Tasmania Congratulations on Tassie License. Mens team to enter 2028. Womens team TBA. Other details TBA 3/5

[Chief]

---

GO TO PART 2 of this thread:

Tasmania - Tasmania Devils, welcome to the AFL. Mens team to enter 2028. Womens team TBA. Other details TBA 3/5 (Part 2)

Continued from Part 1: https://www.bigfooty.com/forum/threads/congratulations-on-tassie-license-mens-team-to-enter-2028-womens-team-tba-other-details-tba-3-5.1226653/ Was going to draft up a Summary but this is pretty good...

www.bigfooty.com

---

 

[workhorse]

Yeah that’s fine mate how many people living in north western Victoria do you think follow Geelong bit different to situation to Tasmania also I’m not sure how you get the long drive and Tasmania in the same sentence the furthest possible you can be in the whole state from Hobart or Launceston is about 3-3.5 hours it seems like you just like to pick and poke and find problems that aren’t really that big of a deal!

The argument was made that 5,000,000 people in Melbourne sharing 9 teams (ie approx. 550,000 per team) is very similar to the whole of Tassie sharing 1. However, as you've put it, the Tasmania scenario accounts for travel times of up to 3.5 hours from Launceston or Hobart. Therefore if you apply similar parameters to Victoria, it actually ends up being, as Wookie put it, a population split of 6,500,000 people for 10 teams.

I agree with that Geelong should not act as a suitable comparison for why a Tasmanian team will work, but I do believe Tassie's population is more than enough to sustain a club, at least in the beginning.

 

[Kwality]

You can't just make up stories to suit your argument. There are several Tasmanians who said they'd switch to supporting the Tasmanian side - some said they'd support their old club as a second club. Count me as one of those. I would change my primary team to Tas, and keep supporting MFC as a second team. I'd probably end up dropping my paid membership with MFC because I can't justify paying to support two clubs. If Tas gets a team, I would buy a membership at the first possible opportunity. There are plenty of people like me. Sentiment and old club loyalties are all very nice, but when you've got a local team you can see every fortnight, the lustre of supporting a mainland team you see once a year (or more likely not at all) wears off very quickly.

Thats how it went in the early years of the Eagles.

 

[Billy ray]

So the tassie team will play games out of geelong yeh? That where we are up to?!

 

[madmug]

The argument was made that 5,000,000 people in Melbourne sharing 9 teams (ie approx. 550,000 per team) is very similar to the whole of Tassie sharing 1. However, as you've put it, the Tasmania scenario accounts for travel times of up to 3.5 hours from Launceston or Hobart. Therefore if you apply similar parameters to Victoria, it actually ends up being, as Wookie put it, a population split of 6,500,000 people for 10 teams.

I agree with that Geelong should not act as a suitable comparison for why a Tasmanian team will work, but I do believe Tassie's population is more than enough to sustain a club, at least in the beginning.

I don't agree completely. As said its the psychosocial benefits it brings to a community. That's the most important reason for having professional sports in a city/region.

The economics will vary for each club, even within a short distance. ie Geelong is 90km from Melbourne, North Melbourne is right in Melbourne. One is at the lower end of the financial & membership pile, the other is 90km from Melbourne.

 

[wizardwaffle]

Tasmania is passionate about Australian Rules, since there has been a national competition they have wanted a team in the competition. They have had teams in junior competitions, which have been restablished in the Tasmanian Devils in the Victorian Under 18's competition.

But why hasn't that translated into a team in the AFL. The simple answer is bums on seats, or the population behind the team in the town they call home. What are the population numbers around Australia.

Looking at those numbers you can see that Tasmania has a population of about 530,000 people. Also, unlike other states in Australia where most of the population live in the cities, only half live in Hobart, 270,000 people.

Look at South Australia, 1,710,000 people which 1,300,000 in Adelaide. That is 650,000 people in the city of Adelaide for each of their two teams. That is only in Adelaide, there is 850,000 in the state for each team. Looking at those figures, Hobart hasn't got the population to support a team in the AFL (Adelaide 650,000 to Hobart 270,000).

