Tasmania AFL Say No To Tassie Team

Remove this Banner Ad

The Case for Tasmania

Background

Some form of football was played in Tasmania in the 1850s, some people believe that this was actually a form of rugby rather than Australian football due to mentions of cross bards and offside rules.

Australian football was first documented in Tasmania in 1866. The Tasmanian Football league, centred on Hobart began in 1879 and the Northern Tasmanian Football Association began in 1886. A third league, the North West Football Union would not begin until 1910.

The First statewide premiership was awarded in 1909 with the Tasmanian State Premiership. These matches were discontinued in 1978. The State premiership would next be contested under a different format in 1980 - the WInfield State Cup, However Northern leagues refused to participate again after percieved favoritism towards the Hobart league.

In 1986 and 1987, A statewide league was proposed when 5 northern league clubs left tol join the TFL Statwide League. The NTFA and NWFU merger to form the NTFL.

The formation of the state league seems to have been the catalyst for teams to begin to lose money with increase travel costs being a large factor. Teams relegated themselves back to local competitions and other clubs folded entirely. The league collapsed after the 2000 Grand Final.

With the TFL disbanded, the Tasmanian Devils were formed in 2001 and bega playing in the VFL the next year. They were aligned with North Melbourne.The Devils played in both ends of the Apple Isle and had a reasonable following before they were disbanded in 2008 to make way for the re introduction of the TFL.

The game presently has the second highest participation rate of any Australian Football state in the country, behind only the Northern Terriotry.

The VFL/AFL in Tasmania

Many exhibition matches were played in Tasmania over the years, and it became something of a panacea for the problems of several Victorian clubs including Fitzroy (91-92, 4 games), St Kilda (03-06, 3 games). Hawthorn have the longest lived presence in Tasmania begining in 2003 and now not expected to end before 2017, in a deal worth 17 million over 5 years. North melbourne began playing at Bellerive in 2012.

For many years Tasmanian football talent left the Apple Isle for the brighter lights of Melbourne. More than 300 Tasmanians have played VFL/AFL over the years including Darrel Baldock, Royce Hart, Laurie Nash, Peter Hudson and Ian Stewart.

Players of a more recent vintage include Garry Lyon, Brendon Gale, Alistair Lynch, Matthew Richardson, Grant Birchall, Brad Green, Jack Riewoldt and David Neitz.

The 1994-1997 Bid

Between 1996 and 1998 a bid was prepared that involved the construction of a 30,000-capacity stadium in the Hobart showgrounds in Glenorchy, at the cost of $34 million. The stadium would have been the team's only home ground, but the appeal was unsuccessful and the stadium was not built. The bid ultimately failed when Port Adelaide and Fremantle were granted entry instead.

The 2008 Bid

With the announcement of teams for Gold Coast and Western Sydney, Tasmania again launched a bid for the AFL with the full backing of the Tasmanian Government. The Tasmanian Bid had reportedly secured 20,000 potential members and a $4 million major sponsorship from Mars before Gold COast and Western Sydney had even got off the ground. Andrew Demetriou, AFL CEO, is reported to have told the Tasmanian premier "not now, not ever", and recently told Foxfooty that it will not happen while he is CEO but may happen while he is alive. [See Video]
The bid had the support of then Prime Minister, Kevin Rudd.
"In terms of how we make all that possible, I've been talking to various folk in the AFL about that for some time."
Click to expand...
The Arguments against a Tasmanian Team

Opponents of the Tasmanian Bid have assumed
  • a lack of corporate support would be a major stumbling block
  • the long running divide between the North and South of Tasmanian football is a key reason why any AFL team would fail.
  • Some cite a percieved lack of popular support and others believe there are forces at AFL House that will never allow a Tasmanian team.
  • its a captive market - already an Australian Football territory
  • its being held for victorian club relocation
The Corporate Argument

Saul Eslake, a Tasmanian born, respected Economist says the lack of corporate support argument is a just plain wrong

''First … the stadium deal that a Tasmanian club would have at Aurora Stadium would be about the fourth best in the league. The second thing is we had sponsors. Mars said they would be our major sponsor, and the Tasmanian government would only need to pay $1 million less than they're contributing to the Hawthorn deal.
Click to expand...
Eslake went on to query the isolation of the state in regard to its sponsors.

