The Case for Tasmania

Remove this Banner Ad

Mar 17, 2009
21,636
17,319
Hobart
AFL Club
Collingwood
I think you are missing some basic points I am & have made over time.
Firstly I dont particularly disagree with aspects of your economic assessment, but your view more reflects what happens in the high cost market in Melbourne than here. The cost of playing at the MCG & Etihad is very high & requires huge breakeven numbers re crowds & sponsors & other revenue sources before you make money to pay for your football costs.
Part of the value here are that they are low cost cleanskin stadiums. The economics are different here. Why do you think north Melbourne can make a profit out of a GWS game? Because it costs a lot less to play.
I know this is only part of the issue but it is a very relevant part.
I also disagree over government support. Most state governments put money into football & other sports & events for that matter. Whether it be to back the building of sports stadiums, to underwriting major sporting events. I fail to see the difference with the form of support. After all its about stimulating economic activity. I think you will find a few sponsors in the private area who have pulled the pin on sports clubs & events, moreso than government.
IMO the Victorian 'market' is over serviced. Evidenced by selling games & so much direct AFL support. I will leave it to the economists but I think a Tasmanian is acheivable, as shown in the Business case.
Anyway Most AFL decisions are Political decisions, not economic. GWS is definitely political. Throwing money at underacheiving old VFL teams is Political. I'll let others argue which political decision is best for football.
 

lihei

Club Legend
Oct 16, 2003
2,499
307
Blue Balls, Pennsylvania
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
Manangatang Thirds
Put me down....

map%20of%20tasmania.jpg
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Mar 17, 2009
21,636
17,319
Hobart
AFL Club
Collingwood
madmug - just a query, if a Tasmania team was to enter next year would you follow them or continue to support the Pies?

I would continue to follow the Pies as I have done for many years, I would also follow a Tasmanian team & go to matches played in Hobart & maybe a few up north. Remember I have seen very few AFL matches. Most AFL is TV football for me. Going to support my team on a regular basis, like most other footy followers get to do, would be a great experience.
 
Feb 21, 2006
20,663
19,483
Muckertal
AFL Club
Melbourne
Other Teams
Turtles, NYJets, Celtics, Tottenham
I would continue to follow the Pies as I have done for many years, I would also follow a Tasmanian team & go to matches played in Hobart & maybe a few up north. Remember I have seen very few AFL matches. Most AFL is TV football for me. Going to support my team on a regular basis, like most other footy followers get to do, would be a great experience.

Thanks for the response mate, genuinely interested. I'm just wondering what level of support a Tassie team may get considering most Tasmanians would likely already have an allegiance to an AFL side. I've no doubt though that supporters like yourself would take out memberships and turn up to games (having them as your second team) which in time may turn into full-fledged support and after a generation would probably cement the Tasmanian allegiance - this is similar to what I assume will happen in the Gold Coast with ex-pats taking them up a second, local side but after a few years or a generation they will become the primary team and the old ex-pats will support the local side against their old teams.

FWIW I'm on the bandwagon that Tassie should have their own team and it would be preferable to be a new team rather than a transplanted Vic side. There's no reason why Tassie can't have their own team while maintaining the status quo in Vic so I disagree with some of your posts earlier that a Vic team or two should move aside to make way for a new Tassie team.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Mar 17, 2009
21,636
17,319
Hobart
AFL Club
Collingwood
Thanks for the response mate, genuinely interested. I'm just wondering what level of support a Tassie team may get considering most Tasmanians would likely already have an allegiance to an AFL side. I've no doubt though that supporters like yourself would take out memberships and turn up to games (having them as your second team) which in time may turn into full-fledged support and after a generation would probably cement the Tasmanian allegiance - this is similar to what I assume will happen in the Gold Coast with ex-pats taking them up a second, local side but after a few years or a generation they will become the primary team and the old ex-pats will support the local side against their old teams.

FWIW I'm on the bandwagon that Tassie should have their own team and it would be preferable to be a new team rather than a transplanted Vic side. There's no reason why Tassie can't have their own team while maintaining the status quo in Vic so I disagree with some of your posts earlier that a Vic team or two should move aside to make way for a new Tassie team.

