by Booney » Wed Jun 04, 2025 11:46 am
by Lightning McQueen » Wed Jun 04, 2025 11:52 am
Booney wrote:All but confirmed, the Greens have publicly stated they'll support the Labor no confidence motion making the stadium a Tasmanian Tiger.
by RB » Wed Jun 04, 2025 12:00 pm
by Booney » Wed Jun 04, 2025 12:02 pm
RB wrote:In the eyes of this mainlander, it would be a good outcome if Tasmania get a team without having to spend a gazillion dollars on a 26k-capacity stadium in Hobart, when there's a 19k-capacity stadium a couple of miles away.
I'd also like the AFL to understand that it's not their place to issue ridiculous ultimatums to state governments.
by Lightning McQueen » Wed Jun 04, 2025 12:03 pm
RB wrote:In the eyes of this mainlander, it would be a good outcome if Tasmania get a team without having to spend a gazillion dollars on a 26k-capacity stadium in Hobart, when there's a 19k-capacity stadium a couple of miles away.
I'd also like the AFL to understand that it's not their place to issue ridiculous ultimatums to state governments.
by wenchbarwer » Wed Jun 04, 2025 12:03 pm
RB wrote:In the eyes of this mainlander, it would be a good outcome if Tasmania get a team without having to spend a gazillion dollars on a 26k-capacity stadium in Hobart, when there's a 19k-capacity stadium a couple of miles away.
I'd also like the AFL to understand that it's not their place to issue ridiculous ultimatums to state governments.
by Lightning McQueen » Wed Jun 04, 2025 12:03 pm
Booney wrote:RB wrote:In the eyes of this mainlander, it would be a good outcome if Tasmania get a team without having to spend a gazillion dollars on a 26k-capacity stadium in Hobart, when there's a 19k-capacity stadium a couple of miles away.
I'd also like the AFL to understand that it's not their place to issue ridiculous ultimatums to state governments.
I'm not sure it's an ultimatum, the terms of entry were negotiated by both parties and the conditions stipulated a roofed stadium.
by Jim05 » Wed Jun 04, 2025 12:06 pm
The AFL can make all the ultimatums it wants but the government also didn’t have to fold like a deck of cards.RB wrote:In the eyes of this mainlander, it would be a good outcome if Tasmania get a team without having to spend a gazillion dollars on a 26k-capacity stadium in Hobart, when there's a 19k-capacity stadium a couple of miles away.
I'd also like the AFL to understand that it's not their place to issue ridiculous ultimatums to state governments.
by stan » Wed Jun 04, 2025 12:06 pm
I reckon your on the money here. The AFL know the stadium won't happen and it the put they want.daysofourlives wrote:whufc wrote:MW wrote:Would be down to 50/50 that this team actually gets in the league in the end. Can't see a state govt commit to $1bn (with federal help no doubt) to a sports stadium. Would need a shift by the AFL to accept no roof.
I can't see the AFL rejecting the team. Whilst they will throw the blame on the Tassie government the AFL don't come out looking great in this either.
Then throw in the fact every year they don't have a 20th team they are losing money through the TV rights that an extra game would cause. So they need to get to 20 teams as soon as possible and the first step is getting a competitive 19th team.
Most likely outcome will be a tassie team to enter playing at both Hobart and Launceston with the AFL agreeing to some form of extension on a time frame for a new stadium.
Ive said from the start the AFL have no intention of having a team from Tassie, they know the conditions they have set will not be met. A 19th team creates massive issues and no benefits, a 20th team is a pipe dream imo.
At the end of the day a Tassie team will only strip money from their bottom line. It doesnt create any extra games it in fact takes away games that are big money spinners, at least one per week. Even if you look at from not so big matches, like instead of say Essendon playing Bulldogs a 2nd time they now play Tassie, 50k at marvel vs 18k if theyre lucky. It will hit the executives KPI's badly and their bonuses. Its a massive risk to go to 19 without a clear plan for 20. Their bonuses could be hit for 10 years, no one is signing up for that.
