Tasmania Fastest way to get a Tasmanian AFL club

[Chicken Parma]

Move North Melbourne or St. Kilda to Tasmania. Done. There's one less depressing team in Victoria...

This.

 

[telsor]

Cute deflection.

But here's my take (to repeat myself) - when the politics change then all of the contra-Tas team arguments will be yesterday's news, wrapping fish-heads.

The pendulum is swinging, and I would not be surprised if a Tas team is launched within the next 5 - 7 years. As a win-win outcome - not at the expense of any Vic team.

It's a deflection to point out that you were wrong in what you said?

 

[telsor]

With 1/2 an ounce of thought, one can see the real problems began when the AFL developed in the 1980's. The State league here started in 1985 so ran headlong into unforeseen social change. It was a brave vision for a stronger league to represent the peak of Tassie footy. The previous 3 leagues were reasonably successful in themselves but the powers of the time saw a bright future for one strong league to be above local football. Many note the quality of play, players & coaches it managed to attract in those early days. Indeed the performance of Tasmanian state teams was at its peak in those early years. Their were victories over VFL, VFA, WAFL & SANFL teams & regular close games. That didn't last.

I've said this before that when the WAFL & SANFL were badly affected by the AFLs development, it was balanced out by WCE & AC clubs starting up & winning flags, then FFC & PA helped spread the AFL in those states & keep the public interest in AF in their community.

The state league here was affected by the changes of that time. The rise of the AFL on TV, weekend shopping, weekend work. Shopping malls, the internet & social media addictions, poker machines have all affected peoples lifestyle choices. Those changes really started back then. Tasmania didnt get an AFL club which would have helped keep the level of football interest in the publics eye via being in the national competition.

Its easy to see the position & relative strength of Tasmanian football suffered from that time & was never managed with the level of equity that its contribution to the game it deserved at that time. The AFL have continued to drain the place to death. With Fitzroy, StKilda, Hawthorn & North Melbn all flying in for money, NONE of them, have done anything more than slightly meaningful for Tasmanian football.

The behavior of AFLTas, in enacting head office policy , has really done very little to affect the decline as I mention above. Its only the AFL who could hope to counter the forces of social change & keep football here at the level it had been. That also applies to WA,SA & VFL footy who also would have suffered from the winds of social change had they not ridden the rise of TV entertainment/sport. Indeed the AFL ended up killing the once proud VFA, the nations oldest competition.

The AFL has effectively continued to drain Tasmania like the VFL had done previously. The changes I note above made it impossible for local football anywhere to resist those changes without help. IMO, that would be either having a presence in the new sports entertainment monolith, the AFL, OR, as distasteful as I'd find it, having a new source of finance, such as poker machines. Here our state Gument sold that income to other interests, so local opportunities were likewise limited in that regard.

Perhaps you can debate that.

So your problem isn't really with the AFL so much as with television and it's capacity to show games in Tasmania that were played elsewhere.

Are there any other technologies you'd like us to get rid of to protect the game in Tas? Those nasty aircraft allowing people to travel must be troublesome for you...


After all, those were the things that had clubs in WA & SA tryign to desert their locals leagues and JOIN THE VFL before the VFL ever seriously considered expanding.

 

[madmug]

So your problem isn't really with the AFL so much as with television and it's capacity to show games in Tasmania that were played elsewhere.

Are there any other technologies you'd like us to get rid of to protect the game in Tas? Those nasty aircraft allowing people to travel must be troublesome for you...


After all, those were the things that had clubs in WA & SA tryign to desert their locals leagues and JOIN THE VFL before the VFL ever seriously considered expanding.

No.

 

[thegreig]

Theres a survey on the AFL website right now with a small section in regard to tasmamnia having a team
http://www.afl.com.au/news/2017-05-25/the-peoples-voice-take-the-2017-fan-survey

 

[telsor]

No.

Well, those are the real causes of your problems...

Just easier to blame the evil AFL than face reality I suppose.

