Sydney AWAY GAME at Canberra?

[Third Ring]

Canberra a capital idea for Swans
Richard Hinds
June 1, 2006



SYDNEY hopes to fill a potential AFL void in Canberra by playing some nominal away games at Manuka Oval next season if the Kangaroos choose not to renew their three-games-a-year deal in favour of a more lucrative offer to play on the Gold Coast.

Swans chief executive Myles Baron-Hay said the club was considering how it could increase its presence in Canberra if the Kangaroos moved on, although options were restricted by scheduling commitments in Sydney and Melbourne.

"The AFL wants more games in Sydney and we now have 12 including the Bulldogs game, which is up for negotiation," he said. "We want to play six games in Melbourne where we've now got about 9000 members so, if we did anything, we would be looking at playing away games there (in Canberra)."

Baron-Hay said that, ideally, the Swans would like to play an away game against a non-Victoria club at Manuka Oval. But, with the four clubs in Perth and Adelaide all financially strong, none was likely to accept inducement to give up a home match.

The Swans have gained a strong following in Canberra because of its proximity to Sydney. A capacity crowd of close to 15,000 is expected at Sunday's match between the Kangaroos and Swans, well in excess of the Roos' usual crowds for Manuka matches.


The Kangaroos expect to decide by the end of this month whether to extend the arrangement under which they play three home games and one pre-season match in Canberra or accept an offer backed by Southport Football Club to play matches at Carrara on the Gold Coast.

Kangaroos CEO Geoff Walsh said the club had told the ACT Government "up front that there is now some competitive tension in the market that was not there before".

You have to give the Swans some credit - market an obvious benefit for them as a benefit for the competition. Out of 22 games, they want:

12 at home,
6 in Melbourne,
4 elsewhere (one of either WC, Port, Bris, Freo, Adel in Canberra).

"Yes we will help out the national game by agreeing to play West Coats's home game in Canberra"

 

[MightyFighting]

I think I've had just about enough of teams offering to play their away games somewhere or other.

 

[FrangaRoo]

What interstate team (Adelaide / Port / Freo / WCE / Brissie) would sell their home game to play the swans in Canberra??? They are all loaded with money.

Thats what the swans are asking for isnt it?

 

[airpoe]

What interstate team (Adelaide / Port / Freo / WCE / Brissie) would sell their home game to play the swans in Canberra??? They are all loaded with money.

Thats what the swans are asking for isnt it?

Yes, same as what Collingwood offered to play away games at Carrara.

Won't happen!

 

[Bring-Back-Powell]

Its called arrogance.

Collingwood explored the possibility of playing their 4 interstate away games at Carrarra.

I can't stand these selfish clubs.

Why doesn't Sydney offer to play 3 home games in Canberra instead of waiting around for another team to offer.

Go to hell Swans

 

[Diego]

Go to hell Swans

OH NO ANOTHER SWANS CONSPIRACY...THE AFL ARE SO HELPING LIKE THE SWANS LIKE TO WIN THE LIKE FLAG LIKE THATS SO LIKE UNFAIR FOR US LIKE MELBOURNE LIKE CLUBS.

Insecure baffons.

 

[SimonH]

I think I've had just about enough of teams offering to play their away games somewhere or other.

No, what you've had enough of is teams offering to play their home games somewhere or other. Offering to play your away games in a particular spot is a new one-- because it's generously offering to give away something you don't own.

At this stage, the announcement is just a political stunt to:
a) shore up Sydney's support in Canberra (where it already has a reasonable groundswell of good will, in part b/c the Swans ressies play in the ACTAFL)
b) ensure that Sydney's name is in the mix if the Roos do run away, and the AFL is trying to organise 3 games in Canberra on the 2007 calendar.

It's also canny because Sydney knows that the South Aussie and WA teams would never play their home games outside of their state (leaving aside the possibility that Port might get fiscally desperate, but that's a few years off yet). So 'offering' to play one of those teams' home games in Canberra could only be somewhat disingenuous. The real reason, I suspect, is to squeeze those teams' home games out of Sydney's draw.

Once you start with 11 games in Sydney + wherever the Dogs play their 'home' game, then request 6 in Melbourne (keep the Sth Melbourne fans happy), a 'traditional rivalry' arrangement that means we always play once in Brisbane, then bid for as many away games as possible in Canberra (which the AFL, desperate to keep a presence there, will be happy to program)... voila! You've got little room left for away games in SA and WA. Which of course helps the team on-field without hurting the bank balance.

 

[Pessimistic]

Why not just relocate freo to the gold coast ?

 

[Mingo]

That is the funniest thing I have ever read Haha what a joke.

