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

[Engimal v3]

Oh, that's completely different.

Like how GWS is all about Canberra...except the 'Tasmanian' team wont even bother to put a few letters on their jumpers to acknowledge Launceston.

It'll all be about Hobart...

Tell me, do you think the team will speand more time in Launceston (in total) for 6 games than Hawthorn does for 4? Or will they be back on the plane so fast they'll do the post match events back in Hobart?

What a nonsense post

 

[fargothegreat]

For a BF member who boasts about his 'facts' in discussions, he sure knows how to be a pointless emotive dick.

The only "facts" in his posts are the ones he distorts to suit his argument. I thought it was trolling, but I think it's a bit sadder than that now.

 

[Roylion]

Fitzroy played a few back in the day. I think Roylion has explained what happened but I can't remember the details.

Two games a year in 1991 and 1992. Fitzroy lost $100,000. Unlike the position with other games played interstate, fares and accomodation for the team and staff were extracted from the gate receipts before distribution by the AFL to Fitzroy.

Fitzroy's games in Tasmania were (with crowd):
1991
vs. Hawthorn. 13335
vs. St Kilda 13746
1992
vs. West Coast 8819
vs. Essendon 10265

There was also a game against Melbourne in 1952.

 

[Tasmanian saint]

Why then, if we're so united, do Launceston and Hobart have separate deals with different teams? Why don't Hawthorn and North Melbourne play two games each in both cities? Why is it a distinctly north/south approach?

It makes no difference which club plays at what ground neither club are a local are they

 

[Tasmanian saint]

The plan is for a Hobart team that FIFOs into Launceston.

Nothing will be based in Launceston, just fly in for a few games. Apparently what is a huge insult for Tasmania as a whole is perfectly fine for Launceston. If they're lucky, they might even get an additional game or two!

You really need to remove your self from this thread or preferably have a mod do it for you

 

[Tasmanian saint]

Oh, that's completely different.

Like how GWS is all about Canberra...except the 'Tasmanian' team wont even bother to put a few letters on their jumpers to acknowledge Launceston.

It'll all be about Hobart...

Tell me, do you think the team will speand more time in Launceston (in total) for 6 games than Hawthorn does for 4? Or will they be back on the plane so fast they'll do the post match events back in Hobart?

Well you do realise a club has to actually be based somewhere don’t you ffs what else would you want them to do

 

[Tasmanian saint]

Two games a year in 1991 and 1992. Fitzroy lost $100,000. Unlike the position with other games played interstate, fares and accomodation for the team and staff were extracted from the gate receipts before distribution by the AFL to Fitzroy.

Fitzroy's games in Tasmania were (with crowd):
1991
vs. Hawthorn. 13335
vs. St Kilda 13746
1992
vs. West Coast 8819
vs. Essendon 10265

There was also a game against Melbourne in 1952.

Yeah remember going to the games in 91 played at north Hobart oval imagine if they had a similar deal to hawthorn one probably would have saved them

 

[telsor]

For a BF member who boasts about his 'facts' in discussions, he sure knows how to be a pointless emotive dick.

I think you mean "points out our hypocrisy by using our own arguments against us".

 

[telsor]

Well you do realise a club has to actually be based somewhere don’t you ffs what else would you want them to do

Sure it does...Which is why all other clubs claim to be a from a city not a 68,401 km² region.

You claim Vic clubs exploit Tas...but you're planning to do exactly the same and instead have a Hobart club exploit the rest of the state.

Look at how the TFL turned out...The Evers report recommended a state league...5 from the south, 5 from the north...But the South wasn't willing to cut any clubs, so you ended up with an expanded Hobart comp posing as a state league ( 6 from Hobart, 2 from Launceston) which collapsed because nobody outside of Hobart bought into it.

So what is the plan now...A Hobart club with a few token gestures to the rest of the state...and those in Hobart are just assuming universal support.

What is the old line about those who wont learn from history are doomed to repeat it?

 

[madmug]

Sure it does...Which is why all other clubs claim to be a from a city not a 68,401 km² region.

You claim Vic clubs exploit Tas...but you're planning to do exactly the same and instead have a Hobart club exploit the rest of the state.

