|
Monoethnic Social Club
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 11K,
Visits: 0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Heart_fan
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 8K,
Visits: 0
|
+xWenzell-Halls and perhaps Luke Devere? The runout wa they were chasing Wenzell-Halls but hadn’t heard about Luke Devere. Wenzell-Halls has his moments but still has a fair amount of work to go. Moving to a new club without a manager in place is always a risky move though for any player.
|
|
|
|
|
Footyball
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 3.8K,
Visits: 0
|
Wenzell-Halls and perhaps Luke Devere?
|
|
|
|
|
Ernie Tapai
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 55,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x
No info or reports. It could just be my perception but I do seem to recall Team 11 bid was pretty much a no brainer up until the 11th hour and after a meeting of the then outgoing FFA board and a delegation of the "clubs" - and the inevitable will they or wont they announce the two expansion bids before Stevie rides off into the sunset - Duvas Team 11 bid magically lost all govnmt funding and the WMG were announced.
That is just not true. Yes, the Team 11 was favoured if the stadium funding was forthcoming. But they were never a front runner because there was never any funding towards the stadium. They never received 1 cent and were never promised 1 cent from the government. WMG became the front runner the day they changed from being the Geelong based “Victoria Patriots” bid, to the WMG bid. +xWasn't it always rumoured that WU's owners were a Chinese consortium? again, this is 100% not true. The owner of Birmingham City was part of the orginal consortium, but they were dumped before WMG lodged their bid. They had no involvement whatsoever. Fair enough, you say it is not true so I guess your correct. I recall otherwise and cant be stuffed being petty enough to find the links and stories from 3 years ago as it is not that relevant. OK WMG were the darlings of both MV and CFG... all good. As to your second point, yes I am aware that the Chinese owners of Birmingham City pulled out after the bid was awarded but the question has been asked hundreds of times, who is the ownership group of WU now??????? Not sure, i work for THE big kahuna and he spoke enthusiastically about Team 11
|
|
|
|
|
Footyball
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 3.8K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+xIs Staj the right man for this managerial appointment though? He is a decent man manager that is true. Will be interesting to see if he does get the job at WU. He would be going from one challenging situation to another. He'd want to manage Diamanti & Berisha which is understandable.
|
|
|
|
|
Heart_fan
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 8K,
Visits: 0
|
+xIs Staj the right man for this managerial appointment though? He is a decent man manager that is true. Will be interesting to see if he does get the job at WU. He would be going from one challenging situation to another.
|
|
|
|
|
Footyball
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 3.8K,
Visits: 0
|
Is Staj the right man for this managerial appointment though? He is a decent man manager that is true.
|
|
|
|
|
AnthonyC
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 611,
Visits: 0
|
If the future of sport is streaming, then why would anyone build a $100,000,000 stadium and watch as it is empty while a game is being played in it.
|
|
|
|
|
Feed_The_Brox
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 3.3K,
Visits: 0
|
+x
No info or reports. It could just be my perception but I do seem to recall Team 11 bid was pretty much a no brainer up until the 11th hour and after a meeting of the then outgoing FFA board and a delegation of the "clubs" - and the inevitable will they or wont they announce the two expansion bids before Stevie rides off into the sunset - Duvas Team 11 bid magically lost all govnmt funding and the WMG were announced.
That is just not true. Yes, the Team 11 was favoured if the stadium funding was forthcoming. But they were never a front runner because there was never any funding towards the stadium. They never received 1 cent and were never promised 1 cent from the government. WMG became the front runner the day they changed from being the Geelong based “Victoria Patriots” bid, to the WMG bid. +xWasn't it always rumoured that WU's owners were a Chinese consortium? again, this is 100% not true. The owner of Birmingham City was part of the orginal consortium, but they were dumped before WMG lodged their bid. They had no involvement whatsoever.
|
|
|
|
|
bettega
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 4.8K,
Visits: 0
|
At least two parties have had the wool pulled over their eyes by a bunch of dodgy anonymous property developers.
In all probability, as already mentioned by another poster, the anonymous investors are linked to a country currently considered persona non gratis.
|
|
|
|
|
Footyball
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 3.8K,
Visits: 0
|
Time to come clean WU. The reason no soil has been turned over on their patch of land is because they've lost investors. Just sitting there forever on the hush hush won't cut it.
