He is gone...rumour

[rodgerfox]

But what if you have a positive attitude unlike your negative one and we do win the flag.

I think panicking as you think your time is running out, is infact the negative attitude.

Even if we didnt it is worth a gamble afterall everything else we have tried in 112 years has only given us one flag.

Now that's negative.

[joffaboy]

I believe I did not use HINDSIGHT when making a call on Lovett...

If I could be f'd I would dig up a few few posts from trade week where I called it a disgrace that we would go down the path.....called him a MORON and was absolutely critisised in doing so......howled down by the same posters who are now wanting to sack him in HINDSIGHT....

You really are something . You could seehe was going to be accused of rape two months beforehand.

Wow - Nostradamus in our midsts

If he has raped a woman of course people who were willing to give him a chance want him gone.

Instead of making this some sordid parlour game for your rampant ego, how about thinking of the victim. Bit hard to do that maybe?

But recieved huge critisism for an honest assessment on
J.Sweeney, Phil Raymond, Brad Howard, Ben Cousins, A Lovett.....have been proved right and never heard a word....from the same people who wanted me to eat humble pie if I was wrong...... because I stuck my neck out ......

I wil continue to put myself out there for abuse......

The ego has landed.

Must be great being you. What a legend you are. Calling Howard ten minutes after he was drafted a dud.

Wow - give the kid a chance.

Calling JB an egomanic - maybe you should apply, you seem to know everything about everything.

Same thing applied with Lovett. You come on and start abusing him as a MORON - months before this crap happened. Now you come on all vindicated.

Have you got Saturday nights tatts numbers as well

Hers something to ponder as you work on your next lot of predictions.

[rodgerfox]

Any chance the Mods can simply delete the above post?

Fair dinkum, what a weird place this is sometimes.

[SydneySainter]

And clearly a kid taken at pick 16 in a compromised draft would have been our salvation for years to come.

I'm tipping he'd be adding more value to the club in 5 years time than Andrew Lovett will be.

Add value, not many would argue the possibility. But to the extent of your doom and gloom threads, you'd think that losing that one pick has essentially been a premature death sentence for the club and that in years to come, we'll all scratch our heads and say 'oh, what pick 16 could have done'.

[saintlee]

I must say I feel extremely pissed off at Lovett for wasting everybody's time.....he has cost us a draft pick, he will cost us money (for his contract), and has harmed the club's reputation, the last point in particular really pisses me off!

I don't blame Lyon or anyone else for drafting him, as he is a good player with blistering pace who can kick goals......but clearly he is a failure as a human being, and doesn't deserve any more chances......I mean seriously, getting into trouble with the police twice before he even plays a single game for us!! What a disgrace....

In hindsight we should have known better than to recruit this guy, he is nothing but trouble......mores the pity, as he has (or had) potential to be a gun....now he is nothing but a wasted talent....consigned to the dustbin of history

End rant

[Milton66]

And clearly a kid taken at pick 16 in a compromised draft would have been our salvation for years to come.

I'm tipping he'd be adding more value to the club in 5 years time than Andrew Lovett will be.

Add value, not many would argue the possibility. But to the extent of your doom and gloom threads, you'd think that losing that one pick has essentially been a premature death sentence for the club and that in years to come, we'll all scratch our heads and say 'oh, what pick 16 could have done'.

I still wake uo in a cold sweat thinking "oh what we could have done with Judd instead of Ball"

[rodgerfox]

Add value, not many would argue the possibility. But to the extent of your doom and gloom threads, you'd think that losing that one pick has essentially been a premature death sentence for the club and that in years to come, we'll all scratch our heads and say 'oh, what pick 16 could have done'.

Huh?

I think you've got the wrong poster.

[meher baba]

So the AFL has gone backwards in the last 10 years. Dont make me laugh. It is bar far the most successful footy code in Australia and has increased the difference between itself and the other codes in the last 10 years. NRL are a laughing stock and the ARU isnt even worth speaking about. Just about every soccer club is in debt where as most AFL clubs are making money whee as 10 years ago more were in debt. Obviously the AFl administration has made errors in the last 10 years but compared to other codes they have made many less.

