Are essendon entirely 'Innocent' re: round 9 ?

[Pessimistic]

I contend that Essendon knew very well when they signed up at colonic that there would be at least one lock-out each year - there was even talk of a bonus if they achieved a lock-out.

The thing that convinces me is I think they also negotiated to have first option on 10,000 tickets for their 'away' game there. In other words their members will never have to experience the CRAP they are now putting on hawthorn supporters. Nice one essendon.

And the crap that peter jackson is coming out with shows that he is a prime candidate to work for the AFL himself. His bull******** could continue as an AFL spokesman without missing a beat.

It just shows that essendon have eclipsed carlton in the 'charge them till they squeak' school of thought whereas Hawthorn represent the "affordable footy for all' notion better than any other club. That extends to opposition supporters as well as their own.

By rights, if the same trend were to continue, Hawthorn should have the biggest following in 10 years.

 

[BUBBALOUIS]

Heard Peter Jackson on 3AW last night, if he isnt the most arrogant spin doctor in the AFL ill barrack for Collingwood! He prefaced every statement with 'im not putting Hawthorn down' and then slagged us, He brought up the attendance figure of our Melbourne game of 30000 but failed to mention it had been raining for two days, and pretty heavily all game! Hooksey and he talked about our York Park game as if it was something sinister when in fact we have catered for an extra 'home' game for our members!!!! He talked about our average crowds against Essendon....45000....since 1994 and failed to mention we have not been a contendor in any of those years, he said the Colonial game still wasnt a sellout, but failed to mention that tickets arent even available yet for the general public......DO US A FAVOUR PETER JUST DONT SAY ANYTHING........

 

[ptw]

Pess

I tried to convince Dan of this a few days back....my view is that this is not a "mistake" or "one off" it is part of the whole business model for colonial, in particular Essendon's involvement in it.

This decision is clearly against the interests of the Essendon members and supporters, obviously it is against the interests of Hawthorn supporters, so why do it ?

It is in the interest of C7, colonial and probably the Essendon FC through their arrangement with the ground.

Dan would have none of it. It was all a big "stupid" mistake and they would see reason once they knew the facts. They know the facts, they just have a different business model than Dan and other Essendon members.

ptw

 

[mantis]

Bubba
What if it rains pretty heavily 2 days before the Bomebrs/Hawks match, then the game will have been moved to the G for nothing.

 

[BUBBALOUIS]

Originally posted by mantis
Bubba
What if it rains pretty heavily 2 days before the Bomebrs/Hawks match, then the game will have been moved to the G for nothing.

Thats a fair point Sandie, i guess im just angry 'coz id love to go to the game and prolly wont be able to. I also believe the AFL should just stop lying about the reasons why the game isnt to be moved, the fact is Ian Collins has been putting the heavies on for more 'big games' and the AFL have buckled, it doesnt hurt there broadcast partners either with live telecasts, my opinion is all games should be seen by the maximum amount of people who want to attend. Still the decisions been made so i guess ill wander down to the social club and watch it from there

 

[Shinboners]

Originally posted by ptw
Dan would have none of it. It was all a big "stupid" mistake and they would see reason once they knew the facts. They know the facts, they just have a different business model than Dan and other Essendon members.

I remember Dan posting something saying that he was talking or e-mailing with Peter Jackson. Has Dan posted up what Jackson told him?

 

[ptw]

something like.....

"oh please Mr Dan....please stop hitting me with that stats book....oh.....oh......oh......don't stop......mmmmmm...........mmmmmmm........please.......talk numbers to me.....oh yes.....Essendon are the most successful club....yes......yes.......yes......OH YES !!!!......and no we will not be moving the game because we are making too much money"


someting like that anyway.

ptw

 

[1AD]

Originally posted by ptw
something like.....

