Remove this Banner Ad

AFL continue campaign to restructure WA footy

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

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.
Well, I call Graeme John a Western Australian but people will say he doesn't count as he has lived elsewhere for such a long time! Bob Hammond (SA) was there for 10 or so years until a year back. They obviously didn't find a suitable candidate from there to replace him when he resigned. There's no-one on the commission from QLD but is that not a problem? I don't think they need to have someone just representing their state, ideally they would all be there to do the best for the AFL and the game and I think they do that pretty well.
 
The AFL will impose a third team on WA. WA only has crowds so small because it costs a fortune to get in. The AFL are acutely aware that the average Perth high school student has never seen a game and never will. Childhood attendance is the basis for future mass tv audiences. That situation is unthinkable in Victoria. Representatives of WCE and FREO dont want it to happen becasue they are on easy street with only two teams.

Would melbourne be happy if the whole city only had four teams? with two home games a weekend? both at Etihad? Because that is the ratio of seats to population that Perth has. And if melbourne had that ratio... they would be charging perth prices to get in and melbourne kids would ALSO never see a game.

I realise it is not in the best interests of my club but it is ridiculous to suggest WA should not have a 3rd team. In sheer numbers, there is more unsatisfied footy demand in WA than in Tassie, Canberra... or there was in West sydney or the gold coast before those teams were made.
 
I am happy for the Wafl to continue to manage The Perth based teams. It was obvious when Both of these sides were languishing on the bottom that merchandising sales were poor so was the money that went through to Country Zones.In a nutshell it needs to be reviewed The Wafl clubs are struggling that they cant even afford to send Regional development officers out to the country. Get over yourself Freo and Eagles! it is about junior development and the betterment of the game.One would hope for an equalization scheme as it is supposed to be the peoples game.
 
Freo and West Coast have the best set up in the AFL. WAFC controls both teams and Subiaco and the WAFC is backed by the state government.

AFL just don't get their way in WA ie talented young players playing senior WAFL.

ATM the WAFC fund WA footy with tax payers and funds for the two AFL Clubs.

AFL (VFL) underfund WA Footy compared to Victoria.

Their is no advantage for the WAFC to lose control of the two AFL teams.

Its only about control.
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

Would melbourne be happy if the whole city only had four teams? with two home games a weekend? both at Etihad? Because that is the ratio of seats to population that Perth has. And if melbourne had that ratio... they would be charging perth prices to get in and melbourne kids would ALSO never see a game.

Most Liverpool or Manchester United or LA lakers supporters havn't been to a game but their support is fairly huge.
 
Would melbourne be happy if the whole city only had four teams? with two home games a weekend? both at Etihad? Because that is the ratio of seats to population that Perth has. And if melbourne had that ratio... they would be charging perth prices to get in and melbourne kids would ALSO never see a game.

Most Liverpool or Manchester United or LA lakers supporters havn't been to a game but their support is fairly huge.
I pay 30 bucks for a ticket at Subi if i am lucky i get to see 2 games a year. It costs me $250 to stay at overpriced hotels with a $50 parking Tariff . As per normal whinging city supporters.
 
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.
you say I'm incorrect but you then say they discussed it but it was knocked back. So who sets the final price for games here in wa, greennick ? Is it the AFL or WAFC ? I know.
 
The only reason the current system supposedly works so well is because West Coast, and to a lesser extent Fremantle, earn so much money. SA has a similar (but not exactly the same) system which also worked well, until Port's crowds turned to shit and suddenly siphoning millions out of them every year remained great for the recipients of that (i.e the SANFL clubs) but no so great for Port, which remained in an arrangement to pay money they didn't have. Admittedly the SANFL have a much greater obsession with paying 2nd rate players more money than the WAFL.

But there's no guarantee that in the future both WA teams will remain drowning in cash. Who knows, maybe a 3rd team in WA is on the cards. Is that when you change things? Because that aint going to be the best time to do it, and a restructure now may save any issues from happening in the future.
 
Would melbourne be happy if the whole city only had four teams? with two home games a weekend? both at Etihad? Because that is the ratio of seats to population that Perth has. And if melbourne had that ratio... they would be charging perth prices to get in and melbourne kids would ALSO never see a game.

Most Liverpool or Manchester United or LA lakers supporters havn't been to a game but their support is fairly huge.
Dont blame the AFL or the Vic clubs for the ratio of seats to population.

