AFL continue campaign to restructure WA footy

[kranky al]

A bit misguided there.

You need to look at what value the owners currently extract from the license, and what ongoing compensation the AFL would offer for them to surrender the license. No-one’s suggesting they’d simply hand over something that earns them a lot of money, and receive nothing in return. That doesn’t make any sense.

Another point – the proposal is widely being represented here as “handing over the ownership of the club to the AFL”. The club would be owned and operated by its members. It’s not currently.

we sure as hell would be handing over our wafl clubs to the vfl though - one jerk of the purse strings and they would all have to come to heel

 

[35Daicos]

if the afl gave a flying **** about w.a clubs we would never do the trip to tassie seeing as we already do 10 times as many airmiles as any vic club. this single issue shows a nice microcosm of what happens when the eastern states have control

So you had to travel a little bit further to play North Melbourne in Hobart, where they have absolutely no home ground advantage, when you could have flown only as far as Melbourne and played them where they have at least a modest advantage. Given the result I wouldn't be complaining, but if you look hard enough negatives can be found in anything.

 

[UpForGrabs]

So you had to travel a little bit further to play North Melbourne in Hobart, where they have absolutely no home ground advantage, when you could have flown only as far as Melbourne and played them where they have at least a modest advantage. Given the result I wouldn't be complaining, but if you look hard enough negatives can be found in anything.

I agree. Wouldn't have beaten North if we played them at Etihad.

 

[greennick]

...because we don't want private franchises in the league?

Yeah. Imagine if a team was listed on the sharemarket. That would be ridiculous. Oh wai....

 

[35Daicos]

Back in the early stages of this discussion the supposed lack of WA representation on the AFL Commission was raised. Yet Mike Fitzpatrick is still it's Chairman, and as such I'd say the most powerful man in the game. In SA they kept bleating about the AFL "still being the VFL" even when Wayne Jackson was the CEO for 7 or so years. This anti-Victorian attitude that is still so strong in SA and WA is just embarrassing, some people need to grow up a lot.

 

[Oneiros]

Back in the early stages of this discussion the supposed lack of WA representation on the AFL Commission was raised. Yet Mike Fitzpatrick is still it's Chairman, and as such I'd say the most powerful man in the game. In SA they kept bleating about the AFL "still being the VFL" even when Wayne Jackson was the CEO for 7 or so years. This anti-Victorian attitude that is still so strong in SA and WA is just embarrassing, some people need invade Victoria and overthrow the government.

 

[ziad]

Back in the early stages of this discussion the supposed lack of WA representation on the AFL Commission was raised. Yet Mike Fitzpatrick is still it's Chairman, and as such I'd say the most powerful man in the game. In SA they kept bleating about the AFL "still being the VFL" even when Wayne Jackson was the CEO for 7 or so years. This anti-Victorian attitude that is still so strong in SA and WA is just embarrassing, some people need to grow up a lot.

Like Mike is approx 60 and has lived in Melbourne for approx 40 years.
I have a similar pattern but multiple states - I think some of us have grown out of the attitudes you expose. Imagine spending your entire life in melbourne and attampting to be balanced on any issue?

 

[35Daicos]

Like Mike is approx 60 and has lived in Melbourne for approx 40 years.
I have a similar pattern but multiple states - I think some of us have grown out of the attitudes you expose. Imagine spending your entire life in melbourne and attampting to be balanced on any issue?

I'm happy to believe Mike Fitzpatrick would put what is best for Australian football first, rather than just what's best for Victoria, WA etc. And on a side note, I'd say if anyone dared suggest to the average South Australian that Stephen Kernahan was a Victorian (even though he's been there for about 27 years) they would be outraged!

 

[Bunk Moreland]

we sure as hell would be handing over our wafl clubs to the vfl though - one jerk of the purse strings and they would all have to come to heel

Obviously the WAFC aren’t going to hand over the license without strict assurances there’ll be commensurate financial compensation going forward.

Some of you guys act like we’re talking about kids with trading cards.

