How about we wear face-masks and maybe the beanie and leggins Garlett was rocking at training? It'll be like some Mortal Kombat get-up for the kiddies over there and absolutely frightful if Viney was closing in for a tackle in an assassin-ensemble.

Compelling arguments Jack.

8 hours ago, AdamFarr said:

If we are scaling back our NT involvement, what's to be done with the financial gap minus those existing Darwin monies? They must be pretty confident that the business is up-trending and we can pull decent enough attendances year round to offset the loss or... we've got another plan up our sleeve?

When we started we were getting 15-17k vs these non-Vic clubs. Now we seem to be able to get 27-28k which might be the difference between having to go to Darwin and not. If we can improve onfield and get those crowds up to 35k then I would assume that would make up the shortfall. 

If we do cut our NT agreement, I would prefer we cut out the Darwin game. Alice Springs would be easier on the players.

If the AFL really want this sport to kickoff in China the game needs to have at least 1 club with a big city name like Melbourne to help with marketing.

No one in China would know where Port Adelaide or Gold Coast are located in Australia let alone heard of them. 

5 hours ago, Whispering_Jack said:

I was in both Beijing and Shanghai not all that long ago and I have come to believe that the experiment of playing a game there, no matter how lucrative for the clubs involved, is in the present climate, a potential disaster for the clubs involved.

Whilst the Chinese economy has been booming during periods when other economies have struggled, there have been recent signs of economic slowdown. The progression from a socialist society into a combination unique to China of the old with capitalism is bringing its  own problems and then there is the environment.

Who is going to construct a stadium to meet the specifications and size for AFL and who can guarantee clean air for the participants? Beijing is one of the most heavily polluted cities on this planet and Shanghai is not far behind. Large numbers of people get around wearing face masks to assist breathing and also apparently to ward off infectious air borne diseases (nobody's sure how effective they are). We were in Shanghai for two or three days and never saw sunshine - the city was shrouded in a dull fog most of the time. Our guide, a well educated man who had good contacts told us that the authorities released dodgy figures of smog readings which are bad enough in themselves but the real figures are much worse and whilst other Asian countries are trying to clean up their acts in this area, the government in China lags far behind.

The AFL did not hesitate when the CAS sanctions were handed down against Essendon, to cite health and safety reasons in order to give the Bombers massive concessions to enable them to prop up their team. I wonder if the AFL will take the same concerns with it into the China project. Will it undertake studies into the pollution issues? Can it trust the authorities to provide decent grounds, issue visas etc for the games to go ahead and will they stick to their promises noting the stories about the ground set aside for football during the Melbourne experiment of five or six years ago remains untouched to this day. 

I suspect that this all boils down to one thing in the end and that's money. The health and safety of the players and the interests of those who follow the game can be damned as usual.

Jack, I have an in-law who had family in the communist party. She assured us that it was just fog.

10 hours ago, AdamFarr said:

If we are scaling back our NT involvement, what's to be done with the financial gap minus those existing Darwin monies? They must be pretty confident that the business is up-trending and we can pull decent enough attendances year round to offset the loss or... we've got another plan up our sleeve?

It could be that the Club thinks that our improved competitiveness in the next four or five years will not only attract more members but greater crowds at our games particularly those played at the MCG, both of which will substantially improve our finances.

The MFC has already bet on our improvement when they used our high pick for this year, last year which allowed us to get Weideman. The only way this could be justified is if the club believed we were going to be much higher up the ladder this year and therefore would have had a lower pick. 

They clearly believe our improvement will come and so are making decisions about our future based in that. Smart move in my opinion, and one that is not only helping our finances but also our medium to long term competitiveness on the field.

5 hours ago, Whispering_Jack said:

I was in both Beijing and Shanghai not all that long ago and I have come to believe that the experiment of playing a game there, no matter how lucrative for the clubs involved, is in the present climate, a potential disaster for the clubs involved.

Whilst the Chinese economy has been booming during periods when other economies have struggled, there have been recent signs of economic slowdown. The progression from a socialist society into a combination unique to China of the old with capitalism is bringing its  own problems and then there is the environment.

Who is going to construct a stadium to meet the specifications and size for AFL and who can guarantee clean air for the participants? Beijing is one of the most heavily polluted cities on this planet and Shanghai is not far behind. Large numbers of people get around wearing face masks to assist breathing and also apparently to ward off infectious air borne diseases (nobody's sure how effective they are). We were in Shanghai for two or three days and never saw sunshine - the city was shrouded in a dull fog most of the time. Our guide, a well educated man who had good contacts told us that the authorities released dodgy figures of smog readings which are bad enough in themselves but the real figures are much worse and whilst other Asian countries are trying to clean up their acts in this area, the government in China lags far behind.

