AFL chief executive Gillon McLachlan has attempted to pour cold water on fresh speculation linking North Melbourne with a full relocation to Tasmania.
The Kangaroos responded angrily this week to reports that senior figures in the game believe relocation remains on the table, more than a decade after the club rejected a move to Gold Coast.
The renewed debate has come at an uncertain time as the AFL and all of its clubs face an existential crisis amid massive financial hits caused by the coronavirus pandemic.
But McLachlan said the AFL remained committed to making sure all of the 18 clubs survive in their current locations beyond 2020.
A $500 million line of credit, secured by the AFL with banks this week, will go some way towards achieving that goal.
“We’re working with the clubs on securing their futures through a revised funding model,” McLachlan told Seven News on Wednesday night.
“We’ve been dealing with the financial situation at hand.
“We’ve talked of the current 18 clubs in the current structure and them coming out exactly the same at the end of this year.”
(Quinn Rooney/Getty Images)
North Melbourne chairman Ben Buckley, club legend Corey McKernan and former president James Brayshaw were among the most vocal club figures to hit back at the relocation reports this week.
Buckley lashed the speculation as “rumour mongering”.
But former North Melbourne powerbroker Ron Joseph believes the club is facing another battle to remain at its traditional home at Arden Street.
“I think North Melbourne has been identified as the club that they’d like to head AFL football in Tasmania,” Joseph told The Age.
“They haven’t got an AFL competition until they have a Tasmanian team. It’s a real issue for the AFL.”
Joseph said he would “fight like buggery” to keep North Melbourne at Arden Street if the league tried to relocate it again.
North Melbourne are currently contracted to play four home games a season in Hobart in a deal that runs until the end of 2021.
Tasmanian football officials have been hopeful of establishing their own AFL club as early as 2025, however, it remains to be seen if the financial crisis alters that timeline.
Republican
Guest
.......the brave new age of the 'consumer' of the 'brand/s' as opposed to supporter of the club, when blood was thicker that H20. This would explain why 50% of Melbourne is not focused on one team or should we say, one commercial entity. Its now a 'lifestyle choice' rather than a cultural legacy. As far as projects ie stadia being put on ice, that will certainly be the case for along time to come I reckon. The obscene corporate business of elite sport will shrink with our shrinking world and that's not necessarily a bad thing.
Republican
Guest
.......concur. Have the Pies done away with these?
Matches
Roar Rookie
Agree Mike. Clubs bleeding the stupid through pokies is the sporting clubs' version of peddling drugs. West Coast dominates the landscape without pokies and there's no reason other clubs can't do the same. Frankly clubs that rely on pokies are parasites.
Mike
Guest
Would be interesting to compare revenue balance sheets of the other big Melbourne clubs minus the pokie revenue they receive to see what percentage of their revenue comes from AFL funding then. Understand their membership revenue will be higher due to larger supporter base, but given North have taken a social stance to ban all pokies, they have had to come up with innovative ways to make up this shortfall.
Chris_S
Roar Rookie
Unfortunately the reality of North’s financial position is that nearly half of its revenue comes from the afl funding. For the big clubs this is less than 20%. The big clubs have so much more money to spend on the science of football and equally importantly to self promote North is like a lower level premier league club destined to be a middle tier team with a small dedicated following Is that what the North supporters prepared to accept
Slane
Guest
The North Melbourne AFLW team already plays out of Tasmania. They are called the North Melbourne Tasmanian Kangaroos.
peter ostle
Guest
In recent years demographics on which club is the most popular in areas of Melbourne has shown that 50% of Melbourne is not focused on one team. In 2019 North were slightly behind Bulldogs and Saints in membership for 2019. As for the AFL money to North, the club received $17.6m, the Bulldogs got $16.5m and the Saints $20.6m. Overall the revenue of the three clubs was nearly equal. Given the financial impact of COVID-19 I do not think the Tasmanian government deciding to spend millions on a new/improved stadium in either Hobart or Launceston, will be popular with voters. Even the projected building of the stadium for basketball I think will be put on ice. I think that if Tasmania want to show their mania for footie it might set up an AFLW team first. Gaining a relocated AFL team or starting one from scratch for the next 5-10 years is off the agenda for now.
Republican
Guest
Concur with that. Perhaps its about demographic, I mean North is no longer a significant catchment in suburban terms, not that that counts for much these days. I have often felt Melbourne and North might merge as well as the Navy Blues, since historically, these tribal demarcations have been watered down over the decades. It's called rationalisation. My club St Kilda, are the only club south of the Yarra but again, they are vulnerable to relocation, to far flung places that hold diddly footy heritage. One thing Tassie does offer in spades, is a compelling footy history and pedigree. You could do a whole lot worse than relocate to that footy state.
Ace
Roar Rookie
With so many other clubs that do not compare to Norths' financial position I cannot see why there should be such a push for North to be relocated. They have done everything right to remain in Victoria. They would probably run at a loss as would their opposition if played in front of small stadiums. Not what the AFL would like
Paul D
Roar Rookie
Zing
Rowdy
Roar Rookie
They'd actually have to push South to Tassie.