 

[Kwality]

Cute deflection.

But here's my take (to repeat myself) - when the politics change then all of the contra-Tas team arguments will be yesterday's news, wrapping fish-heads.

The pendulum is swinging, and I would not be surprised if a Tas team is launched within the next 5 - 7 years. As a win-win outcome - not at the expense of any Vic team.

Your win, win - how is a weaker playing pool a win? Not to mention more pressure on the advertising & promo dollar at a time when many clubs are already reliant on the pokies dollar.

Disappointing to me that so little concern is given to the game itself , yes IMHO.

 

[Kwality]

So your problem isn't really with the AFL so much as with television and it's capacity to show games in Tasmania that were played elsewhere.

Are there any other technologies you'd like us to get rid of to protect the game in Tas? Those nasty aircraft allowing people to travel must be troublesome for you...


After all, those were the things that had clubs in WA & SA tryign to desert their locals leagues and JOIN THE VFL before the VFL ever seriously considered expanding.

Wasn't it 1973 that a VFL club didn't pay its players ... these players still haven't been paid ?
Saints only VFL premiership coach took 22.5 cents in the dollar.
Yep, its been removed from a Google search by, surely not a transparent keeper of our national game ...

Hiding as you regularly do telsor, here is a link on the timeline to a national comp for you:
http://www.footyindustry.com/?page_id=1469
Is the VFL club bankruptcy unworthy of a mention?

In the context of a team in Tas is irrelevant, unworthy of the discussion IMHO.

 

[madmug]

Well, those are the real causes of your problems...

Just easier to blame the evil AFL than face reality I suppose.

I gave you the facts.

How would you know anything about that situation? Were you here? Was it in the sporting globe? Were you even out of primary school at that time?

 

[Rob]

But who would push for WA3? WC and Freo and all their fans would be dead against it. Will never happen.

Nah, most of us are in between apathetic and in favour of it. The clubs themselves will probably be against it though.

But the question will always be where they'll get their fans from. It's not like back in the day when you could draw off WAFL clubs, most of their fans now would support one of the AFL clubs first and foremost. A bit like the problem the hypothetical Tassie club would face.

 

[telsor]

I gave you the facts.

How would you know anything about that situation? Were you here? Was it in the sporting globe? Were you even out of primary school at that time?

Yes, the world changed...Football in Tasmania was always going to fall off as a result.

Blaming the AFL for it is just misdirected anger though. Forces far larger than it were at play....At best it just rode along on their coat tails.

 

[telsor]

Wasn't it 1973 that a VFL club didn't pay its players ... these players still haven't been paid ?
Saints only VFL premiership coach took 22.5 cents in the dollar.
Yep, its been removed from a Google search by, surely not a transparent keeper of our national game ...

Hiding as you regularly do telsor, here is a link on the timeline to a national comp for you:
http://www.footyindustry.com/?page_id=1469
Is the VFL club bankruptcy unworthy of a mention?

In the context of a team in Tas is irrelevant, unworthy of the discussion IMHO.

Exactly...While my comment DID relate to what I responding to....The socio-economic underpinnings of why football in Tasmania is in decline.


I know you have an aversion to facts and logic, but at least TRY to stick to the topic. Spouting random 'I hate Victoria' crap like this might make people think the chip on your shoulder has manifested into full on psychosis.

 

[Kwality]

Exactly...While my comment DID relate to what I responding to....The socio-economic underpinnings of why football in Tasmania is in decline.


I know you have an aversion to facts and logic, but at least TRY to stick to the topic. Spouting random 'I hate Victoria' crap like this might make people think the chip on your shoulder has manifested into full on psychosis.

As exhibited by the monicker 'evil AFL' .... hang on, that's you attempting to deflect anything that challenges 'the gospel according to telsor'.

 

[deltablues]

Your win, win - how is a weaker playing pool a win? Not to mention more pressure on the advertising & promo dollar at a time when many clubs are already reliant on the pokies dollar.