WA gov's have talked about a new stadium for 10 years and still the 1st shovel has not moved from the garden shed. When it does, our gov's are too short sighted to see that it should have at least 80k capacity. Again, not the fault of AFL or the Vic clubs

Why would you play games at Etihad when you have the G?

If the AFL had control instead of WAFC I'm pretty sure that the stadium would have 80k and be more than half built, remember WAFC fought a long battle to keep Subiaco for their own benefit, without the interests of the paying public, i.e., you and i, or any real interests of the 2 WA clubs
 
Dont blame the AFL or the Vic clubs for the ratio of seats to population.

WA gov's have talked about a new stadium for 10 years and still the 1st shovel has not moved from the garden shed. When it does, our gov's are too short sighted to see that it should have at least 80k capacity. Again, not the fault of AFL or the Vic clubs

Why would you play games at Etihad when you have the G?

If the AFL had control instead of WAFC I'm pretty sure that the stadium would have 80k and be more than half built, remember WAFC fought a long battle to keep Subiaco for their own benefit, without the interests of the paying public, i.e., you and i, or any real interests of the 2 WA clubs

well not me as I live in Sydney

ANd I am not blaming the AFL or the vic clubs. I am blaming the existing WA footy establishment for looking at the demand curve and choosing a low volume / high price point on it and then defending that choice to the detriment of the paying footy goer, kids and the nation wide football community...
 
you say I'm incorrect but you then say they discussed it but it was knocked back. So who sets the final price for games here in wa, greennick ? Is it the AFL or WAFC ? I know.

I meant what he was saying was right, not you were incorrect in how the tickets are sold. They did look at charging a levy which is what he was talking about.
 
Dont blame the AFL or the Vic clubs for the ratio of seats to population.

WA gov's have talked about a new stadium for 10 years and still the 1st shovel has not moved from the garden shed. When it does, our gov's are too short sighted to see that it should have at least 80k capacity. Again, not the fault of AFL or the Vic clubs

Why would you play games at Etihad when you have the G?

If the AFL had control instead of WAFC I'm pretty sure that the stadium would have 80k and be more than half built, remember WAFC fought a long battle to keep Subiaco for their own benefit, without the interests of the paying public, i.e., you and i, or any real interests of the 2 WA clubs

It would be great if we didn't have to give $4 billion of our GST to the other states. That would get us a nice stadium pretty quick smart!
 
Well, I call Graeme John a Western Australian but people will say he doesn't count as he has lived elsewhere for such a long time! Bob Hammond (SA) was there for 10 or so years until a year back. They obviously didn't find a suitable candidate from there to replace him when he resigned. There's no-one on the commission from QLD but is that not a problem? I don't think they need to have someone just representing their state, ideally they would all be there to do the best for the AFL and the game and I think they do that pretty well.

Very predictable Daics ... why did you duck the Elliot/McGuire issue?
Thats the same guy who threatens other clubs regularly, your Uncle Ed. It doesnt earn respect anywhere but Melbourne, remember the boning threat in his Ch9 days that sent him a one way ticket out of Sydney.

Great example of why there is no trust in Vic domination.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Very predictable Daics ... why did you duck the Elliot/McGuire issue?
Thats the same guy who threatens other clubs regularly, your Uncle Ed. It doesnt earn respect anywhere but Melbourne, remember the boning threat in his Ch9 days that sent him a one way ticket out of Sydney.

Great example of why there is no trust in Vic domination.
Seriously? I've seen plenty of your posts in other threads and the theme of them is very predictable. The obsession that so many people have with Eddie McGuire is as over the top as the anti-Victorian nonsense.
 
Seriously? I've seen plenty of your posts in other threads and the theme of them is very predictable. The obsession that so many people have with Eddie McGuire is as over the top as the anti-Victorian nonsense.

Again you duck the issue!! This is McGuire at his naked best & of course he will be defended by his acolytes.

Challenging Vic centric decisions will always be unpalatable to the beneficiaries of those decisions, e.g Collingwood.
The nerve of Kwality to challenge Vic thinking ... :eek:
 
Again you duck the issue!! This is McGuire at his naked best & of course he will be defended by his acolytes.

