Considering the massive disruption to the AFL season and as Caro suggests the detrimental long-term impact on memberships, corporate support and TV ratings, what would be considered reasonable compensation for the AFL?
-
AFLW 2024 - Round 10 - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
AFL seeks compensation for World Cup disruption
- Thread starter Beaussie
- Start date
- Tagged users None
Why would it have a detrimental long term impact upon memberships?
- Thread starter
- #3
Perhaps an increase in A-League club memberships at the expense of AFL club memberships.
AFL deserve minor compensation and that's it. This is a competition that is held once in a lifetime in your own country and the AFL should deal with it and move on. Some funding to compensate for the loss in revenue of tv rights but as for scheduling the AFL should just accept that for that particular year, if we do get the World Cup, that our sport will have to play second fiddle.
No, just no.
As an example, Essendon have about 35,000 season ticket members. If Docklands and the MCG were unavailable for 8 weeks and Essendon were to have 4 home games at a smaller venue, they would have to cap their membership at 20,000.
Would the 15,000 regular Essendon members who were turned away that year automatically return the following year? And if Essendon happened to make the grand final that year, the people who were denied memberships would also miss out on any chance of grand final tickets - that's a lot of disgruntled people who may not return.
The Old Dark Navy's
Moderator
- Moderator
- #6
No doubt the AFL should work something out, but to say they should get minor compensation and just deal with it, is a bit much.
What obligation do the AFL have towards football (soccer) as a code? You are suggesting the AFL should give a leg up to a rival code and cost themselves in terms of money and convenience simply because it is a once in a life time event? That wouldn't be and shouldn't be a motivating factor for the AFL who are here to protect the interests of Australian Rules Football only.
The only possible way doing this is in the AFL's interests if AFL supporter backlash compels them to do it.
Of course the Government could also blackmail the AFL into doing it by refusing to help pay for new stadiums etc, but that wouldn't last too long.
Multi-millions, even billions of dollars flowing into the economy and you think the AFL should get minor compensation and like it.
This will only work with cooperation from all sides.
My underlying point is that the AFL administration, being who they are, will demand an arm and leg and then some as compensation. I agree that only cooperation from all sides will work however I can see the AFL attempting to block any proposed resolution unless it strongly compensates them for the loss of 5-10 weeks.
And please don't suggest soccer is a rival code. It isn't. It's played in summer to coincide with the seasons in the northern hemispheres. It's not a risk to our sport, it's too different.
The AFL should refuse to agree to this loss of the MCG and other major stadiums for so long. FIFA should pull their head in and allow OUR game to be played up and till a couple of weeks of the event, if they don't let it played in another country.
Why shouldn't they? The AFL have existing contractual arrangements in place with the venues, and face a major disruption to their business arrangements. Unless the AFL receive something in return which is acceptable to them, they have every right to insist on their contracts being upheld in their current form.
They deserve the exact amount of compensation, in direct lost revenue due to the world cup, nothing more, nothing less. Blah blah blah world game, blah blah blah once in a lifetime oppurtunity. It doesn't matter. The AFL are asking to put their season on hold for a rival and as a bussiness should be compensated. end of story.
RobbieK
Cancelled
- Aug 20, 2009
- 5,731
- 10,803
- AFL Club
- Sydney
This is frankly bullshit.
A one off break of 8 weeks is not going to have any long-term impacts. Why would it?
In all the 12 years up to 2021 the AFL will continue as it is. In 2022 it will have a break in the middle of the season. In 2023 it will continue along as it was prior to 2022, except that it will find that many of the stadiums it uses have upgraded facilities, and will definitely not have such a break again in any of our lifetimes, if ever.
The talk of clubs having to cap memberships is really jumping the gun and making a load of assumptions about what is going to happen in 2022.
Some people need to get some perspective on this. It is a one off, it is a great event for our country to host, it will impact on a single season, and after that things will be completely back to normal. It is not the end of the world. The sky is not falling in.
FIFA sound to me to be very much like the F1 organisation. Do it their way or not at all. As far as I'm concerned FIFA can take the World Cup elsewhere if they are not prepared to work around the existing schedule for football codes in Australia.
Massive disruption for a one-off event, which will never come to Australia again, is just not worth it in my mind. Sure there are economic benefits associated with hosting an international event like the World Cup, but how often do these international events actually return a profit for the taxpayers' dollars invested (not the private sector, who get a one-off spike, but see minimal long-term flow on).
Going to cinema is a rival for the AFL, even a night out with the mates that doesn't involve going to or watching the football, the entertainment dollar can only go so far
nor would it if we didn't host the event
RobbieK
Cancelled
- Aug 20, 2009
- 5,731
- 10,803
- AFL Club
- Sydney
LOL
You seriously don't get it, do you?
The Australian world cup bid is trying to convince FIFA to let us have the competition, it is not the other way round.
FIFA is so much bigger than the AFL, the world cup is the biggest sporting even in the world. The "massive" disruption is 8 weeks in one year of your life.
