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

[Lindsay_Gilbee]

Okay

I do know that Hawthorn right now has 77,000 members (despite b2b bottom 4 finishes and being touted to have the worst list in the league), has the 3rd largest revenue in the league and the second best NTA.

That said we do have an absolute campaigner as president, a dead weight CEO and are in the midst of a civil war so anything is possible.

I wouldn’t put it past Kennett to push Hawthorn to relocate to Tasmania given his public comments in the past.

It would be illogical and stupid but so was paying a 4 x premiership coach $1m to sit on a beach and renewing a CEO to a 5 year contract despite bombing on every metric.

Kennett is probably the worst person to have as president given the environment

Third highest revenue in the league. Wonder how much of “the family clubs” revenue is from pokies…

 

[Lindsay_Gilbee]

A lot of talk about where things have gone wrong in the last 15 years. I reckon the one mistake that was made was creating the suns and not giving the Southport sharks an AFL license… that one small change would’ve made a massive difference. Footy fans on the coast mostly support Southport.

 

[Hawkk]

Third highest revenue in the league. Wonder how much of “the family clubs” revenue is from pokies…

Probably a fair chunk.

I wonder why Hawthorn has the lowest AFL distribution in the league?

All clubs can’t rely on successive pork barreling by State and Fed governments and decades of AFL handouts (approx $25m in CBF and ASD since 2000)

The responsibility falls on the few to remain financially independent of the AFL and do the heavy lifting for the many

 

[Lindsay_Gilbee]

Probably a fair chunk.

I wonder why Hawthorn has the lowest AFL distribution in the league?

All clubs can’t rely on successive pork barreling by State and Fed governments and decades of AFL handouts (approx $25m in CBF and ASD since 2000)

The responsibility falls on the few to remain financially independent of the AFL and do the heavy lifting for the many

Justifying pokies is pathetic. Even worse when your president is the head of beyondblue.

 

[jarrod_island_doggies]

A lot of talk about where things have gone wrong in the last 15 years. I reckon the one mistake that was made was creating the suns and not giving the Southport sharks an AFL license… that one small change would’ve made a massive difference. Footy fans on the coast mostly support Southport.

The problem is that they really don't. The Sharks have such a huge presence due to their "club" membership - "clubs" in this sense include footy, leagues, rsls and surf clubs and are generally where a significant chunk of the population go for dinner, shows or to play the pokes. It's a big thing in SEQ, Gold Coast in particular and helps fund their operation to be successful moreso than the pure on-field stuff does.

Southport are also the "big bad". See Port or Collingwood for somewhat similar examples. There is nothing more likely than a Labrador, Broadbeach, Surfers or Palm Beach fan/player/coach etc hating Southport.

The coast stretches 70 kms and has a long footy history. One of the wisest things the AFL did was *not* give it to the Sharks.

 

[Atomboy]

If an additional team leads to less games in the H&A season, no thanks.
I have no idea why anyone would advocate for less rounds during the year. 22 games is fine, we don't need less.

Do you honestly watch every single game throughout the year though ?.

Less rounds over the same period of time would actually allow punters to watch more football given you could run games consistently from Thursday to Monday.

How many people are watching all five games today as an example ?. Move two of those games to Thursday and Monday and you get more eyeballs.

 

[fargothegreat]

Nobody in their right mind actually thinks ANOTHER team is a good idea within the next 5-10 years?..

Colin Carter does.

 

[Toump Ass]

The Supreme Court of Victoria has already told them that. Even the Brisbane Lions argued in favour of that very fact, in trying to distance themselves in what they saw as Fitzroy Football Club 's "interference" in resisting the Lions' logo change from the Fitzroy Lion to the 'paddlepop' lion in 2010. The Brisbane Lions claimed that the Fitzroy Football Club was a club with a "shrinking if not vanishing supporter base that sought to meddle in the business of a current AFL club". (Brisbane Lions' barrister, Rodney Garratt QC, March 2nd 2010)

Wait, I’m confused. Why did the Fitzroy Lions want the Brisbane Lions to use the Fitzroy Lion logo if they’re different clubs..? That’s like Collingwood suing Port Adelaide for not using black and white “prison bars”.

In 2010, Victorian Supreme Court Associate Justice Nemeer Mukhtar found that the Fitzroy Football Club still existed in its own right in the VAFA and was independent of the Brisbane Lions.

