North want to sell a home game to the Dockers or Eagles

[errant bounce]

Surely the success of the Brisbane Lions model should be repeated as a priority.

Merge North with Gold Coast to free up a spot for Tasmania.

Attach the Kangaroos brand to GC and give it an instant Melbourne support base.

Western Sydney Bulldogs or Western Sydney Saints should be the next priority after that.

This is so dumb. it wasn't a success at all.

People who want historical artefacts of Australian history and global sport can get to absolute ****. they need protecting. I despise Richmond but I want their grandstand to stay up; why are people so pissy about the supposedly irrelevance of a North Melbourne or Footscray?

 

[amazingjoshy]

And do you have any other arguments than "it has an effect, because I'm saying it does"?

I mean, the fact I have to do this for you should tell me hoe futile this is, but is this enough for you?

The Negative Influence of Air Travel on Health and Performance in the National Basketball Association: A Narrative Review - PMC

Air travel requirements are a concern for National Basketball Association (NBA) coaches, players, and owners, as sport-based research has demonstrated short-haul flights (≤6 h) increase injury risk and impede performance. However, examination of the ...

pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Jet lag: How athletes can combat fatigue after flying

Jet lag and travel fatigue are no fun for anyone and can negatively impact athletic performance - but here's some tricks and tips to combat air travel.

www.scienceforsport.com

Radware Bot Manager Captcha

"Travelling, although necessary on many occasions, can have adverse effects on athletes’ health and performance. For example, in addition to the fatigue associated with stress and sitting hours,travel often involves changes in time zones with consequent alterations in circadian rhythms (a state known as ‘jet lag’) and is associated with a higher incidence of gastrointestinal problems. It is important to note that the fatigue associated with travel is not necessarily linked to jet lag. Any trip may have fatigue due to numerous factors beyond the change of time zone (physical inactivity, thermal changes, stress, etc.)."

Whereas we know an extra, 10,000 fans in the crowd influence the umpiring that benefit a team two or three points a game.

In regards to the article you quoted it specifically says

"But there is reason to believe that if you dominate a stadium with your team’s fans, it will exhibit home ground advantage"

"At its strongest, home advantage is probably worth somewhere around two goals. Which is nothing to sneeze at. But usually it’s less."

Meaning, like I said, if your supporters turned up more there'd be negligible disadvantage at all

 

[oak79]

No one is folding these days. It shouldn’t be permitted.

Of course it should be "permitted".

No team has an eternal right to be in the premier comp.

If a team is not financially viable and has few fans, they don't belong at the top level.

 

[____]

I don't get why North don't have two games at Bunbury and give North members first dibs at tickets for both games, they might get close to 50% of the crowd depending on capacity.

Would you describe a Geelong v West coast final at the G a neutral game?

Lions fan here, the prelim did feel a bit like a neutral game since it was a Saturday and there were a LOT of Lions fans there (I reckon a lot travelled down from Qld). The roar of the siren on PF day was louder than the GF.

 

[Canberra Pear]

I agree that we should not be adding more teams.

Tassie is coming in whether we like it or not.

That should NOT mean that we need a 20th team to even things up.

WA3, Canberra, NT, SA3. No to all.

All well and good when you already get to see footy every week.

 

[threenewpadlocks]

I mean, the fact I have to do this for you should tell me hoe futile this is, but is this enough for you?

The Negative Influence of Air Travel on Health and Performance in the National Basketball Association: A Narrative Review - PMC

Air travel requirements are a concern for National Basketball Association (NBA) coaches, players, and owners, as sport-based research has demonstrated short-haul flights (≤6 h) increase injury risk and impede performance. However, examination of the ...

pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Jet lag: How athletes can combat fatigue after flying

Jet lag and travel fatigue are no fun for anyone and can negatively impact athletic performance - but here's some tricks and tips to combat air travel.

www.scienceforsport.com

Radware Bot Manager Captcha "Travelling, although necessary on many occasions, can have adverse effects on athletes’ health and performance. For example, in addition to the fatigue associated with stress and sitting hours,travel often involves changes in time zones with consequent alterations in circadian rhythms (a state known as ‘jet lag’) and is associated with a higher incidence of gastrointestinal problems. It is important to note that the fatigue associated with travel is not necessarily linked to jet lag. Any trip may have fatigue due to numerous factors beyond the change of time zone (physical inactivity, thermal changes, stress, etc.)."

