payback's a bitch....so the roos discover...

[stinger]

AFL rips Roos out of Carrara

Jake Niall and Caroline Wilson | December 12, 2007

THE Kangaroos have expressed disappointment in the AFL's decision to remove them from the Gold Coast during the pre-season competition and community camps — a lightning response to the club's decision to spurn the league's relocation proposal.

The bad news was compounded for the club yesterday when chief executive Rick Aylett announced his resignation, citing personal reasons.

Less than five days after the club rejected a Gold Coast future, the AFL yesterday informed the Kangaroos that it intended to shift their February community camp from the Gold Coast to Bairnsdale and that they would not be playing Brisbane at Carrara in the NAB Cup.

While the AFL is yet to finalise details, the AFL has suggested that another team will play the Lions at Carrara in the NAB Cup and has floated the prospect of the embattled Kangaroos playing the Bulldogs in Darwin instead.

As the AFL acts swiftly to push the club away from south-east Queensland, it also appears certain that the league will let North Melbourne play only three games — instead of the requested four — at Carrara next year and that it will not play any games at all on the Gold Coast in 2009. This means the club will lose the additional $400,000 it would have received for that "extra" fourth game next year and will be deprived of a guaranteed $1.6 million in 2009.

In further moves, AFL chief executive Andrew Demetriou told the Kangaroos that neither the league nor the majority of its clubs would support on-going special assistance to a club run by private shareholders. North Melbourne will lose its $1.4 million annual AFL lifeline within two seasons unless the club hands its powerbase back to its members.

Hours after the club voted to stay in Melbourne, new chairman James Brayshaw was braced for payback from the AFL, for substantial financial assistance to be eventually wound back and for it to lose the lucrative Gold Coast opportunities. But he could not have envisaged that the AFL would move this quickly to remove it from the northern market.

"The club's disappointed because we've put a lot of time and effort in to that market and we enjoy the Gold Coast and that community," Aylett said yesterday. "The time and effort we've put into the community camps and getting out into the community has been a huge effort by the club and the players, and yes, we are disappointed because we enjoy being up there and getting involved up there and we enjoy playing some games up there."

The league insisted that it was acting in the club's interests, since the Roos wanted to remain in Melbourne, it made little sense for them to be on the Gold Coast for a camp and pre-season game. The AFL said that the club had not lost any money by the shifting of a NAB Cup game and the February community camp.

"What's paying back? There's no financial downside," said AFL commercial operations chief Gillon McLachlan. "The Kangaroos want to grow their Victorian base. We're actually working to achieve their ends. It couldn't possibly be argued that there's any payback or anything negative about it."

Aylett confirmed that a game in Darwin against the Bulldogs had been "mooted" as the club's NAB fixture and that Bairnsdale was its likely community camp location.

"We're having a look at the NAB Cup and the community camps because it doesn't make a lot of sense to have a team playing up there whose future growth and future prosperity is in Melbourne and not on the Gold Coast," McLachlan said.

McLachlan said the AFL would honour its agreement for the Roos to play three games at Carrara in 2008, adding: "I don't think it makes any sense for the Kangaroos to be playing on the Gold Coast in 2009."

The club's contract means it will still be financially compensated for those four 2009 games earmarked for Carrara, for which it would have received $400,000 per game.

It is unclear whether there will be a fourth game, or if the AFL will schedule another team at Carrara in 2008.

Brayshaw is understood to be securing an agreement from controlling shareholders led by Bob Ansett and Peter de Rauch to relinquish their shares by 2009.

Demetriou told the Kangaroos' board before last Thursday's historic decision to remain a Melbourne-based club that the club's shareholders would have to make up the shortfall beyond 2009 unless the power was returned to the members.

At the start of 2007 three member-elected directors joined the board in Ron Joseph, Brayshaw and his brother Mark however the club's complicated share structure has continued to influence major North Melbourne decisions despite the fact de Rauch, Ansett and company have not contributed money to the club.

Demetriou is expected to repeat the AFL's intention to remove the Kangaroo's allocation unless the shareholders relinquish their stake in the club.

[bozza1980]

Not a suprising move by the league.

As they responded to the question why they thought there would be a team on the Gold Coast

"We can be very persuasive"

The Kangaroos are about to find out that emotion has caused them to make the worse of two decisions for their club.

[riccardo]

Serves them right, to be honest.

They had little choice, move or die, they won't move, so now they'll die.

What a pity.

[saint66au]

Serves them right, to be honest.

They had little choice, move or die, they won't move, so now they'll die.