I know people in Perth & in Brisbane who changed from supporting Victorian teams to then support their own AFL teams. No doubt the same happened in Adelaide & will happen on the GC. We have over 8k Hawthorn & 3500 North members here now. I bet they dont all actually barrack for those clubs.
I guess I want to see footy people here have the same pleasure of following their own team as many others do in most other parts of the Country. It would be a good unifying factor here IMO. Its a sad pity that Tasmania's 515k dont have any major footy team to call their own. We just have some paid fly in fly out entertainers.
 
Feb 21, 2006
20,663
19,483
Muckertal
AFL Club
Melbourne
Other Teams
Turtles, NYJets, Celtics, Tottenham
Is this a very clear admission of an inability to provide any level of bona fides by those who claim a divine right based on postcode?

If South were a rabble, how would you characterise Melbourne, give you a clue, a joke !!

When a club is on life support , when would you pull the plug !! 5 years, 10 years ...

How are Melbourne a joke? We've cleared a $5 million debt off the back of supporters over the last few years and have added to our assets by merging with the Bentleigh Club last year so we made an on-paper profit of close to $10M. We are a joke on the field the last few years granted but that doesn't translate off-field. Off-field we are going OK and are financially viable so not sure why you think we above other teams are a joke.

Historically we've been going alright off-field, even in the 80's when most other VFL clubs were going to the wall we weren't under threat. In 1996 when the merger with Hawthorn was attempted it was our on-field record that was the issue, we weren't merging for financial reasons - it was the Hawks who were in financial strife despite dominating throughout the 80's.

I'll admit we, like every club, have to improve and expand off-field and grow our supporter base but we are in no danger of going under any time soon and have begun to address our supporter base by creating a base at Casey and doing some groundwork there with the locals. We have also since the Gardner board addressed the issue of being wandering nomads by moving into Olympic/AAMI Park and dumping the Junction Oval which wasn't even fit for a 1970's VFL side let alone a professional AFL club.

The issue that I see for most Victorian clubs is the legacy debts they have had since the rebadging to the AFL. Most clubs have had these debts hanging over their heads like the sword of Damacles since moving into the professional era so have never been able to evolve and grow with this era instead being beholden to the AFL's wealth distribution and administrative decisions. Despite being the ones who laid the groundwork and created the environment that allowed the current competition to prosper like it has they have not been able to reap the benefits, instead seeing the AFL funnel millions upon millions of dollars into NSW/QLD to grow the game. While this may be fair enough on one hand the AFL really should have given these clubs a clean slate to work from during the 90's so that they could develop and grow into professional clubs without being reliant on the AFL's handouts.

That's why I applaud our club for taking the hard yet long-term approach of clearing the debt first at the expense initially of investing in the FD. North has taken the opposite approach and while they have benefited from this in the short-term by remaining competitive on-field (after all that's what it's all about) the debt hanging over their heads (and the interest repayments that hamstring them because of that) remain. The MFC on the other hand has now cleared the debt and with good financial management can now look to invest and expand without having to worry about half a million a year being thrown away on interest to creditors.
 
Feb 21, 2006
20,663
19,483
Muckertal
AFL Club
Melbourne
Other Teams
Turtles, NYJets, Celtics, Tottenham
:eek: Football here is a bloody basket case. Try finding things out before talking about things you obviously know nothing about.

If having 10 Victorian clubs is SO important then why did they bother with the AFL? The VFL was broke, thats why. Some of those clubs are still struggling even with the draft & salary cap.

If the Victorian clubs and the former VFL are so s**t and such a drain on everyone else and make us look bad to the northerners or whatever other rubbish argument you're trying to make then why don't you create a Tassie team and create your own national competition instead of begging to join the one these clubs created on the back of more than a century of history and work. Because no-one would pay or watch that's why. I don't like economic rationalism in sport but in this case it is apt - Victoria is not just the home to 10 AFL clubs - it is the backbone and heartland of the competition. Weaken Victoria by removing 2-3 clubs (and thereby removing hundreds of thousands of supporters) and that $1.25B media rights deal won't be worth anywhere near as much because the TV networks pay based on the numbers and Victoria is the only Australian Football state the networks care about. Not to mention other things like merchandising or stadium deals.

