Tasmania Congratulations on Tassie License. Mens team to enter 2028. Womens team TBA. Other details TBA 3/5

[Chief]

---

GO TO PART 2 of this thread:

Tasmania - Tasmania Devils, welcome to the AFL. Mens team to enter 2028. Womens team TBA. Labor declares support for Stadium 6/5

Continued from Part 1: https://www.bigfooty.com/forum/threads/congratulations-on-tassie-license-mens-team-to-enter-2028-womens-team-tba-other-details-tba-3-5.1226653/ Was going to draft up a Summary but this is pretty good...

www.bigfooty.com

---

 

[Canberra Pear]

Are the AFL keepers of the code or purely a business?

It's not really that black and white.

Just because the AFL might be the "keepers of the code" doesn't mean they should put a team everywhere that asks for one (otherwise Canberra would've had one four or five times already).

If the AFL were expected to fund the NT's $15m annual shortfall, it could very well sink the AFL, and then there'd be no use them being the keepers of the code.

 

[Tasmanian saint]

It's not really that black and white.

Just because the AFL might be the "keepers of the code" doesn't mean they should put a team everywhere that asks for one (otherwise Canberra would've had one four or five times already).

If the AFL were expected to fund the NT's $15m annual shortfall, it could very well sink the AFL, and then there'd be no use them being the keepers of the code.

I highly doubt 15million is going to sink the afl mate

 

[Canberra Pear]

I highly doubt 15million is going to sink the afl mate

That's $15m a year on top of distribution.

People drone on and on about how the AFL is stretching itself too thin supporting GWS with $25m a year, but $40m a year is fine for the NT?

"Sink" may have been hyperbolic, but it would put a strain on the AFL's financials, which isn't great timing while trying to set up the Tasmanian side up for success .

 

[Outtatym]

EFA. But yes it is sad to no longer really like something that I liked for so long. If Tasmania gets a team of course I would be happy and support it. But I'm a passionate AFL supporter that the AFL doesn't need. They can go chase their plastic Hollywood wannabe fans on the Gold Coast who are too busy following the Kardashians on Instagram, stepping on discarded needles and getting their 45th dose of cosmetic botox to care about a Victorian-centric sport
like AFL. Im not serious about Gold Coast stereotypes but the AFL is never going to be popular there.

Salt mine

 

[The Devils Advocate]

.. and UTAS stadium is even finer. We have two grounds that are perfectly acceptable - if they are good enough for Hawthorn and North, then they are good enough for the Devils. The AFL are being !@#$ - as usual.

I was glad to see the Tas Government confirm that a new stadium was NOT part of the bid.

I agree.
I'm happy with both those stadiums. Hell I'm happy with North Hobart haha. That oval was like a mattress to land on.

 

[The Devils Advocate]

The AFL need to spend more money on developing talent in general, that's not Tasmania's fault.

 

[Mr Taswegian]

The afl said they want the majority of clubs on board even if eight clubs were against then 10 is still technically a majority isn’t it

The AFL need to spend more money on developing talent in general, that's not Tasmania's fault.

Colin Carter made it clear that talent won't be a problem. It is the stadium issue that is what will cost Tasmania a place in the AFL.

 

[My_Username]

Are the AFL keepers of the code or purely a business?

Why can't they be both?

It's about the best allocation of their resources.

Let's say they have $50M to spend on 'game development'.

Could they spend that $50M/year and put a team in Port Moresby...Sure they could.

But I doubt that would be the best use for those funds.

'Can do' and 'Should do' aren't always the same thing.

 

[My_Username]

They only require seven teams to vote yes to a Tassie team

In theory, yes.

But if 7 clubs vote yes, and 11 clubs are voting no, it simply wont go ahead, even though it could.

Hell, if you reversed it and had 11 vote yes and 7 clubs vote no, I'd be surprised if it went ahead. Gil has been clear about wanting a broad consensus of support here. Not sure about what the exact numbers would need to be, and it probably depends on who as much as how many (big/loud clubs would matter more), but regardless, it'll require more than the bare minimum.

