14 hours ago, Chris said:

You say thanks for the socialist aagenda of the AFL as it has helped our club by giving us money, wouldnt you prefer we got the opportunity to make money so we didnt need the handout?

I think that when many look at the AFL they don't see the wood for the trees.  Of course there are issues where there will be lively debate - drugs, gambling, player welfare, the draw, exposure, racism, allocation of revenues, FD spending taxes and the list goes on and on.  People will have differing positions and that is healthy.

Where you put forward an argument for "equal opportunity" regarding public exposure on Friday night I'd put forward an argument to reward successful teams (they're there through good management) with Friday nights.  I'm a passionate Friday night watcher.  Would I rather watch Brisbane v Carlton or Hawks v WC?  Which will draw the bigger audience.  Audience will determine TV deals.  The bigger the TV deal the more able the AFL is to support it's clubs.  Good games on Friday mean I'll make that a priority, poor games on Friday and I couldn't give a hoot.

My view is "get the money in and then distribute it fairly".  IMO that gives the competition as a whole the best chance of success.  Better games in prime time means a bigger audience and greater interest in the game leading to more sponsorship, membership and junior participation.  More money means that the AFL can promote junior and country footy and we now have the establishment of womens footy. We now all have academies to promote the game to different cultural groups. Can't do that without money and they are fantastic developments.

You maybe right or I maybe right but the proof of the pudding is in the eating and the AFL has done it very well for years now.  They may have bungled the drug thing, they may have bungled the tanking thing, they may have bungled the FS bidding system, they may have bungled the rookie draft but they certainly haven't bungled the business of football.

Chris I think MFC have had the opportunity to make money but we bungled it and what the AFL's responsibility is now is to let us survive so we can make our own way in the competition.  I think we are doing it now but only because of good management by the AFL. But I also think it's very important that the successful teams get rewarded - not to the extent of exclusion of others but rewarded nonetheless.  The balance is difficult and how to do it will be debated, but AFL footy is very strong under the AFL's management, it's hard to deny that.

5 minutes ago, Baghdad Bob said:

I think that when many look at the AFL they don't see the wood for the trees.  Of course there are issues where there will be lively debate - drugs, gambling, player welfare, the draw, exposure, racism, allocation of revenues, FD spending taxes and the list goes on and on.  People will have differing positions and that is healthy.

Where you put forward an argument for "equal opportunity" regarding public exposure on Friday night I'd put forward an argument to reward successful teams (they're there through good management) with Friday nights.  I'm a passionate Friday night watcher.  Would I rather watch Brisbane v Carlton or Hawks v WC?  Which will draw the bigger audience.  Audience will determine TV deals.  The bigger the TV deal the more able the AFL is to support it's clubs.  Good games on Friday mean I'll make that a priority, poor games on Friday and I couldn't give a hoot.

My view is "get the money in and then distribute it fairly".  IMO that gives the competition as a whole the best chance of success.  Better games in prime time means a bigger audience and greater interest in the game leading to more sponsorship, membership and junior participation.  More money means that the AFL can promote junior and country footy and we now have the establishment of womens footy. We now all have academies to promote the game to different cultural groups. Can't do that without money and they are fantastic developments.

You maybe right or I maybe right but the proof of the pudding is in the eating and the AFL has done it very well for years now.  They may have bungled the drug thing, they may have bungled the tanking thing, they may have bungled the FS bidding system, they may have bungled the rookie draft but they certainly haven't bungled the business of football.

Chris I think MFC have had the opportunity to make money but we bungled it and what the AFL's responsibility is now is to let us survive so we can make our own way in the competition.  I think we are doing it now but only because of good management by the AFL. But I also think it's very important that the successful teams get rewarded - not to the extent of exclusion of others but rewarded nonetheless.  The balance is difficult and how to do it will be debated, but AFL footy is very strong under the AFL's management, it's hard to deny that.

Can't argue with that

although i will say The WADA situation is a disgrace. 

I have it as a much higher priority than Bob

1 hour ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

While the issues might be mutually exclusive, not everyone sees it that way. There are many on here who seem to believe the majority of the MFC's problems exist because of mismanagement of (or by) the AFL. I disagree with that view - I think the AFL is, overall, a well run organisation. If the MFC had been run that well over the last 50 years (or even just the last decade) we might be a powerhouse club, too.

our deemise over the last 50+ years has been largely because of the MCC influence.  the preceeding times playing on the MCG as the sole club had its large benefits.

Since the mid sixties as the world was changing,  in all sports & in all political agendas, & black power was rising,  & woman's rights were bouncing along, the powers that be hamstrung the Melbourne Footy club, & the administrators who get voted onto our boards come from there abouts.  the attitudes come from up in the North.

