WHY IS MELBOURNE SAFE.

[Longjohn]

Why when people talk of clubs folding or moving interstate, do people forget Melbourne?

Theey have done as nearly as much for the game as St Kilda have in the last 35 years, yet with no members, no onfield success (they don't even win Ansett Cups).

They still escape the persecution of the Media, that any other club would get, if in their situation.

Is it a Hinch thing?

 

[Bloodstained Angel]

Or is it aconspiracy by the "big end of town" who all happen to be MCC members I wonder ?

I've often wondered the same thing myself LongJohn and have concluded that it must be a 'class thing'

If the Dees were not such a bastion of the Melbourne establishment would they get off from scrutiny and criticism so lightly ?

I doubt it.

 

[Dave]

I see you've obviously forgotton the aborted merger! Having a multi squillionaire as president certainly doesn't hurt matter either.

 

[Longjohn]

What I am saying is the media never get into them.

 

[Arrow]

Why would the media get into them. IMHO they haven't said or done anything interesting in decades. Apart from getting Neil Daniher to coach them.They are boring just like Hawthorn and would have made very compatible merger partners .

To Blood Stained Angel
FYI there are many MCC members like myself who are Bomber supporters (about 30% of MCC membership in fact)who have absolutely nothing in common with those who support the MFC. Always a mistake to generalise.

 

[Bloodstained Angel]

Thanks Arrow

Can you clarify a point for me

I have been under the assumption that MCC memners are automatically members of the MFC

Is this true ?

Are you a Demons member (whether you want to be or not) ?

Can you decline membership of the Demons if you do not want to ?

cheers

 

[cc]

There is a strong contingent of ex Melbourne players/coaches already in the media. The media always seem to have favorite come finals time in 96 it was Sydney, 97 it was St Kilda, 98 it was Melbourne, 99 it was Brisbane. The media is rife with duplicity.

 

[cc]

There is a strong contingent of ex Melbourne players/coaches already in the media. The media always seem to have favorite come finals time in 96 it was Sydney, 97 it was St Kilda, 98 it was Melbourne, 99 it was Brisbane. The media is rife with duplicity.

 

[servo]

I too seem to recall quite heated discussion and even condemnation of the MFC until their financial saviour arrived. That was followed with much speculation as to the clubs future.

Interestingly both Melbourne & Hawthorn (thought by all but their supporters to be dead and buried after failed merger talks) are now much stronger financially than they had been for decades.

Basically though we really need a 12 team comp. The AFL WILL NOT let any of the non Victorian clubs dissappear so 4 Vic clubs must go by way of mergers or liquidations. Regardless of any future transplants to Sydney or Tassie, 4 of the 10 current Vic clubs will dissappear entirely.

So who will it be? Step right up.

My tips are in alphabetical order, Hawthorn, North Melbourne, St Kilda, Western Bulldogs. No particular reasons, just my hunch.

 

[Bill]

Melbourne is safe because they have more supporters than clubs like North and the Bulldogs. This is due to the 25,000 MCC members who support the Dees but don't buy a club membership.

 

[Deejayem]

The main reason Melbourne is never mentioned amongst the clubs that are in danger of merging/folding is because Melbourne is rarely mentioned in the media anyway!

Just to clarify, the MCC and MFC separated quite a few years ago, and only about 20% of MCC members support Melbourne and about 5% buy MFC associate memberships.

 

[sainter]

It is worth remembering that the Melbourne members actually voted for a merger too.

 

[Longjohn]

Bill,

Why don't these supporters become members of the "GO DEES" team and then I would not be asking the question.

Isn't there membership around 14000? from all reports the Kangaroos are closing in on 24000 members.

 

[Grendel]

One of the reasons I see that melbourne are afe is simply that they are the FIRST football club, ever. Historically they are before anyone. The club that ruled the fifties (going back I know) with a pretty large supporter base back then, if they can tap into that latent base with on field results they should be safe. Also a backer worth $500 million plus is helpful.

 

[Pessimistic]

Servo, Would I be right in saying your team is not one of those you say will go - that seems to be the trend

One way to reach less than 12 clubs in total would be for a general vote and force all VIC teams to pair up and form 5 new clubs. the original clubs would go to the VFL

I bet you collingwoodites or Carltondons wouldn't agree to that.

I'm against anything like you say because to lose four VIC clubs would be to lose one third of the clubs with traditionand appeal

I bet no other football league in the world would allow that much tradition to be lost

Or why not get rid of the worst performing teams, averaged over the last thirty years

By the way, the biggest football club in the world, Manchester united had to be bailed out twice by the manchester council (I bet they could bail out the council now) and I bet every single team has had periods where it struggled.

No teams to go
Dale

 

[James]

Latest figures show that over 40% of MCC members go for Melbourne, which is far higher than any other club.

 

[Matt]

Why are we going on about the future of all the clubs. We should all just stick together and hope that all Victorian clubs survive. No matter which one's they are.

