How Tasmania can have a team by 2023.

[The_Wookie]

In 1986 the VFL was nearly closed down by Corporate affairs commissioner Gordon Lewis. That according to Age writer Jason Dowling (2016).

All State leagues were finanically screwed at this time.

The 'fair & even fixture' of which you speak was clearly killing the league & the clubs leading up to & at that time.

I tire of this circular argument. This isnt true either. What was killing the league was the amateur way the clubs AND league were run. It had nothing to do with the fixture.

the 'unfair' fixture & sucking money out of the whole nation via huge media deals has saved those suburban clubs. They are bloody lucky to be their at all. That is a clear fact.

The AFL takes in more than half its income from none broadcast sources, its time you got your head out of the sand and figure out where that income comes from. Until you can acknowledge this, I have no more time for you and this discussion.

You constantly want to talk about why clubs need propping up and want to ignore the reasons why this is done - despite the fact that each and every one is an indisputable fact.

The double act of the Port Philip 'clique' having the capacity to self sustain 10 clubs & the 'poor bugger me' act from supporters & others here on BF is pathetic, given the real facts of the VFL & where the real money comes from. GWS & GC is more of the same media circus than thinking they'll be commercial operations in their own right. Certainly anytime in the next 50 years or so.

Yawn. Let me know when you get actual facts will you. Dont leave yourself and Tasmania out of the "poor me" category either. Your states failure to adapt to new realities, like everyone else, is directly responsible for the mess the AFL had to take over. You are lucky theres a TSL at all.

 

[madmug]

All State leagues were finanically screwed at this time.



I tire of this circular argument. This isnt true either. What was killing the league was the amateur way the clubs AND league were run. It had nothing to do with the fixture.



The AFL takes in more than half its income from none broadcast sources, its time you got your head out of the sand and figure out where that income comes from. Until you can acknowledge this, I have no more time for you and this discussion.

You constantly want to talk about why clubs need propping up and want to ignore the reasons why this is done - despite the fact that each and every one is an indisputable fact.



Yawn. Let me know when you get actual facts will you. Dont leave yourself and Tasmania out of the "poor me" category either. Your states failure to adapt to new realities, like everyone else, is directly responsible for the mess the AFL had to take over. You are lucky theres a TSL at all.

Yawn!! Actual facts!!!!. You are the one, with other 'notables' on here, with the 'opinion' here on this issue. Geez!

The discussion is about the VFL & the quotes from CAC Lewis are first hand 'EVIDENCE & admissable as PROOF.

The TSL 1 started here in 1986 & was quite financial thank you very much. The increasing encroachment of televised football & the National recession of 1990 is what started the downward spiral here. My 'poor bugger me' attitude is based on what the AFL choose to do. Their neglect of the role they have taken on is my main beef.

The argument about A Tasmanian team is very much open to conjecture. We don't have all the facts so argument is legitimate. I note the massive level of support that comes out of the AFLs own survey of the fans. I note the support from regarded economists. I also note the inconsistent treatment between clubs. If they can make those sort of political decisions, they can make others.

Yawn!!! Please, you're better than that.

 

[The_Wookie]

The discussion is about the VFL & the quotes from CAC Lewis are first hand 'EVIDENCE & admissable as PROOF.

And utterly irrelevant since the way the Commission was appointed by the clubs to address those very issues.

The TSL 1 started here in 1986 & was quite financial thank you very much. The increasing encroachment of televised football & the National recession of 1990 is what started the downward spiral here. My 'poor bugger me' attitude is based on what the AFL choose to do. Their neglect of the role they have taken on is my main beef.

My beef is very much that Tasmania is more at fault than the AFL for the situation Tasmanian football finds itself in. Blame the AFL all you like, but the Commission didnt take over football there until very late in the peace.

The argument about A Tasmanian team is very much open to conjecture. We don't have all the facts so argument is legitimate. I note the massive level of support that comes out of the AFLs own survey of the fans. I note the support from regarded economists. I also note the inconsistent treatment between clubs. If they can make those sort of political decisions, they can make others.

I note that the AFL, and its clubs are the sole arbiters of who gets a team and who doesnt. Being "fair" is not and never has been a consideration. I note that every Commission that has ruled on the issue since 1982 has come to the same conclusion - its just not practical. And ultimately, that opinion is the one that matters.

Yawn!!! Please, you're better than that.

Yawn.

 

[madmug]

And utterly irrelevant since the way the Commission was appointed by the clubs to address those very issues.