I agree it all looks good on the surface ATM: indeed, as a spectacle, the game has never been more exciting or entertaining. The strong Aboriginal element in the game gives it a uniquely Australian flavour which has growing global appeal.

However, there are some fundamental problems with the AFL's strategy that have been papered over by the inflated TV revenue and the problems experienced by competing codes (eg: rugby league raped and pillaged by News Limited, soccer taking far too long to get its act together in terms of moving away from ethnically-based clubs with ageing, declining supporter bases).

The strategy of the AFL since the 1980s has been to seek to expand into the strongholds of the rugby codes: Sydney and south-east Queensland. Progress here has been consistently over-rated IMO I would be interested to see a decent survey that showed the % of members of the Lions and the Swans who were not born or raised in one of the AFL states.

Regardless of what people at AFL HQ think, the Swans have at best a cult following in Sydney. Their Saturday night TV games are frequently outrated by all the other channels, even SBS. The following in Brisbane is perhaps a little better, but hardly outstanding given the great success of the Lions over the past decade.

Yet, despite these far from encouraging signs, the AFL is pushing on with more expansionism into this hostile territory. Meanwhile, traditionally strong AFL areas like southern NSW/ACT and Tasmania have been treated like dirt and even WA and SA have hardly been given red carpet treatment. There is no question that the numbers of players and supporters of AFL have been declining in southern NSW and the ACT relative to the rugby codes. If I were the AFL, I'd also be a little bit worried about the long-term prospects of WA, which has a relatively high rate of influx of people from overseas and NSW and Qld who might generally favour soccer over AFL. Tassie and SA will remain strong, but these states are continuing to decline in economic and demographic significance.

The great strength of AFL over, say, rugby league has been that it has enormous grass roots support which flows over into large memberships and huge crowds. Rugby league is increasingly a TV-based game which appeals to an ageing, indoor audience. AFL is still a great afternoon/night out.

However, in terms of a day/night out, a Swans game isn't much chop. Even when the Swans were flying high, they couldn't regularly pull a full house at the tiny SCG (I went to a Swans-Roos game there a week or so before their triumphant 2005 finals, and the ground was about 1/3 full).

A Western Sydney or Gold Coast game will be even less of an event. The new twilight games on Sunday are also not that electric. But, of course, all of these experiences are designed to attract pay TV viewers, not spectators. The draw and draft rules will continue to be manipulated to try to help these otherwise dud propositions to remain alive, and we might even see more mucking around with the rules of the game such as happened in the Hall case.

If the AFL had decided to expand its comp by introducing, say, a third WA team, or (although I'm a bit doubtful) a Tassie team, or even an Albury-Wodonga or Canberra team, we would be likely to see sizable memberships, good crowds, teams featuring plenty of local lads, etc, etc.

Why does the AFL choose the path of creating more phoney NSW and Qld teams to play in empty grounds to (perhaps) larger TV audiences rather than look to plant in more fertile ground in southern Australia? Is the (surely marginal) increase in TV revenue that important to the AFL's survival?

As I see it, the addtional TV revenue is important for the following reasons:

1. Creating a pool of funds to employ lots of additional administrators at AFL HQ and to give the AFL bosses the sorts of increases in salaries and perks (especially travel) to which they believe they are entitled.

2. Propping up the ailing heartland clubs that have declining numbers of supporters and little prospect of getting more: Roos and Demons are the prime cases along with - in a disturbing recent development - Port Adelaide. I would exempt the Bulldogs for the time being because, at least in theory, they have a large untapped base of potential supporters in western Melbourne. We are also exempt, at least for now, but must remain vulnerable for the foreseeable future.

