Rumour AFL to buy / take control of regional AFL venue.

[Roogal]

With all the money that was piled into it by taxpayers it was supposed to be a community stadium.

Until they made it so expensive local leagues couldn't afford to use it.

Karma if it happens.

Good point. Geelong local teams (and curiously even the Geelong FC NAB team have been known to shift home games to Mars Stadium) do regularly shift games to Mars Stadium which is hired from the Ballarat Council for a relative peppercorn.

 

[olds]

Old mate didn't last long before hitting the ignore list.....

Come on ,bit of sport, its only a game.

Grown men chasing leather.

 

[Roogal]

Sydney gets all that rain in January during their test match and on Golden Slipper Day.

It’s dry pretty much the rest of the year

I dispute you emphatically! Strap yourself in and prepare yourself for a real surprise.

The following two tables show climate data for Sydney and Hobart respectively (Sourced from the BOM):

Sydney:



Hobart:



Nobody should be supporting the AFL view that hundreds of millions should be wasted to put a roof over a stadium in Tasmania for the sake of a four degree difference in mean temperatures between the two cities during the winter months. Even in Winter, Sydney is still getting twice the amount of rain. Nobody with any sense should or could argue with the statistics, they don't darn well lie. The argument of putting an expensive roof on a new stadium in Hobart is purely and deliberately to blow out the costs and feasibility of starting up a Tasmanian franchise. The AFL know it and they are playing that card very well. They know fully well that 20,000 Tasmanians will turn up to every game (roof or no roof) to Blundstone Arena if a Tasmanian representative team is playing.

 

[3207]

I dispute you emphatically! Strap yourself in and prepare yourself for a real surprise.

The following two tables show climate data for Sydney and Hobart respectively (Sourced from the BOM):

Sydney:

View attachment 1914792

Hobart:

View attachment 1914793

Nobody should be supporting the AFL view that hundreds of millions should be wasted to put a roof over a stadium in Tasmania for the sake of a four degree difference in mean temperatures between the two cities during the winter months. Even in Winter, Sydney is still getting twice the amount of rain. Nobody with any sense should or could argue with the statistics, they don't darn well lie. The argument of putting an expensive roof on a new stadium in Hobart is purely and deliberately to blow out the costs and feasibility of starting up a Tasmanian franchise. The AFL know it and they are playing that card very well. They know fully well that 20,000 Tasmanians will turn up to every game (roof or no roof) to Blundstone Arena if a Tasmanian representative team is playing.

1) I was 100% taking the pi55
2) I’m not reading this because of Point 1
3) You went to all that trouble over 1 gag? Sad

 

[Roogal]

1) I was 100% taking the pi55
2) I’m not reading this because of Point 1
3) You went to all that trouble over 1 gag? Sad

That's cool, but there are many out there who are buying into the belief that Hobart is unplayable without a roofed stadium.

 

[3207]

That's cool, but there are many out there who are buying into the belief that Hobart is unplayable without a roofed stadium.

Cool.

But if you seriously think I assume that all of Sydney’s rainfall happens in 6 days then that’s on you.

That’s your issue.

Not mine.

Good luck convincing the masses otherwise

 

[teagueyubeauty]

The same Geelong that holds its B&F in Melbourne.

Haha, game set and match


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[Roogal]

Cool.

But if you seriously think I assume that all of Sydney’s rainfall happens in 6 days then that’s on you.

That’s your issue.

Not mine.

Good luck convincing the masses otherwise

Settle mate, calm the farm. Whether your post was satirical or not, doesn't matter, my response is directed at the "Eddie McGuires" and folks out there on BF who are happy to see hundreds of millions of mine and other tax-payers dollars blown away on something that is completely unnecessary. Whether you are being satirical or not doesn't translate through a keyboard. You're no no Barry Humphries or a professional comedian, so if I were you I'd give the satire away. You're not good at it! You made a stupid statement (whether made in jest or not) and I corrected it. If you got a problem with the fact that I can't read your emotions through the internet, then I have nothing else to say except that, that is your problem not mine. Grow up!!!

 

[3207]

Settle mate, calm the farm. Whether your post was satirical or not, doesn't matter, my response is directed at the "Eddie McGuires" and folks out there on BF who are happy to see hundreds of millions of mine and other tax-payers dollars blown away on something that is completely unnecessary. Whether you are being satirical or not doesn't translate through a keyboard. You made a stupid statement (whether made in jest or not) and I corrected it. If you got a problem with the fact that I can't read your emotions through the internet, then I have nothing else to say except that, that is your problem not mine. Grow up!!!

I’m not reading this either.