 

[Mr Taswegian]

In theory, yes.

But if 7 clubs vote yes, and 11 clubs are voting no, it simply wont go ahead, even though it could.

Hell, if you reversed it and had 11 vote yes and 7 clubs vote no, I'd be surprised if it went ahead. Gil has been clear about wanting a broad consensus of support here. Not sure about what the exact numbers would need to be, and it probably depends on who as much as how many (big/loud clubs would matter more), but regardless, it'll require more than the bare minimum.

If the AFL wants it then we will get it is what a lot of people have said. The proposal goes to all the clubs on Monday so it's going to be interesting to see what comes out in the media when clubs have looked at what is reportedly a very strong case.

 

[My_Username]

If the AFL wants it then we will get it is what a lot of people have said. The proposal goes to all the clubs on Monday so it's going to be interesting to see what comes out in the media when clubs have looked at what is reportedly a very strong case.

I think the AFL wants the PR support of having most, if not all, of the clubs supporting the decision.

They CAN do it with 7 votes their way, but it wouldn't be a good look to have most clubs against their decision....even more so when the new club has teething problems (inevitable for any new entity of this size to have some). The 'I told you so's and such like would come back to bite them on the arse.

Far better to have the unified front (except a few outliers) to gather together when things get rough.

 

[madmug]

The commission rightly or wrongly represent the 18 clubs in (supposedly) an impartial and neutral fashion.

The AFL have to submit the proposal for a Tassie Team, along with #TASPOL and or folks running their bid, and the 18 current clubs will vote on it, just as they did on the Gold Coast rescue package and North's application for a Priority Pick this year

Several Months ago, Gil probably thought he had the numbers at club level to get Tassie awarded a team, but obviously something changed in that time (change of govt in Tassie) and now it's looking likely Tassie will not get enough votes to be awarded a license.

The Tassie Premier and Govt have not exactly helped their cause by giving ultimatiums about the new stadium funding either.

The AFL also represents the game of Australian rules football across the nation. It trades heavily on that aspect in procuring Government & Business support.

So the Commission has other obligations, not always in the selfish interests or Egos of a few club Presidents

 

[Jazny]

Salt mine

What has the North board got to do with anything?

 

[sherb]

It's not really that black and white.

Just because the AFL might be the "keepers of the code" doesn't mean they should put a team everywhere that asks for one (otherwise Canberra would've had one four or five times already).

If the AFL were expected to fund the NT's $15m annual shortfall, it could very well sink the AFL, and then there'd be no use them being the keepers of the code.

They don't seem to have an issue funding the shortfalls of GWS and Gold Coast.

 

[sherb]

Herald Sun today,​

More club presidents ‘violently opposed’ to Tassie team​

The AFL Commission is due to meet on Monday, with Tasmania’s bid for the 19th licence reaching a critical stage.
And the latest news isn’t promising.

This would presumably include clubs that have been happy to milk Tassie of its talent, money (memberships, merch) and support for years and years and years.

****s.

 

[madmug]

It's not really that black and white.

Just because the AFL might be the "keepers of the code" doesn't mean they should put a team everywhere that asks for one (otherwise Canberra would've had one four or five times already).

If the AFL were expected to fund the NT's $15m annual shortfall, it could very well sink the AFL, and then there'd be no use them being the keepers of the code.

(Footy is always black & white!!! )

Certainly they don't put a team everywhere.

The reason we're having such debates is that they clearly have the VFL problem weighing down the growth of the national competition. Why should others suffer for that??

Yes, Canberra should have had a team years ago. The Raiders started 1n 1981 & have had little opposition from the AFL since. Yet they fawn over the Suns v Titans 'fight' on the GC!!! Hello!!!!

Tasmania has 540k people, it has been heartland AR. Its football has rotted since the AFL started. The Government want a team for social, economic development & tourism reasons.

NT is even less of a business market with a smaller yet spread out population. It would need much more Government support for those reasons. It would be far harder for footy supporters to make such a trip than to go to The GC, GWS or Tasmania. However, the NT footy, business & Government have every right to put an application in.

