MCG to host GF through to 2057

Remove this Banner Ad

Carringbush2010

Norm Smith Medallist
Jun 6, 2016
9,472
5,643
Perth
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
Pines Football Club
Not the cricket club?
From what I've heard (in this forum) the MCC is apparently an arm of the vic govt. In any case, the whether or not it was the gov, HQ or MCC at the end of the day it suits both parties.

The gov. keeps the GF in vic - vote grabber.
HQ knows it's biggest revenue base won't get it's nose out of joint by losing the gf to another state.
 

telsor

Hall of Famer
Aug 29, 2004
32,160
30,153
Here
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
Habs
No, it's not obvious at all. When you start from such a ridiculous premise then no wonder you've got no idea what you're missing.

The benefits to the AFL with the MCG contract is a bunch of sh*t governments should be doing anyway. But ignoring that, the AFL refused to open it up to tender and kept the extension as quiet as possible. Why would they do that if the answer is so obvious in the first place? The answer is that they were worried that it wasn't. That's the emotive bit - they didn't want to agitate their home fans.
Why would you open something up to tender when you only have one realistic option?
 

MrKK

Premiership Player
Mar 11, 2012
3,439
4,949
City of churches
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Sturt, Southampton FC, LSU
Why would you open something up to tender when you only have one realistic option?
Amazing foresight from the AFL to know what options would be available 20 years in the future when the last MCG contract was due to expire. Even if you dangle the carrot to other states they'll be encouraged to build bigger and better facilities that will permanently increase crowds.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

telsor

Hall of Famer
Aug 29, 2004
32,160
30,153
Here
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
Habs
Amazing foresight from the AFL to know what options would be available 20 years in the future when the last MCG contract was due to expire. Even if you dangle the carrot to other states they'll be encouraged to build bigger and better facilities that will permanently increase crowds.
Yeah, imagine thinking that a place with over 50% of their market would remain the most significant for more than 20 years into the future and accepting hundreds of millions of dollars based on that sure bet.
 

Heaps of fun

Brownlow Medallist
Sep 13, 2013
18,872
41,852
AFL Club
North Melbourne
The Grand Final is contractually bound to be at the MCG. If there are no crowds so be it. Can't take footy from its spiritual home.
 

MrKK

Premiership Player
Mar 11, 2012
3,439
4,949
City of churches
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Sturt, Southampton FC, LSU
Yeah, imagine thinking that a place with over 50% of their market would remain the most significant for more than 20 years into the future and accepting hundreds of millions of dollars based on that sure bet.
If the Grand Final is about marketing the game, then surely it would be aimed at unsaturated markets here or overseas rather than the self-proclaimed heartland of football. Are Victorians so fickle that they'll drop support if the GF isn't in Melbourne for 1 year?
 

Kwality

Brownlow Medallist
Aug 14, 2011
26,833
9,834
Tootgarook
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Renault F1
From what I've heard (in this forum) the MCC is apparently an arm of the vic govt. In any case, the whether or not it was the gov, HQ or MCC at the end of the day it suits both parties.

The gov. keeps the GF in vic - vote grabber.
HQ knows it's biggest revenue base won't get it's nose out of joint by losing the gf to another state.
It is the MCG Trust that is the Government. The MCC nominally manage the venue but as one involved on tendering major contracts for the venue I was interesting to see a Trust member sit in on the final discussions.

As you elude to, self interest brought the encumbents together/locked out anyone else.
 
Last edited:

Carringbush2010

Norm Smith Medallist
Jun 6, 2016
9,472
5,643
Perth
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
Pines Football Club
It is the MCG Trust that is the Government. The MCC nominally manage the venue but as one involved on tendering major contracts for the venue I was interesting to see a Trust member sit in on the final discussions.

As you elude to, self interest brought the encumbents together/locked out anyone else.
Whoever it is or whatever name they go by doesn't matter. Vic gov gets what they want (for votes) and HQ get what they want - keep their largest market happy.
 

Carringbush2010

Norm Smith Medallist
Jun 6, 2016
9,472
5,643
Perth
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
Pines Football Club
So after 144 pages can we all agree why HQ and the vic govt. cut this deal?

Can we all agree that HQ's end game is the game >end game needs revenue = as much money as possible for that reason = it's a no brainer the gf is held at the largest capacity venue = in the state with the largest market<?

And as we now know why the gf deal is the gf deal can we all accept that HQ is not some non vic hating enterprise put there solely to p155 off the smaller markets, it's purely a business with the intent of growing the game? And we can also agree we're not here to argue how efficiently they do this?

Seems there's one side hell bent on proving some intentional bias and the other side trying to explain the why of the deal.

Can I get a show of hands?
 