The second point is the one that I see as the inherent structural weakness of the AFL's current strategy. Basically, phoney additional TV product is being created to pay for the cost of propping up unsustainable heartland clubs. If Western Sydney and the Gold Coast were really going to provide sustainable supporter bases for AFL clubs over the longer term, then the strategy might be ok (eg, because two ailing clubs could be moved to these areas). However, it isn't clear that even the Lions and Swans - who between them won four out of ten GFs in the 2000s and had two losing appearances besides - would be sustainable without a lot of help from the AFL. So IMO it's all a bit of a charade to chase the TV dollar.

Is this the right way for the AFL to go? I don't believe so. The market for televised sport is becoming increasingly globalised, with an ever-growing emphasis on representative competition (when I was young, club rugby union and interstate cricket used to be regularly televised and get reasonable crowds: but no more). Even domestic club soccer in European countries is under ever-increasing competition from European championships, and a breakaway European "super league" must remain a strong possibility in the medium term.

I think the AFL ultimately can't compete in the area of televised sport in front of empty stadiums. Other codes can do this much better.

But, in Australia, only 20/20 and one day cricket (and the odd test match) can compete with AFL in terms of providing a live spectator experience in terms of the excitement generated by vocal mass crowds. This is the strength I would be building on if I were in charge of the AFL.

[rodgerfox]

But, in Australia, only 20/20 and one day cricket (and the odd test match) can compete with AFL in terms of providing a live spectator experience in terms of the excitement generated by vocal mass crowds. This is the strength I would be building on if I were in charge of the AFL.

It's why I've said for many years now that the AFL are digging themselves a hole.

AFL is not a pretty sport. Most overseas guests that I take to the footy or see it on TV think it's an ugly mess with no apparent rules.

The thing that has made it what it is - is passion.

And the AFL are doing their best to remove the passion from it. Once the passion is gone, it becomes a pretty bland sport.

[meher baba]

And clearly a kid taken at pick 16 in a compromised draft would have been our salvation for years to come.

I'm tipping he'd be adding more value to the club in 5 years time than Andrew Lovett will be.

Add value, not many would argue the possibility. But to the extent of your doom and gloom threads, you'd think that losing that one pick has essentially been a premature death sentence for the club and that in years to come, we'll all scratch our heads and say 'oh, what pick 16 could have done'.

On the basis of past experience, we certainly will be doing that.

Until McQualter finally came good, I can remember reading something like 200 posts on here on how dreadful a waste he was of our 17 pick in 2004. And around 600 about what a dud trade Fergus Watts was for our 17 pick in 2005 (although, of course, he did turn out to be a dead loss because of the crippling injury he experienced, although I accept that he might have been no good anyway).

The only difficult part with Lovett is working out a way of blaming GT for it.

However, we could try saying the reason we needed Lovett was because Fiora was a dud and, Fiora was all GT's fault because he should have.... could have....(I'm not sure we had much choice about taking Fiora: I guess someone could have told Mrs Black a bit earlier about what a bad boy Heath was).

[Milton66]

And clearly a kid taken at pick 16 in a compromised draft would have been our salvation for years to come.

I'm tipping he'd be adding more value to the club in 5 years time than Andrew Lovett will be.

Add value, not many would argue the possibility. But to the extent of your doom and gloom threads, you'd think that losing that one pick has essentially been a premature death sentence for the club and that in years to come, we'll all scratch our heads and say 'oh, what pick 16 could have done'.

On the basis of past experience, we certainly will be doing that.

Until McQualter finally came good, I can remember reading something like 200 posts on here on how dreadful a waste he was of our 17 pick in 2004. And around 600 about what a dud trade Fergus Watts was for our 17 pick in 2005 (although, of course, he did turn out to be a dead loss because of the crippling injury he experienced, although I accept that he might have been no good anyway).

The only difficult part with Lovett is working out a way of blaming GT for it.

However, we could try saying the reason we needed Lovett was because Fiora was a dud and, Fiora was all GT's fault because he should have.... could have....(I'm not sure we had much choice about taking Fiora: I guess someone could have told Mrs Black a bit earlier about what a bad boy Heath was).