My beef is very much that Tasmania is more at fault than the AFL for the situation Tasmanian football finds itself in. Blame the AFL all you like, but the Commission didnt take over football there until very late in the peace.



I note that the AFL, and its clubs are the sole arbiters of who gets a team and who doesnt. Being "fair" is not and never has been a consideration. I note that every Commission that has ruled on the issue since 1982 has come to the same conclusion - its just not practical. And ultimately, that opinion is the one that matters.



Yawn.

Irrelevant!. It utterly exposes your argument! The facts on on the CAC Lewis's own lips. You are just side stepping.

What are you arguing?

The wonderful even roster & the pathetic clubs were the things that FKT the VFL. The Commission righted the ship but now they are the cause of the inbalace between clubs? NONONONONO. Some clubs have struggled for decades, before & after the Commission started, before the AFL started. The commission saved their miserable sububan arses.

Bloody hell. The CAC comments were daming. The VFL was R%$ted. It should have been wound up.

You argue & won't accept or dismiss real facts.

You write an awful lot. I just didn't imaging how blinded you were.

As far as the TSL goes, tell me where I'm wrong? Please, I'd appreciate some facts or persuasive points.

Yawn is rude & arrogant. Perhaps that says it all.

 

[The_Wookie]

Irrelevant!. It utterly exposes your argument! The facts on on the CAC Lewis's own lips. You are just side stepping.

What are you arguing?

The wonderful even roster & the pathetic clubs were the things that FKT the VFL. The Commission righted the ship but now they are the cause of the inbalace between clubs? NONONONONO. Some clubs have struggled for decades, before & after the Commission started, before the AFL started. The commission saved their miserable sububan arses.

The Fixture was NOT one of the things that did in the VFL. Clubs overspending on players and mishandling finances, and VFL house being run by fools was the problem. In all the books and articles Ive seen, not one of them blames the fixture. Not one.

The Commission was supposed to right the ship - its why it was made after all - but its not perfect. You cant cite market forces at work when the Commission acts outside those forces all the time. The Commission makes money for the clubs through centralising revenues and stadium contracts and even directing sponsors -> and takes away the ability of the clubs to make their own money -> AFL tops up club revenues from the central pool to make up for its own decision making. This isnt rocket science.

Bloody hell. The CAC comments were daming. The VFL was R%$ted. It should have been wound up.

Not even disagreeing. But this was rectified and the Commission does the job it was intended to do.

You argue & won't accept or dismiss real facts.

Neither will you.

You write an awful lot. I just didn't imaging how blinded you were.

The Commission was appointed by the clubs to make money for them and the game, it does so and distributes back to the clubs. Thats the only fact that matters now. You can say what you like about the VFL in the early 80s, and Im not even arguing that the Commission didnt save the damn league, Im saying its ongoing financial support of the clubs is its damn job. And you cant accept that. So Im not the only blind one in this thread.

And nothing gets you around the fact that you can have all the supporters of a Tasmanian team you like, but the decision on a team license being granted rests solely with the incumbent clubs and the AFL Commission. As it always has.

As far as the TSL goes, tell me where I'm wrong? Please, I'd appreciate some facts or persuasive points.

When was Football Tasmania bought out by the AFL? Why was that necessary?

Yawn is rude & arrogant. Perhaps that says it all.

Im sure it does. Yawn.

 

[madmug]

The Fixture was NOT one of the things that did in the VFL. Clubs overspending on players and mishandling finances, and VFL house being run by fools was the problem. In all the books and articles Ive seen, not one of them blames the fixture. Not one.

The Commission was supposed to right the ship - its why it was made after all - but its not perfect. You cant cite market forces at work when the Commission acts outside those forces all the time. The Commission makes money for the clubs through centralising revenues and stadium contracts and even directing sponsors -> and takes away the ability of the clubs to make their own money -> AFL tops up club revenues from the central pool to make up for its own decision making. This isnt rocket science.



Not even disagreeing. But this was rectified and the Commission does the job it was intended to do.



Neither will you.



The Commission was appointed by the clubs to make money for them and the game, it does so and distributes back to the clubs. Thats the only fact that matters now. You can say what you like about the VFL in the early 80s, and Im not even arguing that the Commission didnt save the damn league, Im saying its ongoing financial support of the clubs is its damn job. And you cant accept that. So Im not the only blind one in this thread.

And nothing gets you around the fact that you can have all the supporters of a Tasmanian team you like, but the decision on a team license being granted rests solely with the incumbent clubs and the AFL Commission. As it always has.





When was Football Tasmania bought out by the AFL? Why was that necessary?