''People say, 'where are the major corporations in Tasmania?,' but look at Collingwood, whose major sponsor Emirates is based in Dubai.''
Click to expand...
When all was said and done, he came to the conclusion that

"''I think the exercise proved beyond any doubt that the commercial arguments used as to why Tasmania couldn't have a team - that there weren't the big companies there to sponsor it, that there wouldn't be the support or the ground couldn't cope with it - all those arguments were demonstrated to be false.''
Click to expand...
In addition Mars Snackfoods General Manager Peter West, who signed a deal to sponsor the proposed team worth $4 million, said

"Not only is there a traditional affiliation with the sport among the Tasmanian people, but the state's burgeoning economy makes us confident that the club would be financially viable and would attract strong corporate support, so we wanted to be the first business on board."
Click to expand...
The Tasmania Divided argument

Scott Wade, head of AFL Tasmania says the football divide was a big reason an AFL team didnt go earlier.

"In the halcyon days of Tasmanian footy back in the '60s and '70s, if Tasmania could've found a way to work together, rather than be so parochial and so divided, we'd already have a team of our own by now"
Click to expand...
Saul Eslake believes that a Tasmanian AFL side would prove to be a great unifier.

The Popular Support Argument

Generally based around the size of the population, and its decline or growth, it argues that there isnt enough people to sustain a team.
A survey conducted in 2008 by the State Government found that
  • 48% of Tasmanians support a Tasmanian bid
  • 23% of Tasmanians would consider becoming members
  • 41% of Tasmanians would consider attending games
This would have given the club a theoretical support base of 100,000 members.

In 2012, Hawthorn had 8,500 Tasmanian Members, and in 2012 North Melbourne were reportedly at 2,000 in January.

The Andrew Demetriou Roadblock Argument

Many believe that the AFL CEO, Andrew Demetriou was/is the major stumbling block to a Tasmanian team. The Age quoted Paula Wriedt (former Tasmanian Minister for Economics and Tourism) as saying that

''The AFL were blocking it, and when I say the AFL I mean Andrew Demetriou.''
Click to expand...

The Captive Market argument

Australian football has been a major part of the Tasmanian sporting landscape sine the late 19th century and it seems unlikely that this will be challenged soon. There is however a lack of a national league side in any competition for Tasmania in any Australian major sport at the moment.

Rugby League have recently played a trial at North Hobart Oval, paid for by the Australian Football Club there, and there is apparently an Aleague bid by Tasmania United.

The Relocation Argument

Some believe Tasmania is being held to have somewhere for an established Victorian team to relocate. This was denied by Andrew Demetriou following the rejection of the Tasmanian bid who said that he planned on 10 clubs being in Victoria for the foreseeable future.

Bid Assessment

"The amount of work and research is comprehensive and first-class. We were incredibly impressed by the level of detail in the submission," Demetriou said. The AFL however reaffirmed its commitment to establishing teams in Queensland and New South Wales.

Bartlett said Tasmania already had 60 per cent of corporate sponsorship required for an AFL club, would easily meet the required target of 25,000 members and projected stadium revenues would put them in the top four performing stadia in the league.

"The commitment Andrew's given me today is he'll take the business case we've provided very seriously," Bartlett said.

Andrew Demetriou appeared to give Tasmania assurances it was the next cab off the rank for a license.

The Senate Inquiry

Unsatisfied with the AFL response, Tasmanian senator Kerry O'brien convinced the Senates Regional Affairs Committee to undertake an enquiry into the AFL, supported by Family First Senator Steven Fielding.

The inquiry's draft terms of reference included an investigation into "whether the AFL commissioners' obligations to current supporters of the game override their desire to promote larger television audiences for it".

The inquiry was opposed by the Liberal Party, with Pat Farmer saying it was a waste of time since the Senate had no power to make the AFL do anything with its expansion policy.

AFL CEO, Andrew Demetriou and Chairman Mike Fitzpatrick both declined to appear before the enquiry, but Chief Operations Manager Gillon Mclachlan did, confirming the league saw Sydney and Gold Coast as greater priorities for expansion, and wasnt sure a Tasmanian team could ever happen. He added information such as future population growth, size and scope of the local business community, current and future, community participation in the game and other code and the significance of the regions as media markets, determined that priority.

Further issues and notes from the inquiry can be found here.

Today

It should be noted that the Tasmanian Government is directly sponsoring Hawthorn to the tune of $17.6 million over 5 years (following on from a $16 million deal in the previous 5 years), and the Government owned TTlines is sponsoring North Melbourne for another 1.5 million over 3 years. The AFL Bid team was able to secure another $4 million sponsorship from Mars pending AFL entry. (That sponsorship later went to Carlton). Thrown in the 10,000 Tassie Hawks and 8,000 targetted North Tassie memberships, and you've got an excellent begining that would dwarf both of the AFL's new sides on the Gold Coast and New South Wales.

