Grand final at the MCG til 2057 shows limits of AFL's power

By Paul D / Roar Guru

On the morning of April 13 2018, Victorian premier Daniel Andrews confirmed on ABC Radio Melbourne what had already been revealed via a carefully targeted leak to The Footy Show the previous evening – the AFL grand final was extending its stay in Victoria for a further 20 years, to 2057.

In addition to this rather advanced booking, he went on to catalogue a vast list of upgrades to facilities and grounds in regional Victoria.

All in all, his government was spending around $500 million. $20 million for Ikon Park to turn it into the home of AFLW. Whitten Oval got an upgrade as well. A $64 million redevelopment at Parkville Netball facility, $60 million for community sporting grants, and a lot of spending on other sporting precincts around the state and funding for sporting events in regional Victoria. The big ticket item was $225 million for upgrades and redevelopment of Docklands stadium.

But nothing announced in terms of government upgrades to the MCG. No need! The MCC was paying for that itself – it was going to fund the redevelopment of the entire Great Southern Stand and other sundry ground upgrades courtesy of a guaranteed 43 home and away games each season from its five tenant clubs – Collingwood, Essendon, Richmond, Melbourne and Hawthorn – and by retaining exclusive rights to the grand final for a further 39 years.

The announcement caught the AFL and the MCC by surprise – they actually hadn’t signed off on the deal yet within their own organisations, and had to hastily convene board meetings to complete the necessary validations on the morning of the 13th.

But given how outstanding the news was from Andrews’ point of view, you can perhaps understand his rush to get it out and bask in the political accolades.

When you consider the WA state government just dropped $1.6 billion of taxpayer money on a new stadium, SA spent $650 million upgrading Adelaide Oval, and Gladys Berejiklian is enmeshed in a two billion dollar trap of her own making over proposed stadium demolitions up in Sydney – well, Andrews had just pulled off one of the great feats of pork barrelling at a bargain price of 225 million dollars for the stadium component, given that two stadiums were being redeveloped and he (and the Victorian voter) was only paying for one of them.

Against a backdrop of increasingly straitened public finances and proposed GST redistributions that will undoubtedly leave Victoria worse off financially, locking in a stadium redevelopment on the cheap combined with plenty of handouts for grassroots infrastructure – well, that’s both superb politics and sensible economics.

But where Andrews reaped the benefits, the pushback against the AFL was swift and immediate – and not unsurprising. The grand final occupies a highly visible location in the Australian calendar, and is one of those convenient scratching posts for anyone with a grudge over governance of the game, given that it sits at the conjunct of a number of strands running through our game – equalisation, fairness, national spread.

Even people with only a passing interest in football have noticed that the past four grand finals have seen Victorian clubs defeat interstate teams ranked higher on the AFL ladder.

The decision to announce the MCG would remain the home of the grand final for another 20 years on top of the existing 20 years it already was booked in for, rankled with a lot of non-Victorian fans, with plenty of vitriol being directed at the AFL for selling out, shafting their interstate clubs for decades in exchange for their 30 pieces of silver to redevelop Docklands.

Articles swiftly appeared in various publications and sites from the states west of Warnambool, bemoaning the decision as a VFL relic, and a decision made solely with the interests of 10 of the 18 clubs in mind.

The AFL undoubtedly anticipated this sort of reaction, given how ready Gillon McLachlan was with the planned restitution – in-season training sessions on the MCG, providing greater MCG access during grand final week, allocating more grand final tickets to interstate supporters and chartering flights for interstate clubs to the grand final, announced almost in the same breath as the statement that four more decades of MCG grand finals were contractually set in stone.

Since that announcement in April, the VFL grumblings have simmered on – perhaps mercifully for the AFL it has been muted somewhat by Richmond’s head and shoulders existence above the rest of the competition this season.

Given that they seem likely to feature heavily in September, it would undoubtedly be a relief to McLachlan and the AFL if they were playing at the MCG either in their own right, or against a fellow Victorian side.

But all it will take is another high flying interstate side to be shot down by a MCG resident come the last Saturday in September, and those croaking voices will be back in full roar.

While the criticism of the AFL shafting the interstate clubs is undoubtedly accurate, what I believe has been lacking from the debate is the realisation or acknowledgment among fans that the outcome was not something the AFL desired or conspired to achieve from the outset.

What is not being discussed is that the AFL did not have a realistic alternative, and that powers far greater than them arranged the events that transpired.

