Demetriou to quit (Speculation at this stage)

[Saints43]

Stadiums are some of the best in the world and at no cost to the AFL. Pass.

You're writing that on a Saints forum to take the p!$$, yeah?

[plugger66]

Stadiums are some of the best in the world and at no cost to the AFL. Pass.

You're writing that on a Saints forum to take the p!$$, yeah?

I writing that because I think Etihad is a fantastic stadium. Obviously you dont. Obvoiusly not many others agree.

[Saints43]

Stadiums are some of the best in the world and at no cost to the AFL. Pass.

You're writing that on a Saints forum to take the p!$$, yeah?

I writing that because I think Etihad is a fantastic stadium. Obviously you dont. Obvoiusly not many others agree.

Of course I think it's a great stadium. How has it been at 'no cost to the AFL'?

And in particular, say, St Kilda, who are 1/18th of the AFL.

[plugger66]

You're writing that on a Saints forum to take the p!$$, yeah?

I writing that because I think Etihad is a fantastic stadium. Obviously you dont. Obvoiusly not many others agree.

Of course I think it's a great stadium. How has it been at 'no cost to the AFL'?

And in particular, say, St Kilda, who ar 1/18th of the AFL.

Well they didnt pay for it unless a dollar in 12 years is paying for it. I know the returns arent great but to get a billion dollar stadium for dollar will outway the costs. The AFL do give us close to 3 million a year for poor returns so yes there is a cost but its a great deal.

lets face it even the AFL couldnt have built that stadium. If we go down that track then there is a cost to the AFL for every stadium that has been built but I was talking about the initial costs.

[BigMart]

GWS & GC needed players to start... But the AFL wanted to make them a Goliath to garner support ASAP in those markets, knowing flyby supporters will only support the success... And not the game

But they handed them a bevy of concessions in the draft.... Who were uncompetitive for 3 years compromising the AFL by skewing results... But will ultimately be...

Impossible to compete with
But also impossible to keep together

These kids will try and get back to a traditional club ASAP in their state

GWS has cost 100s of millions, and are completely irrelevant in West Sydney... They can't give tickets away...

There was an easier solution to implementation than handing them a soulless premiership, not earned but gifted

[Johnny Member]

Really weird retort plugger66. If I didn't know better, I'd swear you're a Herald-Sun devotee who no longer has free will and can only see things in either black or white. There is middle ground.

Stamping out king-hits is good (and this clearly was happening well before Demetriou came along anyway), but paying frees when a bloke literally places his hand above another player's shoulder is ridiculous. Absolutely ridiculous. Middle ground would be good.

As you dont go to the footy these days luckily every game is live on TV as opposed to those good old days of watching 2 games 3 hours after they finished.

Even netball is on TV these days. Claiming the game is unique and run amazingly well because it's live on TV, is a weak argument at best. We can watch American sport live, and have been able to for years - so if we weren't able to watch AFL footy live we'd be miles behind. And really, the fact that this has only been introduced very recently is really a blight on the current admin.

Back when no footy was live, nothing was live on TV. These days, they even show the news live - they do everything live! So this isn't groundbreaking by the AFL.

But if you did go at least you could stand in the rain at Victoria Park and maybe get in a punch on. Yep the good old days.

You think it would have been impossible to build covered stands at local grounds? Forcing everyone into soulless stadiums that have nearly sent several clubs under - just to keep half the fans dry is hardly a good reason. Middle ground would be good. Why only 2 stadiums? Why did they suddenly find that Geelong can be financial with their own stadium? You don't get wet down there anymore. I wonder if more effort could have gone into keeping Waverley or a couple of other suburban grounds? They backtracked on Geelong and have clearly proved they were wrong with that originally - so I wonder if they got the rest wrong too?

Middle ground, somewhere in between keeping all suburban grounds and stuffing everyone into 2 soulless, money sucking TV grounds would have been good.

Watch the umpiring in the good old days and then try and work out what the free was for. yep the good old days.

Some aspects of umpiring is better, but their directive is ridiculous. Stupid rules such as 'hands in the back' sacrifices the spirit of the game to make it easier for weekenders to follow. You can touch bloke's back with your hands, without pushing him in the back. So why is it now illegal?
Why can you now no longer 'be in his back'? The rule was 'push in the back' - but now in a contest if you lean on a guy's back in a pack you get done for being 'in his back'? Why?

Why can you fly knee first into a pack and knock someone unconscious or rupture their kidney, but you can't charge a guy and shirtfront him?

The umpiring in the modern AFL is completely full of contradictions. It reeks of knee-jerk, ill conceived reactions. The game is poorer for it.