In addition, the Tasmanian Government would own and operate Aurora Stadium, which with upgrades would make it one of the best in the league and guarantee a decent return for the club based there. The Federal Government has also committed 15 million to the upgrade of Bellerive Oval, giving the state two reasonable stadiums to play footy at.

References
 
sherb said:
And yet you are quite the active participant here, relentlessly arguing against a Tasmanian side.

So why can't you spend five minutes of your time here just briefly outlining your support again?
Click to expand...

Because I shouldnt have to repost something already on Bigfooty if I link to it. Before mouthing off at me the least you could have done was referred to the link.

And Im not relentlessly against a Tasmanian side, Im against the notion that Victorian sides should give way for one.
 
sproketman said:
The only way Tasmania gets a footy side is if they become a market where all codes want to compete for attention. If FFA put a team in there, Tasmania would get a footy club in an instant. But the FFA won't put a team there because the economic case does not demand it.
Click to expand...

Disagree.

A Tassie side will come, either in the next round of 2 teams to expand or when a melbourne club relocates.

It wont be because theres a soccer team there.
Central Coast shows this with the fact the NRL heartland got a soccer team but no league team. Hasnt changed a thing.

Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk
 

Log in to remove this ad.

The_Wookie said:
You can call it what you like, but i suggest you open your eyes. Its already been linked in the damn thread. Its on Bigfooty, its on The Roar and its on my own site.

post #354 in this thread


ITs worth noting that you were quite the active participant in that thread.
Click to expand...

So on the premise that us Tassie advocates say that we are not talking about eliminating any Vic AFL team as part of our argument (and I myself have never argued that Tas should come in at the expense of any Vic team), I take it that you (having said earlier that "I support a Tasmanian side but I dont support one at the expense of a victorian one") would be in full agreement of the Tassie advocates' line of argument pro-Tas?

I mean, you can't have it both ways...
 
General Giant said:
Disagree.

A Tassie side will come, either in the next round of 2 teams to expand or when a melbourne club relocates.

It wont be because theres a soccer team there.
Central Coast shows this with the fact the NRL heartland got a soccer team but no league team. Hasnt changed a thing.

Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
The stadium the Mariners play at was once an NRL home ground. The Northern Eagles played there, and before that the North Sydney Bears were meant to be based there, but the interest didn't demand it.
 
deltablues said:
So on the premise that us Tassie advocates say that we are not talking about eliminating any Vic AFL team as part of our argument (and I myself have never argued that Tas should come in at the expense of any Vic team), I take it that you (having said earlier that "I support a Tasmanian side but I dont support one at the expense of a victorian one") would be in full agreement of the Tassie advocates' line of argument pro-Tas?

I mean, you can't have it both ways...
Click to expand...

As Ive said

  • I support a Tasmanian side entering the competition on its own merits
  • I do not believe it needs to replace or relocate a Victorian side, although my money would be on the latter.
  • I do not believe that the sponsorship case can be made without extensive open-ended government support.
  • I dont believe that theres a a question of fairness or deserving to enter the league, I think thats irrelevant.
Otherwise go nuts. Have a team, I wish it all the best.
 
The_Wookie said:
The Case for Tasmania

Background

Some form of football was played in Tasmania in the 1850s, some people believe that this was actually a form of rugby rather than Australian football due to mentions of cross bards and offside rules.

Australian football was first documented in Tasmania in 1866. The Tasmanian Football league, centred on Hobart began in 1879 and the Northern Tasmanian Football Association began in 1886. A third league, the North West Football Union would not begin until 1910.

The First statewide premiership was awarded in 1909 with the Tasmanian State Premiership. These matches were discontinued in 1978. The State premiership would next be contested under a different format in 1980 - the WInfield State Cup, However Northern leagues refused to participate again after percieved favoritism towards the Hobart league.

In 1986 and 1987, A statewide league was proposed when 5 northern league clubs left tol join the TFL Statwide League. The NTFA and NWFU merger to form the NTFL.

The formation of the state league seems to have been the catalyst for teams to begin to lose money with increase travel costs being a large factor. Teams relegated themselves back to local competitions and other clubs folded entirely. The league collapsed after the 2000 Grand Final.

With the TFL disbanded, the Tasmanian Devils were formed in 2001 and bega playing in the VFL the next year. They were aligned with North Melbourne.The Devils played in both ends of the Apple Isle and had a reasonable following before they were disbanded in 2008 to make way for the re introduction of the TFL.

The game presently has the second highest participation rate of any Australian Football state in the country, behind only the Northern Terriotry.