(Would NT, ACT or any other future applicant be told they'd need a new roofed stadium, with heating or aircon to be considered???)

 

[Jazny]

They don't seem to have an issue funding the shortfalls of GWS and Gold Coast.

AFL: Look we have an indigenous round! We're so progressive...
Everyone: That's great. How about also putting a team in Darwin which would have enormous cultural and social benefits for indigenous communities in the NT which the AFL happily takes talent from year on year?
AFL: lol no that would cost money.

 

[Elmer_Hauser]

This would presumably include clubs that have been happy to milk Tassie of its talent, money (memberships, merch) and support for years and years and years.

****s.

Only Hawthorn and North in that regard (with money and merch etc)

It's also been a long time since Tassie was producing solid young AFL players too.

It's just not the right time to bring in another team, especially one with limited resources and population growth like Tasmania and the Clubs know this.

NOT ECONOMICALLY VIABLE

 

[The_Wookie]

AFL: Look we have an indigenous round! We're so progressive...
Everyone: That's great. How about also putting a team in Darwin which would have enormous cultural and social benefits for indigenous communities in the NT which the AFL happily takes talent from year on year?
AFL: lol no that would cost money.

its almost like they are a professional competition and not a social welfare program.

 

[The_Wookie]

(Would NT, ACT or any other future applicant be told they'd need a new roofed stadium, with heating or aircon to be considered???)

I'd bet the ACT would.

 

[Jazny]

It's also been a long time since Tassie was producing solid young AFL players too.

How is this an argument against having a Tasmanian AFL team?

This is the argument for it. When Tasmania is only producing AFL talent roughly in proportion to our population size, and now is producing basketball talent to the levels we used to produce AFL talent (3 tasmanians in the 12 man under 17s Australian basketball team), that's probably a good indication that AFL is losing relevance in a heartland state.

its almost like they are a professional competition and not a social welfare program.

Except they spend equivelant money on unwanted teams in rich white communities like Gold Coast in the vain hope that one day, if the AFL manipulate the competition enough, they will dock their yachts for the day and go watch their McDonalds branded footy team.

 

[madmug]

Only Hawthorn and North in that regard (with money and merch etc)

It's also been a long time since Tassie was producing solid young AFL players too.

It's just not the right time to bring in another team, especially one with limited resources and population growth like Tasmania and the Clubs know this.

NOT ECONOMICALLY VIABLE

The Carter Report, State Government, Federal support & media rights tend to disagree with your expert opinion.

Certainly no less viable than, about 1/2 the current AFL competition it seems. Probably more so in fact.

Indeed if a team in Qld, or NSW or in Victoria hit the wall, the governments couldn't care less. They have many other professional team so would care little about the odd failure.

However, If we had a team, it would be our only team thus very important for us, & would be supported for the social, economic & tourist benefits noted before.

 

[My_Username]

Certainly no less viable than, about 1/2 the current AFL competition it seems. Probably more so in fact.

That there are current clubs of dubious viability is actually a solid argument AGAINST a Tas club (or any new club really).

It's really hard to get rid of an existing club, so it follows that you need to be very careful about letting new clubs in. Even more so after the reality shock of covid hit.

Any doubts and uncertainties are marks against.

 

[madmug]

That there are current clubs of dubious viability is actually a solid argument AGAINST a Tas club (or any new club really).

It's really hard to get rid of an existing club, so it follows that you need to be very careful about letting new clubs in. Even more so after the reality shock of covid hit.

Any doubts and uncertainties are marks against.

Sorry but this is about as clever as the argument that Tasmania shouldn't have a team as we already like Football!!

Its just self serving BS from the selfish & self interested

 

[My_Username]

Sorry but this is about as clever as the argument that Tasmania shouldn't have a team as we already like Football!!

Its just self serving BS from the selfish & self interested

I didn't suggest it was 'clever'.

Just obvious.

If you're going to be stuck with the results for a long time, you tend to be a lot more careful about making the commitment.