Ultimatum time for them.
|
|
|
|
|
charlied
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 2.4K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+xIt may be my lack of knowledge, or it may just be a dumb question, but why can't WU build a temporary ground on the massive chunk of land they have. I'm talking basic pitch. Temporary stands like they use at the F1 (they could probably use those exact stands). Marquees and basic temporary structures for team rooms etc. Portable toilets like they use at events like F1 and music festivals. I'm curious what would be the roadblock for a solution like that. Rumour has been - for a long time - that they don't want to spend any money on the stadium until the council and transport authorities confirm they will be improving the infrastructure... Authorities, whilst supportive of the development have said that they won't invest in infrastructure until it's required - so we have something of a stand-off. For those who aren't keeping up - the infrastructure improvements required for the stadium would massively increase the value of the land around the stadium for anyone who was thinking of developing in the area... Allegedly. ;) Council and the authorities won't do anything until they get given a clear plan . All they got was what we got told. They're given wu everything. Council is awaiting on them and vicroads the same Pretty much what I said... Authorities won't do anything until it's needed... WU won't do anything until the groundwork is done... Dead heat on a merry-go-round. Wu need to pull their finger out and build it. Bunnings didn't wait for new roads when they started doing their new site in tarneit. Council stated that they're not responsible for any new roads as developers need to pay for it. Wyndham used to do it but their budget blew out due to the numerous estates popping up. So all new developments will need to provide it It's pretty obvious that's they don't have the money. You know the old adage that if it's too good to be true..
|
|
|
|
|
Carlito
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 28K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+xIt may be my lack of knowledge, or it may just be a dumb question, but why can't WU build a temporary ground on the massive chunk of land they have. I'm talking basic pitch. Temporary stands like they use at the F1 (they could probably use those exact stands). Marquees and basic temporary structures for team rooms etc. Portable toilets like they use at events like F1 and music festivals. I'm curious what would be the roadblock for a solution like that. Rumour has been - for a long time - that they don't want to spend any money on the stadium until the council and transport authorities confirm they will be improving the infrastructure... Authorities, whilst supportive of the development have said that they won't invest in infrastructure until it's required - so we have something of a stand-off. For those who aren't keeping up - the infrastructure improvements required for the stadium would massively increase the value of the land around the stadium for anyone who was thinking of developing in the area... Allegedly. ;) Council and the authorities won't do anything until they get given a clear plan . All they got was what we got told. They're given wu everything. Council is awaiting on them and vicroads the same Pretty much what I said... Authorities won't do anything until it's needed... WU won't do anything until the groundwork is done... Dead heat on a merry-go-round. Wu need to pull their finger out and build it. Bunnings didn't wait for new roads when they started doing their new site in tarneit. Council stated that they're not responsible for any new roads as developers need to pay for it. Wyndham used to do it but their budget blew out due to the numerous estates popping up. So all new developments will need to provide it
|
|
|
|
|
Benjamin
|
|
Group: Moderators
Posts: 23K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+xIt may be my lack of knowledge, or it may just be a dumb question, but why can't WU build a temporary ground on the massive chunk of land they have. I'm talking basic pitch. Temporary stands like they use at the F1 (they could probably use those exact stands). Marquees and basic temporary structures for team rooms etc. Portable toilets like they use at events like F1 and music festivals. I'm curious what would be the roadblock for a solution like that. Rumour has been - for a long time - that they don't want to spend any money on the stadium until the council and transport authorities confirm they will be improving the infrastructure... Authorities, whilst supportive of the development have said that they won't invest in infrastructure until it's required - so we have something of a stand-off. For those who aren't keeping up - the infrastructure improvements required for the stadium would massively increase the value of the land around the stadium for anyone who was thinking of developing in the area... Allegedly. ;) Council and the authorities won't do anything until they get given a clear plan . All they got was what we got told. They're given wu everything. Council is awaiting on them and vicroads the same Pretty much what I said... Authorities won't do anything until it's needed... WU won't do anything until the groundwork is done... Dead heat on a merry-go-round.
