Opinion Collingwood Board Nominee Sean Callanan talkback.

[SeanC]

+ interstate members?

Yes, I should have included Interstate and Country members, they should not be excluded due to their location.

If you have a concern about the financial commitment it can be solved by tenure, if you have proven your loyalty in years you should get a vote.

Or you could implement a far simpler model, every member gets a vote, but only after consulting all members.

I'll know more when I understand the breakdown of the membership base.

 

[barrackers]

I am for expanding voting rights, the how and who is not yet decided and would require more consultation with the members and the constitution.
There are several levers to pull on deciding who gets to vote including financial & length of membership.

At the moment the current voting rights are too skewed to financial commitment and membership type (people who are AFL members for various reasons they don't love the club any less).

It is a mix of constitution changes and developing appropriate member products that can improve access for all.

One point that hasn't been raised even as a marketing exercise, if you are an 11-game GA member right now, you can upgrade to a Social Club Add-On for 2022 today and vote in the election. Understand it may not be affordable for some members which is why we should not be putting financial restraints on members' voices but the marketer in me would be promoting that fact as it is how the current voting rights stand.

Thanks for the reply Sean. Yeah I understand passion isn’t dictated by financial commitment, direct engagement with the club or even length of tenure. A very passionate fan may not hold any membership (AFL, club, MCC). A line has to be drawn somewhere though.

Where that line sits is a tough decision (someone will always be put out) however there is a need to expand at the very least to those who choose to directly support the club (AFLW, netball and as 76woodenspooners pointed out interstate). I’d have those already within the club as a higher priority as the club seeks inclusion. Netball may put some off, but if they’re part of the club’s future their members deserve a voice.

Not sure how I feel about those who choose to hold memberships outside the club though especially if club support is merely ticking the box to say who you barrack for (is it more?). As an example I’m passionate about cricket and have some interest in horse racing, but don’t get a vote with the MCC or VRC as I don’t support either club financially.

 

[76woodenspooners]

[*]Support on-field - Ensure the resources powered by members are used to give AFL, AFLW, Netball coaching teams every single advantage we can possible. Rather than fighting the AFL about footy operations tax, I'd like to see the club be so successful that paying the tax is not a concern, that is true strength and leverage.

One of the big challenges AFL clubs face is how to overcome the AFL forces of equalisation? Carlton are obviously one of the most skilled in that area - despite the AFL’s best efforts at equalisation, somehow Carlton manage to stay rubbish year after year after year.

Jokes aside, do you have thoughts on how the board can help Collingwood overcome AFL’s equalisation to help us enjoy sustained success? You’ve listed “paying the AFL tax” (presumably on the soft cap) * , and leveraging technology (any technological advantage is only temporary, and presumably all clubs will have tech vendors spruiking to them). Do you have other thoughts on this?

* Re: paying the soft cap … It’s a contentious issue and many fans are in favour of us paying it. I’m in the camp of “I’d prefer we didn’t, except maybe on a rainy day where we need to break the contract of a coach or FD staffer and replace them” … perhaps that’s because I remember the state we were in in the early 80’s when we tried to buy a Premiership and we instead crash and burned and came very close to sending our club the way of Fitzroy. And as much as I hate to say it, we are currently a long way behind a club like WCE who have natural advantages (two team market) and currently have the ability to easily outspend us.

 

[SeanC]

Not sure how I feel about those who choose to hold memberships outside the club though especially if club support is merely ticking the box to say who you barrack for (is it more?). As an example I’m passionate about cricket and have some interest in horse racing, but don’t get a vote with the MCC or VRC as I don’t support either club financially.

That's why we are in discussion mode right now, not solution mode.

As far as I know, Collingwood gets % of $ from AFL Club members who tick that box. It is a significant amount of revenue and speaking to a lot of them they don't feel like members of the club. That is my primary concern, voting rights is part of that.

 

[SeanC]

Jokes aside, do you have thoughts on how the board can help Collingwood overcome AFL’s equalisation to help us enjoy sustained success? You’ve listed “paying the AFL tax” (presumably on the soft cap) * , and leveraging technology (any technological advantage is only temporary, and presumably all clubs will have tech vendors sprinkling to them). Do you have other thoughts on this?

For mine fighting with AFL is futile, influencing yes but too much energy into those efforts can be a distraction.

