AFL....Hypocrites...

[Bossdog 2,002]

The AFL commission was set up because the clubs were all about the themselves and not for the greater good of the game...Fair enough...

It is a non profit organisation there for the betterment of ALL clubs

The millions of dollars spent on establishing clubs all around Australia for a truly national competition....Fair enough.

What annoys me the most is the unfair way the weaker Victorian clubs are treated.

North, the bulldogs, us, are told to manage our clubs better but but are expected to play at the G against interstate teams on mothers day at twilight...Are given no Friday nights games against top sides so that we can generate cash flow, attract sponsers, and corporate members.

The MFC has been treated this way for a long time, and I understand the AFL saying that you have to deserve it, and that the broadcasters insist that the big matches are played to maximise audiences.

They cannot then say "We have to bail these clubs out all the time". It is because of them that a lot of these clubs are where they are.

A Melbourne Vs Hawthorn game at the G at twilight would attract 30 to 40 thousand and help us to become financial. The same game time against GWS lucky to get 10 thousand.

And while I at it, I have played and coached local footy and never in my time have any of the local clubs got 1 iota of help from the AFL,not a footy, not a red cent of financial assistance, not even a recognition of grass root footy club struggling to remain in existence.

Sorry rant over.......except for the AFL funded trip to the USA for the big wigs...During the season and the Ess saga.

[Dwight Schrute 16,797]

The AFL commission was set up because the clubs were all about the themselves and not for the greater good of the game...Fair enough...

It is a non profit organisation there for the betterment of ALL clubs

The millions of dollars spent on establishing clubs all around Australia for a truly national competition....Fair enough.

What annoys me the most is the unfair way the weaker Victorian clubs are treated.

North, the bulldogs, us, are told to manage our clubs better but but are expected to play at the G against interstate teams on mothers day at twilight...Are given no Friday nights games against top sides so that we can generate cash flow, attract sponsers, and corporate members.

The MFC has been treated this way for a long time, and I understand the AFL saying that you have to deserve it, and that the broadcasters insist that the big matches are played to maximise audiences.

They cannot then say "We have to bail these clubs out all the time". It is because of them that a lot of these clubs are where they are.

A Melbourne Vs Hawthorn game at the G at twilight would attract 30 to 40 thousand and help us to become financial. The same game time against GWS lucky to get 10 thousand.

And while I at it, I have played and coached local footy and never in my time have any of the local clubs got 1 iota of help from the AFL,not a footy, not a red cent of financial assistance, not even a recognition of grass root footy club struggling to remain in existence.

Sorry rant over.......except for the AFL funded trip to the USA for the big wigs...During the season and the Ess saga.

At the risk of sounding like another person throwing out conspiracy theories i don't think the AFL are concerned at all about weakening these clubs, i would imagine it would be much easier to move say a St kilda to Tassie than establish a whole new club again and compromise 3-4 drafts.

the thing that makes us different is the promotional side of the Melbourne footy club, being the name of the capitol city of the heart of football we kind of have a shield that makes us a team the AFL needs to get and keep strong, the doggies, saints and Roos probably aren't as important in that sense so the help they receive may be far more limited if at all.

anyway that's just my opinion.

[Bossdog 2,002]

Further to above.....The AFL are now telling us that they will select the CEO, board, bootstudder, I wonder if they will pay for my membership as well. We are now property of the AFL.

[Dwight Schrute 16,797]

Further to above.....The AFL are now telling us that they will select the CEO, board, bootstudder, I wonder if they will pay for my membership as well. We are now property of the AFL.

Not sure if anyone is really happy about it, because i don't think anyone trusts the AFL at all and rightly so it would seem,

if they are the reason we land Roos and Walsh and get our house in order than i am fine with it.

[Sir Why You Little 34,529]

The club is where it is because it has made some very bad decisions since 1965.

Listen to what Jackson says "On The Couch" again. He's right on all levels.

It's not nice to hear, but at least finally the club is admitting it and facing the music.

Jackson is a blast of fresh air...The AFL want a strong Melbourne...listen and learn for now.

[beelzebub 22,225]

ahh the curse !!!

[jnrmac 18,980]

Further to above.....The AFL are now telling us that they will select the CEO, board, bootstudder, I wonder if they will pay for my membership as well. We are now property of the AFL.

We became the property of the AFL in 1988. You are a bit late to squeal about it now.

They own our IP - colors, logo etc. In fact the commission owns the whole competition.

[La Dee-vina Comedia 16,443]

The club is where it is because it has made some very bad decisions since 1965.

Listen to what Jackson says "On The Couch" again. He's right on all levels.

It's not nice to hear, but at least finally the club is admitting it and facing the music.

Jackson is a blast of fresh air...The AFL want a strong Melbourne...listen and learn for now.

WYL - I agree with you. Often our opinions differ, but I think you've nailed this one.

