator
Oct 9, 2001
16,198
8,766
Spitting Bars
AFL Club
Sydney
Another major advantage for the AFL of a Tas. AFL team is to avoid a major PR disaster: severe reputational damage & political "blowback"!
I doubt the AFL are really worried. They control entry into their competition not the government.

It is now a bipartisan formal public position of both the Federal LNP & ALP that Tas. should have its own team in the AFL.
It might be their position but there is nothing they can force the AFL to do. The AFL will take their time on this matter regardless of the position governments of the day.

B. Shorten said this month that Tas. should have its own team; & promised that, should Tas. be granted a licence, a Federal ALP govt. would donate $25,000,000 to assist with initial establishment costs (in addition to an immediate $5,000,000 to assist GR AF in Tas -which is in a parlous situation due to VFL/AFL neglect).
That's if he wins the next election and only if the AFL awards a licence. So thats $25 million he doesn't have to commit to spending anytime in his first two terms if elected. So what happens if the Liberals are in power in 10 years time and the AFL decides its time to expand? No $25 million. As for the $5 million for grass roots footy, thats nice but depends on him winning power NEXT YEAR, so not immediate. So good to see you've fallen for the trap.

PM Turnbull is also publicly keen for Tas. to have its own team, & requested that G. McLachlan keep him informed of progress on this issue.
Its as if there is a winnable by-election in Tasmania next week....

The Tas. State LNP & ALP are, obviously, very keen for Tas. to have its own team -& are willing to provide significant long term funding.
Yet they are still funding the Hawks and Kangaroos. They can't have it both ways.

Luckily for Tas., there now appears only the remotest possibility that the LNP or ALP will ever obtain a majority in the Senate -Tas. has 12 Senators!
Every state has 12 senators (except for NT and ACT with 2 each), you aren't making as good a point as you think. The LNP and ALP senators will never vote as a block together to block anything against party order. Heck WA senators, last year split down party lines on their report from the senate inquiry on the ARU's handling of the axing of the Western Force (look a sporting body who ignored the Government and didn't worry about the senate inquiry called against it because a state didn't like their club was removed).

It is also lucky for Tas. that the LNP or ALP obtaining a clear majority in the House Of Reps. is not automatically guaranteed -and Tas. has swinging H of R seats!
So? Government can't force the AFL to give Tasmania a team and anyone running on such a promise is just a crook in waiting.

The AFL has tax free status as it is a Not For Profit organisation -it is the self appointed promoter & custodian of GR AF. The AFL 11 person Executive team happily pays itself $8,000,000+ pa, easily the biggest remuneration for a NFP in Australia -& it has been losing GR AF male marketshare in Tas. to soccer & basketball. AFL Club Football Departments spend $180,000,000 pa (not including player wages) on a small army of c.9 coaches per team, other hangers-on in the "football industry" (sic), & other Dept. costs.
Club spending does not equal AFL spending. You can't match the two. You've been told this before.

The political & public opprobrium will only worsen for the AFL, whilst the malaise continues; & Tas. does not have a self-funded AFL team (which it can self-fund, as shown by its previous business case). The stench for the AFL is inescapable. It would be totally idiotic & dangerous for the AFL to ignore the very powerful political forces now arraigned against it. It will need to "call in favours" from Canberra one day.
Your living in a dream land if you believe this. The AFL will give Tasmania a team on its own terms, not terms imposed on it despite what you might think.
 

speedpeck23

All Australian
Jul 20, 2008
848
202
Melbourne
AFL Club
Hawthorn
How does having a team in Tasmania raise the profile of the AFL or its club anymore than say adding a team in elsewhere is Australia would? Having another state represented is just something to boast about not an overall benefit. It won't lead to a rush for other codes to do likewise.
...it's along the line of .."The whole being greater than the sum of the individuals".....In any successful organisation the individuals within the organisation gain prestige from the fact that the organisation itself has been successful. It's why a player who is a lesser light in an AFL Premiership team can be seen at times to have a greater status than a star player who never played in a Premiership team. Every individual contributes to the overall success of the team and so collectively and individually the players achieve the ultimate goal. That's why team games generally have such an appeal. ...to quote another well known phrase.."One for all and all for one"

Therefore in this case Tasmania could be seen as the new recruit who brings a traditional and passionate supporter base to the AFL team...thereby enhancing the status of all other members (ie the other AFL clubs) in the AFL Competition.

