Hey - I'm not encouraging the flogs - it's a matter for the moderators to delete posts which are off topic.

Hey - I'm not encouraging the flogs.

GWS v Adelaide 5,830
Melbourne v GCS 13,304

Melbourne have 31,727 members, yet 60% of them did not turn up today despite this being one of the few chances they had to watch their team win this year (well was not to be).

Yeah I know that, it's just getting frustrating seeing so many people dilute the conversation with spiteful attacks on the game that I wish there was a separate medium for them to post this shit and for you to respond.

This. So fucking much this.

How is that bad thing ? because 60 percent dont show up when playing bad and still get more then most a-league teams look at a-league clubs people dont turn up when they play bad too. Because people pay in afl money for more memberships then a-league fans do ?. Because people in WA will buy Melbourne fc memberships and never probably get to go to a game ?

I hope that is the a-league too one day

you can fight about all codes all day both have problems and the a-league is a growing program AFL has over 150 years of history im not sure how anyone can compare yet. More trolling i think lol



I am an afl and a-league fan and im not letting my blindness for any sport get in the way to realize the AFL is in a position that is alot better then then a-league at the moment but the a-league is growing and i hope it can be as big in the future



all this is done on an iphone so if anything is out of place sorry guys cant scroll back up to see



Edited by liverpoolfan2010: 13/5/2013 02:42:05 PM

If the Demons lose $1 million, that's only 3% of annual turnover, it's next to nothing.

One of the oldest football clubs in the world is currently in a bit of trouble, brought on by its own actions I might add, but on the other hand, it still has decent support for a club that has not won a premiership in nearly 50 years.

If the Demons lose $1 million, that's only 3% of annual turnover, it's next to nothing.

Cronulla Sharks face paying big payouts and compensation payments to any players charged with doping

THE impact of the Cronulla doping allegations could be far-reaching for the football club because it faces huge payouts and compensation payments to any players charged with doping.

NRL sources claim the club has already spent more than $500,000 on legal fees in an effort to head off the impact of the scandal.

The legal advice to the Sharks has been that the financial fall-out will be crippling for a club already on its knees with debt.

Any player charged with doping violations is likely to sue the club for a breach in its duty of care and will also be paid out until the end of his contract. That alone could end up costing the Sharks up to $10 million.

"Those players will argue they did not know they were taking illegal substances and that the club is culpable," the source told The Daily Telegraph.

"The old board could face huge payouts and the club's insurance simply won't cover it."

Start of sidebar. Skip to end of sidebar.

End of sidebar. Return to start of sidebar.

Any players suspended will also have to be replaced.

"The Sharks could run into huge payments to a new crop of players just to keep the team running on to the field," the source said.

"They also face the prospect of being sued by the bigger-name players for loss of future earnings.

"The club's risk management insurance does not cover that contingency."
http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/sport/nrl/cronulla-sharks-face-paying-big-payouts-and-compensation-payments-to-any-players-charged-with-doping/story-fni3gol8-1226640667197

If the Demons lose $1 million, that's only 3% of annual turnover, it's next to nothing.

On Melbourne's terrible decision making, have you heard the talk that Demetriou wants the AFL to help convince Paul Roos to take over in some capacity at Melbourne as their player development has been beyond woeful? Roos would be great in helping the football department establish a better player development program but there is only so much one man can do, the whole recruitment department should have been sacked years ago, they've wasted their draft picks and recruited abysmally.

3% of their annual turnover, but 300% of their annual profit.

When your annual revenue is around the $32 to $36 mill mark, it's not a big leap to turn a $1 million loss into a small profit in successive years, not that Melbourne is likely to do that in a hurry, but Port has shown this year that things can turnaround very quickly.

GWS v Adelaide: 5,830

YEs, but Melbourne aren't Port Adelaide. They're not in a two-team city and they haven't won a premiership in the last decade.

I think you underestimate the size of Port Adelaide's support around SA and NT.

In losing $1m, Melbourne can just about kiss goodbye their profits for the next two seasons. Which doesn't bode well for their shareholders.

I think you underestimate the size of Port Adelaide's support around SA and NT.

THE AFL has recorded a 400 per cent increase in positive tests for illicit drugs.

Twenty six AFL players tested positive to illicit substances in 2012, a rise from six the previous year.

AFL medical director Dr Peter Harcourt said cocaine was the drug that players most often tested positive for.

Three AFL players are now on their second strike.

The league has also closed the self-reporting loophole, with players now permitted to self-report illicit drug use only once in their career.

There had been fears players were self-reporting drug use repeatedly as a way to dodge drug strikes.

These tests are for illegal drugs such as amphetamines, not performance enhancing drugs.

The AFL is today releasing the latest drug testing results and updating fans on the work of the illicit drugs working group, formed after a summit on February 1 prompted by Collingwood president Gary Pert's warning of "volcanic" behaviour by players.

The contentions three-strikes policy is set to remain but clubs will have more freedom to target test their own players.

The AFL carried out more tests in 2012 - 1979 up from 1489 - but the percentage of failure still increased from .4 per cent to 1.31 per cent.

The failed test percentage is the worst since the second year of testing (2006).

AFL CEO Andrew Demetriou and AFLPA boss Matt Finnis both described the results as disappointing.

"The rise in detections in 2012 reflects both an increase in the number and effectiveness of target tests conducted as well as the well-documented jump in illicit drug availability and use in the broader community,'' Demetriou said.

''The AFL playing group largely falls within the high-risk 18-30 male age group and individual players are not immune to peer group pressure and poor decision making.

"However, the use of illicit drugs in the AFL playing group remains substantially lower compared with the same age group of males in the wider community.''

None of the 26 positive tests in 2012 was recorded on match days.

The AFL announced several changes to its illicit drugs policy today:

- Players will now only be able to self-report illicit drug use once in their AFL career, closing a potential loophole.

- Clubs will be able to request target testing of their players.

- There will be an overall increase in target testing.

- There will also be an increase in hair testing during the off-season, when there is an increased risk of illicit drug use.

MORE TO COME

Out of curiousity, who does everyone on here support?