Opinion Commentary & Media IV

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
You called.



Tasmania’s bid for its own team has accepted that the state’s best chance for an AFL licence will come through relocating an existing club, rather than a 19th team.

In a turning point that has shifted the focus back onto North Melbourne – although the Kangaroos remain adamant they will never relocate – the powers behind the Tasmanian government-appointed task force believe the AFL Commission will not consider expanding the competition to 19 teams in the wake of savage cuts to the game forced by COVID-19.
*High-pitched scream*

CARACAS!!!
 
You called.



Tasmania’s bid for its own team has accepted that the state’s best chance for an AFL licence will come through relocating an existing club, rather than a 19th team.

In a turning point that has shifted the focus back onto North Melbourne – although the Kangaroos remain adamant they will never relocate – the powers behind the Tasmanian government-appointed task force believe the AFL Commission will not consider expanding the competition to 19 teams in the wake of savage cuts to the game forced by COVID-19.

That's how I view it also, however the NMFC cannot be relocated unless it wishes to do so.

From their perspective, then tactically I see this as their best move.

This also signals that any NMFC --> Tasmanian relocation would only be for license attainment purposes, and that in the event of this occurring, the NMFC aspect would be quickly diluted, then dispatched.

If they cut ties with Hawthorn and seek to extend the package of games with North, then a coup is in the air.

It's time to pack up and get out of there.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

1615592874855.png

Tasmania’s bid for its own team has accepted that the state’s best chance for an AFL licence will come through relocating an existing club, rather than a 19th team.

In a turning point that has shifted the focus back onto North Melbourne – although the Kangaroos remain adamant they will never relocate – the powers behind the Tasmanian government-appointed task force believe the AFL Commission will not consider expanding the competition to 19 teams in the wake of savage cuts to the game forced by COVID-19.

The Roos have repeatedly rejected any talk of a move to Tasmania.

The Roos have repeatedly rejected any talk of a move to Tasmania.Credit:Getty Images

This was a view reinforced by a significant number of club chiefs when the battle over Tasmania was debated at length on Wednesday’s season-launch meeting of the 18 clubs.

While Tasmanian Premier Peter Gutwein on Friday forecast the prospect of a Tasmanian AFL team by 2025 or 2026, AFL bosses were more cautious, saying the only agreement reached between the Premier and league chief Gillon McLachlan had been to bring forward its post-COVID review into the Tasmanian bid.

In a series of developments in recent days it has emerged:
  • Gold Coast chairman Tony Cochrane told Wednesday’s Commission meeting with the presidents that the AFL should immediately reject the Tasmanian bid.
  • Hawthorn president Jeff Kennett raised eyebrows at his own board table after recently raising the prospect of the Hawks committing to 10 games a season in Tasmania.
  • McLachlan has not ruled out the AFL funding home games in Tasmania in 2022 should the state government refuse to renew its deals with the Hawks and the Kangaroos – currently worth about $8 million a season.
  • While McLachlan has agreed to complete his review by mid-season he and Premier Gutwein have not yet agreed on which independent body should run the analysis.
  • McLachlan and his commission scored a victory on Wednesday when it transpired that Swans chairman Andrew Pridham’s bid for an independent review into the AFL’s operations and structure will be brought in-house and run through head office with input from the presidents.
The prospect of a relocated team last month drew the ire of the Gold Coast’s Cochrane, who has repeatedly poured cold water on Tasmania’s AFL ambitions. North Melbourne, who fought off an AFL bid to move to the Gold Coast, have under current chairman Ben Buckley repeatedly rejected playing more than four games a season in Tasmania.

The Kangaroos’ relatively small supporter base and membership numbers continue to make that club a target in relocation discussions, a topic McLachlan has refused to entertain. However the club would be forced to search for a significant new revenue stream should Tasmania refuse to fund North on a fly-in-fly-out basis.

While the state government-appointed task force headed by former Virgin Australia boss Brett Godfrey focused on a 19th AFL licence and a formula targeting 44,000 members and an annual government contribution of $11 million, the task force group has accepted their bid document required an update due to the disastrous effects of the pandemic.

Gutwein, facing an election in the next 12 months, has indicated the Tasmanian government would consider increasing its proposed annual $11 million funding but has refused to entertain a new deal in the short term with Hawthorn and North until the AFL takes a position on his state’s bid for a licence.Pridham’s call, which included an independent assessment into the AFL funding of the clubs, the AFL Players Association, second-tier competitions and game development, was backed by a number of presidents, most vocally Kennett, who on Wednesday repeatedly questioned the league’s lack of transparency.

The Brisbane Lions, West Coast, Adelaide, Richmond, Essendon, Greater Western Sydney and Fremantle have all spoken in favour of an independent review but McLachlan and chairman Richard Goyder have continued to resist the calls, pointing to poor timing following a pandemic and the reality of an independent commission.

However Pridham is one of five presidents, along with David Koch (Port Adelaide), Dale Alcock (Fremantle), Mark LoGiudice (Carlton) and Andrew Wellington (Brisbane), who will help select the next commissioners following the departures this week of Sydney pair Kim Williams and Jason Ball. This follows presidential rumblings about their lack of clout and growing disenchantment with the performance of the AFL Commission.
 
The important bit:

"..........the powers behind the Tasmanian government-appointed task force believe the AFL Commission will not consider expanding the competition to 19 teams in the wake of savage cuts to the game forced by COVID-19. This was a view reinforced by a significant number of club chiefs when the battle over Tasmania was debated at length on Wednesday’s season-launch meeting of the 18 clubs."

They aren't getting a license.
 
The important bit:

"..........the powers behind the Tasmanian government-appointed task force believe the AFL Commission will not consider expanding the competition to 19 teams in the wake of savage cuts to the game forced by COVID-19. This was a view reinforced by a significant number of club chiefs when the battle over Tasmania was debated at length on Wednesday’s season-launch meeting of the 18 clubs."

