Brisbane Lions, you're time at the top is officially over!!!

[GWW]

No issue in football irritates me and gets me fired up more than the emergence of clubs in the Northern states which i argue was due not to inherent strengths of the clubs, but of aritificial assistance provided by the AFL. The classic example was Brisbane, although Sydney arent way behind. Both clubs have enjoyed and still do enjoy a salary cap advantage over other clubs (under the flimsiest pretext!!), additionally though both clubs enjoyed massive recruiting assistance in the 1990's. There was a 2 to 3 year period when they (Brisbane) were continually able to choose the best young talent in the nation through the draft...they were gifted Akermanis and Michael Voss through "Zone" selections......they experienced numerous priority picks (handy to select someone like Alastair Lynch).....they benefitted through the "merger" with Fitzroy (very handy to get Brown through father and son rule here!!). All this i believe virtually turned Brisbane into the worst side of all time to the best side in a matter of a few years. My point is that this should never have been allowed to happen...ok help them out but not to the extent where it becomes an unfair advantage to other clubs.

In discussing Sydney i would point out how they were virtually given Lockett, Roos (arguably the best key forward and defender of their time), and Maxfield in the mid 90', which i believe is the single reason why they played off in the 96 grand final. Their premiership win last year can be partially attributed to their salary cap advantage (the way the Swans could afford to fit Hall into the cap when other clubs couldnt being one example).

So it is with satisfaction (for want of a better word) that Brisbane will now have to work themselves out of their current problems by themself - ie develop their juniors and be selective as to what draft choices they make because in all likelihood they will finish mid table and not be entitled to high draft picks, and more than likely no priority picks. The final piece of the jigsaw is to take away their salary cap advantage and bring them back to the realities of AFL football!!

In a general sense though what irritates me most is that the AFL sees the need to have a football socialism policy - successful clubs must become weaker eventually, weak clubs must be made stronger. My solution is to bring in zoning as i belive this forces clubs to be responsible for players in their "zone" instead of benefitting through high (and priority) picks (also takes away the incentive of "tanking" games late in the season to qualify for priority picks). The whole draft and the socialisation policy i believe was developed in the 80's when AFL directors including Schwab and Oakley visited America to inspect the way US sporting codes operated. My view is that whilst drafts might be the best for American sports, Australian sport does not need to be administered in this way!!!!

[Wedgie]

Excellent post GWW, although not agreeing with a lot of what you say I do agree with most of it.
A bit you left out is the way 3 Melbourne clubs are propped up by assistance with also shits me.
Let them die if they can't compete, Geelong had no assistance when they were in the crap years back but fought their way out of it due to smart management and even despite that fact never get home ground advantage in finals like every other AFL team does.
It all equals a commercially modified comp which is one of the reasons the SANFL is my favourite competition.
Teams like mine in the AFL (Geelong) have been contiuously been disadvantaged because they never finish near the bottom of the comp where they would have been better off if they had. If you don't win the premiership in the AFL you're better off coming last. Geelong are one of the few exceptions, teams like West Coast and the Crows may fit into a similar category where they just got to where they are through hard work.
I've never "hated" Brisbane but if you watch a majority of their players this year its almost an attitude of "Hey, we've won a few premierships, we're happy just to trott around and make mega bucks before we retire".
The AFL is a commercial business, I honestly don't know why people would find it more attractive than the SANFL unless they're shallow theatre going clowns.

[GWW]

Yeah i guess i was mainly referring to recruiting assistance given to Brisbane and Sydney which ultimately wins premierships, whereas the monetary assistance given to the Vic clubs such as the Bulldogs simply enables them to stay in the comp.

Its interesting what you say about the clubs who have continuously finished mid table and have therefore done it tough as far as recruting is concerned. Its one of the reasons why Adelaide, West Coast, and Geelong are my most "favourite" clubs after the team i barrack for (Port). One of my least favourite is Richmond as they fought so steadfast against fair assistance to Port when they joined in the mid 90's. Richmond are a classic example of a team that will only ever succeed with assistance given to them from the league, they've been given a fair bit of that lately and theyre still crap!!

As for Brisbane, i cant believe the audacity of Leigh Matthews a couple of years ago.....he was complaining about how the Lions lost Blake Caracella due to salary cap problems after spending 3 or so years developing him....ahh Leigh the only reason you got him was because Essendon had to release him due to problems fitting all their players into the cap!!

