It’s a pleasure.

Hopefully this is a function this website can serve well with.

btw – the Aust Drug Foundation, whilst helping the AFL develop it’s policy, and being a staunch supporter of the AFL regarding it, the ADF DID also bake the AFL over it’s alcohol policies/attitudes. I’m pointing this out to illustrate that the ADF were fully independant and not playing favourites with the AFL.

Even now, the ADF, who pushed the ‘Goodsports’ program, has suggested that the ‘Aust footy’ culture is changing on this front – but, driven MORE from grass roots than the AFL top down.

Another aspect of the whole illicit drugs code – is the demographic of the people ‘striking out’. It’s easy for people to picture that likes of Ben Cousins, however, with the prevalance of cannabinoids (typically indicative of marijuana) – it’s important to remember where over 10% of the AFL player lists come from……the indigenous community. Now, this is no sweeping claim here – but, there’s a program that got kicked off around 10 years back, the Clontarf Indigenous Academy to encourage kids to school/attendance etc via footy.

From a recent article by Martin Flanagan (the Age) :

“Former Fremantle coach Gerard Neesham set up the Clontarf Foundation, which uses football to attract Aboriginal kids to school, and has supplied a ready flow of nominees for the AFL national draft. Neesham says the average 16-year-old Clontarf deals with has the lifestyle of a 26-year-old in relation to making choices about sex, drugs, cars and crime, the emotional maturity of a 11-year-old and less literacy then his grandparents. That’s one aspect of the reality AFL clubs are dealing with.”

In this context – a naming/shaming 1 strike illicit drugs policy looks like using a sledgehammer for a task requiring a precision toothpick.

irrespective of Richard Hinds’ usual topic…..and to be fair, he normally is fairly broadly based in his writing and is hardly an AFL specialist, seemingly more the person most likely to for the SMH into that market,

but, irrespective, the point is that this ad was proclaimed in the press and by some as a strike right back at the AFL…….however, of course, the officials tried to pour cold water on that.

So, from the Hinds article perspective, it should be no surprise that Gallop et al didn’t mention the ‘war’, but, if you read this paragraph, you see clearly that Hinds is having a healthy dig at BOTH the AFL and NRL :

“It has become no-win situation for rugby league, whose sabre-rattling has played into the AFL’s hands. And another victory for the provocative strategy devised by the AFL’s large Ministry of Information and enacted with relish by the Giants coach/provocateur Kevin Sheedy. By creating the impression that it is a threat to the NRL, a team that will not kick a Sherrin in anger for a year has already made its presence felt.”

and further I heard Andrew Demetriou on 3AW this morning, where he admitted the AFL knew an awful lot about this case that they have chosen to NOT play out in the public domain, including the false claims of pregnancy,

and that Demetriou was interviewed by Liz Hayes for about 30 mins, (and although they only used 2 lines from that) and he was reasonably happy with the balance of the reporting, BUT, was quite surprised that Ch.9 had named the girl and shown her face……however, obviously money has changed hands there.

The AFL again has copped a bit of criticism, including in todays press from the women of footy – – but, for the people NOT privvie to the info it seems clear that much of the criticism has been somewhat unfair or uninformed.

Ironically I heard an interview with a police deputy commissioner who, whilst being very helpful in the interview, was never willing to commit an opinion on specific cases/scenarios without knowing the circumstances and facts. It’s sad a few more people don’t adopt that sort of professional approach.

as an AFL follower, I would like to extend the olive branch and say that I reckon Benji was pretty justified and is being treated poorly and the media is……as per usual, trying to fan the flames into Scandalville.

btw – in the good old days, big tough footballers could give an idiot a clip behind the ears, heck, so could the police for that matter, and the balance of order was retained (or so it seemed). Not so these days. Society may get it’s wish and force footy players to live in cocoons which society with then bemoan.

Moonface and others –
please note now – “St Kilda teen lied she was pregnant ”

as revealed on 60 Minutes last night.

THE girl at the centre of the St Kilda nude photo scandal has admitted she lied about being pregnant to AFL footballer Sam Gilbert.

