News North might be done in Ballarat

[Horace]

Wut?

AFL expects to get $2b from the 2016 broadcasting rights deal. We have tax on football department spending, we should be debt free in a year or two, AFL is genuinely keen to buy-out Docklands early, AFL acknowledges the disadvantage of the smaller clubs and now has a future fund distribution to clubs, there is a genuine desire to create a more levele playing field on-field.

You would have to say the only thing has kept us from prosperity now is the lack of gaming revenue which ALL of our local competitors have.

This is a ******* Eutopia environment, if you want to compare the difference look at the Holocaust-like gloom predictions from the Gemba report.

There is no time like the present for sticking to and growing your supporter base in your home state. It is only our weak-willed administration that makes us vulnerable.

Read my post. I said times are different now, but one thing that will never change is the requirement to be financially stable. No club should ever let its financial situation get to a state where the AFL or a board such as we had in 2007, is prepared to move us interstate.

I think you are reading far too much into the loss of the Ballarat alliance as being the board's doing, rather than something instigated by the AFL and the Bulldogs.

Do you have any evidence that points towards our club being complicit in relinquishing the Ballarat venture? If so then tell us about it.

Ballarat and the new stadium had to happen in 2010 and Labor losing that election cost us that opportunity. Now we are down the track with what is a very beneficial deal for our bottom line through Tasmania, it is pretty hard to stop it.

Of course we should stick to and grow our supporter base in Melbourne. But where is the evidence to suggest that the club is doing other than this? I'm certainly not aware of it.

And if I am not mistaken, earlier in this thread you stated that you no longer have a membership in the club. How does that sit with your exhortations to grow the home state support? Very strange indeed in my opinion.

 

[Engimal]

Look I'm just going to come out and say it. **** Tasmania. **** our Tasmanian supporters

Thanks man.

 

[Horace]

Wut?

AFL expects to get $2b from the 2016 broadcasting rights deal. We have tax on football department spending, we should be debt free in a year or two, AFL is genuinely keen to buy-out Docklands early, AFL acknowledges the disadvantage of the smaller clubs and now has a future fund distribution to clubs, there is a genuine desire to create a more levele playing field on-field.

You would have to say the only thing has kept us from prosperity now is the lack of gaming revenue which ALL of our local competitors have.

This is a ******* Eutopia environment, if you want to compare the difference look at the Holocaust-like gloom predictions from the Gemba report.

There is no time like the present for sticking to and growing your supporter base in your home state. It is only our weak-willed administration that makes us vulnerable.

Let me also add that relying on other factors such as the buyout of docklands and the AFL future fund to prop us up, is a dangerous strategy. All clubs should first and foremost look to help themselves.

 

[Kimbo]

Tas, most Melbournians already have a team. Those that don't don't like footy.
If you want us to grow in that context, I think you should provide some ideas - briefly - about how to do so. (Ballarat obviously is like Tassie, its not our home base.) The HUB is on initiative with long-term potential - and what other kind of potential is there but long-term, the steady build up of potential supporters through contact with the club?
I would genuinely like to hear some other bullet point ideas.

As Horace has pointed out so eloquently, Hawthorn hasn't exactly suffered from having a second home in Tassie; quite the opposite. It is success, in my opinion, that will be the biggest difference now in raising our supporter and membership levels. That and having a strong financial position, which Hobart is also giving us.

For me the line is four games (either all in Hobart or, if the Hawks pull out, 2 each in Hobart and Launie).

 

[Horace]

Thanks man.

Yes, thanks indeed. Posting stuff like **** Tasmania. **** our Tasmanian supporters is really very "helpful".

I think not.

 

[Tas]

Read my post. I said times are different now, but one thing that will never change is the requirement to be financially stable. No club should ever let its financial situation get to a state where the AFL or a board such as we had in 2007, is prepared to move us interstate.

I could actually understand board members concerns back in 2007, we had a divided board with a lot of infighting, our chairman was a part-time clown who loved lobsters, our CEO was a pizza delivery boy, Aylett snr was raised from the dead like Frankenstein with the delusion that he knew which way his arse was pointing, the situation was ****ing dire.

I didn't want us to ship out back then because I didn't feel we left no stone unturned, we were just an amateur rabble in an evolving professional environment, I just wanted us to shape up. A move would have at least got rid of the dead wood and forced positive change, the negative is we would have died, literally eaten by the Sharks.

