Tasmania could have its own team in the AFL and AFLW competitions after the Carter review found there is a strong case for a team to be included in the state.
There was huge speculation around the report with media outlets last night suggesting it was going to recommend a joint venture between an existing AFL club.
A relocated team from Victoria is what the report recommends with a standalone team less likely.
“The review found that the case for Tasmania is strong. There should be a team representing Tasmania in the AFL and AFLW competitions. However, the best form of that team is less clear cut,” AFL chief executive Gillon McLachlan said.
There’s still a long process to get a Tasmanian team – even if it is a joint venture rather than a 19th club.
Tasmania will need three-quarters of the 18 current clubs to agree to the move.
Another report last year said a standalone team would cost $45 million and a 19th club would take until at least 2025 to get off the ground.
A joint venture is, therefore, an easier financial move but finding a Victorian club that’s willing to merge will be a battle.
McLachlan still has hope of a standalone team.
“A 19th Licence is achievable. The review says Tasmania needs to be represented in the AFL and AFLW and it is plausible,” he said.
North Melbourne has already said it’s not willing to be relocated.
KEY REPORT FINDINGS
– The case for Tasmania is strong, particularly with the deep historical links to our game and there should be a team representing Tasmania in the AFL/AFLW national competitions – however the best form of that team is less clear-cut.
– The case can be made for a 19th Licence but re-location of an existing team if a club is prepared to take that path, or a joint venture between Tasmanian stakeholders and a Victorian team that secures strong support in two markets from the outset, would arguably produce a more sustainable outcome and therefore should be considered before a 19th licence.
– Reaching a decision on a team to represent Tasmania should not be impacted by Covid but the decision around timing should. The AFL and the clubs will reasonably minimise new financial risks and the clubs should not be expected to make a final decision at a time when AFL industry finances are under stress.
– Any outcome is dependent on locking in State Government funding guarantees and provision of appropriate stadia and related facilities in Tasmania and these should be finalised ahead of any decision.
Tasmania is deserving of a team to represent the state on historic and fairness grounds and most economic arguments can be overcome as long as Government funding is secured.– A 19th team would be positioned in the middle of the bottom third of the wealth ladder of our industry, but a combined Tasmanian and Victorian support base would position the new club in the middle wealth ranks of AFL clubs, a formidable competitor on and off the field.
– The Taskforce submitted that a 19th team would be net accretive because of incremental media rights but this review notes that AFL and industry advice is that broadcast rights are unlikely to reach the levels forecast by the Taskforce
– Many of the risks of starting a new team in Tasmania can be managed regardless of which pathway is chosen and key concerns raised in opposition to a team such as the size of the Tasmanian population, the north-south rivalry, player retention, dilution of talent, fixture complications and the state of the Tasmanian economy are all issues that can be managed and should not influence the decision on a team, whatever the eventual model.
– Tasmania is a football state and the cost of securing a football state are reasonable, fulfils the purpose of the AFL and is the right thing to do.
AFL STATEMENT – NEXT STEPS
The AFL Commission welcomes the Carter Review and supports Colin’s findings that Tasmania has a strong football history and a clear passion for our game.
Given the current “financial situation” the Commission acknowledges the Carter Review finding that the AFL Clubs should not be asked for a final decision at a time when AFL industry finances remain under serious stress from the Covid pandemic
The recommendation that all models should be investigated before clubs are asked to decide on a team for Tasmania and that a relocation or joint venture capturing the Melbourne and Tasmanian supporters would provide a more successful and sustainable model should also be considered. This review makes clear that the best chance of success is a team that captures both the Tasmanian and Melbourne markets.
While the AFL Commission acknowledges that any decision to relocate or joint venture rests with the directors and members of individual clubs it accepts the Review’s finding that “a combined Tasmanian and Victorian support base would position the new club in the middle wealth ranks of AFL clubs, a formidable competitor on and off the field.”
We are thankful to the Tasmanian Government’s support for its proposed investment for a team to represent Tasmania and investment in stadia to ensure the team was successful and sustainable and agrees with the Review that these issues should be pursued ahead of any decision by clubs.
We will work with the Tasmanian Government to see what a potential model might look like.
Micko
Roar Rookie
And how do you think the AFL would be successful anyway without all the money they leech off governments??? With the obvious exception of Docklands, who pays for stadiums and facilities?? Why not criticise this then? If the Tassie government wants to directly fund a locally based AFL franchise, that's up to them. What you should be criticising is the AFL's lack of willingness to help out, especially after their bizarre desperation to shove in expansion franchises in Gold Coast (a renowned sporting graveyard) and western Sydney; a place that had no appetite for the sport full stop!
Kevo
Roar Rookie
You're hilarious!
