Hawthorn’s Travis Tuck in action during the AFL Round 03 match between the North Melbourne Kangaroos and the Hawthorn Hawks at the Telstra Dome. Slattery Images
When North Melbourne secured a deal to play two home games a year in Hobart earlier this month, its chairman James Brayshaw proclaimed: “This is a great day for the North Melbourne Football Club, the city of Hobart and the AFL.” And he was right.
It was a great day for the North Melbourne Football Club. They got their $1 million a year deal.
It was a great day for the city of Hobart. They got two games of footy annually in their own backyard.
It was a great day for the AFL. They extended even further the number of games in Tasmania.
What got glossed over, however, was that it probably wasn’t such a great day for Tasmania’s bid to get its own AFL team.
This is because North’s deal seems to have exposed – and perhaps even exacerbated – the problem of the single biggest stumbling block behind Tassie getting its own team, the divide between the North of the state (where Launceston is) and the South (where Hobart is).
As Tim Lane noted in The Age on the weekend, “The old wounds of regional division have been reopened.” It was evident last year when the idea of games in Hobart first game up and key figures in Launceston labelled it a “betrayal” of the vision of former premier Jim Bacon and were “astounded” the idea was even being considered.
Now that the deal’s done, the state will have one team representing the north (Hawthorn) and another team in the south (North Melbourne). Chances are, the AFL will fixture these teams to play each other too.
Sure, it will be great that Tasmanians will get the chance to demonstrate they are willing to support six games a year in the state (plus any pre-season games). It’s important to show the AFL this is possible.
It’s also important to silence those who doubt there are enough people to support a team. Tasmania’s population dwarfs that of Geelong and compares well with the Gold Coast and 50 per cent of Adelaide, where Port Adelaide have a market share below half.
But the problem is, those attendance figures look slightly less impressive if they are achieved by having the north and south represented by two different teams. And those population numbers likewise don’t look so good if only half of those people would actually get behind a Tassie team should it eventuate.
Tasmania is a football heartland. On paper, the numbers suggest they deserve a team.
In reality, though, the AFL have every right to question whether if the state was given a team, that the whole state would be behind it.
Eventually, someone – or something – will have to break this perception and show that unity is possible. That it is actually possible for Tasmanians to get behind one team.
But for the foreseeable future (with Hawthorn starting a five-year deal next year and North a three-year deal) the status quo will remain and, most worryingly, with two different teams dividing the state, it could actually get worse.
Sure, most parties would be happy right now. North, Hobart and the AFL would be happy. Launceston and Hawthorn would be content with the continuation of their successful partnership. The Tasmanian government would be pleased with more AFL games in the state.
A lot of people would be happy with themselves right now.
Unfortunately, though, to make everyone happy, something had to give, and that was Tasmania’s chances of landing an AFL team. The bid needed a perception-breaker, instead it got a perception-reinforcer.
Timboon Craig
Guest
ps. followed North from country Vic. since the early 70`s and been a member since 80`s... Sth. Melb. & Fitzroy die-hards unlikely to agree but happy to see my Team Colours running around anywhere that`s viable in this ultra competitive, capitalist environment / world... Such is Life (Ned & Ben :)
Timboon Craig
Guest
Redb & other saboteurs please note, what would have happened to Carlton without Dick Pratt`s cash and earlier, Geelong without Frank Costa`s !! ? whilst accurate, it`s niave and short-sighted to claim Any side drains the (already too thin) talent pool... apparently Gold Coast & West. SYD ( / the AFL !) aren`t doing that, c`mon, get real man.
Republican
Guest
North should re consider Canberra as a permanent base. The ? is - will Canberra re consider them.
Lachlan
Roar Guru
Andrew D. Said that throughout the new tv rights deal that the league with have 18 teams, but he never said 18 of the same teams. Meaning that North can move to Tassie and nothing would change. But i dont believe that they will relocate there before 2016, anyway. My guess is thats where their headed and they will be known as the Tasmanian Kangaroos, not the Hobart Kangaroos because they will split home games between Launceston (North) and Hobart (South). So that the people from the north have the same amount of live access to their states AFL team as the south. Plus Hobarts population is about 200,000 which isn't enough to support a team, whereas if they are known as Tasmanian Kangaroos they have a population similar to that of the Gold Coast, who now have their own team.