Challenging Vic centric decisions will always be unpalatable to the beneficiaries of those decisions, e.g Collingwood.
The nerve of Kwality to challenge Vic thinking ... :eek:
I'm pretty sure I wouldn't be classed as an acolyte! Occasionally Eddie will say things I wish he hadn't said, but clearly most of it is tongue in cheek, and I'm very happy we have him at Collingwood. I basically didn't respond to the bit about him because I don't see it as my job to defend him, especially for something from 10 or so years ago. Finally, trying to suggest that all Victorians must be arrogant, not to be trusted (or whatever) because the president of one of their football clubs supposedly is, is just silly.
 
I'm pretty sure I wouldn't be classed as an acolyte! Occasionally Eddie will say things I wish he hadn't said, but clearly most of it is tongue in cheek, and I'm very happy we have him at Collingwood. I basically didn't respond to the bit about him because I don't see it as my job to defend him, especially for something from 10 or so years ago. Finally, trying to suggest that all Victorians must be arrogant, not to be trusted (or whatever) because the president of one of their football clubs supposedly is, is just silly.

Mate, I live in Melbourne, love the place, but cant cop the idea that the national game should be controlled by a self appointed elite based in Melbourne ... WA footy is in a good place currently, why would you change it?

Enjoyed the Pies Eagles game at the G a few weeks back, enjoyed the fans, the good natured banter, challenging Vic views may not be anti Vic unless maybe you are being protective of all things Vic ... it might be you Daics ...

Cant see why WACA members should go to a game of footy, certainly no room for Perth Cricket Club to get a gig, why would the WAFC/WAFL compete with the Dockers/Eagles for members, why footy club members would not rank #1, #1, #1, when their clubs play finals footy ... nothing to offer here by the AFL model.
 
Mate, I live in Melbourne, love the place, but cant cop the idea that the national game should be controlled by a self appointed elite based in Melbourne ... WA footy is in a good place currently, why would you change it?

Enjoyed the Pies Eagles game at the G a few weeks back, enjoyed the fans, the good natured banter, challenging Vic views may not be anti Vic unless maybe you are being protective of all things Vic ... it might be you Daics ...

Cant see why WACA members should go to a game of footy, certainly no room for Perth Cricket Club to get a gig, why would the WAFC/WAFL compete with the Dockers/Eagles for members, why footy club members would not rank #1, #1, #1, when their clubs play finals footy ... nothing to offer here by the AFL model.
I probably should be living in Melbourne, but I'm a born and bred South Australian and have lived here all my life. I happen to barrack for a Victorian club, have always loved Victorian football, and just try to look at things with a balanced view.

WA footy is certainly in good shape from where I sit as well (probably much better than the SA situation) with two AFL clubs doing well on and off the field, and with so much great young talent coming out of that state. I'm already looking forward to seeing Jaeger O'Meara next year and Jack Martin the year after. I'm very confident the people running the AFL would be too and would do nothing to harm the development of such players in the future.

PS Many apologies for assuming Tootgarook was a made up location name!
 
reading this thread is a laugh

i tell you what - go to afl.com.au

click on the tv and radio tag


when that comes up look at what territory you are automatically assumed to be part of - despite the invention of cookies about..... oh... a thousand years ago...... this is the organisation we are supposed to hand our nuts to

i think otherwise....
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

reading this thread is a laugh

i tell you what - go to afl.com.au

click on the tv and radio tag


when that comes up look at what territory you are automatically assumed to be part of - despite the invention of cookies about..... oh... a thousand years ago...... this is the organisation we are supposed to hand our nuts to

i think otherwise....
Yep. That confirms it alright. They're all bastards! You really can be cranky Al, can't you!!
 
Afl you can have the wa licences. At a cost of 15 million a year to the wafl and amateur leagues, representation of 2 west australians on the AFL commision (one voted for by the west australian club members), 2 on the rules committee and 1 on the tribunal. Oh and lastly with a guarantee that tickets to the football will be the same in every state in australia. Oh and lastly with the permission that the west australian and south australian clubs will acquire the same benefits that the queensland and new south wales teams are entitled too.
 
Lastly wouldn't mind seeing another WA team. Perth royal falcons will do.


i have grown to like garlic a lot more than when i was a kid - but not to the point where i can munch it like popcorn


toothless said:
Yep. That confirms it alright. They're all bastards! You really can be cranky Al, can't you!!

its just one of many things that just go to show its the vfl - not the afl yet.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

AFL continue campaign to restructure WA footy

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top