Micko
Roar Rookie
Yes we’re done. You’re an obnoxious git who doesn’t like it when you get it back. Everything I said regarding the AFL’s lack of enthusiasm for what their own bloody report said would be a good move to establish a Tassie side makes sense. You actually seem to disregard the fact the AFL’s own report says it will be a successful thing. Just what the heck are you arguing here??? I literally don’t understand your point. You’re arguing for the sake of arguing!
Doc Disnick
Roar Guru
"you’re just too dense to understand" We are done. I'm fully aware of what you are trying to argue. It's st#p!d. If your 1-page report is good enough for the AFL, I'm sure they will use it.
Micko
Roar Rookie
Geelong as an example is perfectly reasonable...you're just too dense to understand the point I'm making. And Geelong gives us a prime example of what to assume regarding an AFL franchise in Tasmania. The AFL relies on state and federal governments' funding, and at any year in the past 20+ years, poor Melbourne clubs are happy to sell their games off to interstate venues(and regional in WB's case), and this is despite the AFL actually investing (ironic!) in a stadium in Melbourne's Docklands region to house around half the Melbourne based clubs.
Doc Disnick
Roar Guru
I'm not arguing with you as to whether an AFL team can be successful in Tasmania. I have no idea, nor do you. However, using Geelong as a reason is silly. Let's move on. Secondly, I'm not interested as to whether they can be successful or not. I'm simply arguing that the government shouldn't be spending taxpayer's money to subsidise it if indeed this is required, which likely it would.
Micko
Roar Rookie
I put forward some straight forward logical points, and I've been consistent saying I can't see a reason why a Tasmanian AFL franchise can't be successful. The AFL just can't be bothered apparently, despite apparently fundamentally agreeing with the premise of it. Not exactly sure how I've been "inconsistent" with anything I've said on here. I've always assumed a Tasmanian AFL franchise would be successful, and a great asset for the AFL and the people of Tasmania.
Doc Disnick
Roar Guru
You're changing the argument again. I don't agree with anything you just said.
Micko
Roar Rookie
The point is is that hypothetically a "business case" for a Geelong(a city smaller than Hobart) franchise in the AFL would probably not be glowing in it's appraisal, hence we would unlikely see a new franchise for Geelong if the Cats didn't exist. But we see that they are very successful, with the benefit of history and tribalism over 150+ years. The AFL report actually seemed to be positive regarding Tasmania's "business case". But essentially they put it in the "too hard basket" and basically left the initiative to the Tasmanian government and failing Vic clubs to negotiate a relocation. The same AFL (mind you!) that were desperate to relocate a Melbourne club to Gold Coast a decade ago, and establish a franchise in "Greater Western Sydney" that nobody there wanted (and still don't judging by their lack of support!).
Doc Disnick
Roar Guru
Well that’s it then. Micko’s report says it will work because the GFC works. We don’t need to worry about anything. A 1 page document. Excellent stuff, Micko.
Don Freo
Roar Rookie
What's better? Explain yourself. Don't just abuse.
Micko
Roar Rookie
Geelong literally proves the point! Are you dense? A smaller population base and possibly a smaller economy too, yet a very successful AFL franchise. Nothing about Geelong FC's existence disproves whether a Tassie AFL side will be successful!
Doc Disnick
Roar Guru
You have no idea whether they will be successful or not. You’re arguing something completely different now. If it was so clear that they would, the AFL would have done it years ago. The very fact they haven’t, tells me I’m right so stop pretending. However, if you want to pretend they will be by using Geelong as a reason, then good on you.
Micko
Roar Rookie
No, your excuse is ridiculous. There’s no reason why a Tassie club wouldn’t be successful, and a very small place having a successful franchise like Geelong already proves it. You can make as many lame excuses as you want!
Kevo
Roar Rookie
Better than the tripe you suggested
Doc Disnick
Roar Guru
I’m simply saying using Geelong is ridiculous, utterly ridiculous. Just like most folk around the world would find it ridiculous that an entire state can have a day off for a horse race.
Micko
Roar Rookie
That's actually a pretty lame attempt to discount my example of Geelong proving the business case of a Tasmanian franchise. You don't know what can be achieved by a Tassie AFL franchise as it literally hasn't happened!
Doc Disnick
Roar Guru
Victorians would watch a fly racing up a wall. They have a public holiday for a horse race. That's not enough, so they have another day off as a warm-up to the Granny. No other place is run like this. Please don't use them as an example of what's achievable in Tassie.
Micko
Roar Rookie
Are you serious?! There couldn't be a more appropriate example to use!!! :shocked: Geelong is literally proving the point that a grassroots stronghold region with a relatively small population and economic base can provide for a very successful AFL franchise. As I've pointed out in other comments, the same excuses to not include a new Tasmanian franchise would hypothetically be used to knock back a new hypothetical Geelong AFL franchise (if the Cats never existed).
Doc Disnick
Roar Guru
Geelong is one of the most financially viable clubs. Bad example.