It is idiotic getting into bed knowing that Tasmania wants their own team, that AFL has committed to giving them their own team and they want to give them a Victorian club and maintain their TV viewers in Melbourne. It is not a great idea to swim in those shark infested waters. It is almost play for play panning out exactly like the GC. It is one thing to be manipulated into this position for the first time, how ****ing stupid do you need to be to follow the same play twice in a decade?

I think you are reading far too much into the loss of the Ballarat alliance as being the board's doing, rather than something instigated by the AFL and the Bulldogs.

Mate, that is even worse. It highlights that the AFL are working behind our backs, the guys JB is trusting to not shiv him in the back.

Do you have any evidence that points towards our club being complicit in relinquishing the Ballarat venture? If so then tell us about it.

Nobody on the Ballarat council picked up the phone to anyone at our club and said the Dogs are circling, the AFL are circling, what is your position here? We are either incompetent and have had no meaningful relationships of note with Ballarat since Euge left or we knew what was going on. Either scenario is not good.

Ballarat and the new stadium had to happen in 2010 and Labor losing that election cost us that opportunity. Now we are down the track with what is a very beneficial deal for our bottom line through Tasmania, it is pretty hard to stop it.

The stadium there is largely irrelevant. We went from 35k members to 45k members and only have 4k Tasmanian members or so, so there would have been a large jump here. The focus should be to get Melbourne membership up as high as possible and get to the point where can fill Docklands on our own, ride the success of this group up to promote the club here. It just represented psychological ties to Victoria, with them severed by the AFL so we can **** off elsewhere.

What was our response? We are disappointed... Disappointed? How about ****ing outraged? How about demanding compensation? Only one who seems to have given a shit is Heath and he probably got a slap on the wrist for not bending over like our leaders.

Of course we should stick to and grow our supporter base in Melbourne. But where is the evidence to suggest that the club is doing other than this? I'm certainly not aware of it.

The North West corridor from Werribee to Ballarat was recognised in the AFL strategic plan as our development region to grow our local supporter base, it was the only region in the strategic plan. It has been taken away, it hasn't been replaced with any other region.

And if I am not mistaken, earlier in this thread you stated that you no longer have a membership in the club. How does that sit with your exhortations to grow the home state support? Very strange indeed in my opinion.

I have cancelled my membership twice before, back when we were being shipped off to NSW and back when they tried to ship us off to GC, membership was irrelevant because it gave you no voice in the previous structure. Membership is irrelevant now because people have idiotic blind faith in JB and have shown they will give him the proxy to do whatever he wants to do.

The only voice I have left is to show the club is not going to get my financial support in his endeavour to Tasmanianise the club. If I wanted to follow a Tasmanian team I would follow the shitty league they have.

 

[Tas]

Let me also add that relying on other factors such as the buyout of docklands and the AFL future fund to prop us up, is a dangerous strategy. All clubs should first and foremost look to help themselves.

Even if it is not bought out, and would be ludicrous not to buy out the last 5 years, they would basically just be getting their capital back and what exclusive revenue streams they have access to, it still comes into AFL hands in 2025.

Our club has been turned into a TV viewing audience due to the destruction of the home and away attending mindset due to selling games, our club has a lot of work to do in terms of getting the supporters to game both home and away. The damage done by decades of neglict isn't going to be undone at the wave of a magic wand. We have to put in the time and the effort.

We gave it two years, during the early part of a rebuild. We need to give it more time, we have to make the effort. If we are EVER going to make it here then the time and the effort has to be put in to the market here. The current environment is much friendlier to do that than the one Euge and JB came into.

We are never going to achieve anything if we can't stick something out for more than a handful of years.

 

[Horace]

I could actually understand board members concerns back in 2007, we had a divided board with a lot of infighting, our chairman was a part-time clown who loved lobsters, our CEO was a pizza delivery boy, Aylett snr was raised from the dead like Frankenstein with the delusion that he knew which way his arse was pointing, the situation was ******* dire.

I didn't want us to ship out back then because I didn't feel we left no stone unturned, we were just an amateur rabble in an evolving professional environment, I just wanted us to shape up. A move would have at least got rid of the dead wood and forced positive change, the negative is we would have died, literally eaten by the Sharks.

It is idiotic getting into bed knowing that Tasmania wants their own team, that AFL has committed to giving them their own team and they want to give them a Victorian club and maintain their TV viewers in Melbourne. It is not a great idea to swim in those shark infested waters. It is almost play for play panning out exactly like the GC. It is one thing to be manipulated into this position for the first time, how ******* stupid do you need to be to follow the same play twice in a decade?