We have been conned, duped, into turning on our own code, when in point of fact it’s our own code that has become the political football for bigger, meaner players than ourselves.

Let’s go back prior to April 13 2018 – over two years prior, to March 2016.

It was around then that Eddie McGuire first bobbed his head up with a radical idea to construct a second stadium adjacent to the MCG, a 60,000 seater with a retractable roof, called Victoria Stadium.

Hisense Arena would be relocated, Richmond station moved underground, and Etihad Stadium demolished and sold off.

At the time I found it a baffling outburst, even by Eddie’s standards – I mean, surely it had no chance of getting up, particularly given who it was being suggested by, and the eye-watering cost of well over a billion dollars, to be funded in part by the sell-off of Etihad. Ryan Buckland called it “Bold thinking, but completely crazy in practice.”

What time has revealed is that of course it was crazy in practice – because it was never meant to be put into practice.

In addition to his other talents, McGuire is an accomplished politician – the mere suggestion that the AFL might, however unlikely, be able to stitch together a deal to redevelop stadium infrastructure without needing any assistance from the state government was enough to accomplish the true goal of the suggestion – to get the AFL, the Victorian government and the MCC all in the same room to talk about money.

Which they did, throughout much of 2017. Quietly, discreetly, but with deadly serious intent.

It’s important not to underestimate the political clout of McGuire in all of this – as both a high profile media personality and the president of one of the biggest tenant clubs at the MCG, with plenty of phone numbers and contacts in his rolodex, he played a key role in bringing all of the parties to the table.

(AAP Image/Tracey Nearmy)

We had McLachlan, representing the AFL as CEO, who desired to upgrade (not demolish) Etihad Stadium, relocate AFL House from Docklands, and also wanted money to fund further upgrades to facilities for the AFLW.

Coming into the negotiations, he and his new chairman, Richard Goyder, a prominent Western Australian, were reluctant to discuss extending the grand final further than the 20 years it was already assigned to the MCG.

We had Steven Smith and Stuart Fox, chairman and CEO respectively of the MCC, who were insisting that there was no way that the Victorian state government or the AFL could commit to any sort of long-term funding arrangement for stadiums in Victoria without including the MCC as part of it.

Their demand was for a long-term commitment for the grand final to remain at the MCG beyond 2037, and the financial surety that would provide.

In exchange for this, they would undertake to pay for the redevelopment of the MCG, without any need for assistance from the Victorian government.

They were armed with a bounty of $8 million a year to be split between the five tenant clubs if their terms were met, roughly $170,000 for each of the 43 home games during the regular season, a not inconsequential sum of money to be handing out to football clubs.

And finally, we had Justin Hanney, Lead Deputy Secretary from the Victorian Department of Economic Development, negotiating on behalf of his boss, Daniel Andrews.

He was armed with plenty of authority – and inducements – to get their desired outcome, which was to avoid a situation where the grand final jetted off interstate and the government had to chip in to rebuild the MCG. A happy coincidence that avoiding this situation happened to be the desired outcome of the MCC as well.

Amongst these inducements in Hanney’s bag of tricks were an offer of freehold land under the Bolte Bridge for the AFL’s new headquarters, valued at around $75 million, and the vast array of funding commitments listed above, that would both assist the AFL with its desire to upgrade facilities for AFLW as well as pouring funds into key marginal electorates for the Andrews government.

Against all of this vested interest and shared desire – what hope did the AFL have of resisting? Despite both Goyder and McLachlan being reluctant to give into the MCC’s demands, knowing as they did that it would provoke consternation and condemnation from the interstate clubs within the AFL, they were thoroughly outmatched by the sheer weight of the numbers.

As always with decisions like this, the simplest explanation is to follow the money. The AFL as an organisation received just over $650 million in revenue in 2017, and after operating expenses and distributions of around $612 million, posted a net operating surplus of $48 million.

McLachlan said at the time of announcing the grand final deal in April 2018, that AFL alone is worth about $3 billion to the Victorian state economy. His own organisation’s annual report for 2017, released in March 2018 claims that nationally, AFL added $6.45 billion to the Australian economy. That means that about 47 per cent of the contribution to GDP for a national sporting organisation is generated for a single state.

Economist Tim Harcourt claimed in 2015 that the grand final alone made up approximately $125 million of that revenue each year.

These are big numbers, to be sure. But compare them to the Victorian state government budget – which for 2018-19 lists revenue of $69.4 billion, expenses of $68.1 billion and a surplus of $1.3 billion, and they pale into absolute insignificance.

