The Roar
The Roar

AFL
Advertisement

ANZAC Day debate shows weaker clubs must change

Roar Guru
27th April, 2011
24
1748 Reads

Dane Swan moves to tackle an Essendon playerWe’ve all heard the debate. Whether you do or don’t believe Collingwood and Essendon deserve to retain the fixture on ANZAC Day, at the heart of the discussion is the weaker clubs wanting their piece of the pie. But, without meaning to over-do the metaphor, does the pie need to be shared or can they bake their own?

Now, we know Collingwood and Essendon are traditionally two of the stronger Melbourne clubs, with solid finances and large membership bases.

So the fact that they monopolise a date which has evolved into an AFL event which rakes in piles of cash for the two clubs naturally attracts jealousy from the other clubs, particularly the less financially-stable clubs.

That seems unfair and that’s one of the strongest arguments for sharing around the fixture, or at least sharing around the revenue generated from the fixture.

But as has been mentioned plenty of times in the past week, Essendon and Collingwood came up with the idea of the ANZAC Day fixture and made it work in the mid-nineties. Does that entitle them to the fixture for eternity? I don’t know, but why suddenly all this talk of changing something which isn’t broke?

We shouldn’t forget that Monday’s ANZAC Day crowd at the MCG was 89,626. That was the 10th largest ever home-and-away crowd in VFL/AFL history. So it’s fair to say the concept is flying.

Therefore, it seems the only reason people want to change the ANZAC Day formula is because it’s unfair for other clubs.

To me that seems a little flawed. What a burden!

Advertisement

Surely, change should only happen if something isn’t working. We all know the old saying ‘if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it’.

The response to that is therefore the revenue of the fixture should be shared around by all clubs.

But a key point in all of this is the idea the ANZAC Day fixture is a guaranteed formula for a big crowd.

There’s no evidence of this prior to Essendon and Collingwood coming up with the idea in the mid-nineties. But there’s no doubt the fixture has evolved since the inaugural game in 1995.

And somewhere along the line since 1995 it’s perceived to have stopped being an Essendon-Collingwood initiative and instead an AFL event (that’s got something to do with the day it’s on).

For that very reason – given it’s now seen as an event owned by the AFL and not those two clubs – the other clubs feel entitled to their share.

Therefore, referring back to the old quotation again, it’s seen as if it is broke as it isn’t serving everyone’s interests. That’s a point of consternation for me.

Advertisement

Why change it and punish Collingwood and Essendon who have unearthed and developed a great initiative? It seems a burden on these two for the benefit of weaker clubs.

In my opinion, it’s part of a bigger issue of the growing discrepancy between the strong and weak clubs in the AFL, which is important due to the correlation of football department spending and on-field success in recent years.

Clubs want everything shared because that’s the nature of the AFL with the salary cap. But that’s unrealistic in a business world which is what the modern professional game is. Clubs should be rewarded for running their business effectively.

This begins to get to the issue of Melbourne clubs re-locating simply because the city can’t support nine AFL clubs in an increasingly competitive market, but that’s one for another day.

Moving on, a ‘solution’ may eventually be found to appease everyone on the ANZAC Day fixture, but it’s only one small part of a greater problem.

The weaker clubs will continue to be a burden on the rest with these kind of band-aid measures.

And there’s a lot they could learn from Essendon and Collingwood’s example of creating the ANZAC Day fixture. As this weekend showed, Monday night football has a market and then there’s the old Good Friday chestnut.

Advertisement

Okay, it doesn’t compare to the patriotic occasion of ANZAC Day, but it’s about showing initiative and creating an event. The weaker clubs can’t expect handouts, they need to change.

close