Westaway joins the fray

[InkerSaint]

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/s ... 1imvp.html

''We're talking about fixturing; one, we're talking stadia … where you play; and two, the fixturing, which is also very important. They're the two big matters to be addressed,'' said Westaway, whose comments follow North Melbourne chairman James Brayshaw's description of Eddie McGuire (Collingwood) and Jeff Kennett (Hawthorn) as ''fat cats'' who were unwilling to share their riches.

''[The AFL is] saying these clubs are battling and we're prepared to help them, but we don't just want to hand it out and see them waste it, we want to know what they're going to do with it so that they can invest in something that makes their footy club a better place and improves their future.

''That's what they're after and it's a very noble and sensible approach, and that's the way it should be.

''But that's ignoring the biggest part of the whole problem. The biggest part of the problem are those two - stadia and fixturing.''

[bigred]

So he should.

Stick it to the man.

[Johnny Member]

It creates a problem for the AFL.


They pat themselves on the back and hold on to their jobs by screaming from the highest mountain how much money they make.

That's their answer to any criticism. And an answer that's accepted by lots of the public (ie. "they're doing a great job, look at how much money they get from the TV rights!").


But as I've said, and as have many others, it's coming at the detriment of the sport itself. The fabric of the competition and the spirit of the code is in tatters. And it's because of the 'money is everything' attitude that the AFL currently has.


So if they do sort out the fixture, as they should, it will hurt their pocket in the short term.
They won't get the crowds that they get, and they probably won't get the TV audience that they get.

But what they will get, is some credibility back into the competition. And in turn, in the long run will retain many more 'customers' than they will if they keep doing what they're currently doing.

[plugger66]

It creates a problem for the AFL.


They pat themselves on the back and hold on to their jobs by screaming from the highest mountain how much money they make.

That's their answer to any criticism. And an answer that's accepted by lots of the public (ie. "they're doing a great job, look at how much money they get from the TV rights!").


But as I've said, and as have many others, it's coming at the detriment of the sport itself. The fabric of the competition and the spirit of the code is in tatters. And it's because of the 'money is everything' attitude that the AFL currently has.


So if they do sort out the fixture, as they should, it will hurt their pocket in the short term.
They won't get the crowds that they get, and they probably won't get the TV audience that they get.

But what they will get, is some credibility back into the competition. And in turn, in the long run will retain many more 'customers' than they will if they keep doing what they're currently doing.

And you will get what you seem to want. Less teams in the competition because the AFL will no longer be able to support them. I have no idea how long you have been thinking about the fixture changing but one thing that will not happen is the fixture changing especially in the next 5 years as the TV rights will not allow tat to happen.

You bang on about the fixture as if it is a new thing but it has been going on for at least 5 years and there is no sign that the game is going down the shute as you seem to claim.

[bigcarl]

The fabric of the competition and the spirit of the code is in tatters. And it's because of the 'money is everything' attitude that the AFL currently has.

Exactly, and they have the hide to carry on about the competition having integrity.

Fix the draw FFS.

I'm glad Westaway has weighed in on this.

[plugger66]

The fabric of the competition and the spirit of the code is in tatters. And it's because of the 'money is everything' attitude that the AFL currently has.

Exactly, and they have the hide to carry on about the competition having integrity.

Fix the draw FFS.

You are nearly on this bandwagon as much as getting another forward. The draw will not be changed for at least another 5 years due to the TV rights which keep all clubs going. Anyway how should they fix the draw to make it even because unless it is even or bloody close what is the point if it means losing 2-4 clubs. Surely that would wreck the fabric of footy much more than the draw.

[saintspremiers]

The solution is to follow the NFL lead and equalize the gate.

The AFL can have their bent fixture with Anzac Day, Collingwood round etc etc as much as they want then.

The way the big clubs get bigger would be thru membership and merchandise and corporate growth.

[bigcarl]

The fabric of the competition and the spirit of the code is in tatters. And it's because of the 'money is everything' attitude that the AFL currently has.

Exactly, and they have the hide to carry on about the competition having integrity.

Fix the draw FFS.

You are nearly on this bandwagon as much as getting another forward. The draw will not be changed for at least another 5 years due to the TV rights which keep all clubs going. Anyway how should they fix the draw to make it even because unless it is even or bloody close what is the point if it means losing 2-4 clubs. Surely that would wreck the fabric of footy much more than the draw.

