Quote

“We need our AFL program to train on a ground that is the same dimensions as the MCG and we want our AFLW and second-tier competition teams to play at a venue that not only meets their needs, but that of those supporters that come to watch them play,” Richmond president Peggy O’Neal said.

When he was interviewed lately I think it was Pert (or GB) who mentioned our plans have a Docklands sized oval. That would be a major mistake. We have to barge out some extra room - be it from the facility, the roads/trees or the soccer/rugby fields - to create an MCG sized oval. Investing in anything less would be an awful compromise.

 

14 minutes ago, DeeSpencer said:

Very topical with The Crown, didn't Thatcher say  "We know that there is no such thing as public money – there is only taxpayers’ money”?

Millions and millions of dollars on facilities with the only clear need being female change rooms and maybe some public safety measures to allow crowds back in. You could build the Taj Mahal of female change rooms for 500k yet alone 15M.

The men and women don't train or play at the same time anyway so I wonder how necessary the change rooms even are but if it makes it more professional then it's a good idea. VFL crowds haven't had any issues at Punt Road for a few years now either but maybe a few more toilets and somewhere warm to sit would be good too.

But there's no way the spending matches the return when that same money could go on funding tafe, transport, local sporting clubs, hospitals etc. $15M for a few thousand in the crowd, that takes a long time to make back. Clubs aren't growing jobs either, they all just slashed their footy departments by 30%. 

Maybe it's not one or the other. The Vic Government seem determined to spend big on housing and transport as is, which is great. But I'd be looking at giving 1500 local footy teams across the state 10k each to bounce back next year before I gave 15M to Richmond.

Yep, she did. She was a liar and is most synonymous with neoliberalism, but it actually started in politics on the left side. Denis Healey was the original neoliberal politician (trying to target the money supply). Currency issuing governments spend by crediting bank accounts at the central bank on behalf of Treasury. The BoE knows this, but the current Chancellor of the Exchequer has just come out again to claim the government cannot create the currency and that tax payer money is what funds government expenditure. So where did the firms and households get the money from? And before you say private banks, private banks make loans before they have the funds and then find reserves when the customer wants to clear the payment. It's a lie and it shackles our capacity as a 'society'. Thatcher also didn't believe in 'society', but conservative politicians before her did.

I agree with you on giving Richmond money. It's not the greatest look given their wealth, but no one will hear about grassroots footy clubs, whereas we'll hear about Richmond.

Knocking down the historic Jack Dyer stand and replacing it with a characterless brick and glass block....not happy

Edited November 18, 20204 yr by Diamond_Jim

7 minutes ago, A F said:

Yep, she did. She was a liar and is most synonymous with neoliberalism, but it actually started in politics on the left side. Denis Healey was the original neoliberal politician (trying to target the money supply). Currency issuing governments spend by crediting bank accounts at the central bank on behalf of Treasury. The BoE knows this, but the current Chancellor of the Exchequer has just come out again to claim the government cannot create the currency and that tax payer money is what funds government expenditure. So where did the firms and households get the money from? And before you say private banks, private banks make loans before they have the funds and then find reserves when the customer wants to clear the payment. It's a lie and it shackles our capacity as a 'society'. Thatcher also didn't believe in 'society', but conservative politicians before her did.

I agree with you on giving Richmond money. It's not the greatest look given their wealth, but no one will hear about grassroots footy clubs, whereas we'll hear about Richmond.

She was certainly a [censored], but convenient and topical.

The best thing for women's footy and for the AFL is long term sustainability at community level. The more girls who keep turning up to play the better the standard the AFLW will become. The short term boost of a renovated Punt road will do a lot less for the game than new rooms, hot showers and well maintained ovals at the local level. But you're right, it's easier to look at the nice new facilities as you drive down Punt road and see the investment returns.

21 minutes ago, DeeSpencer said:

But I'd be looking at giving 1500 local footy teams across the state 10k each to bounce back next year before I gave 15M to Richmond

Couldn't agree more with this. Put the money into the grassroots of the game. Much better value for money and offers genuine community benefit rather than contrived justifications I've heard from Richmond (Just listened to a snippet of Brendan Gale on SEN. Talked about how the oval was becoming smaller relatively speaking because the players were fitter. Seriously. I wonder if he had a straight face as he said it)

9 hours ago, Swooper Northey said:

Other than the club's stated desire to have a base in the Melbourne 'sporting precinct', we've yet to see any firm plan. All communication on this issue from the club has been vague and while I understand things can be sensitive when working with state government, City of Melbourne and the Melbourne & Olympic Park Trust, surely the members deserve a more substantial update? 

