"It isn't fair" says Essendon

[GOALden Hawk]

Below is an article from today's Age

"Essendon will today notify the AFL of its disappointment in the league's decision not to place all tickets for Saturday's blockbuster clash with Hawthorn at Colonial Stadium on sale to the general public.

The club believes the AFL reneged on a previous agreement to give the general public, including Essendon supporters, the chance to buy tickets yesterday. It questioned why the Hawks were being given priority treatment when it was not their home game and said the AFL was obliged to consult the Bombers about such ticketing arrangements.

Hawthorn members were given priority access to tickets yesterday and the public will not have access until the close of business today.

It is unlikely many, if any, tickets will be left over with fewer than 3500 tickets left for the match between the top two teams on the ladder.

Essendon members had been given priority access to tickets until midday yesterday.

Last Sunday, Essendon president Graeme McMahon said he was fed up with criticism of the club for not moving the game to the bigger capacity MCG and said he did not care if opposition supporters were unable to attend the game.

Late yesterday, there were 3420 tickets available, 2078 of which were general admission, 1315 reserved seats (general admission with a $10 premium), and only 27 tickets left for AFL members.

Hawthorn chief executive Michael Brown said he hoped his members would buy up the remaining tickets to make their presence felt at the ground, and try to thwart Essendon's desire for a stadium filled with only red-and-black supporters.

Also expected to go on sale soon were 1800 restricted viewing seats."

Are they God-damn serious!!!!! How hypocritical can you get. First they refuse to move a match that is clearly going to sell out to the MCG, and then they have the arrogance to complain when Hawthorn members, who have already paid for the right to see the game under Hawthorn 18 memberships, get a solitary day to buy the scraps of tickets remaining after Essendon members have had weeks to buy them!

How dare the AFL renege on an agreement they claim! What do you call not moving a sell out match from Colonial to the MCG when it is was explicitly promised when the stadium was built?

If Essendon are so upset about their general public supporters missing the game why didn't they move it? And if they don't have a membership, do they deserve to see the game in front of Hawthorn MEMBERS who have already paid to see 18 games for the season? I think not.

 

[topdon]

All i have to say is that the club is looking like a bunch of fools. As an Essendon member with a reserved seat, i have little to worry about this weekend. But i do think that is only fair that the Hawthorn members get priority to tickets (albeit 24 hours), just like Essendon members without reserved seats had up until yesterday lunchtime to reserve a seat. The members of the opposing clubs should always get priority, and i believe the decision by the AFL to give Hawthorn members priority access to tickets was an intellegent one.

Geez...i wish our president and CEO would stop putting their feet in it. Up until now they have kept a low profile. I prefer it to stay that way!

GOALden Hawk...you have every right to be annoyed!

 

[Macca19]

Originally posted by GOALden Hawk
Below is an article from today's Age

"Essendon will today notify the AFL of its disappointment in the league's decision not to place all tickets for Saturday's blockbuster clash with Hawthorn at Colonial Stadium on sale to the general public.


Last Sunday, Essendon president Graeme McMahon said he was fed up with criticism of the club for not moving the game to the bigger capacity MCG and said he did not care if opposition supporters were unable to attend the game.

hahahahaha. I love it. Serves Essendon right for being too damn arrogant and smug. I love "i do not care if opposition supporters cannot attend the game"...and now he is complaining because essendon fans wont be able to attend the game.
What a loser. Making the club look like spoiled brats.


For the showdowns here in adelaide....the 'away' teams supporters get priority access to the tickets available. Its only fair...otherwies youd get about 35 opposition supporters at the game.

 

[Dave]

Originally posted by GOALden Hawk
Are they God-damn serious!!!!! How hypocritical can you get. First they refuse to move a match that is clearly going to sell out

Agree with pretty much all of what you've said except this. How do you know it was Essendon's decision alone, and not the AFL's not to move the game? There's been lot's of spin about why the game shouldn't be moved but as of today no-one has actually come and said "It was my decision". Perhaps Ian Collins will

Macca, how many tickets do they make available at Footy park for non-showdowns? If all Crows games are sold out how many opposition fans get in?

 

[Chris_23]

I found it pretty hard to believe when i read it this morning, Essendon look pretty stupid at the moment. It's only fair that 18 game Hawthorn members get some sort of a go at the tickets, they aren't exactly great seats either, but it's fair enough that Essendon members get priority to the best seats because it's there home game after all. The AFL had to step in and do something about Hawks fans getting in.

 

[Dave]

Chris, agreed, if they've paid for them they should get access. It does beg the question though, what happens to those 18 game ticket holders who can't get a seat?

 

[elt]

Dave,

You already know my thoughts on this issue from previous threads but I know at one stage Hawthorn was pushing for compensation for these members. I'm not sure what form this compensation was going to take, maybe they can get into the Richmond away game twice

Spot on btw about it not necessarily being Essendon's decision. I think the comments made on the weekend and in today's paper are poor form from the Dons and whilst I respect their right to look after their members and no-one else's, the "I don't care" speech was downright inflammatory.