Disappointing to me that so little concern is given to the game itself , yes IMHO.

Telsor said earlier, in some other thread, that he had no problem with a Tas team if it was not at the expense (i.e. liquidation) of an existing Vic AFL team.

My win-win comment was strictly within that telsorian context - altho of course telsor has gone way beyond his concession in his on-going anti-Tas stance, but I won't go into that here, as past a certain point debating a theocratic mindset is fruitless.

But re your weaker player pool and pokies observation - I fully agree with you: you are pushing on an open door. The AFL has no regard for the fostering of the game itself, in a fiduciary/custodianship sense. I have commented on this in the past and am done with it.

As I said, hopefully the pendulum is swinging the other way, so as to be rid of the cynical mindset of the corporate shills and hucksters who currently have their paws on the AFL levers of power.

 

[deltablues]

It's a deflection to point out that you were wrong in what you said?

Your rejoinder is a complete non sequitur to what I posted. Can you not see that?

 

[SgtSchulz]

Move North Melbourne or St. Kilda to Tasmania. Done. There's one less depressing team in Victoria...

Tasmania deserve better than sloppy seconds from Victoria, they should have their own, new team.

 

[madmug]

Yes, the world changed...Football in Tasmania was always going to fall off as a result.

Blaming the AFL for it is just misdirected anger though. Forces far larger than it were at play....At best it just rode along on their coat tails.

It was said on one of 'these' threads that change also affected Victorian football. It did.

It was said they dont have a 'state league'. I noted the demise/destruction of the VFA. That grand old competition. AF first competition. So many old clubs now gone. Thats a lot of community history gone. How does that happen in a large growing city? A place with 10 AFL clubs & the hub of AF itself?

How obvious can it be that what hides the effect of the changes I mentioned was the growing power & reach of the AFL. In so many ways it has supplanted community football around the nation by its media dominance.

Tasmania, unlike Victoria with its 10 clubs, didnt get a look in from day one of the national push. The current FIFO clubs do basically nothing for AF in this place. Its theatre, its not ours. Its not what binds a community. The only value the AFL represent here is that of an organisation just draining whatever resources it can from here & returning a few crumbs off the table.

The AFL is a national competition. I see they spend hugely in supporting AFL clubs & a huge elite u18 competition in one state.

You seen blind to this reality & the effects of that anywhere else.

You say you deal in 'facts' .

Again I ask, In your opinion, what is the Population needed to get an AFL club. What is the 'GDP' needed to support that club & what is actual relationship of GSP to running a club in a national competition.?

Take your time, but I am interested in how you see the criteria one would need.

 

[telsor]

It was said on one of 'these' threads that change also affected Victorian football. It did.

It was said they dont have a 'state league'. I noted the demise/destruction of the VFA. That grand old competition. AF first competition. So many old clubs now gone. Thats a lot of community history gone. How does that happen in a large growing city? A place with 10 AFL clubs & the hub of AF itself?

How obvious can it be that what hides the effect of the changes I mentioned was the growing power & reach of the AFL. In so many ways it has supplanted community football around the nation by its media dominance.

Tasmania, unlike Victoria with its 10 clubs, didnt get a look in from day one of the national push. The current FIFO clubs do basically nothing for AF in this place. Its theatre, its not ours. Its not what binds a community. The only value the AFL represent here is that of an organisation just draining whatever resources it can from here & returning a few crumbs off the table.

The AFL is a national competition. I see they spend hugely in supporting AFL clubs & a huge elite u18 competition in one state.

You seen blind to this reality & the effects of that anywhere else.

You say you deal in 'facts' .

Again I ask, In your opinion, what is the Population needed to get an AFL club. What is the 'GDP' needed to support that club & what is actual relationship of GSP to running a club in a national competition.?

Take your time, but I am interested in how you see the criteria one would need.

I don't have a fixed 'criteria', and if I did, it would have a wide range of factors involved.