The VFL/AFL in Tasmania

Many exhibition matches were played in Tasmania over the years, and it became something of a panacea for the problems of several Victorian clubs including Fitzroy (91-92, 4 games), St Kilda (03-06, 3 games). Hawthorn have the longest lived presence in Tasmania begining in 2003 and now not expected to end before 2017, in a deal worth 17 million over 5 years. North melbourne began playing at Bellerive in 2012.

For many years Tasmanian football talent left the Apple Isle for the brighter lights of Melbourne. More than 300 Tasmanians have played VFL/AFL over the years including Darrel Baldock, Royce Hart, Laurie Nash, Peter Hudson and Ian Stewart.

Players of a more recent vintage include Garry Lyon, Brendon Gale, Alistair Lynch, Matthew Richardson, Grant Birchall, Brad Green, Jack Riewoldt and David Neitz.

The 1994-1997 Bid

Between 1996 and 1998 a bid was prepared that involved the construction of a 30,000-capacity stadium in the Hobart showgrounds in Glenorchy, at the cost of $34 million. The stadium would have been the team's only home ground, but the appeal was unsuccessful and the stadium was not built. The bid ultimately failed when Port Adelaide and Fremantle were granted entry instead.

The 2008 Bid

With the announcement of teams for Gold Coast and Western Sydney, Tasmania again launched a bid for the AFL with the full backing of the Tasmanian Government. The Tasmanian Bid had reportedly secured 20,000 potential members and a $4 million major sponsorship from Mars before Gold COast and Western Sydney had even got off the ground. Andrew Demetriou, AFL CEO, is reported to have told the Tasmanian premier "not now, not ever", and recently told Foxfooty that it will not happen while he is CEO but may happen while he is alive. [See Video]
The bid had the support of then Prime Minister, Kevin Rudd.

​
The Arguments against a Tasmanian Team

Opponents of the Tasmanian Bid have assumed
  • a lack of corporate support would be a major stumbling block
  • the long running divide between the North and South of Tasmanian football is a key reason why any AFL team would fail.
  • Some cite a percieved lack of popular support and others believe there are forces at AFL House that will never allow a Tasmanian team.
  • its a captive market - already an Australian Football territory
  • its being held for victorian club relocation
The Corporate Argument

Saul Eslake, a Tasmanian born, respected Economist says the lack of corporate support argument is a just plain wrong


​
Eslake went on to query the isolation of the state in regard to its sponsors.


​
When all was said and done, he came to the conclusion that


​
In addition Mars Snackfoods General Manager Peter West, who signed a deal to sponsor the proposed team worth $4 million, said


​
The Tasmania Divided argument

Scott Wade, head of AFL Tasmania says the football divide was a big reason an AFL team didnt go earlier.


​
Saul Eslake believes that a Tasmanian AFL side would prove to be a great unifier.

The Popular Support Argument

Generally based around the size of the population, and its decline or growth, it argues that there isnt enough people to sustain a team.
A survey conducted in 2008 by the State Government found that
  • 48% of Tasmanians support a Tasmanian bid
  • 23% of Tasmanians would consider becoming members
  • 41% of Tasmanians would consider attending games
This would have given the club a theoretical support base of 100,000 members.

In 2012, Hawthorn had 8,500 Tasmanian Members, and in 2012 North Melbourne were reportedly at 2,000 in January.

The Andrew Demetriou Roadblock Argument

Many believe that the AFL CEO, Andrew Demetriou was/is the major stumbling block to a Tasmanian team. The Age quoted Paula Wriedt (former Tasmanian Minister for Economics and Tourism) as saying that



The Captive Market argument

Australian football has been a major part of the Tasmanian sporting landscape sine the late 19th century and it seems unlikely that this will be challenged soon. There is however a lack of a national league side in any competition for Tasmania in any Australian major sport at the moment.

Rugby League have recently played a trial at North Hobart Oval, paid for by the Australian Football Club there, and there is apparently an Aleague bid by Tasmania United.

The Relocation Argument

Some believe Tasmania is being held to have somewhere for an established Victorian team to relocate. This was denied by Andrew Demetriou following the rejection of the Tasmanian bid who said that he planned on 10 clubs being in Victoria for the foreseeable future.

Bid Assessment

"The amount of work and research is comprehensive and first-class. We were incredibly impressed by the level of detail in the submission," Demetriou said. The AFL however reaffirmed its commitment to establishing teams in Queensland and New South Wales.

Bartlett said Tasmania already had 60 per cent of corporate sponsorship required for an AFL club, would easily meet the required target of 25,000 members and projected stadium revenues would put them in the top four performing stadia in the league.

