What’s the earliest you think Canberra could come in? I’m thinking 2031. It won’t be a year after Tassie and two years is probably too soon as well.
-
Mobile App Discontinued
Due to a number of factors, support for the current BigFooty mobile app has been discontinued. Your BigFooty login will no longer work on the Tapatalk or the BigFooty App - which is based on Tapatalk.
Apologies for any inconvenience. We will try to find a replacement.
Expansion Canberra
- Thread starter Johnny Bananas
- Start date
- Tagged users None
🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.
- Oct 12, 2019
- 545
- 396
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
Assuming the new Tassie stadium does get approved by late 2025 and firms up the 19th licence by late 2025 the earliest a 20th licence would be announced would be sometime in 2026.
When the possible 20th team started would depend on whether a suitable stadium is ready to go, if so 2029 or 2030 may be possible, if not IMO I agree that 2031 or 2032 is definitely far more likely.
I think Manuka will be the biggest factor. We don't have a time frame yet of when to expect the upgrade by. It should be a simpler job than Mac Point. It's an unknown at the moment, but I wouldn't be surprised if Manuka is ready first.
I think the other factor is the AFL balancing how long they want Tasmania and the draft to settle vs how long they want byes.
I think Canberra could be ready to go from the same time as Tasmania in 2028, but it'd probably be at least 2030-2031 to let things settle. They'd be cautious after bringing in the Giants immediately after the Suns.
Not to be a downer, but this all assumes that there'll be tangible progress on the Manuka upgrades, which isn't a given.
I'm not saying it won't happen, but our government is notorious for dragging these projects out of the cupboard in the lead up to an election only to shove them back in afterward. The most famous example is that they've promised a new rectangular stadium at each election since 2008, and I wouldn't be surprised to see progress on the next stage of upgrades to Manuka quietly disappearing for 4 years as well.
Personally I think future upgrades to Manuka will rely a lot on how negotiations progress with CA and potentially the AFL.
Log in to remove this Banner Ad
Some of us are going to have to get used to night games in winter if we want our own team.
No. Only two of 76 senators are from the ACT. Most want as little as possible to do with the pricks the rest of the country sends us. The shit that goes on at the big top is your fault, not ours.
The Cockatoos would allow ACT traditional blue, yellow and white.
Or the Owls with the Belco owl as the mascot, except a group of owls is a parliament and nobody (except party hack political staffers who should not be taxpayer funded to begin with) wants to be reminded of those ****ers.
So, Cockatoos. Which I'm sure nobody would abbreviate to *****.
There is practically zero chance of a new oval stadium in Canberra. Major works at Manuka are unlikely enough.
Even rebuilding the rectangle at Bruce is unlikely, and if the A-League Mens team get off the ground the rectangle would get far more use than an oval. Between the Raiders and Brumbies, that more than the AFL and 5-7 days of cricket (1 mens international, PMXI, 2-3 BBL, 1-2 womens internationals) a year.
AFLW may be played at the oval as well, depending on clashes with cricket pitch preparation (the square needs a few weeks between any footy and a cricket match).
Add possible occasional Socceroos, Matildas, Wallabies to the rectangle, if upgraded or less likely replaced. Although they would still be less than once a year combined, on average.
Not at all. I appreciate your realism.
My hope is that the Manuka redevelopment is a much easier task. Half the rectangular stadium debacle is even choosing the right location. There's less ambiguity for Manuka, so hopefully there's less faff. But time will tell. The tender closed in August, so hopefully we get some news soon.
Very true. It's just annoying when we have such beautiful winter days. But I've got my Port winter gear ready, so will be nice and rugged up.
The stadium is just the most famous example.
New convention centre, ice rink, new aquatic facility in Civic, new basketball courts, the list of projects that have been election promises for a decade or more goes on and on. Those are just examples of sports and recreation facilities as well.
It's interesting because Bruce has given night games a bad name in Canberra IMO.
At other venues they aren't actually too bad in my experience, but the perception has become that night games in Canberra during winter are unbearable because Bruce's design accentuates all the worst aspects of cold conditions.
It'd be a good idea to invest into making Manuka more snug if it's getting upgraded anyway though.
Last edited:
Griffins has always been the bridesmaid but never the bride in Canberra.
It's linked to Canberra's culture and history without it being overt or connected to politics, it's unique, can work with whatever colours you like, and is highly adaptable. Griffins was also one of the first names proposed for the Raiders and Brumbies as well, but it slipped both by for different reasons. In the Raiders case it's what the team would have been called if the NSWRL hadn't interfered.
You wouldn't have to worry about people abbreviating it to ***** either.
The problem the AFL have is timing... 19 teams will be a nightmare to schedule byes for, as mathematically its a terrible number. Either 7 or 8 game rounds will be norm, or there will be a normal of 9 game rounds, with quite a number of much smaller rounds. In either outcome, a significant number of rounds will be needed which extend the competition length. This would have impacts on both its ability to sell timeslots, and also introduce logistical headaches.
I don't think a 19 team competition is going to be sustainable for long. As in, maybe a year or two at most.
I don't think a 19 team competition is going to be sustainable for long. As in, maybe a year or two at most.
Griffins is certainly an option.
19 teams is not a nightmare at all. In fact, there are multiple ways to do the fixture starting and finishing on the same weekend as they will in 2025, even including adding a 24th game. You don’t have to extend the season of have weeks of 7/8 games.
For example, you can have nine games rounds 1 - 25, then three games in round 26, giving the top 13 teams a bye the week before the finals (rejig after round 19).
Two Canberrans in the draft. Not a bad result. Tasmania and the NT didn't get any.