No-one here is denying Tassie should have a team in the AFL, on the contrary most here are supporting it - however you (and other known anti-Vic trolls Kwality & Papa G amongst others) seem to relish in the thought that the Victorian supporters need to sacrifice at least 2-3 of their own clubs due to some sort of inner rage at having witnessed the demise of their own state competitions because they were not strong enough to compete with the VFL/AFL. You've argued vociferously that Tassie should have a team - agreed. But you seem to think it HAS to be at the expense of at least one Victorian team who has been in this competition for at least 85 years and for most of them 115 years. You fly into a rage because North & Hawthorn come down south to play a few games a year and are leeching money for the privilege but you fail to acknowledge that it is YOUR OWN STATE GOVERNMENT and LOCAL COUNCILS who are paying this money to them to lure them there. The smartest thing for Tasmania to do would be to cease paying Hawthorn & North to play and instead put that money to better use and perhaps even towards their own team.

- You have a cry about Victorian teams selling home games against low ranking interstate sides but then state that you yourself wouldn't bother making the trek to watch a Tassie side play "if it were only against GWS".
- You talk about the entitlement of Victorian sides but then act as if Tasmania deserves to have a side in the competition despite the evidence showing it would not benefit the competition in any way and could potentially actually weaken it.
- Further you claim that the smaller Vic clubs are unsustainable (which is false) but then go on to say that a Tassie team could do just as good as them and no worse - so in your eyes being also unsustainable.

The hypocrisy and flawed logic on show here is hilarious.

Basically your argument is that Tassie deserves a side in a national competition and it is somehow due to there being 10 sides in Victoria that Tassie can't have one until a Vic side makes way. The two things are not even close to being inter-related - there is no reason why a successful Tassie side couldn't enter the competition as an additional team on top of the 18 we have now.
 

blaze036

Brownlow Medallist
Apr 27, 2011
19,477
13,373
Melbourne
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
Gumbies FC
If the Victorian clubs and the former VFL are so s**t and such a drain on everyone else and make us look bad to the northerners or whatever other rubbish argument you're trying to make then why don't you create a Tassie team and create your own national competition instead of begging to join the one these clubs created on the back of more than a century of history and work. Because no-one would pay or watch that's why. I don't like economic rationalism in sport but in this case it is apt - Victoria is not just the home to 10 AFL clubs - it is the backbone and heartland of the competition. Weaken Victoria by removing 2-3 clubs (and thereby removing hundreds of thousands of supporters) and that $1.25B media rights deal won't be worth anywhere near as much because the TV networks pay based on the numbers and Victoria is the only Australian Football state the networks care about. Not to mention other things like merchandising or stadium deals.

No-one here is denying Tassie should have a team in the AFL, on the contrary most here are supporting it - however you (and other known anti-Vic trolls Kwality & Papa G amongst others) seem to relish in the thought that the Victorian supporters need to sacrifice at least 2-3 of their own clubs due to some sort of inner rage at having witnessed the demise of their own state competitions because they were not strong enough to compete with the VFL/AFL. You've argued vociferously that Tassie should have a team - agreed. But you seem to think it HAS to be at the expense of at least one Victorian team who has been in this competition for at least 85 years and for most of them 115 years. You fly into a rage because North & Hawthorn come down south to play a few games a year and are leeching money for the privilege but you fail to acknowledge that it is YOUR OWN STATE GOVERNMENT and LOCAL COUNCILS who are paying this money to them to lure them there. The smartest thing for Tasmania to do would be to cease paying Hawthorn & North to play and instead put that money to better use and perhaps even towards their own team.

- You have a cry about Victorian teams selling home games against low ranking interstate sides but then state that you yourself wouldn't bother making the trek to watch a Tassie side play "if it were only against GWS".
- You talk about the entitlement of Victorian sides but then act as if Tasmania deserves to have a side in the competition despite the evidence showing it would not benefit the competition in any way and could potentially actually weaken it.
- Further you claim that the smaller Vic clubs are unsustainable (which is false) but then go on to say that a Tassie team could do just as good as them and no worse - so in your eyes being also unsustainable.

