Should the GF be played at a Neutral venue?

[BringBackTorps]

AFL have to allow major events at Etihad [?] - so no repeat of the last World Cup application[Which would have "shafted big time" the AFL]

There is a strong argument that the $224,000,000 the Vic. Govt. is paying for external improvements/non-game entertainment options for DS was almost inevitable. Docklands is very quiet after 7pm M-F, & on weekends (contrary to the original, 365 day pa BIG tourism plans. It was envisaged Docklands harbour would emulate other international CBD waterfront tourism magnets).
The relatively small amount of $224,000,000 would have provided a much needed revitalisation of the whole Docklands precinct -which could, over time, recoup $ billions for the economy.

The GOVERNMENT needs a SUCCESSFUL Docklands tourism precinct: to attract tourists 365 days pa.(It is only a success now as a high rise residential & corporate office precinct). It would benefit the local businesses, Victorian tourism, & the Govt's. OWN financial position. The Govt. still owns land in Docklands -so the more successful Docklands becomes, its own land rises in value accordingly; and successful businesses will pay more Land Tax, Rates, & other taxes.

The agreement (which, re AFL acquiescence to DS "major events", was probably unnecessary) IMO is dubious for 4 reasons:-

.The AFL previously had a strong negotiating position with the MCC c.2035 -when the MCG Agreement re minimum no. of AFL games was to be renegotiated. No GF at the MCG = MCC Member nos. evaporate (The VFL wanted to move the GF to Waverley in the 80's, for the huge AFL Membership $ benefits. The Vic. Govt. knew the MCC member nos. would be smashed, so banned the GF move).

Has the AFL unwisely now forfeited its potentially very strong negotiating position with the MCC, with "inadequate compensation"? Is this a possible strategic blunder -could the AFL have "screwed over" the MCC in 2035, with the threat of removing some/many AFL games from the MCG?
The more games at DS, the greater the AFL profits.

.If a World Cup was to be played in Australia before 2058, does this deal (AFL must "allow major events") mean that FIFA could force the normal AFL season to partially or completely stop for 3 weeks; or, if the season proceeds as normally, AFL games cant be held in the same city as WC games; or AFL has to vacate DS for the duration of the WC? What $ compensation would the AFL receive for the sabotaging of its season?

.As the flood of females wanting to play AF is likely to continue, for political/"feminist" reasons, any Vic. Govt. would be forced, for electoral reasons, to devote significant additional funds for new GR ovals/changerooms etc. in Melb. Even the LNP State Opposition is publicly declaring there is a need for vast additional funding for female sport. IMO, the AFL did not need to make any great concessions to the Govt.

.I would like to see ANZ stadium remain as an oval AND rectangular configuration of c.82,000 (Wembley , Munich & Rome Olympic stadia have top class soccer games played on their ovals -very few complain).
ANZ, when Barry Hall played (Sydney fans love a gun full forward ala Capper, Lockett!), had Swans crowds c.60-72,000. Swans v. GWS had a 61,000 Final in 2016. AF strategically NEEDS a large oval in Sydney of c. 82,000 for big games.

AF GR and the AFL are showing good growth in Sydney -male contact RL & RU regd. nos. are in a long term decline. Sydney is estimated to have a population of c. 6,800,000 in 2035. It is the HQ for about half of the top ASX 200 Companies; & has the major media & advertising HQ's.

Was it feasible for the AFL to offer the NSW Govt. in 2018 all Swans or GWS GF's in Sydney? This would be on the proviso ANZ remained an 82,000 Oval, & the NSW Govt. paid the AFL $15,000,000 whenever it happened (benchmarked for future inflation).
This would be a MASSIVE boost for GR AF & the AFL in NSW.

The extra $8,000,000 total pa that MCG tenant Clubs will receive from the deal is good -but, excluding Melb., they are all wealthy. Just more money to be spent on already bloated non-player wage Football Departments? How will it promote AF?

Have the details been made publicly available re the exact terms of the "AFL has to allow major events at Etihad" Vic. Govt. deal?
(Swap these questions over to the Vic. Govt/AFL DS Deal Thread if you wish)

 

[BobbyMorri]

.I would like to see ANZ stadium remain as an oval AND rectangular configuration of c.82,000 (Wembley , Munich & Rome Olympic stadia have top class soccer games played on their ovals -very few complain).
ANZ, when Barry Hall played, had Swans crowds 60-72,000. Swans v. GWS had a 61,000 Final in 2016. AF strategically NEEDS a large oval in Sydney of c. 82,000 for big games.

AF GR and the AFL are showing good growth in Sydney -male contact RL & RU regd. nos. are in a long term decline. Sydney is estimated to have a population of c. 6,800,000 in 2035. It is the HQ for about half of the top ASX 200 Companies; & has the major media & advertising HQ's.