A level playing field is vital if the competition is to be taken seriously, but I don't see this from a league that puts the dollar first in everything.

But that's just me. I value integrity.

[perfectionist]

Mr. Westaway seems to have said nothing. The secret to making sure that the club is profitable is to do everything you can to get people to attend games. It is hard to recall any promotion of Saints games in recent history. We made our decision to go to Docklands despite the wishes of most Saints fans who wanted to stay at Waverley. But once the AFL decided to close Waverley and support Docklands, we had two choices - Docklands or the MCG. Given our crowds at the time, and the fact that the deal provided compensation up front, Docklands looked OK. Our "success" in the last 7 years has rendered that decision poor, but hindsight is a wonderful thing. Clearly, with 9 games per weekend next year, meaning at least 4 in Melbourne on any weekend, two stadia are still necessary. Someone will have to play at Docklands. We should work harder at getting bigger crowds to games involving interstate teams. This will probably mean some over-the-top spruiking like, "Come and see the Saints smash Freo this week", but someone needs to do it.

[plugger66]

The fabric of the competition and the spirit of the code is in tatters. And it's because of the 'money is everything' attitude that the AFL currently has.

Exactly, and they have the hide to carry on about the competition having integrity.

Fix the draw FFS.

You are nearly on this bandwagon as much as getting another forward. The draw will not be changed for at least another 5 years due to the TV rights which keep all clubs going. Anyway how should they fix the draw to make it even because unless it is even or bloody close what is the point if it means losing 2-4 clubs. Surely that would wreck the fabric of footy much more than the draw.

A level playing field is vital if the competition is to be taken seriously, but I don't see this from a league that puts the dollar first in everything.

But that's just me. I value integrity.

So how do they do that with 18 sides? I also gather you want sides to fold. Where is the integrity in that. Losing hundreds and thousands of supporters. The competition is taken very seriously. Just look at this site.

[Junction Oval]

It's good to see Greg Westaway going "public" for a change. Obviously no-one is listening to his in-house comments at the AFL.

However, at the end of the day, who conducted the "very poor" negotiations with Etihad - the St Kilda Football Club. It's very, very easy to look back in hindsight, but a lot of the Saints long-term decision making has been deplorable.

Surely the AFL has enough clout to get some contract changes made with Etihad management. I thought that something was done along these lines over 12 months ago. The whole situation is now getting very messy and some Clubs are in real trouble. Collectively, all parties - the AFL, Clubs, Etihad (which the AFL will own in around 2025) need to come together to sort something out.

I think that the AFL Chairman is also a major shareholder of the Etihad
stadium. If so, it's a "major conflict of interest" for him to be in.

[bigcarl]

The fabric of the competition and the spirit of the code is in tatters. And it's because of the 'money is everything' attitude that the AFL currently has.

Exactly, and they have the hide to carry on about the competition having integrity.

Fix the draw FFS.

You are nearly on this bandwagon as much as getting another forward. The draw will not be changed for at least another 5 years due to the TV rights which keep all clubs going. Anyway how should they fix the draw to make it even because unless it is even or bloody close what is the point if it means losing 2-4 clubs. Surely that would wreck the fabric of footy much more than the draw.

A level playing field is vital if the competition is to be taken seriously, but I don't see this from a league that puts the dollar first in everything.

But that's just me. I value integrity.

So how do they do that with 18 sides? I also gather you want sides to fold. Where is the integrity in that. Losing hundreds and thousands of supporters. The competition is taken very seriously. Just look at this site.

I didn't vote for 18 sides ... it lessens St Kilda's chances of winning a premiership. GWS may win one before we do.

But once again, money and TV rights ruled. Is it a serious sport or an entertainment network?

[plugger66]

The fabric of the competition and the spirit of the code is in tatters. And it's because of the 'money is everything' attitude that the AFL currently has.

Exactly, and they have the hide to carry on about the competition having integrity.

Fix the draw FFS.

You are nearly on this bandwagon as much as getting another forward. The draw will not be changed for at least another 5 years due to the TV rights which keep all clubs going. Anyway how should they fix the draw to make it even because unless it is even or bloody close what is the point if it means losing 2-4 clubs. Surely that would wreck the fabric of footy much more than the draw.