Mate, that is even worse. It highlights that the AFL are working behind our backs, the guys JB is trusting to not shiv him in the back.



Nobody on the Ballarat council picked up the phone to anyone at our club and said the Dogs are circling, the AFL are circling, what is your position here? We are either incompetent and have had no meaningful relationships of note with Ballarat since Euge left or we knew what was going on. Either scenario is not good.



The stadium there is largely irrelevant. We went from 35k members to 45k members and only have 4k Tasmanian members or so, so there would have been a large jump here. The focus should be to get Melbourne membership up as high as possible and get to the point where can fill Docklands on our own, ride the success of this group up to promote the club here. It just represented psychological ties to Victoria, with them severed by the AFL so we can **** off elsewhere.

What was our response? We are disappointed... Disappointed? How about ******* outraged? How about demanding compensation? Only one who seems to have given a shit is Heath and he probably got a slap on the wrist for not bending over like our leaders.



The North West corridor from Werribee to Ballarat was recognised in the AFL strategic plan as our development region to grow our local supporter base, it was the only region in the strategic plan. It has been taken away, it hasn't been replaced with any other region.



I have cancelled my membership twice before, back when we were being shipped off to NSW and back when they tried to ship us off to GC, membership was irrelevant because it gave you no voice in the previous structure. Membership is irrelevant now because people have idiotic blind faith in JB and have shown they will give him the proxy to do whatever he wants to do.

The only voice I have left is to show the club is not going to get my financial support in his endeavour to Tasmanianise the club. If I wanted to follow a Tasmanian team I would follow the shitty league they have.

Just about the only thing that comes through in every one of your posts in this thread (and others too unfortunately), is your absolute negativity as to what the club has done over the last (post GC relocation attempt) few years.

You are great at criticism but silent on suggesting things that the club should do, apart from getting into the pokies.

And then to tell us that you are not a member? Wow, how contradictory is that?

Instead you sit up on high in the Medallion Club, supporting one of the very institutions which is helping to screw us, and pontificate at how useless our administration is.

Give us some real ideas for growing the membership and supporter base here in Melbourne. A good start would be to become a member again yourself.

Whatever failings I might have; and there are many, Mrs. H reminds me regularly; I will never ever stopping paying for my membership. If the ship goes down, well I'll go down with it as well. (Not that I think that the NMFC ship, as a Melbourne based AFL Club, is likely to go down in the near future.)

 

[Devski]

Thank god Tas cancelled his membership.

Being a member of the same club as him would take the shine off it a bit.

Looking forward to a successful year with everyone who actually supports the club!

 

[gokangas]

Wut?

AFL expects to get $2b from the 2016 broadcasting rights deal. We have tax on football department spending, we should be debt free in a year or two, AFL is genuinely keen to buy-out Docklands early, AFL acknowledges the disadvantage of the smaller clubs and now has a future fund distribution to clubs, there is a genuine desire to create a more levele playing field on-field.

You would have to say the only thing has kept us from prosperity now is the lack of gaming revenue which ALL of our local competitors have.

This is a ******* Eutopia environment, if you want to compare the difference look at the Holocaust-like gloom predictions from the Gemba report.

There is no time like the present for sticking to and growing your supporter base in your home state. It is only our weak-willed administration that makes us vulnerable.

True to a degree. The AFL may be rich but they will also decide what funding we receive to the cent. At the least Tassy gives us cash flow that we can manage. Otherwise, despite the AFL's wealth, we would still have to beg and be under their control. The more we make money direct the more control we have. I am sick of chasing other markets too - reality says we have no choice and Tassy seems to be sustainable, profitable and friendly. Three games there for a million plus clear bucks is fine by me.

 

[gokangas]

I'm afraid I can't agree with that sentiment. The fact that in 2007 we didn't have a supplementary source of income at the same level as the Tasmanian games have provided us, was one of the major reasons that put us in a position where the AFL thought they could move us to the Gold Coast. First and foremost football clubs need to put themselves on a financial footing that prevents external influences from ever taking or trying to take decisions out of the clubs hands.

The times are very different now and comparisons can be flawed, but the demise of Fitzroy as an AFL club in 1996, occurred because matters were taken out of the hands of the club, primarily because of its financial position, together with the wheelings and dealings of a number of external forces.

In 2007 the AFL thought they had us on toast, in large part because of our financial position, partly because of a compliant board and partly because of the fact that they underestimated the fierce desire of so many ordinary members to prevent such a move.