|
|
|
|
|
charlied
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 2.4K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+xIt may be my lack of knowledge, or it may just be a dumb question, but why can't WU build a temporary ground on the massive chunk of land they have. I'm talking basic pitch. Temporary stands like they use at the F1 (they could probably use those exact stands). Marquees and basic temporary structures for team rooms etc. Portable toilets like they use at events like F1 and music festivals. I'm curious what would be the roadblock for a solution like that. Rumour has been - for a long time - that they don't want to spend any money on the stadium until the council and transport authorities confirm they will be improving the infrastructure... Authorities, whilst supportive of the development have said that they won't invest in infrastructure until it's required - so we have something of a stand-off. For those who aren't keeping up - the infrastructure improvements required for the stadium would massively increase the value of the land around the stadium for anyone who was thinking of developing in the area... Allegedly. ;) This is actually the most plausible of the various theories about WU. They own a bunch of land out in the west, but its worthless unless infrastructure improvements are made (roads, railway station, etc.), and the government doesn't have that on the priority list. So how do you push them to expedite the infrastructure spend? By building an A-League stadium there! Which is too much of a high-stakes gamble for the A-League to have even entertained, let alone given the green light to. But now the obstacle seems to be less in the government (since council have given them planning permission) and more in the fact that the investors have pulled out and the consortium doesn't have enough money to get going with the project. Horvat sure has shut up. All the bullshit he spouted...
|
|
|
|
|
Monoethnic Social Club
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 11K,
Visits: 0
|
+xIf their investors have pulled out, it would be better for them to be honest about the situation and to try and plan for the future, than keep the smoke and mirrors going.
WU have next to no future without their own stadium, so it will be interesting to see what they come up with. Honest? Hahahahaha They where pitching this mythical "Werribee Wembley" as being shovel ready 30 months ago.... honest? Weren't they also reported to "own" a share in Newcastle together with WSW? Maybe they will merge?
|
|
|
|
|
Heart_fan
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 8K,
Visits: 0
|
If their investors have pulled out, it would be better for them to be honest about the situation and to try and plan for the future, than keep the smoke and mirrors going.
WU have next to no future without their own stadium, so it will be interesting to see what they come up with.
|
|
|
|
|
df1982
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 861,
Visits: 0
|
+x+xIt may be my lack of knowledge, or it may just be a dumb question, but why can't WU build a temporary ground on the massive chunk of land they have. I'm talking basic pitch. Temporary stands like they use at the F1 (they could probably use those exact stands). Marquees and basic temporary structures for team rooms etc. Portable toilets like they use at events like F1 and music festivals. I'm curious what would be the roadblock for a solution like that. Rumour has been - for a long time - that they don't want to spend any money on the stadium until the council and transport authorities confirm they will be improving the infrastructure... Authorities, whilst supportive of the development have said that they won't invest in infrastructure until it's required - so we have something of a stand-off. For those who aren't keeping up - the infrastructure improvements required for the stadium would massively increase the value of the land around the stadium for anyone who was thinking of developing in the area... Allegedly. ;) This is actually the most plausible of the various theories about WU. They own a bunch of land out in the west, but its worthless unless infrastructure improvements are made (roads, railway station, etc.), and the government doesn't have that on the priority list. So how do you push them to expedite the infrastructure spend? By building an A-League stadium there! Which is too much of a high-stakes gamble for the A-League to have even entertained, let alone given the green light to. But now the obstacle seems to be less in the government (since council have given them planning permission) and more in the fact that the investors have pulled out and the consortium doesn't have enough money to get going with the project.
|
|
|
|
|
Carlito
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 28K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+xWasn't it always rumoured that WU's owners were a Chinese consortium? If so, could it be that the current stand-off/tiff between the two governments could also be a factor in the lack of development going on? The FA should be setting a deadline tbh, and if they don't come through: take them out of the league, and bring in someone who'll add something to the league. It's getting beyond a joke really, and you can't expect a squad of 25 players to play their home games in every region of Australia bar the one they're supposed to represent! Only plus side for the current WU players would be the frequent flyer points they're racking up :laugh: Ok, bring in South Melbourne. Tbh, I think Wollongong showed this season that they could handle an A-League franchise with the way the region looked after the Phoenix, so if we were going to admit an NPL side to the A-League tomorrow: they'd get my vote. Provided they have the investors/backing to make it happen of course. +x+xWasn't it always rumoured that WU's owners were a Chinese consortium? If so, could it be that the current stand-off/tiff between the two governments could also be a factor in the lack of development going on? The FA should be setting a deadline tbh, and if they don't come through: take them out of the league, and bring in someone who'll add something to the league. It's getting beyond a joke really, and you can't expect a squad of 25 players to play their home games in every region of Australia bar the one they're supposed to represent! Only plus side for the current WU players would be the frequent flyer points they're racking up :laugh: Their old investors have quietly pulled the pin. They left last year iirc. Ah, I wasn't aware of that. Thanks for clearing it up :) All good Even their old sponsor who is a commercial builder left. Hence why Simmonds is their sponsor