 

...and the club has floundered in soft nice mismanagement since.   apart from a brief stint in the 80's with Richard (Dic') Seddon.

 

we must stop the mcc influence from our boards in future.  & get back to  traditional Hard Footy Values,  which  'Checker'  brought into this club back in the 30's.

Edited February 25, 20169 yr by dee-luded

11 minutes ago, Baghdad Bob said:

IWhere you put forward an argument for "equal opportunity" regarding public exposure on Friday night I'd put forward an argument to reward successful teams (they're there through good management) with Friday nights.  I'm a passionate Friday night watcher.  Would I rather watch Brisbane v Carlton or Hawks v WC?  Which will draw the bigger audience.  Audience will determine TV deals.  The bigger the TV deal the more able the AFL is to support it's clubs.  Good games on Friday mean I'll make that a priority, poor games on Friday and I couldn't give a hoot.

 

Carlton must have been hugely successful 'Bob' to get all those Friday night games last year...

7 minutes ago, Baghdad Bob said:

I think that when many look at the AFL they don't see the wood for the trees.  Of course there are issues where there will be lively debate - drugs, gambling, player welfare, the draw, exposure, racism, allocation of revenues, FD spending taxes and the list goes on and on.  People will have differing positions and that is healthy.

Where you put forward an argument for "equal opportunity" regarding public exposure on Friday night I'd put forward an argument to reward successful teams (they're there through good management) with Friday nights.  I'm a passionate Friday night watcher.  Would I rather watch Brisbane v Carlton or Hawks v WC?  Which will draw the bigger audience.  Audience will determine TV deals.  The bigger the TV deal the more able the AFL is to support it's clubs.  Good games on Friday mean I'll make that a priority, poor games on Friday and I couldn't give a hoot.

My view is "get the money in and then distribute it fairly".  IMO that gives the competition as a whole the best chance of success.  Better games in prime time means a bigger audience and greater interest in the game leading to more sponsorship, membership and junior participation.  More money means that the AFL can promote junior and country footy and we now have the establishment of womens footy. We now all have academies to promote the game to different cultural groups. Can't do that without money and they are fantastic developments.

You maybe right or I maybe right but the proof of the pudding is in the eating and the AFL has done it very well for years now.  They may have bungled the drug thing, they may have bungled the tanking thing, they may have bungled the FS bidding system, they may have bungled the rookie draft but they certainly haven't bungled the business of football.

Chris I think MFC have had the opportunity to make money but we bungled it and what the AFL's responsibility is now is to let us survive so we can make our own way in the competition.  I think we are doing it now but only because of good management by the AFL. But I also think it's very important that the successful teams get rewarded - not to the extent of exclusion of others but rewarded nonetheless.  The balance is difficult and how to do it will be debated, but AFL footy is very strong under the AFL's management, it's hard to deny that.

Two issues, rewarding successful teams is great in theory but it does not happen in practice, it all comes down to the teams with the biggest TV audience regardless of how the club is managed or where they sit on the ladder.

Your view of getting as much money in as possible is shared by the AFL. This is very short sighted. This was the approach taken in the 90's and early 00's for all the right reasons, the AFL was struggling and needed the boost. We are past that point and the code has the warning signs of struggling again due to the inequity of the comp. This initial boost to AFL funding was on the back of the big clubs and using their pull to generate the income, it worked and we should all be thankful for that. It also came at a cost of pushing the smaller clubs further down, it was a price that had to be paid at the time. Now the code is stable and making money it is time to re-balance the equation. We have paid back the big clubs for the last few years at least, they are now huge. The little clubs are now getting paid back for suffering for the cause by way of cash. A better approach for the long term security of the code is to now provide those small clubs with the opportunities the little ones didn't get before and allow them to build and stand on their own two feet. The current system doesn't do that no matter how well run the club is, the TV execs will not allow it. It is time the AFl told the TV execs that this is how our code will be, we understand that means we get less money now but we think that by doing this we will have a healthier code int eh long term (and therefore more long term security).

What is they say about teaching a man to fish?

The biggest problem for the AFL is that no one believes anything they say. People automatically assume every public utterance is spin, or worse. They've completely blown their credibility.

Just now, Tony Tea said:

The biggest problem for the AFL is that no one believes anything they say. People automatically assume every public utterance is spin, or worse. They've completely blown their credibility.

How true is this. A classic borrowing might be .. " How do you know the AFL is bullshlttting?"   ..Their lips are moving !!

10 minutes ago, rjay said:

Carlton must have been hugely successful 'Bob' to get all those Friday night games last year...

