- Thread starter
- #876
AFL membership is not transferable.
Thanks for proving that you have no idea how the membership works mate
I'm sure it never happens. How many AFL members do Richmond have by the way?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
AFL membership is not transferable.
Thanks for proving that you have no idea how the membership works mate
Actually on second thoughts allow each state to bid on it every four years. Then it goes to the highest bidder and you have them competing against each other and sending more money into the coffers of the AFL.
Queensland only paid $20mil to the AFL for 2020.
What makes you assume that other states will pay more than that each year, remembering that the current AFL agreement with the MCC & the Victorian government averages out to approximately $25mil per year for 20 Grand Finals.
They don’t have photo ID on them. Let’s not pretend it’s like breaking into Fort Knox here.AFL membership is not transferable.
Thanks for proving that you have no idea how the membership works mate
Because qld paid 20 million for it in a year where there was not really any competition for it due to covid, no preparation time, most of the players already based in qld. Places like Perth and Adelaide would throw big money at it in the future as they don't really have any major events and the tourism dollars and exposure for their cities is massive for the number 1 tv event of the year.
Queensland only paid $20mil to the AFL for 2020.
Actually on second thoughts allow each state to bid on it every four years. Then it goes to the highest bidder and you have them competing against each other and sending more money into the coffers of the AFL.
The argument is that the advantage is reduced.I can see the side of the argument for keeping the grand final in victoria from a tradition and commercial standpoint, but the idea that Victorian clubs dont have a home ground advantage at the MCG against non vic clubs in a grand final is patently nonsense and the worst argument that is made against the grand final moving.
When you have a break even of high 30k, it is unrealistic to expect clubs like Melbourne to meet that at Etihad.I assume by "sh*te stadium deals" you mean the inability of some Melbourne clubs to fill seats in Melbourne? When you're only expecting 15k a game, most of which are paying GA prices (or less thanks to cheap memberships), it's not the fault of the stadium deal that you can't turn a profit. Especially when you're paying no rent.
Although are you actually agreeing with me that the AFL should not be the primary entity signing stadium deals? Let each club negotiate with stadium operators, or even pool with other clubs and build their own.
Queensland only paid $20mil to the AFL for 2020.
What makes you assume that other states will pay more than that each year, remembering that the current AFL agreement with the MCC & the Victorian government averages out to approximately $25mil per year for 20 Grand Finals.
Your travel shtick is inane.What you clearly articulate: they sell "home" games and end up travelling?
The 1920s version of home & away is long gone, e.g the Suns home game in China, didnt the Saints play a home game there ? The away team was always Port.
How was that recorded in your 'home' & away' stats . Nothing to see there??
Are you simply stuck in the days of Vic Park, Prince's Park, when travel was a ride down the highway in an old bus ?
I am well aware my own clubs advantage is playing 10 games against travelling clubs where minimal crowd support is a factor - remember the brothers Scott complaining about the passion of the crowds in Perth.
Where did you get $25 million from? The Vic Government paid $225 million over 32 years and that isn't actually cash, its in kind upgrades. The Vic Government actually paid next to nothing for the Grand Final. That is why is is such a disgraceful and dumb deal
Your travel shtick is inane.
All sports world wide have home and away.
The EPL sometimes having 8 teams in London, doesn't change fixture when London teams don't travel as much as Newcastle would.
And yes, if travel is the disadvantage than it is obvious that Hawthorn have done themselves a disadvantage by moving games to Tassie and travelling 9 times per year...pity the results again show that travel ain't an issue.
When you have a break even of high 30k, it is unrealistic to expect clubs like Melbourne to meet that at Etihad.
And no, the AFL negotiates with the MCC directly and it owns Etihad. Ultimately the AFL arranges the fixture, so what good would a club like Carlton have in trying to stay at Princes Park when the AFL aren't going to fixture games there anymore??
The H&A needs fixing well before the GF gets a look in.
The advantage a few lower seeded Victorian sides received on grand final day was literally the difference between winning and losingThe argument is that the advantage is reduced.
If the G in a H&A game is worth say 8 points to a regular line, the GF advantage would be a fraction of that.
And when you are getting down to 3 or so points it doesn't really matter.
Mentally strong teams lift and perform on GF day, and mentally weak teams (Collingwood 2003, Adelaide 2017, GWS 2019 etc.) capitulate and then fall right away.
Hawthorn are an MCG tenant, they get 9 MCG games most years (and yes just 9 in 2022), and they travel 9 times.I'm happy to advise I have no idea what the EPL does, given its relevance to AFL footy.
As for the Hawks its members get make up games in Melbourne, is that 2 home teams, no away teams.
We have a national comp that inherited home & away from an era long gone, time to get realistic over what we have got in my view BUT I do understand why some clubs would be terrified by change.
