WSYD West Sydney is AFL's Vietnam

[zero]

the level of paranoia in sydney never ceases to amaze me. the battle of the codes (which doesent exist) has been won by rugby league!

let them think there is a battle raging, i mean, they are always going to win, they will always rate better (in sydney), always have alot more juniors (in sydney) and always have alot bigger crowds (in sydney). rugby league wins, yay for league

meanwhile the AFL can slip in and achieve its goals, that being more people watching, more people attending games and more people playing aussie rules.

as for the stadium issue, well just for starters remember that this is an ongoing process, and things can change around in 9 months if and when the economic or political situation changes

its not ideal but its certainly an option to play non-blockbusters at blacktown for the first few years. a bargain basement investment will bring the surface up to scratch, and the new side can play there while they build support....and if they are weekly selling out a 10000 seat stadium and have a season average of 20k (because of 3 blockbusters), combined with 5 years of lobbying all levels of government, then obviously things are different again.

 

[Giants FC]

I can’t see that Blacktown is an option – it’s fine for pre-season games, and will be first-class as a training base. But even though in its early days WS18 won’t have great support, Blacktown’s 10,000 capacity is too small and the facilities for the corporates won’t be up to standard. And with 8,000 of that capacity being on the hill, it’s a recipe for disaster when it rains.
We can’t ask people to pay $25-$30 to sit or stand on grass; and how can the club ever sell memberships without giving their members a seat?

If the Showgrounds redevelopment isn’t going to happen, then it’ll have to be all home games at ANZ.

 

[Mr Lizard]

All I want from the AFL is the research showing the game is better moving to West Sydney instead of Tassie and I will be happy. Sadly that document doesn't excist.

The game already is in Tassie, it wouldn't be moving there. That is the point of going to West Sydney - take the game somewhere new.

 

[St-KriS]

Like Vietnam? More like The Holy Crusades.

Bringing the gospel to the heathens.

 

[thejester]

Like Vietnam? More like The Holy Crusades.

Bringing the gospel to the heathens.

And they worked out so well.

 

[St-KriS]

And they worked out so well.

Lets not get pedantic here...

 

[Gaz_Brownlow]

The game already is in Tassie, it wouldn't be moving there. That is the point of going to West Sydney - take the game somewhere new.

I don't think people get it. If the move to West Sydney was made the AFL would be propping up a bill for the next decade at least. It will already be heavily involved in propping up the Gold Coast, not to mention 3 or 4 Melbourne clubs and now Port Adelaide!!

Can the AFL afford this? And why is it necessary to increase its debt and obligations right now? Wouldn't it be smarter to establish a working competition where all clubs are economically viable, then look into expansion plans where we can afford to throw around a bit more cash....

It is simple, really it is. Tasmania has guaranteed financial backing from the Government and major sponsor (and would receive continued government backing), because simply put, Tasmania and its people want and would support AFL - look no further than the current Hawthorn arrangement, a success when other experiments in Canberra and the gold coast (Nth Melb, home games) dismally failed.

Tasmania is viable.

It would not add a great new supporter base, no, but it would gurantee additional revenue from TV (Tasmanian people would actually watch there home team!), Crowds and club memberships. I can't beleive the AFL is not recognising this - the bid, the due-dilligence, the cold hard facts have been presented to them.....but instead, in this time of recession, they want to take on increasing liabilities and invest in a franchise they know will require extensive support for at least a decade, reality suggests even longer.

I swear to god, the AFL is becoming worse than Kevin Rudd's buy now pay later cash handout system. Their economic logic is so severley flawed it is almost embarrasing and it is getting to the stage where a big vote of no confidence is about the only sensible alternative.

The Western Sydney expansion can happen in time, but now is definately not that time, especially considering the telling fact that close to 40% of current AFL clubs are now requiring direct AFL support.

 

[frednirk]

Righto. I've been living in western sydney for the last 3 years after living in Melbourne my whole life. I was driving through St Marys (about 15km west of Parramatta) on the weekend and actually saw some of those glorious 2 bigs sticks and 2 smaller sticks on a ground with some under 14s or something playing that totally unknown sport...AFL!! It was incredible to see.

Yes Sydney feels like an AFL desert at times.

Anyway. The AFL will fail with a western sydney team if it is still treated as premium entertainment. Paying those idiotic prices to watch a game is not going to work for western sydney. It may work for the North Shore Swans yuppy supporters but i don't think it will work in the west.

The AFL MUST lower the prices in Sydney!

They have a fantastic opportunity to create a team supported by the toothless hordes of western sydney. The showdowns with the pompous silvertail swannies will be awesome for NSW football and AFL as a whole.

The western sydney team should wear black and dark blue with a flaming skull on the gurnsey. The Paramatta Flaming Skulls.