 

[CharacterFirst]

Roof or no roof, it's still going to be cold inside the stadium unless they plan to heat it too. Besides, it's football ... You know, a winter game. Remember a time when we used to go to the football and wear winter clothes like coats, scarfs, beenies and gloves. We'd keep warm by eating hot food and drinks or have an alcoholic bevvy to warm up the system. Who needs a roof? Clearly Marvel Stadium has a lot to answer for. It's made people soft.

I live in Geelong, and it gets jolly cold and wet down there too. In Winter, not a lot unlike Hobart. Yet nobody suggested putting a roof on the "cattery" during its rebuild over the last ten years.

I was born and bred in Geelong, and I've lived 5 years in Hobart. Hobart is colder.

Hobart gets a new stadium - it should have a roof. It's bloody cold in winter, and a brand new, state of the art stadium should have a roof.

But the backwardness of Tassie will probably scupper it anyway.

Cut their noses off to spite their faces down there.

And it ain't 1975 anymore.

 

[olds]

• Geelong makes over $1M a game at Kardinia Park
• AFL says you must host two games at the MCG every year because contract
• Geelong says then at least make them against large drawing clubs so we don't lose as much money

And then people twist the last point into Geelong requesting these games be at the MCG.

So its the AFL,s contractual agreement with the MCG ?

So just request you don't play home games against the big clubs.

Play all your home games against low drawing teams.

If the GFC. are "Asking "

Quote "Geelong says then at least make them against large drawing clubs so we don't lose as much money"

There is obviously an an avenue to "ASK"

If the draw says 2 games against pies, make them away games.

I'm sure you would get 11 home games then.

You get no revenue for the away game though ,Dick, Nothing, Nada.

Then according to the post's here from Geelong forum people you would rather that than to travel to foreign world where the world drops of a cliff past the Geelong trotting track.

 

[STPer18]

So its the AFL,s contractual agreement with the MCG ?

So just request you don't play home games against the big clubs.

If they are "Asking "

Quote "Geelong says then at least make them against large drawing clubs so we don't lose as much money"

there is obviously an avenue to "ASK"

Let's play a game, you pick from two options, there are no other options. You make $1M+ per home game played at Kardinia Park, and you request all 11 of your home games are played there. However:

The powers that be state you must play two of your home games at the MCG.

Option A:
Collingwood at the MCG with 70k+
Hawthorn/Richmond/Essendon at the MCG with 50k+

Option B:
Gold Coast at the MCG with 10k+
GWS at the MCG with 10k+

Which option are you taking?

 

[olds]

Let's play a game, you pick from two options, there are no other options. You make $1M+ per home game played at Kardinia Park, and you request all 11 of your home games are played there. However:

The powers that be state you must play two of your home games at the MCG.

Option A:
Collingwood at the MCG with 70k+
Hawthorn/Richmond/Essendon at the MCG with 50k+

Option B:
Gold Coast at the MCG with 10k+
GWS at the MCG with 10k+

Which option are you taking?

So which ever one it is the GFC get to pick the option.

 

[STPer18]

Apparently only because they are against the top 12 ranking games for the season.



Lets play your a team that looses money at marvel or would make money at GMHBA

BZZZZT

Didn't pick an option, you lost the game. Better luck next time!

 

[olds]

So which ever one it is the GFC get to pick the option.

I think this is not far from the truth.

 

[olds]

BZZZZT

Didn't pick an option, you lost the game. Better luck next time!

Yep you sure showed me there.

 

[Duckimus Prime]

Geelong's closer than Ballarat.

The train to Ballarat from Southern Cross is around 1hr30 to 1hr 40. From Geelong to Southern Cross an hour. South Geelong station is a few hundred metres from the ground.

Ballarat is about Ballarat paying the Bulldogs to be there.

Nobody is going to pay the Bulldogs extra money to play a home game in Geelong.

 

[TheEscapeClub]

Ballarat is about Ballarat paying the Bulldogs to be there.

Nobody is going to pay the Bulldogs extra money to play a home game in Geelong.

It depends on what the deal is. They don't have to be paid but favourable terms on other game day aspects could make it worthwhile.

Geelong FC don't own Kardinia Park. For a crowd in the low to mid 20s k range they make the same money as a 75+k home crowd at the MCG.

I'm sure there would be a lot of wriggle room in there to make it beneficial for all parties.

Having said that, the Bulldogs have been everywhere in the schools of Ballarat the past few weeks, they wouldn't be able to do that in Geelong.

 

[Roogal]

I was born and bred in Geelong, and I've lived 5 years in Hobart. Hobart is colder.