Put simply, I believe that the AFL never had a hope in hell of standing against a state government determined to ensure that it was not their administration that lost the grand final to those shiny new stadiums interstate, even temporarily.

(Charles Van den Broek/flickr)

Additionally, the government was determined not to make the same mistake as their compatriots in WA and NSW who had to deal with (and are still dealing with) resentment and political firestorms over the easily drawn comparison between spending on projects like stadiums, and the dilapidated state of more humdrum areas of government responsibility, such as transport, schools and hospitals.

Under no circumstances would they allow the AFL to abscond with the grand final and saddle the government with the ensuing costs and opprobium.

The MCC was always going to take a stance alongside the state government, given that the board of trustees are all appointed by the state government, and include such political luminaries as Steve Bracks, Robert Ray, Peter Costello and a host of lawyers and accountants who are dependent on obeisance to the state government for further patronage and ongoing employment.

Those with long memories might remember what happened to the 13 members of SCG trust in 1977 when they dared defy Premier Neville Wran and put their war with Kerry Packer over and above their responsibility to the public.

The Victorian state government knew full well that it had the upper hand in negotiations right from the get go. For all the talk the AFL makes about its size, spread and influence, this is an organisation that is still utterly dependent on state governments the length and breadth of the country to do the heavy lifting when it comes to stadium infrastructure.

Their contributions towards stadium infrastructure can best be described as token, certainly when compared to the contributions from state and federal governments.

Moreover, once the MCC was able to claim that it would pay for the required upgrades to the MCG over the next decades simply in exchange for a guarantee over the grand final (thus saving the government a messy and damaging high profile spending commitment of somewhere between half and a full billion) we had a confluence of desire that the AFL could either stand in front of, Canute-like, before being washed away regardless, or stand aside and put the most positive spin on it that it could.

Hence we had McLachlan making statements like:

“These sorts of deals means that we’ve got more money going into the clubs … and that means we can work hard to keep the game affordable.”

“”We want as many people to go to the grand final as we can… We’re lucky in this country to have a 100,000-seat venue that is loved by sports followers.”

It reminds me of a line from the movie Sum of All Fears, when the Russian President says to an advisor explaining his decision to claim responsibility for an atrocity he didn’t commit, namely that “These days, it is better to appear guilty than impotent.”

It’s a viewpoint McLachlan and the AFL appear to have taken to heart, being quite prepared to stand out in front of microphones and make flaccid comments like the above.

Better to claim that the AFL is emphasising tradition and maximising attendance than to admit the ugly truth – for all the talk of a national sporting competition, for all its talk of wealth, power and viewers, this is an organisation that remains as beholden to the Victorian parliament in 2018 as it was in 1986 when it was staggering towards bankruptcy and it was forced to expand and sell interstate licences to the Eagles and Bears – or be shut down by the corporate regulator in Victoria.

They were thoroughly outclassed, outmatched and they knew it. When Hanney and Fox started putting the screws on them and insisting that they were in accord, and the AFL should see it their way – well, the AFL resisted for a time, but the outcome was inevitable, and everyone in all of the boardrooms involved knew it.

Even within the AFL most of the interstate clubs were already happy to see the grand final remain at the MCG in the short term – their main objection was to the 40-year timeframe, which perhaps was beyond everyone’s expectations of what was considered ‘long-term’.

It does seem an awfully long time to demand surety in a rapidly changing world. But that’s a problem for another generation to deal with.

(AAP Image/Julian Smith)

In writing this article, my aim was to try dig beneath the superficial reasonings around the grand final, knowing that this debate will roll on for years, if not decades.

I feel that the real reasoning behind how the decision was made, and why, has been lost amidst the hue and cry about home ground advantage, best of threee grand finals and the debate about how much of an advantage playing at home actually contributes to the eventual outcome.

People are analysing this decision in terms of its impact on the fortunes of clubs on the field – whereas I feel that the discussions that led to the decision were couched far more of terms of money, budgets and power off the field.

This is upheld I feel, by some of the minutiae from the discussions, where Richmond’s plans to redevelop Punt Road were rejected by the Victorian state government, and Hawthorn didn’t even bother to put in a submission for funding for their Dingley base.

The Victorian state government doesn’t really care who wins the premiership, and they certainly don’t care who plays in the grand final so long as it remains Melbourne.