Yes, there are many sports technology offers out there (I have been the gatekeeper for clubs over the past 12 years). What technology can Collingwood be an early adopter on? Is there a way to invest or leverage our high-performance IP to get access to the upside (revenue/equity) of sports technology startups? (With appropriate due diligence of course)

 

[barrackers]

That's why we are in discussion mode right now, not solution mode.

As far as I know, Collingwood gets % of $ from AFL Club members who tick that box. It is a significant amount of revenue and speaking to a lot of them they don't feel like members of the club. That is my primary concern, voting rights is part of that.

While outlandish solution based platforms can garner more attention it’s a credit that you’re instead being process driven.

 

[76woodenspooners]

For mine fighting with AFL is futile, influencing yes but too much energy into those efforts can be a distraction.

Yes, there are many sports technology offers out there (I have been the gatekeeper for clubs over the past 12 years). What technology can Collingwood be an early adopter on? Is there a way to invest or leverage our high-performance IP to get access to the upside (revenue/equity) of sports technology startups? (With appropriate due diligence of course)

I hope it’s OK if I provide some input into this …

(A heads-up, I’d also share this Febbraio if he comes on here, as this seems to be something that’d also be in his wheelhouse …)

The problem with technology is that it tends to be a one shot thing. It’s a first order system. For example, David Butterfant comes up with the brilliant idea of using the interchange bench for aerobic fitness management. It works wonders, we have a competitive advantage, but very soon all teams are doing it (or the AFL introduces a rule change to limit its effectiveness) and very soon we’re back with the rest of the pack.

IMO for organisations that strive for sustained success in a competitive environment, it’s better to have a culture of innovation. It’s a second order system, which means “velocity of innovation” rather than simply “innovation”. So rather than simply having David Buttifant‘s one-shot idea, the organisation is churning out new ideas for competitive advantage all the time - and not just in areas that would be classically considered ‘technology’.

How is it done in practice? It needs to be built on a strong foundation of team culture, and by ‘team‘ I mean all 200 or so employees of the Collingwood Football Club, but I’ll get back to that later.

For creating a culture of innovation, empower all people in the organisation to be a part of it. (It’s not just the domain of a senior person or some brainiac working in IT.). Challenge all people to think about ways that the organisation can be made better. Make continuous / continual improvement a value of the organisation. Give people the tools to generate innovative solutions to problems (eg: po thinking, trend analysis, resource utilisation analysis, biomimicry, competitor analysis, being influenced from external disciplines). Organisations that have a culture of innovation are sometimes structured in a way that encourages a chance meeting between Bob from accounts and Mary the physio in the kitchen at lunchtime, where Mary provides Bob with an idea to overcome a blocking problem. All this stuff needs guardrails around it so that the whole organisation isn’t suddenly going off piste in all directions (eg: risk management structures, processes of performing experiments where results are measured and analysed and iterated, systems of review and approval that aren’t overly bureaucratic - typically done using ‘push systems’ rather than ‘pull systems’ ). Create management systems where people can innovate not just within their role, but outside their role - even up and down and across the classical chains of command (strong culture is needed to support that) . Being prepared to supersede good ideas with great ideas (the Design Industry have a term for this “murder your darlings”).

The gold standard of having a culture of innovation is when a member of the organisation comes up with a brilliant idea that makes the organisation better and their role redundant. And when the culture of innovation evolves and improves itself and creates a second order system, or “acceleration of innovation“.

Back to team culture, this is about creating an organisation that is greater than the sum of its parts. If our 200 people have the effectiveness of 500, and Carlton’s 200 people have the effectiveness of 100, then we will have sustainable success over them. This is about Collingwood’s 200 people having a strong sense of mission, having everybody buying into that mission, everybody motivated, everybody understanding their role within that mission, everybody working to support their colleagues in any way they can, everybody taking pride in being part of something greater than themselves, fostering a strong esprit du corps, having very effective communication channels around the organisation, having a healthy staff turnover, etc, etc.

So in summary, I think it begins with building a strong team culture (passing no judgment on this at Collingwood now, I have no idea), and then on top of that building a strong and effective culture of innovation. This stuff can be very difficult to do and take a long time to implement - but that’s a good thing because it becomes a competitive barrier. And the rewards are great. IMO that’s a path to us beating the AFL’s forces of equalisation.