"oh please Mr Dan....please stop hitting me with that stats book....oh.....oh......oh......don't stop......mmmmmm...........mmmmmmm........please.......talk numbers to me.....oh yes.....Essendon are the most successful club....yes......yes.......yes......OH YES !!!!......and no we will not be moving the game because we are making too much money"


someting like that anyway.

ptw

Is that before or after Rooboy walks out smiling but sore with $500,000 for North.

 

[CJH]

I have no doubt that Collo has put the hard word on the AFL that if they move the game they could probably find themselves in court over breach of contract.

 

[Arch]

so does this all mean Hawthorn fans only like turning up in numbers, to games against us, in years in which they are "contenders" ?????

hmmmm.....

 

[CJH]

Originally posted by Arch
so does this all mean Hawthorn fans only like turning up in numbers, to games against us, in years in which they are "contenders" ?????

hmmmm.....

Or to use a better word.... Bandwagoner's!!!

 

[Pessimistic]

Lets not forget the irrefutable fact that the equivalent game sold out last year.

They can talk numbers till the cows come home, This fixture will sell-out colonial every year regardless where the 'contenders' are.

I'd still rather be a hawks fan with affordable football than an essendon cash cow

How much was a season ticket this year again ?

 

[BUBBALOUIS]

Originally posted by CJH


Or to use a better word.... Bandwagoner's!!!

Call it what you want LOL, the fact is if ANY side is undefeated after 7/8 rounds as is playing the seasons before premiers who have only lost one, it would be easy to assume that you would get a bigger crowd than if bottom four side is playing top side.....but perhaps logic is to hard for you guys to understand lol

 

[CJH]

Hey Bubba, for once I am happy to get on the offensive about being a Bandwagoner rather than always having to defend!

 

[Dave]

Originally posted by Pessimistic
I contend that Essendon knew very well when they signed up at colonic that there would be at least one lock-out each year - there was even talk of a bonus if they achieved a lock-out.

That was not specific to Essendon, it applied to any tenant club.

I'd say they suspected that there would be lockouts and the the AFL would go back on it's word to shift them. Is it the clubs fault the AFL cannot be trusted? At the end of the day the AFL have the final say.

The thing that convinces me is I think they also negotiated to have first option on 10,000 tickets for their 'away' game there. In other words their members will never have to experience the CRAP they are now putting on hawthorn supporters. Nice one essendon.

So what were they supposed to do, say "oh well, we wont bother trying to get a good deal for our members"? That would've gone down well.

And the crap that peter jackson is coming out with shows that he is a prime candidate to work for the AFL himself. His bull******** could continue as an AFL spokesman without missing a beat.

It just shows that essendon have eclipsed carlton in the 'charge them till they squeak' school of thought whereas Hawthorn represent the "affordable footy for all' notion better than any other club. That extends to opposition supporters as well as their own.

Yes, it's so affordable to fly to York Park isn't it? Gimme a break. Hawthorn don't care about anyone else's supporters otherwise you'd have seen them up in arms about the collingwood/doggies game last year (biggest crowd so far, ~45K). "affordable footy for all" my arse.

And I'm quite happy with the cost of the membership package I bought compared to what some of the other clubs are charging.

By rights, if the same trend were to continue, Hawthorn should have the biggest following in 10 years.

LOL! Dream on


I've said a few times that the game should be moved, but I think that the nail's been hit on the head by those that have suggested that Collo may be behind the lack of action. I also read/heard somewhere that the AFL weren't prepared to meet some of Essendon's conditions for moving the game so they decided that the clubs best interests were served by not moving it. I have no problem with them looking after THEIR clubs interests ahead of those of Hawthorns. As for those who say they should be looking at the bigger picture, that isn't their job it's the AFL's, because at the end of the day, if the AFL wanted the game moved it would be moved, so that's where the blame lies. But then, but it doesn't surprise me that you've turned this into an Essendon bashing exercise.

 

[Dave]

Originally posted by Pessimistic

I'd still rather be a hawks fan with affordable football than an essendon cash cow

How much was a season ticket this year again ? [/B]

Less than a season's ticket & a flight to York Park.