Kwality

Brownlow Medallist
Aug 14, 2011
26,833
9,834
Tootgarook
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Renault F1
Whoever it is or whatever name they go by doesn't matter. Vic gov gets what they want (for votes) and HQ get what they want - keep their largest market happy.
Stitched up :thumbsu: ..... not sure its a vote winner, losing it may have been. The economic cost would have been substantial, Melbourne is set up for big events, e.g the Melbourne Cup.
Entitlement is rife, e.g the tennis 'grand slam' & any suggestion it will be lost to Asia.
 
Last edited:

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Kwality

Brownlow Medallist
Aug 14, 2011
26,833
9,834
Tootgarook
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Renault F1
So after 144 pages can we all agree why HQ and the vic govt. cut this deal?

Can we all agree that HQ's end game is the game >end game needs revenue = as much money as possible for that reason = it's a no brainer the gf is held at the largest capacity venue = in the state with the largest market<?
Does not make it right particularly when posturing about 'fair'.
The AFL will always try to live within its budget, so spending is a smokescreen, why would you need one?
 

Carringbush2010

Norm Smith Medallist
Jun 6, 2016
9,472
5,643
Perth
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
Pines Football Club
Stitched up :thumbsu: ..... not sure its a vote winner, losing it may have been. The economic cost would have been substantial, Melbourne is set up for big events, e.g the Melbourne Cup.
If you're a victorian (and resident) I'm pretty sure that might sway the way you vote in their next election.
 

Carringbush2010

Norm Smith Medallist
Jun 6, 2016
9,472
5,643
Perth
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
Pines Football Club
Does not make it right particularly when posturing about 'fair'.
The AFL will always try to live within its budget, so spending is a smokescreen, why would you need one?
Where did I mention 'right'? HQ are looking after their own interests, that means the more $ required, make as much as possibly possible for the end game = grow the game. Otherwise we wouldn't have these things called gws and gc - just their existence proves the AFL's intent! < read that last word again their intent.

As much as HQ spruik about 'fair' - you should not listen to that, it's to appear as a good sporting organisation in life.

But we know life is not fair don't we, the expanded vic competition is no different, don't know why you'd expect otherwise.

This has been explained to you and others ad nauseum, yet the questions and criticism still come. Whether or not you or l or anyone likes it is irrelevant, now you can either accept it or don't.
 

Kwality

Brownlow Medallist
Aug 14, 2011
26,833
9,834
Tootgarook
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Renault F1
Where did I mention 'right'? HQ are looking after their own interests, that means the more $ required, make as much as possibly possible for the end game = grow the game. Otherwise we wouldn't have these things called gws and gc - just their existence proves the AFL's intent! < read that last word again their intent.

As much as HQ spruik about 'fair' - you should not listen to that, it's to appear as a good sporting organisation in life.

But we know life is not fair don't we, the expanded vic competition is no different, don't know why you'd expect otherwise.

This has been explained to you and others ad nauseum, yet the questions and criticism still come. Whether or not you or l or anyone likes it is irrelevant, now you can either accept it or don't.
No problem really, its the inability to put it as you have. Its not going away any time soon as an issue. IF HQ was up front it would have been little more than a curio, like 'home & away'.
 

Kwality

Brownlow Medallist
Aug 14, 2011
26,833
9,834
Tootgarook
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Renault F1
If you're a victorian (and resident) I'm pretty sure that might sway the way you vote in their next election.
Nope, I value my vote more than that. I was a fan of 'get it done Dan' & the hospital quarantine wont go away, though it will give Dan more time to watch the Bombomers.

The GF will be one of legacies along side railway crossing.
Oh, I'm a born & bred sandgroper, first hit the road after my 21st birthday.
 

Carringbush2010

Norm Smith Medallist
Jun 6, 2016
9,472
5,643
Perth
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
Pines Football Club
Nope, I value my vote more than that. I was a fan of 'get it done Dan' & the hospital quarantine wont go away, though it will give Dan more time to watch the Bombomers.

The GF will be one of legacies along side railway crossing.
Oh, I'm a born & bred sandgroper, first hit the road after my 21st birthday.
Yes you might but that doesn't count for everyone.
 

Carringbush2010

Norm Smith Medallist
Jun 6, 2016
9,472
5,643
Perth
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
Pines Football Club
No problem really, its the inability to put it as you have. Its not going away any time soon as an issue. IF HQ was up front it would have been little more than a curio, like 'home & away'.
Aha no problem you say.........................

As for HQ what do you expect them to say 'look we're gonna have to favour the vic market for the gf because it's our biggest revenue source, sorry everyone else'.

As much as we'd want them to be they won't be bluntly honest.
 

MrKK

Premiership Player
Mar 11, 2012
3,439
4,949
City of churches
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Sturt, Southampton FC, LSU
Aha no problem you say.........................

As for HQ what do you expect them to say 'look we're gonna have to favour the vic market for the gf because it's our biggest revenue source, sorry everyone else'.