 

[SeanC]

I hope it’s OK if I provide some input into this …

(A heads-up, I’d also share this Febbraio if he comes on here, as this seems to be something that’d also be in his wheelhouse …)

The problem with technology is that it tends to be a one shot thing. It’s a first order system. For example, David Butterfant comes up with the brilliant idea of using the interchange bench for aerobic fitness management. It works wonders, we have a competitive advantage, but very soon all teams are doing it (or the AFL introduces a rule change to limit its effectiveness) and very soon we’re back with the rest of the pack.

IMO for organisations that strive for sustained success in a competitive environment, it’s better to have a culture of innovation. It’s a second order system, which means “velocity of innovation” rather than simply “innovation”. So rather than simply having David Buttifant‘s one-shot idea, the organisation is churning out new ideas for competitive advantage all the time - and not just in areas that would be classically considered ‘technology’.

How is it done in practice? It needs to be built on a strong foundation of team culture, and by ‘team‘ I mean all 200 or so employees of the Collingwood Football Club, but I’ll get back to that later.

For creating a culture of innovation, empower all people in the organisation to be a part of it. (It’s not just the domain of a senior person or some brainiac working in IT.). Challenge all people to think about ways that the organisation can be made better. Make continuous / continual improvement a value of the organisation. Give people the tools to generate innovative solutions to problems (eg: po thinking, trend analysis, resource utilisation analysis, biomimicry, competitor analysis, being influenced from external disciplines). Organisations that have a culture of innovation are sometimes structured in a way that encourages a chance meeting between Bob from accounts and Mary the physio in the kitchen at lunchtime, where Mary provides Bob with an idea to overcome a blocking problem. All this stuff needs guardrails around it so that the whole organisation isn’t suddenly going off piste in all directions (eg: risk management structures, processes of performing experiments where results are measured and analysed and iterated, systems of review and approval that aren’t overly bureaucratic - typically done using ‘push systems’ rather than ‘pull systems’ ). Create management systems where people can innovate not just within their role, but outside their role - even up and down and across the classical chains of command (strong culture is needed to support that) . Being prepared to supersede good ideas with great ideas (the Design Industry have a term for this “murder your darlings”).

The gold standard of having a culture of innovation is when a member of the organisation comes up with a brilliant idea that makes the organisation better and their role redundant. And when the culture of innovation evolves and improves itself and creates a second order system, or “acceleration of innovation“.

Back to team culture, this is about creating an organisation that is greater than the sum of its parts. If our 200 people have the effectiveness of 500, and Carlton’s 200 people have the effectiveness of 100, then we will have sustainable success over them. This is about Collingwood’s 200 people having a strong sense of mission, having everybody buying into that mission, everybody motivated, everybody understanding their role within that mission, everybody working to support their colleagues in any way they can, everybody taking pride in being part of something greater than themselves, fostering a strong esprit du corps, having very effective communication channels around the organisation, having a healthy staff turnover, etc, etc.

So in summary, I think it begins with building a strong team culture (passing no judgment on this at Collingwood now, I have no idea), and then on top of that building a strong and effective culture of innovation. This stuff can be very difficult to do and take a long time to implement - but that’s a good thing because it becomes a competitive barrier. And the rewards are great. IMO that’s a path to us beating the AFL’s forces of equalisation.

Well said, agree being innovative requires a culture that promotes it and staff that seek it not just finding the latest shiny toy.

 

[MyManLynch]

Serious question.
Will you be bringing back the Didak Shimmy for out next Grand Final victory?

 

[SeanC]

Serious question.
Will you be bringing back the Didak Shimmy for our next Grand Final victory?

Absolutely would love to bring the shimmy back in a GF win.

Might need to get Dids back to the club to help the players to learn shimmy technique.

 

[76woodenspooners]

Earlier in the year I attended one the Collingwood fan forums, which provided a very interesting insight into the club.

One of my takeaways is that a challenge facing the club is how to balance honouring long serving dyed-in-the wool members, whilst also being an organisation that appeals to new members and supporters? How to create a culture where long serving members are respected, without it being a culture of being insular and cliquey?

For primary school age children who are given a choice (like I was), or for new immigrants to this country (like Christine Holgate was), or for people around this country who are new to the game of AFL (like Bridie O’Donnell had been), how do we ensure that Collingwood is a welcoming tribe that these people can feel a part of?