The hypocrisy and flawed logic on show here is hilarious.

Basically your argument is that Tassie deserves a side in a national competition and it is somehow due to there being 10 sides in Victoria that Tassie can't have one until a Vic side makes way. The two things are not even close to being inter-related - there is no reason why a successful Tassie side couldn't enter the competition as an additional team on top of the 18 we have now.

Post of the thread.

Game, Set, Match
 
Mar 17, 2009
21,636
17,319
Hobart
AFL Club
Collingwood
If the Victorian clubs etc etc etc.

Basically your argument is that Tassie deserves a side in a national competition and it is somehow due to there being 10 sides in Victoria that Tassie can't have one until a Vic side makes way. The two things are not even close to being inter-related - there is no reason why a successful Tassie side couldn't enter the competition as an additional team on top of the 18 we have now.

BF is a forum for discussion/argument. Using the 'Troll' label is a poor arguement against a point of view.
Having read a lot of BF threads & taken note of what AD has said, it doesnt look like their is a desire for, or likelihood of any new teams being added to the league anytime soon. Thus how does Tasmania get a look in to the AFL? (Rhetorical Q)
The AFL seem to be pushing to shove North Melbourne into Tasmania. If it wasnt for our last Premier re-signing Hawthorn at YP, We would be seeing the Roos play 7 home games here. The thin edge of the wedge I would suspect & shows that even the AFL recognise they have too many struggling clubs in Melbourne.
Given that the only new teams look like being in the 'new' territories, & that so many Victorian teams are rellying on selling games to survive. It made it obvious that the only way for Tasmania to progress its position, given that we have an 18 team competition, is for rationalisation of teams in Victoria.
Your claims of 'hypocrisy & flawed logic' are just your point of view. Their is no right & wrong in this, it is opinion.
I generally label my opinion as IMO. Because that is what it is. You take your opinion as fact.
To claim the TV rights are only because of the Victorian market are really arrogant. One may comment that the TV rights have gone up depsite the fact that South Melbouren & Fitzroy have departed & 4 teams actually now play less games in Victoria because the play them interstate!! How does that work?
 
Feb 21, 2006
20,663
19,483
Muckertal
AFL Club
Melbourne
Other Teams
Turtles, NYJets, Celtics, Tottenham
BF is a forum for discussion/argument. Using the 'Troll' label is a poor arguement against a point of view.
Having read a lot of BF threads & taken note of what AD has said, it doesnt look like their is a desire for, or likelihood of any new teams being added to the league anytime soon. Thus how does Tasmania get a look in to the AFL? (Rhetorical Q)
The AFL seem to be pushing to shove North Melbourne into Tasmania. If it wasnt for our last Premier re-signing Hawthorn at YP, We would be seeing the Roos play 7 home games here. The thin edge of the wedge I would suspect & shows that even the AFL recognise they have too many struggling clubs in Melbourne.
Given that the only new teams look like being in the 'new' territories, & that so many Victorian teams are rellying on selling games to survive. It made it obvious that the only way for Tasmania to progress its position, given that we have an 18 team competition, is for rationalisation of teams in Victoria.
Your claims of 'hypocrisy & flawed logic' are just your point of view. Their is no right & wrong in this, it is opinion.
I generally label my opinion as IMO. Because that is what it is. You take your opinion as fact.
To claim the TV rights are only because of the Victorian market are really arrogant. One may comment that the TV rights have gone up depsite the fact that South Melbouren & Fitzroy have departed & 4 teams actually now play less games in Victoria because the play them interstate!! How does that work?

It's only your interpretation that in order for a Tassie team to get in a Vic club will have to die. There is no basis for this yet throughout this thread you have repeated ad nauseum that this is the only way a Tassie team can get in. Most Victorians would love a Tassie team in the comp but if you start saying that 2 or 3 of their clubs who have been around anywhere up to 150 years have to make way for them you're going to face a lot of stiff opposition and are unlikely to get far.