Look at how the TFL turned out...The Evers report recommended a state league...5 from the south, 5 from the north...But the South wasn't willing to cut any clubs, so you ended up with an expanded Hobart comp posing as a state league ( 6 from Hobart, 2 from Launceston) which collapsed because nobody outside of Hobart bought into it.

So what is the plan now...A Hobart club with a few token gestures to the rest of the state...and those in Hobart are just assuming universal support.

What is the old line about those who wont learn from history are doomed to repeat it?

GWS is not a city.

The many Melbourne clubs do not represent cities. Not even the suburbs they came from. They are clubs with historic suburban beginnings, that s all. Melbourne is one big turf war for members & money. Hence why so many export games to survive.

Not cutting clubs to start a new league, sounds like the AFL.

Learning from history? You clearly know nothing about the State league. Yes it started with 6 south & 2 north clubs, then added 2 NW clubs, then another 1 north club. But that didn't suit your rant. The facts never do.

So for a guy who uses 'facts', maybe you should learn some.

 

[sherb]

I'm not sure what you want? Do you want the team to be called the Tasmania-Launceston Devils? You're just trying to create an issue where there isn't one because you hate Tasmania (for some reason).

All he/she wants is for Tasmania not to have an AFL team.

 

[Tasmanian saint]

Sure it does...Which is why all other clubs claim to be a from a city not a 68,401 km² region.

You claim Vic clubs exploit Tas...but you're planning to do exactly the same and instead have a Hobart club exploit the rest of the state.

Look at how the TFL turned out...The Evers report recommended a state league...5 from the south, 5 from the north...But the South wasn't willing to cut any clubs, so you ended up with an expanded Hobart comp posing as a state league ( 6 from Hobart, 2 from Launceston) which collapsed because nobody outside of Hobart bought into it.

So what is the plan now...A Hobart club with a few token gestures to the rest of the state...and those in Hobart are just assuming universal support.

What is the old line about those who wont learn from history are doomed to repeat it?

You really have no idea about what you comment on do you the state league for a large amount of time had three Launceston clubs as well as two on the north west coast that’s five a few clubs have come and gone in the south as well Hobart new Norfolk sandybay of course a state league will have more clubs based in the largest populated area . As for a Tasmanian afl team of course it will be representing the whole state the same as west coast and Adelaide did when they first entered any person with any commonsense whatsoever would understand a afl team would have to be based in Hobart as that’s were players would want it they have said Launceston would get the bigger games you being such an expert please tell me how you would set up a team in Tasmania??

 

[fargothegreat]

Sure it does...Which is why all other clubs claim to be a from a city not a 68,401 km² region.

Not sure I've ever heard of the city of West Coast ...

For a while North Melbourne were just called the Kangaroos and represented either nowhere or everywhere.

There's nothing wrong with having a team that represents the whole state of Tasmania. It doesn't divide people. It brings us together.

 

[Father Jack]

North Melbourne went to Sydney when Tasmania was ripe for the plucking, which Hawthorn then duly plucked

 

[sherb]

North Melbourne went to Sydney when Tasmania was ripe for the plucking, which Hawthorn then duly plucked

And what a time that was.

I worked at this game. Attendance? 7,334.

AFL Tables - Kangaroos v Port Adelaide - Sun, 28-May-2000 2:40 PM - Match Stats

 

[Father Jack]

And what a time that was.

I worked at this game. Attendance? 7,334.

AFL Tables - Kangaroos v Port Adelaide - Sun, 28-May-2000 2:40 PM - Match Stats

North were almost the second Sydney team, and then almost the Gold Coast team, and now it looks like they'll be almost the Tasmanian team. They knew twenty years ago that their future laid anywhere but Melbourne.

 

[Back One Out]

North Melbourne went to Sydney when Tasmania was ripe for the plucking, which Hawthorn then duly plucked

What do you mean by this?

Hawthorn entered a partnership with the Tasmanian government where they became our major sponsor in return for the Hawks playing some of their games at York Park in Launceston.