 

[Joel]

TOO RIGHT!!!!

 

[Dan26]

I think it is important that Melbourne stays.

They were established in 1858, which makes them the oldest football club in Australia, and really, one of the oldest in the world.

Despite only a small membership, they have more supporters than both North Melbourne and the Bulldogs. Attendances at games prove this. They don't draw that well outside the MCG, but they play 13 or so games at the MCG each year anyway, so that's not really an issue.

Sure, the MCC members don't contribute anything financially to the club, but does this mean, we should not care about them at all ? Does this mean we take their football club away ? If the club continues to make a profit, and is financially viable there is no reason why they can't continue. They have strong latent support (as someone above mentioned beofre), and we shouldn't get rid of an entire market of football followers. It's not good for the game.

I don't really like the concept of a merger, but if one was unavoidable and simply had to happen, I think it would be North Melbourne and the Bulldogs. Both are neighbouring suburbs. Both have small supporter bases. Both are "new" clubs into the VFL-AFL (they came in in 1925). Neither would be a dominant partner in the merger. They would both be equal.

As for Melbourne, who said they haven't done anything for football ?? 12 Grand Fianl victories is a fairly impressive history, even if you compare it to Carlton, Collingwood and Essendon. They are also the only club to finish on top of the ladder for SIX consecutive seasons (55,56,67,58,59,60)

They won evey Grand Fianl in this period EXCEPT for 1958, when they went down in a massive upset to an inferior team. (HEY, that's another reason why top spot should get more recognition than the Grand Final winner in addition to still having the Grand Final as something to win and to aspire to in it's own right !)

 

[Longjohn]

Dan24 the Dope,

Sorry Dan but your letter is full or Rubbish,
if age of a club means anything why is Fitzroy no longer here and North Melbourne was established in 1869 (141 years of history means everything, 131 years means nothing, DON'T BE AN IDIOT)

You say "Despite only a small membership, they have more supporters than both North
Melbourne and the Bulldogs" Wrong again IDIOT get your facts right before you speak.

You said on mergers "I think it would be North Melbourne and the Bulldogs. Both are
neighbouring suburbs. Both have small supporter bases. Both are "new" clubs into the VFL-AFL (they came in in 1925)" Do you know anything about football at all, that would be like merging Collingwood and Carlton, they are arch rivals, since their days in the VFA.

You also said "Neither would be a dominant partner in the merger. They would both be equal" Stop being an IDIOT the reigning Premiers would be equal with a bunch of chokers, ask A.Lynch if they would be equal"

You said "As for Melbourne, who said they haven't done anything for football ?? 12 Grand Fianl victories is a fairly impressive history, even if you compare it to Carlton, Collingwood and Essendon." all of them were more then 35 years ago, and that was what was originally posted, SO ALL I CAN SAY IS STOP BEING SUCH AN IDIOT, AND GET YOUR FACTS RIGHT IN FUTURE.

 

[Lizard]

Dan wake up and smell the roses, Melbourne have been crap for the last 35 years and have under 15000 members.

Who really cares about them?

Only Hinch, Sheehan, what ever her name is on channel 2, Lyon, Mitchell and goodnick.
I wonder why we never heard anything about Neitz assault charges?

 

[Roylion]

I disagree that Melbourne is (or has been!) considered safe by the media. If there is some perception by some of the public (and the media) that Melbourne are safe from merger or relocation is, it would be because:
1) Primarily and foremost they have Joseph Gutnick who has kicked in $3,000,000 at last count. (Wouldn't Fitzroy have loved to have that sort of money in 1996!!)
2) They have the MCC behind them.
3) Other clubs such as North, Western Bulldogs and St Kilda. have had more public problems in terms of support and also finances.
Also wasn't it reported recently that Melbourne would be playing home games in Tasmania, and wasn't it raised in the media about what does this mean for the future of the Melbourne FC in Melbourne for the future?
Collingwood playing a home game in Sydney raised no speculation for obvious reasons.

The history of the competition since 1983, testifys that Melbourne has come under a fit bit of scrutiny in the past.

1983 South Melbourne relocates to Sydney and becomes the Sydney Swans.
1985 MELBOURNE and Fitzroy come to within an inch of merging. The new team was to become known as the 'Melbourne Lions', was to wear the Melbourne jumper with the Fitzroy Lion on it, the team had been selected. It fell through because they couldn't decide who was to be the President and the make-up of the Board
1986 Fitzroy prepared to move to Brisbane but is 'saved' by Hecron, which kicks in money to keep Fitzroy in Melbourne.
1989 Fitzroy and Footscray merge to become the Fitzroy Bulldogs until the Dogs supporters rally and keep Footscray alive.
1991-2: Carlton makes an offer to North Melbourne to merge.
1993: Fitzroy and MELBOURNE again talk about the possibility of merging.
1994: Collingwood offers to merge with Fitroy and generously says that they will put a Lion on their shorts. MELBOURNE and North Melbourne according to media reports hold unofficial talks about the possibility of merging.
1995: MELBOURNE and Fitzroy again reported in the media to have held discussions about merging.
1996: North Melbourne and Fitzroy attempt to merge, to be called the North Fitzroy Kangaroos. Merger fails.
Fitzroy and the Brisbane Bears do merge to form the Brisbane Lions.
MELBOURNE and Hawthorn come within a whisker of merging to form the Melbourne Hawks until Joseph Gutnick and Don Scott come to the rescue (Gutnick with money and Scott with bravado).

