The Melbourne Kangaroos?

[Spandex]

.......why has this not made it's way to bay 13?

Because it's a fact.

Facts and Bay 13 don't mix.

 

[chopper41]

Because it's a fact.

Facts and Bay 13 don't mix.

Yeah, very true.

This is the funniest thing I've ever heard though. Although i cant really get on a high horse about it, even if it was a dodgy vote and a take over, a lot of my mob did vote yes thus ending the Demons........ BUT! this is meant to be the greatest president in the history of people. A man amongst men. The man currently in charge of the very team he wanted to be killed off.

where did you get this gem from? please dont say ya made this up, i'll be freakin crushed.

 

[Spandex]

where did you get this gem from? please dont say ya made this up, i'll be freakin crushed.

It's true. Trust me.

 

[SweetLeftFoot]

I've posted it on Bay13, at the height of the North v Hawthorn feuding.

Just for you though mate, here's the original article as taken of Lexisnexis.


The Age (Melbourne, Australia)

March 28, 1996 Thursday
LATE Edition

Hawks, Demons should have merged - Kennett
BYLINE: STEPHEN LINNELL

SECTION: SPORT; Pg. 18

LENGTH: 319 words


Hawthorn's patron, Premier Jeff Kennett, believes his club should have merged with Melbourne.

Kennett, a paid-up member of the club, said yesterday: "I was disappointed that Hawthorn and Melbourne didn't merge last year or the year before. I think that would have shown leadership."

He said of the AFL: "I think we do need to have a couple of mergers."
Hawthorn's potential merger with Melbourne was generated primarily by Crown Casino chairman Lloyd Williams. It is believed Crown was prepared to provide significant, long-term sponsorship had the clubs merged.

The league's pro-merger policy had been placed on the backburner in the lead-up to the start of its centenary year, but Kennett's comments will re- ignite the debate.

Speaking on 3AW, he also took a swipe at Hawthorn's past administrations. "I'd like to think we still are the family club. We've gone through a few problems . . . I don't think we've looked after our ex-players very well in the same way that some of the other clubs do."

It is believed he was referring to Hawthorn's poor handling of club champion Dermott Brereton, which led to Brereton moving to Sydney, before finishing his career at Collingwood.

Hawthorn finished 15th last year, and most commentators believe the club will again struggle this season. Its campaign begins on Saturday at Whitten Oval, against Fitzroy.

The Lions yesterday received a timely financial boost when they announced that Adelaide-based company Clipsal had signed a one-year deal and would feature on the back of the club's guernseys this year.

Club officials say the deal, believed to be for less than $100,000, will help in Fitzroy's battle to prove its solvency to the league. "Any dollars are a help," club chief executive John Birt said.

Gerard Industries' Victorian manager, Laurie Bendle, said: "We like to get behind the underdog a bit. Hopefully at the end of this year they won't be so much of an underdog."

 

[chopper41]

I've posted it on Bay13, at the height of the North v Hawthorn feuding.

Just for you though mate, here's the original article as taken of Lexisnexis.

WELL............DONE .
That is freakin sensational. I can't stand that arrogant flog. Hawks better not fall back in to trouble, or it will be more than just 4 games in Tassie a year.

 

[SweetLeftFoot]

No bother. The Crown Casino Melbourne Hawks.

What an abomination that woulda been.

 

[Deefolt]

Imagine where the TV rights deal would be without a team in Sydney? Then imagine how much money the AFL would have to prop up VIC teams.

There are too many teams in Melbourne. One will fold eventually. A merger is the only way that the team who is going to fold will keep their club in Melbourne.

Lets look at the positives of this potential merger;

1. Kangaroos have training facilities (currently being redeveloped) Melbourne dont.
2. Kangaroos have a decent mascot - Melbourne dont.
3. Melbourne have access to the MCC, MCG as a home ground - Kangaroos dont
4. No clash guernsies would be needed - just use either of the traditional guernsies.