Ultimately it is the AFL who are supposedly custodians of the game and it is they who should have moved the game to the G. If that required compensating Essendon so be it, the goodwill earnt would be more than worthwhile.

BTW, did anyone else here Demetriou talking garbage on AW last night? First he claimed "we don't mind 10,000 or so missing out on seeing the game live because that means it will be live on tv for hundreds of thousands." When asked if that was an about face on maximising game attendances, he said "No we are still committed to maximising attendances at games". Huh?!?

 

[Dave]

Elt,
yeah I agree, McMahon is starting to act like a real dill. Agree 100% with what you've said about shifting the game. There's no way the AFL could not have moved this one & then switched another game back later in the year. It's just a silly decision all round, being made to look worse by statements like this and Demetriou.

 

[WCE2000]

agree with practically everything said.

They look so hypocritical, so greedy, so self-centered when they have that type of attitude. It's typical of the American Attitude to the rest of the world.

Essendon have a big cry when things don't go they're way, but have a "who cares" attitude when other clubs have things go against them.

I've stuck up for Essendon on a few occasions this week (mainly about umpiring bias towards them) and it really annoys when you see a club do this.

And i say, good on the AFL for not falling down to Essendon and sticking up for the smaller Hawthorn Club.

 

[Port01]

If Hawthorn are selling 18 game memberships then its Hawthorns responsibility to get the seats at the game. It has nothing to do with Essendon.

The AFL doesn't guarantee opposition supporters get seats at non-home games.

Unless Hawthorn and Essendon had made a deal prior to the season then the only people that the Hawk's 18 games members can bitch at is Hawthorn themselves for selling tickets they cannot provide.

 

[RogerC]

Port01, I was about to send in a knee jerk reaction to your post, but on reflection I can see your point. Not saying I agree with it, but it has some merit.

At the start of the season this kind of a sellout was a distant and unlikely prospect. Furthermore, the precedent for moving the game has been set previously (the Essendon-Kangaroos game), so the Hawthorn Football Club had every right to assume a similar sellout, should it become likely, would be moved. Otherwise, it seems pointless to leave the MCG vacant on the Sunday. Nevertheless, they could have (you would argue Should Have) tied it down prior to the start of the season. Somewhere along the line Hawthorn 18 game members are being shafted.

But whose fault is it? For mine, I would argue that the fault lies squarely with the AFL. The promise that sold out Colonial matches would be transferred provides Hawthorn with a ready made contingency plan for this match, but unfortunately the AFL (with the aid of Essendon) have not honoured their promise.

I should have seen this coming. The deal struck between Essendon and the AFL that both must agree for a game to be switched was very handy for both. Now the responsibility can be shared (read: avoided) and ultimately the blame can be neatly sidestepped.

Nevertheless, Essendon have won no friends out of this selfish, opportunistic move. It is uncertain whether they had a choice, but they are behaving as if they did. Once again, the AFL are succeeding in playing club against club, and I for one don't want to play that game.

From my correspondence with Peter Jackson, it is clear that Essendon knew the game would sell out. They quibble that the game would only get 55,000 anyway, but Peter Jackson is unwilling it seems to clarify exactly how they reached that conclusion.

Remember who the winners are from this deal. Not Essendon, not the fans, not the members. The winners are Colonial and Channel 7. Business, not football, wins. And that is a bloody shame.

 

[Dan26]

Agree with everything said.

But don't blame our fans. It's not our fault. Blame the men at the top.

 

[Toots]

Where are all the Hawthorn supporters at the not so big games?
I also think the game should be at the MCG but having only 23,000 on a fine day didn't help the cause any. WCE game didn't mean much to Essendon either but 35,000 turned up.

 

[Mags]

Essendon are just trying to turn Colonial into another Moron Park and it has backfired on them.

So sucked in Essendon it will teach you bastards right!

Mags

 

[mantis]

Playing devils advocate, say that the game had been switched to the G, then saturday turns out to be a cold & rainy night, how many people would turn up do you think?. I imagine the crowd figures would be extremely poor.
Who loses out then, the EFC, the AFL, the players having to play on a wet ground & Colonial, the only ones who don't suffer are the hawks.
So how about looking at this situation from a different angle, OK I admit if it is a nice night, then there COULD be over 50,000 or what ever the capacity is at Colonial, but is it worth the risk?

 

[Arch]

I hear whispers theres some controversy about a football game being played at Colonial this saturday night. Can anyone explain what its all about ???

Theres been a total lack of media coverage and discussion on the topic. This is the first ive heard about it !!!!

Id also like to know why my HIH shares have so suddenly devalued, and also Im wondering why a fantastic new Nicole Kidman film called Moulin Rouge isnt getting the hype it deserves.