2010, so roughly two decades after everyone stopped caring about the fact that Fitzroy merged with the Bears?

Merger was it?

That’s right slick.

Removing North Melbourne from the AFL competition and then rebranding the Gold Coast Suns as the 'Gold Coast Kangaroos' with royal blue and white vertical stripes as their jumper doesn't make it a merger either.

Unless of course you merged the two clubs identities along with the playing list and called it a merger, in which case for all intents and purposes it is in actual fact a merger.

 

[Roylion]

But the end result is two teams ended their time operating in the Melbourne market and moved to two non traditional states in an effort to survive in one form or another.

Nah. One club did.

 

[HairyO]

Without success they might. A few lean years and their members will jump off pretty quickly

Last year we sucked and this year have more members.

The biggest threat to memberships is Kennett. I wont be a member again while he is there.

 

[Hawkk]

Justifying pokies is pathetic. Even worse when your president is the head of beyondblue.

I agree, Hawthorn is big and ugly enough to remain without pokies and especially without Kennett

 

[Roylion]

Wait, I’m confused. Why did the Fitzroy Lions want the Brisbane Lions to use the Fitzroy Lion logo if they’re different clubs..?

Fitzroy took legal action on behalf of those Fitzroy supporters that had chosen to support the rebranded Brisbane Bears who in 1996 had made pledges to use the Fitzroy lion in perpetuity in order to gain their support, as the Deed of Arrangement between the AFL and the Brisbane Bears had stated it would do. The Fitzroy Lion logo was and still is AFL intellectual property.

Unless of course you merged the two clubs identities

Rebranding the Brisbane Bears with AFL owned intellectual property that was assigned from a exited club to that club so it can look more like that exited club purely for marketing purposes is not a 'merger'.

As I said, removing North Melbourne Football Club from the AFL competition and then rebranding the existing Gold Coast Football Club as the 'Gold Coast Kangaroos' and bestowing the AFL owned royal blue and white vertical stripes as their jumper and the existing AFL owned Kangaroo logo as the club logo is not a merger. Then giving that rebranded existing AFL club, small pre-draft player selections from the North Melbourne list still doesn't make it a merger between the Gold Coast FC and the North Melbourne FC.

along with the playing list and called it a merger, in which case for all intents and purposes it is in actual fact a merger.

It's a rebranding of an existing AFL club. Fitzroy Football Club, that used to be in the AFL remains a completely independent, functioning football club in Melbourne. It is not, nor has it ever been, a part of the Brisbane Bears (now branded as 'Brisbane Lions'), as one would expect if it was in fact a merger.

 

[Toump Ass]

Rebranding the Brisbane Bears with AFL owned intellectual property that was assigned from a exited club to that club so it can look more like that exited club purely for marketing purposes is not a 'merger'.

For all intents and purposes, it is a merger.

Fitzroy Football Club, that used to be in the AFL remains a completely independent, functioning football club in Melbourne. It is not, nor has it ever been, a part of the Brisbane Bears / Lions, as one would expect if it was in fact a merger.

Hold on a second.

How many years after the merger exit was it before the Lions took the field again?

 

[Roylion]

For all intents and purposes, it is a merger.

It's not. I've explained why. For all "intents and purposes"? What does that mean? Marketing something as a 'merger' does not make it actually so.

How many years after the exit was it before the Lions took the field again?

Fitzroy Football Club remained a football club with directors, shareholders, members and revenue streams such as a shop selling Fitzroy mechandise from 1997-2008. It was a football club in recess (in the same as many VFL football clubs went into recess in wartime). In 2009 Fitzroy returned to the playing field fielding a senior and reserves side for the first time since 1996, as well as two Under-19 sides. They are no longer 'the Lions'.

 

[Engimal v3]

Unless of course you merged the two clubs identities along with the playing list and called it a merger, in which case for all intents and purposes it is in actual fact a merger.

Fitzroy pretty objectively did not merge. It's not really a matter of debate.

 

[Roylion]

Fitzroy pretty objectively did not merge. It's not really a matter of debate.