Redb
Roar Guru
North Melboune continue to blot the landscape with their stubborn refusal to accept their fate. The AFL is now locked into 5 years more of support as it has to have 18 teams for the TV deal. Its lucky for them, but nothing will change and in 2018 the landscape should be re-assessed with a relcoation to Tasmania better for the competition than North Melb dragging the chain. Tasmanian Kangaroos or Hobart Kangaroos works.
AW
Guest
We all need to wait and see what occurs at Gold Coast and GWS, in their day both Sydney and Brisbane have come close to folding. Sydney was one AFL Commission meeting away from collapse and the North/Fitzroy merger was quashed by the AFL by its need to prop-up Brisbane. North were right to reject the so-called 'deal of a lifetime" when the AFL could not provide a guaranteed clean stadium and at the time the Qld. Government were insisting on them playing home games at the Gabba. Carrara Stadium may be good, but the lack of public transport and a hopeless car parking set-up make Waverley Park and AAMI Stadium look like top class facilities. An inability to attract crowds and what I think will be total lack of support for GWS, I think in a few years time, the AFL will be looking to relocate one of these sides and then Tassie will get its own team.
Redb
Roar Guru
Agree its a step in the right direction.
TW
Guest
One more point on this topic. Sure its speculation but Caroline Wilson chief footy writer for the Age has stated several times that Andrew Demitriou boss of the Executive and Mike Fitzpatrick boss of the Commission have not stated their future employment plans after 2012 when the GWS enter the AFL. That project was their "Baby" so as to speak to get the two new clubs up and running. If they both go expect changes - Which maybe minor or major re the clubs and the Comp. The AFL will remain at 18 clubs for the forseeable future - And I totally agree the talent is thinly spread but was hoping the international market would supply more talent. However that market is still too immature in its development at this time.
Redb
Roar Guru
Excellent post. "There’s truth to Colin Carter’s comments about the mining industry, where, the bigger the pile of ore in the ground, the sloppier the management above the ground." Never a truer word spoken, which is why the AFL doesn't just wipe each club's debt overnight with the TV rights dollars bonanza. However , the concern for North is despite the adroit financial management they simply do not have a large fan base to tap into and make hay whilst the sun shines through the premiership window. "The current day legacy of North Melbourne is perhaps greater than any other club." That alone won't save it from the economic rationalists such as myself :) But seriously, North for its own future will have no choice but to relocate or die within a decade IMHO.
amazonfan
Roar Guru
Well, yes, I never disputed that they were in the VFL/AFL longer. I simply said that when discussing history, the quality of the history may be regarded just as important as the quantity. Although, if we talk only about the quantity of the history, it should be noted that North is older than both South Melbourne/Sydney & Fitzroy (who did not relocate, but was killed off.)
Redb
Roar Guru
Fitzroy & Sth Melb were foundation members of the VFL entering in 1897, both with history in the VFA dating back to the 1880s.
amazonfan
Roar Guru
Are you serious? "Not sure if just because you are squatting on the name ‘Melbourne’ it entitles you to bludge you way through being a member of the AFL." Nobody is squatting on any name or bludging. It is our name, which we have every right to use, and under Jim Stynes, we have taken amazing steps forward financially. For one thing we are debt free. "In my lifetime the Demons have been largely useless and only really nuisance value." I take it you were born after 2000? We made a grand final that year. In fact, we are one of the best performed Vic clubs between 2000-2009. This year, whilst inconsistent, we are still only % out of the top 8. "Would they be missed if they relocated them to Hobart?" Yes, absolutely. "By about as many people who missed Fitzroy and South go. They never really had much of a supporter base. They benefitted by being based at the MCG and having the MCC back them up." I can't speak for Sydney, however Melbourne's wider support base is larger that of Fitzroy; and many Fitzroy fans still haven't gotten over their club dying in 1996. "They need to pull their socks up and their supporters to ease back on those ski trips." What a cliched generalization.
Redb
Roar Guru
If Melbourne had the same success as North Melbourne they would be a top 5-6 club in Melbourne. The Demons have a much bigger latent fan base.
