TAS Looks like Tassie are serious.

[huntos]

Well if things go as they are at the moment, West Sydney will get a team and Tasmania won't because of Andrew Demetriou. How is that any different?

Although having said that, I'm guessing Kerry O'Brien is only doing it for political points scoring. The AFL can accept and deny whatever teams they want. Doesn't stop them from making idiotic decisions like putting teams where the demand isn't there, but they are a private organisation, they can do it if they like.

I'm sympathetic to the AFL in regards to the Western Sydney club because that is where the newest people of Australia will be, in effect all the new players for the AFL.

Tasmania should have had a team 20 years ago, but unfortunately the way Australian sport is set up follows colonial lines and not national lines.

If a Tasmanian club was set up and the AFL drafted 10 Tasmanians a year it would be incomparable to the potential new draftees that could be obtained in Western Sydney if the/when the club succeeds.

Hopefully we can one day we can see NT and Tasmanian teams in the league, but the future of footy must follow a fiscal potential. I think its an analogous debate to Waverly vs Docklands. Docklands is clearly the more equitable venue for the future of footy, but Waverly was a ground amongst the people. Overall i think that Docklands is the better venue for footy - but a lot of people disagree with that. I think that Western Sydney is the better place for the future of footy - but Tasmania is where more people play footy.

It just amazing how decisions like this can change the shape of sport. It will be an interesting 10 years ahead.

 

[Gibbke]

Tasmania produces far fewer draftees than it used to, but that isn't because NSW is producing more - they don't produce enough to fully staff the Swans, let alone a second side - it's because footy has been left behind in Tassie and is stagnating.

Years from now, you'll still see the same set up - SA, WA and Victoria providing the vast majority of players, and the expansion sides doing a hell of a lot of recruiting...while the AFL makes absolutely sure they cruise along because they are crucial to rights bargaining...

WS and the GC are only there for the tv rights - they have absolutely no other value. Tasmania can't offer this, and the AFL isn't fussed as to whether they can pump out footballers - as far as they are concerned, SA, WA and Victoria are providing enough, and the token numbers they get from other states make up all of the club lists...having said that, Qld is contributing plenty these days.

So forget the grand plan speeches and betterment of the game c r a p...NSW will contribute little on field as they've always done, and Tassie will dream on, while the status quo remains everywhere else too...

 

[Chuq]

a survey of 1000 people is just abut iirelelevant..

Actually it's fairly significant. The TV ratings figures are calculated from about 1500 homes across the entire nation (something like 300-400 in Melbourne, for example). Of course the ratings homes are chosen based on demographics so that they are as close as possible to the spread of demographics across Australia.

However you would be surprised how 1000 people won't really give you a much less accurate number than what you would get from 10000 people.

 

[funkyfetlock]

I respectfully disagree with Gibbke. I truly believe the admission of Western Sydney and the Gold Coast sides into the AFL will prove beneficial in far more ways than just tv rights. Support for Rugby League in Sydney is very soft. I have frequently been amazed at just how easy it is to get so called league supporters to change to Aussie rules as their code of choice.

I have absolutely NO doubt that giving West Sydney supporters their own team will be a huge boost to the number of supporters and profile of the sport in this untapped market. To suggest that West Sydney isn't capable of pumping out footballers in the future is just plain naive in my view. Prior to the admission of the Swans in the competition there were very few NSW players competing at the highest level Now we have the following:

Notable NSW Players in the AFL

• Lewis Roberts-Thomson
• Nick Davis
• Kieran Jack
• Paul Bevan
• Leo Barry
• Brett Kirk
• Henry Playfair
• Jarrad McVeigh
• Ben Mathews
• Adam Schneider
• Dylan Addison
• Lenny Hayes
• Hamish McIntosh
• Setanta Ó hAilpín

• Justin Koschitzke
• Dean Solomon
• Mark McVeigh
• Daniel Cross
• Ryan Houlihan
• Cameron Mooney
• Ben Fixter
• Brent Staker
• Tom Hawkins
• Shane Crawford
• David Trotter
• Sam Gilbert
• Ray Hall

Note: 2008 Sydney Swans listed players in bold.