She told 60 Minutes last night: ”I was a stupid immature little teenager … [But] I don’t think I owe anyone an apology other than Sam.”

her credibility is severely questionable,

and the way the media is fanning the flames is severely questionable.

Moonface –

why oh why do you go on and on choosing to ignore such things as,

that Blacktown is a shared facility between AFL NSW and Cricket NSW and has already hosted top grade cricket matches and 2nd tier tournaments, and is a facility into which both the AFL and Cricket NSW invested about $2.5 million EACH.

That exactly fits your criteria – a multi function shared facility. In a precinct that includes a soccer goalkeepers training centre and a baseball training centre…….I wonder how much Govt money went into those.

btw – there’s a major difference between operational expenditure being subsidised (as with the FFA) compared to getting funding to assist with infrastructure projects (which all sports/codes recieve).

What IS obvious is the AFL invests far more into these shared projects than any other sporting body in the country – and, precious few see the asset anywhere other than in public hands (local councils in the main).

re multi function – I don’t recall many NRL/FFA/ARU investments in major multi function rectangular venues able to be configured for AFL. The AFL on the otherhand invested (even if not massively) in Homebush stadium, and invested heavily into Docklands stadium.

How much did the NRL put into Robina stadium? or the SFS?……and they ain’t much good for cricket.

FIUL –

considering how many ignorant comments you’ve made on the AFL tab, you should be the last person pushing someone for a ‘qualification’ to have or voice an opinion.

I’m not sure why you’ve gone the man rather than addressed any of the actual guts of my comments.

btw – the HAL and FFA has been an interesting sporting experiment to follow – and, to this point in time, most my early days predictions have come true…….not based on in depth knowledge of the game of soccer,

and that’s your problem here – – this is not about the technical aspects of a game of soccer – it’s broader, it’s about the lay of the land of the Australian sporting landscape – and on that front, I’ve got sufficient basis to form an opinion.

So do you.

We aren’t always right, and hopefully are ready to submit to someone armed with facts (although, even facts can be based upon perspective and recollection!).

Luke –

good article. I like your opinions. None of this mindless code war hoopla.

Good article.

Good read.

the other good element for Australia is that all that sports salary funding is in the main, based on sustainable business models and spreads the money quite broadly across a number of sports, with clubs spread broadly across the country. The wealth is quite nicely decentralised, and overseas corporations hoping to enter our markets have to split their sponsorship and attack individual markets with far greater respect and specificity than might happen if there was “an AFL-free sporting landscape with the beautiful game filling the vacuum”.

Congrats on doing the logistics that you have.

Note too, that around the world where there are Aust Footy and NRL sporting vacuums – – that, in the main, there’s only the couple of major Euro soccer leagues, and then, for many soccer feeder nations, the local league is almost an apology of a league. Small crowds, small venues, ….all the focus is off shore. The WC is the time you get the best of your lads grouped back together. On global comparisons, it’d actually be hard to argue that the A-League would or should be bigger than it is.

Australia kicks way above it’s weight in global comparisons…….with the HAL, on relative comparisons. Let alone, with the NRL and AFL sitting above and around it, that the HAL is 3rd in line in a nation the size (pop’n) of Australia and yet is still favourably comparable to other primarily soccer nations including founding members of FIFA.

SO, I question whether if you removed the AFL in particular, ……would that sporting vacuum necessarily exist? Would it just be ‘filled’??

I do have some theories on why Melbourne (time, locations, sudden wealth, isolation, urban development, social development) was a pretty unique case in the global sporting landscape. Had Aust Footy not evolved when it did, it was still 20 years before soccer or rugby stand alone would make the ‘football’ landscape more clarified. Now, Tom Wills at the time suggested the formation of playing some form of football to keep fit, or a shooting club (the concern of invasion).

The Melb Cup and Aust Footy got their footholds in the key 1850s-1860s era. Massive immigration and wealth creation and suburban growth, and creation of social institutions. Miss that window and who knows?

So, what we might’ve seen was had not footy evolved when it did – – the vacuum otherwise, would’ve been a red neck guy culture akin to the USofA and John Howard would’ve never been brave enough to push his gun reforms.

Compared to that, gimme egg ballers any day!!!!

and less revenue, profit margins killed, and FFA had to cut something,

enter the Fury,…..well, actually, exit the Fury.

