- Video
-
Club Roar
Captured a great grassroots sporting moment? We want to see it!Content Collections
The Roar Community
- Join
- Login
The current zeitgeist of equalisation through the AFL is a good and noble thing. Many seem to disagree.
But punish the rich for being rich? It’s not going to help.
I’ve seen comments along the lines of “Why don’t we just have a rotation of the Premiership, then?” and “If they can’t perform they should fold or be relegated”.
I understand their view points and it is an opinion born of the Darwinian theory of only the strongest survive. This isn’t the way the AFL should be reacting, though.
Andrew Demetriou has been chastised in some papers for spending the AFL money on ‘fact finding’ missions through America and Europe.
To be honest there’s no better place to learn about equalisation. The NFL has a system that is working really well.
Granted, it’s based around private ownership, but even these millionaire bosses aren’t baulking at the fact that all clubs need to be able to compete in order to grow the sport as a spectacle. They put their hands in their pockets each year for those struggling sides.
Look at the Seahawks. A few years ago they were mocked in the streets of Seattle and called an embarrassment (I know this from a friend living in Seattle).
Then as the wheel turned they started climbing. Getting to a couple of wild card places for the play-offs.
Then before you know it they’re at the big dance and now have one of the highest winning margins NFL Super Bowl history. The New York Giants took it out a couple of seasons ago and now they’re hovering mid table. That’s what equalisation is about.
The English Premier League has recently introduced the Financial Fair Play rule which is there to deter the billionaire owners stepping in and ‘buying’ titles.
There are restrictions on debt and spending so the top clubs can’t strengthen their sides while decimating the lower clubs who can’t compete with the offers. While it’s not perfect, it’s a step in the right direction.
Clubs like Southampton and Hull are now sitting pretty comfortably in the mid section of the Premier League table, while former powerhouse Newcastle are gradually clawing their way back without the backing of a wealthy owner using the league as a hobby.
Manchester United and Tottenham are slipping away. Who doesn’t like seeing the title race get altered after such a long time of passing the success around the top 4?
The AFL has spotted this widening gap before it’s too late.
While the league isn’t influenced by private ownership, it’s still at the mercy of money. As much as the rest of the game’s supporters love to hate Eddie McGuire (and his team), Collingwood was the club that was sitting up at night with the lamp on in a lone room at Victoria Park trying to work out how to pay all the bills that were ‘past-due’ before he turned up.
McGuire applied his very savvy business knowledge and contacts to turn that around incredibly quickly, got his team the best coach and ended up in two successive grand finals. Any way you cut it – he made that club and has every right to defend it until his face turns purple… again.
Do we now punish them for reaping the success they have sewn?
They survived a huge failure in investment with their hotels that would have put many clubs on the back foot, but the Magpies took it in their stride. They now, more or less, own the Olympic Park precinct, which would be a huge drawcard for any player looking to move clubs.
Hawthorn’s Ian Dicker took the momentum of the failed merger with Melbourne (who were meant to be the money team of that marriage) and built them into a team that not only has their own suburb in the south-east of Melbourne but until recently had free run of the Apple Isle and lined the brown and gold pockets with millions in the process.
Clubs like Melbourne, North Melbourne, the Western Bulldogs and St Kilda are currently the minnows. Claiming a $1 million loss is a win in the scheme of things.
They preach viability and growth but will never really challenge the cash of the big clubs. But as Peter Jackson said regarding ultimate success, “I still don’t believe that the amount you spend [is the determining factor] – and I know there’s some suggestions at the moment there is – but it goes deeper than that.”
No doubt it helps, though! But he is right.
Port Adelaide swung it around with a good coach and an enviable team ethos. North Melbourne dominated for years on just an idea of money. Melbourne turned up to a grand final after battling possums for use of their gym.
The Dogs were knocking pretty hard on the door, even though they were paying for the privilege of playing in front of 15,000 fans at the Docklands.
I don’t think that taking money of the rich to hand out to the poor will solve much.
There’s a mentality with supporters of the rich clubs that these financial minions are happy to roll up to AFL House with the bowl in hand and expect their extra helping of gruel then happily racing back to the table to devour it.
The reality is no club wants to be getting a bigger portion of the pie, but it’s a necessity. You can guarantee that if the Demons or the Roos were in the top 4, pulling the crowds and getting their share of Friday night slots, there wouldn’t be a peep about the reduction of funds allocated to them.
On the other side of the coin if it all went pear-shaped for the Hawks or the Cats and they ended up floundering at the bottom with empty coffers (unlikely, but let’s suspend disbelief here) it would be their turn to get that extra 10-15 percent of the AFL funding.
No one can have a problem with that.
I think the cap, if it needs to be placed anywhere, is on intellectual resources. Seeing the Collingwood coaches box split screened with the Roos reminds me of before and after weight-loss photos – kind of similar but shockingly thinner.
Hiring coaches to serve as ‘Directors of Football’ or poaching another talent scout then given the title of ‘Talent Developer’, in my opinion, is where the problem really lies.
Rodney Eade can still coach or at least be a worthy assistant. If Collingwood don’t want him officially directing players, then they can’t invent a position to keep him away from other clubs offering him that gig.
I know he chose to stay, but it’s also because he had a role to move in to.
This happens across all the departments. Hiring two of the best sports scientists with alternate titles. Clutching on to former players by defining part-time coaches as separate entity.
I think that if a club wants to get hold of someone like Brendan McCartney when his time comes to an end, and their coaching team is full, they should go to the AFL advising that a new position is required and this is the candidate they want.
The AFL can then ratify if that position is an actual necessity and approve or decline.
As with many things, it’s not perfect. But if the AFL wants to have a more of a hand in the clubs to generate this level playing field, this could be a good place to start.
Who’s in your ultimate team? Pick the best team and compete with other fans for daily prizes on Draftstars. For the best odds on the game try out Aussie bookmaker PlayUp. Think. Is this a bet you really want to place? Set a deposit limit.