Reflecting back on Ed’s regime, I liked that we had no number 1 member (“we are all Number 1 members”), I liked that we removed the membership years from the scarves (just because my scarf has a big number, that doesn’t make me any more or less of a supporter than somebody with a lower number - it’s a form of elitism, and we’re traditionally a working class club, not a club of elitism).

Obviously members who contribute more to the running of the club can reasonably expect more value from their contributions. But that aside, how do you see the club navigating a delicate path through all of this?

 

[SeanC]

Earlier in the year I attended one the Collingwood fan forums, which provided a very interesting insight into the club.

One of my takeaways is that a challenge facing the club is how to balance honouring long serving dyed-in-the wool members, whilst also being an organisation that appeals to new members and supporters? How to create a culture where long serving members are respected, without it being a culture of being insular and cliquey?

For primary school age children who are given a choice (like I was), or for new immigrants to this country (like Christine Holgate was), or for people around this country who are new to the game of AFL (like Bridie O’Donnell had been), how do we ensure that Collingwood is a welcoming tribe that these people can feel a part of?

Reflecting back on Ed’s regime, I liked that we had no number 1 member (“we are all Number 1 members”), I liked that we removed the membership years from the scarves (just because my scarf has a big number, that doesn’t make me any more or less of a supporter than somebody with a lower number - it’s a form of elitism, and we’re traditionally a working class club, not a club of elitism).

Obviously members who contribute more to the running of the club can reasonably expect more value from their contributions. But that aside, how do you see the club navigating a delicate path through all of this?

You make some good points, it is a tough balancing act for sure.

For me, it is about developing membership products and experiences that cater to different audiences. There is no one size fits all for the reasons you described above. Older rusted-on members are calling for more access and events, whereas a younger demographic may want greater access to players via social and digital and a completely different matchday experience.

I don't think it is difficult if you have member focus, but if you try to serve all members with every initiative you'll rarely satisfy everyone.

 

[Trickster]

There's been some references to AFL members so I'll jump in with my thoughts as I am one.

I've been an AFL member with a Collingwood support package for 30+ years. The price of an AFL gold membership is $620 of which I think Collingwood gets somewhere in the vicinity of $150-$200. I assume this ratio has come down over time or not increased.

I feel valued from Collingwood so no issues there, though I would like to be able to vote.

The reason I took out an AFL membership was due to an older sibling who did the same at that time. I've looked into converting to a Legends membership (especially in 02/03) but from a value for money perspective, I cannot justify it. If I went to all games plus 4 finals, I think all up I'd be out of pocket 900 or 950 as an AFL member and pretty assured of going to all finals (other than the 18 prelim issue which is now solved). That's the starting price of legends let alone finals tickets etc. And not that I do often but if I wanted to go and see the GF minus Collingwood I could do that too.

While it's not an issue of affordability, I can't justify having to pay the extra few hundred or more given what I am getting now. If i was starting from scratch and was on a wait list then maybe I'd do it differently, but I don't see the value now. I know Ed has said in the past the AFL undercuts the clubs and I can understand the viewpoint.

The challenge from a Collingwood sense is I've signed up my daughter to an AFL membership also. I guess its similar from an MCC perspective in that the cycle continues.

Now I know its supply and demand and Collingwood can price their packages accordingly so not sure what the answer is. Its part proposition part value for money I guess. I don't feel as a Collingwood supporter I'm missing out on too much though.

Good on you for putting your hand up Sean.

 

[MyManLynch]

Following on from 76Woodenspooners comment re Membership years.
I agree that there is no need to ‘advertise’ individual Members years (scarfs) etc, although recognition of the years of service (Membership) is still important.
My question, should the measurement be consecutive years only or total years?
Example:
I commenced buying seasons tickets direct from the Club in the Mid 70’s, joined the Social Club in 1979/80, however was working overseas & let the Membership lapse in 2000.
Then rejoined as a Legends Member in 2009/10.
The Club only recognises that I have been a Member for 12 years.
The earlier Membership is not recognised (even though I was running around selling raffle tickets for the Club in the 70’s & 80’s, attending every game, watching training at Vic Park etc).
Trying not to make this about me…it’s the principal of Club recognition of Membership.
Probably not a big issue, just something to consider.

 

[SeanC]

I've been an AFL member with a Collingwood support package for 30+ years. The price of an AFL gold membership is $620 of which I think Collingwood gets somewhere in the vicinity of $150-$200. I assume this ratio has come down over time or not increased.