ManInBlack
Guest
The case for North Melbourne : A club dating back to 1869, but not one of those splitters that walked out on the VFA to form the break away VFL along with those Johnny come lately Collingwood people. North Melbourne, whilst not a financial powerhouse, has provided invaluable innovation, and by way of that, an invaluable training base for future VFL/AFL administrators. There's truth to Colin Carter's comments about the mining industry, where, the bigger the pile of ore in the ground, the sloppier the management above the ground. Some of the North Melbourne 'graduates' include Dr Allen Aylett (no small role in the evolution of the national league). Ben Buckley, oh, okay, he jumped ship to the FFA. Andrew Demetriou. Other names worth a google if not coming straight to mind include Albert Mantello, Barry Cheatley, Robbie Kerr, Dale Holmes. All North people. North, via Allen Aylett, pioneered the North Melbourne Grand Final breakfast - somewhat of an institution on Grand Final day to this day, and if immitation is the best form of flattery - there are immitators, including Eddie down at Channel 9. Innovation was crucial in how North worked the 10 year rule and changed the face of footy. Innovation drove North to seriously develop local talent via the Under 19s in the 1980s when a club like Carlton was mostly happy to buy in the interstaters. Products of Norths U19s of that era include Carey, McKernan, Martyn, Schwass, Liberatore, German, T.McGrath etc. Innovation saw North pioneer Friday night footy at the 'G when most clubs felt it just too cold, too dewy and too much like Tuesday night footy at VFL park. The current day legacy of North Melbourne is perhaps greater than any other club. It should also be pointed out that North did not go seeking the Hobart option, North has been seeking the Ballarat option. The Hobart option has been 'delivered' to a degree. To suggest that 2 games a year in Hobart is a precursor to North relocating, as some on here are doing, is rather mischievious after North just a few years back said no to the Gold Coast. The Arden St redevelopment is running, the club is doing okay, and the only real impediment for now is the ordinary arrangements at Etihad whereby North can lose money on a crowd of 25,000 while down the road at Geelong they can make $600,000 on a crowd of 24,000. What's the difference? Well, Govt invested in Kardinia park, but, hasn't invested in Docklands. The AFL should seriously consider an early buy out of the venue - perhaps lobby the state govt to match the $267 million they put into AAMI park and buy out Etihad early for the AFL? (I know, it won't happen).
amazonfan
Roar Guru
"Are they ever in a postive revenue contribution to the AFL competition?" Why does a club only need to add financially in order to be a valued member of the competition? "Fitzroy & South Melb had far more history than North Melbourne who entered the VFL in 1925." That's debatable. A club's history may be determined not just through how long it has been around, but through the quality of the history. North has won four flags ad has produced some of the greatest players of all time. They also have had several innovations, such as Friday night footy.
The Word
Guest
Well, a bit far to drive to a relocated match in Melbourne from Tassie. Geelong folks are only 50 minutes away. Brisbane Lions played finals to less than 30k, less than 20k if memory serves in the 1990s. But agree with the sentiment. The smart thing for Geelong city council would be to stipulate that if they provide any stadium improvements mean you gotta play all games in Geelong, including finals. They should just put in loads of standing room at the northern end to get capacity up to 45k, like it used to be. Why should Geelong's ratepayers prop up the Melbourne Cricket Club and the various private equity funds that own Etihad Stadium? Geelong folks are being had!
The Cattery
Roar Guru
Squatting on the name - just like the Collins St farmers they all are!
The Word
Guest
It annoys me how they got the government to bankroll the Arden St redevelopment when they are just going to bail sooner or later. I expect a serious financial blow out to become public soon. They are playing the 'Greece' tactic of kicking the can down the road for as long as possible, delaying the tough decisions because the AFL is bailing them out.
The Word
Guest
Not sure if just because you are squatting on the name 'Melbourne' it entitles you to bludge you way through being a member of the AFL. In my lifetime the Demons have been largely useless and only really nuisance value. Would they be missed if they relocated them to Hobart? By about as many people who missed Fitzroy and South go. They never really had much of a supporter base. They benefitted by being based at the MCG and having the MCC back them up. They need to pull their socks up and their supporters to ease back on those ski trips.
woodsman
Guest
Keep the Roos (playing half their home games in Ballarat), keep all the current teams. Over the next fifty to sixty years expand to a 24 team competition where each team plays each other once and one extra 'rival round' (derbies). Tasmania, Canberra, WA 3, FNQ, NSW 3 (central coast), NT. If you want an optimistic plan (as the AFL has successfully pursued until now) keep it simple and keep pushing. Makes a final 8 system a true reward for excellence (top-third), keeps all teams- no loss of fans or Fitzroy-esq tragedies. All areas of Australia represented in an undeniably national competition across the continent.