Mega Thread VICBias - Genuine Discussion

[Roylion]

It isn't.

That's correct. Do they really think the AFL can just order mergers and relocations?

 

[Carringbush2010]

That's correct. Do they really think the AFL can just order mergers and relocations?

Just to extrapolate for all the members on this forum.

If I am correct:

A proposal of a merger needs these key elements, as it is in the charter.

• The two proposed merging clubs agree to said merger
• The members of each club need to agree by vote to further the proposal, by a 2/3 majority.
• HQ then needs to put forward the proposal to all clubs in the competition
• Then those other clubs need to put forward their yes or no vote on that said merger, only a 2/3 majority puts forward said merger.
• * Not sure if the remaining clubs need to get a majority 2/3 votes from their own members.

Have I got this right Roy?

If not please explain to all the forum members how it works.

 

[Boston tiger]

Merge Melbourne and North Melbourne
Merge St kilda and western bulldogs

One more team in perth

“The AFL employs an independent commission model to govern its sport. This structure entails 18 clubs, of which 11 are owned by their members, five are owned by the AFL, and two are privately owned by the Western Australian Football Commission.”

Members have a bit of say in things

 

[Boston tiger]

Because that was the home of football in WA, it’s where the gF was played every year.

So you get it then. No one would have been complaining about Subiaco always getting the grand final. No talk of sharing it around etc. Just play it at the biggest venue.

 

[greatwhiteshark]

So you get it then. No one would have been complaining about Subiaco always getting the grand final. No talk of sharing it around etc. Just play it at the biggest venue.

Read my posts, never really argued that at all.

 

[greatwhiteshark]

“The AFL employs an independent commission model to govern its sport. This structure entails 18 clubs, of which 11 are owned by their members, five are owned by the AFL, and two are privately owned by the Western Australian Football Commission.”

Members have a bit of say in things

Not that I am advocating merging or losing clubs but it could be done and does not need members.

The AFL could simply say that in 3 seasons time we will be only issuing 12 licences. To gain one of those licences you will need to turn over x amount. You must be fully able to fund your world from top to bottom.

If you cannot then you will not get a licence.

The problem would then be that maybe 15 of the clubs couldn't do it. lol

 

[Carringbush2010]

Not that I am advocating merging or losing clubs but it could be done and does not need members.

The AFL could simply say that in 3 seasons time we will be only issuing 12 licences. To gain one of those licences you will need to turn over x amount. You must be fully able to fund your world from top to bottom.

If you cannot then you will not get a licence.

The problem would then be that maybe 15 of the clubs couldn't do it. lol

I don't think this is correct, HQ aren't likely to lawfully withhold competition licences.

Any merger or liquidation of any club would need a 2/3 majority vote from all the competing clubs, by extension all clubs would need to consult their own members which would also require a 2/3 majority vote.

I believe it is in the charter.

 

[sr36]

Not that I am advocating merging or losing clubs but it could be done and does not need members.

The AFL could simply say that in 3 seasons time we will be only issuing 12 licences. To gain one of those licences you will need to turn over x amount. You must be fully able to fund your world from top to bottom.

If you cannot then you will not get a licence.

The problem would then be that maybe 15 of the clubs couldn't do it. lol

Careful what you wish for. Considering the comp is thriving the logical thing isn't to get smaller - it's to round up to 20. Going by population and footy interest - a third club in Perth is the go. Now rather than creating a brand new club which will leave the comp with one huge club in WA and 2 minnows - the best idea is to split WCE in half - so that you end up three relatively even sized clubs.

 

[greatwhiteshark]

Careful what you wish for. Considering the comp is thriving the logical thing isn't to get smaller - it's to round up to 20. Going by population and footy interest - a third club in Perth is the go. Now rather than creating a brand new club which will leave the comp with one huge club in WA and 2 minnows - the best idea is to split WCE in half - so that you end up three relatively even sized clubs.

Maybe thats what should happen in Victoria mate. Split the Pies in half, what you reckon?

 

[greatwhiteshark]

I don't think this is correct, HQ aren't likely to lawfully withhold competition licences.