People have always tried to portray this arrangement as a charitable one-way gift in Hawthorn's favour. Mostly f**kwits with an axe to grind and people who are biased against Hawthorn.

It's us travelling Hawks fans who are the ones footing the bill.

We give up 4 of our home games here in Melbourne. Thousands of our supporters fly to Launceston and spend their money on a weekend in Tassie. Not just once or twice, but 2,3,4 times a year over many many years...

Various Tasmanian governments have been so happy with the benefits of this arrangement that they've chosen to renew the deal repeatedly over the past 20 years. 5 state elections in that period with 6 different Premiers from both the Labor and Liberal parties. All happy to fork over a few million bucks each year in return for our 4 home games and the benefits they provide the local economy.

In 2017, a Pricewaterhouse Coopers report calculated that about $30 million was returned in the Tasmanian economy, per $5 million spent on bringing the Hawks to Tasmania.


Yet our club is still cast as "bandits" who are getting something for nothing... Just plucking those poor Tassie taxpayer's dollars and laughing all the way to the bank.

 

[Father Jack]

What do you mean by this?

Hawthorn entered a partnership with the Tasmanian government where they became our major sponsor in return for the Hawks playing some of their games at York Park in Launceston.

People have always tried to portray this arrangement as a charitable one-way gift in Hawthorn's favour. Mostly f**kwits with an axe to grind and people who are biased against Hawthorn.

We give up 4 of our home games here in Melbourne. Thousands of our supporters fly to Launceston and spend their money on a weekend in Tassie. Not just once or twice, but 2,3,4 times a year over many many years...

Various Tasmanian governments have been so happy with the benefits of this arrangement that they've chosen to renew the deal repeatedly over a 20 year period. 5 state elections in that period with 6 different Premiers from both the Labor and Liberal parties. All happy to fork over a few million each year in return

In 2017, a Pricewaterhouse Coopers report calculated that about $30 million was returned in the Tasmanian economy, per $5 million spent on bringing the Hawks to Tasmania.


Yet our club is still cast as "bandits" who are getting something for nothing... Just plucking those poor Tassie taxpayer's dollars and laughing all the way to the bank.

It's us Hawks fans who are the ones paying the most.

I meant that Hawthorn recognised that playing games in Tasmania would be a good idea. What did you think I meant?

 

[Financialpanther]

What do you mean by this?

Hawthorn entered a partnership with the Tasmanian government where they became our major sponsor in return for the Hawks playing some of their games at York Park in Launceston.

People have always tried to portray this arrangement as a charitable one-way gift in Hawthorn's favour. Mostly f**kwits with an axe to grind and people who are biased against Hawthorn.

We give up 4 of our home games here in Melbourne. Thousands of our supporters fly to Launceston and spend their money on a weekend in Tassie. Not just once or twice, but 2,3,4 times a year over many many years...

Various Tasmanian governments have been so happy with the benefits of this arrangement that they've chosen to renew the deal repeatedly over a 20 year period. 5 state elections in that period with 6 different Premiers from both the Labor and Liberal parties. All happy to fork over a few million each year in return

In 2017, a Pricewaterhouse Coopers report calculated that about $30 million was returned in the Tasmanian economy, per $5 million spent on bringing the Hawks to Tasmania.


Yet our club is still cast as "bandits" who are getting something for nothing... Just plucking those poor Tassie taxpayer's dollars and laughing all the way to the bank.

It's us Hawks fans who are the ones paying the most.

Whilst I do agree - the portrayal as being completely one sided is loaded up with hyperbole, the arrangement is more in favor of the Hawks than it is Tasmania. The PWC report was commissioned by the Tasmanian Government and don't believe it to a very realistic and objective analysis as the political implications of even a break even would be disastrous. Suggest likewise with the knockers of the arrangement, those in favor exaggerate the impacts.

 

[Bicco]

Could something be done stadium wise at Dowsing Point? There’s a million places to move the barracks? We’d the have racing, DEC and stadium all together and ferry stop already there.

 

[Back One Out]

I meant that Hawthorn recognised that playing games in Tasmania would be a good idea. What did you think I meant?