When you look at the state as a whole you get the problem they have in Tasmania with competitions across the whole state. With populations of 150,000 in Launceston and 110,000 in the North West there is always arguments over the competition. Were will a Tasmanian team play its home games, five at Hobart, four at Launceston and one in the North West. The problem is that the team won't have a base to call home. If they did, the team would be from that town and the other parts of Tasmania will complain.

Tasmania is serviced by Hawthorn and North Melbourne playing home games at Launceston and Hobart. The people of Tasmania deserve some AFL football, but there isn't enough people in Tasmania to have an AFL team.

I added the number of people in Geelong to the list because someone would say what about them. Yes, Geelong has a team in a town of 200,000 people. But the Cats have played in this competition since the start. Geelong is also supported by many people in Melbourne. So Geelong has the back up of the 5,190,000 in Melbourne. something that a Tasmanian team won't have.

It is a shame that these are the numbers we have, but 650,000 football following people to make a team survive in the AFL, like we have in Adelaide, Tasmania doesn't have the population in the whole state, and in a city they are nowhere near. I put this thread here to state what is holding back a team from Tasmania entering the league. Also, would the side become the 19th team in the AFL, which would introduce the weekly bye again. The competition is all set up to run with 18 teams in deals with pay-TV and other companies. Does the AFL want to ruin that?

 

[Kwality]

The economics will vary for each club, even within a short distance. ie Geelong is 90km from Melbourne, North Melbourne is right in Melbourne. One is at the lower end of the financial & membership pile, the other is 90km from Melbourne.

Thats the reason each club has a very different business model, as will the Tas club.

 

[madmug]

Thats the reason each club has a very different business model, as will the Tas club.

Absolutely, which is my point. One I've made many times in the 10 years I've been at this on BF.

 

[AstroboyUK]

Here's a guess based on nothing but intuition, which counts for nothing, but my antenna is twitching.

I think Gills recent downlplaying of an Tassie team in the near future may actually be an act of strategic positioning to tease out the best possible commitment from the Tasmanian Government. I think the AFL may be (wisely in my view) gently deploying proxies to talk it up, and engaging in the analysis process constructively to help build up groundswell - but I think he's already decided its going to happen. He is maintaining a level of detachment/measured cynicism publicly at CEO level to make sure the bar (ie proposal for a team) is set as high as possible, but its quite possible the minimum criteria has already been met.

 

[jarrod_island_doggies]

Just read the most idiotic thing on twitter (surprise surprise) saying that the Tasmanian backers would be better off bring a doom and gloom doc to AFL house displaying how/why the Suns should fold.

Aside from being caustic and naive, how exactly would these nuffies see their grand scheme playing out? "Sorry Gil, the AFL is stuffed due to the Gold Coast, the very viability of the league is at stake - now that you've opened your eyes to the reality, boy oh boy do we have a plan for you..."

Wowee...

A) The Suns/Giants are doing exactly what the league wants long term - the better they do, the more chance Tassie has.

B) If things get so dire that they need to cull a team, why on earth would they look to bring in what's going to be a fringe club at best?


Fyi I'm pro Tassie having a stand alone side (brought in with WA3 by 2028ish), just don't understand the thinking going on with some people...

 

[Demonoid]

Peter Gordon backs Tasmanian AFL taskforce's business case

Western Bulldogs' president Peter Gordon described the business case for a standalone team in Tasmania as "sound".

www.theage.com.au

 

[fargothegreat]

Tasmania is passionate about Australian Rules, since there has been a national competition they have wanted a team in the competition. They have had teams in junior competitions, which have been restablished in the Tasmanian Devils in the Victorian Under 18's competition.

But why hasn't that translated into a team in the AFL. The simple answer is bums on seats, or the population behind the team in the town they call home. What are the population numbers around Australia.