"The commitment Andrew's given me today is he'll take the business case we've provided very seriously," Bartlett said.

Andrew Demetriou appeared to give Tasmania assurances it was the next cab off the rank for a license.

The Senate Inquiry

Unsatisfied with the AFL response, Tasmanian senator Kerry O'brien convinced the Senates Regional Affairs Committee to undertake an enquiry into the AFL, supported by Family First Senator Steven Fielding.

The inquiry's draft terms of reference included an investigation into "whether the AFL commissioners' obligations to current supporters of the game override their desire to promote larger television audiences for it".

The inquiry was opposed by the Liberal Party, with Pat Farmer saying it was a waste of time since the Senate had no power to make the AFL do anything with its expansion policy.

AFL CEO, Andrew Demetriou and Chairman Mike Fitzpatrick both declined to appear before the enquiry, but Chief Operations Manager Gillon Mclachlan did, confirming the league saw Sydney and Gold Coast as greater priorities for expansion, and wasnt sure a Tasmanian team could ever happen. He added information such as future population growth, size and scope of the local business community, current and future, community participation in the game and other code and the significance of the regions as media markets, determined that priority.

Further issues and notes from the inquiry can be found here.

Today

It should be noted that the Tasmanian Government is directly sponsoring Hawthorn to the tune of $17.6 million over 5 years (following on from a $16 million deal in the previous 5 years), and the Government owned TTlines is sponsoring North Melbourne for another 1.5 million over 3 years. The AFL Bid team was able to secure another $4 million sponsorship from Mars pending AFL entry. (That sponsorship later went to Carlton). Thrown in the 10,000 Tassie Hawks and 8,000 targetted North Tassie memberships, and you've got an excellent begining that would dwarf both of the AFL's new sides on the Gold Coast and New South Wales.

In addition, the Tasmanian Government would own and operate Aurora Stadium, which with upgrades would make it one of the best in the league and guarantee a decent return for the club based there. The Federal Government has also committed 15 million to the upgrade of Bellerive Oval, giving the state two reasonable stadiums to play footy at.

References
Click to expand...

Thanks for that - I have read similar before, but not as a kind of Exec Summary.

But the bottom line is that if the AFL wanted a Tas team then there would be a Tas team. Anyone experienced in corporate/political policy areas would know that. The references you cite and details you provide above in essence clearly indicate that the AFL's expansion-driven policy currently remains VFL-centric - as evidenced, among other things, by some Vic AFL teams gathering acorns in Tas.
 
sproketman said:
The stadium the Mariners play at was once an NRL home ground. The Northern Eagles played there, and before that the North Sydney Bears were meant to be based there, but the interest didn't demand it.
Click to expand...

Yes the barely rebranded Manly did. But the cc boys and girls did the opposite to the tassie faithful.
They told the NRL to go and get knicked as they werent going to support barely half a side.
As for norths. They went bust because of the sl war before the move. And then got taken over by Manly.
Nothing to do with lack of interest.
If they had their own team they would sell the place out. Probably like tassie in the afl.

Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk
 
The_Wookie said:
As Ive said

  • I support a Tasmanian side entering the competition on its own merits
  • I do not believe it needs to replace or relocate a Victorian side, although my money would be on the latter.
  • I do not believe that the sponsorship case can be made without extensive open-ended government support.
  • I dont believe that theres a a question of fairness or deserving to enter the league, I think thats irrelevant.
Otherwise go nuts. Have a team, I wish it all the best.
Click to expand...

I disagree with your 3rd bullet point. This also goes to your first bullet point. But it's 2.30 a.m. here in the backwoods of Virginia (minding some friends' house while they are on vacay) and I have been kept up by a pack of coyotes near the dogs' house. I may detail my reasons why I disagree in a day or so.
 
The_Wookie said:
You can call it what you like, but i suggest you open your eyes. Its already been linked in the damn thread. Its on Bigfooty, its on The Roar and its on my own site.

post #354 in this thread


ITs worth noting that you were quite the active participant in that thread.
Click to expand...

I couldnt find anything other than your historic time line. I know you say you support a Tassie team but not at the expense of a Vic team, fine. But what is your criteria for inclusion in the AFL?
 
General Giant said:
Yes the barely rebranded Manly did. But the cc boys and girls did the opposite to the tassie faithful.
They told the NRL to go and get knicked as they werent going to support barely half a side.
As for norths. They went bust because of the sl war before the move. And then got taken over by Manly.
Nothing to do with lack of interest.
If they had their own team they would sell the place out. Probably like tassie in the afl.

Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
There's still a push for a CC team, like a Tassie side. Despite Central Coast being bogan central it's never going to happen.