FFS, we finally have a thread with no GT blame, and you have to bring it up. You are obsessed man. Let it go.

[bozza1980]

I must say I feel extremely pissed off at Lovett for wasting everybody's time.....he has cost us a draft pick, he will cost us money (for his contract), and has harmed the club's reputation, the last point in particular really pisses me off!

I don't blame Lyon or anyone else for drafting him, as he is a good player with blistering pace who can kick goals......but clearly he is a failure as a human being, and doesn't deserve any more chances......I mean seriously, getting into trouble with the police twice before he even plays a single game for us!! What a disgrace....

In hindsight we should have known better than to recruit this guy, he is nothing but trouble......mores the pity, as he has (or had) potential to be a gun....now he is nothing but a wasted talent....consigned to the dustbin of history

End rant

That's pretty much how I feel too.

It really is a terrible situation on so many different levels.

[Badlands]

Yet, despite these far from encouraging signs, the AFL is pushing on with more expansionism into this hostile territory. Meanwhile, traditionally strong AFL areas like southern NSW/ACT and Tasmania have been treated like dirt and even WA and SA have hardly been given red carpet treatment. There is no question that the numbers of players and supporters of AFL have been declining in southern NSW and the ACT relative to the rugby codes.

As an ACT resident, can i ride on the coat-tails of your post here Meher (the content of which i agree with btw)?

I used to go out to Manuka for just about every game but in about 2007 or 2008 after being treated to yet another dull, uninspiring, stoppage-riddled, sydney swans fixture, i finally came to my senses and pulled the pin. Canberra is not renowned for turning on the most delightful weather for footy during the winter and any swans games played at manuka are screened live on tv in the ACT anyway (often on both pay tv and free-to-air).

The last game I went to was the Saints/Cats NAB cup game (a corker for what it's worth) in 2008 where Jack Steven nabbed a winner in the dying seconds.

I have a fairly considerable contingent of friends in the area who follow AFL. So do many, many people I work with. Of all of these people, I know of one person who supports the Swans. One person. There is this misconception (in my view) that Canberrans have some great affection for the Sydney Swans - i would like to see some research on this - when I believe the reality is that the vast majority of Swans supporters at Manuka games have made the 3hr trek along the highway. In fact, most locals i know hate the Swans. Canberra is made up of a heap of public servants, and presumably many of the AFL devotees are re-located Victorians.

Last year, the Melbourne media had the hide to criticise Canberra for only attracting 7,311 fans to ... wait for it... Sydney vs Melbourne - in late July. You couldn't have paid me to attend that one.

I agree it's naive to think the big Melbourne clubs would give up a potential home gate of 50000+ people to play in front of 16000 at Manuka regardless of how much money the ACT government puts up. But geez, give us a product that at least offers something in the form of entertainment.

And don't get me started on the missing out on big blockbuster clashes because on occasions in the ACT we get Swans broadcast live on both foxtel and free-to-air at the expense of the game being televised free-to-air into other regions.

Rant over and I'm 100% certain no one cares, but i do feel better.

[BallBanger]

Must be great being you. What a legend you are. Calling Howard ten minutes after he was drafted a dud.

Wow - give the kid a chance.

Calling JB an egomanic - maybe you should apply, you seem to know everything about everything.

BM did not call howard a dud 10 mins after the draft. What he did say was "taking howard (a smokie) this early in a strong draft was not smart".

You never really understood this logic

You do need to lie to boost your own little ego

Remember I did save a copy of this thread I will put it back up to disprove your point (lies) if you want.

BM is correct when saying we should also be protecting our future but to argue this with fools is unwise

[poatina]

I don't ususally bother to read the strings that have gone on for four or more pages because I know that they would have degenerated to name calling and general big - dicking by then - as this one has - but in the midst of it Meheh Baba and others have raised interesting matters, thoughtfully put , about the future of the game which deseerve their own post , rather than tacking on the end of a ridiculous discussion about a person who ( unless I have missed the news) hasn't as yet even been charged with anything , let alone been found guilty .
Mods, can the discussion which has promise be moved to a new post ?