I've already conceded this though - try and put it into the context of the mathematical disadvantages, and compare it to the other advantages of the fact that the government can build you a stadium with greater capacity etc. etc.

Meaning, like I said, if your supporters turned up more there'd be negligible disadvantage at all

Sure, but then give us an ability to lock out away fans in a manner that replicates Geelong and non-Victorian teams to be fair. I don't want 30,000 Essendon or Carlton fans turning up to a Dogs home game through various ticket access AFL and away team of support GA membership packages, or even at the very least not having to declare your support or buy tickets through the Dogs' GA membership programs. Dogs GA members are in effect locked out from attending these games as they fill to capacity because they get no priority ticketing access over the (in theory), 30,000 AFL members who have an AFL membership, or the 10's of 000's of Essendon fans who get given GA tickets to away games when they buy a home reserved seat membership.

There is not much that the Western Bulldogs can do about this as the AFL wants to maximise revenue out of the Melbourne market (through things like the AFL Membership program) by selling more game-access tickets than the theoretical capacity of the ground (once you add together the AFL membership, away supporter access etc.).

The Dogs could implement a system that for instance requires pre-ticketing rather than walk-up access to their home games vs. Essendon etc, and accessing that ticket requires a purchase of a membership or package through the Dogs website.

It is a Dogs home game after all - why should they be prevented from doing this?

The AFL does not let them do this as it diminishes the peceived value of their AFL Membership, as well as by clubs like Essendon leaning on them to make the overall increased costs of their reserved seat membership packages seem less bad. I get that the AFL and Essendon pay a bit of money to the Dogs when these barcodes are scanned in, but you could get the same sized crowd anyway, it's just a matter of not making it equal access as a walk-up, but by giving the Dogs GA members the right of first refusal of a ticket earlier in the week (by putting in your membership barcode and reserving a seat) before the AFL members and Essendon members and any punter buying a ticket off the AFL can then walk up to any seats left over.

But again the AFL doesn't allow this, as it diminishes the perceived value of an AFL membership and and Essendon membership to generate revenue. But it results in the fact that the Dogs then play a nominal home game at a ground that's also the opponent's home ground with a greater number of away supporters in the crowd (as was the case with our home game vs. Essendon earlier this year).

It's the small clubs that unfairly take a hit, even though WB can't control for who attends their home games with anywhere near the same control and ease that the 9 clubs outside of Melbourne can in their home stadiums.

Furthermore, compensate us for the fact that we are unfairly prevented from building a fanbase due to not being allowed to play marquee fixtures. The size of Collingwood and Essendon relative to us has been influenced by the fact that they can sell Anzac Day to their fans (which not only is a locked in home game for one of their 22 home games over a two-year cycle thus generating more fans but allows their fanbase and attendance to grow generally outside of that).

Collingwood are contractually guaranteed for 5 of their 11 away games to be at the MCG FFS. Even in an indirect manner that disadvantages small Melbourne clubs that don't play at their home games at the MCG, as it makes it far less likely that they host Collingwood as a home team at Docklands (as opposed to their 11 home games being found among the other 16 teams), because it means that there's contractually less appealing games for Dogs fans to attend, rather than a balanced fixture where you would play the 17 other teams at home on average 11 times over a 17-year cycle.

I agree that more of our fans should simply just show up, but that's only a equally fair request provided that you try and make the entire competition's 11 home games equal in terms of how often you get matched up to certain away opponents and to priority in accessing tickets for the home teams.

 

[speedpeck23]

It's one thing to sell games to a market that doesn't have a team. But when you need to sell home games to another team you got to ask the question is the team viable in the first place.