Inclusion of a second Sydney team is well overdue in my opinion and it will be crucial to the future development of the game.

I am not averse to Tasmania entering the competition sometime in the future but it cannot be at the expense of a WS side.

 

[medusala]

23% said they would become a member, that equates to 113,000 people. 41% saying they would attend games equates to over 200,000 people. And finally more people said they would support the team than said they wouldn't. Obviously there won't be 100,000 members etc, but that still seems like a pretty bloody healthy supporter base to me

Plus there would be a decent number of ex Tasmanians in Melbourne that would attend away games in Victoria.

 

[funkyfetlock]

Plus there would be a decent number of ex Tasmanians in Melbourne that would attend away games in Victoria.

But they are probably Aussie Rules fans already. New fans and a bigger supporter base is more valuable to the AFL.

 

[RED STRIPE MAGIC]

one in tassie and the other in darwin and that would be truly an national sport. dont forget about how many great players there are in darwin

 

[medusala]

But they are probably Aussie Rules fans already. New fans and a bigger supporter base is more valuable to the AFL.

And what were all those folk in WA and SA doing prior to AFL? Avid rugby and soccer fans?

How can you argue that Port Adelaide should be in the comp but not Tasmania?

 

[Benigro]

Just because Tassie does not get their own AFL team does not translate to them all starting to watch wogball.

There is nothing wrong with wogball. How many a time when someone waggled a wog whisking woefully wimping did I find myself in tears....besides.....wogball hasnt killed wogs wags or waddles...so there...

Tassie does not need, nor could it support it's it's own AFL team ..all Tasmanian football supporters already follow a AFL team ...they won't give up their support just because there is a Tasmanian side.

I have heard this so many times. How many Tasmanians follow an AFL team indeed? But for how many what was the reason to do this? For the most like I, probably because there was a Tasmanian in the side that captured thier imagination. For me, as a child of the 60's and 70's ,it could've been none other than Peter Hudson...so I follow the Hawks. Had their been a Tassie side in the VFL....the chances are I would of hated the Hawks. My guess is that 99% of Tasmanian AFL team followers came to a simular conclusion in chosing a side. In other cases they would have followed what there parents supported who most probably followed a Tasmanian who gripped there fancy.
Tasmania is the first state to follow the VFL code. She is basically one of the formative states. So much for retorical loyalty.
Its called AFL...then their should be one team from evey state in the league, unless they forgo the priveledge....all the other slots are for the highest bidder.
Thats my view.....and I am trying to start the first offical footy club in Holland (Together with a "Developing sport" approval from the NOC/NSF....Dutch Olympic Committee and the Dutch Sport Federation. ). This in conjunction with the allready existing national team "Flying Dutchmen". And we have NOTHING....well no not true. We have a ground, clubhouse with a bar so things are looking up..( Ok...its not a full size footy ground...only 135 by 100 metres..but a start...thanks to the Amsterdam Cricket & HockeyClub Veni Vidi Vici) Now there is a challenge....and what a market for the AFL..all these millions of soccer players that didnt make the soccer big leagues...
But to them...the AFL...we dont exist. Only should it ever pay of..(which it wont) make money (which we dont)...and are and have some form of succes (now that we do...we are playing, bumpin, marking, kicking and having a ball) will they show interest....basically when they can make, take or winge a buck they will come knocking. Now compare that to cricket....and there bid to internationalize the sport......
AFL is woefull at nationalising our great game. Because we shouldnt forget....Aussie Rules was meant to be the peoples game.

