By Michael C -
August 1st 2010 @ 12:19am
Get a Roar profile
Loading ...Related coverage
Ballarat or Hobart for North Melbourne?
Liam Anthony of North Melbourne is tackled by Andrew Embley of the Eagles during the AFL Round 03 match between the North Melbourne Kangaroos v West Coast Eagles at Etihad Stadium, Melbourne.
North Melbourne once upon a time sold three games a year to Canberra, Sydney and then the Gold Coast. They have also had feeder team arrangements variously with Port Melbourne, Tassie and a stand alone Murray Kangaroos.
Presently, North Melbourne plays 11 home games a year in Melbourne. However, the AFL in their wisdom has scheduled six of those versus ‘interstate’ sides which greatly reduces the financial viability of North at Etihad stadium.
This raises a question around further ‘selling’ of games even if just for a modest profit as being preferred to a loss.
In the last couple of days there’s been movement on two fronts. Firstly, reports of a deal to upgrade facilities in Ballarat where North Melbourne currently partners North Ballarat as one of two VFL feeder teams. The second venue has now been reported to be a done deal for Hobart for four games a year beginning in 2012.
Sadly, as a North Melbourne supporter and member for over 20 years, I do wonder that the Hobart deal is not a prostitution of the club.
After all, the Tassie VFL partnership is now but a memory, whereas Ballarat is the current and very successful partnership; combined with the Werribee affiliation.
My preference would be to sink long term roots – and the Ballarat partnership is something I’d like to see take more AFL action to regional Victoria. I’d love to be able to trek a couple of times a year to Ballarat to watch the Rooboys take on a GWS or Freo.
Four games in Hobart appears too many, and this story is yet to be confirmed.
It remains to be seen what eventuates.
Discover the best in new art and culture at our sister site, Lost At E Minor
Please support The Roar columnist Troy Chaplin's charity initiative: Baby Archie's Bear Giving Program. Please support generously.
(11)
Footy Legend said | August 1st 2010 @ 7:40am | Report comment
I have to agree, Ballarat should be where North sells their games to.
Timmuh said | August 1st 2010 @ 9:43am | Report comment
Ideally nowhere. All North, and other clubs, need is a fair fixture rather than getting all the interstate teams in dead timeslots (though thankfully only one of the dreaded Sunday twilight) and a fair crack at FTA TV. There was a report (by Ernst&Young I think) about five years ago that clubs such as North were robbed $4m a year by fixturing and television (and get about $2m back through additional AFL funding) while Collingwood are gifted $7m a year.
If getting an equitable fixture doesn’t happen, it has to be Ballarat. The media focus on possible relocations would kill North, by driving away sponsors who are likely to doubt where the cub would be based. With both my Tasmanian and my North hats on, Hobart would be a very bad move for both. Hobart would be better off with the Richmond, and North will die if they go to Hobart.
The only problems with Ballarat are the lack of an airport, but its not that much more travelling time from Tullamarine than where clubs stay (or at least have stayed) on St Kilda Rd, and that there is no venue at this point. The Vic government is talking about bringing it up to scratch, and Bellerive needs major work to be AFL-ready. (The hill is virtually unusable if it rains for a couple of day in the lead up, dropping an already low capacity by a few thousand.)
Michael C said | August 2nd 2010 @ 9:40am | Report comment
alas Timmuh, take it up with Eddie McGuire and he’s still somehow able to argue that Collingwood are hard done by.
The AFL and big clubs have to be careful about not getting too greedy – - and not to budget on best case rather than farer case scenarios.
re Ballarat –
now, given the growth of Ballarat and Bendigo and the state govt encouragement – - a decent regional airport with links would be a good thing and if holding AFL matches there and perhaps even FIFA WC training venues or what have you – - if that all helps a bit of ‘development’ and ‘progress’ (gawd, I sound like a Gold Coast local politician circa 1979!!!)……ah well, wait and see, although, mindful that Ballarat is about the only place colder than Canberra!! Personally, I’d love the chance to drive the kids to a game or two in Ballarat each year, make a weekend of it, do Sovereign Hill and duck over to Hepburn.
Dan said | August 2nd 2010 @ 12:15pm | Report comment
There is no way that Ballarrat is colder than Canberra!!