[stinger]

poatina......went there once......tasmanian hydro town isn't it....???

[AnythingsPossibleSaints]

The buck stops with Lyon. he cops kudo's for most of his recruiting, but has stuffed the trading period up big time in 2009. Overall, Lyon has been excellent, this time however he has been very poor.

Why is it that Lyon is above critisism?

I think because so many were on the "In Ross we trust" bandwagon. And so, in defending Lyon, they're also in effect trying to defend themselves, for hitching themselves to that bandwagon.

[GrumpyOne]

The buck stops with Lyon. he cops kudo's for most of his recruiting, but has stuffed the trading period up big time in 2009. Overall, Lyon has been excellent, this time however he has been very poor.

Why is it that Lyon is above critisism?

I think because so many were on the "In Ross we trust" bandwagon. And so, in defending Lyon, they're also in effect trying to defend themselves, for hitching themselves to that bandwagon.

Yeah.... RL didn't win us a flag, gambled and lost on a couple of draft picks, time to sack him.

Jesaulenko, Patterson, Gellie, Baldock, Alves, Thomas.... a lot of good replacements waiting in the wings.

Sheesh, but for Pakistan's imeptitude we could have had Ricky Ponting.

[Teflon]

I actually reckon Rodger makes a lot of sense - in this instance. maybe we should read his posts for what they are rather than assuming that everything he writes is attempting to bait someone?

Who did Geelong 'gamble' on for their success? The hawks went for Stuey Dew but gave up nothing to get him, bit like Gardiner for us.

Sydnet and W.C. before them? If they recruited a player for premiership success I can't think of one. And if you include Hall, well how old was he when he went to the swans 23-24? Hardly a gamble I would have thought.

The lions before them? Can't think of anyone recruited for that 'window'? Maybe Martin Pyke, but hardly a superstar and they gave up nothing for him.

The argument isn't so much as to why did Lyon (and co) recruit Lovett. It's why did we give up so much to get him? Historically, despite what others say, premiership clubs haven't loaded up for a premiership tilt, rather they have generally trusted their lists. If they have gone for an older player, they have taken them well down the draft order, so any risk is almost neutralised by the fact that they are giving up nothing and paying the bloke peanuts.

Believe it or not - we're not the only club out there desperate for a flag. The good clubs always have one eye to the future.

Thats lovely but thats not remotely linked to what Dodgerfox said - Id suggest instead "suggesting" what he said re read his post.

Hes on about "risk" - ofcourse there's risk - there's risk in all attempts for a flag be it injury to players, who to leave out (see King at Cats etc)....whatever....

Point is we took a gamble to fill a hole most on here and the coaching panel obviously saw.....it hasnt paid off and Lyon has to wear that....but spare me the Dodgy fox drama that we are all of a sudden selling out our long term future for short termism on the back of 1 draft pick that hasnt worked whilst ignoring those kids we have actually taken???

[BigMart]

Put this on record

I think Ross Lyon is a GREAT coach.....and St.Kilda have done well
1) to appoint him when he was an underdog....the due process works...rather than the usual dodgy way we do thing at Moorabbin
2) to sign him for a further 3 years...

he is possibly the best in the AFL (with Roos/Malthouse)

reason I believe this is because unlike GT (who was also a good coach/excellent motivator and list manager) he is a trendsetter - ahead of the AFL......he did not copy a premiers game-plan....he devised won.....which was a combination of Sydney/Hawthorn/Geelongs/Brisbanes/StKildas 04-06 and came up with a rolling zone with Frontal Pressure with power mids with flooding a quarter back and running defender with switch to the fat side and two key fwds....

and he demanded resources be put into the most important area....the football dept.