As I've said several times before, by using Tasmania as a standard for 1 team, then a 23 team league seems about right.
So working out by Tasmanian equivalents...

Vic would be over 12, but lets leave it at 10, because adding more Vic clubs would freak the haters out.
WA is 4 (really just short of 5)
SA is about 3 (a bit over, but again, we round in Tas's favor).
So 18 'heartland' clubs + the 4 in NSW & QLD = 22 + 1 more in either WA or another expansion team, giving 23 (which also makes the fixture work by having each club play each other once per year).

I still think the Tas team would be one of the weaker ones in terms of finance and support (akin to the poorer Vic clubs, and probably the weaker WA/SA clubs after this), but the sentimental push allows a little fudge factor in their favor to push their cause up and let them in anyway.

 

[madmug]

I don't have a fixed 'criteria', and if I did, it would have a wide range of factors involved.

As I've said several times before, by using Tasmania as a standard for 1 team, then a 23 team league seems about right.
So working out by Tasmanian equivalents...

Vic would be over 12, but lets leave it at 10, because adding more Vic clubs would freak the haters out.
WA is 4 (really just short of 5)
SA is about 3 (a bit over, but again, we round in Tas's favor).
So 18 'heartland' clubs + the 4 in NSW & QLD = 22 + 1 more in either WA or another expansion team, giving 23 (which also makes the fixture work by having each club play each other once per year).

I still think the Tas team would be one of the weaker ones in terms of finance and support (akin to the poorer Vic clubs, and probably the weaker WA/SA clubs after this), but the sentimental push allows a little fudge factor in their favor to push their cause up and let them in anyway.

I dont recall you ever saying anything about using Tasmania 'as a standard'. When was that?

You say you've argued the 'facts'. You've said repeatedly that you use 'the facts' I see no facts here.

How do you assess this then? What are the 'standards' you use then? What is the 'standard' or Tasmania 'equivalents'?

Is it purely population? Is it a guess at TV ratings? Is it a guess at sponsorship? Is it some aspect of economics? What is it?

 

[whiskeytown]

Interesting to see if North get a licence for the AFLW on the proviso they play a number of games out of Tassie. This would further align Norths claim to Tassie over Hawthorns.... a step closer to having North AFL play 6 games a year in Tas as a partial relocation. Partial relocation first to test the waters of how an AFL team would fare down there.

 

[SgtSchulz]

I really hope North don't get an AFLW licence as a pseudo Tasmanian team.

Tasmania deserve better than a relocated North.

 

[The_Wookie]

I really hope North don't get an AFLW licence as a pseudo Tasmanian team.

Tasmania deserve better than a relocated North.

Why do they?

No area that has an AFL team got one because they "deserved" one.

• 12 VFL sides were admitted because the VFL Commission decided to take all 12 clubs on its national expansion programme.
  
• In NSW, The Swans got in because South Melbourne were broke and were almost forcibly relocated to Sydney.
  
• In WA, The Eagles got in because it was good for the VFL or out of fear of the VFL - take your pick.
• In QLD, The Bears were admitted because they paid a 4 million license fee when the SANFL wouldnt.
  
• In SA, The Crows got in because an SA team was deemed good for business
• In SA and WA, the Power and Dockers were admitted for the same good for business reasons.
• In QLD and NSW, Suns and Giants were business decisions.

At no stage has "deserving" been a criteria for getting a VFL/AFL or AFLW team.

 

[madmug]

Why do they?

No area that has an AFL team got one because they "deserved" one.

• 12 VFL sides were admitted because the VFL Commission decided to take all 12 clubs on its national expansion programme.
  
• In NSW, The Swans got in because South Melbourne were broke and were almost forcibly relocated to Sydney.
  
• In WA, The Eagles got in because it was good for the VFL or out of fear of the VFL - take your pick.
• In QLD, The Bears were admitted because they paid a 4 million license fee when the SANFL wouldnt.
  