HK47 said | August 1st 2010 @ 12:27pm | Report comment
You beat me to the punch MC, Was in the final stages of an article similar to this.
Hobart is better short term. Team aspirations from Tasmania mean a maximum of 8 years (begin playing games in 2012, Tassie team in 2020) and North would once again be taking money, with no real connection to the locals.
However, Ballarat looms as a likely “Home away from home”. A (very) long term deal to play 3 games a year there (Gws/GC/Freo/Port), would create another fanbase, adding to the combined fanbase from the North ballarat VFL side. Imagine if North could create the same atmosphere as Geelong has at Skilled.
If North could get say 3000-5000 memberships from Ballarat, in say a 15,000 capacity stadium, along with 7000-9000 Melbourne-based Members then 3000 tickets to the general public/opposition supporters, a wonderful long-term partnership could occur.
Redb said | August 2nd 2010 @ 7:38am | Report comment
Ballarat for mine. Even worth looking at Bendigo as well, build a country Vic fan base for North.
Tigers would do better in Hobart given there will be no government support due to the Hawks deal and they dont carry the swagman image of North.
Michael C said | August 2nd 2010 @ 9:53am | Report comment
correct re Bendigo, alas, Essendon are too big to take games there one would think. And, really, perhaps it should’ve been structured logically that the Doggies associate with Ballarat and North Melbourne with Bendigo.
At any rate – - the AFL is too big and most the Victorian regionals are too small for an NRL style permanent regional presence as per Wollongong, Newcastle and Townsville.
The AFL is seemingly okay playing before about 10,000 or so in Canberra and Darwin, so, should also be fine to do the same in Albury, Bendigo, Ballarat, Traralgon/Morwell and perhaps Wagga. That’d be a way to disperse games vs GWS and GCFC and Freo and Port against sides like North and the Doggies. It’d also help ‘protect’ AFL regional heartlands. Although, I’m not running a ‘fear’ campaign on the back, for example of Melb Hearts playing a practice match in Morwell, as, after all, Morwell used to host the Morwell/Gippsland Falcons in the NSL and there used to be the Gippsland Lakers in the basketball. It’d just be nice to see the game taken to the people a tad more.
(again, sounds a bit like the pro-FIFA WC argument, although, this is far from suggesting Carl, Ess, Rich or Coll playing anywhere outside of a min 55,000 venue!!).
Redb said | August 2nd 2010 @ 10:52am | Report comment
Vic country venues need to be 15,000 minimum capacity for AFL games.
JamesP said | August 2nd 2010 @ 5:48pm | Report comment
Here’s one from left field – how about Albury-Wodonga? The combined community make up about 100k so similar population base to Ballarat. Rich football history on the Riverina Border e.g. Brett Kirk, and Ovens & Murray league is one of the strongest country leagues in the country. Regional airport is also available.
I do know that GWS are tryign to make Southern New South Wales their own – but they are looking to play games in Canberra. North has been there and done that. What about A-W?
Footy Legend said | August 2nd 2010 @ 6:24pm | Report comment
Good suggestion, Albury-Wodonga would be a fantastic place for a home away from home. Just give them a 10-20k stadium and it would probably sell out for every match held there.
ren said | August 2nd 2010 @ 6:58pm | Report comment
I dont think you can blame who your team is fixtured to play against as a reason for poor crowds. surely the supporters of the home team should turn up to support their team not watch the visitors. I really believe that this is a pathetic mindset to have and goes along way to showing why the vic clubs and PA for the most part need handouts and this new equalisation policy being proposed (?).
My club Fremantle has won bugger all in 15 yrs, we were in debt up to our necks and then some, but instead of whining about crap fixturing, tv exposure etc we did something, we rebuilt the club up from the bottom. Finally we are beginning to see some successes on the field and the AFL announces that we are now a rich club that needs to be taxed to prop upo 100 year old clubs that make the same mistakes over and over. the thing is its never ‘their’ fault so they get helped back up only to bugger it up again. sorry for the rant and the slight irrelevancy to the topic, but i have had enough of eastern state suppporters blaming everyone and everything bar their own club for all that is wrong.
back on the main issue. IF the vic clubs want to sell their home games, that is fine but it is ridicuolus to expect fremantle or wc to be the away sides. we are surely the most travelled teams in domestic sport already.