You're correct it is unlikely that any new teams will be added in the immediate future as there have just been two new teams introduced in markets that historically have been difficult to crack for the AFL and therefore they are going to require a bundle of investment in time and money to shore up these teams before being able to look at introducing further teams. However I would suggest that the next time teams are looking at being introduced (probably 5-10 years) Tassie will be on the agenda as the only other really viable option is a 3rd Perth side. Despite the theoretical musings about teams in FNQ, north WA, NT and NZ these are not really options for the next few decades based on infrastructure and development.

So yes while it may be frustrating and you may want a side down there next year reality is it is not going to happen. Nor are any Victorian teams going to fall over any time soon so may as well stop banging your head against a brick wall. You should actually hope that teams like North Melbourne or the Bulldogs remain viable in Victoria because if they are not they have a far greater chance of being relocated to Tasmania than just dying and a new license given to Tassie. Most people want to see a new Tassie team that is started from scratch rather than a transplanted side so I think it would be in your best interests to hope the Vic sides remain sustainable. Further to this it is actually beneficial for your cause to have games down there in the meantime as home games there by Hawthorn and North Melbourne are pre-cursors to having your own side. You may not like having these "rentaclubs" "sponging money" from the good people of Tasmania however trust me, it would be far worse if they were playing these games in Canberra, Cairns or Darwin instead because that would mean Tasmania was not even anywhere close to being on the AFL's agenda.

It is also a fallacy to state that Victorian teams are selling games to survive. Do you think Hawthorn would roll over and die if the Tasmania sponsorship was withdrawn? Would Richmond cease to exist if the didn't get the revenue from playing one game a year in Cairns? That Melbourne would go back into debt without playing one home game a year against Port Adelaide in Darwin? Do you think that perhaps the AFL is happy for these games to be played in these areas that otherwise wouldn't have any exposure whatsoever to the AFL? Do you also factor in that by 2025 the AFL will own and control Docklands and therefore the Victorian sides (like North Melbourne & Bulldogs) who play out of there will be much more financially better off and in all likelihood will not have to sell games against low drawing teams anymore as they will begin making money on these games instead of writing cheques. Melbourne has already come to an agreement with the MCC so that we don't lose money for home games at the MCG.

I also think your anger is a bit misdirected towards the Vic sides - I would be more upset with GWS & the AFL rather than the Vic sides as really they are the ones who have taken the license that could have gone to Tassie, not Melbourne, North or the Dogs who have been competing since 1897 and 1925 respectively in this competition.
 

blaze036

Brownlow Medallist
Apr 27, 2011
19,477
13,373
Melbourne
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
Gumbies FC
It's only your interpretation that in order for a Tassie team to get in a Vic club will have to die. There is no basis for this yet throughout this thread you have repeated ad nauseum that this is the only way a Tassie team can get in. Most Victorians would love a Tassie team in the comp but if you start saying that 2 or 3 of their clubs who have been around anywhere up to 150 years have to make way for them you're going to face a lot of stiff opposition and are unlikely to get far.

You're correct it is unlikely that any new teams will be added in the immediate future as there have just been two new teams introduced in markets that historically have been difficult to crack for the AFL and therefore they are going to require a bundle of investment in time and money to shore up these teams before being able to look at introducing further teams. However I would suggest that the next time teams are looking at being introduced (probably 5-10 years) Tassie will be on the agenda as the only other really viable option is a 3rd Perth side. Despite the theoretical musings about teams in FNQ, north WA, NT and NZ these are not really options for the next few decades based on infrastructure and development.

So yes while it may be frustrating and you may want a side down there next year reality is it is not going to happen. Nor are any Victorian teams going to fall over any time soon so may as well stop banging your head against a brick wall. You should actually hope that teams like North Melbourne or the Bulldogs remain viable in Victoria because if they are not they have a far greater chance of being relocated to Tasmania than just dying and a new license given to Tassie. Most people want to see a new Tassie team that is started from scratch rather than a transplanted side so I think it would be in your best interests to hope the Vic sides remain sustainable. Further to this it is actually beneficial for your cause to have games down there in the meantime as home games there by Hawthorn and North Melbourne are pre-cursors to having your own side. You may not like having these "rentaclubs" "sponging money" from the good people of Tasmania however trust me, it would be far worse if they were playing these games in Canberra, Cairns or Darwin instead because that would mean Tasmania was not even anywhere close to being on the AFL's agenda.