|
|
|
|
|
PIFA
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 389,
Visits: 0
|
+x+xWasn't it always rumoured that WU's owners were a Chinese consortium? If so, could it be that the current stand-off/tiff between the two governments could also be a factor in the lack of development going on? The FA should be setting a deadline tbh, and if they don't come through: take them out of the league, and bring in someone who'll add something to the league. It's getting beyond a joke really, and you can't expect a squad of 25 players to play their home games in every region of Australia bar the one they're supposed to represent! Only plus side for the current WU players would be the frequent flyer points they're racking up :laugh: Ok, bring in South Melbourne. Tbh, I think Wollongong showed this season that they could handle an A-League franchise with the way the region looked after the Phoenix, so if we were going to admit an NPL side to the A-League tomorrow: they'd get my vote. Provided they have the investors/backing to make it happen of course. +x+xWasn't it always rumoured that WU's owners were a Chinese consortium? If so, could it be that the current stand-off/tiff between the two governments could also be a factor in the lack of development going on? The FA should be setting a deadline tbh, and if they don't come through: take them out of the league, and bring in someone who'll add something to the league. It's getting beyond a joke really, and you can't expect a squad of 25 players to play their home games in every region of Australia bar the one they're supposed to represent! Only plus side for the current WU players would be the frequent flyer points they're racking up :laugh: Their old investors have quietly pulled the pin. They left last year iirc. Ah, I wasn't aware of that. Thanks for clearing it up :)
|
|
|
|
|
Carlito
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 28K,
Visits: 0
|
+xWasn't it always rumoured that WU's owners were a Chinese consortium? If so, could it be that the current stand-off/tiff between the two governments could also be a factor in the lack of development going on? The FA should be setting a deadline tbh, and if they don't come through: take them out of the league, and bring in someone who'll add something to the league. It's getting beyond a joke really, and you can't expect a squad of 25 players to play their home games in every region of Australia bar the one they're supposed to represent! Only plus side for the current WU players would be the frequent flyer points they're racking up :laugh: Their old investors have quietly pulled the pin. They left last year iirc.
|
|
|
|
|
Footyball
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 3.8K,
Visits: 0
|
+xWasn't it always rumoured that WU's owners were a Chinese consortium? If so, could it be that the current stand-off/tiff between the two governments could also be a factor in the lack of development going on? The FA should be setting a deadline tbh, and if they don't come through: take them out of the league, and bring in someone who'll add something to the league. It's getting beyond a joke really, and you can't expect a squad of 25 players to play their home games in every region of Australia bar the one they're supposed to represent! Only plus side for the current WU players would be the frequent flyer points they're racking up :laugh: Ok, bring in South Melbourne.
|
|
|
|
|
PIFA
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 389,
Visits: 0
|
Wasn't it always rumoured that WU's owners were a Chinese consortium? If so, could it be that the current stand-off/tiff between the two governments could also be a factor in the lack of development going on? The FA should be setting a deadline tbh, and if they don't come through: take them out of the league, and bring in someone who'll add something to the league. It's getting beyond a joke really, and you can't expect a squad of 25 players to play their home games in every region of Australia bar the one they're supposed to represent!
Only plus side for the current WU players would be the frequent flyer points they're racking up :laugh:
|
|
|
|
|
Footyball
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 3.8K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+xThe reporting at the time was definitely that both Melbourne clubs opposed Team 11. Around the same time, someone released data showing the number of members each Melbourne club had and what part of Melbourne they came from - there was a relatively large number of members from SE Melbourne, in particular, Victory members. No surprise that ultimately the FFA chose a team to be located out in the middle of nowhere, I'm sure the Victory owners and CFG couldn't hide their mirth when it was announced. WU were the only of the 3 bids that was pretty much guaranteed to not take any fans away from City and MV, it was also a no brainer that they would start in Geelong.
They were worried about team 11, not just for the reasons you outlined, but for the fact that with no stadium they were gonna head straight to AAMI Park as a home venue to begin with.
