and I thought denial was a river in Eygpt. If you look close enough you’ll see the residue of coconut on the left bum cheek right next to the koala bear tattoo and differential grease mark.

Redb

~~~~~~~~~
KB

Mid
might be a bit closer than driving to the SFS.

We already know where the 11th and 12th teams are going.

The FFA have not really made specific noises about the timing for going to 14 teams.

One last comment I have come across some interesting news .. Since the defection of Wayne Bennett to the Saints riding off into the sunset on the original Bronco horse … Bronco headquarters have been advertising for replacements; for a new horse and an assistant coach… some of the applicants have been breathtaking..

Mr Edd the new Bronko’s horse and Oikee your cousin Denis, the new assistant coach … Exciting times ahead at Suncorp…

http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=Uu9QLZvhLyI&NR=1

btw I am pleased to hear you have decided to return to the ZOO..

~~~~~~~~~
KB

Redb

Let me think on that one that’s 6 games each ……… The off the top problem I see is the gong become a team for southern Sydney both the beach & Western Suburbs much like northern Sydney providers the Mariners with some fans…. but will give it some more tho …….. any idea on how long it takes to go from Canberra to the Gong ??

Oikee, I must say if you have not done so already, when you said you are going to stork me, I have to pin you down on, which form are you likely take, so I can greet you accordingly…

Oikee Storker..
http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=pMLJo-fb9hI

Oikee Bronco Storker..
http://au.youtube.com/user/storker?ob=1

A look a like Haans, the Viking Salior “Stalker”…..
http://jessmo.files.wordpress.com/2007/01/old-lady.jpg

Regla Australiana/Balón Juego

Lads what a marvelous idea!! A Grooky Boutique Store for the laddies at Princess Park .. I am not sure where Oilkee fits in here. Is he the Storker in the Zoo? or is it the Bronco Stalker on the Whitsunday Marina with Haans the Viking Sailor on holidays with Redb … ?