[iv'a worn smith 1,979]

If it weren't for the AFL - the TV rights money - the MFC may not even be in existence right now. The AFL believes, correctly in my view, that you can't have a truly national competition, without a team called Melbourne, where the game began. Without the TV money, there would be no equalisation fund. So, TV to a large extent, runs the game, whether we like it or not. For that reason, the AFL could not continue to put up with us trashing the brand.

Right now, we have "caretakers" and didn't we need them.

I agree with WYL. Jackson is a breath of fresh air at the club and while taking a look in the mirror is painful and long overdue, facing the problems square on means you are compelled to fix them, not wallpaper over them.

[biggestred 4,314]

Have a read of Jeff Kennetts opinion piece in the Hun today.

whatever you think about the guy, its spot on.

[Bossdog 2,002]

We became the property of the AFL in 1988. You are a bit late to squeal about it now.

They own our IP - colors, logo etc. In fact the commission owns the whole competition.

I'm not "squealing" as you so delicately put it.....All I am saying that the stronger clubs get stronger and get much better deals than the poorer clubs who need it.....The AFL whinge about how the poorer club can't generate their own cash flow yet provide no fixture to allow them to do this. The equalisation fund give cash hand outs but do not give the opportunity for the lower clubs to generate membership and sponsorship, media profile, ect. I realise that they are so generously helping us out but if all things were equal, maybe they would not have to in the first place.

WYL. I am not having a go at Jackson, as I think he may be good for the footy club, I am just sick of fact of being on our bellies and saying "Thank you god almighty AFL for your precious hand me downs"

[Sir Why You Little 34,529]

Have a read of Jeff Kennetts opinion piece in the Hun today.

whatever you think about the guy, its spot on.

Thanks for the recommendation. Good arguement.

I wouldn't object if Kennett was part of a board ticket.

We need movers & shakers to run and promote the club. The quiet compliant Melbourne has failed.

[Webber 10,073]

Thought provoking OP, and it's interesting to see the current 'equalisation' agenda, which would be the no.1 story at the moment if not for the Bombers debacle. It's really more of a re-equalisation, as the draft and salary cap were the initial pillars.

Essentially the AFL has a hard task ahead, with the competing principles of allowing the lesser clubs revenue raising opportunities (prime time tv) with commercial maximisation (Collingwood v Hawthorn the optimum prime time coupling). TV is king, not so much as the NRL, where nobody goes to the games, but the major fixturing driver nonetheless.

There is a catch 22 in that in NOT fixturing the lesser clubs in prime time, regardless of on field success, their supporter growth potential is limited. But in order to justify equalisation measures, they MUST look to grow support.

There is an absolute advantage to the non-Melbourne clubs which must be addressed on field as well as off. Geelong has a ridiculously gifted armchair ride season after season. Their own stadium, with 90% + parochial support, a geographical supporter base, no 'derbies' to even out the support, a la WA and SA clubs, and NO games there against the power clubs.

The MFC are now and have always suffered from not having 'territory', and thus an identifiable community. We are a figurehead club, and the establishment club, and whilst that sounds nice, it's a bloody albatross, and it's time the AFL woke up to that.

[Sir Why You Little 34,529]

I'm not "squealing" as you so delicately put it.....All I am saying that the stronger clubs get stronger and get much better deals than the poorer clubs who need it.....The AFL whinge about how the poorer club can't generate their own cash flow yet provide no fixture to allow them to do this. The equalisation fund give cash hand outs but do not give the opportunity for the lower clubs to generate membership and sponsorship, media profile, ect. I realise that they are so generously helping us out but if all things were equal, maybe they would not have to in the first place.

WYL. I am not having a go at Jackson, as I think he may be good for the footy club, I am just sick of fact of being on our bellies and saying "Thank you god almighty AFL for your precious hand me downs"

WE are in the position we are in because the MFC has not stood up for ourselves over 5 decades.

We have allowed our power base to be eroded. It started when Ch7 made VFL a loungeroom sport in the 60's.

i don't blame the AFL for where we find ourselves (& yes the fixture sucks & the AFL killing home grounds sucks)

I blame the MFC & The MCC for not standing up and fighting harder and louder.

Gutnick tried & got the ass, i was furious at that.

Jackson is at least going to get the club running smoothly so we can concentrate on having champion footballers again.

If we can pull crowds the AFL will reward us.

[iv'a worn smith 1,979]

Have a read of Jeff Kennetts opinion piece in the Hun today.

whatever you think about the guy, its spot on.

As I said on another thread, relating to Stockdale, sometime ago, once a politician, always a politician. Jeff's point about AD's o/s junket, at a time when there are significant AFL issues to be dealt with, is well made and one I accept.

However, clearly the politician in him can't resist trying to score political points. I don't want such cynicism in my footy club thank you very much.