While it remains there, it contributes around $125 million to the state economy at best estimate, and more importantly, funds a highly visible spending commitment and avoids a potentially messy political stoush.

To supporters of interstate clubs who are perhaps feeling bereft or angered by this piece – I simply point out that this state of affairs is not set in stone – but I would add that the status quo regarding the grand final will never change without a corresponding state government purchasing the rights to the grand final in advance for a particular year.

I only see Perth bothering to do this – Sydney seems unlikely to make a pitch for it, Adelaide is too small and Queensland doesn’t care.

But regardless, I see a grand final purchase as a vanity project that would extremely unlikely to occur outside of another iron ore earnings spendapalooza by the WA government in coming years – and even then, I maintain the politics of it would make it prohibitive, given it would probably come with a price tag of tens of millions of dollars.

Some might argue the other states have only themselves to blame by constructing stadiums much smaller than the MCG – I don’t give this argument much credence, given that other states don’t have the financial advantage of bootstrapping the stadium size and costs to the grand final.

Vast white elephant stadiums with seats in the upper echelons aren’t a good look for governments battling budget cuts – anyone with a passing interest in Homebush can testify to that.

The states themselves perhaps realised the futility of making a realistic pitch at time of construction – certainly they have since then, with Mark McGowan making off the cuff comments earlier this year that the grand final should be played in Perth as a sop to the GST rip-off endured by West Australians.

What’s more interesting than his rampant idiocy in trying to link a decision within the remit of the AFL to one within the remit of the Federal Government is the fact he made these comments in January 2018, meaning that he had to be unaware of the negotiations occurring between the AFL, the MCC and the Victorian government over the preceding year and a half that were busy placing the grand final firmly out of reach of any interstate rivals.

If he was, he’d have said nothing about it, rather than look foolish and ignorant a few short months later. But then again, they were solely aimed at reminding people of the unfair deal on GST, rather than actually advancing the cause of a grand final in Perth.

In my view, based on the evidence available and presented here, I feel that the AFL has chosen to claim responsibility for the decision to retain the grand final in Melbourne for a further 40 years, rather than admit that they had no alternative against such a collected assembly of vested interests, power and money in Victoria.

The AFL certainly would have liked the flexibility to be able to throw a grand final interstate as a sop within the next decade, but now this has been denied to them for several decades, they have switched their PR machine to discuss continuity, tradition and maximising attendance for all.

Hopefully this piece has given people some food for thought, and perhaps encourages people to think beyond the easily framed narrative that the AFL are the bad guys in all of this. I know doing the research and assembling the facts from various news sources and articles has given me a lot of pause, and a far greater understanding of what I feel are the true circumstances behind this decision. Any thoughts or perspectives people have on this matter in a similar vein are most welcome.

The Crowd Says:

2018-11-19T06:58:55+00:00

Goalsonly

Roar Rookie


I think ground aesthetics are important and changing the shape of the oval affects these aesthetics in a negative way.

2018-07-12T08:08:10+00:00

Lee Delaney

Roar Rookie


"Im sure english players do not practise at Wimbledon all year around and the same as American golfers at Augusta.".............The 4 tenant clubs do not train at the MCG either. Melbourne (train at Casey Fields), Richmond (Punt Road), Collingwood (The Holden Centre - Olympic Park) and Hawthorn (Waverley) so what's your point ? Also, the competing clubs in the AFL Grand Final get an equal amount of tickets to provide to their members so your point regarding the "important role" the crowd makes holds no weight. Name an Olympic stadium that had a capacity of 60 - 70,000 in the modern era. They are much larger but again a moot point. The Olympics goes for 2 weeks the AFL Grand Final is a single day event !!!

2018-07-12T03:54:40+00:00

Cat

Roar Guru


Heck of a lot easier to go hat in hand asking for sub $100m funding for each stage than to try and get gov't to hand over the $500m at once. Kardinia Park is the only AFL stadium where a tenant club has contributed financially out of pocket. No other club has had to contribute a solitary cent to whatever stadium or stadiums they call home. As far as 'regularly revisited', that is only true when view myopically. The current round of upgrades is necessary in large part because the stadium was largely falling down around itself from neglect. Kardinia Park is now run under a similar model to the MCG under statutory authority by the Kardinia Park Stadium Trust. Of course they don't have the ability to generate the income an almost thrice the size MCG does. I note you didn't actually answer my question. If not the owners of the ground (the taxpayers) than who should pay to update the ground?