 

[Benigro]

Prior to the admission of the Swans in the competition there were very few NSW players competing at the highest level

Hmm Very good point, that only adds to WHY Tasmania has a right to the AFL bid. Tasmania has allways been a footy state. NSW had RL and union as a code...but changed to another for....succes, TV, money....what if soccer comes along with an attitude. Will they leave footy to play soccer....because of the intenational appeal? Tasmania at least loves footy, not soccer and so on.
This retoric has been played before when Tasmania wanted te be in the Shield (Cricket). No-one wanted them, no base, no growth and so on. The rest we know......AFL leads to growth leads to more. NSW , West Australia, South Australia and Queensland all have teams. If there is so much growth possibilites I wonder why they havent doubled there revenue, why havent they grabbed the penants yet...so much growth. Its time for Tas....the others can wait...

 

[Howard Littlejohn]

And what were all those folk in WA and SA doing prior to AFL? Avid rugby and soccer fans?

How can you argue that Port Adelaide should be in the comp but not Tasmania?

The WAFL and SANFL still had (and have) support, with relatively weak support for a Victorian club. Local football in Tasmania has basically no supporter base because the AFL already controls virtually every sporting dollar in the state.

Unlike in SA, nobody in Tas ever speaks about local footy at the pub or school or wherever. SA and WA Also had the finances, Tasmania's claim in that regard is highly dubious - we'll know more when the business plan is put together; but the selection seems to have been made partly on the basis of already having declared a positive outlook, so I don't expect it will be properly analysed. The fact that government had to get involved before a case could even start to be made says a lot about the lack of business in the state.
And its all been spawned from one newspaper trying once again, as they did in the 90s and failed to spectacularly, to build some sort of state patriotism to pull in readers.

In terms of new support for either the league or the game, Tasmania brings nothing. In terms of TV rights, Tasmania brings nothing. In terms of finance, Tasmania brings all the risk of Western Sydney with none of the potential reward. Western Sydney and Gold Coast bring little initially, but 30 or 40 years down the track WS should be going strong; I have doubts about GC longer term, though it should be far stronger in the initial years.

In terms of history, a team being "deserved", etc, Tasmania brings a lot. All the things that are purely football. And its already sacrificed its own football to Victoria. But these decisions are not made on established football terms, but on projected market sizes - where Tasmania fails dismally now, and worse decades down the track.
Whether anyone would swap clubs is highly doubtful. That survey is a positive, but things can change when confronted with the reality. Quite a few would take the side on as a "second team", and kids (at least in the region the team was based) would undoubtedly take the Tasmanian team; but there are far fewer of them, even per capita, in Tas than WS.

 

[medusala]

In terms of new support for either the league or the game, Tasmania brings nothing. In terms of TV rights, Tasmania brings nothing.

Neither did Port or Freo

And its already sacrificed its own football to Victoria. But these decisions are not made on established football terms, but on projected market sizes - where Tasmania fails dismally now, and worse decades down the track.

And how do the demographics of Tasmania compare to Port Adelaide?

I would have thought rather well. Ditto Geelong

Whether anyone would swap clubs is highly doubtful.

You dont think a large amount of people in WA and SA followed a Vic club in VFL days?

The old Tas vs Vic games were very well supported. One of the best football games I have ever seen when Tas beat them.

A Tas team has very little competition from anything else re entertainment on a Saturday. Given a decent ground in Hobart the crowds and support would come.

 

[Howard Littlejohn]

Neither did Port or Freo

And how do the demographics of Tasmania compare to Port Adelaide?

I would have thought rather well. Ditto Geelong

Freo and Port both gave further local interest into one of the five metro TV markets; and both had the prospect of being relatively low cost start-ups that would be able to fend for themselves very quickly. Tasmania doesn't have that, or the growth argument of Western Sydney or the Gold Coast.
In Port's case there were also many Port supporters who didn't follow the Crows because they thought (rightly in my opinion) that Port should have got in first.