The AFL will not budge on the roof
Could this be why the AFL is holding off on making key appointments and or sackings. Waiting for Benny Gale to become available in 6 weeks time
by dedja » Wed Jun 04, 2025 12:07 pm
RB wrote:In the eyes of this mainlander, it would be a good outcome if Tasmania get a team without having to spend a gazillion dollars on a 26k-capacity stadium in Hobart, when there's a 19k-capacity stadium a couple of miles away.
I'd also like the AFL to understand that it's not their place to issue ridiculous ultimatums to state governments.
by Brodlach » Wed Jun 04, 2025 12:15 pm
RB wrote:In the eyes of this mainlander, it would be a good outcome if Tasmania get a team without having to spend a gazillion dollars on a 26k-capacity stadium in Hobart, when there's a 19k-capacity stadium a couple of miles away.
I'd also like the AFL to understand that it's not their place to issue ridiculous ultimatums to state governments.
Brodlach wrote:Rory Laird might end up the best IMO, he is an absolute jet. He has been in great form at the Bloods
by mighty_tiger_79 » Wed Jun 04, 2025 12:27 pm
Brodlach wrote:RB wrote:In the eyes of this mainlander, it would be a good outcome if Tasmania get a team without having to spend a gazillion dollars on a 26k-capacity stadium in Hobart, when there's a 19k-capacity stadium a couple of miles away.
I'd also like the AFL to understand that it's not their place to issue ridiculous ultimatums to state governments.
They are currently spending $100 million on the current stadium now too
by Dutchy » Wed Jun 04, 2025 12:39 pm
by dedja » Wed Jun 04, 2025 12:39 pm
by RB » Wed Jun 04, 2025 12:43 pm
Booney wrote:RB wrote:In the eyes of this mainlander, it would be a good outcome if Tasmania get a team without having to spend a gazillion dollars on a 26k-capacity stadium in Hobart, when there's a 19k-capacity stadium a couple of miles away.
I'd also like the AFL to understand that it's not their place to issue ridiculous ultimatums to state governments.
I'm not sure it's an ultimatum, the terms of entry were negotiated by both parties and the conditions stipulated a roofed stadium.
by dedja » Wed Jun 04, 2025 12:45 pm
by RB » Wed Jun 04, 2025 12:45 pm
How much investment do you think is required?mighty_tiger_79 wrote:Brodlach wrote:RB wrote:In the eyes of this mainlander, it would be a good outcome if Tasmania get a team without having to spend a gazillion dollars on a 26k-capacity stadium in Hobart, when there's a 19k-capacity stadium a couple of miles away.
I'd also like the AFL to understand that it's not their place to issue ridiculous ultimatums to state governments.
They are currently spending $100 million on the current stadium now too
Drop in the ocean when considering total investment required
by Brodlach » Wed Jun 04, 2025 12:50 pm
RB wrote:How much investment do you think is required?mighty_tiger_79 wrote:Brodlach wrote:RB wrote:In the eyes of this mainlander, it would be a good outcome if Tasmania get a team without having to spend a gazillion dollars on a 26k-capacity stadium in Hobart, when there's a 19k-capacity stadium a couple of miles away.
I'd also like the AFL to understand that it's not their place to issue ridiculous ultimatums to state governments.
They are currently spending $100 million on the current stadium now too
Drop in the ocean when considering total investment required
Brodlach wrote:Rory Laird might end up the best IMO, he is an absolute jet. He has been in great form at the Bloods
by mots02 » Wed Jun 04, 2025 12:55 pm
Dutchy wrote:Can anyone explain to me why a roof on the new stadium was a non negotiable?
by Lightning McQueen » Wed Jun 04, 2025 12:57 pm
Dutchy wrote:Can anyone explain to me why a roof on the new stadium was a non negotiable?
Competitions SANFL Official Site | Country Footy SA | Southern Football League | VFL Footy
Club Forums Snouts Louts | The Roost | Redlegs Forum |