You'd rather they come out early so we know what's going on only for it to be nixed by private interest groups before it gets off the ground (ala the Jolimont option?)

Edited November 18, 20204 yr by Dr. Gonzo

2 hours ago, Diamond_Jim said:

Knocking down the historic Jack Dyer stand and replacing it with a characterless brick and glass block....not happy

Surely a 106 year old stand is heritage listed? Absolutely appalled that the rich city footy clubs are getting all this government funding. Really feel sorry for the struggling footy clubs in the country.

8 hours ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

I still believe the Government will agree to provide financial support when we have an appropriate proposal to present them with. For some time, I've believed the best plan for us is to work with Collingwood to redevelop Victoria Park so they can return to their nest* while we take over their facilities in Olympic Park.

 

*Once there, if they want to [censored] in it, that's their business. It's what they, and their supporters, do best.

Check victoria park out nowdays. It is a fantastic community park. Horse long bolted

3 hours ago, DeeSpencer said:

When he was interviewed lately I think it was Pert (or GB) who mentioned our plans have a Docklands sized oval. That would be a major mistake. We have to barge out some extra room - be it from the facility, the roads/trees or the soccer/rugby fields - to create an MCG sized oval. Investing in anything less would be an awful compromise.

 

I noted that slip of the tongue too, and got ridiculed for saying it on here 

Edited November 18, 20204 yr by Half forward flank

Sorry but I don't care if Punt Rd burns to the ground. Get rid of that black and yellow rubbish.

24 minutes ago, dice said:

Surely a 106 year old stand is heritage listed? Absolutely appalled that the rich city footy clubs are getting all this government funding. Really feel sorry for the struggling footy clubs in the country.

you would think so given that the black and white stand that surrounds the outer at Vic Park is heritage listed.

I cycled out past Victoria Park today and it looked great. A world away from its days as a VFL venue. Whether it's Richmond or us, all of these developments are only good until the next widening of Punt Road. We might be fine depending on where our facility is located at Goschs but the Tiges would surely need to relocate. 

I'm genuinely surprised there isn't a heritage listing placed on the Jack Dyer stand, there aren't many of those old classic stands left over (I suppose for good reason).

As for us, I actually also am of the opinion if he have a good proposal to put forward to the government then it will be supported, it would just be interesting to know what plans we have brewing (it's felt like they've been going forever). 

4 hours ago, A F said:

Yep, she did. She was a liar and is most synonymous with neoliberalism, but it actually started in politics on the left side. Denis Healey was the original neoliberal politician (trying to target the money supply). Currency issuing governments spend by crediting bank accounts at the central bank on behalf of Treasury. The BoE knows this, but the current Chancellor of the Exchequer has just come out again to claim the government cannot create the currency and that tax payer money is what funds government expenditure. So where did the firms and households get the money from? And before you say private banks, private banks make loans before they have the funds and then find reserves when the customer wants to clear the payment. It's a lie and it shackles our capacity as a 'society'. Thatcher also didn't believe in 'society', but conservative politicians before her did.

I agree with you on giving Richmond money. It's not the greatest look given their wealth, but no one will hear about grassroots footy clubs, whereas we'll hear about Richmond.

She was also the first person with the title Prime Minister/Chairman/Premier/President/Chancellor (i.e. Head of Government) to use the term 'global warming'. 

1 hour ago, Queanbeyan Demon said:

She was also the first person with the title Prime Minister/Chairman/Premier/President/Chancellor (i.e. Head of Government) to use the term 'global warming'. 

Interesting tidbit. Climate science is only really political in the US and Australia. Germany, the UK, Canada etc all believe in the science. I suspect most of the US and Australian politicians do too, but they're paid very well to do the opposite. 

And @DeeSpencer, yeah, Punt Road is one of the busiest roads in Melbourne. Lots of eyes on that site each day.

3 hours ago, dice said:

Surely a 106 year old stand is heritage listed? Absolutely appalled that the rich city footy clubs are getting all this government funding. Really feel sorry for the struggling footy clubs in the country.

it didn't stop them tearing down the members stand at the g, and that was a 100x more heritage than that rotting wooden ferals stand. 

16 hours ago, A F said:

Yep, she did. She was a liar and is most synonymous with neoliberalism, but it actually started in politics on the left side. Denis Healey was the original neoliberal politician (trying to target the money supply). Currency issuing governments spend by crediting bank accounts at the central bank on behalf of Treasury. The BoE knows this, but the current Chancellor of the Exchequer has just come out again to claim the government cannot create the currency and that tax payer money is what funds government expenditure. So where did the firms and households get the money from? And before you say private banks, private banks make loans before they have the funds and then find reserves when the customer wants to clear the payment. It's a lie and it shackles our capacity as a 'society'. Thatcher also didn't believe in 'society', but conservative politicians before her did.