Agree I don't think it will lead to a rush for other codes to set up in Tassie. The very point about Tasmania is that the game of Australian Rules grew up with the involvement of the people of Tasmania from the get go. At the very least the AFL, if it is to remain true to it's principles of inclusion and community (promoted endlessly in the establishment of GWS), has an obligation to explore all avenues to include a club from Tasmania in the AFL competition for the good of Tasmania itself, the AFL and the game of Australian rules.
 
Last edited:

madmug

Brownlow Medallist
Mar 17, 2009
15,014
8,380
Hobart
AFL Club
Collingwood
...it's along the line of .."The whole being greater than the sum of the individuals".....In any successful organisation the individuals within the organisation gain prestige from the fact that the organisation itself has been successful. It's why a player who is a lesser light in an AFL Premiership team can be seen at times to have a greater status than a star player who never played in a Premiership team. Every individual contributes to the overall success of the team and so collectively and individually the players achieve the ultimate goal. That's why team games generally have such an appeal. ...to quote another well known phrase.."One for all and all for one"

Therefore in this case Tasmania could be seen as the new recruit who brings a traditional and passionate supporter base to the AFL team...thereby enhancing the status of all other members (ie the other AFL clubs) in the AFL Competition.

Agree I don't think it will lead to a rush for other codes to set up in Tassie. The very point about Tasmania is that the game of Australian Rules grew up with the involvement of the people of Tasmania from the get go. At the very least the AFL, if it is to remain true to it's principles of inclusion and community (promoted endlessly in the establishment of GWS), has an obligation to explore all avenues to include a club from Tasmania in the AFL competition for the good of Tasmania itself, the AFL and the game of Australian rules.
Demitriou said Western Sydney 'deserved' its own team. What he probably meant was he & Fitzpatrick 'deserved' bonuses from the media rights, from a game they didn't own.

But no one 'deserves' a team, except if they started in the VFL, do they?
 

BringBackTorps

Club Legend
Jan 5, 2017
1,416
784
AFL Club
GWS
The AFL will take their time on this matter[Obviously]
I disagree with all your views -except for the obvious situation (which I never suggested) that, should Tas. have its own AFL team, the Tas.govt. will no longer fund HFC & NMFC.

The very strong & very public Federal bipartisan political support for a Tas. AFL team is a paradigm shift. The AFL knows the inevitability of it seeking in the future "favours" from a Federal govt.

Do you understand the term "Opportunity Cost"?
 
Last edited:

(Log in to remove this ad.)

robbieando

Moderator
Oct 9, 2001
16,198
8,766
Spitting Bars
AFL Club
Sydney
I disagree with all your views -except for the obvious situation (which I never suggested) that, should Tas. have its own AFL team, the Tas.govt. will no longer fund HFC & NMFC.
Cool you keep living in a fantasy world. Keep believing that the clubs will just give up money and agree to funding another club out of their own pockets in some sort of move designed to live up to your dream of living in the past. Forget that political "forces" in Western Australia couldn't save the Western Force from being cut by the ARU including most of ideas you suggested BUT keep believing that politics will create a team for Tasmania in the AFL. At least be realistic

The very strong & very public Federal bipartisan political support for a Tas. AFL team is a paradigm shift. The AFL knows the inevitability of it seeking in the future "favours" from a Federal govt.
The AFL will take its chances as they hold all the power and they will have State Governments to help with Stadia and Grass Roots funding which is where the AFL does its most of its government business. I think you over estimate the importance of the federal government to the AFL.

Do you understand the term "Opportunity Cost"?
Yes I do and Tasmania is no more important than any other regional heartland area without a team (what about them:rolleyes:). Statehood doesn't give them a right to a team without merit. Previous success also doesn't give them a right. What gives them a right is when the AFL decides to expand the competition and they can prove they are financially viable as a club. Its doesn't come down to history, location or past success. It helps but it won't be the main reason they get a team.

I want to see a team in Tasmania, but I want to see it be strong and viable. Playing on the history alone isn't enough nor are ideas that will never happen.
 

speedpeck23

All Australian
Jul 20, 2008
848
202
Melbourne
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Demitriou said Western Sydney 'deserved' its own team. What he probably meant was he & Fitzpatrick 'deserved' bonuses from the media rights, from a game they didn't own.

But no one 'deserves' a team, except if they started in the VFL, do they?
Agree, hard to say that GWS deserved a team. Although that's a label the AFL chose to identify the communities of Western Sydney and Southern NSW (Riverina)...the latter of whom have the same connection to Aussie Rules as the Southern States....evidenced by the great players from that region..Danihers, Carey, Crawford, Kelly, Bunton and others.