2018-07-12T03:33:28+00:00

Perry Bridge

Guest


#Cat re Kardinia Park - the reality there is of a rather complex funding model over the successive phases of upgrades - with 3 tiers of govt plus the AFL themselves plus Geelong FC contributing. What it HAS been is perhaps the most regularly revisited AFL venue re funding/upgrades. The contrast is clear to the MCG (owned by the State, managed by the MCC on behalf of the MCG Trust and yet funded effectively by the AFL via MCC revenues - based mostly on AFL product - and AFL direct revenues.) and to Docklands ('Marvel' - privately funded based on AFL contractual revenues and bought out by the AFL).

2018-07-11T20:21:56+00:00

Tricky

Guest


Regardless of how good or bad a team is going, their supporters and members still will by and large attend the games and flick on the tele. That's what HQ looks at, if it were that these teams are doing so badly that their own turn on them then at that point your theory would be more valid. If it is / was as you say then one of those smaller clubs would've been merged/ relocated/ liquidated by now. That is in the best interest of the AFL because they want to expand into foreign and or new territory - and make no secret about that. On the flipside they don't want to lose that amount of paying supporters / members, and they know they would lose them forever - probably from the game completely. These are not supporters with a passing interest - they all have a vested interest in varying degrees. I get it looks bad for HQ with non performing teams for extended periods of time but they must still value the rusted on supporters - reliable for coin. Seems right now it's in favour of the rusted on supporter.

2018-07-11T12:10:56+00:00

Cat

Roar Guru


Every ground has members.

2018-07-11T10:19:12+00:00

Cat

Roar Guru


I’m curious who you think should have paid for the Kardinia Park redevelopments. Keep in mind the ground is owned by City of Geelong.

2018-07-11T10:14:43+00:00

Lee Delaney

Roar Rookie


Interstater stating that playing the Grand Final at the MCG, where it has been for 100 years, is an injustice is an absurd comment. Not only is there no other stadium, not only in Australia but in the world, that host such a big event for such a large number of both footy fans and the corporates but there is the small matter of the MCG being a central part to the very fabric of Australian Rules Football. The very first game ever was played in basically the same spot (although on a field a mile long). They have been playing Grand Finals at the MCG for a 100 years. I suppose you want the Melbourne Cup to be moved from Flemington as well as it's not fair for all the other cities ?

2018-07-11T04:57:58+00:00

Bretto

Roar Rookie


Fair point - worry about what you can control. Just don't think there is a need to rub people's noses in it like some posters are.

2018-07-11T04:20:25+00:00

Cat

Roar Guru


Moving goalposts is not so simple. Not every ground is shorter than the MCG either, some are in fact longer (MCG is the 'fattest' though).

2018-07-11T04:14:23+00:00

Kelly Andrews

Guest


The idea of the top seeded team hosting the GF at their home ground is ridiculous. Yes in a perfect world that is what would happen. However take this year for example. It's conceivable that the 2 preliminary finals could be played between Richmond, Sydney, West Coast and Port Adelaide. Therefore the AFL would have to reserve 3 stadiums which could be the MCG, Adelaide Oval, The SCG and Optus Stadium (the 4th ranked team couldn't host a home GF). Add in the caterers for each stadium. The security and whatever other staff are required. Then you have accommodation, etc. It is logistically impossible. One compromise I can't believe hasn't been discussed, or not that I'm aware, is the MCG surface being configured to match the ground dimensions of the highest seeded team playing in the GF. That would at least give the highest ranked team the advantage of playing on a surface with the same dimensions as their home ground. It would be so simple to do.

2018-07-11T03:38:47+00:00

Perry Bridge

Guest


I got up to the SCG for my first ever visit last Thurs (as a neutral watching Swans v Geelong). Sat around in the Trumper stand. A tad dated but a good viewing ground and lovely with the green roofed heritage stands as my backdrop. Caught bus in (from our accommodation out near Little Bay) - straight up Anzac Pde. No real issues there other than the cramming back into buses at the end of the night. the AFL GF - I prefer the Prelim final as an 'event' and for its atmosphere and the anticipation that is left for the week ahead. That said - I've been to 3 AFL GF's (North won in '96 and '99 but in both cases as the favourite - and I was there in '89 as a neutral). My main observation is that for me - every other year watching on tele - it was 'different' - however - there was a lot of 'atmosphere' to soak up pre game and outside before the game..... so, still a degree of making of the day what you can. btw - there is an arrogance amongst Hawthorn fans - they were the foremost booers of Adam Goodes (ostensibly for some rough conduct on Sam Mitchell once upon a time - - ironically via Hodge and Lewis they had some of the dirtiest players at the time but......).