Looking at those numbers you can see that Tasmania has a population of about 530,000 people. Also, unlike other states in Australia where most of the population live in the cities, only half live in Hobart, 270,000 people.

Look at South Australia, 1,710,000 people which 1,300,000 in Adelaide. That is 650,000 people in the city of Adelaide for each of their two teams. That is only in Adelaide, there is 850,000 in the state for each team. Looking at those figures, Hobart hasn't got the population to support a team in the AFL (Adelaide 650,000 to Hobart 270,000).

When you look at the state as a whole you get the problem they have in Tasmania with competitions across the whole state. With populations of 150,000 in Launceston and 110,000 in the North West there is always arguments over the competition. Were will a Tasmanian team play its home games, five at Hobart, four at Launceston and one in the North West. The problem is that the team won't have a base to call home. If they did, the team would be from that town and the other parts of Tasmania will complain.

Tasmania is serviced by Hawthorn and North Melbourne playing home games at Launceston and Hobart. The people of Tasmania deserve some AFL football, but there isn't enough people in Tasmania to have an AFL team.

I added the number of people in Geelong to the list because someone would say what about them. Yes, Geelong has a team in a town of 200,000 people. But the Cats have played in this competition since the start. Geelong is also supported by many people in Melbourne. So Geelong has the back up of the 5,190,000 in Melbourne. something that a Tasmanian team won't have.

It is a shame that these are the numbers we have, but 650,000 football following people to make a team survive in the AFL, like we have in Adelaide, Tasmania doesn't have the population in the whole state, and in a city they are nowhere near. I put this thread here to state what is holding back a team from Tasmania entering the league. Also, would the side become the 19th team in the AFL, which would introduce the weekly bye again. The competition is all set up to run with 18 teams in deals with pay-TV and other companies. Does the AFL want to ruin that?

Gee that Devils logo has some serious colour contrast issues.

 

[BringBackTorps]

1.

It is a shame that these are the numbers we have, but 650,000 football following people to make a team survive in the AFL, like we have in Adelaide, Tasmania doesn't have the population in the whole state, and in a city they are nowhere near

Tamania's current population of c. 540,000 is, cf Melb., overwhelmingly anglo-celtic- this group is where the vast majority of AFL players are drafted from.
About 12%+ of Melb.'s pop. is from an Asian background (including Middle Eastern)- yet the AFL drafts almost no players from this background.
Tasmania is overrepresented in the AFL Hall Of Fame, & AFL Team Of The Century. The AFL is very keen to revive the fabled Tas. VFL/AFL recruitment goldmine. Thus, the "AF demographic" population of Tas. equates to much more than its population of 540,000.

Tim Lane (& others), in his 26.7.19 submission (quoted in full in post#1419) to the Tas. Parlt. AFL Team C'tee, comprehensively demolishes your arguments.
Your views haven't addressed:-

. this Tas. AF playing/AF fan demographic/ethnic issue

. the many issues raised by Tim Lane (& many other pro Tasmania AFL 19th team proponents- including McLachlan, Demetriou- both several times, including 2019; & former AFL Chairman & CEO R. Oakley, in 2019).

. the very detailed Business Case submitted to the Tas. govt. on 7.2 (contained in this thread about 7.2). This strongly counters ALL arguments that a Tas. team is not financially sustainable.

http://www.parliament.tas.gov.au/ctee/Council/Submissions/AFL/15%20Tim%20Lane%20v2.pdf

Yes, Geelong has a team in a town of 200,000 people. But the Cats have played in this competition since the start. Geelong is also supported by many people in Melbourne. So Geelong has the back up of the 5,190,000 in Melbourne. something that a Tasmanian team won't have

Geelong, pop., c, 220,000, demonstrates that a small regional city can support an AFL team. Most who attend Kardinia Park are from the Geelong area, & regional Victoria.
Also, you have completely ignored that the Tas. Business Case demonstrates many thousands of AFL fans from Melb. etc. will visit Tas. to attend games- which will contribute many millions of $ to the Tas. economy. It is a very easy trip by the overnight ferry, or c. 1 hour in a plane. Stressed-out & crowded Melburnians (c. 9m pop. in 2050) visiting beautiful Tasmania is a big financial & attendee advantage for the Tas. team.
You have also ignored there are c.100,000 expat Tasmanians living in Melb., many of whom can be expected to support the Tas. team (by attending its games in Melb. and/or Tas.).


