lawyers and beancounters

The big problem is they haven't replaced the head of football and have a temp in that role.

A lot of this is on Gil for not moving on when he should have instead of hanging around.

Probably why they are desperate for Brendon Gale to jump on board.

Unfortunately it has really started to flag the lack of football nous shown by those running the AFLand the impact it is having on the game that we love, simple things like Fixture, Umpiring, MRO, favouritism, inexplicable decisions regarding the future of the game, it’s all about the Money.!!! Why did Brad Scott leave the inner sanctum to take up coaching again??

The reality is that now the AFL should be considered as a cultural sports entertainment industry. Creates revenue for media, tourism, employment, airlines, caterers, other ancillary services as well as a public distraction to genuine problems in society. Just another successful business and quasi political tool. The equivalent of Roman circuses hence run by qualified elites. 

Edited June 19, 20232 yr by John Crow Batty

1 hour ago, whatwhat say what said:

lawyers and beancounters

Sadly footy has moved on from being a game, a competition to just another big business.

Fairness and even handed justice has very little role, unless it makes a few bucks.

Edited June 19, 20232 yr by monoccular

The old boys club continues. 

I wouldn’t describe the AFL executive as ‘the heart of the game’.

Nor can I understand how you can praise Laura Kane but then declare the job is effectively vacant. Would they say the same about a man in that role?

Then they list a bunch of names that goes about 30 deep. Not like the AFL is hard up for staff. Heck, they even have 2 CEO’s currently.

If there’s a problem with the AFL it’s probably that there’s way too much focus on the AFL. 

Whoever they choose to make 500k, fiddle with some rules and gift Geelong a dream fixture every year will do the job 

1 hour ago, DeeZone said:

Unfortunately it has really started to flag the lack of football nous shown by those running the AFLand the impact it is having on the game that we love, simple things like Fixture, Umpiring, MRO, favouritism, inexplicable decisions regarding the future of the game, it’s all about the Money.!!! Why did Brad Scott leave the inner sanctum to take up coaching again??

More cash on offer as head coach.

10 minutes ago, DeeSpencer said:

Whoever they choose to make 500k, fiddle with some rules and gift Geelong a dream fixture every year will do the job

Sounds like a good job for Joel Selwood...

32 minutes ago, DeeSpencer said:

I wouldn’t describe the AFL executive as ‘the heart of the game’.

God no. I’d describe the executive as the ‘heart of the game’ antithesis.

Grass roots footy and club supporters, there’s your heart.

to have a hole in the heart you must have at least a heart to begin with 🥴

2 hours ago, whatwhat say what said:

lawyers and beancounters

Bit like the modern Labor Party. All a bunch of lawyers and corporate execs. 😉

1 hour ago, old dee said:

The old boys club continues. 

Well, it's not the player old boys. That's the point of the article.

Didn't we get into more trouble when we had a lot of old boys that were too involved in the club?

2 hours ago, John Crow Batty said:

The reality is that now the AFL should be considered as a cultural sports entertainment industry. Creates revenue for media, tourism, employment, airlines, caterers, other ancillary services as well as a public distraction to genuine problems in society. Just another successful business and quasi political tool. The equivalent of Roman circuses hence run by qualified elites. 

The next step is allowing private equity to buy a 49% stake in the League. It's not buying a club but rather a stake in future revenues produced by the League.

Cricket Australia are doing the sums and it would be naive to think that the AFL and NRL are not doing the same.

Who are these private equity funds.. mainly State owned wealth funds. The upside is the resale value in the longer term. The plus for us is that AFL is a minnow on the world stage but economically we are reasonably placed on the world list of available sports.

So to run a massive multimillion dollar entertainment brand you need to have been able to kick a football in the 90’s? The people who run record labels usually don’t come from being drummers in great bands.

I find this an outdated argument. Bad decision making is bad decision making - personal history won’t change that. Thinking that ‘if only we could get David King or Luke Hodge involved it’ll all make sense’ is weird.

Maybe Hirdy? He’ll solve it. Worked so well last time.

2 hours ago, A F said:

Bit like the modern Labor Party. All a bunch of lawyers and corporate execs. 😉

There's no corporate execs in the Labor Party. They're mostly union plodders

There's a hole in my heart, as deep as the well for that poor AFL, who fell half way to hell. 

1 hour ago, jnrmac said:

There's no corporate execs in the Labor Party. They're mostly union plodders

The only union people in the Labor Party are union executives, who have not been voted by the membership, but placed there by the executive arm (think Bob Hawke as pres of ACTU).

This is the modern world. Complete corporate capture. The corporatisation of sport, politics, arts etc. But provided my football club remains, it is what it is.

In many ways, the modern AFL is a far superior product than say its 90s incarnation, because of the amount of resources poured into the sport. The strategy, mental health and overall professionalism of the game is incredible. 

The only gripe I have with the AFL, and this will be contentious with some, is the faux corporate centrism that pretends to care about minorities to cash grab. If the AFL was really an inclusive sport, you'd have openly gay players for one. It's this sort of staged liberalism that really annoys me. And the corporate sector has gone crazy for it, which flows into how you finance things.

The premise of the article is that a lack of top level AFL playing experience is a bad thing. But is it? I remain unconvinced that playing at the top level is somehow necessary for any role within the AFL. The only two positions where it might be helpful are the old Brad Scott role and the MRO. But I still don't think it is essential for either.

 

59 minutes ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

The premise of the article is that a lack of top level AFL playing experience is a bad thing. But is it? I remain unconvinced that playing at the top level is somehow necessary for any role within the AFL. The only two positions where it might be helpful are the old Brad Scott role and the MRO. But I still don't think it is essential for either.

 

If you're going to lead the MRO, you'd want someome who's played the game at the elite level this century.

Michael Christian retired in 1995. It's only 28 years ago...

1 hour ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

The premise of the article is that a lack of top level AFL playing experience is a bad thing. But is it? I remain unconvinced that playing at the top level is somehow necessary for any role within the AFL. The only two positions where it might be helpful are the old Brad Scott role and the MRO. But I still don't think it is essential for either.

 

The premise of the article is talking about the Brad Scott role!

I think it’s fair to say the head of footy ops should have high level club experience. Be that coaching, playing or another footy department role.

But in theory Laura Kane could keep the job and be assisted by someone with more footy experience as deputy footy ops.

The article names a heap of former players but none of them seem to be in a high level footy ops role. The AFL should be flexible enough to have rolled someone across when Scott left and/or when Dillon was promoted up.

6 hours ago, A F said:

Bit like the modern Labor Party. All a bunch of lawyers and corporate execs. 😉

Huh?

Was that a callback to a different conversation I missed?

Not really. Couldn't help myself.