The proof of the dire financial balance is there to be seen. It’s gotta be a very, very fine line right now, There’s other clubs in murky waters but that are higher priorities for the FFA to retain life lines for.

and to see and hear supposed fans of the game whine in other forums (and theRoar) about the price of finals tickets and the pathetic return of only 7500 to a home prelim final – – that’s attrocious and will only bury the HAL quicker than anything.

Right now, it’s more like the NSL than ever before, justification seems to be derived from one or two well attended games in isolation, the odd final…….the NSL had that. It’s not a sustainable business model and that’s I guess the crux of what Crawford was trying to deliver.

GrantS –

it’s a really good question re Travis Tuck – – because, whilst the policy had a number of guys on 2 strikes, the longer it went without anyone incurring a 3rd strike – then that was a measure of success.

Tuck is interesting for more reasons though, because, his dad, the AFL games record holder is a legend of the Hawthorn footy club. His older brother Shane Tuck was NOT picked up by Hawthorn, and has forged a solid career at Richmond. There was much supporter pressure on the Hawks for NOT having pick up the first son of a legend.

So, Travis Tuck comes along, and Hawthorn make sure they get their man this time…….and for Travis, he’s got all that ‘son of a legend’ pressure. Different circumstances and different personalities handle it in a variety of ways. Look at Geelong where Nathan Ablett was reluctant, then retired way too early with a premiership medallion and now is having a crack on the Gold Coast where Gary Jnr has ‘escaped to’ as well.

So, I dunno just what the club could or should’ve done, other than perhaps trade him to another club!!

The club doctors know and they are probably better placed than the club president to manage the player. If there’s nothing perceptable in other areas of the players performance, then, how is it the concern of the footy coaches or president?? If the player in question has not felt comfortable to confide in family, or friends or employers……is it appropriate to force that? when it’s the normal domain of confidential medical care?

That there’s no such thing as a perfect solution in this area is clear. Drugs both legal and illegal is a major issue and it’s not all black and white. I’m no expert but I prefer to defer to the experts in the field.

If you look back at how this story evolved, back during the 2006-2007 time frame and lead into the 2007 elections, the Howard Govt tried to make a political football of the AFL. Senator Christopher Pyne, George Brandis and John Howard in particular chimed in, with policy written effectively on a napkin, and Howard getting exposed on 3AW radio for not comprehending that the AFL WAS WADA compliant as well as having the additional illicit drugs code. Back during this time of ignorant politickng, there was an open letter paid for and published in the Age by 21 or so experts in the field who openly backed the AFL’s code and position and urged the AFL to resist populist pressures. These same people are very much opposed to the ‘zero tolerance’ and public outing ideals that J.Howard was pushing (which may be fine for drug cheats with performance enhancing drugs, but, given that Howard had a severe case of confusion – – it’s doubtful that his policy was that well thought out to distinguish.)

For me then, I keep thinking back to this, and unless I see these people turn around and change their mind, then, I’m willing to trust that the policy is worth sticking by in the long term.

The main measure of success so far has been that even with a more than trebling of tests, better knowledge of who and when to test and a broader range of drugs tested for, that the ‘strike rate’ has fallen from over 4% to 0.89%. As they say, it’s still too many – – but, the trending is all in the right direction.

sheek –

alas, after we saw the FFA pay overs to attract John O’Neill from the ARU and then Ben Buckley from the AFL, that becomes an inflationary pressure on key exec salaries.

Demetriou at very least prooved his worth during the negotiations with FFA, Lowy and Govt in the WC bid process……apparently…….if we believe the FFA sources that Michael Lynch quoted!!!

re the morality of it,

well, look at Ashley Cole, shoots a guy after bringing gun to training……..WTF????

and he get’s a penalty of being fined 2 weeks wages.

and that amounts to $400,000.

Let’s not be too fussed about someone getting $2.2 mill a year, when there’s ball kickers earning $10 million plus a year.

And while AFL players ARE NOT on a global pay scale, being industry specific as they are – the executives in charge of the game ARE on a global pay scale.

but – agreed, the PM is under paid, but, they do get pretty cool benefits.