The Old Dark Navy's
Moderator
- Moderator
- #16
It's hardly the point. There is very little in this for the AFL so the AFL as a business are entitled to make it work for them. They have some leverage at present and the government and FIFA will have to work with them.
Sure those that want to see the World Cup spectacle will be upset if denied the chance to see it because the AFL didn't play ball, but that doesn't take away from the fact that the AFL have every right to get what they can out of it, and in fact, are probably derelict in their duties if they don't. The facts of life really.
As for not being a rival code, a rival doesn't merely have to be competing for attendances by having its season running at the same time as yours. It might also be fishing out of the depleted corporate sponsorship pool. It's probably not an issue yet but it could become one.
You don't get it, putting aside the lost revenue for the AFL , there is also a principle at stake here. bow down to FIFA demands because they are the "world game", How does "get ****ed" sound, I know it us bidding for the event, but we can also withdraw if they don't like it
invinciBlues
Norm Smith Medallist
And thats 8 weeks too many.
How big FIFA is compared to the AFL? Stand up, walk away from the computer and towards the nearest window. Look up in the sky and you should be able to see the flying f*** I couldn't give
RobbieK
Cancelled
- Aug 20, 2009
- 5,731
- 10,803
- AFL Club
- Sydney
And thats 8 weeks too many.
How big FIFA is compared to the AFL? Stand up, walk away from the computer and towards the nearest window. Look up in the sky and you should be able to see the flying f*** I couldn't give
LOL
Whether you give a **** or not is irrelevant. What you want is irrelevant
The AFL will probably be getting some compensation for the short-term disruption in one season in a decades time, sure.
However, the federal government has given this world cup bid its full support so all of you in the "get ****ed FIFA" camp need to come back to reality and get used to the idea of disruption to one season of the AFL if this bid is succesful.
The bid is certainly not going to be withdrawn because of the AFL or AFL supporters. Deal with it.
mcgarnacle
Norm Smith Medallist
- Dec 2, 2003
- 9,786
- 4,212
- AFL Club
- Sydney
but im sure the AFL will be the 1st Oz sporting governing body to campaign that the playing arena in new stadia in Adelaide and Perth be built to AFL specifications.
the AFL will be out to take as much as it can..........but im sure they realise that the upside to th world cup for the AFL re stadia and infrastructure will be huge for the following 30 years at the least........and it'll be all govt funded. If the AFL try to squeeze for compo, then the fed govt might just tell the AFL to GAGF and build rectangulars instead.
the AFL will be out to take as much as it can..........but im sure they realise that the upside to th world cup for the AFL re stadia and infrastructure will be huge for the following 30 years at the least........and it'll be all govt funded. If the AFL try to squeeze for compo, then the fed govt might just tell the AFL to GAGF and build rectangulars instead.
I find this to be a major misconception about the allocation of World Cup hosts. The FIFA executive doesn't sit in a room, surrounding a big table with a map of the world on it, deciding "where should we go next? which unsuspecting nation should we force ourselves on to, against their will?"
I can understand the confusion - after all, you are used to the AFL's methods, such as the Western Sydney situation.
Upgraded 40k Gold Coast venue
New 40k Adelaide venue
New 60k+ Perth venue
Minor upgrades to MCG/Docklands
There will be 31 visiting nations who will need training bases, its possible some of these could be minor Aussie rules grounds that would then get facilities upgrades.
Seems like a great opportunity for the AFL to play some international games in the weeks leading up to the World Cup if you ask me.
Get the government to underwrite all cost as part of the compensation package and play a round (s) of games offshore. Could host them in:
S Africa
India
China
US
New Zealand
UK
Given they are played for Premiership Points I think you'd get a good response from expats and locals in all of those markets in terms of attendance.
Sponsors get international exposure so they also win.
Seems like a no-brainer to me...
Get the government to underwrite all cost as part of the compensation package and play a round (s) of games offshore. Could host them in:
S Africa
India
China
US
New Zealand
UK
Given they are played for Premiership Points I think you'd get a good response from expats and locals in all of those markets in terms of attendance.
Sponsors get international exposure so they also win.
Seems like a no-brainer to me...
- Aug 30, 2007
- 9,004
- 6,155
- AFL Club
- Melbourne
- Other Teams
- Warney's IPL team!
Not really considering one is played in summer one is played in winter.
Porbably more due to season ticket holders, almost all clubs would in some way shape of form have to cap their members or season ticket holders much in the way Adelaide have to do now.
Clubs Like Melbourne, Bulldogs and North who have battled hard over the years to building their memberships may lose a lot of "fringe" members for one year and may not gain them back straight away.
I would of thought this would of been mostly due to not clashing with the AFL, and give the soccer the best chance to fluorish in Australia.
People fas say soccer is going to over take AFL, it may well and laready do so at grass roots and participation level. However when Soccer get a $ 750 million (mostly free to air) tv deal then maybe they can talk themesleves up.
I would love to see the Soccer World Cup in Australia, but not with such a detremental affect on the AFL!