That's my understanding from conversations ($180) I've had with ticketing staff in the industry (not just Collingwood). So similar revenue from a GA member.

I'm not comfortable with the AFL members are "lesser than" club members narrative.

Voting rights is obviously a hot topic and needs to be debated and resolved.

As for the years of membership loyalty question from MyManLynch , I'm OK with either model (Consecutive or total years) but the data to assess it may be the issue.

 

[76woodenspooners]

A campaign idea …

… not sure if anybody else has noticed, but the outside of the Holden Centre has looked tired and in dire need of a lick of paint for a long long time. I’d imagine if it had a coat of paint the building would pop. Nothing fancy or that would risk heritage push-back. Maybe it’ll improve our chances and value of getting a naming rights sponsor (Holden’s sponsorship expired nearly 12 months ago)

Does anybody know if this is part of the current scope of building works?

I’ll share this with all candidates on here.

 

[barrackers]

There's been some references to AFL members so I'll jump in with my thoughts as I am one.

I've been an AFL member with a Collingwood support package for 30+ years. The price of an AFL gold membership is $620 of which I think Collingwood gets somewhere in the vicinity of $150-$200. I assume this ratio has come down over time or not increased.

I feel valued from Collingwood so no issues there, though I would like to be able to vote.

The reason I took out an AFL membership was due to an older sibling who did the same at that time. I've looked into converting to a Legends membership (especially in 02/03) but from a value for money perspective, I cannot justify it. If I went to all games plus 4 finals, I think all up I'd be out of pocket 900 or 950 as an AFL member and pretty assured of going to all finals (other than the 18 prelim issue which is now solved). That's the starting price of legends let alone finals tickets etc. And not that I do often but if I wanted to go and see the GF minus Collingwood I could do that too.

While it's not an issue of affordability, I can't justify having to pay the extra few hundred or more given what I am getting now. If i was starting from scratch and was on a wait list then maybe I'd do it differently, but I don't see the value now. I know Ed has said in the past the AFL undercuts the clubs and I can understand the viewpoint.

The challenge from a Collingwood sense is I've signed up my daughter to an AFL membership also. I guess its similar from an MCC perspective in that the cycle continues.

Now I know its supply and demand and Collingwood can price their packages accordingly so not sure what the answer is. Its part proposition part value for money I guess. I don't feel as a Collingwood supporter I'm missing out on too much though.

Good on you for putting your hand up Sean.

Cheers for the info. I considered AFL membership as it very clearly affords better value for money, however ultimately I choose to keep all my spend with the club and a small part of that reasoning included voting rights and years of service. If voting rights are extended to AFL members is there a risk of more supporters choosing the AFL package and therefore decreasing revenue? Will be interesting to know if there’s any impact at Carlton who have chosen this path.

 

[Trickster]

Cheers for the info. I considered AFL membership as it very clearly affords better value for money, however ultimately I choose to keep all my spend with the club and a small part of that reasoning included voting rights and years of service. If voting rights are extended to AFL members is there a risk of more supporters choosing the AFL package and therefore decreasing revenue? Will be interesting to know if there’s any impact at Carlton who have chooses this path.

And that's the consideration and what the club would want, people to pay more knowing it all goes to the club rather than most to AFL. As I mentioned, there's probably a 7 or 8 yr waiting list to become a gold afl member so if I was starting afresh now I'd probably go straight to legends knowing I could get GF tickets if needed. Still a silver member gets you to first 2 weeks of finals so its still reasonable.

The other option is taking a social club membership along with the AFL membership to vote. Probably something I should do. Effectively a donation really.

Collingwood has the most AFL members with Coll support and the flow on is, like in my case, its easier to get my kids an AFL membership too.

 

[Quicky]

Yes, I should have included Interstate and Country members, they should not be excluded due to their location.

If you have a concern about the financial commitment it can be solved by tenure, if you have proven your loyalty in years you should get a vote.

Or you could implement a far simpler model, every member gets a vote, but only after consulting all members.

I'll know more when I understand the breakdown of the membership base.

SeanC I'm an interstate supporter and I live in Cairns. The memberships I have available to me are an interstate membership that gives me a ticket to a game in Brisbane. For perspective a game in Brisbane is closer for someone in Melbourne to get to than me in Cairns. There is also an interstate social membership (that the club doesn't advertise) and that I understand doesn't give me a vote under our clubs constitution (because its interstate).