 

[CharlieG]

Once you start with 11 games in Sydney + wherever the Dogs play their 'home' game, then request 6 in Melbourne (keep the Sth Melbourne fans happy), a 'traditional rivalry' arrangement that means we always play once in Brisbane, then bid for as many away games as possible in Canberra (which the AFL, desperate to keep a presence there, will be happy to program)... voila! You've got little room left for away games in SA and WA. Which of course helps the team on-field without hurting the bank balance.

Yep. Laughing my ass off if it works, too.

Melbourne could probably be convinced to play Sydney in Canberra rather than Brisbane at the Gabba - when does their deal come to an end? If Port continues to draw <25,000 at Footy Park a sell-out at Manuka - with a guaranteed cash payment from the ACT Gov't - is going to start looking attractive. Could you imagine a draw that sees 12 games in Sydney, two in Canberra, six in Melbourne, one in Brisbane and one in Perth or Adelaide?

Also, if the Kangaroos move to Carrara or the Dogs want to move their game to Darwin, forget about them playing the Swans there. Our home games are at a premium. With our Melbourne-based membership having doubled in two years the club would have a fit if they were playing five games in Victoria to go to Darwin or the Gold Coast.

 

[Tas]

Only the Swans could come up with an idiotic plan like this.

 

[CharlieG]

Only the Swans could come up with an idiotic plan like this.

Idiotic? Are you kidding? If it doesn't work noone will remember it any way. But if it comes off we've scored ourselves a dream draw.

 

[Mingo]

Idiotic? Are you kidding? If it doesn't work noone will remember it any way. But if it comes off we've scored ourselves a dream draw.

What do you think the odds are of it coming off?

 

[CharlieG]

What do you think the odds are of it coming off?

Considering there's absolutely nothing to lose in any case, I think the odds are pretty juicy myself.

 

[MightyFighting]

No, what you've had enough of is teams offering to play their home games somewhere or other. Offering to play your away games in a particular spot is a new one--

It's not new. Carlton offered to play all their away games in Sydney during the late 80s, and clubs have been trying it ever since. Only last week, Brisbane offered to play 3 away games at Carrara.

 

[CharlieG]

It's not new. Carlton offered to play all their away games in Sydney during the late 80s, and clubs have been trying it ever since. Only last week, Brisbane offered to play 3 away games at Carrara.

That was 1993, when the arrogant scumbags tried to take over the Swans.

 

[Tas]

Idiotic? Are you kidding? If it doesn't work noone will remember it any way. But if it comes off we've scored ourselves a dream draw.

It is idiotic because there is a less than a zero percent chance of it happening.

Nobody who is not already playing games interstate will want to move games, especially not to Canberra which gives Sydney an advantage.

If the AFL was interested in playing games there other than just giving lip service they would give the ACT government a grant so it could match the offer the GC is offering us, they would only have to spend a fraction of the cost it would otherwise cost them to bribe clubs to play the Swans in Canberra.

 

[garth p]

Its called arrogance.

Collingwood explored the possibility of playing their 4 interstate away games at Carrarra.

I can't stand these selfish clubs.

Why doesn't Sydney offer to play 3 home games in Canberra instead of waiting around for another team to offer.

Go to hell Swans

I agree. Arrogant turds. 'em.

 

[CharlieG]

There is a chance of it happening, however slight, and seeing as how it costs Richard Colless nothing to talk to a journo I can't see how it's possibly 'idiotic'.

I identified one club that already moves games from Victoria (Melbourne) and speculated that they might find the move attractive. The ACT gives the Kangas $300,000 a game, don't they? That's more than Melbourne are getting from the Lions, and it is a more neutral venue than they currently have.

 

[SimonH]

It is idiotic because there is a less than a zero percent chance of it happening.

Nobody who is not already playing games interstate will want to move games, especially not to Canberra which gives Sydney an advantage.

If the AFL was interested in playing games there other than just giving lip service they would give the ACT government a grant so it could match the offer the GC is offering us, they would only have to spend a fraction of the cost it would otherwise cost them to bribe clubs to play the Swans in Canberra.

What on earth are you talking about? Are you on the same planet as the rest of us? The AFL should hand money to the ACT Government on condition that the ACT Government hands it over to North Melbourne. Shyeahh right. And they should put it all in a big paper bag and hire Wayne Carey to walk it from Melbourne to Canberra on a Walk Against Want; following which John Stanhope can walk it back to Arden Street.

1. Do you honestly think that the ACT Government has a special lovey feeling about North Melbourne, but will just shrug its shoulders and say 'ah well, that's our lot with the AFL then' if the Roos walk? It will match the offer it's putting to the Roos, to any team prepared to play home games in Canberra. You might think that there's a "less than zero percent" chance of any other club biting; but history shows you'd be wrong. This is not only cost-neutral for the AFL during the season: it saves them money at the end of the season, as the cash that poor clubs get from the ACT Gov't doesn't need to be made up from the CBF.