Skills were great back then as well. I love it when poeple think the past was better.

I thought Nicky Winmar had great skills. Lockett too. Greg Williams was pretty handy also.

Players are professional these days. They don't have day jobs - so they absolutely should be more highly skilled. The only difference between now and the past, is that modern players have generally better techniques. They still can't kick straight for goal (even though the ball is always dry and in half the games there is no wind) and they still can't hit a target (even though the ball is always dry and in half the games there is no wind).

So I'd actually say it's debatable that the skills are better. Maybe if you made the modern footballer play with the same waterlogged pill for the whole game, we'd find that their skills aren't much better these days afterall?

Those same people will probably say in 20 years times, back in 2014 footy was so much better than it is now.

I wouldn't say that.

I feel that it peaked in the 90s. From roughly 1990 to 2000, the game was awesome. There were some genuine gun 'footballers' playing, whilst the emergence of the 'freak athlete' was happening too. Both had their place in the game.

You could knock a dude out fairly. An aspect of the game was that every time you ran out, you could get really hurt. It meant not everyone could play it - or be brave enough to play it well.

I could walk up under cover in the grandstand if it started raining, but stand and drink my beer comfortably wherever I felt like.

Players were still actually playing on each other for a whole match.

The main games of the round were professionally televised.

You could have a kick on the ground after the game.

You could go down to training and kick on the ground in the areas the players weren't using.

I never saw a bloke get king hit.

I never got into a fight in the crowd.

I felt like the Saints were a genuine club that I was involved in.

The AFL was the biggest sport in the country. It was the 'national game'.

Kids everywhere were playing it.

You didn't have some flog announcer explaining what was happening to you like you're a deadest moron at each break.



For mine, this era was when the game had found that 'middle ground'. It was pretty much perfect.

[plugger66]

Really weird retort plugger66. If I didn't know better, I'd swear you're a Herald-Sun devotee who no longer has free will and can only see things in either black or white. There is middle ground.

Stamping out king-hits is good (and this clearly was happening well before Demetriou came along anyway), but paying frees when a bloke literally places his hand above another player's shoulder is ridiculous. Absolutely ridiculous. Middle ground would be good.

As you dont go to the footy these days luckily every game is live on TV as opposed to those good old days of watching 2 games 3 hours after they finished.

Even netball is on TV these days. Claiming the game is unique and run amazingly well because it's live on TV, is a weak argument at best. We can watch American sport live, and have been able to for years - so if we weren't able to watch AFL footy live we'd be miles behind. And really, the fact that this has only been introduced very recently is really a blight on the current admin.

Back when no footy was live, nothing was live on TV. These days, they even show the news live - they do everything live! So this isn't groundbreaking by the AFL.

But if you did go at least you could stand in the rain at Victoria Park and maybe get in a punch on. Yep the good old days.

You think it would have been impossible to build covered stands at local grounds? Forcing everyone into soulless stadiums that have nearly sent several clubs under - just to keep half the fans dry is hardly a good reason. Middle ground would be good. Why only 2 stadiums? Why did they suddenly find that Geelong can be financial with their own stadium? You don't get wet down there anymore. I wonder if more effort could have gone into keeping Waverley or a couple of other suburban grounds? They backtracked on Geelong and have clearly proved they were wrong with that originally - so I wonder if they got the rest wrong too?

Middle ground, somewhere in between keeping all suburban grounds and stuffing everyone into 2 soulless, money sucking TV grounds would have been good.

Watch the umpiring in the good old days and then try and work out what the free was for. yep the good old days.

Some aspects of umpiring is better, but their directive is ridiculous. Stupid rules such as 'hands in the back' sacrifices the spirit of the game to make it easier for weekenders to follow. You can touch bloke's back with your hands, without pushing him in the back. So why is it now illegal?
Why can you now no longer 'be in his back'? The rule was 'push in the back' - but now in a contest if you lean on a guy's back in a pack you get done for being 'in his back'? Why?

Why can you fly knee first into a pack and knock someone unconscious or rupture their kidney, but you can't charge a guy and shirtfront him?

The umpiring in the modern AFL is completely full of contradictions. It reeks of knee-jerk, ill conceived reactions. The game is poorer for it.

Skills were great back then as well. I love it when poeple think the past was better.

I thought Nicky Winmar had great skills. Lockett too. Greg Williams was pretty handy also.

Players are professional these days. They don't have day jobs - so they absolutely should be more highly skilled. The only difference between now and the past, is that modern players have generally better techniques. They still can't kick straight for goal (even though the ball is always dry and in half the games there is no wind) and they still can't hit a target (even though the ball is always dry and in half the games there is no wind).