Yeh, that was amazing wasn't it.  I can't explain it either.  I didn't watch their games and that is why the successful clubs should play.

7 minutes ago, Chris said:

Two issues, rewarding successful teams is great in theory but it does not happen in practice, it all comes down to the teams with the biggest TV audience regardless of how the club is managed or where they sit on the ladder.

Bigger support bases means higher audiences means higher revenues means all clubs are better off and the game is more secure.

Chris we differ.  Let's revisit in 10 years and see how the AFL is going.

16 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

Can't argue with that

although i will say The WADA situation is a disgrace. 

I have it as a much higher priority than Bob

The whole handling of the EFC case was embarrassing to anyone who has an interest in these things and in reality if we had a more independent AFL media they would be calling for heads.

Just now, Tony Tea said:

The biggest problem for the AFL is that no one believes anything they say. People automatically assume every public utterance is spin, or worse. They've completely blown their credibility.

That they have & i don't think they care. 

$20-30 a ticket to attend a practise match that has no meaning apart from blowing out cobwebs

betting on these games is just wrong. 

 

1 minute ago, Chris said:

The whole handling of the EFC case was embarrassing to anyone who has an interest in these things and in reality if we had a more independent AFL media they would be calling for heads.

100% agree

Bob its been far easier for some clubs to build/enhance their brand than others. This is probably the greatest inequality  that has affected the bottom line of many clubs. Even when Collingwood and Hawthorn were far less successful they weren't dlcked around like some clubs , us included. This emanates from a boys club within a boys club.

If as you suggest we  are to morph more and more towards a pure business model... lets run it properly as one and not a toy for some well to do's !!

1 minute ago, Sir Why You Little said:

That they have & i don't think they care. 

$20-30 a ticket to attend a practise match that has no meaning apart from blowing out cobwebs

betting on these games is just wrong. 

 

Firstly people can vote with their feet and not go to the matches.  And I hope they don't but you get in free if you are a club member don't you?

You may think betting on these things is wrong but where are peoples rights to do what they want and make their own decisions?  I don't bet so IDGAF but we've got to stop making decisions for people and make them responsible for their choices.

1 minute ago, Baghdad Bob said:

Yeh, that was amazing wasn't it.  I can't explain it either.  I didn't watch their games and that is why the successful clubs should play.

Bigger support bases means higher audiences means higher revenues means all clubs are better off and the game is more secure.

Chris we differ.  Let's revisit in 10 years and see how the AFL is going.

Yes we do differ. My fear is that in 10 years we will still have the same teams getting handouts from the AFL, that is what will happen under the current system. I would love to see a comp in 10 years where every club is making a profit off their own back (with the exception maybe of the two newbies who may take a little longer).

I would love for the AFL to turn around to the clubs and give them all the same access to the market, help them put the right processes in place and then say the welfare stops in 5 years, if you can't stand on your own two feet at that point then you are gone. They are in a position now where they can do that without jeopardising the code as a whole. 

1 minute ago, Chris said:

I would love for the AFL to turn around to the clubs and give them all the same access to the market, help them put the right processes in place and then say the welfare stops in 5 years, if you can't stand on your own two feet at that point then you are gone. 

I fear that because I wonder if we'd have a competition.  Interestingly Collingwood were broke under McAlister and Eddie put them right.  Hawthorn were broke and Dicker put them right.  Richmond were the worst run club in the comp for years and Essendon and Carlton  would be in terrible trouble now.  Melbourne, NM, PA and Saints (?) would all have folded under this system.  There would be no little league and no Friday night footy.

The reality is the clubs can't be trusted.  Many here point to the failures of the AFL but could just as easily point to he failure of just about any club over the years.  Poor CEO's and Boards come and go.  I think there needs to be a safety net which the AFL provides or we won't have a competition in (say) 10 years.

Another point of difference.

2 minutes ago, Baghdad Bob said:

I fear that because I wonder if we'd have a competition.  Interestingly Collingwood were broke under McAlister and Eddie put them right.  Hawthorn were broke and Dicker put them right.  Richmond were the worst run club in the comp for years and Essendon and Carlton  would be in terrible trouble now.  Melbourne, NM, PA and Saints (?) would all have folded under this system.  There would be no little league and no Friday night footy.

The reality is the clubs can't be trusted.  Many here point to the failures of the AFL but could just as easily point to he failure of just about any club over the years.  Poor CEO's and Boards come and go.  I think there needs to be a safety net which the AFL provides or we won't have a competition in (say) 10 years.

Another point of difference.

I agree that there would need to be a safety net of some description for the appalling management that has been in place at various clubs, including ours. I think we are at a point though where clubs can become healthy, viable, and profitable if given the same opportunities. It wont matter how well we are run or how many games we win, we will never get the exposure to the market of say a Collingwood. That hold us down as it does with many other clubs. That is what I want to stop. 