But certainly the people who follow and support Australian rules where ever they live deserve the chance to grow the game. The harsh economics haven't favoured Tassie so far. But I would say there is no logic expanding into NSW and Qld unless ultimately the traditional followers and supporters (which of course absolutely includes Tasmania) are equally involved in the game.

I certainly believe now that the mechanism is there to bring a club based in Tasmania into the AFL....many people have helped get to this point...no reason to stop now.
 

madmug

Brownlow Medallist
Mar 17, 2009
15,014
8,380
Hobart
AFL Club
Collingwood
Agree, hard to say that GWS deserved a team. Although that's a label the AFL chose to identify the communities of Western Sydney and Southern NSW (Riverina)...the latter of whom have the same connection to Aussie Rules as the Southern States....evidenced by the great players from that region..Danihers, Carey, Crawford, Kelly, Bunton and others.

But certainly the people who follow and support Australian rules where ever they live deserve the chance to grow the game. The harsh economics haven't favoured Tassie so far. But I would say there is no logic expanding into NSW and Qld unless ultimately the traditional followers and supporters (which of course absolutely includes Tasmania) are equally involved in the game.

I certainly believe now that the mechanism is there to bring a club based in Tasmania into the AFL....many people have helped get to this point...no reason to stop now.
Their is no mechanism, no plan, no direction. The only change in the situation of any consequence is the change in the political landscape in Tasmania. The growing awareness of whats really happened here. Their is pressure on the politicians as to how much the AFL get out of us & what we get in return.

Why else would Gil bother coming down to pay attention to Tasmania?. The problem was inflamed by the garbage plan he came up with. It addressed nothing. It was an attempted fob off. People here are footy people, they saw through the smokescreen straight away. It was back to the future 2. We're footy people & what he presented was a disgrace, nothing less.

The struggles of the under funded TSL & the under engaged local AFL office here has led us to the current woes of AF here. The expose of the problem has shaken the local political tree. The Hawthorn position has been untouchable. Both parties & the Bass electoral situation has ensured that, until now. Kennett can see that. Thats why he's shyting himself. He's lashed out, then tried to suck up again.

Tasmanians love AR, 'our game'. The rude selfish arrogance in AFL house has cause this problem. So far they've done nothing but poor petrol on the fire.
 

BringBackTorps

Club Legend
Jan 5, 2017
1,416
784
AFL Club
GWS
Keep believing that the clubs will just give up money and agree to funding another club out of their own pockets [I have always said that the Tas. AFL team should be self funded -but, of course, would receive the normal AFL funding similar to other, smaller Melb. Clubs. Also, an extra 10th game pw, played always on Prime time Thur. nights, would bring huge extra Broadcast $] Forget that political "forces" in Western Australia couldn't save the Western Force from being cut by the ARU including most of ideas you suggested BUT keep believing that politics will create a team for Tasmania in the AFL. [Poor analogy - ARU & Super clubs, unlike the AFL, are almost broke. Also, you are foolishly comparing the status & history of RU in WA with the glorious status & history of fanatical Tas. AF. You are also conveniently omitting the fact that the VFL/AFL have been carpetbaggers re Tas. AF]



The AFL will take its chances as they hold all the power[The AFL would be absolutely stupid to make enemies of the federal LNP & ALP. Are you seriously suggesting the AFL is not aware that the AFL will need, some time in the future, to "call in some favours" from a fed. govt?]



Yes I do[ You clearly don't understand the Opportunity Cost the AFL is paying re the loss of the Tas. recruitment goldmine -as outlined in my post #24 above of the illustrious list of Tas. great players] and Tasmania is no more important than any other regional heartland[Nonsense. And other heartland regions have a local AFL club & elite pathways to nurture the GR] area without a team (what about them:rolleyes:). Statehood doesn't give them a right[?] to a team without merit.[I have never argued this] Previous success also doesn't give them a right.[Opportunity Cost is now being paid by the AFL, so I disagree] What gives them a right is when the AFL decides to expand the competition and they can prove they are financially viable as a club.[Agree] Its doesn't come down to history, location or past success.[Again, you are ignoring the VFL/AFL have been carpetbaggers on Tas. Not only have they ravaged Tas. of its best players, crippling & demoralising its GR & elite comp. -but, additionally, they are preventing a Tas. GR revival/ "fight back", by denying Tas. its own AFL team] It helps but it won't be the main reason they get a team.