Better get used to it....this appears to be the next phase in AFL Expansion....forget relocation...just get matches out of Melbourne. Collingwood is currently trying to convince the AFL to let them sell a Marvel home game into the Gold Coast. Clearly they will have 3 game memberships for sale in Qld and see how it builds from there.

If the North plan works they will have a 3 game membership in WA. The Victorian Clubs have a great chance to become national brands and promote the game....they are guaranteed to get 12 games in Melbourne even if they sell one or two ...no drama.

Despite clear state parochialism in some matches the AFL is not a state based competition. Players come from any state ( even Ireland), supporters come from anywhere.... The AFL and the clubs, like it or not, are dependent on commercial forces. For the AFL to prevent a club pursuing a commercial agreement which can potentially create a win win for for the clubs and the expansion and growth of the game is counter intuitive.

Remember everyone going crazy when North first took on Friday nights at the G.....then it became prime time and North was given the boot. Then more matches were shifted to the G. They played on Sundays and everyone worried about the 6 day break....and so on and so on. Things change....you try stuff to see if it works. NZ and China were not success stories.

Will be interesting to see how North goes.

 

[stallon]

I've already conceded this though - try and put it into the context of the mathematical disadvantages, and compare it to the other advantages of the fact that the government can build you a stadium with greater capacity etc. etc.

Sure, but then give us an ability to lock out away fans in a manner that replicates Geelong and non-Victorian teams to be fair. I don't want 30,000 Essendon or Carlton fans turning up to a Dogs home game through various ticket access AFL and away team of support GA membership packages, or even at the very least not having to declare your support or buy tickets through the Dogs' GA membership programs. Dogs GA members are in effect locked out from attending these games as they fill to capacity because they get no priority ticketing access over the (in theory), 30,000 AFL members who have an AFL membership, or the 10's of 000's of Essendon fans who get given GA tickets to away games when they buy a home reserved seat membership.

This is another issue entirely, and not related to the North getting WA home games.

Nobody in here is suggesting other issues with the fixturing dont exist

 

[Rich01]

This seems less strategic and more tactical from the North CEO. But perhaps I’ve underestimated her and she has plans to sell even more games to different interstate sides. The Northern Nomads perhaps?

Not sure this is going to work to increase the membership base in the long term.

 

[VicBased]

But I can argue that FIFO workers not keeping themselves fit and in good health (that AFL players are) means that the common knowledge that is appropriate for FIFO workers does not apply to AFL players. They are less physically burdened by airline travel than some fat truck driver driving a truck in a mine, which diminishes the impact of the travel itself.

Sure, then argue for a fair go in all fixturing elements for all teams, such as the inequality among Vic teams (through things like access to the public holiday marquee matches in Melbourne), as much as there's inequality across states. Otherwise you're just biased toward your own team, and not wanting to uphold the principle of fairness for all teams generally.

Mate, there is so much info about long haul flights and athletes.
Go and educate yourself.
You can start right here on BF. Pages of it.

 

[Chip Scab1]

As a supporter you may be happy with it, as a North player I don't think I would be.

Well win a few games, be more entertaining and then we'll start listening to the Players. We are in this position because of them, not because of our incredible Perth support. They can have a telethon and call them directly if they want.

It's only a 3 year deal, I can't see it being an issue in that time frame. Sheezel will be 23, LDU might be more affected, but he could hit a target or two and solve that straight up.

 

[Profop]

To be clear I don’t think the AFL should block it if that’s what North want to do I just think there’s no way North would do this if they were on the verge of success and I don’t think it sends an amazing message to their playing group

 

[Schauermann]

How much do we have to pay for 4 points?

 

[GoRoos2023]

Swapping 4 games in Tassie for 2 in WA. 2 more genuine home games in Melbourne from 2026 onwards.

I’m pretty sure players, coaches and supporters would prefer the WA option.

 

[dean33]

Whilst I agree, not sure you can complain about North selling homes games when your own club did it to say afloat, just over a decade ago.

I’m not complaining about north doing, I’m saying the afl shouldn’t allow it, like they shouldn’t have 10 years ago. Just because it’s happened before doesn’t make it right.