2018-07-11T03:13:15+00:00

Cat

Roar Guru


The disadvantage is minor compared to other issues that are plaguing the game – and that can actually be changed!

2018-07-11T02:49:24+00:00

Perry Bridge

Guest


Given the reference above to 1977 and the SCG trust; the clear example of the Victorian Govt 'strained' relationship with the then VFL is also very relevant. Many of us on here know only too well how the Vic State Govt screwed over the VFL with respect to VFL Park and forced the VFL to retain the Grand Final at the MCG which consolidated the power of the MCC (as manager of the venue and their revenue stream via MCC memberhships) while the VFL who had sold VFL Park memberships on the promise of the Grand Final relocating to an expanded venue - were left with no planning approvals at VFL Park and members who needed somewhere to sit at the MCG which was sadly out of date. The Govt was fine to obstruct. However - there was no monies to put towards improved facilities at "the peoples ground". It was seemingly only the discovery of 'concrete cancer' in the old Southern Stand that finally the ball began to move - but even then - Govt funds were not forthcoming. And so began over 2 main phases a 100% rebuilt of the MCG, grand total reported at $576 mill ($142 mill and $434 mill) but the time the 2006 C'wealth Games came around and over that only $77 mill from State Govt and 0 from the Feds. We know that for Docklands stadium (reportedly around $460 mill or so to build) that there was no Govt money but there was - consistent with the time - bargain basement land available to the developers (note - NOT the AFL). As it eventuates - the AFL have managed to find themselves owners of the stadium and land. And during that time - the State Govt largesse in Victoria has been directed to the rectangle codes ($265 mill for AAMI Park - 100% Govt funded), and to the Tennis centre, oh, and to Kardinia Park because of the nature of that electorate!!!. The capacity for the AFL to wriggle is limited - and clearly with the size of the Victorian/Melbourne AFL sector - including clubs like Richmond, Collingwood, Essendon and Hawthorn with almost more members between them than the NRL in total - well, you can't not seek to ensure that a decent MCG is available more often than not. Docklands is a poor substitute. The irony of the Perth stadium was how much the Govt ploughed ahead without having tenants signed up!! The AFL at least played a significant role in facilitating the Adelaide Oval (re the SACA/SANFL situation), but in Perth - it was pretty well a Govt flight of fancy. Looks great. It would be nice to see the AFL get some more real support in its home state. There was at least support from the Vic Govt almost 10 years ago - when Frank Lowy was pushing real hard to get the AFL pushed aside in Victoria to facilitate a clean FIFA WC bid. In the end - Lowy couldn't secure Docklands and was offered Kardinia Park. That was Brumby at that time as Vic Premier.

2018-07-11T02:42:49+00:00

IAP

Guest


Unfortunately we live in a petty world at the moment Cat, where no-one can accept losing. There's always an excuse and someone to blame. It's quite obvious that the Dogs had no home ground advantage at all during that finals series. Winning 4 finals in a row to win the flag is unprecedented; there's no advantage to that. In fact, they overcame the disadvantage of finishing 7th to win the flag. Why do the nay-sayers not laud them for that? Refer to my previous paragraph.

2018-07-11T02:37:56+00:00

IAP

Guest


Your team should try being first to the ball. Then maybe they'd win on the greatest stage of all, the mighty MCG! That club sits proudly at Western Oval, where it will remain FOREVER.

2018-07-11T02:36:40+00:00

IAP

Guest


That's right, we take your money to put in our pockets while you play our game. It's a beautiful system

2018-07-11T02:35:35+00:00

IAP

Guest


Do you think the MCC members aren't footy fans? They line up day and night to get their spot for grand final day, such is their passion for their indigenous game.

2018-07-11T02:34:20+00:00

IAP

Guest


Haha, you'd have no chance without the might of the Victorian footy clubs. Your measly little insular towns could never create a competition as great as the VF...AFL.

2018-07-11T00:38:29+00:00

MG

Roar Rookie


I felt so privileged to have spent a couple of thousand to attend the 2016 Grand Final. Watching the Victorian team get 15 free kicks in 2 1/2 quarters while my team got one. Very privileged indeed. Any non-Victorian team supporter should rush at the opportunity. An experience you will never forget.

More Comments on The Roar

Read more at The Roar