Any merger or liquidation of any club would need a 2/3 majority vote from all the competing clubs, by extension all clubs would need to consult their own members which would also require a 2/3 majority vote.

I believe it is in the charter.

Just having Monday fun mate, Its cricket season

 

[sr36]

Maybe thats what should happen in Victoria mate. Split the Pies in half, what you reckon?

I wouldn't have thought you'd be interested in adding an extra large club in Victoria.

To get rid of bias, perhaps we could go with a supporter cap - no club bigger than North.

 

[greatwhiteshark]

I wouldn't have thought you'd be interested in adding an extra large club in Victoria.

To get rid of bias, perhaps we could go with a supporter cap - no club bigger than North.

Yep why not, I reckon 2-4 more clubs in victoria. Then these threads will really be fun.

 

[Roylion]

Just to extrapolate for all the members on this forum.

If I am correct:

A proposal of a merger needs these key elements, as it is in the charter.

• The two proposed merging clubs agree to said merger.

Yep. That's the decision of the boards of the two participating clubs.

• The members of each club need to agree by vote to further the proposal, by a 2/3 majority.

Depends on their constitutions. A simple majority vote of eligible members may be enough. For example in 1996, Hawthorn members voted against the merger. That was enough to end it.

• HQ then needs to put forward the proposal to all clubs in the competition

The AFL commission will recommend a merger if the clubs agree to it. In 1996, all the AFL could agree to was that the Brisbane Bears wished to purchase some of Fitzroy's assets to help pay Fitzroy's debts and also keep Fitzroy going for the rest of the season. The administrator and the AFL agreed and from that point on marketed it as a 'merger'. The adminstrator of Fitzroy surrendered Fitzroy's licence to compete in the AFL as the Commission wanted.

• Then those other clubs need to put forward their yes or no vote on that said merger, only a 2/3 majority puts forward said merger.

That was the case in 1996. It may be three-quarters now.

• * Not sure if the remaining clubs need to get a majority 2/3 votes from their own members.

Not that I'm aware of.

 

[Miller1971]

Hit reply, go to a line/paragraph and hit enter, will make a gap for you to reply.



I think all clubs have agents or talent scouts in all states, but opinions vary, not everyone is as good a judge of talent. I think they generally take footage and make some notes. It is different here, and it is not due to auskick, the Victorian pathway has existed for a long time and is largely driven by two private school leagues. They are very competitive with each other, are well funded and have very good programs. The majority of the Metro and Country players come from this system, most public schools no longer play football at a competitive level any longer.

Part of the condition of the SANFL and WAFL entering the AFL was that the AFL would not interfere in grassroots development in those two states. The AFL has it's state level affiliates in NSW, QLD, ACT, NT and Tasmania but it is impossible to recreate the Victorian pathway up North because it isn't the AFL or VFL that created the pathway in Victoria, they have just helped it where they could.

The main reason the U19 competition and Reserver grade competitions were abandoned and lists massively reduced was because it would have been significantly disadvantaged the interstate clubs. I don't think people appreciate the compromises made in the name of broadening the game beyond the traditional football states.



I am not sure that it is due to bias though, it is just easier for clubs to develop local talent. Richmond broadened their horizon out of necessity. It is a lot harder to move someone from QLD to Victoria on a rookie contract and have them survive financially and be able to commit 100% to a football program. If clubs are desperate enough they will bring players from Ireland or USA. It can be difficult to gauge how well someone does in a lesser league due to the difference in standard in the leagues. Now that the Lions, Suns, Giants and Swans are in the VFL there is a greater opportunity to get exposed form in a higher quality competition.



Was Brisbane biased for not taking him in 2018? There must have been a reason why they didn't take him.



They know, there are profiles on almost every player even from those not associated with any club.

There will probably be 60 odd players drafted this year, realistically double that could easily play at AFL level, we just do not have room on our lists to take everyone that is good enough to play so clubs have to make hard decisions about who to pursue and who not to. Everyone is biased to some degree but I think if you talk to talent scouts, recruiters and player managers they be able to quantify what their criteria is for determining what kind of players they are looking for and what kind of attributes they need and kind of risks and difficulties exist with players from outside of your region.