[Wedgie]

Monetary assistance to the Bulldogs, Kangaroos and Melbourne shits me more than the draft concessions given to the northern states as at least its in the games interest if the northern states do well (not that I agree with it). Its actually to the games detriment that clubs like the Bulldogs, Kangaroos, Melbourne and Richmond survive. The AFL is so bloody hypocritical at times.
Agreed fully about Richmond, they shit me no end. Absolute joke of a club. Shouldn't even be allowed in the VFL let alone the AFL.
Mind you, the whole comp shits me, its only clubs like Geelong that do it the hard way after being down and out that are compettive still like a traditional footy club would be that keeps me interested. Don't even get me started on zones when Geelong would have players like Jonathan Brown playing for them!!!!

[spell_check]

Monetary assistance to the Bulldogs, Kangaroos and Melbourne shits me more than the draft concessions given to the northern states as at least its in the games interest if the northern states do well (not that I agree with it). Its actually to the games detriment that clubs like the Bulldogs, Kangaroos, Melbourne and Richmond survive. The AFL is so bloody hypocritical at times.
Agreed fully about Richmond, they shit me no end. Absolute joke of a club. Shouldn't even be allowed in the VFL let alone the AFL.
Mind you, the whole comp shits me, its only clubs like Geelong that do it the hard way after being down and out that are compettive still like a traditional footy club would be that keeps me interested. Don't even get me started on zones when Geelong would have players like Jonathan Brown playing for them!!!!

That leads me to a thing that shits me - the father son rule.

[Wedgie]

That leads me to a thing that shits me - the father son rule.

christ, don't get me started on that, great idea in principle (similar to zoning) but so many people don't understand the maths behind it!
For some 5AA listeners to agree with it you'd have to bring artificial insemenation with stem cell technology into the equation as they blame the AFL for some people not having gifted sons as footballers! Freaking morons!
(And that doesn't even take into account that Ben Cousins and Jonathan Brown are playing for other clubs when they should be playing for Geelong!! ITS ****!!!!! But the AFL are happy while clubs like Brisbane and West Coast are doing well for ratings purposes. )

[GWW]

Monetary assistance to the Bulldogs, Kangaroos and Melbourne shits me more than the draft concessions given to the northern states as at least its in the games interest if the northern states do well (not that I agree with it). Its actually to the games detriment that clubs like the Bulldogs, Kangaroos, Melbourne and Richmond survive. The AFL is so bloody hypocritical at times.
Agreed fully about Richmond, they shit me no end. Absolute joke of a club. Shouldn't even be allowed in the VFL let alone the AFL.
Mind you, the whole comp shits me, its only clubs like Geelong that do it the hard way after being down and out that are compettive still like a traditional footy club would be that keeps me interested. Don't even get me started on zones when Geelong would have players like Jonathan Brown playing for them!!!!

Yes i agree with the part about Geelong, i seriously believe they deserve any success theyre able to achieve. And thats why i was so proud of Port winning the flag 8 years after joining the league, given the fact that they had no concessions given to them, they did everything the hard way!! Similarly, the Crows (although the cross town enemy!!) have achieved their success on their own merits without a lot of help. I also believe the Eagles are to be commended for the way they've been able to develop their team after the mediocre "Judge" years. Sure they were lucky with Judd, but they've been able to develop a lot of "lesser likes" (Fletcher/Kerr/Sampi etc) into great players. Having said that, i was critical of West Coast in their premiership years (92/94) i thought they were given a "free ride" with their WAFL selections (eg McKenna) during the early 90's.

[am Bays]

Umm Geelong still wouldn't have got Brown as the father and son rule trumps the zone when it comes to deciding where a kid plays his footy.

I'm in favour of Sydney, at least, getting extra salary cap concessions for living in Sydney because when I was looking at moving to Sydney for work a couple of years ago the cost of real Estate absolutely scared the living beegeezus out of me unless I wanted to live on the nother side of the Blue Mountains!!

The bottom line is that unless we have teams in Sydney and Brisbane the ability of our great game to attract sponsorship $$ and TV rights $$ is severly compromiised. AFL gets ~ $100 Mil a year in TV rights up to ~$130 Mill, the NRL only gets ~$50 Mil. That in turn helps all our clubs get a dividend from the AFL

So to me for AFL to thrive and survive you have to have a reasonably competitive Brisbane and Sydney

Mind you hats off to Geelong for doing the hard yards and doing it themselves, compared to the other piss weak clubs I think it is their right to get hand outs. The Bulldogs FFS have a bigger area to attract fans from (Western Suburbs of Melb) compared to the big country town of Geelong.