Oikee, there are only two Gold World Cups that I know of, the FIFA world cup and the Rugby Union World Cup, all others are Aluminium painted Gold… However one must not forget the Clayton’s World Clay Potty…

~~~~~~~~~
KB

Dunno, maybe we should bring back Jeff as Premier and persuade Justin Madden to ditch Labour and the Planning Ministry and get back into Sport. LOL

Redb

and that’s the thing – - you can’t work too much in isolation when the govt starts intervening in a highly competitive ‘economy’ (that of ‘football’).
Would a liberal govt have done it????

The intro of the draft pretty much ended zones for the VFL clubs, its noticeable in south-western Victoria from Portland to Warrnambool the Essendon influence from past years. That has waned in recent years.

Good to see the Vic clubs getting together to sort out this stadium rubbish. I have no problem with the Vic govt funding of the rectangular stadium, but disagree with soccer or rugby league getting a better deal at lower crowd levels, – that’s rubbish.

Redb

btw – Pip

that’s why the AFL is after the State Govt to make some appropriate noises in favour (even just in principle) of a ’boutique’ AFL stadium. Get that, and the AFL has an argument to TD.

The “Ballarat Road Roos” – -

how about play out of Skinner reserve out at Sunshine????

Certainly though, I’ve been a fan of Princes Park (whatever it’s called), but, Carlton have demolished the old wooden stand and are doing whatever it is they’re doing out there.

But, like you, I can’t understand why that was never earmarked as a boutique stadium.

It’s brilliant for about 20,000 out there, I’d attend NOrth home games and still get a car park after the game had started!!!

I’ve always known about this issue, but I didn’t understand the full extent of the problem till I read an article in The Age today. Incredibly, I find that my team, ol’ struggling WB, supposedly on life support, lose $5 mill in comparison to Geelong because of its stadium deal. WB has more members than Geelong, yet Geelong is pulling in an extra $5 mill because they control their shitty little ground.

Which makes me wonder – MC – time for NM and WB to band together and approach whoever looks after Princes Park.

Get 25,000 in that ground every fortnight, and you’re on par with Geelong. $5 mill per annum is basically the difference between going broke and thriving!

How quickly would the TD management change their tune if that threat hung over their head? Is it an option? That’s where the bullies were playing before they moved to the Dome in 2000.

Just why it is so critical when talking of the Bullies and North,

the main issue is that North can host 28K and lose…that’s right…..lose money,……………they hosted the Swans, got 28K and lost $1000. Geelong down at Skilled host 24K and make $600K. That gives a clear idea of the chasm that can exist. And why Geelong is one of the best placed teams in the competition having such a distinct home ground advantage in more ways than one, and NOT being a 2-3 hour plane flight from Melb and over half of the competition.

The fact that TD were willing to give MVFC a fixed rate deal that allows MVFC to attract low 20K’s and not be going broke is example enough…………that………….just as any regular person would exercise the right to seek a cheaper home loan, or a better phone plan……..likewise, the AFL needs to assist it clubs to get a better deal. Unfortunately there’s not many ‘players’ in the stadium market. And, the newest one is fully built by the state government and is taking business away from a privately built and owned stadium.

WHo in their right mind would ever again contemplate a private stadium investment in Melbourne???? You wouldn’t. The State Govt will provide a tax payer funded non profit geared stadium as your competition!!?!?!

And yet, no state govt is willing to build a rail link to the airport competition to citilink.

The irony though is, that EAstlink (the newest tollway) is losing over $200K daily. Perhaps, when they go broke and the road is still there…………that the users might benefit……….(the investors won’t). Perhaps, the same might happen at Docklands. The sooner the operators go broke the sooner the AFL might get their hands on it??

Thanks for the back ground information

Have you tho you may be a curse as is being discussed in another thread and may the curse of the Pip could one day become more famous than the curse of ……

THE CURSE OF NORM SMITH (from SJ thread today)

A curse on Melbourne Demons AFL club is used to explain why they have failed to win a premiership since it sacked Norm in the middle of the 1965 season.

Smith had coached fourteen years and won six premierships, including the previous season, but his relationship with the club grew strained and the multiple premierships winning coach was sacked.

He attacked the club in the media following his dismissal, and claimed they would never win another premiership, which has remained true to this day.

The other interesting aspect about the bullies and NM is that they were part of the three expansion clubs in 1925 (along with Hawthorn). For the decades that followed, they had the lowest support and regularly swapped around the bottom three spots, so there are sound historic reasons why, say, NM and WB do not have massive followings (although I should hasten to add that their membership numbers are certainly much higher than you see in the other codes).

Hawthorn won 9 premierships between 1971 and this season, and as a consequence, have grown a decent following (not to mention that thay hve much of the Eastern suburbs sewn up).