I'm exaggerating a tad, but you get the point.

Goddamit Demetriou

 

[grayham]

I don't think people get it. If the move to West Sydney was made the AFL would be propping up a bill for the next decade at least. It will already be heavily involved in propping up the Gold Coast, not to mention 3 or 4 Melbourne clubs and now Port Adelaide!!

Can the AFL afford this?

The AFL is stopping proping up melbourne clubs, so a lot of money will be freed up.

It is simple, really it is. Tasmania has guaranteed financial backing from the Government and major sponsor (and would receive continued government backing), because simply put, Tasmania and its people want and would support AFL - look no further than the current Hawthorn arrangement, a success when other experiments in Canberra and the gold coast (Nth Melb, home games) dismally failed.

Tasmania is viable.

NSW had government backing too. It's never guaranteed. Just take a look at QLD. The GC came down to who won the election. A bit of economic strife, a change of government, and the backing is under review.

That is why tassie is such high risk. They know that it will never be viable without government backing.

It would not add a great new supporter base, no, but it would gurantee additional revenue from TV (Tasmanian people would actually watch there home team!), Crowds and club memberships.

No it wont. TV revenue is saturated in tassy already.

Isnt it funny that the NSW government rejected upgrading the showgrounds for the bulldogs RL team, and they consequently moved to ANZ, yet when the same think happens to AFL a few years later, its a victory to RL !

Although the showgrounds is a nice stadium, its not designed for AFL, and is in a bad location. Better off biting the bullet and using ANZ, and finding another ground for small matches.

 

[Ice-Wolf]

Simple solution, don't get the money from the NSW gov, go and talk to Kev, explain how upgradeing the stadium will create however many jobs and flow on effects in the current economic climate, as well as the long-term economic effects of a 2nd AFL team in Sydney and get the Federal Government to chip in. Then blanket the media with talks of job creation ect.

 

[legend166]

If Labor is still in power after the 2011 election, NSW is officially the dumbest state in the country.

 

[Ice-Wolf]

If Labor is still in power after the 2011 election, NSW is officially the dumbest state in the country.

What about WA? Look at the mess they got themselves into at their last election.

 

[Gaz_Brownlow]

The AFL is stopping proping up melbourne clubs, so a lot of money will be freed up.

Is that so? Well how the **** are Melbourne, Nth, and Bulldogs going to take that....and i hope Carlton have got some money back in the kitty to repay the million dollar loan. Fact is, Melbourne based clubs will continue to need additional support if all 8 are to survive.

That is why tassie is such high risk. They know that it will never be viable without government backing.

Government backing is never guranteed as is sponsorship money, however Tasmania, being a 1 team state with no hope of having 2 teams would have a much greater chance of continually securing long term government backing than any other team. The benefit of high level football to Tasmania (from grass roots to corporate) has been recognised state wide and (suprisignly) for Tasmania well received. This has been demonstrated with the response to Hawthorn in launceston, Tasmania (both people and government) have recognised the benefit therefore see it as an importatnt investment - this is not the case with NSW and Qld as other interests dictate.

No it wont. TV revenue is saturated in tassy already.

TV levels are satuarted in Tassie, but i would imagine if you broke it down the majority of TV support would be for teams traditionally backed by Tasmanian's; i.e nobody would really tune into a Port vs. Dockers match, in the same way nobody is really going to be that fussed with a GC vs. West Sydney match.

Is the bid that was presented to the AFL publically available yet? I would be very interested to see it and compare it against that of both the GC and West Sydney. I would imagine that there are a lot of fictional 'Projected' figures amongst the West Sydney and GC bids that would be interesting to compare. The fact that Tasmania had already secured Government support and major sponsorship is something to behold.

 

[Mr Lizard]

I don't think people get it. Tasmania is viable.

I'm not really arguing the merits of either option. But I know this: If Tassie was going to get a side, it would already have one. The AFL isn't interested.

Tasmanians is potentially viable. West Sydney is also potentially viable.

Whatever the bill it will have to foot, the AFL is only going to create a new club because it deems it worthwhile. It is easy for us to think of them as semi-intelligent monkeys, but they have a fair idea of what bills they can afford to pay, and what is 'worthwhile' for them. They didn't just throw darts at a map of Australia to decide the location.

 

[Gaz_Brownlow]

Simple solution, don't get the money from the NSW gov, go and talk to Kev, explain how upgradeing the stadium will create however many jobs and flow on effects in the current economic climate, as well as the long-term economic effects of a 2nd AFL team in Sydney and get the Federal Government to chip in. Then blanket the media with talks of job creation ect.