GrantS –

do you understand the difference between drug cheats (WADA testing) and the illicit drugs policy for the health related ‘recreational’ drug use??

2 separate policies. The AFL has both, i.e. is fully WADA compliant plus the illicit policy.

what is tiresome is the ignorance.

FIFA and WADA have danced around each other for the best part of the 2000s. FIFA has in the main been not technically WADA compliant. The Rio Ferdinand issue was as much about Sep Blatter being keen for FIFA to not be seen as too soft – because, of course WADA regards a missed test very seriously.

FIUL – in quoting this incident is ignorant again that this is totally irrelevant to the AFL Illicit Drugs policy.

re WADA sanctions and policy, the AFL is and has been fully WADA compliant since the end of the 2005 season. No strings attached. Before that, the AFL was like FIFA, running their own variation on the theme of WADA with a tad bit more leeway for case by case assessment and punishment.

FIUL – should also be aware that as WADA is designed for top performers – that WADA target testing did NOT detect anything in the case of Ben Cousins in season 2006.

FIUL is way, way too like the old Jimbo who had no apparent comprehension of the distinction b/w the two drug testing protocols, the range and the double exposure to testing that AFL players have.

btw – MyLeftFoot below mentions the NRL,
in Australia, Cricket Australia was the only other single sport body to develop and apply an additional illicit testing policy.
And in Oct 2010, as I mentioned below, the Aust Sports Commission via the AIS has adopted it’s own 3 strike illicit policy.
None of the above replaces WADA testing. In all cases – it’s additional to WADA testing.

The ASC/AIS is a clear vindication of the AFL policy. So, this article should infact be far more broad in it’s terms of reference and attack the Aust Sports Commission and the AIS who clearly are, in the eyes of FIUL and the author, being irresponsible.

So, it’s very tiring once again having to put up with the abject ignorance of people who are showing the same inability to grasp the issue that people were 5 years ago. Time apparently is NOT a healer.

1 strike?? why are you brining up the AFL illicit drugs policy whilst talking about a fellow who failed a WADA performance enhancing drug test??

You do realise the difference? and that the AFL runs BOTH.

This fellow has failed a WADA anti-doping test.

The AFL IS WADA compliant and as such, any player faling an ASADA conducted WADA program test, is subject to up to a 2 year ban. 1, 2 or 3 strikes doesn’t even come into it!

As seen during the week with a young WAFL player attempting to get onto the Richmond Rookie list. He recieved 2 years suspension after apparently taking only 2 sudefeds (apparently he suffers bad hayfever – 1 before and 1 at 1/2 time of a grand final), and despite the WADA website recommending that less than 3 is a safe level – the dilemma is that after a game, a dehydrated player might be vulnerable to elevated test levels and he apparently was ‘just’ over.

So, not a forbidden item full stop, just, a forbidden level, just,

is it fair? Is it over the top? Not sure.

But, that’s why both the AFL and FIFA have at time fought against the dictatorial approach of the WADA system. FIFA in particular has engaged in a long running battle to rsetain case by case approaches, with the international court of sports arbitration as a fall back position should WADA not be satisfied. Such has been the level of the battle that in the lead up to the 2004 and 2008 Olympics there were articles running speculating whether soccer would be banned from the Olympics because of the FIFA/WADA impasse.

re the AFL illicit drugs policy. 1 strike would NOT serve it’s purpose, which is clearly and obviously different to a performance enhancing testing policy. You can’t run a health/welfare program as a zero tolerance public outing 1st strike system. Not when players are dealing confidentially with doctors and being put, like other members of the pubic, into ‘diversion’ programs.

The NRL can do what they want, they have zero transparency, they don’t even report their results. The AFL does. So, forgive me for not taking the NRL too seriously in this discussion because they’ve given us nothing.

However, that in Oct 2010, the Australian Sports Commission introduced for the AIS a 3 strikes illicit policy that actually goes less punitive than the AFL policy (noting the AFL was blackmailed by John Howard and his govt during an election campaign……politics is a bad bed partner).

Crosscoder –

I’d tend to agree re ACT and Cairns – – for several reasons and certainly the missing the boat reason in Canberra.

re the Enclave aspect, Melbourne I still regard for the NRL as a beach head only.