[sydney-dog]

All good posts

We need to strike a balance between unfair advantage to a club and the overall benefit to the game

GWW, I take all your points on board, but we need to remember footy was not going anywhere in QLD, the Bears were struggling, they were playing out at the Gold Coast and their membership was the lowest in the comp.

Yes the AFL assisted the club with draft concessions, finance etc, but now we have a true National Comp, the Gabba games are sold out week in week out most importantly the club is the leading club in a traditional rugby league / union market, this can only be good for our game in the long term.

The issue regarding cap relief for Sydney, 3 years ago I relocated from adelaide even though i earn more then double, my disposable income is less.

Just to rent a standard 2 bedroom apartment in a good area your looking at $400 p/w, anything more depending on your needs you can be paying up to $650 p/w rent and we are talking about standard no thrills apparentments.....

To buy a standard 2 bedroom appartment your looking at $500k, my friend just purchased a two bedroom home, 30 years old in a crap area, cost him $1.1m..... for me to drive to work it cost me $12.00 in tolls per day, parking in shopping centres is about $10.00 per hour and it goes on......

So yes Sydney definitely need cap relief.........

But the AFL's assistance does not stop with the Northern Clubs

Kanga's and Bullies have had their hands out for finances for at least the past decade, so in principle at least the AFL has a consistent value and message "the overal well being and prosper of the game"

This is why we are starting to penetrate Rugby league and Union markets and this is why our game is prospering while League is lucky to get 10,000 per game.......

We can argue how much did the leagues assistance assist Brisbane, but the league has also rewarded failure through the draft priority pick system

St Kilda may win a flag this year, if they do how much of this can be credited to priority picks that were rewarded for poor performance, Hawthorn may be the next power club in three years, once again have has numerous priority picks in recent years.......

For me, priority picks system needs to be reomoved, receiving the #1 draft selection is a big enough advantage for finishing bottom, review the father-son rule to ensure fairness across all clubs, this alone with the salary cap rules should ensure a fair level playing field.......

[Wedgie]

Umm Geelong still wouldn't have got Brown as the father and son rule trumps the zone when it comes to deciding where a kid plays his footy.

I know, I was just indicating how the father/son rule can be unfair as I don't remember Jonathan Brown's dad playing for Brisbane, just re-iterating the initial point of GWW and my frustration at him playing for Brisbane who he has no connection with when he grew up in country Vic.

[Rik E Boy]

GWW. You sound like Eddie Maguire or Jack Elliott mate. Remember that the AFL is just one sport competing with a lot of other sports for what is in reality a limited market place. Without 'football socialism' (Elliotts own phrase that you have repeated verbatim in your post) we would end up with a situation where only a few clubs would be able to a realistic chance to win the premiership every year. During the 1970's and 80's the premiership was pretty much owned by five clubs, since the AFL has been created, 10 teams have managed to win a premiership. If you want market driven sport I suggest you stick to Forumula 1 racing or English Premier League where the final result is known before even the halfway point of the season.

The difference between Port, Adelaide and a Brisbane and Sydney is that SA is a football state, the infrastructure is already in place for the game to grow. Up here in Qld, the success of the Lions is much bigger than three premierships..kids up here want to play footy and not Rugby league. That is a major achievement by the code in a 'foriegn' territory and one of the aims of the concessions that have caused you so much bitterness. As has been pointed out, if Sydney don't have that concession they will find it impossible to retain players due to the cost of living in that city.

Your club first blinkered view of what the AFL is trying to achieve is the very reason why our great game is not an international sport today. In the early years of the 20th century there was considerable interest in the game in New Zealand (who even competed in at least one national carnival) but the VFL opted to grow it's own garden and look after the home clubs and the game was allowed to wither and die in Kiwiland. A club first view a la Elliott or Maguire is just brilliant at growing a game in foriegn territory in Australia as well. In the 90's the NRL had teams in Perth and Adelaide but when the superleague war broke out it was every club (first) for itself and now the game has disappeared in Perth and Adelaide just so they coud ressurect (a good weekend for it LOL) South Sydney and Manly. League has shot itself in the foot with this introspective viewpoint and it seems you should think the AFL should do the same just so the Power can win a few more flags.