One of those factors has definitely changed since then. The factor that has changed is that our financial position has improved. In part our financial position has improved because more people have realised the importance of buying a membership. But I have no doubt that Tasmania has also played a big part in improving the financial position. When else in the history of the club has it been able to secure such a large profit from playing games?

I think it is quite offensive to say f*** Tasmania, f*** our Tasmanian supporters, when they have come to the party in such a major and quantifiable way. Without the Tasmanian dollars we certainly wouldn't be in the same off field financial position we are today and I suspect that the corollary of that is that we might not be in the same on field position as we are.

I wonder how many Hawthorn supporters, who railled against the Hawks playing games in Launceston when the proposal was first floated, now realise that move was one of the best moves the club has ever made?

I'm betting that a lot of their supporters would have threatened not to sign up, or predicted dire consequences for membership numbers when the move was first mooted. Instead now the Hawks have grown significantly in financial terms, are second on the 2014 membership ladder at 68652 members and have coincidentally won flags in 2008, 2013 and 2014, not to mention runners up in 2012. Now the Tasmanian connection isn't responsible for all of that, but what it has done is to provide badly needed supplementary cash to bolster the coffers and enable the Hawks to be able to better fund their operations and recruit and retain quality players.

Last year we were able to secure Nicky Dal, because we were in a better financial position than we have been for a long time and again I say that the Tasmanian dollars have helped us here. This year, rightly or wrongly in terms of their future outputs, we have picked up two more Free Agents in Waite and Higgins, who otherwise we might not have been able to secure.

Let's not demean the good people from Tasmania, who have become members and supporters of our club. They have helped us and we need to respect them.

Instead we should be lobbying our club board to make them understand that the heartland is still the key, the bread and butter of the clubs operations and that we will not view kindly an increase in the number of games played in Tasmania.

And I say this as someone who goes to every game in Melbourne. I hate missing out on watching any game played interstate but I also understand that if our club is not on a sound financial footing, there are far worse ramifications than playing a small number of games in Tasmania. I say this also because of my Fitzroy connection. We tried the Tasmanian thing in the early 1990's but in my opinion it wasn't properly supported by the AFL or Tasmania then. It had huge potential and had Fitzroy survived through to the early 2000's, it might well have allowed the club to survive as an AFL club.

BTW sorry H2H about rambling on.

Yep.

 

[Kimbo]

You are great at criticism but silent on suggesting things that the club should do, apart from getting into the pokies.

Give us some real ideas for growing the membership and supporter base here in Melbourne. A good start would be to become a member again yourself.

"I'm Horace, who da f*** are you?

Still waiting..."

 

[Horace]

Just on our perceived by some here that our club showed less than the desired level of anger about the loss of Ballarat, does anyone seriously think that if the Ballarat alliance was delivering really good financial results, the club would have just meekly given in?

Of course not.

In my opinion Ballarat was only going to work if the promise of the stadium had have been able to come to fruition. You have to actually be playing real games for points in any area, to be able to garner support and reap financial rewards. So far we have been able to achieve that in Hobart.

Even if after this election, a stadium in Ballarat to achieve this is years away, and in my view too far away for us to put other opportunities on hold

 

[TommyVercetti]

This shouldn't be an issue of weather Tasmania is good or not for North because clearly it has been. This is a question of how many games is the right amount.

 

[Horace]

"I'm Horace, who da f*** are you?

Still waiting..."

That's right, Kimbo. I am Horace and since that great fleet sailed from Albany 100 years ago yesterday, not many have been prepared to follow the lead of my parents who had the "presence" of mind to name me, Horace, all those many and more years ago.

I'm just "thrilled" really.

 

[Kimbo]

Just on our perceived by some here that our club showed less than the desired level of anger about the loss of Ballarat, does anyone seriously think that if the Ballarat alliance was delivering really good financial results, the club would have just meekly given in?

Of course not.

In my opinion Ballarat was only going to work if the promise of the stadium had have been able to come to fruition. You have to actually be playing real games for points in any area, to be able to garner support and reap financial rewards. So far we have been able to achieve that in Hobart.

Even if after this election, a stadium in Ballarat to achieve this is years away, and in my view too far away for us to put other opportunities on hold

Agreed Horace re the 'anger shown by the club' and Carl 'Consiglieri' Dilena (TM LTSmash) and re the returns would really only come via playing at a real ground there.