Hell, there's no longer a Wollongong side despite it being RL mad and having one of the best located stadiums in the country.

Sad reality is, having a passionate supporter base is no longer enough in sport.
 
sproketman said:
There's still a push for a CC team, like a Tassie side. Despite Central Coast being bogan central it's never going to happen.

Hell, there's no longer a Wollongong side despite it being RL mad and having one of the best located stadiums in the country.

Sad reality is, having a passionate supporter base is no longer enough in sport.
Click to expand...
Exactly. Which is why i said having an aleague team wont change the AFL's mind if they dont want a club there.

Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk
 
General Giant said:
Exactly. Which is why i said having an aleague team wont change the AFL's mind if they dont want a club there.
Click to expand...
But the NRL attempted and failed. It's not like it's unexplored territory for rugby league, nor is it a sought after market. The NRL needs to focus its ambitions nationally if it wants to continue growing, and that means a team in Perth, another in Brisbane, before an area in between Sydney and Newcastle get tried again.

(And let's be honest, would the Mariners even exist if not for John Singleton?)

The AFL has at least two teams in every major market. No other football code beats it for exposure across the country. If the FFA placed a team in Tasmania that would give it greater territory than the AFL. That's when the AFL would take notice.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

sproketman said:
But the NRL attempted and failed. It's not like it's unexplored territory for rugby league, nor is it a sought after market.
Click to expand...

No they didnt. There was no attempt.
The northern eagles were exactly the same as the Hawks and Kangas.

Its exactly the same as tassie for the AFL. Heartland territory. The NRL payed them lip service with the eagles just as the afl is with the hawks and kangas.


You cant bag out the afl for how they are handling tassie then go on to say the nrl tried with cc. They didnt.

Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk
 
http://www.themercury.com.au/sport/...on-states-future/story-fnj4f7h7-1227503034569

A SINGLE AFL team playing in Tasmania appears to be one step closer after the AFL Commission met with Tasmanian Government representatives today.

The Commission has agreed with the State Government to deliver an investment plan for developing and supporting junior, community and elite football in Tasmania.

Specifically, a working party will be formed to develop and test specific Tasmanian recommendations from the AFL’s Future Directions of Football project, including:

A PATHWAY to a one-team model as the next step for AFL in Tasmania.

THE potential for a Tasmanian academy that strengthens the link between junior and the elite level of Australian football.

story-fnj4f7h7-1227503034569

INVESTMENTS required to support and strengthen community and State League football.

RESOURCES needed to support the growth of women’s football.

FUTURE governance and funding of AFL Tasmania.

The working party will also develop an understanding of the economic and social benefits of football for Tasmania; and job and training opportunities and potential partnerships with business and Government.

AFL Chairman Mike Fitzpatrick said AFL football had never had a stronger presence in Tasmania than it did right now, a result of 15 years of consistent and increasing market presence and investment, and was in a healthy position to continue to embed and build this presence longer term.
 
sproketman said:
You aren't serious on that last part, right? Tasmania's second biggest industry is already tourism. A footy team is not going to see a 50% boost to tourism, there are enough people already visiting Tasmania for wineries, wildlife, food etc. It's a nonsense argument, as flimsy as arguments governments make to justify wasting billions of tax payer dollars on events like the Olympics and World cup.

Which sponsor would sign up to Tasmania in preference to one of the existing clubs? Why would a company in Melbourne sponsor Tasmania as opposed to the Western Bulldogs? No greater exposure, no wealthier market to appeal to, no growth prospects. As I said, the same facts that undermine a club in Melbourne apply to any club formed in Tasmania.

Collingwood would player there? Really? Out of the 8 current non-Vic clubs they travel four times per year, meaning they realistically only visit each state once per year at best. How many times would they go to Tassie. Think carefully.
Click to expand...

50% increase in footy related tourism, in line with the number of games - fair dinkum is 1 +1 =2 or what you want it to be.
That you deny the increase in tourism suggests the Tassie taxpayer is doing the Hawks a favour ... its a commercial decision.

Why would you need to take a sponsor from one of those currently sponsoring an AFL club, now that is nonsense, muddle headed thinking sproket. Hungry Jacks were happy to sponsor the Eagles to a national audience & WA based iiNet sponsor the Hawks, Toyota sponsor the Crows, QBE sponsor the Swans, Programmed sponsor Freo (shock/horror its Melbourne based) ...

Yes, I believe every Melbourne club would visit just as they have a game scheduled in Q, in NSW, in SA, & WA.

My point is simple the financial argument run against a Tassie AFL team is flawed.