Now, whether you regard the Swans likewise in Sydney or not,

my response would be that if you are trapped on the beach, you either withdraw (Gallipolli), or you do something to smash your wait off the beach (GWS).

the potential growth line for the NRL is a bit of a crock though,

seriously,

the potential exists,

but, that’s because it’s so enclaved presently,

and that enclavity (if that’s a word) actually undermines the perceived value of any such potential expansion.

That the NRL has sat back and seen the Force ang Glory lever into the WA/Perth market as well as the Fremantle Dockers joining in with the Eagles…….might it be suggested that the NRL has missed it’s chance and should take a leaf from the AFL new 2nd tier comp called the NEAFL, the NRL might consider calling itself the NERL.

QED.

and so I feel no guilt for having no feelings for the RL Kangaroos or the RU Wallabies or the FFA Socceroos,

but then, back in the ’80s, I seriously preferred watching the West Indies than I did the Australians in the cricket………must make me a bad person!!!

perhaps, at the end of the day, all the nationalistic clap trap is just that – – it’s only sport. And I felt cheated if Viv Richards got dismissed cheaply.

FIUL –
stop being so obstinately argumentative. You ignorance makes you look foolish.

If you’ve ever played a game of Australian Football, you’ll ruddy well know it’s a 2 hour test, that each quarter runs effectively 30 minutes and whilst you may believe it’s only 20 mins, as a player, those last 10 phantom minutes that you don’t believe exist are ruddy hard to battle out.

(no matter how you try to cut up the time – – noting that it used to be 25 mins plus time on – – but then with a time administrative change to 20 plus time on – – the quarters still run for 30 mins……so, does that mean it’s 100 mins or 80 mins?? – it’s really just an accountancy practice.).

Mind you, having played in the ruck for several years, I can vouch that there’s no standing around after a goal is scored,

because those pesky boundary umpires get that ball back to the centre of the ground too ruddy quickly,

the number of times I was battling to get even a 5 second breather by the time I got back there before contesting the next ball up………..then I took up playing at full back, where, I might be standing around a lot even during general play.

btw – if we deduct what you call standing around time, then an NRL game reduces to what?? 55 mins? And a soccer match to 55 mins as well (based on FIFA’s own stats).

Where do you want to stop or start???

FIUL –

there’s a difference between game time and ‘actual play time’.

The Aust Footy game is 120 mins roughly of game time, the actual ‘play time’ you correctly point out is 4 qtrs of 20 mins, plus time on.

The NRL is 80 mins effectively without time on – – the debate has been had in the past around the waste of time when a conversion kick is set up. And we know from the 2006 FIFA WC that FIFA’s own stats showed that for 90 mins game time, the ‘actual playing time’ by their measure averaged only around 56 minutes I think it was. Ranging from 47 mins to mid/high 60s I think.

So, by any of those measures – – the ‘game’ time is 120 mins.

However, and this is key to the FTA format.

The AFL game time of 120 mins includes natural stop points, ad break opportunities, even when live (but shorter), i.e. after goals and with 3 inter period intra game extended breaks.

These are key factors still forgotten by many, in any like for like comparison. Ch.7 is quite happy going on delay on Friday night, as, if they went live, they could only squeeze one quick ad in between each goal. Presently, they know they can have a 4 ad ad break after each goal if they want. And it doesn’t kill the ‘continuity’ of the game as broadcast.

what responsibility does Frank Lowy take?

and how is Buckley judged with the separation of the A-League vs the FFA in general. Aren’t there a list of FFA wins that are somewhat separate to the A-League itself.

I guess the main thing is that Archie Fraser quit as a frustrated head of the A-League and whether that reflected upon an FFA focus on non-A-League activities that he couldn’t operate in those conditions????

how do you feel when Australia plays host to about 20 odd nations once every 3 years in a code that is supposedly only played here (certainly at Pro level) and yet there’s no expat Aussies amongst the 500-1000 participants. That Australia hosts it, owns it, runs it and is the central cog of it offsets that Australia does not actually contest the cup.

Does that swell your national pride?

or does it only count if we’re able to get on the field and smash the minnows (as England might wish they could!!).

