Apple Isle Showdown: Tas Govt threatens to end Hawks, North deals if no plan for 19th side

[Roylion]

They CAN remove the bank guarantee as I have pointed out previously & I know you disagree. My commercial experience says it can.

But this was still no guarantee that North would have relocated to the Gold Coast. The AFL could not force them to take that particular action.

What justification would they have had removing only North's guarantee and not the other bank guarantees? How would that not generate long and drawn out court action. Had it been a viable option you could be sure that Caroline Wilson would have written about it. She didn't.

She did write about on the 27th November 2007 that if North didn't accept the relocation offer the AFL would consider redrawing the 2008 fixture and pulling the Kangaroos out of Gold Coast games should they reject the league's $100 million relocation offer. The AFL also considered purchasing shares in the North Melbourne football club. She also wrote that the Kangaroos would lose their Gold Coast match revenue - $1.6 million in 2008 - and have no guarantee that the special assistance of $1.4 million from the AFL would continue. Had that been done that would have been the subject of legal action given that the AFL itself limits certain revenue raising practices and makes up for the inequities by the special assistance fund.

And even then North might have considered a merger with a Melbourne based club before it relocated to the Gold Coast. As Fitzroy chose to do.

 

[Engimal v3]

For all intents and purposes, they did.

You've done it now

 

[Roylion]

For all intents and purposes, they did.

No they didn't.

 

[Engimal v3]

No club should be coping it really, its nonsensical tribal crap to push for the death of another club. I wouldn't even want to wish that on Essendon.

Well let's not go too far...

 

[kaiserchief13]

We could have f’ed off the Eagles to Tassie when your mob was insolvent, instead us WA taxpayers stepped in and bailed you out. And this is the thanks we get.

So you want Victorian taxpayers to bail out North?

 

[eastfreo75]

he’s a smart man Colin. He knows no club is going to relocate. Focusing the debate on that option and sinking it early means there’s really only one alternative and that’s a 19th team in Tas.

Like John Howard did with the republic debate.

 

[Toump Ass]

I swear to God if Kennet can relocate the Hawks I will take back every bad word I ever said about him. I'll even vote Liberal for the rest of my life and take up the pokies as a hobby.

Carn Jeff!!!

 

[jwikked]

He's not wrong, North should have been moved. Its not right that teams making a profit need to subsidise teams not, especially in established markets

Your argument would make sense if all teams were treated equally by the AFL, which they aren't.
The fixture isn't fair, the same big teams get gifted the same big slot marquee games.

Make the fixture truly random, make the timeslots truly random, each team has the exact same stadium deal capped at the capacity of the smallest venue, give all teams time to settle and THEN you can argue about teams not making a profit in a more equal environment.

 

[parano1a]

And where is Fitzroy Football Club now?

Dead, in terms of the AFL competition.
Yes I know they compete in the VAFA.

 

[Kwality]

People will never get it mate, trust me. I've been telling people this for 10 years. It'll be posted again tomorrow, and the next day, etc.

How many times a week do you have to remind people that Fitzroy didn't merge? It's the same thing.

I am not suggesting a merger.

 

[Roylion]

Dead, in terms of the AFL competition.
Yes I know they compete in the VAFA.

Not dead then. And no merger, no matter what the AFL wanted or tried to bring about in 1996.

Still in Melbourne. Still at the Brunswick Street Oval. Still wearing the Fitzroy jumper. Still have their history and achievments in the VFA, VFL and AFL. Still known as 'Fitzroy'. Still representing the suburb of Fitzroy in Melbourne metropolitan football, as they were formed in 1883 to do.

 

[Roylion]

I am not suggesting a merger.

In 2007, the AFL could not force North Melbourne to take a particular course of action in relocating to the Gold Coast. No matter what funding they took away.

 

[Kwality]

Your argument would make sense if all teams were treated equally by the AFL, which they aren't.
The fixture isn't fair, the same big teams get gifted the same big slot marquee games.

Make the fixture truly random, make the timeslots truly random, each team has the exact same stadium deal capped at the capacity of the smallest venue, give all teams time to settle and THEN you can argue about teams not making a profit in a more equal environment.

The argument on fairness ignores the GF decision behind closed doors. There clubs earn home finals except the GF, fairness for a select group & the rest of the competition make their own transport arrangements.
The version of equality is equally destroyed by AFL distributions year after year.

 

[jwikked]

The argument on fairness ignores the GF decision behind closed doors. There clubs earn home finals except the GF, fairness for a select group & the rest of the competition make their own transport arrangements.
The version of equality is equally destroyed by AFL distributions year after year.