Ha ha, yes why don't we just get Kev to dip into his never ending pockets and pull out 100 million or so. We could call the team the West Sydney Kev's - i am sure it would suit the public profile he is going for, hard line blue collar man of the people....(much like Rusty Crowe and the Rabbitohs!)...

Infact thats a brilliant idea, and a great team name, the KEV's!

Oh, im sure we will be fine with the Tax payer bill too... i mean whats another 100 million handout on top of, i dunno even how many billions.... We could put a statue of Kev out the front of Bankstown too, alongside Steve Waugh in a tribute to Australian men of Steele!

**** it, i would chip in my life savings to see that...

Go Kev, you absolute muppet!

 

[Ice-Wolf]

Ha ha, yes why don't we just get Kev to dip into his never ending pockets and pull out 100 million or so. We could call the team the West Sydney Kev's - i am sure it would suit the public profile he is going for, hard line blue collar man of the people....(much like Rusty Crowe and the Rabbitohs!)...

Infact thats a brilliant idea, and a great team name, the KEV's!

Oh, im sure we will be fine with the Tax payer bill too... i mean whats another 100 million handout on top of, i dunno even how many billions.... We could put a statue of Kev out the front of Bankstown too, alongside Steve Waugh in a tribute to Australian men of Steele!

**** it, i would chip in my life savings to see that...

Go Kev, you absolute muppet!

How about we just make up a statue of you looking like an idiot with your thumbs up in Hobart. Give the Pigeons something to crap on, money well spent.

Having the Federal Government provide money to upgrade the stadium, isn't them just pissing money up the wall, its a long term infrastructure project that would provide jobs ect. The AFL should probably push the same agenda with the Federal Government to help fund the redevelopment of Subiaco. Less than 100 million for a project in Western Sydney that would provide jobs and ultimately some long-term jobs as well actually is a viable option for the Federal Government to get involved, even if it is only to a similar degree as they are to Gold Coast.

 

[Sanks]

What will it take for the AFL to listen to economic reason. West Sydney doesn't have the means to support an AFL club, hey even the Swans will be struglling at the end of the year.

Port Adelaide a club established over 100 years with a huge demographic of hard core football supporters can't even remain viable.

NSW government will not be propping a team up at the detriment of Rugby League.

Tasmania, a team which would receive long term Government backing, has an AFL ready stadium (complete with government backed upgrades), major sponsor and a huge membership base chomping at the bit to be included...why Demetriou, why, why don't you listen to reason!

This sort of reasoning anoys me. West Sydney, Port and Tassie, for the most part, are three seperate sets of circumstances and should be treated as such. The problems facing Port are not the same problems facing a proposed Tassie club which are also not the same problems facing a proposed West Sydney club.

 

[snrub]

So I'm just trying to follow this story... the AFL is building a $30 million training facility at Blacktown and they were also involved in a $100 million new stadium at the Showgrounds which is right next door to the Olympic Stadium which is also an AFL venue. 3 major facilities for a club that doesn't exist yet compared with 9 clubs sharing 2 venues in Melbourne, and 2 clubs in Perth and 2 in Adelaide screaming out for assistance to replace their decrepit home grounds. Is that about it?

 

[Il Naso De Gastev]

I really hope it does fall on its arse.

Demetriou is hell-bent on alienating the traditional football fan, by sanitising it and appealling to soccer-mums, in an attempt to grow the game in areas like West Sydney. Meantime, those traditional football fans are turning their back on the game in droves in it's homeland, Melbourne. If West Sydney falls over, the current AFL commission might wake up and really look at what they have done to the game.

 

[Gaz_Brownlow]

This sort of reasoning anoys me. West Sydney, Port and Tassie, for the most part, are three seperate sets of circumstances and should be treated as such. The problems facing Port are not the same problems facing a proposed Tassie club which are also not the same problems facing a proposed West Sydney club.

Absolutely, entirely different situations, but designed to highlight how more than a few AFL clubs are in trouble and do need to be propped up - the argument being that Tasmania has more of a chance of being able to support itself then West Sydney, which to me (and ill admit, this is not researched) will seemingly require a significant proportion of AFL funding to keep itself afloat. Why not grow the finances of the game slowly and reduce the leveraging that current clubs have now, making the already established clubs sustainable, before moving onto new areas that are clearly going to fall into the same problems.?

I know this argument could be turned back around on Tasmania supporting a team - but i would simply like to look at their bid figures, because to me it seems that they are not speculating about being able to support a team, more they actually can support a team right now and have the upfront cash to be able to do so.

How about we just make up a statue of you looking like an idiot with your thumbs up in Hobart. Give the Pigeons something to crap on, money well spent.