 

[Same Old's]

Originally posted by mantis
Playing devils advocate, say that the game had been switched to the G, then saturday turns out to be a cold & rainy night, how many people would turn up do you think?. I imagine the crowd figures would be extremely poor.
Who loses out then, the EFC, the AFL, the players having to play on a wet ground & Colonial, the only ones who don't suffer are the hawks.
So how about looking at this situation from a different angle, OK I admit if it is a nice night, then there COULD be over 50,000 or what ever the capacity is at Colonial, but is it worth the risk?

The problem with that argument is that you use it for any game. What about if heavy rain was forecast for an Essendon vs Carlton or Collingwood vs Carlton match. Should those matches then be switched to Colonial?

 

[mantis]

Same Olds
Sorry, I don't understand your argument. I am talking about the reasons for not switching venues, yet you are doing the opposite. You are saying that if it rains at a G home game it should be switched to colonial, no it shouldn't, whoevers home game it is should keep it at the G no matter what the weather etc, but with saturdays game Essendons home game, people want it switched to the G, saying that colonial won't be able to hold all the people that want to attend, I am just pointing out, that due to the chances of inclement weather, the attendances mightn't even fill colonial. I never mentioned taking a game off say Melb or the Tigers & playing at colonial if the weather is bad, but interesting idea, wonder if those clubs would complain because it would affect their members & sponsors.
Everyone is carrying on as if it is going to be a beautiful dry saturday night, what if it isn't, the hawks supporters have already blamed bad weather for the lack of crowds at their games.

 

[Dan26]

Mantis,

Same Old's argument isn't that difficult to understand. It is common-sense, really. He is saying it's stupid to not switch a match using "potentially" bad weather as your reason. Going by this logic, why schedule any match at the MCG in June or July?

Weather should NOT be a consideration when it comes to switching matches. You can't base your reasoning for not switching a match on the off chance that it might rain! That's ridiculous.

By the same token, it could very well be a beautiful sunny day! The AFL should schedule matches at the most appropriate venues. If it then rains...bad luck.

 

[The Abuser]

Originally posted by mantis
Same Olds
Sorry, I don't understand your argument. I am talking about the reasons for not switching venues, yet you are doing the opposite. You are saying that if it rains at a G home game it should be switched to colonial, no it shouldn't, whoevers home game it is should keep it at the G no matter what the weather etc, but with saturdays game Essendons home game, people want it switched to the G, saying that colonial won't be able to hold all the people that want to attend, I am just pointing out, that due to the chances of inclement weather, the attendances mightn't even fill colonial. I never mentioned taking a game off say Melb or the Tigers & playing at colonial if the weather is bad, but interesting idea, wonder if those clubs would complain because it would affect their members & sponsors.
Everyone is carrying on as if it is going to be a beautiful dry saturday night, what if it isn't, the hawks supporters have already blamed bad weather for the lack of crowds at their games.

Wrong as usual bitch! I now se why you are so hated by some people on this board Sandie you ugly cow. I'm now with Chris - KILL ALL DOGS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[mantis]

Originally posted by Same Old's


The problem with that argument is that you use it for any game. What about if heavy rain was forecast for an Essendon vs Carlton or Collingwood vs Carlton match. Should those matches then be switched to Colonial?

OK, read this & try & understand, I am talking about the reasons for NOT switching a match, where same olds is talking about reasons FOR switching it.

I don't think a game should be switched from a teams home ground, unless it can be proven that it will be better for attendances & financially for the home team, it should not be switched on the off chance that just maybe it will benefit both the home team & the visitors.

 

[mantis]

Originally posted by The Abuser


Wrong as usual bitch! I now se why you are so hated by some people on this board Sandie you ugly cow. I'm now with Chris - KILL ALL DOGS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Oh dear
Another male who can only resort to abuse when they can't win an argument with a woman any other way.

Oh & abuser who are you really, you are a newbie who came along after the disagreements between me & Chris, so how did you know what they were about & how did you know my real name. Hmm maybe you aren't a newbie after all, but an old poster using a new name.

 

[mantis]

abuser
Still haven't replied, oh no you have been caught out, thank goodness for IP addresses.

 

[BUBBALOUIS]

Sandie, i can see where your coming from, however what about last years fixture against North that was switched? Wasnt there a chance of rain there too? Does your argument mean no games ever should be switched away from Colonial because it might rain? If so why did the league say all potential lockouts will be moved , why not be honest and say NO GAMES from Colonial will ever be moved? Cheers

 

[James2]

Hypocrites??

A venomous, but quire spurious arguement.

1. Essendon have breached no agreement. They did not promise to move games, this was the AFL's "promise". Your anger on this point is misdirected.

2. The AFL's decision is in clear breach of an agreement Essendon made with Colonial Stadium. In my opinion the club had every right to say what they did.

I do recall a few years ago that Hawthorn were quite indignant when the AFL "forced" the Hawks to move from Waverly to the MCG. Undermining commercial agreements made by the clubs, was the arguement- and fair enough. However, when Essendon complain about the AFL undermining their commercial dealings, they are suddenly hypocrites!!!