It is also a fallacy to state that Victorian teams are selling games to survive. Do you think Hawthorn would roll over and die if the Tasmania sponsorship was withdrawn? Would Richmond cease to exist if the didn't get the revenue from playing one game a year in Cairns? That Melbourne would go back into debt without playing one home game a year against Port Adelaide in Darwin? Do you think that perhaps the AFL is happy for these games to be played in these areas that otherwise wouldn't have any exposure whatsoever to the AFL? Do you also factor in that by 2025 the AFL will own and control Docklands and therefore the Victorian sides (like North Melbourne & Bulldogs) who play out of there will be much more financially better off and in all likelihood will not have to sell games against low drawing teams anymore as they will begin making money on these games instead of writing cheques. Melbourne has already come to an agreement with the MCC so that we don't lose money for home games at the MCG.

I also think your anger is a bit misdirected towards the Vic sides - I would be more upset with GWS & the AFL rather than the Vic sides as really they are the ones who have taken the license that could have gone to Tassie, not Melbourne, North or the Dogs who have been competing since 1897 and 1925 respectively in this competition.

i love this guy, his put what i've been trying to say for 50 pages in to one post :rolleyes:
 
Mar 17, 2009
21,636
17,319
Hobart
AFL Club
Collingwood
It's only your interpretation that in order for a Tassie team to get in a Vic club will have to die. There is no basis for this yet throughout this thread you have repeated ad nauseum that this is the only way a Tassie team can get in. Most Victorians would love a Tassie team in the comp but if you start saying that 2 or 3 of their clubs who have been around anywhere up to 150 years have to make way for them you're going to face a lot of stiff opposition and are unlikely to get far.

You're correct it is unlikely that any new teams will be added in the immediate future as there have just been two new teams introduced in markets that historically have been difficult to crack for the AFL and therefore they are going to require a bundle of investment in time and money to shore up these teams before being able to look at introducing further teams. However I would suggest that the next time teams are looking at being introduced (probably 5-10 years) Tassie will be on the agenda as the only other really viable option is a 3rd Perth side. Despite the theoretical musings about teams in FNQ, north WA, NT and NZ these are not really options for the next few decades based on infrastructure and development.

So yes while it may be frustrating and you may want a side down there next year reality is it is not going to happen. Nor are any Victorian teams going to fall over any time soon so may as well stop banging your head against a brick wall. You should actually hope that teams like North Melbourne or the Bulldogs remain viable in Victoria because if they are not they have a far greater chance of being relocated to Tasmania than just dying and a new license given to Tassie. Most people want to see a new Tassie team that is started from scratch rather than a transplanted side so I think it would be in your best interests to hope the Vic sides remain sustainable. Further to this it is actually beneficial for your cause to have games down there in the meantime as home games there by Hawthorn and North Melbourne are pre-cursors to having your own side. You may not like having these "rentaclubs" "sponging money" from the good people of Tasmania however trust me, it would be far worse if they were playing these games in Canberra, Cairns or Darwin instead because that would mean Tasmania was not even anywhere close to being on the AFL's agenda.

It is also a fallacy to state that Victorian teams are selling games to survive. Do you think Hawthorn would roll over and die if the Tasmania sponsorship was withdrawn? Would Richmond cease to exist if the didn't get the revenue from playing one game a year in Cairns? That Melbourne would go back into debt without playing one home game a year against Port Adelaide in Darwin? Do you think that perhaps the AFL is happy for these games to be played in these areas that otherwise wouldn't have any exposure whatsoever to the AFL? Do you also factor in that by 2025 the AFL will own and control Docklands and therefore the Victorian sides (like North Melbourne & Bulldogs) who play out of there will be much more financially better off and in all likelihood will not have to sell games against low drawing teams anymore as they will begin making money on these games instead of writing cheques. Melbourne has already come to an agreement with the MCC so that we don't lose money for home games at the MCG.