Having the Federal Government provide money to upgrade the stadium, isn't them just pissing money up the wall, its a long term infrastructure project that would provide jobs ect. The AFL should probably push the same agenda with the Federal Government to help fund the redevelopment of Subiaco. Less than 100 million for a project in Western Sydney that would provide jobs and ultimately some long-term jobs as well actually is a viable option for the Federal Government to get involved, even if it is only to a similar degree as they are to Gold Coast.

Yes, federal funding for stadiums is a great way to spend public monies i agree... but why not throw that biscuit to Tasmania? Tasmania would seem to be a place where the money would be more greatly received, the costs wouldn't be as signifcant (hence less tax payer obligation at a time when we are projected to go 200 billion into the red), job creation would be just as strong and the long term benefit and sustainability would be signifcantly greater than a place which is receiving a 100 million dollar stadium next door.

The Western sydney argument is very weak and i am yet to see some figures behind it which would support the 'supposed' economic development of the game. The costs of this expansion is paramount to the vietnam war as this thread suggests.

As for Krudd, don't get me started on what a peanut the man is, needless to say the vast majority of 15 year olds posting on this board will be dishing back the dollars in years to come to combat the 'revolution' that is the Kev....

Viva la Western Kev's!

 

[Richard Cranium]

It would not add a great new supporter base, no, but it would gurantee additional revenue from TV (Tasmanian people would actually watch there home team!),

Bit of contradiction there. Why would the networks pay more for one extra game in such a small market, when they already have it covered? Do the TV networks even care about ratings in Hobart/Tas at all?

 

[Ice-Wolf]

Bit of contradiction there. Why would the networks pay more for one extra game in such a small market, when they already have it covered? Do the TV networks even care about ratings in Hobart/Tas at all?

Nope.

 

[InformedOpinion]

Rugby league is on its knees and we need to put the sword in to the low-lifes.

The NSW government never "withdrew" money as it was never promised or guaranteed.

Helllooooo... we have a perfectly good stadium to play at - ANZ Stadium!! Hardly a bad option, and will just manage to cater for the 80,000 Sydney derby crowd in R1 2012.

Soccer is the real threat we must confront NOW and have a presence in Western Sydney ASAP.

It is not Vietnam it is the WW1/2 Western Front - it will be a long hard battle but we cannot afford to run and hide when Australia's biggest population/region is at stake.

10 years ago there was virtually no AFL in western sydney. Now we have 30,000 Auskickers introducing their parents to the game. It is generational but we must fight and as John Kennedy said - don't think, DO!

 

[Richo83]

Firstly, can we get the analogy right?

The AFL are The US. An incursion into another state to try and win a population over ideologically. A long drawn out campaign which was largely unnecessary, wasteful in efforts (monetary and men), overstretching forces to breaking point, relying on inferior people to get the job done and ultimately a huge failure. Here its the sport, not the ideals.

So is the AFL the US? Sure seems so. The AFL is trying to make Sydney AFL. It will be a long drawn out campaign which is largely unnecessary. It will be wasteful in terms of money and efforts, it will overstretch the AFL especially in tough economic times, and it will rely on people like Anderson to sell it, basically useless gits. Oh and it will be a failure.

People may argue it's rugby spin. One can't deny that West Sydney has major problems. Its a miracle Sydney survives and it mainly survives by combining a state's support into one team. Making WS would just divide the support. At least Brisbane and the Gold Coast are two different areas and cities, are W Sydney and Sydney two different cities? No, their name signifies they are are parts of one city. Many people may also argue that rugby is covering up for its failures. Maybe, but if rugby, which is a dominant sport in NSW, has trouble running multiple clubs in Sydney, then I can't see why the AFL wont have the same problem.

Sydney and Canberra is where sports teams go to die. Just ask the Sydney Kings and the Balmain Tigers. I'd hate to see a foray into WS which wont succeed go ahead as a result of the AFL's pig-headishness. If WS goes ahead, vlad and his puppet better hope it succeeds otherwise it will come on them. The last thing the AFL needs is an unsuccessful failing side. It makes a farce of the competition and keeps attendances low. Just ask the Melbourne Demons. Sydney is not an endless pool of money and soccer has more attachment to WS than footy does. Since Sydneysiders are known for the lack of commitment to support their clubs numerically and financially, its time to realise the WS idea sucks balls.

And I applaud the op. Vlad's dictatorship is showing cracks. Firstly jeff and now this.

 

[RUNVS]

People may argue it's rugby spin. One can't deny that West Sydney has major problems. Its a miracle Sydney survives and it mainly survives by combining a state's support into one team. Making WS would just divide the support. At least Brisbane and the Gold Coast are two different areas and cities, are W Sydney and Sydney two different cities? No, their name signifies they are are parts of one city.

Actually we can deny that. Western Sydney may have the name "Sydney" in it but it may aswell be a completely different city.