It could actually work and work well if supporters and members got behind it. There is little doubt that one of the clubs or perhaps another VIC club will cease to exist all together if something like this does not happen.

Selective one you hawks fans are aint ya?
1, Melbourne are currently being developed, remember that rather large stadium being built in melbourne, for storm victory and the DEMONS... oh yeah
2. Melbourne have a history behind theirs, one of Melbourne's coaches said for the Demons to go out and player like a pack of demons as opposed to Flowers. The funny thing is that the prob most famous sporting club world wide has roughly our name, Demons = sorta = red devils. so next
3. You have already stated this one
4. What a stupid thing to say, you guys will prob have to change if a tas side comes in i would assume, or if another team comes in. Jumper clashes are a part of new clubs, i saw Man U have a blue jumper in a game the other day. BLUE

And mate if you are being so cocky that your team didnt vote for the merger between our clubs and we did, we voted for a takeover, your president voted and mentioned later that he wanted the takeover to happen.

Check your facts, come back later.

 

[Beckers]

By the way, haven't Melbourne managed 30,000 members this year, despite the fact that they are no chance of making the finals? Have hawthorn ever managed that feat while in a similar period of re-building?

Hmmm, short term memory loss perhaps??

 

[S.Patrol.G]

Says there they started in 1870 and have won 36 SANFL premierships, i also notice they call them all SANFL premierships despite winning some in the SAFA and the SAFL,

They didn't and they haven't. They were formed in 1997. However, the Port Adelaide Football Club did start in 1870. They have won 36 SANFL Premierships and 1 AFL Premiership.

Anyway, getting too far OT to continue this converation here but, by all means, come over to the Port board and have a read or PM me and I'll attempt to clarify your mis-understanding.

 

[Hawkk]

By the way, haven't Melbourne managed 30,000 members this year, despite the fact that they are no chance of making the finals? Have hawthorn ever managed that feat while in a similar period of re-building?

Given that we were the first side in Victoria to actually get to 30,000 members (1999) I'd have to say yes

You sir are a legend. I recently posted the numbers showing that just three years agio we smashed Hawthorn in membership and attendances when we finished 5th and they were on the bottom. What a joke you Hawkers are.

Not really

Melbourne V Hawthorn since 1998

1998 17,870 v 27,640
1999 19,713 v 32,120
2000 18,227 v 27,879
2001 22,940 v 30,410
2002 20,152 v 33,319
2003 20,555 v 31,500
2004 25,252 v 31,255
2005 24,220 v 29,282
2006 24,698 v 28,002
2007 28,077 v 31,065
2008 29,619 v 41,886
2009 30,410 v 51,323

The smallest gap between the 2 clubs was in 2007 - 2,988

 

[Spandex]

Kennett is an economic rationalist to the core. At least he's consistent, even if it meant sending his own club under.

Just shows though how clubs can turn it around.

 

[Upgrayedd]

You cant expect to put 2 pieces of crap together and come out with gold.

That said, Merging is a pretty average thing to do for clubs, im sure both clubs would rather fight on being a minnow club then bow down and throw half their history away.

 

[Papa G]

You cant expect to put 2 pieces of crap together and come out with gold.

That said, Merging is a pretty average thing to do for clubs, im sure both clubs would rather fight on being a minnow club then bow down and throw half their history away.

It worked with Woodville and West Torrens in the SANFL. Torrens hadn't won a flag since 1953 and Woodville never had. 2 massive piles of steaming crap if there ever was. Since 1991 when they merged, they have won 2 flags and been runners up 5 times. It can work. One of the biggest things working against it is that North have actually had some success in living memory, but again they may not have any choice in the matter.

 

[FOOOOTY]

They didn't and they haven't. They were formed in 1997. However, the Port Adelaide Football Club did start in 1870. They have won 36 SANFL Premierships and 1 AFL Premiership.

Putting aside your clubs confusion with stealing another clubs history for a second, why do you call them all SANFL premierships despite winning some in the SAFA and SAFL??

 

[Spandex]

Also, i don't recall a club called London in the EPL?