NO MORE TEAMS is a bigger hurdle than the financial argument.
 
sverik25 said:
What and NSW and QLD, two of the countries best economies, aren't receiving far more in handouts than Tassie?
Click to expand...

You dont understand the difference ? Clearly many dont know between Tas & the developing markets
A more relevant criticism is the handouts to keep 100+ year old teams in Melbourne because not enough Melburnians are prepared to pay to keep them. Wookie runs a divine right, a House of Lords argument for continuation of preferential treatment ;) - a fair summation of your view Wookie?
 
thegreig said:
http://www.themercury.com.au/sport/...on-states-future/story-fnj4f7h7-1227503034569

A SINGLE AFL team playing in Tasmania appears to be one step closer after the AFL Commission met with Tasmanian Government representatives today.

The Commission has agreed with the State Government to deliver an investment plan for developing and supporting junior, community and elite football in Tasmania.

Specifically, a working party will be formed to develop and test specific Tasmanian recommendations from the AFL’s Future Directions of Football project, including:

A PATHWAY to a one-team model as the next step for AFL in Tasmania.

THE potential for a Tasmanian academy that strengthens the link between junior and the elite level of Australian football.

story-fnj4f7h7-1227503034569

INVESTMENTS required to support and strengthen community and State League football.

RESOURCES needed to support the growth of women’s football.

FUTURE governance and funding of AFL Tasmania.

The working party will also develop an understanding of the economic and social benefits of football for Tasmania; and job and training opportunities and potential partnerships with business and Government.

AFL Chairman Mike Fitzpatrick said AFL football had never had a stronger presence in Tasmania than it did right now, a result of 15 years of consistent and increasing market presence and investment, and was in a healthy position to continue to embed and build this presence longer term.
Click to expand...

Great post Tony & a fair outcome from the AFL Commission (for a change o_O )
 
thegreig said:
http://www.themercury.com.au/sport/...on-states-future/story-fnj4f7h7-1227503034569

A SINGLE AFL team playing in Tasmania appears to be one step closer after the AFL Commission met with Tasmanian Government representatives today.

The Commission has agreed with the State Government to deliver an investment plan for developing and supporting junior, community and elite football in Tasmania.

Specifically, a working party will be formed to develop and test specific Tasmanian recommendations from the AFL’s Future Directions of Football project, including:

A PATHWAY to a one-team model as the next step for AFL in Tasmania.

THE potential for a Tasmanian academy that strengthens the link between junior and the elite level of Australian football.

story-fnj4f7h7-1227503034569

INVESTMENTS required to support and strengthen community and State League football.

RESOURCES needed to support the growth of women’s football.

FUTURE governance and funding of AFL Tasmania.

The working party will also develop an understanding of the economic and social benefits of football for Tasmania; and job and training opportunities and potential partnerships with business and Government.

AFL Chairman Mike Fitzpatrick said AFL football had never had a stronger presence in Tasmania than it did right now, a result of 15 years of consistent and increasing market presence and investment, and was in a healthy position to continue to embed and build this presence longer term.
Click to expand...

The first paragraph is a bold statement about a one team strategy (whatever that means) Then there scant evidence to back it up. Then Fitzpatrick states that the AFL has never had a stronger presence. Is this because there are currently 2 Melbourne teams playing "home" games there?
It's just bullshit and spin.
 
The_Wookie said:
Because I shouldnt have to repost something already on Bigfooty if I link to it. Before mouthing off at me the least you could have done was referred to the link.

And Im not relentlessly against a Tasmanian side, Im against the notion that Victorian sides should give way for one.
Click to expand...
I read the post previously.

It is a brilliantly written summation of the Tasmanian situation from a neutral point of view. Which is why, for example, it includes the arguments "for" and "against" the side.

It doesn't actively support (or otherwise) a Tassie side. It simply sets out the information to provide the framework for a discussion.

Anyway, aside from that, I still don't think you get what I am saying.

I haven't seen you here supporting a Tasmanian side, in fact it has been the opposite. Then you hit us with "I support a Tasmanian side". Lolwut?

It makes it difficult to discuss the issue with someone who says one thing and seems intent on arguing the other.

If madmug and I suddenly turned around after all our postings and said "oh, but we really don't support a Tasmanian side" I am sure you would just laugh and wouldn't take us seriously. And rightly so.

If you do support a Tassie side how about you post along those lines occasionally?

And in my case, I would point out that I am NOT advocating a Victorian club go down the gurgler (fold, merge or relocate) to accommodate a Tassie side. So on that I am agreeing with you.

Anyway, I will leave it at that.