As for South well they borderline open with their objections for obvious reasons. This. The reality is, for Team 11 they wouldnt have had a stadium either and relied fully on government, and youd assume if the government saw they were fine at AAMI and that the AFL can manage by having all clubs essentially based out of MARVEL and the MCG, it would be fine for Team 11 to be simply be a third tenant in the CBD, ulitmately making a third CBD club, which is what they wanted to avoid to spread the fan base and gain potential new fans. Ultimately i think the whole '1 city, 1 club' rule which they built the A-league on has backfired, as its hard to position new clubs, as most clubs are based centrally and dont allow for much give in terms of new teams, which is the primary reason there is a problem with a 2nd brisbane, perth or adelaide side. The one city one club strategy isn’t the issue for adding new clubs.
The bigger Issue is the lack of stadiums outside the cbd in all cities except for sydney. Brisbane seem pretty lucky with dolphin stadium bei an option. Not sure if it’s been a success or not. Maybe with the Olympics in Brisbane, their Gov can build a couple of training stadiums, about 7-12k capacities around the S/E Qld region.
|
|
|
|
|
Heart_fan
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 8K,
Visits: 0
|
I must say I had wondered for a long time how the infrastructure would be built, as that will be quite an undertaking for that location. How was that not factored into their model in the first place though? It’s not like the stadium was the only consideration, and even with the rest of the houses and commercial development, that was always going to be a significant undertaking.
Honestly, I feel sorry for those fans that did believe in WU. There were once more than likely would want to admit it out there (just as there are now more City supporters than would admit to it.. amazing what some success does).
|
|
|
|
|
PIFA
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 389,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+xThe reporting at the time was definitely that both Melbourne clubs opposed Team 11. Around the same time, someone released data showing the number of members each Melbourne club had and what part of Melbourne they came from - there was a relatively large number of members from SE Melbourne, in particular, Victory members. No surprise that ultimately the FFA chose a team to be located out in the middle of nowhere, I'm sure the Victory owners and CFG couldn't hide their mirth when it was announced. WU were the only of the 3 bids that was pretty much guaranteed to not take any fans away from City and MV, it was also a no brainer that they would start in Geelong.
They were worried about team 11, not just for the reasons you outlined, but for the fact that with no stadium they were gonna head straight to AAMI Park as a home venue to begin with.
As for South well they borderline open with their objections for obvious reasons. This. Ultimately i think the whole '1 city, 1 club' rule which they built the A-league on has backfired, as its hard to position new clubs, as most clubs are based centrally and dont allow for much give in terms of new teams, which is the primary reason there is a problem with a 2nd brisbane, perth or adelaide side. Good point re Brisbane. COVID has given the impetus for Roar to morph into a North Brisbane domiciled team. Would enable Western Pride (and even Gold Coast) to bring genuine tribal type rivalry. Before when Gold Coast were in there wasn't as much differentiation as I had expected. Now is the opportune time to create the separate identities. Pride got a decent stadium and some money? They've got neither afaik
|
|
|
|
|
Carlito
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 28K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+xThe reporting at the time was definitely that both Melbourne clubs opposed Team 11. Around the same time, someone released data showing the number of members each Melbourne club had and what part of Melbourne they came from - there was a relatively large number of members from SE Melbourne, in particular, Victory members. No surprise that ultimately the FFA chose a team to be located out in the middle of nowhere, I'm sure the Victory owners and CFG couldn't hide their mirth when it was announced. WU were the only of the 3 bids that was pretty much guaranteed to not take any fans away from City and MV, it was also a no brainer that they would start in Geelong.
They were worried about team 11, not just for the reasons you outlined, but for the fact that with no stadium they were gonna head straight to AAMI Park as a home venue to begin with.
As for South well they borderline open with their objections for obvious reasons. The reality is, for Team 11 they wouldnt have had a stadium either and relied fully on government, and youd assume if the government saw they were fine at AAMI and that the AFL can manage by having all clubs essentially based out of MARVEL and the MCG, it would be fine for Team 11 to be simply be a third tenant in the CBD, ulitmately making a third CBD club, which is what they wanted to avoid to spread the fan base and gain potential new fans. The difference is that if the government commits to building a stadium, there is a certain guarantee that a stadium gets built. Funds are allocated and the project moves forward. You don't get that with a private company. They can say whatever they want and have no obligation to follow through (or complete) any of it. Hence why this bid was always shonky. When a new bunnings is nearly completed in tarneit and which was approved after wu bid something is up
|
|
|
|
|
Monoethnic Social Club
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 11K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+xThe reporting at the time was definitely that both Melbourne clubs opposed Team 11. Around the same time, someone released data showing the number of members each Melbourne club had and what part of Melbourne they came from - there was a relatively large number of members from SE Melbourne, in particular, Victory members. No surprise that ultimately the FFA chose a team to be located out in the middle of nowhere, I'm sure the Victory owners and CFG couldn't hide their mirth when it was announced. WU were the only of the 3 bids that was pretty much guaranteed to not take any fans away from City and MV, it was also a no brainer that they would start in Geelong.