And my point is of course in this thread is that the AFL cannot force their constituent clubs to merge or relocate to get teams in Tasmania, or the Gold Coast, or keep the competition at a certain number of clubs, or to reduce clubs in Melbourne or whatever else they want to do to play around with the structure of the competition. Despite the claims by some here that the AFL could have done this or should have done that in 1996 or 2007 in this area the AFL have limited power. Clubs in Melbourne will fight tooth and nail to avoid relocation or merger and the AFL commission simply cannot force them against their will to do so. Any argument to the contrary is simply fanciful. Ironically all the AFL did in 1996 was to prevent North Melbourne and Fitzroy from voluntarily merging, forcing Fitzroy out of the competition.

The best chance of a club in Tasmania is a 19th club. Based on what has happened so far I can't see any other way.

 

[Bunk Moreland]

And my point is of course in this thread is that the AFL cannot force their constituent clubs to merge or relocate to get teams in Tasmania, or the Gold Coast, or keep the competition at a certain number of clubs, or to reduce clubs in Melbourne or whatever else they want to do to play around with the structure of the competition. Despite the claims by some here that the AFL could have done this or should have done that in 1996 or 2007.... In this area they have limited power. Clubs in Melbourne will fight tooth and nail to avoid relocation or merger and the AFL commission simply cannot force them against their will to do so. Any argument to the contrary is simply fanciful. Ironically all the AFL did in 1996 was to prevent North Melbourne and Fitzroy from voluntarily merging, forcing Fitzroy out of the competition.

The best chance of a club in Tasmania is a 19th club. Based on what has happened so far I can't see any other way.

In short, what did happen? Fitzroy simply handed in their AFL license?

 

[Roylion]

In short, what did happen? Fitzroy simply handed in their AFL license?

Yep. The administrator surrendered it as part of a deal to secure AFL funding to settle the club's debts. The AFL intellectual property, pertaining to Fitzroy's AFL identity was then allocated by the AFL to the Brisbane Bears for use.

 

[Breretonisahood]

A bit of a digression, but with all of this talk about a 19th team in Tassie, can we please have more rounds of matches? The VFL had a 22 rnd season in 1970 WITH ONLY 12 TEAMS! Those players were semi-amateur with day jobs. We now have 18, perhaps soon to be 19, teams and still only play 22 matches per year despite the players being fully professional footballers. That is ridiculous and has the flow on effect that the biased draw is a joke.

 

[Billys Back]

Third highest revenue in the league. Wonder how much of “the family clubs” revenue is from pokies…

True. I think Kennett has said in the past they can’t afford to let go of the pokies. The ‘family’ club feels a need to bleed the community dry and keep members coming back to satisfy their addiction. Feed their dependency and squeeze every bit out of them.

 

[Billys Back]

Anyway, back to topic. Who cares about Tassie anyway? I doubt they produce anymore than 5 top footballers a decade.
If it’s not financially viable, why expand the competition again with another team that will spend the next 10 years near the bottom of the ladder and financially struggle?

Not to mention the likelihood of a predicable, ugly green jumper.

 

[Hawkk]

True. I think Kennett has said in the past they can’t afford to let go of the pokies. The ‘family’ club feels a need to bleed the community dry and keep members coming back to satisfy their addiction. Feed their dependency and squeeze every bit out of them.

He made those comments - which are not supported by the financial statements in the annual report - in the context of funding the $130m to $150m training base at Dingley

Don’t get me started on what a white elephant that will turn out to be.

As an aside this is the same man that claims his politicking on Andrews cost the club a $20m to $40m grant from the Victorian government.

He is a complete and utter liability for Hawthorn...

‘Governance Jeff’ is basically John Elliot reincarnated, and Hawthorn will be burdened by his presidency for decades

 

[eastfreo75]

2020 AFL club distributions. : AFL (reddit.com)

Tasmania can't get $12-13m contribution ie North Melbourne or Melbourne.

 

[Slysh]

Anyway, back to topic. Who cares about Tassie anyway? I doubt they produce anymore than 5 top footballers a decade.
If it’s not financially viable, why expand the competition again with another team that will spend the next 10 years near the bottom of the ladder and financially struggle?

Not to mention the likelihood of a predicable, ugly green jumper.

Who cares about Tassie?

Tasmanians.

 

[eastfreo75]

Anyway, back to topic. Who cares about Tassie anyway? I doubt they produce anymore than 5 top footballers a decade.
If it’s not financially viable, why expand the competition again with another team that will spend the next 10 years near the bottom of the ladder and financially struggle?

Not to mention the likelihood of a predicable, ugly green jumper.

Long live the VFL.