Thanks. :)
 
Last edited:
sherb said:
I read the post previously.

It is a brilliantly written summation of the Tasmanian situation from a neutral point of view. Which is why, for example, it includes the arguments "for" and "against" the side.

It doesn't actively support (or otherwise) a Tassie side. It simply sets out the information to provide the framework for a discussion.



Anyway, I will leave it at that.

Thanks. :)
Click to expand...

Yes a nice historic regurgitation. Nothing discussional either way. So I still dont know how he reasons his stated position. I support Tasmania because I support Tasmania.

Circular reasoning?
 
madmug said:
It may come as a shock to some people, but a lot of major businesses sponsor clubs because of the exposure to national television, NOT because of where a particular club is. Ie Mazda (Japanese & not making cars here) sponsor North Melbourne. Etihad (from the Dubai) sponsor Collingwood, Mars (from the USA) agreed to be the major sponsor for a Tasmanian team as part of the Gemba report, now sponsor Carlton.

Local markets are a side issue. For major sponsors, Its about national exposure.
Click to expand...

To an extent. Although you're not going to get an international airline that doesn't fly to Tassie sponsor a Tassie team. Even major sponsors will have to have a major local presence to be worthwhile. As an example, the 4 companies that are the major sponsors of Fremantle and West Coast are all WA companies.

But a vast majority of corporate income does not come from the jumper sponsors. It comes from selling corporate boxes, space in coterie groups and the like. And they have to be locally based companies. They pay huge money to entertain staff and clients. Obviously a company with no presence in Tassie isn't going to fork out $50k for a corporate box when they have neither staff nor clients in Tassie.
 
Rob said:
To an extent. Although you're not going to get an international airline that doesn't fly to Tassie sponsor a Tassie team. Even major sponsors will have to have a major local presence to be worthwhile. As an example, the 4 companies that are the major sponsors of Fremantle and West Coast are all WA companies.

But a vast majority of corporate income does not come from the jumper sponsors. It comes from selling corporate boxes, space in coterie groups and the like. And they have to be locally based companies. They pay huge money to entertain staff and clients. Obviously a company with no presence in Tassie isn't going to fork out $50k for a corporate box when they have neither staff nor clients in Tassie.
Click to expand...

No no no no. Its about TV exposure. I mean why would Emirates sponsor Collingwood when 80% of footy heads in Melbourne hate them, or Mazda sponsor North Melbourne when 95% hate them? Its time on TV!!!!! They pay for exposure, not supporters.

Yes but a lot of that sort of Corporate income just helps pay huge stadium costs for most clubs.

Its a bit pointless using WA clubs as a guide. They only have 2 clubs. That would equate to having 5 clubs in Melbourne. But they have 10 fighting it out in two expensive stadiums. The cost equivalents are way in favour of Tasmania.

Tasmania is very much able to sustain the actual costs of running a club. We dont need $45million. They may need at least that to play at the G or Etihad, the SCG, Gabba, but not here.

Do you understand that?
 
Papa G said:
Woodside would be the most pointless major sponsorship in Australian sport. Where can I buy this Woodside product? I keep seeing it and I want one.
Click to expand...

It's about public relations, not selling more stuff.

It's not unusual over here for mining companies to sponsor sporting teams. BHP sponsor West Coast (and have their name on the Swan Districts jumper), but I doubt any West Coast supporter is in the market for a few tonnes of iron ore. Fortescue sponsor the Kookaburras (who I think are still based in Perth). Atlas Iron was Perth Scorchers naming rights sponsor. Although they're now worth about half a fig, so it's now always a prudent thing to do. :D
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Tasmania AFL Say No To Tassie Team

Similar threads

The_Wookie
North in $6m deal to sell WA 2 games a year over 3 seasons
Replies
16
Views
411
The_Wookie
The_Wookie
Plugger46
2024 AFL GF BINGO
Replies
0
Views
334
Plugger46
Plugger46
The_Wookie
AFL Clubs on Social Media 2024
Replies
1
Views
239
The_Wookie
The_Wookie
fargothegreat
AFL Reserves League
Replies
17
Views
1K
RedV3x
RedV3x
The_Wookie
Play Nice 2024 Non AFL Crowds/Ratings and other Industry thread
27 28 29 30 31
Replies
755
Views
48K
Aucklander
Aucklander
The_Wookie
128,000 Register For NAB AFL Auskick - a new record
Replies
12
Views
626
RedV3x
RedV3x
G
AFL(S): Footy All Year Around, 2nd Tier Leg Up & Expansion
Replies
8
Views
389
Walshawk
Walshawk

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top