Moooooooooooooo.

 

[Blues2001]

Yeah I heard that Peter Jackson guy too. He was shocking, really shocking - and disrespectful to Hawthorn supporters. He was bringing up all these crowd averages and Hawthorn away games averages when they were completely irrelevant and were against sides with a smaller supporter base than Essendon and the games weren't even at the MCG anyway. And I thought that we only had to put up with bullcrap from the club presidents.

 

[Dave]

Base membership costs.

Essendon membership, $125 for eleven games.

Hawthorn, $120 for eleven games, plus what it costs to get to tassie

Now repeat after me Pess, MOOOOOOOOOOO.

 

[BUBBALOUIS]

Originally posted by Dave
Base membership costs.

Essendon membership, $125 for eleven games.

Hawthorn, $120 for eleven games, plus what it costs to get to tassie

Now repeat after me Pess, MOOOOOOOOOOO.

Dave at least get your facts right base membership gets you into 11 GAMES IN MELBOURNE!!! Hawthorn did a deal where Members get into Richmonds home game at the 'G. York Park was an extra, ah well i guess its easy being brainwashed by Peter Jackson for some!

 

[Danny Chook Fan Club]

Re: Re: Are essendon entirely 'Innocent' re: round 9 ?

Originally posted by Dave
Yes, it's so affordable to fly to York Park isn't it? Gimme a break. Hawthorn don't care about anyone else's supporters otherwise you'd have seen them up in arms about the collingwood/doggies game last year (biggest crowd so far, ~45K). "affordable footy for all" my arse.

And I'm quite happy with the cost of the membership package I bought compared to what some of the other clubs are charging.

Psst, Dave, you're making an idiot of yourself. Hawthorn members paid $5 less than Essendon members to get into the same amount of games in Melbourne. Hawthorn members do not have to pay for a seat for several of their home games, in excess of their membership tickets. Hawthorn members do not have to ring up someone two weeks in advance of their home games to ensure that they can actually get in. Hawthorn members do not have to pay anywhere near as much as Essendon members to get a annual reserved seat.

Keep moo-ing.

 

[Dan26]

PTW,

Look, I agree with you. You know my feelings on the matter. Thematch should have been moved. After all we moved last year, so it's not as if we hadn't switched a game before.

You can't fault our draw. The decision mkaes rightly made our 4 MCG home matches against Collingwood, Carlton, Essendon, and North. Fair enough. if there was some conspiracy, then why not schedule all these matches for Colonial Stadium?

There doesn't appear to be any evidence based on the draw, that anyone was "purposely" aiming for sell-ours. I mean, we scheduled our traditional 4 biggest games at the MCG.

Also, the AFL did meet with Essendon to discusss the transfer. It wasn't as if it was never considered (as you seem to imply). After all, we did switch last year, so why not now? If the AFL were never going to switch, then why have a meeting to discuss it??

I just think they lost the plot. Ian Collins and Colonial, could have very easily had an Ess-North game in return for an Ess-Hawthorn game, which seems pretty fair. Colonial would ganain a 43-44,000 Ess-North match. They want big matches, and Ess-North would provide that.

I just think someone lost the plot. It was a stupid decision. It was probably influenced by Ian Collins, but that doesn't measn the AFL had to back down so easily. Perhaps the furore created by this pathetic, incompetant decision will ensure it won' happen again. The AFL will not want to put up wit this crap again, I ensure you.

 

[Dan26]

Shinboners,

I sent 3 e-mails to Peter Jackson. The first one was virtually a copy of the thread I wrote titlled "Disgraceful decision to leave Essendon-Hawthorn at Colonial" It can be found at: http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/showthread.php&threadid=9380

He responded to that with this :

Daniel,

I have replied to your letter to me of 10 May re this matter which you should receive tomorrow. It is not a stupid decision as there can be no guarantee of the crowd size exceeding 60,000 based on any reasonable analysis of crowds for Essendon vs Hawthorn games and Hawthorn games this year. I trust my letter to you will explain that satisfactorily as I have included the facts.