What I struggle with is access to a telecast. I have to pay for a streaming service because the AFL live stream won't cast to a TV. If I decide to travel to a game its to Melbourne. What would be meaningful to me is help getting there, staying there and making the most of my time when I'm there.

If I want to feel engaged with the club I come to this forum for VFL, training or draft content and to discuss the merits of pineapple on pizza (you passed the test).

As a club we often boast that we are the biggest football club in Australia. There are a lot of fans in regional Victoria, interstate and overseas. How would you approach ensuring those fans feel engaged and involved in the club?

 

[Obese Arachnid]

SeanC I'm an interstate supporter and I live in Cairns. The memberships I have available to me are an interstate membership that gives me a ticket to a game in Brisbane. For perspective a game in Brisbane is closer for someone in Melbourne to get to than me in Cairns. There is also an interstate social membership (that the club doesn't advertise) and that I understand doesn't give me a vote under our clubs constitution (because its interstate).

What I struggle with is access to a telecast. I have to pay for a streaming service because the AFL live stream won't cast to a TV. If I decide to travel to a game its to Melbourne. What would be meaningful to me is help getting there, staying there and making the most of my time when I'm there. If I want to feel engaged with the club I come to this forum for VFL, training or draft content and to discuss the merits of pineapple on pizza (you passed the test).

As a club we often boast that we are the biggest football club in Australia. There are a lot of fans in regional Victoria, interstate and overseas. How would you approach ensuring those fans feel engaged and involved in the club?

You just love his stance on Phar Lap & by extension Vegemite in the fridge.

"Oh the humidity!!!"

I do like the fact he has been looking at "Presidency & the Board" thread.

 

[sr36]

You just love his stance on Phar Lap & by extension Vegemite in the fridge.

"Oh the humidity!!!"

Kuala Lumpur is 3 degrees North of the equator, yet nowhere near humid enough to keep tomato sauce or vegemite in the fridge. No wonder there's so much carbon usage and no ozone layer above you guys, your fridges must be bloody enormous.

 

[Quicky]

Kuala Lumpur is 3 degrees North of the equator, yet nowhere near humid enough to keep tomato sauce or vegemite in the fridge. No wonder there's so much carbon usage and no ozone layer above you guys, your fridges must be bloody enormous.

You like your tomato sauce and vegemite blue?

 

[SeanC]

OK trying to get this thread back on topic...

As a club we often boast that we are the biggest football club in Australia. There are a lot of fans in regional Victoria, interstate and overseas. How would you approach ensuring those fans feel engaged and involved in the club?

The last 2 years as s**t as they were have been transformational for many businesses including sports clubs like the Pies. Sport has always been focussed on the stadium experience, "getting the cheeks on the seats" as I like to say. Collingwood is no different with a strong focus on membership and getting people to the game. If there was an award for promoting Digital Transformation then COVID would win as we found out fans were still engaged despite not being able to attend (just like interstate & regional members).

We all know there are more Collingwood fans than can fit into the MCG so we need to take the lessons from the last 2 years and continue to develop ways to engage members who will not or can't attend (for whatever reason - cost, location, health, lifestyle, family).

That is where digital can fill that gap, getting the balance right will be key but taking an approach that brings all members to the G or our virtual G is a HUGE upside for the club in my opinion.

 

[76woodenspooners]

That is where digital can fill that gap, getting the balance right will be key but taking an approach that brings all members to the G or our virtual G is a HUGE upside for the club in my opinion.

Do you have some examples of what “our virtual G“ might look like?

 

[SeanC]

Do you have some examples of what “our virtual G“ might look like?

That's changing all the time. Primarily providing more content on gameday and outside game day for members to feel part of the club. That could be for consumption anytime like the episode of Grind coming out tonight or alternate methods of watching a game with other members not at the game. The NBA now has a Watch Party option on League Pass and I'm sure plenty of people ran a Zoom or Facetime while watching a game in lockdown. NFL has ManningCast on Monday night football where they are chatting while watching the game, imagine watching the game with some AFL or AFLW or past players chatting about the game as an alternate broadcast. Now I am jumping into areas that require massaging of TV rights but that is where sports consumption is headed.

It could be as simple as an online meeting place post-match where are a player or coach joins after the game. The technology to do this is getting cheaper so it comes down to resources and priortities.