The Grand Final should be hosted at a neutral venue
- Thread starter Nile
- Start date
- Tagged users None
- Oct 30, 2010
- 5,547
- 4,365
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
that'd be a good guess i reckon.
HeaveHo_WeBlow
All Australian
- Oct 6, 2013
- 874
- 895
- AFL Club
- West Coast
More like, Victorians should be more grateful we joined their rundown competition and stopped it from going under. If it wasn't for us there wouldn't even be a VFL or AFL.
Don't bite the hand that feeds mate.
Then again majority of Victorian blokes wear skinny jeans, though now it must be starting to cut off blood flow to their minuscule brains.
- Moderator
- #756
yeah thats totally how it went down. The WAFL didnt practically beg to be in the VFL out of fear the VFL would expand into WA without them. Same drivers in the SANFL, but the SANFL were just fussier and more conniving about it.
The hand that feeds it isnt the same hand that fed it briefly in 1986.
we can do without this.
- Moderator
- #757
Not moving the grand final doesnt change that one iota.
- Apr 12, 2012
- 46,261
- 42,107
- AFL Club
- GWS
While i understand your empassioned response and applaud it,
The game changed to a national competition and therefore is already changed.
But fight the good fight.
Wookie was it ever really discussed to relocate a side to Perth? I had never heard that before. That would of been a huge fail I think.
It seems the situation now is unviable for many clubs, Geelong is living proof having your own ground makes you more money.
See Wookie's post. Also, must take a massive brain to dig stuff out of the ground and poison the planet. Back in your hole.
- Moderator
- #762
it was never really contemplated at the VFL end, but it was a serious fear of the WAFLs that if they didnt get in of their own accord, they'd either lose a state league side to the Victorians, or the VFL would either create their own or send a team over. In 1984-1986 there were any number of teams that were financially poor enough to be forced somewhere.
Cheers, never really heard of that scenario. Still wish it had of been formed as a new comp from state league clubs but it is what it is now.
- Moderator
- #764
It was never the intent of the WAFL or SANFL to allow individual clubs to leave the state competition and join a national one. The SANFL applied to the VFL with a composite team as early as 1981, and registered the Adelaide Football club in 1986. The WAFL applied to have a composite team in 1984. Neither state wanted to see its best teams go - see the SANFL response to Port leaving.
in any case, football clubs in WA and SA were too reliant on clearance fees from Victorian clubs, and few clubs were solvent without them, and some were barely solvent with them - a financially sound league in 1986 would probably have consisted of
- VFL - Carlton
- VFL - Essendon
- VFL - Hawthorn
- VFL - Geelong
- VFL - Collingwood
- WAFL - South Fremantle
- WAFL - Subiaco
- SANFL - Port Adelaide
- SANFL - Norwood
- GCAFL - Southport
- CANFL - Ainslie
The problem is those clubs have been virtually killed off anyway, the leagues are decimated and have little future. I wonder how the vote from the 8 WAFL clubs would of gone if they knew where they would end up. I think the vote was 5-3 at the time.
I think West Perth and East Fremantle would of been the two WA clubs as they had the following and were always the biggest clubs just as Port and Norwood were in SA.
What do you think would of happened to the VFL clubs that did not make that list? Would they of survived or like as you mention some of them simply would of been in trouble.
The AFL basically exists to make 6 Victorian clubs richer, whilst having the means to keep the other 4 on life support, which in turn had created a large industry in Victoria as well as an influx of of money coming into their economy which is thoroughly endorsed and backed by the State government. It also acts as an opiate to the masses and prevents every fifth person necking themselves on their mind numbing daily commute on the Monash Freeway. Move the GF from the MCG or Malbun? Pfft. Never.
- Moderator
- #767
Sure it does.
- Moderator
- #768
- 1986 – WAFL Presidents vote 6-2 for joining the VFL. Only East Fremantle and Swan Districts vote against. (Headliners – Birth of the West Coast Eagles)
How many people do you need bound by a tradition they are not part of before it is no longer viewable as a tradition. While the origins of the AFL in the VFL and the continuation of many aspects of the VFL in the AFL are not in dispute, is it a national league, or just an expanded Victorian league.
If it is an expanded league, then the views of a fan in Melbourne should not carry more weight than the views of a fan in Sydney, although the cumulative opinion of Melbourne fans will carry more weight than Sydney fans, just through weight of numbers.
In that case, four cities with a combined population of 7 - 8 million people with no possibility of seeing a grand final in their home city, because Victorians have a tradition, is a bit odd.
If it is an expanded Victorian league, and some supporters views are more equal than others, then it makes more sense.
And I still think on balance of considerations, it should stay in Melbourne for at least some considerable time.
It is just that some arguing the point do not get much past a view of, it should be in Melbourne because it is our God given right (or tradition, whichever floats your boat).
Given what having the Grand final in perpetuity in Melbourne says to the rest of the country, a little effort should be put into rationalising it.
- Moderator
- #770
Theres nothing inherently wrong with maintaining traditions - and playing the grand final at the MCG is one of those. It doesnt make the AFL evil, and it makes absolutely no difference to the leagues ability to grow the game.
The fact remains that the competition - national as it is - IS an expanded VFL, as noted by the fact it was as simple as a simple name change in 1990. That means it came with certain traditions including the Grand Final. You also get the Brownlow medal, Coleman medal, Jock Mchale medal, Norm Smith medal and the Mclelland Shield - all of which are VFL awards dating back to the 1950s.
The fact remains that the competition - national as it is - IS an expanded VFL, as noted by the fact it was as simple as a simple name change in 1990. That means it came with certain traditions including the Grand Final. You also get the Brownlow medal, Coleman medal, Jock Mchale medal, Norm Smith medal and the Mclelland Shield - all of which are VFL awards dating back to the 1950s.
It is exactly as you have just said it is no question about that.
Those traditions however are only traditions to 50% at best of people who follow the AFL, that the s a hell of a lot of people who The names McHale, Coleman and Brownlow mean absolutely nothing.
That is not knocking them or what it is as it was logical to just continue those awards in those names. The AFL I believe really that they think they are national now, most large organisations are he'll bent on appeasing a very high percentage of their customers yet I am not sure the AFL has achieved that or in fact how they could??
I respect the traditions of the competition but I also understand how many West Aussies and South Aussies feel a little short changed in how the games history is sold, the game I am talking about not just an expanded VFL. But it is what it is and while I wish many things had been done differently we have what we have and unless some trillionaire wanted to change it we are left with what we have now.
- Moderator
- #772
Theres some great history out there - maintained in books commissioned by the WAFL (Behind the Play - AJ Barker, or The Footballers - Geoff Christian) and SANFL (The South Australian Football Story - Bernard Whimpress) which i recommend reading. The AFLs 150th anniversary of football offical book - the 2006 "The Australian Game of Football - since 1858" does a fairly reasonable job of acknowledging the history of the game across the country, as opposed to its 1996 "History of Australian Football - the Official history of the AFL", which is more or less a history of the league itself.
Yes, the AFl could do more for the history of the game - but Im not sure that looking after the history of other organisations is part of that - especially when those organisations are fiercely opposed to AFL interference in anything they do.
Eh? They nearly went broke not that long ago (when they were bog ordinary on the field). If anything, they're living proof winning flags makes you more money. They missed the finals this year and made a $3 million loss.
So what? Thats not an expense. My point was that their recent financial success has more to do with winning than anything else. They werent making much money before 2007 and one year missing from the finals resulted in a huge loss.
Similar threads