2. The Mercury B. Stubbs 2.3.20

Stubbs wrote, re P. Gordon Footscray Chairman (who on 3.3.20 gave submissions to the Tas. Parlt. C'tee for an AFL Team)

"Mr Gordon said the Business Case stacked up economically, and would not be a drag on the State, nor the other 18 clubs. Gordon said 'I also agree it could be AFL cost neutral...and the Tasmanian Brand...will and does add tremendous value (my emphases) both to existing AFL sponsors, but also to the AFL itself'.

Mr Gordon said Tasmania should be represented at AFL Commission and AFL Club President meetings as the state did not have a voice when its future was discussed".

Re A. Demetriou, who also spoke to the Tas. Parl. AFL Team C'tee on 3.3.20, Stubbs wrote

"He too endorsed the Business Case".

Tasmanian AFL Team (@TasAFLteam) | Twitter

The latest Tweets from Tasmanian AFL Team (@TasAFLteam). Join up: https://t.co/oXSZfDikC6 // Keep up to date: @uws_tassie // Follow the team: @TasmaniaDevils_ // This is an unofficial account. Swansea, Tasmania

twitter.com

(go to 3.3 tweet, click on The Mecrcury article by B. Stubbs for full transcript)



3. Tas. Premier P. Gutwein has reaffirmed that should Tas. not be given a 19th licence, it is very unlikely Tas. would apply for a VFL team.



4. FFT CEO M. Bulkeley, in Tas. soccer's 2019 Annual State Of The Game report, is, again, falsely claiming that soccer has more participants in Tas. than any other sport- again citing the very misleading AusPlay "participant" nos. He claims Tas. soccer has 38,086 participants (up 10.2%), AF 22,184 (& basketball, netball, & cricket 21656, 1768 & 17180 respectively). The AFL's own registered nos. are 42,000+
(AusPlay is a survey of only 1 in every 1000 people people in Aust.; & it counts a person as a "participant" if they answer they only did a sport/activity ONCE in the last 12 months!)

It is true that, due to the AFL negligence in Tas., & carpetbagging of Tas. elite players, male club competition nos. (& the Tas. elite AF comp.) are in a long term decline in Tas.
AF Tas. fans have been demoralised. They are being robbed of tribalism, state pride, & the general desire to only follow the most elite comp. (the AFL). Their own team would solve these problems.

https://footballfedtas.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/StateOfPlay2019.pdf

 

[BringBackTorps]

1. https://www.bigfooty.com/forum/thre...oty-general-discussion.1158561/#post-64531782 (go to post#14)

The female Tas. U18 girls have their first game (as part of the full 10 week season) in the Vic. based female elite NAB League this Saturday 7.3- at 12.30, at North Hobart oval. It will precede the NM/Tas. AFLW match at NHO.
It will be interesting to see how big the early, & later, crowd will be.

Devils' NAB League Girls debut a special moment: Humphries

"We've never had this opportunity and the girls have never had this pathway."

www.theadvocate.com.au

(Behind a paywall- can anyone open, & post here)


2. David King, ex NMFC, said on SEN Melb. Radio this week he had doubts there was sufficient depth in AF to go to 19 teams. He said " I know this will not be a popular view".