And/but, unless the AFL has done our dirty work for us, so to speak, by announcing this to help us save face, it does come across, publicly, as if we meekly gave in. I'm inclined to think the former. A shame to my mind as I think we needed to keep Ballarat as a 'placeholder', especially if a push comes to move us to Tassie in future. I share one Tas' views that we haven't really invested much there since Eugene left; the other option of being incompetent in managing and maintaining the relationships isn't palatable.

As to the future, if a Eureka ever got upgraded and AFL games were played there, I can foresee it could host two tenants.

 

[Kimbo]

That's right, Kimbo. I am Horace and since that great fleet sailed from Albany 100 years ago yesterday, not many have been prepared to follow the lead of my parents who had the "presence" of mind to name me, Horace, all those many and more years ago.

I'm just "thrilled" really.

Funny you should mention that centenary. The whole damned place is full of tourists. Albany ran out of milk (not beer?!) on Friday apparently.

Wear "Horry" with pride.

 

[muttley45]

Stuff Ballarat, best known for producing Potatoes, lets concentrate our efforts North, to Albury/Wodonga, Ziebell ( Murray Bushranger ) country, i have witnessed more than one fine praccy matches @ Lavington oval, and it is only a short trip up the Hume Freeway too.

 

[Horace]

Agreed Horace re the 'anger shown by the club' and Carl 'Consiglieri' Dilena (TM LTSmash) and re the returns would really only come via playing at a real ground there.

And/but, unless the AFL has done our dirty work for us, so to speak, by announcing this to help us save face, it does come across, publicly, as if we meekly gave in. I'm inclined to think the former. A shame to my mind as I think we needed to keep Ballarat as a 'placeholder', especially if a push comes to move us to Tassie in future. I share one Tas' views that we haven't really invested much there since Eugene left; the other option of being incompetent in managing and maintaining the relationships isn't palatable.

As to the future, if a Eureka ever got upgraded and AFL games were played there, I can foresee it could host two tenants.

I'm also disappointed that we appear to have lost Ballarat, as I was very keen to see that push ahead when the prospect of an upgraded stadium was in the air back there prior to the last election.

If I had my choice, I would rather be playing some home games in Ballarat (or Geelong for that matter) than having them played interstate. The one location interstate that I would have seen as an exception, was when we tried to play one game a year in Perth. Given our support over in WA, which you know much more about than I do, Kimbo, I think that would have been a pretty fair outcome to reward our supporters in Perth.

But the stadium never got off the ground after 2010 and now that we have some really good support in Hobart, I think that support deserves to be acknowledged and rewarded. The new 3 games a year is I think a pretty fair arrangement for all parties.

 

[Istanbul Roo]

I'm also disappointed that we appear to have lost Ballarat, as I was very keen to see that push ahead when the prospect of an upgraded stadium was in the air back there prior to the last election.

If I had my choice, I would rather be playing some home games in Ballarat (or Geelong for that matter) than having them played interstate. The one location interstate that I would have seen as an exception, was when we tried to play one game a year in Perth. Given our support over in WA, which you know much more about than I do, Kimbo, I think that would have been a pretty fair outcome to reward our supporters in Perth.

But the stadium never got off the ground after 2010 and now that we have some really good support in Hobart, I think that support deserves to be acknowledged and rewarded. The new 3 games a year is I think a pretty fair arrangement for all parties.

Personally I see no difference to growing the Kangaroos support in Ballarat or in Tassie. Neither are our home base, and at neither place is it easy to get footy lovers to change teams. However they may go to the footy to see AFL. On that logic Tassie is much better, as it is harder for footy lovers there to get to Melbourne. As for growing the support base in Melbourne, what would that actually involve (Tas).
Tas thinks that the AFL would like to re-locate a team in Tassie, and that's why Ballarat is preferable. Do they? Who knows? Not Tas definitively.

 

[Horace]

Personally I see no difference to growing the Kangaroos support in Ballarat or in Tassie. Neither are our home base, and at neither place is it easy to get footy lovers to change teams. However they may go to the footy to see AFL. On that logic Tassie is much better, as it is harder for footy lovers there to get to Melbourne. As for growing the support base in Melbourne, what would that actually involve (Tas).
Tas thinks that the AFL would like to re-locate a team in Tassie, and that's why Ballarat is preferable. Do they? Who knows? Not Tas definitively.

I simply prefer Ballarat because I can get there easily and cost effectively. That is a personal and selfish point of view and I understand that.

But Tasmania is where we have established our most financially beneficial presence in all of the various options we have tried. Now that it is established we should commit to it and and try to make it work for all parties for the the long term on a 3 home games a season basis. If someone pulls the rug from under us then we address that at that time.