I also think your anger is a bit misdirected towards the Vic sides - I would be more upset with GWS & the AFL rather than the Vic sides as really they are the ones who have taken the license that could have gone to Tassie, not Melbourne, North or the Dogs who have been competing since 1897 and 1925 respectively in this competition.

-Never have I said a Victorian team has to 'Die'. Nor do I wish to see then collapse. South Melbourne chose to walk away from Victoria & reinvent itself, Fitzroy had no choice but to effectively leave the AFL through a shame amalgamation with the Bears. If playing in the AFL is such a struggle for some clubs, they can go back to the VFL.
-Most contributors on BF seem to feel 18 teams is the maximum & indeed their should be less teams in the AFL. If this is so then the only way to get our own team is either Rationalisation of perhaps amalgamation of GWS &/or GC with a Victorian team.
-You are correct, I do not like having the rentaclub mob flying in & out. Especially two of them. I'm quite sure they dont do it out of the goodness of their hearts. What proof do you have that having games played by those two teams is any kind of precursor to Tasmania having its own team? Why do you say 5-10 years? Hawthorn have been here 11 years. Isnt that enough???
 

McCrann

Premiership Player
Nov 1, 2007
3,882
822
Australia
AFL Club
St Kilda
Who cares who wins the point. Just look at the title of the thread FFS.
The issue is how much of a national competition is it when it includes so many clubs that just represent melbourne suburbs & do almost nothing to improve the 'national' credentials of the competition.
Clearly the AFL has too much protected ex VFL deadwood that has to sell game or demand 'handouts' like social welfare payments.
I am convinced that Tasmania could do better than some of those suburban hangers on.
Let them go back to the VFL.

Yep, good idea to get rid of "suburban" clubs. I bet the EPL is happy they didn't allow Arsenal, Chelsea, Tottenham, Fulham, West Ham, QPR, Brentford, Charlton, Wimbledon et al to consolidate into a couple of London "super-clubs" - London United (Red) and London City (Blue) perhaps????

In the AFL World you need a drawing pool of about 300,000 "supporters" to survive. This equates to about 500,000 - 600,000 people in an AFL state.

Given these figures, Tasmania is right on the border-line of being able to sustain a club. I believe they could sustain a club, but there is no rush to get down there, the business case is only likely to become more marginal as the rest of Australia grows at a faster pace than Tasmania.

Despite all that, I think there will be a club in Tasmania, but it will most likely be a relocated club - 'forced out and down' by the AFL. We all know who these clubs are. They will lose supporters in Melbourne, but they will retain most of them if they do it carefully. And they will not pick up some supporters because they're a relocated club - however in time this effect will diminish.

I think sometime in the 2020s is the likely timeframe. So there is time to wait. Hopefully by then we are playing a 24 or 25 round season so the club could play 6 home games each in Launceston & Hobart - although they would have to be based in one of these cities (probably Launceston).
 
Oct 17, 2000
18,955
16,608
Melbourne
AFL Club
Brisbane Lions
Other Teams
Fitzroy Football Club
Fitzroy had no choice but to effectively leave the AFL through a shame amalgamation with the Bears.

The Brisbane Bears won the right to use the Fitzroy branding as their own. Hence their re-branding as the Lions.

If playing in the AFL is such a struggle for some clubs, they can go back to the VFL.

Fitzroy went to the VAFA instead, after a short stint in 1999-2000 as the naming rights sponsor of the Coburg Football Club. They currently are as they started. An amateur club representing the suburb of Fitzroy in Victorian metropolitan football.
 

Tha Main Man

Rookie
Sep 1, 2012
30
12
AFL Club
Collingwood
Melbourne Kangaroos
St Kilda Bulldogs
Tassie Devils
17 team comp
22 Round Season, each team plays 20 games and has 2 byes.
Will strengthen the comp, less draining on players, and 50 less s**t blokes on lists.

Why the * would you want Melbourne to be merged. Its a great club with great history & one of the oldest clubs in the world, merging or relocating any of the poorer clubs in the comp wont strength the comp, it will divide it. If i supported any of those clubs i wouldn't want a merger, moving the kangaroos & bulldogs to the VFL should be the logical choice.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back