But Ross Lyon is capable of mistakes and can/should be questioned and held accountable.....like anyone.....if we stop asking questions we don't find improvement....I am sure he does this himself....and would be kicking himself after the Lovett/Ball fiasco


Please do NOT delete Joffa's post.....it is indicative of what he does....just throws out the personal insults and has the cheek to call me the egomaniac....a feeble attempt to humiliate me....FFS...if he makes a sensible footy argument I would probably take some notice of him......Lovett's character was WELL known.....I am not nostradamus.....just recognised the fact he was trouble....and not worth giving up a FRDP for....or anything for that matter..

[saint66au]

BigMart, I was logged on the day of that draft and I distinctly remember you giving John Beveridge a massive spray for drafting Howard, just minutes after his name was called. I'm fairly sure you called him an egomaniac..if not then it was something very close to that. Risk it might have been, but your attack on Bevo was, in my opinion, totally excessive and unneccesary

[BigMart]

Obviously it was not over the top or excessive IMO....thats the beauty of opinions....everyone can have them....right or wrong...you are entitled to your views...

the spray was a bit over the top.....holding back is not something I am known for....which is why I am much loved on here....and even more so on local cricket grounds in Melbourne

[Solar]

I must say I feel extremely pissed off at Lovett for wasting everybody's time.....he has cost us a draft pick, he will cost us money (for his contract), and has harmed the club's reputation, the last point in particular really pisses me off!

I don't blame Lyon or anyone else for drafting him, as he is a good player with blistering pace who can kick goals......but clearly he is a failure as a human being, and doesn't deserve any more chances......I mean seriously, getting into trouble with the police twice before he even plays a single game for us!! What a disgrace....

In hindsight we should have known better than to recruit this guy, he is nothing but trouble......mores the pity, as he has (or had) potential to be a gun....now he is nothing but a wasted talent....consigned to the dustbin of history

End rant

This sums up the whole situation for me,

What a waste

[markp]

Put this on record

I'm getting it tattooed on my chest as we speak.... *ouch* though I do wish you were just a tad less verbose... (thank **** it's not an MB post)

if we stop asking questions we don't find improvement

You are aware that this is just a little unofficial fan forum aren't you?... the CS dont even take notice of our banner suggestions anymore.

[plugger66]

So the AFL has gone backwards in the last 10 years. Dont make me laugh. It is bar far the most successful footy code in Australia and has increased the difference between itself and the other codes in the last 10 years. NRL are a laughing stock and the ARU isnt even worth speaking about. Just about every soccer club is in debt where as most AFL clubs are making money whee as 10 years ago more were in debt. Obviously the AFl administration has made errors in the last 10 years but compared to other codes they have made many less.

I agree it all looks good on the surface ATM: indeed, as a spectacle, the game has never been more exciting or entertaining. The strong Aboriginal element in the game gives it a uniquely Australian flavour which has growing global appeal.

However, there are some fundamental problems with the AFL's strategy that have been papered over by the inflated TV revenue and the problems experienced by competing codes (eg: rugby league raped and pillaged by News Limited, soccer taking far too long to get its act together in terms of moving away from ethnically-based clubs with ageing, declining supporter bases).

The strategy of the AFL since the 1980s has been to seek to expand into the strongholds of the rugby codes: Sydney and south-east Queensland. Progress here has been consistently over-rated IMO I would be interested to see a decent survey that showed the % of members of the Lions and the Swans who were not born or raised in one of the AFL states.

Regardless of what people at AFL HQ think, the Swans have at best a cult following in Sydney. Their Saturday night TV games are frequently outrated by all the other channels, even SBS. The following in Brisbane is perhaps a little better, but hardly outstanding given the great success of the Lions over the past decade.

Yet, despite these far from encouraging signs, the AFL is pushing on with more expansionism into this hostile territory. Meanwhile, traditionally strong AFL areas like southern NSW/ACT and Tasmania have been treated like dirt and even WA and SA have hardly been given red carpet treatment. There is no question that the numbers of players and supporters of AFL have been declining in southern NSW and the ACT relative to the rugby codes. If I were the AFL, I'd also be a little bit worried about the long-term prospects of WA, which has a relatively high rate of influx of people from overseas and NSW and Qld who might generally favour soccer over AFL. Tassie and SA will remain strong, but these states are continuing to decline in economic and demographic significance.