The club did not procrastinate over this decision. It condensed all relevant facts, most importantly, the crowd sizes.

Your comment that the clubs have a combined membership of over 60,000 is not relevant. What is relevant is the people that turn up to games.

Essendon’s “home” crowd is about 35,000 each time we play. That has been proved over a number of years from match-returns we have received, and is clearly displayed each time we play an interstate club, no matter where that home game has been played. Of this crowd, only about 20,000 members attend.

Research has shown this to be consistent over the years, and even at blockbuster games against Carlton and Collingwood, the number of members only increases to the low 20,000’s.

For example, at our last three games at Colonial Stadium last year against Fremantle, Hawthorn and the Bulldogs, with crowds of about 34,500, 47,000 and 46,000 respectively, only 16,000, 18,800 and 19,000 EFC members were at those respective games.

Consider also the crowds for Hawthorn games this year. Despite being undefeated, crowds of only 28,000, 34,000 and 38,000 have turned up at their away game. Their only substantial game was against Collingwood when only 56,000 turned up at the MCG. Even if Hawthorn members and supporters made up half of these crowds, the total crowd for the Round 9 games may only be in the mid 50,000’s. That is, there is no evidence to suggest an Essendon v Hawthorn game will attract 65,000+.

There are other reasons we did not switch the game. They are outlined in the media release, a copy of which I have attached financial reasons.

I trust this helps explain the Club’s position.

Yours sincerely,


PETER JACKSON



I then wrote back and said this :

Dear Peter,

Thankyou very much for replying to my letter. It is much appreciated.

However, I must tell you that I am very good at predicting crowds. I confidently predict a crowd in Round 9 of over 70,000. I have shown you why this crowd will occur based on past examples. This is my specialty, Peter. It is not yours.

Were you you aware of the crowd Essendon had in Round 17, 1999? It was a 1st vs 2nd match-up between Essendon and North Melbourne. The crowd was 69,000.HAWTHORN HAVE A FAR BIGGER FOLLOWING THAN NORTH MELBOURNE. A 1st vs 2nd
clash between Essendon and Hawthorn could easly attract over 70,000. I mean, look at the massive media build-up to this match.

I am aware that previous Essendon-Hawthorn crowds have not attrwcted huge crowds. So what? The circumstancs are different now. Last year we saw a 1st vs 2nd match between Essendon and Carlton which attractd 91,000, withthousands missing out on tickets.

Hawthorn have never started the season with 7 straight wins, which this weekend will probably extend to 8 straight wins. For you to imply that the game won't attract a significnt crowd is a slap in the face, not only to Hawks fans, but to Bomber fans too. I am insulted by the fact that you don't think we can draw 70,000 in a top of the lader clash agaisnt another big club. If we can get it against North, we can sure as hell get it against
Hawthorn.

I understand you feel the need to stick by your decision, but this doesn't make that decison correct. No amount of persuasion will convince me, becaue I KNOW that the wrong decision has been made.

Going by your logic, why transfer last years Essendon(1st)-Roos(4th) match (which drew 67,000)? That was a smaller match than this years Round 9 clash.

What about this years upcoming Round 16 match? We are going to be confronted with the embarrassing situation of playing North in front of "about" 50,000 people. WHY HASN'T THIS BEEN SWAPPED WITH THE HAWTHORN MATCH?

Next year, why don't we play our 4 MCG matches against Adelaide, Fremantle, West Coast, and Port Adelaide? Then we cna play our 7 Colonial matches against Carlton, Collingwood, Richmond, and all the other Vicotrian basedteams. That seems to be the logic.