Geelong is roughly the same size as Hobart, but has a lot of its support an hour's drive away in Melbourne. In Tassie's case a lot of its support would be an hour's flight away in Melbourne. That makes it a little harder to get to every home game. Tasmania, overall, has near 500k compared to Geelong's 200k (plus surrounding area and Melbourne based support). However, Tasmania is effectively at least two markets; Hobart and the south, and the north - which could realistically be seen as two markets in itself.
Geelong is also an incumbent, which gives a stronger position in many respects - plus it has strong corporate links through Geelong Grammar.
Tasmania has nothing to match that; even if the north-south thing was not to come into play. Tasmania is also virtually irrelevant in terms of advertisers, and therefore of little value to TV networks - who, as you would be well aware, only gain the less valuable on-sale rights to the two regional FTAs that operate in the state (plus TDT, but as that is a WIN-Sthn Cross joint venture and only on digital its even more irrelevant).

You dont think a large amount of people in WA and SA followed a Vic club in VFL days?

Followed yes, but they also followed local football with equal; or in SA greater; passion. That simply isn't the case in Tasmania.

The old Tas vs Vic games were very well supported. One of the best football games I have ever seen when Tas beat them.

A Tas team has very little competition from anything else re entertainment on a Saturday. Given a decent ground in Hobart the crowds and support would come.

Tas v Vic was well supported, around 19k at North Hobart for all three games from memory; I only made it down to the first of those and not the win.
That support doesn't necessarily equate to being willing to drop your club, any more than Victoria getting people to a state game means Collingwood supporters have dropped their club.

I do agree that any team, should the unlikely happen, has to be based in Hobart. People simply won't travel ten or eleven times a year, so a full time side needs to be in the single biggest catchement.
An upgraded KG5 would be the perect spot in my opinion. Unlike Bellerive its accessible and there is parking nearby. Even a train line close by, I seem to recall New Norfolk running trains down a couple of times in the 90s. Passenger trains in Tasmania, amazing stuff.

 

[sturtman]

The issues of where teams are sourced are two fold. One is as already outlined, that of increasing the market base. The second is using a stadium every week of the season. Tasmania can field only one team and that 20,000 crowd effectively halves to 10,000 per week. Compare to SA where Port draw 20,000 and the Crows 40,000 the following week, average 30,000 per week at AAMI stadium alone. Given that the Sturt V Glenelg game at state level two weeks ago drew over 10,000 for one SANFL match, you can see that the SANFL is in a much stronger possition than Tasmania.

I've said it before, that if Tassie had any real pretense of joining the AFL, it needed to use the SANFL as the vehicle to acheive it. Firstly, because of the higher salary cap of a SANFL based Tassie club could import players from Victoria and retain more home grown talent. Secondly the Tassie AFL club could have been drawn from the SANFL as a whole with players moving back and forth like they do between the Power & the Crows where all SANFL clubs have quite a sprinkling of AFL listed players.

The Tassie stadium could be utilised by the AFL club one week and by the SANFL based club on the alternative week thereby making running a stadium a much more viable proposition.

Added to this was the prerequisit of a strong 8 team state league, four in the north and four in the south from which the Tassie SANFL based club could recruit Tasmanian players. Other than this model I can not see a stand alone Tasmanian AFL club being viable. Stadium administration and travelling costs would kill any chance of viability IMO.

In the next five years create a strong viable plan. Get the state league happening. Get the Devils out of the VFL and playing in the SANFL. Then Launch the AFL franchise. And you just might get your wish?

 

[Howard Littlejohn]

I have to disagree with Sturtman regarding the SANFL.
Whichever second level competition really has little to do with AFL viability, but it would be best for Tasmania (both internally, and for an AFL bid) to stand on its own again and get a strong state competition going - without being traeted as a suburb of either Melbourne or Adelaide.
The problem is, to have any impact on AFL bid the state league needs to be strong over the long term. Which means it can't help in the current push (which should fail anyway, for the benefit both of the AFL and Tasmanian football).