Dumbest argument ever.

What's London got to do with it?

Why did you choose London? Because it's the capital city? Melbourne isn't the capital of Australia. Canberra is genius.

Your argument makes as much sense as saying there should be a Melbourne team in the AFL because there is a Washington team in the NFL.

One thing has nothing to do with the other.

And the less the AFL is like the EPL, the better.

 

[Spandex]

They have won 36 SANFL Premierships and 1 AFL Premiership.

Just a question about the SANFL. Why is it called the SANFL, the South Australian National Football League?

Why did they throw the word National in there?

Always wondered about it.

Just asking.

 

[ExTasDeeMan]

Bollocks to the suggestion.

 

[J_Dog]

How could we merge the oldest club in the oldest organised league in history??? Couldn't happen wouldn't be the AFL without Melbourne

 

[jacko57]

It is strange isn't it? In the population of blood-hungry tossers who want to see the traditional clubs die, Hawthorn outnumbers every other club about 10-to-1. They even outnumber the interstate sides who have no concept of history or tradition and feel inferior to the Vic Clubs. Further, the Hawks have only just come from the brink of collapse themselves. You should all have a good look at yourselves and be ashamed

Fair call, Demon.

 

[Geddy Lee]

Stop being sentimental.


The AFL has become a business. Melbourne and North are NOT viable.


Just look at the past 5 years, Australia has grown faster and had more money then any other period in our history.

And yet both of these clubs were losing money.

You clearly have no clue about Melbourne's leaps and bounds in the last 12 months so please STFU.

 

[Groggyk]

Stop being sentimental.


The AFL has become a business. Melbourne and North are NOT viable.


Just look at the past 5 years, Australia has grown faster and had more money then any other period in our history.

And yet both of these clubs were losing money.

Yep that's why Sydney and Port Adelaide are absolutely firing.

 

[Geddy Lee]

Yep that's why Sydney and Port Adelaide are absolutely firing.

What do Sydney, Port, Brisbane, Melbourne and North have in common?

Supporters of franchises potting them.

 

[whelan=legend]

Stop being sentimental.


The AFL has become a business. Melbourne and North are NOT viable.


Just look at the past 5 years, Australia has grown faster and had more money then any other period in our history.

And yet both of these clubs were losing money.

Infact, in the past 5 years Melbourne only lost money once, last year.

When we were competitive on field we were consistently making profits upwards of 800,000, including some in the millions.

Just wait until two years time when we are seriously challenging. Combined with our reallignment with the MCC, Melbourne will be one of the most financially stable clubs in the league.

That's if we aren't already.

So, uh, do you want to get your facts straight before you start to type your utter garbage?

 

[El_Scorcho]

Melbourne and North, if in the long term prove to be unable to sustain themselves, fine, but IMO they should be given all the time in the world to right themselves. Look at the clubs over the years who have gotten into financial trouble. Carlton, Hawthorn, further back IIRC even Collingwood at one stage.

Any existing club should be given all the help in the world to stay afloat. Fitzroy was not given that because the AFL were determined to make a place for us in the AFL, and I honestly feel bad when that is brought up in Fitzroy discussions.

 

[whelan=legend]

3rd lowest crowd ever this year.


Yes, keep those leaps and bounds up!!!


Get back to me in two years and see how that debts going and we will see if you've actually made any progress.

Sunday night, 12 degrees and raining all day.

Going to watch a crappy interstate side that continuously plays a horrible brand of footy, always having 6 men behind the ball.

Many people chose not to go and their choice was justified by the match.

Adelaide are an absolutely horrible team that nobody wants to watch, ever. With the circumstances a poor crowd was completely reasonable.

While we are on poor crowds, i think we should go make Hawthorn fold for their 11,000 at the G a mere 5 years ago. Obviously they can never turn it around


Also, 3rd lowest crowd ever? What records are you looking at? That is possibly the worst statistic i have ever seen to vilify an argument. 14,000 wouldn't even be in the 100 worst crowds ever.