 

[dean33]

Until the AFL does something about it by scheduling more games in WA to reduce the travel burden of the WA clubs they wont stop looking for things to assist like this scenario thats playing out now.

The AFL has ****ed up, they should be making 2 vic clubs go over for 2 weeks every year, with every vic club taking a turn once every 5 years(10 clubs at 2 per year).

What a load of bullshit. Why should vic teams have to compensate for Perth being so far away? You have better weather and beaches as a positive, you are far away as a negative, that’s no one else’s fault.

 

[random260]

It's time. North Fremantle Kangeroos

Fremantle kangaroos.

I mean even fremantle supporters are likely going wtf is our emblem. It's an anchor a bloody object.

Not only that they wonder why they have a hippie surfer as mascot.

 

[dean33]

Of course it should be "permitted".

No team has an eternal right to be in the premier comp.

If a team is not financially viable and has few fans, they don't belong at the top level.

I am saying selling games shouldn’t be permitted. The fact is the afl won’t let any team fold as they are worth too much in tv rights. Whether they deserve to be in the comp or not is another matter.

 

[bzparkes]

I’m not complaining about north doing, I’m saying the afl shouldn’t allow it, like they shouldn’t have 10 years ago. Just because it’s happened before doesn’t make it right.

Why?

I mean, if you look at North's record at Optus recently, one would suggest they have more of a chance of winning there than they do in Hobart.

We have Gather Round in SA for the next 2 years, the AFL has to give Perth teams something.

 

[dean33]

Why?

I mean, if you look at North's record at Optus recently, one would suggest they have more of a chance of winning there than they do in Hobart.

We have Gather Round in SA for the next 2 years, the AFL has to give Perth teams something.

You really can’t see what sort of precedent this is setting? What’s to stop a rich team buying 4 additional home games, or Sydney buying a few extra, Collingwood as well. Do we just open it up to the clubs to sort out who plays home and away based on who pays what?

 

[stallon]

What a load of bullshit. Why should vic teams have to compensate for Perth being so far away? You have better weather and beaches as a positive, you are far away as a negative, that’s no one else’s fault.

If you want a fair competition with 10 vic clubs then this like that has to happen.
Its not the Vic clubs compensating for the WA clubs being so far away, its called a balanced competition.

You guys travel only a handful of times per year, why should all the non vic clubs have to travel to Vic for half of their games just to allow you guys to have 4-6 teams too many?

12 games at home out of 23 is not too much to ask for at all, especially when SA gets 12, Vic teams(mostly) get 16-17, and the northern states get their bullshit academies

 

[stallon]

You really can’t see what sort of precedent this is setting? What’s to stop a rich team buying 4 additional home games, or Sydney buying a few extra, Collingwood as well. Do we just open it up to the clubs to sort out who plays home and away based on who pays what?

The AFL refuses to do anything else to help the WA clubs, this is the type of rubbish that has to happen in the meantime to restore some amount of competitive integrity to the league.
Every state right now gets something EXCEPT the WA clubs.

SA gets gather round, NSW and QLD get their academies, and Vic clubs get a bunch of extra games with no travel along with extra MCG games.

Blame the AFL for not fixing a shit situation sooner and leaving it up to the wealthy clubs in WA to find their own solution which could potentially in the future open up the fixture to become even more compromised by other bigger Vic clubs.

 

[bzparkes]

You really can’t see what sort of precedent this is setting? What’s to stop a rich team buying 4 additional home games, or Sydney buying a few extra, Collingwood as well. Do we just open it up to the clubs to sort out who plays home and away based on who pays what?

West Coast and Freo didn't buy the games though, WA government did.

How about Hawthorn creating their own home ground advantage by only playing interstate teams/minnows at Launceston?

 

[dean33]

West Coast and Freo didn't buy the games though, WA government did.

How about Hawthorn creating their own home ground advantage by only playing interstate teams/minnows at Launceston?

Do hawthorn get extra home games to play in Tassie?

 

[bzparkes]

Do hawthorn get extra home games to play in Tassie?

They get the best of both worlds, no?