 

[kranky al]

Back in the early stages of this discussion the supposed lack of WA representation on the AFL Commission was raised. Yet Mike Fitzpatrick is still it's Chairman, and as such I'd say the most powerful man in the game. In SA they kept bleating about the AFL "still being the VFL" even when Wayne Jackson was the CEO for 7 or so years. This anti-Victorian attitude that is still so strong in SA and WA is just embarrassing, some people need to grow up a lot.

when you see decision after decision go against you - you can tend get a bit this way - when in every respect the vfl had to be dragged kicking and screaming to make it a semblance of a fair contest - you grow up with an attitude that way


we have the umpires on our side according to you lot and you shriek blue bloody murder - yet when the eagles were travelling to victoria five weeks in a row you didnt see a problem - when we finished higher than another side yet had to play a final in victoria - that was just too bad - west aussies should stop whinging = you joined our competition not the other way around. thats the attitude we have always had from your lot.


at the end of the day as ive said before - your own problems are the ones that are going to be most important to victorian football - then you have the expansion which is something else to be monitored closely - we come a distant - 4000 odd km distant 3rd and given your track record in footy, in politics etc etc why do you find it so hard to believe that we would want out own wafl controlled by west australians - who are there - on the coal face every day rather than have decision made by people 4000 km away - how happy would you be if the wafl took over the purse strings of the vfa? do you think that an organisation 400km away would have the best interests of you comp at heart?

 

[Oneiros]

Obviously the WAFC aren’t going to hand over the license without strict assurances there’ll be commensurate financial compensation going forward.

Some of you guys act like we’re talking about kids with trading cards.

Willingly anyway.

 

[35Daicos]

at the end of the day as ive said before - your own problems are the ones that are going to be most important to victorian football - then you have the expansion which is something else to be monitored closely - we come a distant - 4000 odd km distant 3rd and given your track record in footy, in politics etc etc why do you find it so hard to believe that we would want out own wafl controlled by west australians - who are there - on the coal face every day rather than have decision made by people 4000 km away - how happy would you be if the wafl took over the purse strings of the vfa? do you think that an organisation 400km away would have the best interests of you comp at heart?

I seriously admire your passion for WA football. I just don't understand why anyone would ever believe the AFL, who are putting so much into the development of the game in the northern states, would do anything to harm it's development in a state which is such a great provider of talent for the national competition. The introduction of the NW WA team into the national u-16 championships would have come at quite a cost, and it's a small but significant sign that they are hardly trying to kill off the game over there!

 

[Underdog]

I'm happy to believe Mike Fitzpatrick would put what is best for Australian football first, rather than just what's best for Victoria, WA etc. And on a side note, I'd say if anyone dared suggest to the average South Australian that Stephen Kernahan was a Victorian (even though he's been there for about 27 years) they would be outraged!

Both might have originated in these states but if you think their insight into the game is anywhere near what it would be for a local, you're kidding yourself.

 

[kranky al]

I seriously admire your passion for WA football. I just don't understand why anyone would ever believe the AFL, who are putting so much into the development of the game in the northern states, would do anything to harm it's development in a state which is such a great provider of talent for the national competition. The introduction of the NW WA team into the national u-16 championships would have come at quite a cost, and it's a small but significant sign that they are hardly trying to kill off the game over there!

its not a matter of trying to kill of the game - i dont think they would ever want to do that - its just time and distance - one thing we have learnt to our cost over here is that we are too far away to be as noticed as what is right under your nose - thats just human - any bureaucracy is the same

 

[sigur]

I seriously admire your passion for WA football. I just don't understand why anyone would ever believe the AFL, who are putting so much into the development of the game in the northern states, would do anything to harm it's development in a state which is such a great provider of talent for the national competition. The introduction of the NW WA team into the national u-16 championships would have come at quite a cost, and it's a small but significant sign that they are hardly trying to kill off the game over there!

But they might decide to make the league an U/23 ammo league and divert money to the U 18s, or to merge WAFL clubs to save money, or to impose AFL reserve teams on the WAFL comp. All of which would help the 18 AFL clubs but damage the WAFL clubs.

It's not just about the money.

 

[greennick]

that is incorrect.

wafc set the price for tickets and that is the sole reason why wa is the most expensive in the league. the afl set a minimum price but its up to wafc to set final price

Actually, you are incorrect in this. The AFL did discuss imposing a levy on the "rich" teams. Over and above our current prices and that would result in greater funds going to fund the less supported clubs. It disappeared though once Collingwood, Essendon, etc complained about it though.