Even with 4 premierships in 24 years, NM has struggled to grow its supporter base in a significant degree, and that is because of the historic reasons, as well as coming from a central part of Melbourne replete with successful clubs (Collingwood, Carlton and Essendon).

Redb mentioned that the bullies have most of the Western suburbs to themselves (little overlap from Essendon and Geelong), but once again, one premiership in 84 seasons in the VFL/AFL says it all.

Here are some sombering facts and figures:
1. After going 70 years without a premiership, South Melbourne was packed off to Sydney.
2. After going 53 years without a premiership, Fitzroy was forcibly merged with Brisbane.
3. WB has now gone 54 years without a premiership – the most of any modern day club – next is Melbourne going 44 years without one, but at least they have made the grand final twice in last 20 years, WB hasn’t even been there in last 47 years – that’s my whole life!! (I am conscious that I could be the cause, and WB will only make a grand final after I breathe my last breath)

Remember, back in the mid ’90s, the Kennett era. Victoria had been broke. Kennett was attempting big Melbourne City projects. Docklands redevelopment was highly desired. The centrepiece to give the ‘zone’ or ‘precinct’ a profile and some allure was to be a ‘waterside’ stadium. Initially, it was to be a rectangle stadium. It couldn’t get off the ground – - the govt had no money and private backers wouldn’t go near it.
The only way to secure the project was to get the AFL on board. The AFL was given a carrot of ulitimate stadium full ownership. They sold Waverley, invested in Docklands ($30mill or so). The Docklands stadium goes ahead as does the entire precinct in it’s wake. The Govt is done a huge favour by the AFL, the AFL get’s to be in the prime location and a stadium with a roof – - – but, the flipside is it’s privately owned and operated with the AFL as major tennant.
It’s not the AFL’s fault that the designers didn’t appropriately factor in grass growth/health, and that the theoretical ‘mobile’ stands were more trouble than they’re worth!!
At any rate – - Telstra Dome, is privately owned. It’s the stadium the govt desired where they desired.
The AFL, had been left on a limb with Waverley by previous state govts not fulfilling commitments to extend a public transport connection to the ground.
Waverley became a practicle ‘white elephant’ as a result.
The AFL, via it’s success, had out grown the many suburban venues, upgrade of which would be unviable, and many got closed in the wake of stadium catastrophes in England (i.e. as health and fire hazards).
So, 9 Melb teams are forced to squeeze into 2 venues.
AFL no longer own either (at this point in time).
State Govt has benefitted hugely, and done stuff all in return.
The AFL owes it to the Docklands tennant clubs to support them in negotiations – - because, back when they were negotiating in the first place, the AFL was pre-occuppied with it’s own dealings with the MCC over finals – - that the AFL effectively forced clubs into Docklands and left them to sink or swim on their own. (poorly managed in the extreme).
The ‘demand’ for the venue only exists because there are 10 Vic clubs using it during winter. Soccer is now a summer sport and Storm will never be at Docklands, nor, a potential super 14/16 club – - so, the AFL needs to force some re-negotiations now from a position of strength – - and that would be added to greatly should the State Govt agree in principle to the concept of a new boutique AFL stadium (even if it were never actually intended to be built!!).

so, for the State Govt to go and lavish $270m plus the promise of more plus the on going savings onto the square ground mob – - – it’s a sick joke in this city.

The government-appointed MCG Trust vests administration of the Melbourne Cricket Ground in the Melbourne Cricket Club.

The eight-person Trust meets bi-monthly to discuss general policy on ground management and development. All trustees are State Government nominees.

The State Govt presumably has a little leverage on this front.

The Melbourne Cricket Club (MCC) is ground manager on behalf of the Victorian Government appointed MCG Trust.

So – somewhere down the line, the State Govt is a ’stakeholder’ in the relationships at play.

Now – one key factor here is that the state govt made a minimal contribution to the MCG redevelopment – - now, might be a good time for the state govt to relieve the MCC of some of it’s debt and thus reduce the burden upon the MCC, it’s members and it’s major tennant (the AFL). (alas, that isn’t deemed as sexy as ‘creating jobs’ via an infrastructure project – - – and that’s where the AFL has to ensure that they are prioritsed appropriately for a boutique venue – - – because, unless something amazing happens in the soccer world or rugby world, the next squared stadium should have to pay for itself to expand to 40K).

the definable catchments -

interesting though, with a view to the zonal history, NOrth Melbourne was recruiting from up around Jacana, Broadie, Hadfield, Oak Park etc. And up buth up around Wang and Shep. Richmond had Mt.Waverley and Mildura region.

I know the TAC cup was partly because VFL/AFL clubs couldn’t be relied upon to ’service’ their zones as even handed as the HQ administration would desire (esp clubs like Carlton that spent their time and money on buying ready made talent from interstate or other clubs rather than developing internally within their zones – - – Carlton were a sporting parasite in that respect, – - a cashed up parasite).