A level playing field is vital if the competition is to be taken seriously, but I don't see this from a league that puts the dollar first in everything.

But that's just me. I value integrity.

So how do they do that with 18 sides? I also gather you want sides to fold. Where is the integrity in that. Losing hundreds and thousands of supporters. The competition is taken very seriously. Just look at this site.

I didn't vote for 18 sides ... it lessens St Kilda's chances of winning a premiership. GWS may win one before we do.

But once again, money and TV rights ruled.

It actually makes no difference to our chances because we have won one in 114 years and there has been 4 sides up to 17 sides. Our best chances apart from the year we won was when there was 16 sides. Anyway that has happened and isnt changing so I await your answer on how they make the draw fair and on how you feel about sides folding. If you dont watch out this fascination will overtake your fascination with finding another tall forward.

[matrix]

the more teams that join the less chance each one has of winning

if ten people do saturday lotto this week i have more chance of winning it than if 100 do it

[bigcarl]

I await your answer on how they make the draw fair and on how you feel about sides folding.

That's the league's problem to sort out. They're the ones that have cocked it up.

[bigcarl]

the more teams that join the less chance each one has of winning

if ten people do saturday lotto this week i have more chance of winning it than if 100 do it

correct.

[plugger66]

the more teams that join the less chance each one has of winning

if ten people do saturday lotto this week i have more chance of winning it than if 100 do it

Well that actually isnt true at all. Doesnt matter how many do lotto you need the right number.
If 10 horses are racing the odds arent 10 to one on every horse because not every horse can win. Pretty sure the same goes for footy.

If it works on odds can you explain why we havent got about 10 flags.

[plugger66]

I await your answer on how they make the draw fair and on how you feel about sides folding.

That's the league's problem to sort out. They're the ones that have cocked it up.

So you admit you are whinging just for the sake of it. Havent got any answers. Well you are probably right. Nothing will change. By the way how could you agree with what Matrix said. It is just plain wrong.

[jonesy]

Of course it's harder for a side to win a flag with two extra teams in it

Going on our history when there was 12,14 and 16 in it,our chances of winning one with 18 in it are cactus...

[plugger66]

Of course it's harder for a side to win a flag with two extra teams in it

Going on our history when there was 12,14 and 16 in it,our chances of winning one with 18 in it are cactus...

But if you are the best side you will still win. Why havent we got 10 flags if it is done on odds.

Black Cavier wins whether there is 5 in the field or 20. Her odds dont change because of the numbers.

[matrix]

if theres two teams in the league you reckon they have the same chance of winning a flag if there was 22 teams in the league??


if yes, it would explain a lot around here

[bigcarl]

I await your answer on how they make the draw fair and on how you feel about sides folding.

That's the league's problem to sort out. They're the ones that have cocked it up.

So you admit you are whinging just for the sake of it. Havent got any answers. Well you are probably right. Nothing will change. By the way how could you agree with what Matrix said. It is just plain wrong.

Split it into two divisions with 10 teams in each. Every team plays each other twice. Once at home and once away.

Oh hang on, Eddie wouldn't go for it. Too many matches away from the MCG.

[bigcarl]

if theres two teams in the league you reckon they have the same chance of winning a flag if there was 22 teams in the league??


if yes, it would explain a lot around here

[plugger66]

if theres two teams in the league you reckon they have the same chance of winning a flag if there was 22 teams in the league??


if yes, it would explain a lot around here

Are we talking about 2 teams or 22. Not a great example but no worse than your lotto one. Can please explain any logic in that all. How many flags have we won. One. How many years have we played. 114. How many sides have we played against. Between 4 and 17. Has GC made it harder for anyone likely to win the flag this year. No.

Why will not anyone answer why we havent got about 10 flags.

[jonesy]

Of course it's harder for a side to win a flag with two extra teams in it

Going on our history when there was 12,14 and 16 in it,our chances of winning one with 18 in it are cactus...

But if you are the best side you will still win. Why havent we got 10 flags if it is done on odds.

Black Cavier wins whether there is 5 in the field or 20. Her odds dont change because of the numbers.

It is not done on odds,but quite simply,the more competition we have,the harder it is for us to win,I'm not sure how you don't see that? Have you started on the syrup earlier today?