The great strength of AFL over, say, rugby league has been that it has enormous grass roots support which flows over into large memberships and huge crowds. Rugby league is increasingly a TV-based game which appeals to an ageing, indoor audience. AFL is still a great afternoon/night out.

However, in terms of a day/night out, a Swans game isn't much chop. Even when the Swans were flying high, they couldn't regularly pull a full house at the tiny SCG (I went to a Swans-Roos game there a week or so before their triumphant 2005 finals, and the ground was about 1/3 full).

A Western Sydney or Gold Coast game will be even less of an event. The new twilight games on Sunday are also not that electric. But, of course, all of these experiences are designed to attract pay TV viewers, not spectators. The draw and draft rules will continue to be manipulated to try to help these otherwise dud propositions to remain alive, and we might even see more mucking around with the rules of the game such as happened in the Hall case.

If the AFL had decided to expand its comp by introducing, say, a third WA team, or (although I'm a bit doubtful) a Tassie team, or even an Albury-Wodonga or Canberra team, we would be likely to see sizable memberships, good crowds, teams featuring plenty of local lads, etc, etc.

Why does the AFL choose the path of creating more phoney NSW and Qld teams to play in empty grounds to (perhaps) larger TV audiences rather than look to plant in more fertile ground in southern Australia? Is the (surely marginal) increase in TV revenue that important to the AFL's survival?

As I see it, the addtional TV revenue is important for the following reasons:

1. Creating a pool of funds to employ lots of additional administrators at AFL HQ and to give the AFL bosses the sorts of increases in salaries and perks (especially travel) to which they believe they are entitled.

2. Propping up the ailing heartland clubs that have declining numbers of supporters and little prospect of getting more: Roos and Demons are the prime cases along with - in a disturbing recent development - Port Adelaide. I would exempt the Bulldogs for the time being because, at least in theory, they have a large untapped base of potential supporters in western Melbourne. We are also exempt, at least for now, but must remain vulnerable for the foreseeable future.

The second point is the one that I see as the inherent structural weakness of the AFL's current strategy. Basically, phoney additional TV product is being created to pay for the cost of propping up unsustainable heartland clubs. If Western Sydney and the Gold Coast were really going to provide sustainable supporter bases for AFL clubs over the longer term, then the strategy might be ok (eg, because two ailing clubs could be moved to these areas). However, it isn't clear that even the Lions and Swans - who between them won four out of ten GFs in the 2000s and had two losing appearances besides - would be sustainable without a lot of help from the AFL. So IMO it's all a bit of a charade to chase the TV dollar.

Is this the right way for the AFL to go? I don't believe so. The market for televised sport is becoming increasingly globalised, with an ever-growing emphasis on representative competition (when I was young, club rugby union and interstate cricket used to be regularly televised and get reasonable crowds: but no more). Even domestic club soccer in European countries is under ever-increasing competition from European championships, and a breakaway European "super league" must remain a strong possibility in the medium term.

I think the AFL ultimately can't compete in the area of televised sport in front of empty stadiums. Other codes can do this much better.

But, in Australia, only 20/20 and one day cricket (and the odd test match) can compete with AFL in terms of providing a live spectator experience in terms of the excitement generated by vocal mass crowds. This is the strength I would be building on if I were in charge of the AFL.

From the sounds of your post maybe we just revert back to the bankrupt VFL as most states are gone. Also why is the price of the TV rights over inflated? Because you say Packer deliberately put in an overpriced bid. That is pure speculation. Facts are the AFL got 750 million. Facts are Sydney crowds are as good or better than most NRL games in Sydney. Facts are the crowds in AFL are the best ever in last seasons are the best ever.