Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Could you show your working, ie the maths to arrive at a figure if 25% interstate clubs on average?Since the AFL was formed 32 years ago, interstate clubs have won 12 premierships to the Victorian clubs 20 premierships. Considering the interstate clubs over these 32 years make up about roughly 25% of the competition (give or take the recent inclusion of GWS & GC), it is not a bad record and it is certainly not an issue about interstate clubs not being able to win at the MCG, its a load of bullsh!t driven by sooks.
Don Pyke started this and it sounds to me like he has just cracked the sh!ts about missing the boat in 2017. No suprise $ydney jumped on it too given they invested millions in two massive forwards from two massive clubs (never achievable without COLA and the other ambassador allowance crap), and the end result is nothing. Maybe Adelaide and Sydney can play their own three game series and fill that void they have in their lives.
That's what I thought as well, happy to be corrected.Yeah as far as i know the AFL still pays COLA to players under a certain salary.
Everyone who lives in Sydney is affected by the cost if living in Sydney, so that really makes no sense.Don't Sydney & GWS still receive COLA for the players that would actually be affected by the increased cost of living?
Could you show your working, ie the maths to arrive at a figure if 25% interstate clubs on average?
Everyone who lives in Sydney is affected by the cost if living in Sydney, so that really makes no sense.
You're right though players on minimal contracts get an additional 10%. That would no doubt help guys onthe fringes relocating to Sydney or moving to the AFL system and having to devote themselves full time.
No one at our club earns over a million a year.You seriously going to tell me that players earning 300k to over a million per year are affected by the cost of living in Sydney?
IMO it's fair for the players earning less than 200k but after that you guys are taking the piss if you think those players earning above that are on Struggle Street.
The Grand Final should be one game and at the MCG. What MCG should not be is a home ground for any club. Play the match of the round there on a Friday Night and thats it.
Upgrade the old grounds and find a home for Melbourne.
Collingwood - Move back to Vic Park
Richmond - Punt Hill
Melbourne - Find a Ground
St Kilda - Morrabbin
Essendon - Windy Hill
Bulldogs - Whitten Oval
North - The Dome
Geelong - Skilled.
hawthorn - Waverley
All 18 teams to play a Friday Night at the G.
Sorry but I'm not buying that for a second.No one at our club earns over a million a year.
COLA was actually never about welfare and it's dumb to frame the debate in that manner.
Rental assistance is and it's a good initiative. Minimum wage isn't much money for a player with a family.It's a very good idea.
COLA was to correct the inequity in the expenses faced by living in Sydney. Those expenses are faced by everyone living in Sydney, it's not complicated.
Sorry but I'm not buying that for a second.
If it was about inequity as you say why didn't the AFL give the Perth or VIC clubs a COLA.
Those States have higher costs of living compared to SA & QLD, some argue that Perth is as expensive as Sydney
You're right with one of your points though, COLA was never about welfare.
I don't think there is any chance the AFL will give the Swans & GWS etc an allowance to retain/recruit players.(COLA or whatever bullshit name the AFL want to give it)The cost of living in Sydney is higher than other state capitals. That's just the way it is.
If you think COLA shouldn't be reintroduced fair enough, it hardly seems likely anyway.
Clearly I'm not unbiased and it would help us a great deal. There are more lucid arguments you make though.
I dont oppose a sliding scale. Derived from objective data.
Club CEO advocates for his team? Doesn't surprise me at all. They should be sacked if they dont.I don't think there is any chance the AFL will give the Swans & GWS etc an allowance to retain/recruit players.(COLA or whatever bullshit name the AFL want to give it)
I'm surprised Harley even thought it would be worth trying to bring up the topic considering they have an existing COLA arrangement.
Agree with all that except for the bolded.Club CEO advocates for his team? Doesn't surprise me at all. They should be sacked if they dont.
Matthews is a bit more subtle, but essentially does the same.
Eddie advocates very well for the Pies interests, the insterstate clubs need to counter balance.
So how does making the 3rd game at the MCG make it fair?The only way this is fair is if game 3 is at the MCG, because in the case of it being game one or two, there will always be one team that misses out on the home ground advantage if it's decided in two games.
How so?The only way this is fair is if game 3 is at the MCG, because in the case of it being game one or two, there will always be one team that misses out on the home ground advantage if it's decided in two games.
He didn't. Caro has never had a problem airing her version of eventsWhile I'm not in favour of this idea personally (each to their own, the game needs alternate perspectives) I can't help but think it's one of those things that comes off as cringeworthy coming from a losing Grand Finalist. This isn't something Don Pyke should be raising with the AFL immediately after losing the GF to Richmond.
How so?
Game 1 @ Higher ranked team
Game 2 @ Lower ranked team
Game 3 (if neccessary) @ MCG
Who are the absolute lunatics that are actually campaigning for this idea to be introduced?
This still gives the Vic side an advantage .
Game 1 @ Higher ranked team
Game 2 @ Lower ranked team or mcg if top ranked team not from vic
Game 3 (if neccessary) @ higher ranked team .