Tasmania Riewoldt calls on AFL to give Tassie its own team

[madmug]

Can you elaborate more on this? What would the club be called and who and where would its supporters come from? It's over 30 years since the Eagles were created and the WAFL clubs have little support (with average crowds less than 2k). Most footy fans in WA do support WC and Freo with a small number following other AFL clubs and its unlikely that many would drop their decades old allegiances.

Importantly, there is no push at all (and hasn't been) from the WAFC or any of the WAFL clubs for a new team to enter the AFL. If you're waiting for WA3 you will be waiting a very long time (and possibly forever).

Vic, WA,SA & Tas are all traditional footy heartland.

One large & obvious point is that the numbers of members of WCE & Freo per head in WA as against members per head in Victoria shows a huge discrepancy. In WA, club membership numbers per head of population is 1/2 what is in Victoria. That represents a huge unmet number of members of up to 100,000. Given that huge discrepancy, a new club has every chance of getting to 50k plus members it would need. Clearly the membership numbers are relatively low & so theirs room for expansion.

Their is a discrepancy too in SA but it's nowhere near as pronounced & probably wouldn't indicate room for another club.

A new club, say Perth Falcons perhaps, should/would attract many who maybe ain't Freo & dont like WCE & their club culture or whatever. Their's clearly a gap in the market that the current 2 clubs haven't met.

Treating Perth as a 2 team town is clearly limiting the game in WA & nationally as a result.

WA3 & Tas1.

 

[Prince Imperial]

One large & obvious point is that the numbers of members of WCE & Freo per head in WA as against members per head in Victoria shows a huge discrepancy. In WA, club membership numbers per head of population is 1/2 what is in Victoria. That represents a huge unmet number of members of up to 100,000. Given that huge discrepancy, a new club has every chance of getting to 50k plus members it would need. Clearly the membership numbers are relatively low & so theirs room for expansion.

WC's membership figures have been held back by the size of Subiaco. The move to new stadium (60k and apparently easily expandable to 70k) will make a substantial difference for them and should also easily accommodate Freo's fan base.

WC are simply a subsidiary of the WAFC and the members have absolutely no say in the election of directors and the running of the club. They are easily the wealthiest club in the AFL and would spend far more on their footy department and players if they were able to.

The situation of the Victorian clubs is diametric to this. Large numbers of people join as members (often as three game and armchair types) despite not wanting to attend any or many than a few games. They do so as it is heavily promoted (with some factual basis) that they need to do so to ensure the survival (or at least competitiveness) of their clubs - two of the three highest membership clubs (Hawthorn and Richmond) had near death experiences not that long ago.

They also have an intangible (but I believe) important benefit in ownership of their clubs and their runnings. These are factors that contribute strongly to membership numbers that are absent with WC (and to a lesser extent Freo).

 

[madmug]

WC's membership figures have been held back by the size of Subiaco. The move to new stadium (60k and apparently easily expandable to 70k) will make a substantial difference for them and should also easily accommodate Freo's fan base.

WC are simply a subsidiary of the WAFC and the members have absolutely no say in the election of directors and the running of the club. They are easily the wealthiest club in the AFL and would spend far more on their footy department and players if they were able to.

The situation of the Victorian clubs is diametric to this. Large numbers of people join as members (often as three game and armchair types) despite not wanting to attend any or many than a few games. They do so as it is heavily promoted (with some factual basis) that they need to do so to ensure the survival (or at least competitiveness) of their clubs - two of the three highest membership clubs (Hawthorn and Richmond) had near death experiences not that long ago.

They also have an intangible (but I believe) important benefit in ownership of their clubs and their runnings. These are factors that contribute strongly to membership numbers that are absent with WC (and to a lesser extent Freo).

So? Theirs room for a more traditionally structured & based club in a city of over 2million people? With scope to grow membership? To increase the number of games by 33% in Perth? To increase the draft opportunities for WA lads?

Whats not to like?

 

[Prince Imperial]

So? Theirs room for a more traditionally structured & based club in a city of over 2million people? With scope to grow membership? To increase the number of games by 33% in Perth? To increase the draft opportunities for WA lads?

Whats not to like?

If Perth was a blank canvas, I would agree with you that it could support 3 and probably 4 clubs, but its not.

The WAFC don't seem to have any desire to introduce another club in the foreseeable future as neither they or the AFL want to set up a team that would have limited support and require very heavy financial support. If the WAFC wanted to underwrite it for the long term then I would be more favourable to the idea.

 

[madmug]

If Perth was a blank canvas, I would agree with you that it could support 3 and probably 4 clubs, but its not.

The WAFC don't seem to have any desire to introduce another club in the foreseeable future as neither they or the AFL want to set up a team that would have limited support and require very heavy financial support. If the WAFC wanted to underwrite it for the long term then I would be more favourable to the idea.

Fine. Its just a point of discussion. I guess if all we did was agree with the status quo or pine for the 1980's football, it wouldn't be much of a site for discussing football. Trying to think outside the square is what this is all about. How it could be better is my point.

WA3 & Tas1

 

[telsor]

If Perth was a blank canvas, I would agree with you that it could support 3 and probably 4 clubs, but its not.

The WAFC don't seem to have any desire to introduce another club in the foreseeable future as neither they or the AFL want to set up a team that would have limited support and require very heavy financial support. If the WAFC wanted to underwrite it for the long term then I would be more favourable to the idea.

While I support the idea of more WA teams in principle, you'd think that if it was even on the radar, then the negotiations for a stadium deal at the new stadium would have brought them to the fore. The prospect of more clubs, and thus more games at the venue would have been a significant influence over negotiations, and the AFL/WAFC would have been remiss not to at least discuss it if they thought there was any chance of it happening.

Of course we're not privy to the negotiations in full, but you'd have to think that there not even being a murmur about it means that it is, at least, a long way off.