If you think that the Lions were gifted three flags you are selling this club very short. They only won the grand final in 2002 by eight points...hardly an unstoppable monolith..and your lot finished top, what, four years in a row?, Only to lose at home to the likes of Hawthorn, Collingwood and Sydney. Hang on, that's what your post was really about wasn't it??? Your post reeks of bad sportsmanship mon ami and while we are enjoying Easter eggs you appear to be dining on sour grapes. The fact is, you know the rules of the comp, so you get on with it, or don't participate. Port and Geelong and every club chose to participate but not every club is in an identical scenario. I reckon if the AFL stop mucking about with the rules and bring back the contest then they will have just about got it right. After all, last year's premiership was the most open flag race that I can remember.

Wedgie..people prefer the AFL to the SANFL because that's where the best players play. It aint rocket surgery mate. Example..Fergus Watts bags ten goals in a final and can't get a kick for St Kilda or the Crows. Example two, blokes like Arnot and McCabe that were fringe players at best in the AFL come into the SANFL and become regular contributors for a gun side. Agreed the mob that run the AFL seem to be doing their very best to kill the golden goose and the game as it is being played and interpreted is a bit of a worry at the moment but you blokes need to get your head out of the sand.

By the way, happy Easter boys.

regards,

REB

[Adelaide Hawk]

The AFL is a commercial business, I honestly don't know why people would find it more attractive than the SANFL unless they're shallow theatre going clowns.

I think you've answered your own question there Wedgie. AFL is an artificial competition generated to attract those who previously knew stuff all about footy to the game, so a handful of people can make plenty of money. The AFL reminds of those old barber shops in the city that survived because they were a front for other activites.

Take a look at an annual report & balance sheet of any AFL club and it spells out loud and clear that the game of football isn't exactly priority number 1 these days. Player and coaching payments are only a very small percentage of operating costs. It's not important how the team performs on the field so long as other busniess operations are thriving. I use Collingweood as a classic example. They are raking in the millions even though their team has been crap for years.

[Rik E Boy]

The AFL is a commercial business, I honestly don't know why people would find it more attractive than the SANFL unless they're shallow theatre going clowns.

I think you've answered your own question there Wedgie. AFL is an artificial competition generated to attract those who previously knew stuff all about footy to the game, so a handful of people can make plenty of money. The AFL reminds of those old barber shops in the city that survived because they were a front for other activites.

Take a look at an annual report & balance sheet of any AFL club and it spells out loud and clear that the game of football isn't exactly priority number 1 these days. Player and coaching payments are only a very small percentage of operating costs. It's not important how the team performs on the field so long as other busniess operations are thriving. I use Collingweood as a classic example. They are raking in the millions even though their team has been crap for years.

More bull5hit. You think Collingwood aren't trying to win the premiership just because they are making money??

This might actualy surprise you Hawker but before the advent of the National comp the VFL was just about broke. Maybe, just maybe they are actually trying to get the game to survive, and then thrive? How well do you think the game would have gone if the VFL had fallen over in the mid 198O's? I'll tell you something you wouldn't see a full football park every two weeks and 30 thousand at the ground every other week. Nah, the AFL are doing a shit job! FFS

regards,

REB

[Punk Rooster]

REB, instead you would see a thriving SANFL, with an extra 30000 people through the gates each week (possibly more), as Vic players were lured here. Yeah, I would've been spewin if the VFL went broke...

[Rik E Boy]

REB, instead you would see a thriving SANFL, with an extra 30000 people through the gates each week (possibly more), as Vic players were lured here. Yeah, I would've been spewin if the VFL went broke...

Yeah, that's what would have happened...LOL.

regards,

REB

[GWW]

GWW. You sound like Eddie Maguire or Jack Elliott mate. Remember that the AFL is just one sport competing with a lot of other sports for what is in reality a limited market place. Without 'football socialism' (Elliotts own phrase that you have repeated verbatim in your post) we would end up with a situation where only a few clubs would be able to a realistic chance to win the premiership every year. During the 1970's and 80's the premiership was pretty much owned by five clubs, since the AFL has been created, 10 teams have managed to win a premiership. If you want market driven sport I suggest you stick to Forumula 1 racing or English Premier League where the final result is known before even the halfway point of the season.