Just like in general society I think we should be getting people off welfare through supporting them and giving them the tools to stand on their own feet, teaching them to fish. And just like in society if we can do this then as a whole we are better off. The AFL see things differently. 

Happy to leave it there, we both know how the other thinks on this issue and both are valid views.

I might be on my own but I reckon footy is in a good state.  I really enjoy watching it (despite being a Dees fan). Last year the race for the flag was quite open, 5-6 teams could have won it and I think it will be even more open this year.  the race for the top 8 will go down to 13-14th position i reckon

areas for improvement sure. 

2 minutes ago, DubDee said:

I might be on my own but I reckon footy is in a good state.  I really enjoy watching it (despite being a Dees fan). Last year the race for the flag was quite open, 5-6 teams could have won it and I think it will be even more open this year.  the race for the top 8 will go down to 13-14th position i reckon

areas for improvement sure. 

I would say last year there was some competition for places in the 8 but unfortunately and as it panned out there really was only one club that was going to win if they didn't get major injuries. Geelong, Sydney & Freo had past their primes and Port the logical contender had a shocker of a season. WC were an anomaly and were never going to win it.

25 minutes ago, Baghdad Bob said:

Firstly people can vote with their feet and not go to the matches.  And I hope they don't but you get in free if you are a club member don't you?

You may think betting on these things is wrong but where are peoples rights to do what they want and make their own decisions?  I don't bet so IDGAF but we've got to stop making decisions for people and make them responsible for their choices.

 

25 minutes ago, Baghdad Bob said:

Firstly people can vote with their feet and not go to the matches.  And I hope they don't but you get in free if you are a club member don't you?

You may think betting on these things is wrong but where are peoples rights to do what they want and make their own decisions?  I don't bet so IDGAF but we've got to stop making decisions for people and make them responsible for their choices.

Bob. These are practise games where the final score is not paramount

betting on these games is just wrong. 

11 minutes ago, Tony Tea said:

The biggest problem for the AFL is that no one believes anything they say. People automatically assume every public utterance is spin, or worse. They've completely blown their credibility.

 

....... this is the way of the whole western world at this time,  whether by CEO's of Multinational Organ isations.   & including the AFL as well.  Churces, Politicians no one believes...  if our leaders can't be straight with us,  then no-one will be honest

 

the leaders have run Humanity off the rails.  in the name of the $$$$

 

 "white man speak with fork tongue"

1 minute ago, dee-luded said:

 

....... this is the way of the whole western world at this time,  whether by CEO's of Multinational Organ isations.   & including the AFL as well.  Churces, Politicians no one believes...  if our leaders can't be straight with us,  then no-one will be honest

 

the leaders have run Humanity off the rails.  in the name of the $$$$

 

 "white man speak with fork tongue"

You've only got to look at who the AFL use for publicity, spin and bvllsh!t to see that all those groups scoop their personnel from the same rancid bucket.

25 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

betting on these games is just wrong. 

Why? And who are you (or I) to tell others what they should and shouldn't do?

 

3 minutes ago, Baghdad Bob said:

Why? And who are you (or I) to tell others what they should and shouldn't do?

 

Match Fixing Bob

5 minutes ago, Baghdad Bob said:

Why? And who are you (or I) to tell others what they should and shouldn't do?

 

I guess if anyone is stupid enough to bet on a practice match it's up to them 'Bob'.

...but I don't think it's as simple as telling people what they should and shouldn't do. Gambling in sport is out of control and along with drugs is a major issue. I see nothing wrong with trying to regulate it so that problems like match fixing or spot bet fixing don't be come an issue in our game.

I don't know how we will do it but I think we might be pushing against a very strong tide, we seem to be in bed with the enemy on this one.

15 minutes ago, rjay said:

I guess if anyone is stupid enough to bet on a practice match it's up to them 'Bob'.

...but I don't think it's as simple as telling people what they should and shouldn't do. Gambling in sport is out of control and along with drugs is a major issue. I see nothing wrong with trying to regulate it so that problems like match fixing or spot bet fixing don't be come an issue in our game.

I don't know how we will do it but I think we might be pushing against a very strong tide, we seem to be in bed with the enemy on this one.

Banning betting on NAB matches is not going to stop match fixing.  That is a much bigger issue.  Frankly I'd like to ban betting in any form but that is an invasion of rights.

I was responding to WYL's assertion that betting on NAB matches was wrong.  It's no more "wrong" than betting on anything.  And where there is betting match fixing is an issue and has been forever.