Quoting past crowd figures is not the anwer, Peter. You have to treat each game on it's merits. Essendon hasn't played Hawthorn in a big match-of-the-round game for years. You know this, but you don't seem to acknowledge it. You seem to think the crowd won't be big.

Essendon have a massive following. It is our home game. We are playing a top of the lader clash with another side that has a "reasonable" following (Hawthorn are probably only behind the big 4). It is the ideal recipe forthe match of the season.

Stupidly, the club doesn't think that this match warrants to be one of Essendon big 4 MCG games. You have an obligation to ensure that Essendon's 4 MCG games are our 4 biggest. That obligation is not being met. I have already sent a similar letter to Wayne Jackson and Andrew Demetriou and various media outlets. I simply cannot beleive this.

Three year ago, in the "Colonial Stadium handbook" the club published this message:

"We will be able to get our crowd into Docklands, because the only games that will be played there will be those that fit."

That comment looks kind of stupid now, doens't it, given the inevitable sell-out?

Whenever any game has been transferr, by any club, there is always going to be the element of "predicting" the crowd. Common-sense has to be used. Common-sense,and past 1st vs 2nd match-ups indicate that Ess-Haw warrants top billing. Don;t quote past crowd "averages" to me as it won't work on me.
Anyone can bend stats to suit themselves. All I want is an admission that the wrong decision has been made and will at least "attempted" to be rectified. I trust you will give the courtesy of a response.

Thanyou for your reply

Daniel Green.


He then replied back, and said this :

Daniel,

The problem is we will never know who would have been right about the MCG crowd. And with respect, we do have some special knowledge in predicting crowds. We do it October each year for the followinf season and we are not often wrong. After all, it is our business. We maintain that Hawthorn have shown this year that they don't have a great following despite being undefeated. Their home game against Melbourne at MCG got 30,000. They only had 37000 last Saturday night as an away game despite being 6/0. Their MCG home game against Collingwood only reached 56,000. They are not the numbers, in our opinion, that confidently allow you to forecast 70,000+ at the MCG, before taking into account the other unknowns such as weather, and people who have pre-booked and pre-planned to
attend Saturday night from interstate or country. We switched the game last year because history of crowds and the intense
recent rivalry between Essendon and Kangaroos told us the crowd would reach 65000-70000.

I don't attempt to persuade you so you will change your mind. That is your prerogative. All I am trying to explain is why we made the decision we did, and the facts available to us.
Regards,

Peter Jackson

 

[Dan26]

(Bigfooty has a limit on how big posts can be, so I will continue the exchange here)

I then responded to Peter Jackson with this :

Peter, you said :

"We maintain that Hawthorn have shown this year that they don't have a great following despite being undefeated. Their home game against Melbourne at MCG got 30,000."

This match was affected by probably the worst weather conditions in 2 years. Melbourne-Hawthorn average over 40,000 in recent history.

You also said:

"We switched the game last year because history of crowds and the intense recent rivalry between Essendon and Kangaroos told us the crowd would reach 65000-70,000"

Wrong, Peter. Essendon-Hawthorn is a greater rivalry than
Essendon-Kanagroos. We are Hawthorn's greatest rival. The only reason Essendon-Kangaroos matches have drawn big crowds in recent years is due to the fact that BOTH clubs have been at the top of the ladder. I remember a North Melbourne-Footscray match in 1998 that attracted 68,000 because it as a 1st vs 2nd match-up. This clash was not a traditional rivalry. It does not
NEED to be a traditional rivalry to attract a crowd, as long as both clubs are high on the ladder.

Your email to me stated that about half of Essendon members attend home games.

Do you remember Round 18 1999? Essendon vs West Coast. 1st vs 3rd on a Friday night. 55,000 people, attended. Only 20,000 of those were Essendon members, which means the other 35,000 were general public, theatre goers etc etc. An incredible crowd, when you think about it.