The difference between Port, Adelaide and a Brisbane and Sydney is that SA is a football state, the infrastructure is already in place for the game to grow. Up here in Qld, the success of the Lions is much bigger than three premierships..kids up here want to play footy and not Rugby league. That is a major achievement by the code in a 'foriegn' territory and one of the aims of the concessions that have caused you so much bitterness. As has been pointed out, if Sydney don't have that concession they will find it impossible to retain players due to the cost of living in that city.

Your club first blinkered view of what the AFL is trying to achieve is the very reason why our great game is not an international sport today. In the early years of the 20th century there was considerable interest in the game in New Zealand (who even competed in at least one national carnival) but the VFL opted to grow it's own garden and look after the home clubs and the game was allowed to wither and die in Kiwiland. A club first view a la Elliott or Maguire is just brilliant at growing a game in foriegn territory in Australia as well. In the 90's the NRL had teams in Perth and Adelaide but when the superleague war broke out it was every club (first) for itself and now the game has disappeared in Perth and Adelaide just so they coud ressurect (a good weekend for it LOL) South Sydney and Manly. League has shot itself in the foot with this introspective viewpoint and it seems you should think the AFL should do the same just so the Power can win a few more flags.

If you think that the Lions were gifted three flags you are selling this club very short. They only won the grand final in 2002 by eight points...hardly an unstoppable monolith..and your lot finished top, what, four years in a row?, Only to lose at home to the likes of Hawthorn, Collingwood and Sydney. Hang on, that's what your post was really about wasn't it??? Your post reeks of bad sportsmanship mon ami and while we are enjoying Easter eggs you appear to be dining on sour grapes. The fact is, you know the rules of the comp, so you get on with it, or don't participate. Port and Geelong and every club chose to participate but not every club is in an identical scenario. I reckon if the AFL stop mucking about with the rules and bring back the contest then they will have just about got it right. After all, last year's premiership was the most open flag race that I can remember.

Wedgie..people prefer the AFL to the SANFL because that's where the best players play. It aint rocket surgery mate. Example..Fergus Watts bags ten goals in a final and can't get a kick for St Kilda or the Crows. Example two, blokes like Arnot and McCabe that were fringe players at best in the AFL come into the SANFL and become regular contributors for a gun side. Agreed the mob that run the AFL seem to be doing their very best to kill the golden goose and the game as it is being played and interpreted is a bit of a worry at the moment but you blokes need to get your head out of the sand.

By the way, happy Easter boys.

regards,

REB

The AFL's basic premise is of "fairness" and "equal treatment" for all clubs, but then it brings in a policy that blatantly rewards failure and gives these clubs a huge advantage against clubs who have achieved success on their own merits. Just because none of us like Eddie doesnt mean that everything that he says has no merit. Why dont we just accept the reality that AFL is a southern states competition and let the northern states have League, or at least if Sydney and Brisbane are to stay in the comp, then they should have had to compete on equal terms. Theres no way that if zones were brought in that the competition would go back to the "bad old days" of the 70's. Port and the Crows for example would be competitive as they would half of the players each in this state to choose from. Then you could have 5 to 6 clubs in Vic, they wouldnt be able to solely rely on their chequebook (as the clubs did in the 70's) but would be responsible for developing the players in their zones. And as for Geelong....well why cant they just be given exclusive access to all players in that geographic location. That would enable players to be able to stay in their home town and enable the supporters to be able to more closely identify with their club (this doesnt just apply to Geelong, this is just an example). If players in a certain "zone" didnt want to play for that club then they could put themself up for a trade or maybe even the free market.

I dont have "sour grapes" as you said REB, its just that i'm proud of the way Port Adelaide has competed in their 10 years in the comp without being given any assistance at all, compared to Sydney and Brisbane who were given huge assistance. Just because we have rules in the AFL as they are now, doesnt mean we have to mutely comply with them. Port Adelaide dominated the SANFL and wanted to get into the AFL to test themselves against the best clubs in the nation, they really had no choice but to put up with the rules of the competition, as bad as they actually are. What are they going to do, set up their own "super league"?

[McAlmanac]

How's that NRL side going in Adelaide? Or Perth?

The health of the sport is more important than the health of any one of its clubs. Sure - Brisbane and Sydney have had a leg up. But the health of Australian Rules across the nation (as meaured by participation and attendances) is better than that of rugby league.

And why "just accept" that the AFL should only reside in the southern states? That is a rather insular view.

