Beyond the GF – Why the MCG Contract doesn’t pass the Stink Test

[GhostofJimJess]

Melbourne play games in the nt

BCAUSE THERES TOO MANY FUNKING CLUBS IN ONE CITY!!!

you dont catch eagles selling games off - we dont need to - we have a perfect ratio of city size as to teams

Population of Geelong ~250k
Population of Melbourne ~5.2M (i.e. ~20 times larger, with probably more Cats supporters than in actual Geelong city)

No way they're reducing the number of clubs in the AFL - the lucrative TV deal is now dependent on at least 9 matches every weekend. Losing over 10% of it's fixture would result in a massive loss of revenue.

Have 20 teams, 3 each in WA, SA, QLD, NSW (inc. ACT team), 6 teams VIC, 1 TAS, 1 NT.

Right so what you're aiming for is a state with only ~1.75M population (SA) to have exactly half the number of teams as another football-mad state (Vic) who has a population almost 4 times larger with ~6.8M ?

And the Northern Territory which has 30x smaller population to have only 6X less than Vic?

You really haven't thought this through.

We know and understand we will travel longer distances.

Thats just a strawman you throw up in every thread.

In a proper national comp the teams would travel a roughly equal amount of times - naturally we would end up with the most km’s - ce la vie

But right now its nothing like equal amount of flying - the interstate teams do the lions share and then lose out playing vic teams on their home ground on the biggest day of the year.

Less melbourne teams and a rotated gf would even up the travel and reduce the chances of home gfs.

It would make for a much more balanced competition.

So if all teams must travel the same total distance across each season, then it's only fair that teams only get to play against the same total travel distance by opponents too. After all, we're constantly being told by our friends in the west that travel distance is a major disadvantage.

Hence, the Eagles would end up playing Freo about 8 times in a season to accommodate.

 

[Carringbush2010]

Only a nuffie would openly lie & claim the current situation is equitable.

Of course you don't want to change your advantage of playing grand finals on your own home ground.

If they were all played at Adelaide Oval, there would be no end of complaining by the likes of yourself.

If the VAFL wants to truly become an AFL, then it needs to consider the interests of all teams equitably, rather than prioritising Victorian interests as a leftover of the VFL era.

1/ The dopple has been explaining in the previous 5 posts that the GF is not about equity.

2/ It's not played at AO, you're wishing for some alternate universe. Just so you can 'venge'

3/ Who says the VAFL want to become truly national? They might spruik that they do and that it is even now 'national' but it ain't and probably will never be, will certainly never be equitable.

4/ Accept what is or don't, up to you.

 

[Stabby McGee]

How would you like it if all grand finals were played at Optus or Adelaide Oval or SCG or the Gabba?

The fact you can't see it's inequitable demonstrates you are blinded by Victorian favouritism.

I’d be pissed off at my team for joining that competition. But I wouldn’t be pissed off at the competition for doing it that way

 

[kranky al]

Population of Geelong ~250k
Population of Melbourne ~5.2M (i.e. ~20 times larger, with probably more Cats supporters than in actual Geelong city)

No way they're reducing the number of clubs in the AFL - the lucrative TV deal is now dependent on at least 9 matches every weekend. Losing over 10% of it's fixture would result in a massive loss of revenue.

Right so what you're aiming for is a state with only ~1.75M population (SA) to have exactly half the number of teams as another football-mad state (Vic) who has a population almost 4 times larger with ~6.8M ?

And the Northern Territory which has 30x smaller population to have only 6X less than Vic?

You really haven't thought this through.

So if all teams must travel the same total distance across each season, then it's only fair that teams only get to play against the same total travel distance by opponents too. After all, we're constantly being told by our friends in the west that travel distance is a major disadvantage.

Hence, the Eagles would end up playing Freo about 8 times in a season to accommodate.

How many teams does new york have in the nfl

A city with the population of australia?

 

[Stabby McGee]

North and Melbourne should have been done away with years ago. Especially North. Neither offer the league anything except less travel for the other viable Vic teams. Would have made the league more representative.