Remember too, playing sides that are on the road is an advantage for my club compared to the Melbourne clubs.
Where did you get $25 million from? The Vic Government paid $225 million over 32 years and that isn't actually cash, its in kind upgrades. The Vic Government actually paid next to nothing for the Grand Final. That is why is is such a disgraceful and dumb deal
That's been completely debunked though, because it did not include membership income. So say someone had a $550 membership with reserved seat, you'd think that's $50 per game when it comes to the "break even" figure. It was actually zero, and only spectators paying at the gate were included. That's why the break even figure kept increasing every year when membership numbers went through the roof, as the vast majority of match day income was from their members.
If the break even of "high 30k" were true, then some clubs would be forking out millions to the stadium every year. Club financials show that's not the case, in fact there's very little evidence of payments by clubs to stadiums at all. Think about it, a crowd of 15k at Docklands means a shortfall of around $600,000 (i.e 20k x $30 average ticket price). No club was paying $600k to the stadium operator for a game.
But that's my point though - short of setting minimum standards for stadiums, clubs should be able to play where they like with no AFL involvement. Obviously AFL clubs shouldn't be allowed to play in hovels with sub standard facilities, so the AFL clearly will have a role in enforcing that. If Princes Park meets those minimum standards, why the hell shouldn't Carlton be allowed to play there? The reason is because the AFL signed deals with the MCG and Docklands guaranteeing a minimum number of games.
Insanity.
Now you have the absurd situation where the AFL owns a stadium and lets it out to certain clubs. Talk about a massive conflict of interest. Take out any argument about how good or bad the stadium deal is, it's clearly a ridiculous arrangement that no other major sporting body in the world would have got involved in.
How could anyone possibly agree with the league doing that?
Check your numbers, you have flagged that the Tigers may have 50% of the MCC reserve but instead of jumping the club members from 17k to 28k you have gone to 38k.Here is the allocation of the last GF at the MCG
Footy's biggest day: how the tickets are allocated
Not all memberships will guarantee you a ticket to the AFL grand final. Here's how the seats are allocated.www.smh.com.au
Forget that its GWS, the allocations are the same, let's go back 2 years and say it was Adeaide v Richmond. Adelaide even have the bigger supporter base.
17,000 go to each clubs members. Fine. Even Keel so far.
Now it gets interesting
MCG membership: 23,000 according to that article. How many Richmond supporting MCG member are their compared to Adelaide? Sure there definitely would be a fair few neutrals in the MCC but you'd think every Tigers MCC member would find a way to get in. Lets give them half the MCC Reserve Lets call it 11,500 tigers fans to say 500 Crows fans and the other 11,000 neutrals.
Okay now we're sitting at 38500 to 17500.
Lets halve the Allocation to of AFL members to 18,000. From the article Gold AFL Members of competing clubs are given preference. How many AFL members do you reckon Adelaide have compared to Richmond? AFL members are also transferable. So how much easier is it for a Richmond supporter, living in the same city as 99% of AFL members, find someone friend family or otherwise to give them their ticket?
Let's give 11500 to Richmond, 500 to Adelaide and 6000 to the neutrals.
Now we are sitting at 50,000 Richmond supporters to 18,000 Adelaide supporters
4000 Medallion club members. Being a Melbourne thing, you expect almost all of these would be Melbourne based. I'm sure these tickets too could be farmed out to a local you know if you, as a say Saints supporter doesn't want to go. Are you more likely to have friends or family that are Tigers or Crows supporters? Exactly. So let's give 2000 of these tickets to Tigers fans, 1800 to neutrals and 200 to Crows fans.
52,000 to 18,200 now.
5000 to competing clubs? They tend to resell a lot of these. Lets split this so let's give this 1500 to each of the Tigers and Crows and 2000 neutrals.
53500 to19700.
Lets give 2000 to Government, Dignitaries and Sponsors, which whilst a lot of neutrals, given the Vic Govts running of the show there would be a heavy bias to the local side. Lets 1400 neutrals, 500 Richmond, 100 Adelaide.
54000 to 19700.
Leaving 12,000 Corporate seats
Hard to judge but again a bias to the locals because they're in town any rate. Lets go with 4000 Tigers, 2000 Crows and 6000 neutrals.
58000 tigers, 21700 Crows and the rest neutrals. Whilst educated guesstimates im pretty sure I wouldn't be far off the mark. So in this instance, and pretty much every instance when a WA or SA team plays a Vic MCG Tennant club, that Tennant club supporters will outnumber them 3 to 1. Which my Chimpy friend equals massive home ground advantage.
Hawthorn are an MCG tenant, they get 9 MCG games most years (and yes just 9 in 2022), and they travel 9 times.
Port, WC, Adelaide, Freo get 12 games at their stadiums and only travel 10 times.
Talk about inequality.
No.You need to review the relevance of home & away in the modern day.