 

[DivideandMultiply]

Presumably you would have no issue with a caveat being placed on the licenses so that WAFC is not allowed to sell the Eagles or Dockers to a South African consortium.

Fine with that.

That said it was what, a decade ago? Very weak pretext.

 

[DivideandMultiply]

So you had to travel a little bit further to play North Melbourne in Hobart, where they have absolutely no home ground advantage, when you could have flown only as far as Melbourne and played them where they have at least a modest advantage. Given the result I wouldn't be complaining, but if you look hard enough negatives can be found in anything.

And Brisbane at the GABBA and GC at Metricon and GWS at Homebush/Blacktown, Sydney at the SCG and the Hawks in Launceston.

Maybe not all in the same year, but we are regularly given those extra long trips on top of a ridiculously heavy travel schedule.

Handing back our license to the AFL would be a grave mistake. They know they have a captive market out west and they know they can exploit the buggery out of this fact.

 

[DivideandMultiply]

Obviously the WAFC aren’t going to hand over the license without strict assurances there’ll be commensurate financial compensation going forward.

Some of you guys act like we’re talking about kids with trading cards.

The AFL could not afford to pay in the short term what the licenses are worth.

 

[greatwhiteshark]

I seriously admire your passion for WA football. I just don't understand why anyone would ever believe the AFL, who are putting so much into the development of the game in the northern states, would do anything to harm it's development in a state which is such a great provider of talent for the national competition. The introduction of the NW WA team into the national u-16 championships would have come at quite a cost, and it's a small but significant sign that they are hardly trying to kill off the game over there!

I think the biggest issue is that the WAFL must stay as it is, not become an under age comp or any changes that effect this comp. I know very little about what has happened to football in Victoria but I do know that the WAFL and SANFL should be protected and encouraged by the AFL as very good comps in their own right. There is nothing wrong with having very strong second tier football, unfortunately it appears the AFL only want one competition in the entire country that is broadcast on TV, radio, reported in papers etc etc.
The AFL are there for themselves, I can't argue with what you say they put into the game in the northern states, thats great but how does that help the SANFL and The WAFL remain good comps and ensure it continues to bring along talent? What about the country leagues and amteur football in WA, who will take care of it? The AFL??? No chance in hell. they will nail them to the cross.
The WAFC looks after and protects football the state over. It works well. Why would anyone want to fix something that is clearly not broken?
I don't even know why Freo and Eagles supporters complain about having to hand over profits, they don't hand over anything. The WCE and Fremantle football clubs are a division of the WAFC, it is the WAFC money. The WAFC are nice enough to not take all of it and let both clubs build financially. The WAFC own the Eagles and Dockers.

 

[Freo2012]

you are very naive.

as i posted above, afl do not set final price. blame that on wafc

if you want a true and fair comp, you can't just make vic clubs prove they have a long term viable financial life. So we'll say goodbye to not only 3 or 4 vic clubs but also port, probably suns, lions, gws and maybe syd and freo (remember, you want clubs to substantially prove they can survive,thats why i added the last 2) That would leave us with 8 clubs. 6 from vic, 1 from wa, sa and none in nsw or qld.
Your league is looking good now 'freo2012'

If you abolish the equalisation policy, we will lose another 2 or 3 teams in vic. Now your league has 3 from vic 1 from wa and 1 from sa

Assist in funding stadiums, they are in sa and said they would in wa, problem in wa is that neither political party (when in office) could make a decision on whether to build it or not and then where to build it.

you contradict yourself with your next point, you don't want a promise of set $ amount, but a % of revenues of the wa/sa based clubs. but then you want money spent on $/kid

you want a fair draw, in 'your league' we have 5 teams, so it'll be easy to have a fair draw. Play each other 4 times, 2 home 2 away, followed by a final 5. play each other all year, finish last and still make the finals. Or have a final 4 and kick the last team out of the comp.

Seriously, west aussies need to get over their obsession with the vics. That is the biggest joke

Anyone can pluck a point, or points to prove or disprove any argument whilst ignoring all the evidence to the opposite - that is naivity or trying to fool others - which is what you do.