West Coast didn't cash in pick 2 last year for lesser picks because they had no talent scouts in Victoria, it wasn't bias against Victorian players either, they didn't want to take on certain risks and opted for safer local talent. Clubs aren't perfect and don't always make the right calls, there are numerous players every year that every club got wrong, there just isn't a perfect or easy science to it. If you spend 2-5 years developing someone and they leave because they are homesick or do not like they have the discipline or desire to make it at AFL level then even if you have the attributes, the risk can sometimes be prohibitive.

For example, Collard is probably going to slide way past where his talent and attributes would suggest he should go in the draft, you can call it bias but clubs have a lot of experience in dealing with players from outside their region, some ring alarm bells, others do not. You can only judge if decisions are right or wrong with the benefit of hindsight. EVERY club wants to get the leg up on the other clubs by getting the most talented players they can on their list.

Yes, I agree with you.

It's not bias, they are just taking the path of least resistance.

Assessing two kids, similar talent, have to use a crystal ball to have any idea how good they might be, and one if from Qld and one is from Vic, the Vic kid will be taken 99% of the time by those clubs in Vic, and the Qld clubs might still take the Vic kid because there remains an ineferiority complex up here than talent from the south is somehow better.

 

[Boston tiger]

Yes, I agree with you.

It's not bias, they are just taking the path of least resistance.

Assessing two kids, similar talent, have to use a crystal ball to have any idea how good they might be, and one if from Qld and one is from Vic, the Vic kid will be taken 99% of the time by those clubs in Vic, and the Qld clubs might still take the Vic kid because there remains an ineferiority complex up here than talent from the south is somehow better.

If taking someone from another state take the country kid over the city kid because the country kid is away from home and family no matter where he goes.

 

[sr36]

If taking someone from another state take the country kid over the city kid because the country kid is away from home and family no matter where he goes.

Nah take the city kid. You'll be helping out Collingwood or Richmond - where he'll end up, rather than helping out Geelong.

 

[Freomaniac]

The MCG is the home of footy.

true...

Saying that... Liam Henrys main reason to head to the saints...

How Norm Smith medallist Hill inspired Henry’s St Kilda move

Watching Norm Smith medallist Bobby Hill thrive at Collingwood inspired Liam Henry to take the plunge and be traded to St Kilda after a decade at Fremantle.

thewest.com.au

I know its paywalled... But it has to be Vic bias? lol

Henry even knows that you have to play for a victorian side to win a flag.

 

[Chronz]

true...

Saying that... Liam Henrys main reason to head to the saints...

How Norm Smith medallist Hill inspired Henry’s St Kilda move

Watching Norm Smith medallist Bobby Hill thrive at Collingwood inspired Liam Henry to take the plunge and be traded to St Kilda after a decade at Fremantle.

thewest.com.au

I know its paywalled... But it has to be Vic bias? lol

Henry even knows that you have to play for a victorian side to win a flag.

Yeah. Being traded to the saints guarantees him a flag.

 

[Freomaniac]

Love how VFL flags are somehow included as AFL Premierships.... there's VicBias right there!

Facts are facts

 

[Freomaniac]

Yeah. Being traded to the saints guarantees him a flag.

It aussures he will play in a grand final at the saints.

 

[Freomaniac]

Unless Perth3 is good for 240k+ members, seems like poor planning

A 3rd WA side is possible. WA population should hit 3 million by 2030.

 

[Outtatym]

A 3rd WA side is possible. WA population should hit 3 million by 2030.

Absolutely it is, but not at the expense of 4 Vic clubs

 

[sr36]

A 3rd WA side is possible. WA population should hit 3 million by 2030.

How and where would they get a supporter base? That's the issue for expansion into an area where the market already has teams.

 

[demondavey]

A 3rd WA side is possible. WA population should hit 3 million by 2030.

WC is the dominant club. Not sure many people would get on a new WA club.

 

[demondavey]

Merge Melbourne and North Melbourne
Merge St kilda and western bulldogs

One more team in perth

Do this and don’t introduce any more teams. Those 4 can definitely be combined imo.