 

[Horace]

BTW, I look forward with much joy to the 2015 Premiership Cup being flown to Hobart and triumphantly paraded through the streets of Hobart, culminating in a huge celebration at Constitution Dock and Fish and Chips at Mures.

 

[Tas]

True to a degree. The AFL may be rich but they will also decide what funding we receive to the cent. At the least Tassy gives us cash flow that we can manage. Otherwise, despite the AFL's wealth, we would still have to beg and be under their control. The more we make money direct the more control we have. I am sick of chasing other markets too - reality says we have no choice and Tassy seems to be sustainable, profitable and friendly. Three games there for a million plus clear bucks is fine by me.

They can't open up the cheque book and give wads of cash to Dogs and Saints and discriminate against us, what the AFL is going to to do is give Tasmania money... which they give to us and it seems like a great deal, but in the process they are going to ask for 7-8 games in 2 years time.

If we were getting $5m net from pokies, like a fair few Melbourne clubs, the $3m the AFL gives us extra and the Tassie money would be covered. Fine, the club has morals and doesn't want the blood money. But, why should our club be the only club that has morals? AFL doesn't give a shit, public doesn't give a shit. Why should we sell off our club? The money is indirectly going to come from the AFL and the government, we will be getting hand outs whichever way it pans out.

I'd prefer we didn't get money from pokies, but I'd prefer even more we weren't getting handouts from the AFL who dictate everything we do while they give the green light to other clubs in our same situation to do whatever they want and to piss even more money they are given against the wall.

 

[Dodecahedron]

They can't open up the cheque book and give wads of cash to Dogs and Saints and discriminate against us, what the AFL is going to to do is give Tasmania money... which they give to us and it seems like a great deal, but in the process they are going to ask for 7-8 games in 2 years time.

If we were getting $5m net from pokies, like a fair few Melbourne clubs, the $3m the AFL gives us extra and the Tassie money would be covered. Fine, the club has morals and doesn't want the blood money. But, why should our club be the only club that has morals? AFL doesn't give a shit, public doesn't give a shit. Why should we sell off our club? The money is indirectly going to come from the AFL and the government, we will be getting hand outs whichever way it pans out.

I'd prefer we didn't get money from pokies, but I'd prefer even more we weren't getting handouts from the AFL who dictate everything we do while they give the green light to other clubs in our same situation to do whatever they want and to piss even more money they are given against the wall.

Tas - I disagree with many of your posts but they are very passionate and deep down all North supporters probably share some of your sentiment. But I can't believe you are letting all the infringements by the AFL affect your membership commitment to our great club. The club is doing whatever it can to survive and thrive in the AFL environment. If you stick to your guns it could be 20 years before you are a member again. C'mon mate, I''ll buy you a 3 game membership to ease you back in.

 

[Tas]

Just about the only thing that comes through in every one of your posts in this thread (and others too unfortunately), is your absolute negativity as to what the club has done over the last (post GC relocation attempt) few years.

You are great at criticism but silent on suggesting things that the club should do, apart from getting into the pokies.

And then to tell us that you are not a member? Wow, how contradictory is that?

Instead you sit up on high in the Medallion Club, supporting one of the very institutions which is helping to screw us, and pontificate at how useless our administration is.

Give us some real ideas for growing the membership and supporter base here in Melbourne. A good start would be to become a member again yourself.

Whatever failings I might have; and there are many, Mrs. H reminds me regularly; I will never ever stopping paying for my membership. If the ship goes down, well I'll go down with it as well. (Not that I think that the NMFC ship, as a Melbourne based AFL Club, is likely to go down in the near future.)

It is not my job to come up with ideas, I am a supporter, and if the club is fortunate, a member. If JB and Carl have no ideas, other than to kill the club long-term, then step down and lets find someone else who has fresh ideas.

Perhaps if JB didn't hand pick every board member who was on the same page as he was then he would have some fresh ideas, perhaps let the members, you know, vote someone in?

Not sure where I sit at the games has any relevance. We haven't had a contract to play at Docklands for a decade and there is nothing legally requiring us to play our games there. We have an obligation to play as many games there as every Victorian club has, but no more than that. If our leaders are too timid to stand up against the AFL then that isn't my fault. I don't think they require us to play 8 games at Docklands if they can quite happily have us play 8 games in Tasmania.

I'd prefer to remain a member and for our 'representatives' to act like they represent us instead of dicatate to us. While we have a dictatorship I don't see the point of donating to the dictatorship.