Rumour The St Kilda debt situation - no more tick

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
The league has an obligation to look after its incumbent clubs.

I dont think its overpopulated - particularly given that Victoria's population continues to grow and will pass NSW in the not too distant future.

I think its over-regulated. North and the Dogs shouldnt have to play at Marvel if they dont want - the league shouldnt do overarching ground agreements. If North want to play at Kardinia Park or the Dogs want to play at the Western Oval, then they should be able to. The league should provide minimum ground standards and leave it to the clubs.

The fixture should be randomised and equalised. Drop the preseason comp, extend the season, whatever.

As it is however, theres only one Victorian club thats in the financial doldrums - and even they are pulling out of that.

THe AFL Commission has no duty to look after the incumbent clubs OR it should not have ever assumed the role of the ANFC:
The Australian National Football Council (ANFC) was the national governing body for Australian rules football in Australia from 1906 until 1995. The council was a body of delegates representing each of the sport's individual state leagues which controlled football in their states. The council was the owner of the laws of the game and managed interstate administrative and football matters. Its function was superseded by the AFL Commission.
 
THe AFL Commission has no duty to look after the incumbent clubs OR it should not have ever assumed the role of the ANFC:
The Australian National Football Council (ANFC) was the national governing body for Australian rules football in Australia from 1906 until 1995. The council was a body of delegates representing each of the sport's individual state leagues which controlled football in their states. The council was the owner of the laws of the game and managed interstate administrative and football matters. Its function was superseded by the AFL Commission.

Thats cute, but the AFL Commission is elected by the incumbent clubs and THEY believe the league should look out for their interests, including presumably, their existence.

ANFC folded, and the League took over defacto control. It wasnt a handover. It just served no purpose with the AFL doing whatever it wanted, as it had been since the 70s. Literally no reason the SANFL, WAFC, VFA, QAFL, SydneyAFL, and others couldnt have kept going, except the entire thing was propped up by VFL money and involvement.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Which deal was worse?

Dan Hannebery

V

Jared Polec
 
Thats cute, but the AFL Commission is elected by the incumbent clubs and THEY believe the league should look out for their interests, including presumably, their existence.

ANFC folded, and the League took over defacto control. It wasnt a handover. It just served no purpose with the AFL doing whatever it wanted, as it had been since the 70s. Literally no reason the SANFL, WAFC, VFA, QAFL, SydneyAFL, and others couldnt have kept going, except the entire thing was propped up by VFL money and involvement.

The AFL Commission need to do their job & take responsibility for what its administration do.
 
cesspit of a thread

but it'll be kept open for the purposes of s**t slinging at StKilda and the mods won't do anything about it.

Allowances are made in scandals and rumours that wouldnt be tolerated elsewhere.

However in the absence of further information, Im inclined to lock it. There are finance threads on the industry board for this sort of thing.

Thanks all.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top