I’m not trying to be overly prevocative – – – however, it’s more the national pride thing?

an example I guess is to remove Mark Webber from the F1 GP, as was the case a few years back – – no Aussies in it. Do you take pride in Australia hosting such an event even if no Aussies are participating?

(btw – I’m not trying to compare the AFL international cup to the F1 GP other than trying to establish whether playing host can swell national pride irrespective of competing)

Wall Nut –

in the RU vs RL thing though, I can clearly understand at very least a certain generation harboring deep rooted animosities.

And re the ‘un Australian’ thing – – what often get’s me is, over the distances that separate us across this wide sparcely populated land – – anywhere else in the world, you WOULD have national borders. Australia is a pretty flimsy construct in that respect. Just as we see anti AFL people claiming the game doesn’t represent their idea of Australia and to them is a ‘foreign’ game.

Kinda says it all really – –

and I’ve heard Eddie McGuire comment that Sydney isn’t just a different city to Melbourne, but, to him, it’s like a different country.

So, I reckon the ‘un-Australian’ lines should be parked, but, people should just remember that Australia DOES have regionalisation that does provide different levels of engagement with different sports. Obviously, were Australia like a lot of other countries with only 1 or 2 main footy codes – – there’d be a different level of engagement for national teams than there is given the hugely competitive domestic sporting/football market that exists.

And keep mindful too, that for every RU person lamenting the lack of support from RL people for the Wallabies, there would be an RL person frustrated by the RU people claiming the RL WC is Mickey Mouse and the Kangaroos only have 1.25 countries (aggregated) to play against.

funny thing is, a few NRL people talk about Perth, but, for TV networks, WA is a black hole.

Just look at how the AFL get’s carved up and Friday night east coast games go into Perth…..on a 3 hour delay!!!!

Would they cut the nightly news to run a NRL game from 5.30 to 7.30 on Friday nights into Perth?? I somehow doubt it. One thing that is clear is that a single team in a market is really only niche – – – until you get at least 2 teams, then, that market is almost more a liability than an asset.

FOr the NRL, Central Coast or Logan or Toowoomba or whereever, is still all nice and local, but not likely to add much.

The NRL would actually be better served with 2 teams in a market, like Melbourne, but, Melbourne has just been flooded with Rebels, Hearts and the Storm has a lot of work to reestablish market credibility.

Mike –

look at the lay of the land re the A-League 3-4 years ago. V2 and V3 had pretty good crowds, underpinned by MVFC doing averages at Docklands of around 26-32,000. Plans were being hatched to bid to host a FIFA WC, and 2006 had given optimism to believe that every 4 years a big boost to the game would come it’s way, and perhaps optimism that the Asian Cup and ACL might resonate more into the domestic market.

Back then – do you reckon there was perhaps a little too much optimism?

Not learning lessons from the MLS and J-League that showed you might expect an initial honeymoon period followed by a decline and period of hard graft before potentially rebounding with a more ‘mature’ and established product offering after 10-15 years (hmmm, and hosting a home WC!!!).

At any rate – – I’d suggest that costs have increased over that time, you have expanded player lists, NYL teams, W-League teams and the global player market, not getting any cheaper. And yet, you have MORE games, MORE mid week matches, no extra TV revenue, and attendances have dropped markedly.

It’s not just that the attendances drop and the revenues drop proportionally. Because – what you’ve lost is the profit margin. The cream is gone, even in Melbourne!!

Did the FFA take a punt?? And would it all have turned out differently with a successful WC bid? Was it worth the risk?? Would the FFA have been lambasted for NOT trying??

btw – I must say though, if the Fury was such a good idea, in a regional market a long way from anywhere, and already serviced by NBL and NRL teams – – then why wasn’t a 2nd side in each of Melb/Syd an even better idea at the time. The imbalance of moving to 6 teams in NSW and QLD and 1 in NZ and only 3 teams across the rest of Australia was a structually deficient model that seemed to be fighting the NRL for regional centres rather than establishing a big city core strength (i.e. a big city core strength of weekly rather than fortnightly games, of local derbies, and double the media presence and double the school visits (Peter Costello’s approval pending!!) etc).