If you count Queanbeyan in the ACT, we were actually the third highest drafted state/territory per capita. Only behind Victoria and SA.
If you count Queanbeyan in the ACT, we were actually the third highest drafted state/territory per capita. Only behind Victoria and SA.
I would like to see someone compile a list of all the picks and which states that come from actually. It would be good to keep an eye on it.
Great effort by ACT. NSW none, Qld 1.
A state by state break down of draftees. Interesting Levi Ashcroft comes out as a Victorian, when he was born and raised in QLD.
www.google.com
AFL Draft: A state-by-state breakdown and the local clubs for all 86 new recruits
Victorian prospects make up close to 60 per cent of this year's talent intake, with only one state or territory not represented.
www.google.com
- Sep 10, 2010
- 18,261
- 25,505
- AFL Club
- Brisbane Lions
- Thread starter
- #1,418
Uh, what? Joel Cochran alone brings NSW to 1. Pretty sure Shanahan is from NSW too.
Yeah NSW/ACT got six. Two of those were from Canberra/Queanbeyan. Queensland's three or four, depending where you count Ashcroft.
If you included Queanbeyan in the ACT (they do play in AFL Canberra), the rough breakdown is as below
Victoria - 1 player per 159k people
SA - 1 player per 172k
ACT/Queanbeyan – 1 player per 258k
WA – 1 player per 300k
Queensland – 1 player per 1.4m
NSW (minus Queanbeyan) – 1 player per 2.12m
🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.
The Giants partnership has been copping strays in Canberra over missing out on Rugby World Cup games.
Our local senator David Pocock said: "The ACT government seems very willing to put millions into a Sydney AFL team, but when it comes to teams that are here - like Brumbies, Raiders, Canberra United, Capitals, the Brave - a whole bunch of teams that have a really loyal fanbase and so many juniors who look up to those players, I'm not seeing that same follow through."
A lot of comments have reflected that sentiment. And it's a repeated refrain when we miss out on a sport event.
For context, the Raiders and Giants get pretty much the same funding, but the Raiders are never mentioned. So it's not so much the money, as to where it's going.
It reinforces that the Giants aren't seen as a real Canberra team compared to those others mentioned.
Our local senator David Pocock said: "The ACT government seems very willing to put millions into a Sydney AFL team, but when it comes to teams that are here - like Brumbies, Raiders, Canberra United, Capitals, the Brave - a whole bunch of teams that have a really loyal fanbase and so many juniors who look up to those players, I'm not seeing that same follow through."
A lot of comments have reflected that sentiment. And it's a repeated refrain when we miss out on a sport event.
For context, the Raiders and Giants get pretty much the same funding, but the Raiders are never mentioned. So it's not so much the money, as to where it's going.
It reinforces that the Giants aren't seen as a real Canberra team compared to those others mentioned.
That Canberra times really is an anti afl rag isn't it. Up there with the daily telegraph.
It's fair criticism.
Andrew Barr has kept a new rectangular stadium on the hook for 15 years despite the desperate need for a replacement. He's repeatedly claimed there's no money to attract events in other sports, and repeatedly been caught out flat out lying about his negotiations and interactions with the governing bodies and representatives of others sports, including in the interview you quoted above.
During that same time he's consistently invested silly money into the sports that just so happen to be his favourites, and repeatedly funded major upgrades to a facility without a single regular tenant in a national competition while most other major sports infrastructure degraded, in some cases to the point that it's had to be closed to the public.
I'm sorry, but you can't act like that and expect nobody to notice.
It's especially egregious considering that under his watch Bruce has not only been allowed to deteriorate to the point that it's getting increasingly unsafe, but is also so dated that it literally doesn't meet the minimum standards to host WR, FIFA, and most AFC events anymore, and the NRL and IRL avoid using it like the plague.
He is an AFL 'stooge', and he should represent the needs of the whole community, including sports he doesn't personally enjoy. And everybody here would rightly be unhappy if he was showing favouritism to other sports and disadvantaging the AFL.
Last edited:
Not in the slightest.
What they have a problem with is AFL and cricket getting money and resources thrown at them while-
- The AIS arena is allowed to rot to the point that it was forced to close for public safety reasons for years, only to get a lipstick on a pig "upgrade" to reopen it.
- Phillip ice rink kept on life support despite it's terrible state because the replacement that's been promised for 20 years at every election has never materialised.
- Half the public pools in the city being an absolute mess.
- Plots set aside for new basketball courts sitting undeveloped for a decade or more, while basketball has been forced to turn participants away because there literally aren't enough basketball courts in the city to support them all.
- New Olympic diving boards promised for so long that the sport has basically died waiting for them.
- Constant lowballing of other sports events, teams, and grassroots programs.
- The problems with Bruce stadium don't bear repeating, but are serious and getting worse by the year.
None of the above is the AFL's fault, but they aren't victims in this situation either.
I wouldn't say so. I haven't read a hard copy in a while, but I'd say AFL gets a decent amount of coverage considering we don't have a team.
They've had a few pro 20th team pieces in recent years.
Funding an interstate team at the expense of Canberra teams isn't popular outside of AFL circles. It's low-hanging fruit for political points, but it shows that the Giants are still seen as "other" compared to actual Canberra teams. Nobody cares about the Raiders getting essentially the same funding.
The giants should be funded more than the raiders, coz afl fans actually travel to Canberra to watch their teams. I reckon they'd add more to the local economy than traveling nrl fans that struggle to even travel to the next suburb, let alone interstate.
On the paper, I've read a bit of anti afl garbage in it in the past and i think i looked up previously that the owner is some stooge from nsw somewhere, i may be wrong though it was a year or so ago i looked into it, when seeing a lot of b.s articles with an agenda.
Last edited: