Hawks not ready to share revenue yet

By Sam Lienert,

Tagged:
 , ,

5 Have your say

    Hawthorn president Andrew Newbold says the AFL must correct some structural weaknesses that are working against an equal competition before expecting wealthy clubs like the Hawks to share revenue.

    Newbold was one of several club officials on a recent equalisation fact-finding trip to the United States, along with AFL chief executive Andrew Demetriou and his deputy Gillon McLachlan.

    It was driven by a desire to close the growing on-field divide between the AFL’s richest and poorest clubs.

    Upon return, McLachlan said revenue-sharing would be critical.

    But Newbold said while powerhouse clubs such as his own and Collingwood wanted to help, they weren’t ready to open their coffers before the AFL fixed what they regard as anomalies.

    Newbold pointed to the cost-of-living salary cap allowance granted to the Sydney clubs, priority draft picks and poorer stadium deals for some clubs as obstacles that needed to be removed first.

    “It’s not an easy topic, equalisation,” Newbold told a club function at the MCG on Friday night.

    “I was just talking to (AFL chairman) Mike Fitzpatrick and I said that really before we get to the equalisation issue, there’s a number of anomalies that we need to correct, including cost-of-living allowance, salary cap inequalities, draft priority picks, things like that.

    “I think we need to get the baseline right.

    “First cab off the rank needs to be the stadium deals that all the clubs have.

    “I think once we can sort out those structural weaknesses, the bigger clubs like Hawthorn and Collingwood can very well look to contribute to a pot of money and to revenue-sharing.”

    © AAP 2018

    Oldest | Newest | Most Recent

    The Crowd Says (5)

    • August 17th 2013 @ 11:08am
      Lroy said | August 17th 2013 @ 11:08am | ! Report

      Why should clubs that get 40,000 + per week crowds have to subsidize the Skodas or that mob on the Gold Coast?? No one wanted them in the comp to begin with…

      The AFL is a dogs breakfast… compensatory draft picks?? For what?? If clubs dont want to pay a guy what he wants.. he should be free to walk… companies dont get compensated if talent goes elsewhere.. why should footy clubs?

      If Demetriou ran the EPL he would force Manchester to hand over money to Tranmere Rovers…. can you imagine Barcelona being asked to bankroll the debts of some 4th division Catalan soccer club??

      Draft is a joke… the best talent get rewarded by being forced to go to the worst team.

      Clubs getting fined for not tanking…

      blokes taking cocaine, nothing happens.. others take legal engergy drinks.. get 2 year bans.

      .. and sides getting an extra million dollars a year in the salary cap?? How many combined flags would Brisbane and Sydney have won if they didnt have this advantage?? It wouldnt be ‘5″ thats for sure.

      AFL should be disbanded, the clubs should all appoint a rep to sit on a commission, with a rotating presidency each year.

      • August 19th 2013 @ 3:08pm
        Peter Care said | August 19th 2013 @ 3:08pm | ! Report

        Why should the wealthy clubs help GWS, Gold Coast, Port Adelaide and the Western Bulldogs? Because if we dont, we will end up with an six team competition, Hawthorn, Essendon, Carlton, Collingwood, Adelaide and the West Coast Eagles. That would be good. You get to play each other five times a season, and all teams get to play finals.

    • August 17th 2013 @ 12:02pm
      Mitcher said | August 17th 2013 @ 12:02pm | ! Report

      I suspect if revenue sharing is introduced it would have to be part of an agreement between all the clubs. Like most of the other things you mention were.

    • August 18th 2013 @ 11:26am
      Stan McCan said | August 18th 2013 @ 11:26am | ! Report

      Watch suburban footy then Lroy

      • August 19th 2013 @ 11:40am
        Geronimo said | August 19th 2013 @ 11:40am | ! Report

        The 18 AFL clubs should all share the same goal – selling AFL football. If there are 6 strong clubs and 12 weak ones then you are not going to get $1.25bn TV deal so they are selling an equalized footy competition with teams in all major parts of Australia (incoming Tasmanian bomb). If 6 teams go broke and exit then you have 6 games a week again a lesser TV deal. and corporate support..You don’t want to end up like the EPL where at best 6 teams out of 20? have a chance of winning the league or going into Europe. There is no viable competition to soccer in England whereas there is here…The NFL and MLB understand this….which is why the Super Bowl winner gets a tough draw the following year..Lroy sounds like an NRL official

    Have Your Say



    If not logged in, please enter your name and email before submitting your comment. Please review our comments policy before posting on the Roar.

    Explore:
    , ,