Was it feasible for the AFL to offer the NSW Govt. in 2018 all Swans or GWS GF's in Sydney? This would be on the proviso ANZ remained an 82,000 Oval, & the NSW Govt. paid the AFL $15,000,000 whenever it happened (benchmarked for future inflation).
This would be a MASSIVE boost for GR AF & the AFL in NSW.

The extra $8,000,000 total pa that MCG tenant Clubs will receive from the deal is good -but, excluding Melb., they are all wealthy. Just more money to be spent on already bloated non-player wage Football Departments?

Have the details been made publicly available re the exact terms of the "AFL has to allow major events at Etihad" Vic. Govt. deal?
(Swap these questions over to the Vic. Govt/AFL DS Deal Thread if you wish)

You got your stadiums confused. Wembley is very much a football ground first. you are thinking of West Hams Olympic stadium and that has not been warmly received by Hammer fans. Juve moved stadiums as it didn't like the athletic track about 20 years ago. Bayern also built their own due to the same reason.

Also, Sydney Swans live at the SCG and are happy there. Perfect size and close to its heartland. It is unfeasible to have a 2nd huge oval in Sydney at this time or perhaps any time in the foreseeable future. And the NRL will never go away as it is apart of the culture of NSW. They are the main tenant and the NSW has to improve if they want to keep the NRL GF for example. (and that is not discussing the other rectangle sports).

If you accept public funding for stadiums, then you got to make concessions to its use.

 

[BringBackTorps]

You got your stadiums confused. Wembley is very much a football ground first. you are thinking of West Hams Olympic stadium and that has not been warmly received by Hammer fans. Juve moved stadiums as it didn't like the athletic track about 20 years ago. Bayern also built their own due to the same reason.

Also, Sydney Swans live at the SCG and are happy there. Perfect[? -AFL has had 60,000+crowds in Sydney] size and close to its heartland. It is unfeasible to have a 2nd huge oval in Sydney at this time or perhaps any time in the foreseeable future. And the NRL will never go away as it is apart of the[poor attendance] culture of NSW. They are the main tenant and the NSW has to improve if they want to keep the NRL GF for example[Why don't RL, RU, & soccer contribute $ to stadia, as does the AFL?]. (and that is not discussing the other rectangle sports).

If you accept public funding for stadiums, then you got to make concessions to its use.

What are the approx. dimensions of the old and new Wembley?
Are top class soccer and/or RU matches still being played at Rome's & Munich's Olympic stadia? They were originally considered satisfactory.

ANZ, 18 y.o., is NOW rectangular, when required.
RL, RU, & soccer attract small (cf. AFL) and declining crowds. Many in NSW are arguing that games should be transferred to more "intimate" smaller, existing Sydney suburban grounds -this destroys the business case for new ANZ & Allianz. Both ANZ & Allianz are appropriate for NSW needs, & are fine stadia.

The NSW Govt., with its latest stadium policy switch, is now proposing to spend "only" $1.5 billion - still a waste of taxpayers' money. And STILL no independent business case!
The light rail project, from Sydney CBD to Randwick, was originally costed at $1.5 billion -recently, the cost has doubled!
Are you aware of the APPALLING record of Federal & State Govt. spending "blowouts" of taxpayer-funded projects? Expect the same for ANZ & Allianz?

 

[Registered User]

I'm not reading the whole thread, so I dunno if this has been mentioned: What if the Grand Final was an interstate derby? For example, wouldn't it be silly to have Freo and the Eagles playing each other in Melbourne? Or would more members from those teams get seats at the MCG?

 

[The_Wookie]

I'm not reading the whole thread, so I dunno if this has been mentioned: What if the Grand Final was an interstate derby? For example, wouldn't it be silly to have Freo and the Eagles playing each other in Melbourne? Or would more members from those teams get seats at the MCG?

Brisbane have played Port (2004), Sydney have played West Coast with no harm done (2005, 2006).

 

[kranky al]

Brisbane have played Port (2004), Sydney have played West Coast with no harm done (2005, 2006).

These were games where the mcg was the neutral venue

 

[Registered User]

Brisbane have played Port (2004), Sydney have played West Coast with no harm done (2005, 2006).

Yeah, I guess so, but what about a derby?

 

[The_Wookie]

Yes, but what about a derby?

Yeah misread post.

 

[Pessimistic]

Just one point on FIFA. After Qatar they won’t be dictating to anyone what can and cannot happen while the World Cup is on

 

[kranky al]

Just one point on FIFA. After Qatar they won’t be dictating to anyone what can and cannot happen while the World Cup is on

Elaborate please - this doesnt make much sense