They aren't getting a license.


Thats right.

AFL talking about supporting the cost of North & Hawks down there

It''l work its way out.

I like seeing the Gold Coast so obviously in the gun too - we have almost moved on, GC now defensive
 
Thats right.

AFL talking about supporting the cost of North & Hawks down there

It''l work its way out.

I like seeing the Gold Coast so obviously in the gun too - we have almost moved on, GC now defensive

If they just fund games in Tasmania themselves, then they are not seen to be abandoning AFL footy in Tasmania.

It's definitely the wiser fiscal choice.

The business interests in Tasmania will climb on board for promotion.

The government gets left holding nothing, and Gutwein comes out of it looking like a fool.
 
*High-pitched scream*

CARACAS!!!

🤣 The mozz! Nevertheless, she is being forced to scrape around now. She, very specifically, mentions that Gil doesn’t want to touch it. That wasn’t the case back in 2007. Also, “cash-strapped” is not a phrase that’s constantly being aired now. It has to be remembered that Wilson has taken major hits to her pride from NMFC. She will carry that particular chip to her grave, no doubt. However, her erstwhile supporters on this front have pretty much disappeared.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app
 
If they just fund games in Tasmania themselves, then they are not seen to be abandoning AFL footy in Tasmania.

It's definitely the wiser fiscal choice.

The business interests in Tasmania will climb on board for promotion.

The government gets left holding nothing, and Gutwein comes out of it looking like a fool.


Ultimately his timing is terrible.

They have two highly engaged teams doing great work, providing great opportunity for Tassie fans and players.

I would be looking at a different strategy that develops a more organic team development through the VFL or something.

tricky but its not going anywhere soon.
 
"However the club would be forced to search for a significant new revenue stream should Tasmania refuse to fund North on a fly-in-fly-out basis."

Being debt free this year is good timing and I have no idea what the financial impact would be of losing these games.

Significant money but we would likely find another option and move on.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

The Tassie equation is pretty simple. If we're weakened and vulnerable at the wrong time then we're absolutely ripe for the picking. We're always vulnerable with our small supporter base as is the Bulldogs, Melbourne and St Kilda with their smaller bases. We're arguably stronger off the field than all 3 but one of the reasons we're being singled out is we're perceived to be the weakest of that group on the field. Here's the thing, we're actually not that weakened despite what will be a tough 2021. We're not because we've already reversed the on field decline and, although it's hard for some to believe, with a base like Simpkin, LDU, Scott, Phillips,Powell, Larkey,Taylor, Stephenson, Thomas and Zurhaar, we're likely to rise much sooner than later Yep, we're the right type of club for the taking but the vultures will soon learn they're about 4 years too late.
 
🤣 The mozz! Nevertheless, she is being forced to scrape around now. She, very specifically, mentions that Gil doesn’t want to touch it. That wasn’t the case back in 2007. Also, “cash-strapped” is not a phrase that’s constantly being aired now. It has to be remembered that Wilson has taken major hits to her pride from NMFC. She will carry that particular chip to her grave, no doubt. However, her erstwhile supporters on this front have pretty much disappeared.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

There's no source on her claim either.

I'll note that she was getting good info on us from ... somewhere ... last year, that seems to have dried up along with suggested board challenges.

Odd coincidence that.
 
"However the club would be forced to search for a significant new revenue stream should Tasmania refuse to fund North on a fly-in-fly-out basis."

Being debt free this year is good timing and I have no idea what the financial impact would be of losing these games.

Significant money but we would likely find another option and move on.

Shows just how cut out of the actual thinking she is at contemporary North.
 
St Kilda is the obvious candidate for relocation.

Financially in the sh*t, their greatest icon is a Tasmanian, plus their their most recent club legend can be the face of the move. He’s been pushing hard for a team there.

However will the AFL maintain a presence in the south eastern suburbs growth corridor?!
 
Ironic thing of course being this is the area in which we've consistently led the way over decades, and which has probably saved us from being South or Fitzroy.
I don’t agree that Joseph, Barrassi, Mantello, Aylett, Casey and Pagan are any of the highlighted. And they are the main reasons we are still around.
Ron Joseph in particular should have a statue at Arden st IMO
 
"However the club would be forced to search for a significant new revenue stream should Tasmania refuse to fund North on a fly-in-fly-out basis."

There's nothing controversial or novel about that.
 
The Tassie equation is pretty simple. If we're weakened and vulnerable at the wrong time then we're absolutely ripe for the picking. We're always vulnerable with our small supporter base as is the Bulldogs, Melbourne and St Kilda with their smaller bases. We're arguably stronger off the field than all 3 but one of the reasons we're being singled out is we're perceived to be the weakest of that group on the field. Here's the thing, we're actually not that weakened despite what will be a tough 2021. We're not because we've already reversed the on field decline and, although it's hard for some to believe, with a base like Simpkin, LDU, Scott, Phillips,Powell, Larkey,Taylor, Stephenson, Thomas and Zurhaar, we're likely to rise much sooner than later Yep, we're the right type of club for the taking but the vultures will soon learn they're about 4 years too late.

It's crucial that this era delivers.
 
St Kilda is the obvious candidate for relocation.

Financially in the sh*t, their greatest icon is a Tasmanian, plus their their most recent club legend can be the face of the move. He’s been pushing hard for a team there.

i will preface this by saying i don't want any club to relocate. but it's ******* remarkable how they manage to skate by every time there's a discussion of this. i try to be charitable with caro but i just can't ******* fathom the thinking behind writing yet another "north (might be) in the gun" article that contains official quotes from the club and the afl completely ruling out and refusing to entertain the idea.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top