[McAlmanac]

GWW. You sound like Eddie Maguire or Jack Elliott mate. Remember that the AFL is just one sport competing with a lot of other sports for what is in reality a limited market place. Without 'football socialism' (Elliotts own phrase that you have repeated verbatim in your post) we would end up with a situation where only a few clubs would be able to a realistic chance to win the premiership every year. During the 1970's and 80's the premiership was pretty much owned by five clubs, since the AFL has been created, 10 teams have managed to win a premiership. If you want market driven sport I suggest you stick to Forumula 1 racing or English Premier League where the final result is known before even the halfway point of the season.

The difference between Port, Adelaide and a Brisbane and Sydney is that SA is a football state, the infrastructure is already in place for the game to grow. Up here in Qld, the success of the Lions is much bigger than three premierships..kids up here want to play footy and not Rugby league. That is a major achievement by the code in a 'foriegn' territory and one of the aims of the concessions that have caused you so much bitterness. As has been pointed out, if Sydney don't have that concession they will find it impossible to retain players due to the cost of living in that city.

Your club first blinkered view of what the AFL is trying to achieve is the very reason why our great game is not an international sport today. In the early years of the 20th century there was considerable interest in the game in New Zealand (who even competed in at least one national carnival) but the VFL opted to grow it's own garden and look after the home clubs and the game was allowed to wither and die in Kiwiland. A club first view a la Elliott or Maguire is just brilliant at growing a game in foriegn territory in Australia as well. In the 90's the NRL had teams in Perth and Adelaide but when the superleague war broke out it was every club (first) for itself and now the game has disappeared in Perth and Adelaide just so they coud ressurect (a good weekend for it LOL) South Sydney and Manly. League has shot itself in the foot with this introspective viewpoint and it seems you should think the AFL should do the same just so the Power can win a few more flags.

If you think that the Lions were gifted three flags you are selling this club very short. They only won the grand final in 2002 by eight points...hardly an unstoppable monolith..and your lot finished top, what, four years in a row?, Only to lose at home to the likes of Hawthorn, Collingwood and Sydney. Hang on, that's what your post was really about wasn't it??? Your post reeks of bad sportsmanship mon ami and while we are enjoying Easter eggs you appear to be dining on sour grapes. The fact is, you know the rules of the comp, so you get on with it, or don't participate. Port and Geelong and every club chose to participate but not every club is in an identical scenario. I reckon if the AFL stop mucking about with the rules and bring back the contest then they will have just about got it right. After all, last year's premiership was the most open flag race that I can remember.

Wedgie..people prefer the AFL to the SANFL because that's where the best players play. It aint rocket surgery mate. Example..Fergus Watts bags ten goals in a final and can't get a kick for St Kilda or the Crows. Example two, blokes like Arnot and McCabe that were fringe players at best in the AFL come into the SANFL and become regular contributors for a gun side. Agreed the mob that run the AFL seem to be doing their very best to kill the golden goose and the game as it is being played and interpreted is a bit of a worry at the moment but you blokes need to get your head out of the sand.

By the way, happy Easter boys.

regards,

REB

Congratulations on a fantastic post.

[sydney-dog]

GWW

Mate you are way off the mark, who wants an extended sanfl / vfl comp, we want a true national comp........

Where have you been the last few years, Brisbane has won threee flags, Sydney one, the tradional vicyorian side have finished in the bottom 4, the national comp is alive, breathing and growing strong.......

I currently live in Syd, previously I lived in Brisbane and it is awesome that AFL is penertrating these tranditional rugby markets, kids in school are starting to play afl, your seeing more afl clubs and grounds out in the suburbs, this is what it's all about, the growth and long jepardy of our great game.

GWW, your argument is short sighted and bad business strategy, to grow and penertrate different markets you need to invest money, resources, set up infrastructure.........

Believe me Rugby League is going backwards because of your short sighted and nartrow minded principles...........

Lets do it your way, no cocessions to any clubs, then we wont have Sydney, Brisbane, Kanga's, Bullies, Melbourne and maybe soon to be Carlton, as all these clubs have recieved some sort of AFL assistance to stay alive

Where would that then leave out game

Mate, my advise to you is, you need to consider what is best for the game, if your club is good enough, they will win a premiership in the premier comp in the land, a true national comp...........

Gone are the days that the AFL is an extended VFL comp, get with the program,

WE HAVE A NATIONAL COMP

[sydney-dog]

P.S

Their is only one NRL Game on in Sydney tonight, Roosters v Broncos, two traditional top 4 sides, they have less the 10,000 people at the game

Is this the sort of comp we want

I don't think so