 

[Gibbke]

I'd be thinking the second level comp IS a big issue...SA and WA revolve around them. NSW and Qld don't, but here's the catch - the AFL will not come in and start bailing out a Tasmanian franchise if it falls on hard times or even looks like it might struggle later, as it did the Bears, Swans and Lions...the concessions that went into those sides were greater than anyone else's but the AFL had a vested interest in making them work...those two states don't even need their comps to field sides a such, and if you'd ever watched a game in Qld you'd realise you aren't watching a working definition of "second tier footy"...!

Tassie won't get any of this, and even though our SW comp will throw up a few good games, it won't be the sort of nursery that the WAFL and SANFL are...we need all the help we can get, because I can't see us doing it on our own...the SANFL idea throws up its own problems, but certainly shouldn't be dismissed at this stage...

 

[Gibbke]

The Tassie stadium could be utilised by the AFL club one week and by the SANFL based club on the alternative week thereby making running a stadium a much more viable proposition.

Why would we have an SANFL club? If we were one of 3 AFL teams operated by the SANFL, wouldn't we just freeload off that comp? And if it was just the AFL side, it won't be every second week, it will be once a month. AFL standard York Park will be used, but obviously the capital of the state will want the team based there and will push for the lion's share of matches at upgraded Bellerive (good arguments are made for other venues down there, but I couldn't imagine the govt actually spending that hard). To get any support at home, Tassie would need to split home games North and South (not necessarily equitably, but an effort seen to be made)...by putting the Hawks in Launceston, a bump in the road was created...there would be less of an issue if they went south instead, but that didn't happen...and the issue would have come up at some stage anyway...

 

[medusala]

Freo and Port both gave further local interest into one of the five metro TV markets;

so would Tas

and both had the prospect of being relatively low cost start-ups that would be able to fend for themselves very quickly.

why wouldnt costs be low in Tas other than maybe new stadium in Hobart?

In Port's case there were also many Port supporters who didn't follow the Crows because they thought (rightly in my opinion) that Port should have got in first.

Ports case is no better than Tas.

Tasmania is also virtually irrelevant in terms of advertisers,

Adelaide?

Followed yes, but they also followed local football with equal; or in SA greater; passion. That simply isn't the case in Tasmania.

It was the case until the late 80s when it was stuffed. Thats even more not less reason for them to support an AFL team ie no competition from local football

Tas v Vic was well supported, around 19k at North Hobart for all three games from memory; I only made it down to the first of those and not the win.
That support doesn't necessarily equate to being willing to drop your club, any more than Victoria getting people to a state game means Collingwood supporters have dropped their club.

Even if they dont drop their club they would likely attend games.

I do agree that any team, should the unlikely happen, has to be based in Hobart. People simply won't travel ten or eleven times a year, so a full time side needs to be in the single biggest catchement.

I agree with you but maybe with three or four games in Lton.

Pity North Hobart was so small.

 

[pazza]

It's getting even more serious by the second.

Buoyed by the news that 81% of respondents to the Herald-Sun Footy Fans Survey want Tasmania to happen, the announcement today of consultancy firm Gemba (which James Hird is amongst those involved) is forming the final package is big news. Also mentioned was that a major sponsor has been already lined up.

 

[Howard Littlejohn]

Freo and Port both gave further local interest into one of the five metro TV markets;
so would Tas

How? Tas is outside the all-important five metro ratings regime; which is the five mainland state capital cities, plus a few other areas which receive the broadcast from those cities. (I think Geelong gets a Nine broadcast, not a WIN one and is included in the 5 metro for example.)
Regional figures don't hold much weight with advertisers when looking at national things. Yes, all Tas games would go on FTA into one of the big 5 markets; well nearly all, games against some Vic sides wouldn't. But they wouldn't add any local interest in those markets, except perhaps Melbourne, where so many ex-Tasmanians live.

why wouldnt costs be low in Tas other than maybe new stadium in Hobart?

Any stadium would need an upgrade, even York Park, but especially in Hobart where no ground currenbtly has lights of a sufficient standard. And KG5, the best option in my view, would need a massive overhaul.
Government can probably relied on for much of this, but not for ongoing costs.