I want to see a team in Tasmania, but I want to see it be strong and viable.[The AFL has said the next time the AFL expands, Tas. will "probably be the next team" -so Tas, obviously, has an extremely strong case].
The stench wafting from the AFL re its responsibility/contribution to the decline of AF in Tas. will not dissipate. The odour will become more noxious & disgusting, as the AFL is now under very strong, bipartisan Fed. govt. scrutiny over Tas. It can no longer "spin"/conceal the festering sore & what has happened to the once exceptional GR Tas. AF/snr. comp.- and its former assembly line of VFL/AFL champions. The $8,000,000 + pa AFL Executive team are now, rightfully, directly under the public, media and Federal LNP (including PM Turnbull) & ALP microscopes.

The AFL needs to publicly announce asap an approximate timeline & "roadmap" for a Tas. AFL team. This would include GR & financial KPI's etc.
 
Last edited:

speedpeck23

All Australian
Jul 20, 2008
848
202
Melbourne
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Their is no mechanism, no plan, no direction. The only change in the situation of any consequence is the change in the political landscape in Tasmania. The growing awareness of whats really happened here. Their is pressure on the politicians as to how much the AFL get out of us & what we get in return.

Why else would Gil bother coming down to pay attention to Tasmania?. The problem was inflamed by the garbage plan he came up with. It addressed nothing. It was an attempted fob off. People here are footy people, they saw through the smokescreen straight away. It was back to the future 2. We're footy people & what he presented was a disgrace, nothing less.

The struggles of the under funded TSL & the under engaged local AFL office here has led us to the current woes of AF here. The expose of the problem has shaken the local political tree. The Hawthorn position has been untouchable. Both parties & the Bass electoral situation has ensured that, until now. Kennett can see that. Thats why he's shyting himself. He's lashed out, then tried to suck up again.

Tasmanians love AR, 'our game'. The rude selfish arrogance in AFL house has cause this problem. So far they've done nothing but poor petrol on the fire.
Appreciate your sentiments...you seem to be saying that nothing can be done and it all depends on the AFL..
 

madmug

Brownlow Medallist
Mar 17, 2009
15,014
8,380
Hobart
AFL Club
Collingwood
Appreciate your sentiments...you seem to be saying that nothing can be done and it all depends on the AFL..
Unfortunately yes. WA & SA have 2 clubs which support all their footy development work. NSW/Qld get huge prorata funding. We have no such benefit of having an AFL club which does anything for Tasmanian football. The AFL throw a few crumbs & platitudes. Hawthorn & North are here for money, thats all.

The current awareness has shone a light on the poor state of affairs for AR footy here. The TSL is an AFL competition. They are responsible for it. The rubbish 'plan' Gil presented recently was just a rude insult & showed the AFL ignorance & arrogance at its best.
 

madmug

Brownlow Medallist
Mar 17, 2009
15,014
8,380
Hobart
AFL Club
Collingwood
The stench emanating from the AFL re its responsibility/contribution to the decline of AF in Tas. will not recede. The odour will become more noxious & disgusting, as the AFL is now under very strong, bipartisan Fed. govt. scrutiny over Tas. It can no longer "spin"/conceal what has happened to the once sensational GR Tas. AF, and its former assembly line of champions.

The AFL needs to publicly announce asap an approximate timeline & "roadmap" for a Tas. AFL team. This would include GR & financial KPI's etc.
The TSL clubs have had KPIs for the money they do get from AFLTas the whole time we've had the TSL. So to see Gil carry on like its something new is quite pathetic.
Getting an AFL club is one thing, but the 'plan' the go back to the VFL & full time Mariners is a plan for the AFL, its a disastrous backward step for the Tasmanian football community.
If they spent the money this would cost on airfares & accommodation on the TSL & access to better coaching, everyone would be better off.
 

Walshawk

Club Legend
Mar 24, 2017
1,189
1,072
Blackburn
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Tas in. That is a given. Will average 20k crowds first season.
Sydney Giants to play 10 games Spotless, one each in Newcastle and Wollongong while the Easter show is on
Canberra RAMS to play 8 games in Canberra and 4 in Albury.

Thus the games broadens it’s coverage significantly.
 

speedpeck23

All Australian
Jul 20, 2008
848
202
Melbourne
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Tas in. That is a given. Will average 20k crowds first season.
Sydney Giants to play 10 games Spotless, one each in Newcastle and Wollongong while the Easter show is on
Canberra RAMS to play 8 games in Canberra and 4 in Albury.

Thus the games broadens it’s coverage significantly.
Canberra as the twentieth team. Is the need for a twentieth team a consequence of Tassie coming into the AFL ? This is more challenging for the AFL to bring in Tassie and another club at the same time. I agree in the long term this is the way to go.....for other reasons I would include NT rather than Canberra.
 

Top Bottom