They were worried about team 11, not just for the reasons you outlined, but for the fact that with no stadium they were gonna head straight to AAMI Park as a home venue to begin with.
As for South well they borderline open with their objections for obvious reasons. The reality is, for Team 11 they wouldnt have had a stadium either and relied fully on government, and youd assume if the government saw they were fine at AAMI and that the AFL can manage by having all clubs essentially based out of MARVEL and the MCG, it would be fine for Team 11 to be simply be a third tenant in the CBD, ulitmately making a third CBD club, which is what they wanted to avoid to spread the fan base and gain potential new fans. The difference is that if the government commits to building a stadium, there is a certain guarantee that a stadium gets built. Funds are allocated and the project moves forward. You don't get that with a private company. They can say whatever they want and have no obligation to follow through (or complete) any of it. ... but they promised everyone they would build a 15k stadium AND a 5k training centre if the council gifted them the land AND developed the infrastructure around their housing estate (ooops I mean sports precinct) :(
|
|
|
|
|
someguyjc
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 4.1K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+xThe reporting at the time was definitely that both Melbourne clubs opposed Team 11. Around the same time, someone released data showing the number of members each Melbourne club had and what part of Melbourne they came from - there was a relatively large number of members from SE Melbourne, in particular, Victory members. No surprise that ultimately the FFA chose a team to be located out in the middle of nowhere, I'm sure the Victory owners and CFG couldn't hide their mirth when it was announced. WU were the only of the 3 bids that was pretty much guaranteed to not take any fans away from City and MV, it was also a no brainer that they would start in Geelong.
They were worried about team 11, not just for the reasons you outlined, but for the fact that with no stadium they were gonna head straight to AAMI Park as a home venue to begin with.
As for South well they borderline open with their objections for obvious reasons. The reality is, for Team 11 they wouldnt have had a stadium either and relied fully on government, and youd assume if the government saw they were fine at AAMI and that the AFL can manage by having all clubs essentially based out of MARVEL and the MCG, it would be fine for Team 11 to be simply be a third tenant in the CBD, ulitmately making a third CBD club, which is what they wanted to avoid to spread the fan base and gain potential new fans. The difference is that if the government commits to building a stadium, there is a certain guarantee that a stadium gets built. Funds are allocated and the project moves forward. You don't get that with a private company. They can say whatever they want and have no obligation to follow through (or complete) any of it.
|
|
|
|
|
Butler99
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+xThe reporting at the time was definitely that both Melbourne clubs opposed Team 11. Around the same time, someone released data showing the number of members each Melbourne club had and what part of Melbourne they came from - there was a relatively large number of members from SE Melbourne, in particular, Victory members. No surprise that ultimately the FFA chose a team to be located out in the middle of nowhere, I'm sure the Victory owners and CFG couldn't hide their mirth when it was announced. WU were the only of the 3 bids that was pretty much guaranteed to not take any fans away from City and MV, it was also a no brainer that they would start in Geelong.
They were worried about team 11, not just for the reasons you outlined, but for the fact that with no stadium they were gonna head straight to AAMI Park as a home venue to begin with.
As for South well they borderline open with their objections for obvious reasons. This. The reality is, for Team 11 they wouldnt have had a stadium either and relied fully on government, and youd assume if the government saw they were fine at AAMI and that the AFL can manage by having all clubs essentially based out of MARVEL and the MCG, it would be fine for Team 11 to be simply be a third tenant in the CBD, ulitmately making a third CBD club, which is what they wanted to avoid to spread the fan base and gain potential new fans. Ultimately i think the whole '1 city, 1 club' rule which they built the A-league on has backfired, as its hard to position new clubs, as most clubs are based centrally and dont allow for much give in terms of new teams, which is the primary reason there is a problem with a 2nd brisbane, perth or adelaide side. The one city one club strategy isn’t the issue for adding new clubs.
The bigger Issue is the lack of stadiums outside the cbd in all cities except for sydney. Brisbane seem pretty lucky with dolphin stadium bei an option. Not sure if it’s been a success or not.
|
|
|
|