The AFL did not hesitate when the CAS sanctions were handed down against Essendon, to cite health and safety reasons in order to give the Bombers massive concessions to enable them to prop up their team. I wonder if the AFL will take the same concerns with it into the China project. Will it undertake studies into the pollution issues? Can it trust the authorities to provide decent grounds, issue visas etc for the games to go ahead and will they stick to their promises noting the stories about the ground set aside for football during the Melbourne experiment of five or six years ago remains untouched to this day. 

I suspect that this all boils down to one thing in the end and that's money. The health and safety of the players and the interests of those who follow the game can be damned as usual.

If you want to look at an outrageous gamble on the health of elite athletes just look at the olympics in Rio. My brother is close to the AOC and he says the harbour is so pulluted it is like swimming in raw sewage. This affects the rowers and the sailors, to the extent that after each practice the sailors have special chemical showers to make sure the are not affected health wise from their practice. The rowers likewise.

God knows how they will manage the open water swimming events, unless they hold them far away from RIO, or in an inland lake!

3 hours ago, Dees2014 said:

If you want to look at an outrageous gamble on the health of elite athletes just look at the olympics in Rio. My brother is close to the AOC and he says the harbour is so pulluted it is like swimming in raw sewage. This affects the rowers and the sailors, to the extent that after each practice the sailors have special chemical showers to make sure the are not affected health wise from their practice. The rowers likewise.

God knows how they will manage the open water swimming events, unless they hold them far away from RIO, or in an inland lake!

Your brother is 100% right about Rio. The bay where the aquatic events (including the long distance swim) is to be held is heavily polluted endangering not only the health of the humans who use it but it's especially toxic for the marine life and birds that, among other things, suffocate on plastic bags that get there through being dumped into the nearby river systems or the bay itself. There is another area suitable for water sports at Buzios (100k away) which is relatively clean but apparently when this was suggested as an alternative by an observer sent to examine the conditions, he was summarily sent home.

The waterways are not the only problems facing the Rio Olympics. A number of infrastructure projects are well behind, the economy is collapsing and the government is about to fall. The country lives on corruption.

It might be time for Gillon to mosey along and attempt to organise a home game for GWS. They would make a good fit.

5 hours ago, Left-Field said:

If we do cut our NT agreement, I would prefer we cut out the Darwin game. Alice Springs would be easier on the players.

Agreed. Also I think Alice Springs is where our academy will be located so it's a logical connection.

20 minutes ago, hells bells said:

Agreed. Also I think Alice Springs is where our academy will be located so it's a logical connection.

i'll drink to that

Alice is a great place to watch the footy as the sun sets on the West Macs. and there is something special to witness as fans pour into Alice form the surrounding communities though they all seem to go for Port. I've really enjoyed my trips to the games in both Darwin and Alice. The first Darwin game was played way too early, it was fairly brutal just watching from the stands but conditions are fairly mild in the middle of the year.

It will be interesting to see whether the club continues with the NT deal into the future. I'm not sure if we are committed for next year.  At some time the financial reward will have to be weighed up against the impact on our chances of playing finals and/or top 4.

IMO it will impact our chances this year.  Games at the MCG against Port and Freo based on current form you would be relatively confident of victory.  We may still win them, but the likelihood is less.  Not to mention the impact on the following weeks performance.

If we are serious about playing and winning finals it you'd think the NT solution may need a rethink.

If the Darwin game is to continue, the AFL must in the interests of both teams and of OH&S schedule it immediately before the bye for both teams. 

Alice is a different story - not nearly so physically testing or draining.

If I could say one thing to PJ, it would be to ditch one of these games from next year. It's far too taxing on the players. Surely the $500K we forgo won't kill us financially.

We have a brutal schedule in July because of the Darwin game and it will probably kill off our finals chances if we're still in the mix by then.

Sun July 3 - V's Adelaide - MCG

Sat July 9 - V's Freo - Darwin (we don't even have bye before the game let alone after!)

Sun July 17 - V's St Kilda Etihad

Sat July 23 - V's West Coast - Subiaco

Sun July 31 - V's Gold Coast - MCG

 

 

7 minutes ago, Bring-Back-Powell said:

If I could say one thing to PJ, it would be to ditch one of these games from next year. It's far too taxing on the players. Surely the $500K we forgo won't kill us financially.

We have a brutal schedule in July because of the Darwin game and it will probably kill off our finals chances if we're still in the mix by then.

Sun July 3 - V's Adelaide - MCG

Sat July 9 - V's Freo - Darwin (we don't even have bye before the game let alone after!)