And since then, we’ve had community camps during pre-season etc. BUt, perhaps, clubs, and their community camps need to revert back to a pseudo ‘zonal’ arrangement, such that proper community partnerships/relationships can be nurtured. The example is that CCM in the HAL offers a community partnership that is permanent. AFL clubs other than Geelong don’t really have that through Victoria.

I’d like to see AFL Victoria ‘community zones’. It might simply be that clubs do 75% of their ‘community’ activity within said zone. I know certain clubs still try to nurture certain areas, esp St.Kilda down through Frankston, but gee, over the years, Hawthron was pretty identifiable with that area (Chelsea, Frankston etc).

Thanks for your post … but you have told me why the AFL wants the Vic gov to step in …….. my question is does the Vic gov own the grounds or control the trusts …… how can the Viv gov and moreover why should they help its not like the AFL was or is poorly managed either now or in the past or signed these deals without knowing what they where signing… maybe I am missing the point and TBH have almost no knowledge of the background behind the original deals ….. I am just confused over who owns the grounds … why the deals where signed in the first place …. and why the Vic gov should do something about it especially if the answer is someone else did a better deal….

the main thing is the Vic govt can assist the MCG trust in recognising that their major cash cow/major tennant – - the AFL – - ought be looked after a little better – - that the MCC and MCG trust must realise that without a successful AFL (including a good number of Melb based clubs – - as, any reduction will be felt hard by the major venues, perhaps 1 and sometimes 2 less games per week in Melbourne). It is therefore in their commercial interest to not screw over the AFL. At times, there has seemed a localised tall poppy issue, plus a ‘olympic’ sports style elitism that attempts to hijack a venue like the MCG.

Re Telstra Dome – - that’ll be interesting. The main thing is to make the public better aware that the combined membership of probably only about 25,000 of MVFC and Storm at present, (but I’ll use 30K) is being gifted about $9000 per person – - up front – - with their new venue. Plus the residuals via lack of private ownership stadium deals and potential upgrade of venue to a 40K capacity further down the track.

WHen this is compared to dribs and drabs of public/private partnership grants for specific projects (often related to drought proofing of shared facilities, or opening up training grounds for greater community access etc) – - comparing even a combined $10 or $20million every couple of years – - across 350,000 Victorian based AFL members, well, that equates out at about $30-60 per head………………a fair way off $9000 per head (and growing).

However – - the AFL previously manipulated the fixture (at the expense of crowds) for a couple of years to force the hand of the MCC over the finals ‘arrangement’. Now, the AFL has to work the MCC/MCG trust hopefully via the Govt, get them ‘on side’, whilst potentially trying to ‘force’ the hand of Telstra Dome to renegotiate better deals. If the AFL CAN get the Govt and MCG trust on side, then, the position of the AFL to operate in this space is improved.

And the reality for Telstra Dome – - they will lose MVFC, they don’t have Storm, they will be less likely to see any rectangular action – - as, Socceroos would remain at the MCG. Docklands desperately needs good relations with the AFL.

The ultimate bargaining chip for the AFL is to have the state government make positive noises about a potential future ’boutique’ 25-30K AFL stadium in Melbourne – - – this most certainly CAN be justified. Especially should the AFL be an 18 team competition (whether that is the AFL LONG term plan or not – - if it WILL be in the short term, then, use it to bargain) – - which might see an extra game in Melbourne on most weekends.

So – - there’s a fair bit that can be achieved for the AFL to present a united and organised lobby to the state government, and to assemble the forces of public opinion as well.

Especially if state & fed govts try to work out some ‘economic’ stimulus infrastructure projects – - and the argument the AFL can always mount is that partically all monies invested in the AFL actually recycle through the Australian economy. (okay, apart from a couple of $100K over in South Africa). At a time when the global economy is rather on the nose – - a relatively insulated and self sustaining domestic economy is ever more important to nurture.

(right now, you wouldn’t want to be 1.5 years off hosting a FIFA WC – - – would you? South AFrica must be getting terribly nervous. Perhaps by 2018, the global economy will be heading in the right direction again – - – but gee, for now, you’d have to be questioning the value proposition and revisting the cost-benefit modelling around hosting a FIFA WC. Similar to how the AFL is re-visiting the GC17 proposition. The old sums and assumptions need to be re-tested. We all know that any model, and the range of potential outcomes, is only as good as the assumptions up front.)

Thanks for your post on the criteria, for club selection ……… MC interesting article you posted on the TD & AFL clubs…. but what can Vic gov do as is the request by the clubs.

still a lot of water to go under the bridge, especially regarding stadium deals:
http://www.realfooty.com.au/news/news/call-for-state-help-on-venue-deals/2008/11/26/1227491635495.html

this 30/70 ratio for AFL in Melbourne vs more like 70/30 deals interstate??