I have stated that clubs in developing areas (no historical teams) would be exemptions (ie QLD, NSW and elsewhere they want to expand to). Like in any organisation the initial years require funding to build to a sustainable basis. It is only in long term established footy states (Vic, WA and SA) that the requirement to prove sustainability would apply. A very simple test is the one used by Public Companies - must prove they can pay all future debts (atleast 12 months) from reasonably expected revenue forecasts, without outside assistance or guarantees in the case of footy clubs. So they must be able to prove they can stand on their own 2 feet. In public companies if one folds the first step an administrator does is see if the company's directors continued to trade whilst insolvent, incurring debt they knew they could not repay - criminal offence.

Port Adelaide is a problem and one which probably need special dispensation if the AFL wants 2 teams in that footy heartland. The same excuse cannot be used in Vic where they is a continual over satuation of clubs (there has always been 3-4 teams failing to support themselves - yes it changes but the market is so obviously oversaturated with teams given the sponsorship and revenue $ available)

 

[santa claws]

Incorrect. Richard Goyder is on the AFL commission and has stated publicly several times that he considers representing the interests of the WA clubs to be an important part of his role.

I don't know that a move like this (and similar in SA) is about AFL control. The clubs would be controlled by their members, as they should be. The clubs then elect the commission.

At the moment the WA and SA clubs are controlled by bodies that aren't elected by their members.

dont kid yourself its all about afl control.

the set up in wa works extremely well if it aint broke why tinker or in this case take over.

 

[Kwality]

Back in the early stages of this discussion the supposed lack of WA representation on the AFL Commission was raised. Yet Mike Fitzpatrick is still it's Chairman, and as such I'd say the most powerful man in the game. In SA they kept bleating about the AFL "still being the VFL" even when Wayne Jackson was the CEO for 7 or so years. This anti-Victorian attitude that is still so strong in SA and WA is just embarrassing, some people need to grow up a lot.

Remember WA had no rep on the Commission for 10 years after Terry O'Connor was tossed out for having views unacceptable to Messrs Elliot & McGuire. No question about the need to grow up, but like beauty, its in the eye of the beholder.
Should McGuire 'grow up' ?

Why is there no SA representation on the AFL Commission today?

This will be an issue for the WAFC IF the AFL come clean on why they want changes.

 

[seanoff]

I think the biggest issue is that the WAFL must stay as it is, not become an under age comp or any changes that effect this comp. I know very little about what has happened to football in Victoria but I do know that the WAFL and SANFL should be protected and encouraged by the AFL as very good comps in their own right. There is nothing wrong with having very strong second tier football, unfortunately it appears the AFL only want one competition in the entire country that is broadcast on TV, radio, reported in papers etc etc.
The AFL are there for themselves, I can't argue with what you say they put into the game in the northern states, thats great but how does that help the SANFL and The WAFL remain good comps and ensure it continues to bring along talent?.

Being from a Northern state i can't see the AFL trying to kill the state leagues. Especially given the later developing talent that is coming out of all the leagues (even the NEAFL, Zorko). If they turned them into underage leagues it would stunt the development of the game. The AFL are trying to get the NEAFL closer to the other 3, what would be the point of then killing them?

Not sure about the lower divisions.

I would expect if the WAFC hand them to the members they would make sure the AFL fund the WAFC to the same level with guarantees into the future. They would be silly not to get such guarantees.

 

[basashi]

I always thought Freo were doing alright off-field, obviously not a financial powerhouse like Collingwood, West Coast or Essendon, but still pretty well off. That's not the case?

The age said that fremantle had the third highest revenue in the league, behind only collingwood and west coast...


"

Figures obtained by​

​

The Age​

​

show that the top-two earning clubs, Collingwood and the Eagles, each had football revenue of $45.6 million, ....​

Fremantle, which has a similar arrangement to West Coast, is a distant third on the cash ladder, with $34.6 million,"​

Geelong, hawthorn, carlton, essendon follow in that order.​

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/ground-deals-key-as-revenue-gap-grows-20110504-1e8g2.html

I think the difference is that a crowd of 60 thousand at the MCG still represents quite a poor gate taking. I think even 80k does not get a gate as big as a west coast home game of 44 thousand.​

​

​