So I'd actually say it's debatable that the skills are better. Maybe if you made the modern footballer play with the same waterlogged pill for the whole game, we'd find that their skills aren't much better these days afterall?

Those same people will probably say in 20 years times, back in 2014 footy was so much better than it is now.

I wouldn't say that.

I feel that it peaked in the 90s. From roughly 1990 to 2000, the game was awesome. There were some genuine gun 'footballers' playing, whilst the emergence of the 'freak athlete' was happening too. Both had their place in the game.

You could knock a dude out fairly. An aspect of the game was that every time you ran out, you could get really hurt. It meant not everyone could play it - or be brave enough to play it well.

I could walk up under cover in the grandstand if it started raining, but stand and drink my beer comfortably wherever I felt like.

Players were still actually playing on each other for a whole match.

The main games of the round were professionally televised.

You could have a kick on the ground after the game.

You could go down to training and kick on the ground in the areas the players weren't using.

I never saw a bloke get king hit.

I never got into a fight in the crowd.

I felt like the Saints were a genuine club that I was involved in.

The AFL was the biggest sport in the country. It was the 'national game'.

Kids everywhere were playing it.

You didn't have some flog announcer explaining what was happening to you like you're a deadest moron at each break.



For mine, this era was when the game had found that 'middle ground'. It was pretty much perfect.

You use the example that all games are on TV now well all sports are now more professional and are played in better stadiums and they all have announcer carrying on like morons, not that matter as you can choose to basically not listen.

What I find amazing is you dont go to see the club you say you follow because you dont like AFL footy anymore but somehow waste your time on here with 2 nicks and from what it seems to watch plenty of games because you seem to know a lot about a sport you dont like anymore. I know people like that. They watch all a movie and then ring up and complain there was to much swearing. All I know is if I didnt like the AFL but loved my club I would still go to games but if I chose not to I wouldnt waste my time on a footy forum telling everyone how bad the game is. Its very weird to say the least.

Yep the AFL has some aspects that arent as good as these good old days but they have many aspects much better. I suppose some people would rather just look at the negative and complain. each to their own. Just about every sport is a business these days and the AFL couldnt just stay like the past. We then wouldnt get the best athletes playing and the game would eventually look poorer for it. Try looking to the future occassionally.

[happy feet]

I don't think it's a sport anymore. Has morphed into entertainment. Very disenchanted with the AFL. Love the Saints and always will, but there are so many questionable aspects to the AFL that I am a bit over.

[plugger66]

I don't think it's a sport anymore. Has morphed into entertainment. Very disenchanted with the AFL. Love the Saints and always will, but there are so many questionable aspects to the AFL that I am a bit over.

Cant you have both. When I see footy played it looks very much like a sport with the best athletes in Australia playing. To be honest i reckon a hell of a lot of saints fans loved the game in 2009 and 10. Yep im sure there are some who went off the game earlier but I reckon they are poorer for missing those 2 seasons. That was so close to a ride of a lifetime. Imay be different to most but I love aussie rules whether its my local team or my AFL team.

[Johnny Member]

What I find amazing is you dont go to see the club you say you follow because you dont like AFL footy anymore but somehow waste your time on here with 2 nicks and from what it seems to watch plenty of games because you seem to know a lot about a sport you dont like anymore. I know people like that. They watch all a movie and then ring up and complain there was to much swearing. All I know is if I didnt like the AFL but loved my club I would still go to games but if I chose not to I wouldnt waste my time on a footy forum telling everyone how bad the game is. Its very weird to say the least.

What I find amazing is how you feel you have some form of authority over who posts on here, and what the content of their posts are?? Extraordinary really. Utterly irrelevant to the discussion too.

Yep the AFL has some aspects that arent as good as these good old days but they have many aspects much better. I suppose some people would rather just look at the negative and complain. each to their own. Just about every sport is a business these days and the AFL couldnt just stay like the past. We then wouldnt get the best athletes playing and the game would eventually look poorer for it. Try looking to the future occassionally.

I wouldn't say the year 2000 is the 'old days'.

It's a common ignorant line thrown out there by those trying to defend the hijacking of the game for monetary gain. It was never a choice between footy in 1963 or footy in 2014.

It's a choice of what to sacrifice in order to 'grow the game'. Sacrificing fundamentals of the game for money, is wrong. I believe this began to happen in earnest when Demetriou and particularly Adrian Anderson took over.


