- Jul 9, 2010
- 24,163
- 26,536
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
I have nothing against the VFL expanding to Sydney and Brisbane and then Perth and Adelaide, this isn't some dumb hur hur VFL bitching.
This is mostly directed toward West Australians and South Australians.
Now, although my interest is waning in footy due to to the fact it's just so devoid of excitement, intensity, and intrigue and there are constant floggings and every team feels the same with about three clear rungs of sides, I have thought about this before. As much as I enjoyed being the opposition, wearing the purple, getting cheeky pricks making comments, all this, I've quite often wished I followed a club of history and lineage and where, although I'm third generation Freo, it's not proper third generation. It's cool to know your family have always done that same ritual you are, and you're just another one passing through.
Not getting into the politics or issues with Gold Coast and GWS, but there's clear issues in Tasmanian footy where no one is getting drafted, these historical clubs are all folding, and the development and pathways are cactus because there's no money or professionalism in the admin.
In WA, I grew up and a trip to the footy used to get other kids jealous – kids who were into footy and were middle class enough simply had never been to the AFL before. It's not that unique. The cost was so prohibitive and experience so unenjoyable at Subi, a generation has grown up following the footy but not actually going to games. It's a bit wrong.
Crowds and money is important but there's a divide in Victoria where no matter how good the opposition side is or the match-up looks, interstate sides don't garner the same attention that Hawthorn v St Kilda or Richmond v Bullies would.
Not to mention fundamental issues with some teams rarely leaving Melbourne and others travelling a minimum three hours every second week, then there's the Grand Final (it should always be at the MCG – I agree with that, but it's hard for clubs out of Vic).
The draft is a hot one as well, with expansion clubs given academies and poaching guys like John Blakey's son. The idea of being from a certain area and probably going for the nearest club but knowing that you're going to play juniors then seniors there is a cool thing; quaint, novel, but it's a cool thing. It'd help foster relationships to specific areas and it gives each club a rightful identity and feel. Not to mention the fact it'd force clubs to develop well.
All in all, is the game just too attached and based on regionality to succeed?
I like the idea of bringing back zones and scrapping the draft but it's just so obvious that the WA and SA clubs will be dominant that it's not really ever going to get up.
Naturally if the VFL didn't expand, we wouldn't have three ultra professional and crisp leagues, but that's probably a good thing. Do we need this much media attention and whoring when the end result is Lingy acting like a handball was the most amazing thing he's ever seen, like a double head transplant or man on the moon? If we had three leagues they'd probably all be at a similar level to the A-League or NRL. But is that so bad? Does it make a better standard game if the players get 80k a year as opposed to three or four times that? Is there anything wrong with having a Winners type show and keeping up that way, or one league trying to go toward the TV model and playing weekday games so people all over the country can watch?
Those who follow the Crows, Eagles, and Dockers... do you wish you could still follow a local club, probably the one your family went for?
The more and more I think about it, the more I'd love the idea of going down to a sunny Freo Oval or cold Leederville and watching a game of footy for 20 bucks, with connection and relevance. And how much worse could the standard really be?
This is mostly directed toward West Australians and South Australians.
Now, although my interest is waning in footy due to to the fact it's just so devoid of excitement, intensity, and intrigue and there are constant floggings and every team feels the same with about three clear rungs of sides, I have thought about this before. As much as I enjoyed being the opposition, wearing the purple, getting cheeky pricks making comments, all this, I've quite often wished I followed a club of history and lineage and where, although I'm third generation Freo, it's not proper third generation. It's cool to know your family have always done that same ritual you are, and you're just another one passing through.
Not getting into the politics or issues with Gold Coast and GWS, but there's clear issues in Tasmanian footy where no one is getting drafted, these historical clubs are all folding, and the development and pathways are cactus because there's no money or professionalism in the admin.
In WA, I grew up and a trip to the footy used to get other kids jealous – kids who were into footy and were middle class enough simply had never been to the AFL before. It's not that unique. The cost was so prohibitive and experience so unenjoyable at Subi, a generation has grown up following the footy but not actually going to games. It's a bit wrong.
Crowds and money is important but there's a divide in Victoria where no matter how good the opposition side is or the match-up looks, interstate sides don't garner the same attention that Hawthorn v St Kilda or Richmond v Bullies would.
Not to mention fundamental issues with some teams rarely leaving Melbourne and others travelling a minimum three hours every second week, then there's the Grand Final (it should always be at the MCG – I agree with that, but it's hard for clubs out of Vic).
The draft is a hot one as well, with expansion clubs given academies and poaching guys like John Blakey's son. The idea of being from a certain area and probably going for the nearest club but knowing that you're going to play juniors then seniors there is a cool thing; quaint, novel, but it's a cool thing. It'd help foster relationships to specific areas and it gives each club a rightful identity and feel. Not to mention the fact it'd force clubs to develop well.
All in all, is the game just too attached and based on regionality to succeed?
I like the idea of bringing back zones and scrapping the draft but it's just so obvious that the WA and SA clubs will be dominant that it's not really ever going to get up.
Naturally if the VFL didn't expand, we wouldn't have three ultra professional and crisp leagues, but that's probably a good thing. Do we need this much media attention and whoring when the end result is Lingy acting like a handball was the most amazing thing he's ever seen, like a double head transplant or man on the moon? If we had three leagues they'd probably all be at a similar level to the A-League or NRL. But is that so bad? Does it make a better standard game if the players get 80k a year as opposed to three or four times that? Is there anything wrong with having a Winners type show and keeping up that way, or one league trying to go toward the TV model and playing weekday games so people all over the country can watch?
Those who follow the Crows, Eagles, and Dockers... do you wish you could still follow a local club, probably the one your family went for?
The more and more I think about it, the more I'd love the idea of going down to a sunny Freo Oval or cold Leederville and watching a game of footy for 20 bucks, with connection and relevance. And how much worse could the standard really be?
If you lived in civilization you go down to Spotless with $25 and watch AFL, and a NEAFL curtain raiser.