Im sure it does. Yawn.

The AFL effectively took control when Barry Breen was sent here around 1992. The league & clubs had run progressively into trouble from the increased presence of the AFL on tv & the 1990 recession. The build up to that was high interest rates. You may remember the Pyramid building society collapse & the damage that did in Victoria. Things were tight & tough for sponsorship etc.The AFL funded the league management. Roger Hampson then took over, I guess after Barry got sick of playing golf & hitting the piss. Hampson got a better job with Basketball. These & Wade were employed by the AFL. They paid the bills & had the final say on what went on.

The AFL took over all the finances in 2014. A lot of people had queries on the financial matters with the Wade regime. He finally lost his job when the Cheese make arrived. Now he's been kicked upstairs next door to his brother & we have the part time office lady as the latest AFL Tas talking head.

Saying the AFL have the final say is just oh so correct. The basis of such decision making is more political than commercial though. Reading Gil's comments, the AFL is up to its financial nuts trying to support 1/2 the competition. Demitriou got paid a fortune & left that mess for them.

So the push from here continues.

The other matter of getting the TSL on some sort of equitable footing is still not certain. The 'steering' committee is all AFL. F&^k knows what they'll decide from the desk at AFL house.

I maintain that without an AFL club here, our football is just pissing in the wind & will continue like that.

Anyway, the VFL safety net season has started, Yawn.

 

[The_Wookie]

Saying the AFL have the final say is just oh so correct. The basis of such decision making is more political than commercial though. Reading Gil's comments, the AFL is up to its financial nuts trying to support 1/2 the competition. Demitriou got paid a fortune & left that mess for them..

This is the same AFL that turned over 750m last year, made a 60m profit - AFTER distributing 300m to clubs and 50m to state bodies, has 135m in cash lying around and 20m sitting in a capital reserve while paying 15m a year off its loan for a stadium it now owns? Oh the financial mess they've been left with

 

[madmug]

This is the same AFL that turned over 750m last year, made a 60m profit - AFTER distributing 300m to clubs and 50m to state bodies, has 135m in cash lying around and 20m sitting in a capital reserve while paying 15m a year off its loan for a stadium it now owns? Oh the financial mess they've been left with

So they could show some fair & even handed behaviour then, as the National controller of the game.

But they chose football politics, & to use their tax advantage not to the fair & equitable benefit of Australian Football. Just the mainland bit.

 

[The_Wookie]

So they could show some fair & even handed behaviour then, as the National controller of the game.

We'll see what happens by June 30 then.

 

[madmug]

We'll see what happens by June 30 then.

Thats not the answer on my email.

None the less. I'm happy to talk the inconvenient truth.

I know the great number of AFL sycophants on here don't like it.

Yawn.

 

[Colonial]

Thats not the answer on my email.

None the less. I'm happy to talk the inconvenient truth.

I know the great number of AFL sycophants on here don't like it.

Yawn.

Just a question.

Who do you think holds more blame for the current Tassie situation?

The AFL or people/organisations in Tasmania?

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk

 

[telsor]

My beef is very much that Tasmania is more at fault than the AFL for the situation Tasmanian football finds itself in. Blame the AFL all you like, but the Commission didnt take over football there until very late in the peace..

You recently posted in the finances thread from the AFL report about the state by state breakdown for facilities funding.

Tas gets significantly more than it's 'fair share' from the AFL, but is massively let down by local councils, state government and local football. So much so that at the end of the day they spend less per capita than anywhere else.

Nationally,
Local councils spent over $100M...in Tas? $74K
State governments spent over $74M...in Tas? $64K
Feds spent over $29M...in Tas? $125K (the only state they paid more than state/local government).
Local football over $16M...In Tas? $77K

AFL almost $15M...In Tas $744K

But no, far easier to ignore the facts and just blame the AFL....


To be honest, this discrepancy is so glaring I wonder if they included it in the light of recent press about Tas to put pressure on the various levels of Government to do their share.

 

[madmug]

Just a question.

Who do you think holds more blame for the current Tassie situation?

The AFL or people/organisations in Tasmania?

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk

Depends on how you look at the different levels of the game.

Country footy & 'amateur' footy are a law unto themselves. Its an issue, but not vital.

Regional footy is trying to gain the moral high ground & many clubs will not work with TSL clubs. Some is justified as they feel used. Clarence is the classic user. They have Brighton FC in their area & have done nothing than farm kids from them. That club almost folded, yet its junior program is very good!