2. Do you think that Footscray playing their home game at the SCG for years on end has given Sydney 'an advantage'? Just a tiny one? Poor Victorian clubs will play their home games wherever the cash is greatest. If the last 5 years haven't shown that to you, then you need to start paying attention.

3. Sydney will not give up 11 games in Sydney; nor has the AFL any interest in them doing so.

4. If AFL games are played in Canberra in 2007; and the Roos are not playing those games (following me so far?); then is there a reasonable chance that Sydney will be involved in one or more of those games? Got it? Or is your answer to that question still "less than zero percent"?

 

[timmeh]

Ohhhhh Nooo!!

Let's run a mock because the Swans came up with an absurd idea that won't be benefical for Kangaroos who have some of their home games at Canberra.

Get a grip you imprudent people. How far is Canberra from Sydney? And how far is Canberra from North Melbourne?

I'll let you do that math.

 

[fishmonger]

stupid kangaroos just keep burning bridges

pretty soon they'll be begging antarctica to relocate to mawson station ....

 

[pluga_4]

can't we all just play our home games on our actual home ground.

whats it all coming too????

 

[section8]

Allowing wealthier teams to buy poorer teams home games but punishing those that exceed the salary cap. Why the blatant hypocrisy?

 

[Tas]

What on earth are you talking about? Are you on the same planet as the rest of us?

I don't know, are you from the planet of the apes?

The AFL should hand money to the ACT Government on condition that the ACT Government hands it over to North Melbourne. Shyeahh right. And they should put it all in a big paper bag and hire Wayne Carey to walk it from Melbourne to Canberra on a Walk Against Want; following which John Stanhope can walk it back to Arden Street.

Okay, you must be from planet of the apes because you comprehansion is ape-like.

I said it would cost the AFL a whole lot less to play games at Canberra by helping the ACT retain the games currently being played there as 'home games' rather than try to fund a ridiculous concept to try and buy some extra home games for the swans. What will that cost the AFL, $2 million, $5 million? Where are these games going to come from? Who that doesn't already play games interstate is willing to sell home games?

It is just moronic. It would cost a fraction of that pipe dream to keep games played there with something that is realistic and tangible.

1. Do you honestly think that the ACT Government has a special lovey feeling about North Melbourne, but will just shrug its shoulders and say 'ah well, that's our lot with the AFL then' if the Roos walk? It will match the offer it's putting to the Roos, to any team prepared to play home games in Canberra.

They couldn't give a crap about our club, they just want games played there. It is why we are prepared to move if we can get more money. That has nothing to do with it though. Unless Swans are prepared to play home games there, and they are not, then it is just a pipe dream.

What we are paid is not worth ANY other club in the competition to entertain as a home game. Name one club that will go play 'home' games in front of a 15k audience in Canberra where they will be giving away home ground advantage to the Swans.

You might think that there's a "less than zero percent" chance of any other club biting; but history shows you'd be wrong. This is not only cost-neutral for the AFL during the season: it saves them money at the end of the season, as the cash that poor clubs get from the ACT Gov't doesn't need to be made up from the CBF.

Seriously, what are you on because I would like some of whatever it is to get me through this season. The nickle and dimes the ACT has is not going to attact an AFL side there. We moved games there when we had a membership of 12k, since then it has doubled and it is probably borderline feasible to play games here in Melbourne than continue in Canberra. Anyone who has a larger membership than us, that is everyone else, would have a greater incentive to stay where they are now.

2. Do you think that Footscray playing their home game at the SCG for years on end has given Sydney 'an advantage'? Just a tiny one? Poor Victorian clubs will play their home games wherever the cash is greatest. If the last 5 years haven't shown that to you, then you need to start paying attention.

This has no relevance to this thread.

3. Sydney will not give up 11 games in Sydney; nor has the AFL any interest in them doing so.

Nobody wants them to and nobody cares, you are just not going to get extra home games handed to you on a platter. You would have to be a moron to think that is in even a remote possibility.

4. If AFL games are played in Canberra in 2007; and the Roos are not playing those games (following me so far?); then is there a reasonable chance that Sydney will be involved in one or more of those games? Got it? Or is your answer to that question still "less than zero percent"?

The sooner we get out of that crap hole the better. I couldn't give a toss if Sydney move there or not.

The only way three teams will play home games there against the Swans is if the AFL bribes them, it is going to cost a fortune compared to what it would cost to preserve the games already played there. That was my point.

If the AFL are too tight to help the ACT government out to match a figure being paid to play on the GC then what makes you think they will pay considerably more to get three other teams to play a game there?