As I've stated, improvement is always a priority. It's another bulls*** line to say that anyone who doesn't like the direction the game has been taken in, is against change and stuck in the past. Sometimes, 'improving' doesn't always mean changing. And 'improving' doesn't always mean having more money.


To turn footy from a tribal, cultural religion to an entertainment business was a mistake. And I mean this from a future perspective. I've lost interest already because of this, but I'm aware that although many others have also - many haven't yet.

What I believe though, is that in this blinkered obsession with growing the game for financial gain, they are alienating the supporters by diluting the very thing that made the game our national sport - Tribalism, involvement/inclusion, and an emotional link to a club.

As those who still have a footy club in their DNA drop off, the new breed will want to be entertained. They won't have the emotional link to a club. They'll swap clubs just like players and coaches do. And if it's entertainment they want, there are many, many other things to turn to, plenty of which are far more entertaining and popular than the AFL.

[Johnny Member]

To be honest i reckon a hell of a lot of saints fans loved the game in 2009 and 10. Yep im sure there are some who went off the game earlier but I reckon they are poorer for missing those 2 seasons.

Our lousy membership and crowd numbers don't really support that view.

[tweedaletomanning]

Johnny TOTALLY owned plugger in that exchange.

Excellent posts JM!!

[plugger66]

To be honest i reckon a hell of a lot of saints fans loved the game in 2009 and 10. Yep im sure there are some who went off the game earlier but I reckon they are poorer for missing those 2 seasons.

Our lousy membership and crowd numbers don't really support that view.

Crowd numbers were excellent and membership was very good then. Better than Geelong. No idea why you care about anything to do with the game. Never go, wont watch unless on FTA. Hate the game of footy. Put up crap reasons why the game is no good. refuse to look at future and try and tell me 200 isnt in the past. A league didnt even exist then, thats how much in the past it is. Refuse to realise even sports like Netball are run like business now. Somehow think footy would be as good in subrban grounds when just about every other sport is at high class grounds. The AFL would be a laughing stock the way you want footy to complain and im guessing you would be the first complaining but then there are always people like you.

[saintspremiers]

Patrick Smith wrote an article in the Australian saying Dimwit was pushed out by the comission. Makes sense. Dimwit knew the writing was on the wall due to the Essendope disgrace and tried in vain to get the ATP job. Dimwit on OTC denied that claim - clearly he needs to surpress such rumours as he tries to line himself up with another job.

[Johnny Member]

I think it's becoming more apparent by the day, that Demetriou was a dud.

Had the perfect product, but has stuffed pretty much everything he touched.

[Dis Believer]

I think it's becoming more apparent by the day, that Demetriou was a dud.

Had the perfect product, but has stuffed pretty much everything he touched.

I tend to agree with this. The fact that attendances surged during AD's reign is a fortunate coincidence of timing. He got lucky that while he was in the top job Geelong, St Kilda, Collingwood and Hawthorn were at the top of the ladder along with the Swans getting the perpetual leg up.

If Victorian teams are going well then crowd figures will be up. End of story. AD being a supposedly great administrator has nothing to do with it. Port, Freo and Sydney are in the ascendancy right now and Geelong are in decline. Hawthorn will be in decline soon enough as well when a couple of key senior players retire. Watch attendance numbers continue downwards.

The fact is that the model used has been to have "power" clubs get favourable fixturing and broadcasting set ups and use the profits to help "strugglers whose graveyard fixtures and crap broadcast coverage diminishes their ability to generate their own revenue. This model is all well and good until the "power" clubs you build around start having issues and struggling on field, then whee does your revenue come from?

The other aspect that really blights the AD administration in my opinion was the obvious influence of his lawyer mate AA. The tribunal and the rules were two areas that reek of the involvement of a lawyer. Firstly the MRP thing was set up with lawyer speak grading's "negligent, reckless, deliberate" - what are the definitions of those? Why they are whatever the guys in charge say they are. Surprise, surprise. Suddenly a different (and inexplicable) grading of a charge enables, say, Barry Hall to beat the wrap and play in a GF for an AFL favoured team. Precedent was also removed from the process, because the one thing that a lawyer doesn't want working against him is precedent. There has been shocking inconsistency ever since which has never been addressed. Brian Collis may have favoured Geelong (Scarlett getting off on that whack in the throat to Roo many years ago was a disgrace) but at least the tribunal he oversaw was basically consistent.

They did the same with the rules to right everything up as more general charges of "misconduct" with lots of grey areas. The Sirengate affair was a classic example of an admin that made it up as they went along, generally to suit themselves. The rules stated that the games when the umpire hears the siren and ends the game. THE AFL overruled that on the basis of "natural justice" !! Where in our rules is natural justice eve mentioned?? The games actually ended in accordance with the rules, but the admin didn't like the outcome !!