AFLTas are their to 'manage' the game & they pay to set up the Tas Footy Council but it too does nothing to help the better coordination & running of the game to help everyone, especially the players.

The TSL cannot fulfil its mandate. Its not, in general, able to get the standard up to a level that would be respected as good enough for developing draft candidates. Most clubs cannot fund their operations to a decent level. Given the recent 'emergency', with Gil FIFO, it should NEVER have gotten to this stage. WTF was the AFLTas circus, headed by 'The Cheesemaker' doing in the 2 years since the Garlick review? And they get paid????

Given the obvious financial pressures, why did the AFL eliminate tranfer fees? The clubs lose players to NEAFL & VFL with no help to reinvest in their players. Why? Geez, don't the NEAFL have enough kids in NT, Qld, NSW, ACT, without free access here? If they had to pay, they'd be a lot more selective about it.

Sure the level of management ability in each club would be open to question. From what I've seen/heard, Most of the TSL people seem credible enough.

In the end, you can't make a silk purse out of a Sows ear.

The AFL & clubs make enough out of this place to justify a lot more help to TSL & community football. Coaching, management & somethingto better attract players & defray the rising costs & travel issues.

I don't know what the AFL6 will do. The only rep from here is last years AFLTas part time office girl. She has NO TSL club experience what so ever. As if she'll have anything to offer that group. 'Was that 2 sugars Gil'?

So we still have no voice, except maybe Caroline Wilson, Tim Lane & Martin Flanagan. The rest of the Victorian media a sycophants of the highest order. Just wallowing in the AFL trough.

Its not healthy for the game. Here or anywhere else.

 

[Colonial]

Depends on how you look at the different levels of the game.

Country footy & 'amateur' footy are a law unto themselves. Its an issue, but not vital.

Regional footy is trying to gain the moral high ground & many clubs will not work with TSL clubs. Some is justified as they feel used. Clarence is the classic user. They have Brighton FC in their area & have done nothing than farm kids from them. That club almost folded, yet its junior program is very good!

AFLTas are their to 'manage' the game & they pay to set up the Tas Footy Council but it too does nothing to help the better coordination & running of the game to help everyone, especially the players.

The TSL cannot fulfil its mandate. Its not, in general, able to get the standard up to a level that would be respected as good enough for developing draft candidates. Most clubs cannot fund their operations to a decent level. Given the recent 'emergency', with Gil FIFO, it should NEVER have gotten to this stage. WTF was the AFLTas circus, headed by 'The Cheesemaker' doing in the 2 years since the Garlick review? And they get paid????

Given the obvious financial pressures, why did the AFL eliminate tranfer fees? The clubs lose players to NEAFL & VFL with no help to reinvest in their players. Why? Geez, don't the NEAFL have enough kids in NT, Qld, NSW, ACT, without free access here? If they had to pay, they'd be a lot more selective about it.

Sure the level of management ability in each club would be open to question. From what I've seen/heard, Most of the TSL people seem credible enough.

In the end, you can't make a silk purse out of a Sows ear.

The AFL & clubs make enough out of this place to justify a lot more help to TSL & community football. Coaching, management & somethingto better attract players & defray the rising costs & travel issues.

I don't know what the AFL6 will do. The only rep from here is last years AFLTas part time office girl. She has NO TSL club experience what so ever. As if she'll have anything to offer that group. 'Was that 2 sugars Gil'?

So we still have no voice, except maybe Caroline Wilson, Tim Lane & Martin Flanagan. The rest of the Victorian media a sycophants of the highest order. Just wallowing in the AFL trough.

Its not healthy for the game. Here or anywhere else.

Thanks for the info

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk

 

[threenewpadlocks]

To put what Wookie was saying a few days ago in this page and the previous one in the most illuminating example:

In 2002, Carlton signed a deal independently with the Docklands management to play more home games there, which meant that the agreement that the AFL, Princes Park and Carlton had meant that the AFL had to schedule neutral games at Princes Park.

Which clubs had their matches shifted there? The Bulldogs, St Kilda and North Melbourne. What happened? Their sponsors weren't allowed to put their logos around the ground, the Dogs were shafted with Sunday penalty rates and nobody went because they weren't going to a stadium that was, well, theirs.

Yet it was completely out of those clubs' control. They were forced by the AFL to play there and were victim to the financial consequences.

 

[madmug]

To put what Wookie was saying a few days ago in this page and the previous one in the most illuminating example:

In 2002, Carlton signed a deal independently with the Docklands management to play more home games there, which meant that the agreement that the AFL, Princes Park and Carlton had meant that the AFL had to schedule neutral games at Princes Park.