Agree with your first point 100%. AFL Distributions are a result of the inequality of teams within the AFL umbrella.

 

[Kwality]

In 2007, the AFL could not force North Melbourne to take a particular course of action in relocating to the Gold Coast. No matter what funding they took away.

The question here is Tasmania & Fitzroy is not relevant, interesting as it WAS.

 

[Kwality]

But this was still no guarantee that North would have relocated to the Gold Coast. The AFL could not force them to take that particular action.

What justification would they have had removing only North's guarantee and not the other bank guarantees? How would that not generate long and drawn out court action. Had it been a viable option you could be sure that Caroline Wilson would have written about it. She didn't.

She did write about on the 27th November 2007 that if North didn't accept the relocation offer the AFL would consider redrawing the 2008 fixture and pulling the Kangaroos out of Gold Coast games should they reject the league's $100 million relocation offer. The AFL also considered purchasing shares in the North Melbourne football club. She also wrote that the Kangaroos would lose their Gold Coast match revenue - $1.6 million in 2008 - and have no guarantee that the special assistance of $1.4 million from the AFL would continue. Had that been done that would have been the subject of legal action given that the AFL itself limits certain revenue raising practices and makes up for the inequities by the special assistance fund.

And even then North might have considered a merger with a Melbourne based club before it relocated to the Gold Coast. As Fitzroy chose to do.

All good, just not relevant here.

 

[Roylion]

The question here is Tasmania & Fitzroy is not relevant, interesting as it WAS.

The point of mentioning the AFL not being able to force Fitzroy to do as it wanted suggests that the AFL will be unable to force North Melbourne to Tasmania, just as they couldn't force North Melbourne to the Gold Coast in 2007.

 

[rdhopkins2]

Disappointing that Tassie won’t get its own team but it’s hard to write a business case for it, especially in the current environment. Also the AFL won’t want an odd number of teams so it’s merge a Tassie team with an AFL team or an existing AFL club relocating.

I certainly don’t want to see a club forcibly merged or relocated.

Interesting times for North and Hawks to see if Tassie pulls the plug on sponsorship.

 

[afl genius]

They definitely need priority access at their first draft. I just don’t get this obsession the AFL has with getting new teams up to standard ASAP and gifting them all the talent. Who cares if it takes 10,20 or 30 years for them to play finals

Would of thought this was pretty obvious. Trying to get new fans on board and new teams winning will have more support compared to a side getting belted by 100 points everywhere. Agreed that robbing everyone else of top end talent though is a big issue

 

[Roylion]

All good, just not relevant here.

Then why did you comment in this thread in reference to North Melbourne going to the Gold Coast in 2007 that "The AFL took the easy way out & the game is paying for it"

 

[afl genius]

Disappointing that Tassie won’t get its own team but it’s hard to write a business case for it, especially in the current environment. Also the AFL won’t want an odd number of teams so it’s merge a Tassie team with an AFL team or an existing AFL club relocating.

I certainly don’t want to see a club forcibly merged or relocated.

Interesting times for North and Hawks to see if Tassie pulls the plug on sponsorship.

Reckon they will one day but this report certainly hurts the chances significantly.

Wouldn't a bye every round work and offset the two byes throughout the year? 19 teams probably opens the door for an NT/Cairns team too at some point down the line

 

[Bjo187]

Can we all please take a moment to acknowledge the additional stain on the legacy of demetriou and how he ****ed up the north relocation plan by being dodgey with the figures. He should have given north two options. Move to gc or west sydney. The west sydney one being the more attractive deal. 4 home games in melbourne per year, a relocation to a fully non football market, emulating the success of the swans, the blue of north to contrast to the red of the swans and giving the smallest club in the land some history and supporter base to be established upon. Then could have brought in 2 new clubs in gc and tassie, effectively expanding and solidifying traditional football bases in one and giving more power to the west sydney franchise.
And yes i have seen the doco, it was his stuff up that made north powerbrokers question the proposal to go to gold coast.

 

[big_e]

So you want Victorian taxpayers to bail out North?

We don't need bailing out. Just pointing out the hypocrisy of Eagles fans, who death ride any club who dares to be small, and forgets you were once in the same place.

 

[Engimal v3]

Pages and pages about how the AFL can't force relocation, then this:

He should have given north two options. Move to gc or west sydney.

Lost cause lol

 

[Engimal v3]

“We want to run and operate our own team. We don’t want to rent one"

Gutwein goes bang. I do find it hard to believe that he'd really push for no AFL if push really came to shove, but it'd be incredible if he did. He's certainly more of a bold man than Hodgeman ever was on this issue.