I agree with you on giving Richmond money. It's not the greatest look given their wealth, but no one will hear about grassroots footy clubs, whereas we'll hear about Richmond.

YES AF private banks are highly leveraged businesses that really own very little in terms of share holder equity

the only thing of any value they own is the banking licence>They add zero to the real economy other that the influnec on the cost of managing money.

That gives them the ability to borrow at wholesale and lend at retail. Its like magic and the government gives them the licence.

the worst of all then government limits the number of banking licences which then underwrites a false valuation on the banks

And it just goes on. the only time you can value a bank is when they go broke mainly from trying to hold too many balls in the air.

And now $16M for St.Kilda on top of the bucketloads they have received to re-develop Moorabbin:

https://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/victoria/danny-frawleys-legacy-spurs-16m-centre/news-story/0640a1198930b63f1ba67f6a8c5a938c

 

7 minutes ago, george_on_the_outer said:

And now $16M for St.Kilda on top of the bucketloads they have received to re-develop Moorabbin:

https://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/victoria/danny-frawleys-legacy-spurs-16m-centre/news-story/0640a1198930b63f1ba67f6a8c5a938c

 

Jeez we better hurry the f up before all this money gets allocated.

Mr Barlett. Mr Pert. Where are our plans?

14 hours ago, Half forward flank said:

Check victoria park out nowdays. It is a fantastic community park. Horse long bolted

 

13 hours ago, Rab D Nesbitt said:

I cycled out past Victoria Park today and it looked great. A world away from its days as a VFL venue. Whether it's Richmond or us, all of these developments are only good until the next widening of Punt Road. We might be fine depending on where our facility is located at Goschs but the Tiges would surely need to relocate. 

Describing "Victoria Park" as "fantastic" and looking great just doesn't compute after years of being conditioned to it being otherwise.

The saints have found a great angle naming their pool and gym after Spud and pretending it’s about mental health. 
 

What’s our angle?

Jim Stynes centre for sun smart education?

The Ox’s gamblers help.

Norm Smith Institute for curses.

Ronald D B building and it changes it colours multiple times?

13 minutes ago, DeeSpencer said:

The saints have found a great angle naming their pool and gym after Spud and pretending it’s about mental health. 
 

What’s our angle?

Jim Stynes centre for sun smart education?

The Ox’s gamblers help.

Norm Smith Institute for curses.

Ronald D B building and it changes it colours multiple times?

Has to be something to do with The Reach foundation and youth.  So that is every Victorian club except us and I Hawthorn but there will be funding for Dingley.

You hope with the role change of the Footy Manager that something is in the pipeline.

43 minutes ago, DeeSpencer said:

The saints have found a great angle naming their pool and gym after Spud and pretending it’s about mental health. 
 

What’s our angle?

Jim Stynes centre for sun smart education?

The Ox’s gamblers help.

Norm Smith Institute for curses.

Ronald D B building and it changes it colours multiple times?

I think you're being a bit harsh with the "pretending" comment. But I absolutely agree that we need to find an angle.

The link to youth via Reach might be one way. The other is to find a suitable, but not corny, link to the foundation of either (or both) of the game itself or the city of Melbourne. Our name has more value than any other in the AFL. We should make better use of it.

1 hour ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

I think you're being a bit harsh with the "pretending" comment. But I absolutely agree that we need to find an angle.

The link to youth via Reach might be one way. The other is to find a suitable, but not corny, link to the foundation of either (or both) of the game itself or the city of Melbourne. Our name has more value than any other in the AFL. We should make better use of it.

Look at the floor plan and description on the Saints website. It’s a gym, lap pool, hydro pool and a few token consulting rooms that will probably be used by the clubs doctor and psychologist.

Theyll bring some school groups through to tell them about mental health but it’s overwhelmingly a football facility. That’s not to discredit Spud in any way, he’s worth of a facility on football ability alone plus his mental health advocacy. But the Saints have built a footy facility then found a community angle for it 

1 hour ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

I think you're being a bit harsh with the "pretending" comment. But I absolutely agree that we need to find an angle.

The link to youth via Reach might be one way. The other is to find a suitable, but not corny, link to the foundation of either (or both) of the game itself or the city of Melbourne. Our name has more value than any other in the AFL. We should make better use of it.

The most obviously link isn’t charitable at all but we should partner with Melbourne Girls Grammar to give them a proper sports facility.