Let’s be seriously honest- 99% of SA and 100% of the rest wouldn’t lose a wink of sleep if the PA franchise folded.
And buddy keep up the good work and that might not be so far away

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

Let’s be seriously honest- 99% of SA and 100% of the rest wouldn’t lose a wink of sleep if the PA franchise folded.
And buddy keep up the good work and that might not be so far away

No, most South Australians, including Crows supporters would want Port in the competition as rivalry is healthy.

No coincidence Crows won their flags when Port came in as it was healthier no longer being the sole focus of a 1 team town.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

1/ The dopple has been explaining in the previous 5 posts that the GF is not about equity.

2/ It's not played at AO, you're wishing for some alternate universe. Just so you can 'venge'

3/ Who says the VAFL want to become truly national? They might spruik that they do and that it is even now 'national' but it ain't and probably will never be, will certainly never be equitable.

4/ Accept what is or don't, up to you.

Why should we just accept when something is inequitable... particularly if it can be improved?

It would be a ordinary world if people just stood by & accepted all inequities & did nothing...

 

[kranky al]

No, most South Australians, including Crows supporters would want Port in the competition as rivalry is healthy.

No coincidence Crows won their flags when Port came in as it was healthier no longer being the sole focus of a 1 team town.

I love to hate port.

Id chip in if they were going broke.

Same as id chip in if one of the sustainable vic clubs had a bad trot and needed help.

 

[Aussie in exile]

Ah yes. The legitimacy of a national competition rests on the inclusion of a team in Hobart of all places....

I could add our capital city to that as well.
How people can claim we are a national comp without a team in Tassie and a team in our capital is laughable

 

[The_Wookie]

I could add our capital city to that as well.
How people can claim we are a national comp without a team in Tassie and a team in our capital is laughable

How people give a damn about this is laughable.

Its never been a damn requirement to have a team everywhere to make something a national competition. Its the Australian Football league. Playing the game of Australian Football. In Australia. And its a League.

 

[Aussie in exile]

How people give a damn about this is laughable.

Its never been a damn requirement to have a team everywhere to make something a national competition. Its the Australian Football league. Playing the game of Australian Football. In Australia. And its a League.

I certainly have touched a nerve with you for sure, but my thoughts remain the same that' it's not a national comp until we a team in Tassie and Canberra.

 

[The_Wookie]

I certainly have touched a nerve with you for sure, but my thoughts remain the same that' it's not a national comp until we a team in Tassie and Canberra.

Havent touched any nerves. I find it as amusing as the AFLisnotasport guy on twitter.

 

[Papa G]

Tassie should have a team in front of Gold Coast, GWS, Melbourne and North.

Canberra if it keeps growing in size could have a team. Both Rugby and the NRL got the headstart and have had a generation, even 2 generations of lost hearts and minds.

I dont think Darwin is viable. The population is too small and transient.
I also think Far North Queensland is a pipe dream.

The perfectly balanced league would be:
7 Melbourne
1 Geelong.
2 NSW
2 QLD
2 WA
2 SA
1Tas
1 ACT

 

[Rich01]

Why should we just accept when something is inequitable... particularly if it can be improved?

It would be a ordinary world if people just stood by & accepted all inequities & did nothing...

Yep. So how do you propose this gets done?

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

Yep. So how do you propose this gets done?

The start would be that all finals are hosted by the higher ranked team.

The next step would be a better distribution of sides across Australia, such that we can have a fair draw.

 

[Rich01]

The start would be that all finals are hosted by the higher ranked team.

The next step would be a better distribution of sides across Australia, such that we can have a fair draw.

Great. So how are you proposing to compensate the parties for tearing up the GF contract? And how would you go about convincing teams that they must relocate or fold?

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

Great. So how are you proposing to compensate the parties for tearing up the GF contract? And how would you go about convincing teams that they must relocate or fold?

If the AFL was fair dinkum about an equitable competition, they would find a way.

We were forced to play a home final against Melbourne at the MCG... & Brisbane also had to play a home final away.... & this contract was renegotiated... so don't tell me it's not possible if they really wanted too.

Hardly any of the competing clubs members attend the Grand Final which is a joke as they should have 1st preference. Why should MCC members benefit from the AFL?

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

Tassie should have a team in front of Gold Coast, GWS, Melbourne and North.