Which clubs had their matches shifted there? The Bulldogs, St Kilda and North Melbourne. What happened? Their sponsors weren't allowed to put their logos around the ground, the Dogs were shafted with Sunday penalty rates and nobody went because they weren't going to a stadium that was, well, theirs.

Yet it was completely out of those clubs' control. They were forced by the AFL to play there and were victim to the financial consequences.

Carlton signed the deal & soon after copped the biggest ever fine for salary cap breaches. Also loss of draft picks. Maybe the size of the penalty was in part due to the Carlton agreement.

None the less, did the AFL compensate the clubs forced to play at Princess park?

 

[The_Wookie]

Carlton signed the deal & soon after copped the biggest ever fine for salary cap breaches. Also loss of draft picks. Maybe the size of the penalty was in part due to the Carlton agreement.

None the less, did the AFL compensate the clubs forced to play at Princess park?

The AFL had been pushing for the Blues to move since Docklands opened.

League didnt really have the funds to pay much extra money until after 2002 and the first of its mega tv deals. and no clubs werent compensated for the move. Carlton was however compensated for loss of AFL games under its deal for a long time after its move to Etihad.

 

[madmug]

The AFL had been pushing for the Blues to move since Docklands opened.

League didnt really have the funds to pay much extra money until after 2002 and the first of its mega tv deals. and no clubs werent compensated for the move. Carlton was however compensated for loss of AFL games under its deal for a long time after its move to Etihad.

Carlton certainly got penalised.

All those clubs survived the situation. No doubt the salary cap & draft helped that.

I guess they all get compensated now

 

[threenewpadlocks]

Carlton certainly got penalised.

All those clubs survived the situation. No doubt the salary cap & draft helped that.

I guess they all get compensated now

Or the AFL being disequal with their funding survived that.
Also didn't stop large differences between clubs in terms of football department spending that grew so large to the extent that the AFL felt like it had to implement a soft tax for competitive balance reasons.

 

[madmug]

Or the AFL being disequal with their funding survived that.
Also didn't stop large differences between clubs in terms of football department spending that grew so large to the extent that the AFL felt like it had to implement a soft tax for competitive balance reasons.

Of course that begs the question, How much benefit is derived from more footy department spending? To a point maybe but its about proper targeting of such spending & the quality of the cattle you have in the first place.

 

[Kwality]

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-06-...ia-steering-committee-report-imminent/9911946

The end of June is approaching and that means the steering committee looking into Tasmanian football is almost ready to hand down its recommendations for the game in the state.

The ABC understands committee members Chris Fagan, Nick Riewoldt and Brendon Bolton have all pushed the AFL to create a framework and a set of criteria for the establishment of a Tasmanian AFL

Club members would foot a chunk of the operating costs. It is not unreasonable to assume a new Tasmanian club would have 10,000 members signed up soon after launch.

 

[madmug]

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-06-...ia-steering-committee-report-imminent/9911946

The end of June is approaching and that means the steering committee looking into Tasmanian football is almost ready to hand down its recommendations for the game in the state.

The ABC understands committee members Chris Fagan, Nick Riewoldt and Brendon Bolton have all pushed the AFL to create a framework and a set of criteria for the establishment of a Tasmanian AFL

Club members would foot a chunk of the operating costs. It is not unreasonable to assume a new Tasmanian club would have 10,000 members signed up soon after launch.

Speaking to a footy club official, he isn't hopeful the AFL will do much except some window dressing, deck chairs on the titanic stuff more like it.

Clearly the AFL ONLY care about their image, not about football. It is the VFL after all & they nave never changed their cabbage patch attitude to Tasmania. Take what you can get & fk whats left.

 

[Kwality]

Speaking to a footy club official, he isn't hopeful the AFL will do much except some window dressing, deck chairs on the titanic stuff more like it.

Clearly the AFL ONLY care about their image, not about football. It is the VFL after all & they nave never changed their cabbage patch attitude to Tasmania. Take what you can get & fk whats left.

Sadly you nailed it.

Interesting from the ABC article quoted, the Hawks deal is central to the next few years for Tas.
I'm a fan of how the Hawks have handled the sponsorship, but its time ..... thanks Jeff, but no more !!

 

[The_Wookie]

 

[The_Wookie]

with announcements coming today and tomorrow, and two threads currently discussing the same thing, Im closing this one and leaving the other one open.

Please refer discussion to
https://www.bigfooty.com/forum/threads/tassie-football-in-crisis-again.1186163