• In SA, The Crows got in because an SA team was deemed good for business
• In SA and WA, the Power and Dockers were admitted for the same good for business reasons.
• In QLD and NSW, Suns and Giants were business decisions.

At no stage has "deserving" been a criteria for getting a VFL/AFL or AFLW team.

If the AFL give North an AFLW team with Tasmania plastered all over it as some pseudo "Tasmanian' club, that would be a complete embarrassment to the League & more so to the AFLW league.
Womens AR is growing, but the ranks are still quite thin at this stage. Using the growing brand as some political statement will do the Women's game no favours. Tasmanian womens football is in its infancy. IMO its in no position to be a meaningful part of such a project with NM. This is not the right reason to have an AFLW team here.

So far as deserving a team in the AFL, their are such a things as fairness & equity. Their is also the need to fulfil some level of criteria. The fact that with the commencement of the national 'push', all 12 VFL clubs were admitted 'en masse' despite their relative ability& capacity to compete at that level, shows the political nature of the League structure. That 10 clubs currently exist, & require such huge support, all in close proximity around Port Philip bay, & a city, Perth, with 40% of that population gets just 2 clubs, really says it all.

Suggesting the Tasmania argument bears no legs because it is all about 'deserving' a team is simply disingenuous. To ignore the reality of whats been 'gifted' to so many clubs, & heavily subsidised since by the 'national' body, just ignores the realpolitik. As example, Tasmania would have no trouble fulfilling the criteria of the GC, which they themselves struggle to do.

Just admit that political realty & move on.

I can handle not getting a Tassie team on the basis of regional self interest. Why not,? its how the VFL ran itself for a century. Its how that body has treated & used Tasmania for over half that time. I'td be nice if that weren't so, but it is.

What galls me more is the blatant mismanagement by the AFL over the last 20 years or more., It has complete control of AR here. It has failed the AR players & supporters here, badly. The game is dying by neglect.

 

[Scott2clarkson]

Move North Melbourne to Tasmania.

Nah I reckon Hawthorn just need to relocate there. They are looking for a suitable training base.

 

[The_Wookie]

So far as deserving a team in the AFL, their are such a things as fairness & equity. Their is also the need to fulfil some level of criteria. The fact that with the commencement of the national 'push', all 12 VFL clubs were admitted 'en masse' despite their relative ability& capacity to compete at that level, shows the political nature of the League structure. That 10 clubs currently exist, & require such huge support, all in close proximity around Port Philip bay, & a city, Perth, with 40% of that population gets just 2 clubs, really says it all.

12 teams were not admitted en masse. They already were there, as was clear when the league declined to undertake rationalisation of the clubs. Thats historical fact. Perth gets two clubs because that all the AFL Commission wants, if they wanted more there would be more.

Suggesting the Tasmania argument bears no legs because it is all about 'deserving' a team is simply disingenuous. To ignore the reality of whats been 'gifted' to so many clubs, & heavily subsidised since by the 'national' body, just ignores the realpolitik. As example, Tasmania would have no trouble fulfilling the criteria of the GC, which they themselves struggle to do.

Im saying that the notion that anyone "deserves" a team is in itself crap. And always has been. It has ALWAYS been up to the VFL Commission and later the AFL Commission as to what teams were admitted and the terms they were admitted on.

Clubs werent gifted a position in the league - they already had it, most of them for more than a century at that. If you mean revenue then 'gifted to clubs" by a league that would not have existed without them, and that STILL forces them to play in venues on their terms, can and has vetoed sponsors, and until last year had the final say on all ticket pricing, all the while it competes with them for memberships and sponsorships AND stadium revenues.

And for 30 years successive Commissions and executives have all said that Tasmania does not meet their financial expectation. And frankly, their expectation is all that matters when it comes to assigning licenses.

Just admit that political realty & move on.

I wont, because its rubbish as far as Im concerned. You are ignoring actually historical and commercial realities in search of a manufactured political truth you desperately want to exist.