Sun July 17 - V's St Kilda Etihad

Sat July 23 - V's West Coast - Subiaco

Sun July 31 - V's Gold Coast - MCG

 

 

Not scheduling this game so we have the bye after it is criminal. And two games against Saints at Etihad? Please Gill what are you blokes doing?

1 hour ago, monoccular said:

If the Darwin game is to continue, the AFL must in the interests of both teams and of OH&S schedule it immediately before the bye for both teams. 

It is unthinkable that hasn't happened to date. I cannot fathom the logic in not ensuring a bye follows a game played in the humidity of Darwin (for both us and our opponent). Surely the club has agitated for the bye to follow the Darwin game in the past? I just cannot comprehend it.

24 minutes ago, Bring-Back-Powell said:

Sun July 3 - V's Adelaide - MCG

Sat July 9 - V's Freo - Darwin (we don't even have bye before the game let alone after!)

Sun July 17 - V's St Kilda Etihad

Sat July 23 - V's West Coast - Subiaco

Sun July 31 - V's Gold Coast - MCG

 

 

Two very winnable games and two 50/50's with one unlikely. Doesn't seem that bad but I agree the fact we have to play on the fast Docklands track the week following the Darwin game is a worry and would surely heighten the risk of soft tissue injuries due to fatigue.

1 hour ago, It's Time said:

Not scheduling this game so we have the bye after it is criminal. And two games against Saints at Etihad? Please Gill what are you blokes doing?

I presume that your question is rhetorical.

Clearly Gil's primary agenda is to ensure the survival and success of his marquee clubs and the rest can just take it or leave it.

There can be no possible excuse for not scheduling a bye for both competing teams following a game in Darwin.....no excuse whatsoever.

If I were to meet Peter Jackson I would ask him straight out - "Peter, why have you not demanded a bye (for both clubs) following the Darwin game.  If not, why not. If so, what is Gil's response?"

As far as Alice is concerned, this should be no greater problem for either club than any other interstate travel.

2 hours ago, hells bells said:

It will be interesting to see whether the club continues with the NT deal into the future. I'm not sure if we are committed for next year.  At some time the financial reward will have to be weighed up against the impact on our chances of playing finals and/or top 4.

IMO it will impact our chances this year.  Games at the MCG against Port and Freo based on current form you would be relatively confident of victory.  We may still win them, but the likelihood is less.  Not to mention the impact on the following weeks performance.

If we are serious about playing and winning finals it you'd think the NT solution may need a rethink.

I'm sure when we are a chance of finishing Top 4 it won't matter where we play these games.

45 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

Two very winnable games and two 50/50's with one unlikely. Doesn't seem that bad but I agree the fact we have to play on the fast Docklands track the week following the Darwin game is a worry and would surely heighten the risk of soft tissue injuries due to fatigue.

There's greater risk of soft tissue injuries playing back to back games at Etihad, which would be a possibility if we scrap our "home" NT games.

Why the preoccupation with China? The national sport of China? Table tennis. 

Why not Japan. Well within our timezone. Proven acceptance of introduce game - baseball. They are obsessed with baseball. Rugby is also popular as is soccer. And they love to see big blokes wearing minimal clothing slapping the [censored] out of each other too.

Promote it with some sort of warrior analogy to tie into their samurai culture and Bob's your uncle.

2 hours ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

Two very winnable games and two 50/50's with one unlikely. Doesn't seem that bad but I agree the fact we have to play on the fast Docklands track the week following the Darwin game is a worry and would surely heighten the risk of soft tissue injuries due to fatigue.

I agree the quality of teams we play in July aren't exactly Rolls Royce, but the travel to Perth and Darwin combined with the short breaks are a killer.

Why have the AFL scheduled us to play Adelaide on a Sunday and then Darwin 6 days later?

 

If they addressed the poor scheduling, I am comfortable on us retaining both NT matches (and their sponsorship). After the Roos and Hawks carved up Tassie between them, the NT is the only other State/territory which has an AFL culture. I am convinced it would work on a Win-Win basis if only the AFL would work in with us. It could be potentially exciting if the AFL let us establish an Academy for indigenous players with first rights, similarly to what the Northern States currently enjoy. 

I know I'm in the minority here but I don't agree that the AFL should be obliged to schedule a bye for us post-NT.

Sure, it'd be nice, but it's our choice to play there and I don't think we deserve favourable treatment because of it. 

The clubs that play us there - Port, Freo et al - have a much stronger case for it, as they are forced to make the trip because of us. 

It'd be a different story if we were playing there at the behest of the AFL, but we're not. 

On 4/23/2016 at 3:49 PM, Whispering_Jack said:

The waterways are not the only problems facing the Rio Olympics. A number of infrastructure projects are well behind, the economy is collapsing and the government is about to fall. The country lives on corruption.

Sounds like the soccer world cup all over again.