What a pity.

Theres some compassionate little flowers on here isnt there??

The AFL bend St Kilda over and people (rightly) scream the place down..any other Club? "Oh well..they'll just die..ha ha who cares it's not St Kilda" Are teh AFL only bad guys when St Kilda cop the rough end of the stick??

I'd be amazed if North's board hadn't well and truly expected this move by the AFL actually.

[Huzzad]

Wonder if we'll be given those 3 or 4 games in 2009. We've got one away game there next year, I reckon if they get good crowds and ratings for that, the AFL might take up our offer.

[riccardo]

Serves them right, to be honest.

They had little choice, move or die, they won't move, so now they'll die.

What a pity.

Theres some compassionate little flowers on here isnt there??

The AFL bend St Kilda over and people (rightly) scream the place down..any other Club? "Oh well..they'll just die..ha ha who cares it's not St Kilda" Are teh AFL only bad guys when St Kilda cop the rough end of the stick??

I'd be amazed if North's board hadn't well and truly expected this move by the AFL actually.

Well, I happen to be one eyed, so sue me.

[TimeToShineFellas]

Serves them right, to be honest.

They had little choice, move or die, they won't move, so now they'll die.

What a pity.

Theres some compassionate little flowers on here isnt there??

The AFL bend St Kilda over and people (rightly) scream the place down..any other Club? "Oh well..they'll just die..ha ha who cares it's not St Kilda" Are teh AFL only bad guys when St Kilda cop the rough end of the stick??

Pretty much summed up what I was thinking.

I reckon you'd change your tune if it was us riccardo. Your kind of thinking on the Kangaroos situtaion borders on the arrogant Carlton-esque "Let Them Rot" mentality......

[Cirra]

In further moves, AFL chief executive Andrew Demetriou told the Kangaroos that neither the league nor the majority of its clubs would support on-going special assistance to a club run by private shareholders. North Melbourne will lose its $1.4 million annual AFL lifeline within two seasons unless the club hands its powerbase back to its members.

Can anyone tell me what it means to have a club run by private shareholdes?
Is that different to what we have?

Thanks

[Oh When the Saints]

Cirra, the Saints are a club run by members, which mean all voting rights on club issues (i.e. board, branding etc.) are solely in the hands of members.

The Kangaroos are run by private shareholders - 95% of voting rights on club issues are in the hands of a small group of individuals who own the club's shares. The members have basically no say.

[bigmicka]

Cirra yes it is.

Our club is owned by the members. North is currently owned by about 4 people who control 75% of the club, with the other 25% spread out over a number of people.

mic

[skeptic]

Serves them right, to be honest.

They had little choice, move or die, they won't move, so now they'll die.

What a pity.

lol bet u'd feel that way if it was the saints too ric

or would u have a rant at how unfair the AFL is

so righteous yet soooo predictable

[Cirra]

Cirra, the Saints are a club run by members, which mean all voting rights on club issues (i.e. board, branding etc.) are solely in the hands of members.

The Kangaroos are run by private shareholders - 95% of voting rights on club issues are in the hands of a small group of individuals who own the club's shares. The members have basically no say.

Wow. I'm surprised a club could run that way.

Why did it happen in the first place?
Wouldn't the member have not wanted that?

[riccardo]

Once again, my opinion dosen't happen to fall into line, once again I'm villified for it.

This is becoming rather pathetic, its a wonder I stay around here at all when everything I say is ripped apart and I get looked at as if I'm a villain for speaking my mind, yet certain arrogant blowhards are allowed to run rampant and post long, rambling and insulting threads bitching at each other for no good reason.

Regardless, I will continue to state my opinion, no matter how unpopular it is or how much it upsets the wowsers and conformists on this site.

Too damn bad if you don't like it, you'kll have to learn to deal with the fact that nopt everyuone has the same opinion in this world.

This has been building up for a long time, glad I've finally said that, it needed to be said.

[St Fidelius]

Serves them right, to be honest.

They had little choice, move or die, they won't move, so now they'll die.

What a pity.

and if the Saints were forced to move, by your own admission, you will not support them any more...

so instead of "move or die" for you it would be move and die....

[riccardo]

Serves them right, to be honest.

They had little choice, move or die, they won't move, so now they'll die.

What a pity.

and if the Saints were forced to move, by your own admission, you will not support them any more...

so instead of "move or die" for you it would be move and die....

Damn right I wouldn't support them any more.

Thats just how I feel, not going to pretend to be someone I'm not to please everyone else, not any more.

I'm sorry if you don't like it, but thems the breaks.