AFAIK, he is the first (in recent times) MSM AF expert who has directly stated opposition to Tas. being added as the 19th team.
(I am excluding some of HFC Chairman J. Kennet's- conflicted- anti-Tas. expansion comments. NMFC, despite receiving $4m pa from the Tas. govt., has been publicy supportive of Tas. having its own team in the near future)

 

[Kappa]

Surely Tasmania United is much much better name than Tasmania Devils

 

[Kwality]

Peter Gordon backs Tasmanian AFL taskforce's business case

Western Bulldogs' president Peter Gordon described the business case for a standalone team in Tasmania as "sound".

www.theage.com.au

so what?

 

[Kwality]

http://www.parliament.tas.gov.au/ctee/Council/Submissions/AFL/15%20Tim%20Lane%20v2.pdf

Good read, lots in there.

 

[Professor Knowall]

...David King, ex NMFC, said on SEN Melb. Radio this week he had doubts there was sufficient depth in AF to go to 19 teams. He said " I know this will not be a popular view".

AFAIK, he is the first (in recent times) MSM AF expert who has directly stated opposition to Tas. being added as the 19th team....

King was a good footballer and he was always adept at spinning quite a few words together ... but alas I've always found his words to fall far short of that of an 'expert' and hence pay him little attention.

Then again, a 19th team would be the perfect opportunity for the AFL to help address another problem - that of congestion - by implementing the long overdue need to reduce on-field playing numbers to 16 a side. This would also take care of King's player depth concern. win/win.

 

[Kwality]

King was a good footballer and he was always adept at spinning quite a few words together ... but alas I've always found his words to fall far short of that of an 'expert' and hence pay him little attention.

Then again, a 19th team would be the perfect opportunity for the AFL to help address another problem - that of congestion - by implementing the long overdue need to reduce on-field playing numbers to 16 a side. This would also take care of King's player depth concern. win/win.

More teams must include the good professors know it all (sic) plan, there are just not the cattle out there.

 

[Blackhawk42]

Surely Tasmania United is much much better name than Tasmania Devils

I don't think you'll have too many friends on that one.

 

[telsor]

(I am excluding some of HFC Chairman J. Kennet's- conflicted- anti-Tas. expansion comments.

Odd how you're so quick to dismiss the views of anyone you perceive to have a bias *against* a Tas team as being conflicted, and yet consider the views of those biased towards a Tas team to be unquestionable facts.

 

[madmug]

Odd how you're so quick to dismiss the views of anyone you perceive to have a bias *against* a Tas team as being conflicted, and yet consider the views of those biased towards a Tas team to be unquestionable facts.

Hawthorn is conflicted. Having such a financial interest in the Tasteam proceedings would be the very definition of 'conflict of interest'.

 

[madmug]

I don't think you'll have too many friends on that one.

The AFL own that name. The NBL team has been linked to the new NBL license via people wanting the name to be given to the new team. The old team of course was the Devils. But as said, the name is no longer in circulation.

 

[telsor]

Hawthorn is conflicted. Having such a financial interest in the Tasteam proceedings would be the very definition of 'conflict of interest'.

I agree.

Now use the same criteria in assessing those who support a Tas team.

 

[madmug]

I agree.

Now use the same criteria in assessing those who support a Tas team.

To what point? We know who wants a team. Hardly a vested interest like Kennett has.

 

[footyfan1978]

Geelong, pop., c, 220,000, demonstrates that a small regional city can support an AFL team. Most who attend Kardinia Park are from the Geelong area, & regional Victoria.
Also, you have completely ignored that the Tas. Business Case demonstrates many thousands of AFL fans from Melb. etc. will visit Tas. to attend games- which will contribute many millions of $ to the Tas. economy. It is a very easy trip by the overnight ferry, or c. 1 hour in a plane. Stressed-out & crowded Melburnians (c. 9m pop. in 2050) visiting beautiful Tasmania is a big financial & attendee advantage for the Tas. team.
You have also ignored there are c.100,000 expat Tasmanians living in Melb., many of whom can be expected to support the Tas. team (by attending its games in Melb. and/or Tas.).

Well put.