Do you remember Round 22 1998? Kangaroos vs Bulldogs. 68,000 people (40,000 more than normal) saw a 1st vs 2nd clash. Probably 55,000 would have been away team supporters, general public, theatre goers etc etc.

Last year's Essendon-Carlton clash drew 64,000 in Round 5, yet it drew 91,500 in Round 20 after it became apparent that it was a 1st vs 2nd clash. I've already mentioned many times the 69,000 who witnessed the 1st vs 2nd clash in 1999 between Essendon and the Kangaroos.

How much evidence do you need? I have presented facts to you, just as you did towards me, but mine hold more merit, because they are more "comparable" to the upcoming Round 9 match. You stated past Essendon-Hawthorn crowds. Hardly relevant given that we havn't had a big match against them in years. In 1997,despite both Essendon and Hawthorn having 4-6 win-loss records, their clash drew 60,000 to the MCG in Round 11. Not once have I heard anyone acknowledge this figure. Not once have you acknowledged the lockout in Round 19 last year, or the 1997 match.

There are a number of people who have expressed to me that they would have gone to the Round 9 match had it been at the MCG. This match has a unique appeal, and the only way I can prove it to you, is for the match to be scheduled at the MCG. Then you will see what I am on about. It deserves top billing at the leagues biggest venue. Can you honestly look me straight in
the face and tell me that it doesn't deserve top billing at the biggest ground? I mean we drew 70,000 against the top placed Swans in 1996. Can you imagine what we will draw against the top placed Hawks!!!

It seems to me as though the wrong stats have been analysed, and it frustrates the hell out of me. Have any of the figures I have just presented to you, been analysed and used as a reason to move then match when the discussion were taking place?

Look, anyway, I'll leave it at that. We could go on forever, and we shouldn't do that. I know you are a busy. I would still appreciate it if, you could respond to this email (I appreciate you have responded to the past two) to try to justify the comments I have marked in "italics" earlier in this message. And also to tell me whether these stats I presented (easily the most relevant so far) were used last week when the discussion were taking
place.

It seems to me that "someone" wanted the match at Colonial Stadium (i.e the AFL or Essendon) and conveniently used irrelevant statistics to justify their case. Does this mean no matches will ever be transferred ever again? We have a 1st vs 2nd match between the most supported club and the 5th most
supported club (as big as it gets at Colonial, given we don't paly the big 4 there). If that doesn't get shifted, then nothing will ever again get shifted. See what I mean? We have been lied to.

Yours sincerely


Daniel Green.


He then responed with this today :

Daniel,

Nothing we continue to debate is going to change either of our minds. I do appreciate your feelings on the matter and the time taken to express them. But the club has made a decision it believes to be right, having considered all the issues, and that is now the end of it. We should agree to disagree.
Regards,

Peter Jackson

As you can see, he virtually ignored all of my stats, to justify the switch and only pushed his case. When I changelled him to justify his comments in my last letter to him (above), he failed to do so in his reply. Anyway, at least he responded I suppose.

 

[Pessimistic]

You guys addressed all my assertions in detail - but you forgot to adress this one

THE DAMN GAME SOLD OUT LAST YEAR ! it will this year, it will next year !

 

[Dan26]

Pess,

Check our http://www.realfooty.com.au (The Age's web-site) and there is an article, which mentions the sell-out last year and all the facts that I and other have used to try and persuade a switch.

I might add, however, that last years crowd is basically irrelevant. You have to treat each match on its own merits. If you keep on arguing that last years match was a sell-out, they will keep on telling you that they average Ess-Haw crowd is 47,000.

You have to to treat each match on it's merits.

You can't compare last years clash, or any other Essendon-Hawthorn clash to the upcoming Roud 9 match. Different matches, different circumstances. The best comparisons are other 1st vs 2nd match-ups featuring other teams over the years. If you compare these games to Essendon-Hawthorn, and factor in Essendon's and Hawthorns support, you will come up with a figure of 75,000. Last years match had different circumstances.

Okay?