It's entirely dependent on Hawthorn fans flying over to Launceston and spending their money there

Just your use of the word "plucking" implies the Hawks are taking and not giving anything. Don't come the raw prawn with me!

The club gives up 4 of its Melbourne home games. Hawthorn fans who fly over spend a minimum of $500 for a night in Launnie and watching a "home" game at York Park the next day. That's dinner, a few beers and a big brunch. Some people choose to make a full weekend of it, hire a car, visit a winery and buy a few bottles.

 

[Back One Out]

Whilst I do agree - the portrayal as being completely one sided is loaded up with hyperbole, the arrangement is more in favor of the Hawks than it is Tasmania. The PWC report was commissioned by the Tasmanian Government and don't believe it to a very realistic and objective analysis as the political implications of even a break even would be disastrous. Suggest likewise with the knockers of the arrangement, those in favor exaggerate the impacts.

I can't be bothered quibbling over details

If you're not happy with the report from Pricewaterhouse Cooper and their figure of $30m, then why don't you pull a figure from out of your arse that you're happier with? $25m ? $20m ? $15m ? $10m ?

The point is... Tasmanian government ministers since 2001 are not closet Hawks fans who've been funneling taxpayer dollars into Hawthorn's bank account for no return. Critics have tried to claim it's been a financial drain on the state and the Hawthorn F.C is the only beneficiary when clearly, that's not the case!

 

[sherb]

It's entirely dependent on Hawthorn fans flying over to Launceston and spending their money there

Just your use of the word "plucking" implies the Hawks are taking and not giving anything. Don't come the raw prawn!

The clubs gives up 4 of its Melbourne home games.

Hawthorn fans who fly over spend a minimum of $500 for a night in Launnie and watching a "home" game at York Park the next day
That's dinner, a few beers and a big brunch. Some people choose to make a full weekend of it, hire a car, visit a few winery and buy a few bottles.

The implication in that statement is that it is some sort of sacrifice on the club's part. Or that it's doing it out of the goodness of its heart.

It isn't on both counts, they are generally games against lower drawing clubs for which they get paid good $$$. Plus they get to develop a local membership/supporter base out of the arrangement.

Kudos to the Melbourne Hawks supporters who fly over to watch the games though and, in doing so, help/support the local economy.

 

[Financialpanther]

I can't be bothered quibbling over details

If you're not happy with the report from Pricewaterhouse Cooper and their figure of $30m, then why don't you pull a figure from out of your arse that you're happier with? $25m ? $20m ? $15m ? $10m ?

The point is... Tasmanian government ministers since 2001 are not closet Hawks fans who've been funneling taxpayer dollars into Hawthorn's bank account for no return. Critics have tried to claim it's been a financial drain on the state and the Hawthorn F.C is the only beneficiary when clearly, that's not the case!

Quite an aggressive response given you don't want to be bothered - my point is the report is most likely 20-30% over estimating the impact. You of course took my skepticism as flat out attack on the arrangement. Clearly, Hawthorn saw an opportunity where the AFL has fallen over and found an arrangement that benefited them and there was mutual benefit to the politicians to bringing the game to Tasmania. My point which you have evaded is that its possible for a politically sensitive issue having a report that is used to quell this with a report that suits the narrative. Doesn't mean the arrangement didn't work or shouldn't be in place, rather I would take the report with a heavy grain of salt (likewise, an opposing party could very well produce a report from a party suggesting it doesn't provide much value).

 

[Bicco]

Anyone who thinks that the Hawks/Tassie relationship is one sided with the Hawks preying on a defenceless Tas Govt. isn’t seeing things correctly. The govt. (state) has absolutely benefited. I would suggest though that that benefit is getting less and less as time goes on. Any Hawks members who made the trip probably aren’t continuing to do so, the novelty has worn off. Also the fixturing of interstate (non vic) teams means less ‘away’ supporters are going to make the trip than potentially Vic team supporters. It’s a keen WA fan to spend $1000’s on two flights to visit Launceston in the middle of July.
The benefits to the state of the Hawthorn sponsorship are lessening and the govt. thinks there is better value for their $$’s in moving to support a full time team.
Tassie just isn’t that into the Hawks anymore.