As much as we'd want them to be they won't be bluntly honest.
The GF is a marketable commodity in its own right - who know how much another state government would pay the AFL to host it as a one-off? Quite possibly more than Victoria would pay on a per-year basis.

Plus if those states had to increase their stadium capacity to meet whatever GF hosting requirements then the AFL would benefit from increased ticket sales every year, even if the GF never left the MCG.
 

Our Game

Club Legend
Sep 30, 2014
2,480
1,422
Sandringham
AFL Club
Geelong
You are mistaking it for the MCG Trust.
Yes a lot of people think the MCC own and control the MCG they dont, the the Melbourne Cricket Ground Trust/Victorian Government does IE: The people of Victoria OWN the MCG therefore its the "Peoples Ground".
The MCC are only the ground managers.

MCG Trust
Melbourne Cricket Ground/Owners

"The government-appointed MCG Trust vests administration of the Melbourne Cricket Ground in the Melbourne Cricket Club.

The Trust meets bi-monthly to discuss general policy on ground management and development.

All trustees are State Government nominees.

The MCG Trust members are:
  • Mr Steve Bracks AC (chairman)
  • Mr Ian Carson
  • Ms Bianca Chatfield
  • Ms Belinda Duarte
  • Mr Dale Monteith
  • Mr Robert Ray
  • Ms Amanda Ring
  • Ms Linda White
  • Mr James MacKenzie
Executive officer: Ben Foskett"
 
Last edited:

Rob

Brownlow Medallist
Nov 8, 2000
29,051
15,732
South of the river
AFL Club
Fremantle
Other Teams
Peel Thunder
So after 144 pages can we all agree why HQ and the vic govt. cut this deal?

Can we all agree that HQ's end game is the game >end game needs revenue = as much money as possible for that reason = it's a no brainer the gf is held at the largest capacity venue = in the state with the largest market<?
Nope. I think you leave out one of the major objectives of the AFL - integrity of the competition. It's something that seems to have gone less and less down the scale of importance, when in reality it should be number 1. Always.

Never mind that there is absolutely no guarantee that the largest stadium automatically brings in the most revenue. The AFL have never even tried to find out. That's what makes them so neglectful.

And as we now know why the gf deal is the gf deal can we all accept that HQ is not some non vic hating enterprise put there solely to p155 off the smaller markets, it's purely a business with the intent of growing the game? And we can also agree we're not here to argue how efficiently they do this?

Seems there's one side hell bent on proving some intentional bias and the other side trying to explain the why of the deal.

Can I get a show of hands?
I certainly don't think the league is 'some non vic hating enterprise', but I think the league get influenced by the goings on at their doorstep far too much. It's part of the reason i'd move HQ to Canberra if it was up to me.
 

Carringbush2010

Norm Smith Medallist
Jun 6, 2016
9,472
5,643
Perth
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
Pines Football Club
Nope. I think you leave out one of the major objectives of the AFL - integrity of the competition. It's something that seems to have gone less and less down the scale of importance, when in reality it should be number 1. Always.

Never mind that there is absolutely no guarantee that the largest stadium automatically brings in the most revenue. The AFL have never even tried to find out. That's what makes them so neglectful.



I certainly don't think the league is 'some non vic hating enterprise', but I think the league get influenced by the goings on at their doorstep far too much. It's part of the reason i'd move HQ to Canberra if it was up to me.
Like I've mentioned more than once I'm not here to debate how efficiently HQ 'fund raise' for their end game, or how 'neglectful' that might seem.

But no one can argue the intent of the end game = grow the game.

As far as integrity goes, I agree there should be a balance, more than what it is now - this is something you need to bring up with HQ themselves though.

If the comp was purely based on integrity we'd have equity in the national comp but the biggest market and profile will always be where the biggest market is. Not much anyone can do about that.

HQ get influenced by what's at their 'door step' because that's where there biggest revenue source is. Move it up to Canberra and they'll still be listening for the folding stuff.
 

The_Wookie

Queenslander
Jul 2, 2010
33,323
31,039
Scamander
AFL Club
Carlton
As Ive said before - the MCG deal is between the AFL, the MCC and the Victorian Government.


The Victorian government will have a say in the AFL's decision on the venue for this year's grand final in the likely event that it cannot be played at the MCG.

While the AFL ultimately decides the venue and has been in discussions with all the relevant state governments, the Victorian government still holds the contract, along with the MCC, to play the grand final at the MCG until 2057.

In effect, the Victorian government could exercise a veto over the alternative venue for the grand final, because they hold that long-term contract, though sources said such a step would be unlikely to be taken given their long-term, close relationship.


The long-term contract to play the grand final at the MCG is a tripartite one between the MCC, the AFL and the Victorian government. In return, the Andrews government also agreed to heavily fund the upgrading of Marvel Stadium.

The AFL takes the view that the Victorian government relationship is paramount over the long-term.
 

Top Bottom