Hobart gets a new stadium - it should have a roof. It's bloody cold in winter, and a brand new, state of the art stadium should have a roof.

But the backwardness of Tassie will probably scupper it anyway.

Cut their noses off to spite their faces down there.

And it ain't 1975 anymore.

Irrespective of what those on the mainland think, it's ultimately up to the people of Tasmania to decide. After all they will be paying for about 60% of the all up cost of the proposed facility. To give some perspective as to what Tasmanians are being demanded to do, please consider ... There are 530,000 people in Tassie, while there are 6,930,000 people in Victoria (roughly 13 times as many people). The cost of Tassie taxpayers contributing $400 million toward construction of a stadium to them would be the equivalent of convincing Victorian tax payers to shell out $5.2 billion to rebuild the MCG. When you think about it in those terms, you can understand the resistance by many and reticence of others over there. As I said, it's not for us to decide, only they can.

As I had stated in an earlier post. If the Tassie venture doesn't get off the ground then clubs such as North Melbourne and Hawthorn will no doubt renegotiate their deals with Tourism Tasmania. It is further likely that the Tassie government would choose the more popular and politically sellable option (from the Tasmanians perspective) of a full upgrade of York Park and a more modest upgrade to Blundstone Arena. On the positive side of such an outcome, the AFL would then not need to consider either purchasing or leasing another Victorian stadium.

 

[3207]

Irrespective of what those on the mainland think, it's ultimately up to the people of Tasmania to decide. After all they will be paying for about 60% of the all up cost of the proposed facility. To give some perspective as to what Tasmanians are being demanded to do, consider this. There are 530,000 people in Tassie, while there are 6,930,000 people in Victoria (roughly 13 times as many people). The cost of Tassie taxpayers contributing 400 million toward construction of a stadium to them would be the equivalent of convincing Victorian tax payers to shell out $5.2 billion to rebuild the MCG. So you can understand the pushback that is growing over there. As I said, it's not for us to decide, only they can.

If they did spend $5.2B to refurb the MCG my chances of getting a ticket to Tay Tay’s next concert would be substantially higher.

Refurb approved.

 

[Mofra]

Ballarat is about Ballarat paying the Bulldogs to be there.

Nobody is going to pay the Bulldogs extra money to play a home game in Geelong.

Anecdotally, we make more from 2 games at Mars than 9 games at Marvel. Our Marvel deal is that bad. An extra game in Ballarat makes sense and the playing surface is excellent.

 

[3207]

Anecdotally, we make more from 2 games at Mars than 9 games at Marvel. Our Marvel deal is that bad. An extra game in Ballarat makes sense and the playing surface is excellent.

And the city of Ballarat is far nicer than dockkands

 

[Mofra]

And the city of Ballarat is far nicer than dockkands

Pretty sure it was, for a brief period, the richest city in the western world by capita. Love the gold rush history.

 

[STPer18]

This is from 2013. AFL owns Docklands these days so it's likely changed but what a shitty deal those teams found themselves caught up in.

The Western Bulldogs could reap about $750,000 if they play home games in Geelong

$750k for Dogs games in Geelong

www.foxsports.com.au

Geelong is inviting the Western Bulldogs to play home games at Simonds Stadium next year with the lure of a $750,000 cheque for crowds of just over 20,000.

As the idea of a third boutique stadium again gained momentum yesterday, the Cats revealed they had made overtures to the AFL about rivals using their redeveloped stadium.

Rather than writing a cheque to Etihad Stadium management for crowds in the low 20,000s, the Bulldogs could make a cash windfall from playing in Geelong.

Geelong chief executive Brian Cook said the offer was on the table for the Bulldogs and other clubs.

Talk of a boutique stadium invariably raises its head when the AFL is bargaining with its existing stadiums, but Cook said his door was also open to other clubs.

"We have had a couple of discussions with the AFL on the continual redevelopment of our stadium, and we are completing stage three now," he told the Herald Sun.

"We have spoken to the AFL on several occasions about the Doggies coming down in particular and playing other AFL clubs.

"We are very willing for that to happen. They would make very good money. Our capacity crowd was 22,000 last year and we made about $750,000 profit per game.

"Even if the Dogs only averaged half as much as that, the worst-case scenario is they get 10,000 people and they still make more than at Etihad Stadium."

In 2011, North Melbourne made just $97,540 from 11 home-games at Docklands before guaranteed top-ups of $100,000 per game, with seven losses on games with crowds of less than 28,000.

Geelong has warned the fabric of the competition was threatened if the gap continued to grow between the haves and have-nots.

 

[3207]

Pretty sure it was, for a brief period, the richest city in the western world by capita. Love the gold rush history.

Think you’re right