Canberra if it keeps growing in size could have a team. Both Rugby and the NRL got the headstart and have had a generation, even 2 generations of lost hearts and minds.

I dont think Darwin is viable. The population is too small and transient.
I also think Far North Queensland is a pipe dream.

The perfectly balanced league would be:
7 Melbourne
1 Geelong.
2 NSW
2 QLD
2 WA
2 SA
1Tas
1 ACT

GWS already have a connection with Canberra... so do they warrant their own team? I'm not sure.

Agree Tasmania as a traditional football state should have been in before the 2nd QLD & NSW teams.

Ideally would either reduce to 16 teams & go to a 30 season home & away with no pre-season.... or expand the number of teams so they play each other once - home & away every 2nd year... to make the draw fair.

 

[Rich01]

If the AFL was fair dinkum about an equitable competition, they would find a way.

We were forced to play a home final against Melbourne at the MCG... & Brisbane also had to play a home final away.... & this contract was renegotiated... so don't tell me it's not possible if they really wanted too.

Hardly any of the competing clubs members attend the Grand Final which is a joke as they should have 1st preference. Why should MCC members benefit from the AFL?

I don’t disagree with anything you are saying.

But thinking the AFL is going to tear up a grand final contract and relocate teams because it isn’t fair is laughable.

We all know it’s not fair. But the commercial and contractual circumstances of the competition mean that there will be anomalies like this. Unless there is a valid commercial enticement to change it.

And I haven’t heard one decent suggestion from any complaining poster in this thread that would come close to solving the problem.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

I don’t disagree with anything you are saying.

But thinking the AFL is going to tear up a grand final contract and relocate teams because it isn’t fair is laughable.

We all know it’s not fair. But the commercial and contractual circumstances of the competition mean that there will be anomalies like this. Unless there is a valid commercial enticement to change it.

And I haven’t heard one decent suggestion from any complaining poster in this thread that would come close to solving the problem.

Guaranteeing the competing clubs members 1st crack at all Grand Final tickets would be a good start.

The members who support their clubs should be rewarded, rather than hanger ons.

 

[Papa G]

It all comes back to the corrupt and non commercial MCG contract. It is the cornerstonstone of the unfairness of a sporting competition. Its an underhanded disgrace.

 

[Rich01]

Guaranteeing the competing clubs members 1st crack at all Grand Final tickets would be a good start.

The members who support their clubs should be rewarded, rather than hanger ons.

I agree.

So how would you propose keeping sponsorship $$$ at the same level without grand final tickets?

And if AFL and MCC members ticket quotas were eroded, how would they be compensated?

Where will the money come from?

 

[doppleganger]

Why should we just accept when something is inequitable... particularly if it can be improved?

It would be a ordinary world if people just stood by & accepted all inequities & did nothing...

You keep blabbering about equity.

Why?

The GF location in shared equally amongst competing clubs in which Aussie Rules competitions?

How is potentially costing 60k fans a chance to see their team in a GF live if it was at the SCG an improvement?

 

[The_Wookie]

It all comes back to the corrupt and non commercial MCG contract. It is the cornerstonstone of the unfairness of a sporting competition. Its an underhanded disgrace.

The problem for you is the "non commercial" MCG contract is very much a commercial decision for the league. Youve yet to demonstrate any corruption, particularly for something that has never been put to tender or public consultation.

 

[doppleganger]

Hardly any of the competing clubs members attend the Grand Final which is a joke as they should have 1st preference. Why should MCC members benefit from the AFL?

The MCC members take on the debt that pays the stadium upgrade.

Club members get 34% of tickets when at tje G, this is 17000 each. And the clubs share in up to5k for staff families sponsors etc. 40k is goven two clubs with fans getting cost price access to 34,000

Could go the SuperBowl approach, and give 17.5% to competing clubs. The clubs, players take all their cut before getting down to season ticket holders. In a 70k seater, that means 12.5k go to clubs so perhaps less than 10k go to club members. The other 75% is controlled by the NFL.

Put a GF on at the SCG, club members arent getting access to 17,000 tickets...imagine Adelaide finally make a GF and only 10k members get a chance because it was the GABBAs 'turn'.

How the feck is that an improvement?