Since then with Joseph Gutnick's money and leadership there has been no media or public speculation about Melbourne. Why would there be? The financial situation is the bottom line and it has been reported by the media that North, Western Bulldogs and St Kilda are struggling financially. Melbourne, because of Gutnick's millions, are not.

The AFL's public projection for the future is, sadly, that there will be 8 teams in Melbourne and 8 interstate teams including a second team in Sydney and another in Queensland (the tip is Southport). Sooner or later that will happen.

 

[Dan26]

Longjohn,

Listen IDIOT (and I'm being kind), I don't post things unless I get my facts right.

FACT : North Melbourne and the Bulldogs have smaller support than Melbourne. This is a fact. It must pain you, but of the 10 Melbourne based clubs, North Melbourne is the least supported. Official stats prove this. I'm not talkina about membership. I'm sure if Melbourne had made 6 consecutive preliminary finals, their membership would increase too. I'm talking about actual supporters, Australia wide. Melboure has strong latent support as their attendance at games (in comparison to North's) proves.

FACT : IF the Kangaroos and Bulldgos merged OF COURSE it would be equal. Both with similar small support. Neither would dominate politically. Imagine if Carlton merged with North. Imagine how Carlton would "swallow up" North. I'm not talking about on-field success. A merger is for the next 50 years.

You say North and the Bulldgos are great rivals. What a load of rubbish. How many North supporters would classify the Doggies as their fiercest rival ? None !
Don't even compare it to Crlton and Collingwood. Don't make me laugh.

I'm not talkina bout their history before the VFL. Why ? Becasue no one cares about that. They both came in to the VFL in 1925, and have had similar unsuccessful histories.

I didn't say they should merge. I simply said that if a merger HAD to happen, they would be ideal partners. They would be perfect. I can't think of two more ideal partners. What you say is full of rubbish.

Yes, I know Melbourne hasn't done much since 1964. But they have still won 12 Grand Finals, and becasue of that, they have secured a supporter base, that, whilst smaller than most clubs, is BIGGER than both the Kangaroos and the Bulldogs

I don't approve of a merger at all, but with the close geography, similar support, and both clubs having a history of struggling financialy, I challenge you to find a better partner for North if a partner HAD TO BE FOUND. You won't find a more logical partner. I mean, you say North are the premiers, so the merger wouldn't be equal. A merger is not about that. A merger is for the next 100 years. It would be a 50-50 merger. Colours, geography, support, home ground etc, etc. Neither club would dominate.

I don't want a merger either, but in future, will you please get your facts right, and post something sensible. You will just embarass yourself with crap like you wrote in your last post.

I simply stated that if North HAD to merge, the Doggies would be the ideal merger partner. But this probably won't eventuate.

P.S. Melbourne's history of 12 flags (notwithstanding they havn't won one since 1964) is a history most clubs would kill for. I think we can safely say that Melbourne will always be Melbourne.

 

[Longjohn]

Oh I am so sorry Dan24, how dare I think support base should equate to members, that is so stupid of me, so if you can't show any numbers to prove your case, I should just agree with you. HOW MUCH OF AN IDIOT ARE YOU?

 

[Dan26]

Longjohn,

If support base equates to membership, then going by that theory, Hawthotn had the most supporters in 1999. After all, they had the biggest membership, didn't they ?

I suppose because Hawthorn had a bigger membership than the Bombers in 1999, this must mean that Hawthorn have more supporters, right ?

Only an idiot can see that is not true. We all know (including you) that certain teams, despite their membership have bigger supporter bases than other teams. Essendon and Collingwood have the most supporters, followed by Carlton and Richmond. Geelong is next, then Hawthorn and St.Kilda (who are about even), followed by Melbourne, the Doggies, and last of all, the Kangaroos. Membership fluctuates due to performances on the field.

I don't suppose you've thought that Melbournes poor membership has anything to do with the fact they finished 14th ? That logic probably hasn't occured to you.

We all know the the Magpies have more supporters than Carlton, but Carlton has more members. This is due to Collingwoods wooden spoon last year. But once again, you probably didn't think of that, and the logic that goes with it.

I don't mean to embarass you, but it is frustrating when people like you, who obvioulsy have no idea post utter garbage.

Shoooo, you're not wanted.