Ports case is no better than Tas.

Far better in a number of ways, including being part of a 5 metro. That shouldn't count in pure football terms, it does in money generation terms.
SA also has a far greater number of actual people worth bribing with corporate boxes, etc. Even on a per capita basis. Some decisions are made in SA, none in Tas.

Tasmania is also virtually irrelevant in terms of advertisers,
Adelaide?

Again, for TV the 5 metro is all-important. Plus, even though Port don't share the city on equal terms in support it is reaching a city of over 1m generally wealhier than Tasmanians; rather than 0.5m spread across the state of Tas and without major corporates even having a state office, without some major brands existing in the state, and being more expensive to serviuce due to the population spread and the stretch of water.

Followed yes, but they also followed local football with equal; or in SA greater; passion. That simply isn't the case in Tasmania.
It was the case until the late 80s when it was stuffed. Thats even more not less reason for them to support an AFL team ie no competition from local football

The point is that people are already passionate about their AFL club, beyond what SA and WA people were. And are therefore less likely to swap clubs.
If your taking about the statewide TFL in comparison to the TANFL, you have to remember the reason why the TANFL invited East and North Launceston in was because the TANFL was stuffed at the time. The first years of stateuwide led to a big increase in crowds; which in turn led to the unfortunate budgeting, based on the early inflated resulkts, both at league and club level that saw so much trouble in the latter half of 90s. That history, though, is largely irrelevant to any AFL bid - except to underline that things have been run poorly in Tasmania for a long time.

Even if they dont drop their club they would likely attend games.

11 games a year as neutrals, every year? For a while, until the novelty factor wears off, then it will be a case of pick and choose; and when the major city is only 200k that is something that simply can't be afforded.

I agree with you but maybe with three or four games in Lton.

Pity North Hobart was so small.

North Hobart has many of the same problems re parking as Bellerive, but as the home of footy southern footy would be the idealistic choice - and is far more accessible to most people. An upgraded KG5 is the best practical choice for mine - easy access, ample parking, even a rail line, and there shouldn't be any complaints about lights.
As for 3-4 games a year in Lonny, that has issues of its own that would need to be weighed up. It could bring in more minor sponsors, but at a reduced income from southern based ones. It would also keep those who might travel south a couple of times a year from doing so; but without it any club would be unlikely to gain statewide support - in fact Hawthorn could continue to play in Launceston with little to no effect on a Hobart club.
I can see advantages and disadvantages, and really don't know which outweighs the other.

 

[Hoops]

I see tassie as good leverage in getting state goverment support for the Gold Coast bid.

 

[saints__01]

I see tassie as good leverage in getting state goverment support for the Gold Coast bid.

I think GC17 will go ahead with or without govt or supporter support....Its just what AD wants to do...he wants to spend the AFL's money.

 

[maceman]

I think they will be more organised with sponsors etc then GOld Coast, but AFL will still choose Gold Coast.........then an A-League team will start up in Tas.

The Gold Coast team is inevitable but I think a tassie team over west sydney would be more appealing. I reckon they'd be pretty strong within a couple of years also...

 

[thegreenmachine]

Agree with the poster above me, although it's highly unlikely that we'll get it. We're going to have these debates for a few years and beyond so it's nothing new.

 

[medusala]

How? Tas is outside the all-important five metro ratings regime

Their games will be broadcast in to the metro areas as you note

Any stadium would need an upgrade, even York Park, but especially in Hobart where no ground currenbtly has lights of a sufficient standard. And KG5, the best option in my view, would need a massive overhaul.
Government can probably relied on for much of this, but not for ongoing costs.

Tas govt has shown willingness to pay (unlike Qld for example). Ongoing costs can be met from revenues

The point is that people are already passionate about their AFL club, beyond what SA and WA people were.

They will still support a state team.

in fact Hawthorn could continue to play in Launceston with little to no effect on a Hobart club.

Cant possibly see state govt paying for both a Tas team and hawthorn.