[Saints94]

Serves them right, to be honest.

They had little choice, move or die, they won't move, so now they'll die.

What a pity.

and if the Saints were forced to move, by your own admission, you will not support them any more...

so instead of "move or die" for you it would be move and die....

Damn right I wouldn't support them any more.

Thats just how I feel, not going to pretend to be someone I'm not to please everyone else, not any more.

I'm sorry if you don't like it, but thems the breaks.

Gee your not a true saint!

[barks4eva]

lol bet u'd feel that way if it was the saints too ric

or would u have a rant at how unfair the AFL is

so righteous yet soooo predictable

pffft... this is rich

the kangaroos supporters have neglected and not given a cr@p about that club since the 70s and r now jumping on the bandwagon... this will last 2 years tops until they implode into the rabble that they are

[asiu]

good on ya ric

the old ways are a dying .....say yr piece , and dont give a rats arse what 'judgements' others blow on with

individuality without concept .....thats whats coming .....like it or not

[snoopygirl]

Did Demetriou get dropped from the Kangaroos side when they were about to play in a GF or something? Hard to believe he ever played football with them with his petulance he is displaying at the moment. Fancy not letting them play the 4th game there or have their community camp there. Smacks of "my bat, my ball, I'm going home!"

[Saints94]

They should have moved to the gold coast. They would have got a lot of money, now there likely to be extinct in the next 3 years

[snoopygirl]

They wanted confirmation from the AFL that a stadium deal had been stitched up before agreeing to move. AFL couldn't produce & have now reacted like kids in a schoolyard spat.

[skeptic]

good point barks, my criticism of the Roos fans is EXACTLY the same as the AFLs treatment of them which Ric is supporting but wouldn't if it was us


little advice... presenting out of context arguments and hoping that the ppl not knowing the full story is a technique that the Andrew Bolts of this world do and sometimes get away with

however, smart ppl see through that for the lazy, pathetic garb that it is and hence the author has very little credibility.

U Andy really enjoy posting out of context staff and continually ignore learned forumites who rip ur pathetic cut n paste posts apart; though they're wasting their time (as u ignore them coz u can't argue with facts) you my friend come across as the tool that u r

[Richter]

They wanted confirmation from the AFL that a stadium deal had been stitched up before agreeing to move. AFL couldn't produce & have now reacted like kids in a schoolyard spat.

That's a bit of a selective reading of the situation IMO.

As I see it North wanted another year in order to retain the financial advantage of playing some home games on the Gold Coast this coming year before saying NO next year.

From the AFL's point of view they need to have a club that has some crowd-pulling potential playing games on the Gold CoaST. Options are....

- Roos, as long as it preludes a move North. The GC public can get bhind their own team.

- Collingwood, as they are the most popular team in Australia

- Saints, as we have a prominent former GC resident who is our best, and most marketable player.

------------------------------------------------------------------

AFL can harldly be blamed for wanting to maximise the game's exposure on the GC. This is not going to happen with North who struggle to get a decent crowd even in their home city.

[Saint Bev]

I don't fall for the confirmation on a stadium rubbish. Brayshaw said all along he wasn't interested in shifting and thats fair enough, I understand that. However, what would be the point in shifting them to the Gold Coast if there was no where to play. Seriously, blind Freddy knows there is a stadium waiting here to be used for AFL. Why would the Government waste there time negotiating with the AFL until they have a team committed to shifting here.

The AFL have done the right thing by stopping games being played up here as no one is interested in the Kangaroos now. In fact Brayshaw coming out and bagging the Gold Coast isn't doing anyone any favours.

Personally I think the Kangas have been pretty nieve in the way they have handled the whole thing. It could well come back to bite them on the bum. Which would be a great pity for their fans. Certainly glad, St Kilda doesn't operate that way.

[Richter]

good point barks, my criticism of the Roos fans is EXACTLY the same as the AFLs treatment of them which Ric is supporting but wouldn't if it was us


little advice... presenting out of context arguments and hoping that the ppl not knowing the full story is a technique that the Andrew Bolts of this world do and sometimes get away with

however, smart ppl see through that for the lazy, pathetic garb that it is and hence the author has very little credibility.

U Andy really enjoy posting out of context staff and continually ignore learned forumites who rip ur pathetic cut n paste posts apart; though they're wasting their time (as u ignore them coz u can't argue with facts) you my friend come across as the tool that u r

I think the point that Barks is making is that your response to Ricc is actually a direct attack on Ricc, rather than a genuine contribution to the debate.