The fact is that without evolution you become extinct, and most reasonable people accept that the game needs to evolve. However the thing that makes the game so appealing to corporates and TV networks is the grass roots supporters that are their target "market". And those "rusted on" supporters can be lost when they feel that those charged with being the custodians of our game are manipulating events to their preferred outcome. Most simply want a fairly run competition where their team has as fair a crack at the flag as every other team.

[Spinner]

I think it's becoming more apparent by the day, that Demetriou was a dud.

Had the perfect product, but has stuffed pretty much everything he touched.

AD was a great CEO.

[plugger66]

I think it's becoming more apparent by the day, that Demetriou was a dud.

Had the perfect product, but has stuffed pretty much everything he touched.

I tend to agree with this. The fact that attendances surged during AD's reign is a fortunate coincidence of timing. He got lucky that while he was in the top job Geelong, St Kilda, Collingwood and Hawthorn were at the top of the ladder along with the Swans getting the perpetual leg up.

If Victorian teams are going well then crowd figures will be up. End of story. AD being a supposedly great administrator has nothing to do with it. Port, Freo and Sydney are in the ascendancy right now and Geelong are in decline. Hawthorn will be in decline soon enough as well when a couple of key senior players retire. Watch attendance numbers continue downwards.

The fact is that the model used has been to have "power" clubs get favourable fixturing and broadcasting set ups and use the profits to help "strugglers whose graveyard fixtures and crap broadcast coverage diminishes their ability to generate their own revenue. This model is all well and good until the "power" clubs you build around start having issues and struggling on field, then whee does your revenue come from?

The other aspect that really blights the AD administration in my opinion was the obvious influence of his lawyer mate AA. The tribunal and the rules were two areas that reek of the involvement of a lawyer. Firstly the MRP thing was set up with lawyer speak grading's "negligent, reckless, deliberate" - what are the definitions of those? Why they are whatever the guys in charge say they are. Surprise, surprise. Suddenly a different (and inexplicable) grading of a charge enables, say, Barry Hall to beat the wrap and play in a GF for an AFL favoured team. Precedent was also removed from the process, because the one thing that a lawyer doesn't want working against him is precedent. There has been shocking inconsistency ever since which has never been addressed. Brian Collis may have favoured Geelong (Scarlett getting off on that whack in the throat to Roo many years ago was a disgrace) but at least the tribunal he oversaw was basically consistent.

They did the same with the rules to right everything up as more general charges of "misconduct" with lots of grey areas. The Sirengate affair was a classic example of an admin that made it up as they went along, generally to suit themselves. The rules stated that the games when the umpire hears the siren and ends the game. THE AFL overruled that on the basis of "natural justice" !! Where in our rules is natural justice eve mentioned?? The games actually ended in accordance with the rules, but the admin didn't like the outcome !!

The fact is that without evolution you become extinct, and most reasonable people accept that the game needs to evolve. However the thing that makes the game so appealing to corporates and TV networks is the grass roots supporters that are their target "market". And those "rusted on" supporters can be lost when they feel that those charged with being the custodians of our game are manipulating events to their preferred outcome. Most simply want a fairly run competition where their team has as fair a crack at the flag as every other team.

The thing that maybe suggests he was a great administrator is people who have no bias at all towards him and even like sticking it up him like Smith and Wilson still claim he has clearly been the best CEO the AFL/VFL have ever had. They also see his faults but they claim the good outways the bad by a fair way. Of course will will rememeber incidents of stuff ups but so could any competition or workplace. You need to look at the overall picture. lets face it no one on here I would think has claimed a CEO has done a good job whilst CEO. They stopped presenting the cup because of all the booing every year. I tend to look at the final result and for all the good and bad the AFL is still in a great position. We will soon own a ground worth maybe a billion dollars and it will cost nothing. Reckon that isnt a bad deal. Yep some clubs have no money but at least they are being propped up. The last couple of CEO either merged sides or got rid of them. Not sure as a saints supporter we should be worried with debt when if it was like 1996 we may have just folded like Fitzroy or a merged as they called it. Didnt seem like a merger to me at that time.

[stinger]

to me the jury is still out...did a lot of good things.....and some bad....pouring two hundred million into the suns and handing them a squillion draft picks whilst letting foundation clubs like the saints wither on the vine has seen some of the worst excesses..


the afl's handling of the bombers has been appalling.....andrew must wear that rap....