International clubs in AFL by 2032?

Welcome to World Footy News Saturday, November 15 2025 @ 03:11 pm ACDT

International clubs in AFL by 2032? | 26 comments | Create New Account

The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.

Comments are closed and no new posts are allowed.

International clubs in AFL by 2032?

Authored by: Brett Northey
on Tuesday, July 05 2011 @ 10:43 am ACST

You have a real chip on your shoulder there about Canberra Rory. You keep re-interpretting my words to make it sound like Canberra is politics and that's all. You're your own worst enemy. Flowery words around culture but no substance.

There's far more to hosting an AFL side than just some history with the game, and I invited you to enlighten us as to the history, the culture, the demographics in terms of population and allegiance to the game, business and political backing. You avoided answering any of that and simply say we should already know. Either you don't have the answers or you naively think we should already know. I hope someone else in Canberra is doing a better job of advocating for them than you because after all the lines you've written I don't think you've said anything to help your cause.

---
Brett Northey - Co-founder and Chief Editor of WFN

International clubs in AFL by 2032?

Authored by: Cam Homes
on Tuesday, July 05 2011 @ 10:53 am ACST

That's not a chip, that's a log :-)

Cam

---
Brett Northey - Co-founder and Chief Editor of WFN

International clubs in AFL by 2032?

Authored by: Harley Vague
on Tuesday, July 05 2011 @ 11:08 am ACST

Rory . I sympathise with you . One of the failings of the VFL/AFL is that they didn't add a team in Canberra when they had the chance , when AR was stronger , when consortiums were seeking licences and before there other national football teams in the capital .A historical mistake that makes in more difficult today , but I feel canberra is not forgotten and I point to the GWS situation . Whatever way GWS goes Canberra will be better off .As regards to the article it wasn't a serious analysis but rather some well known people speaking out loud maybe more for effect than statement .Any serious analysis would see the focus on further development within Australia first before seriously tackling overseas .Take L.A. as one example . It is the least likely starting point . It is a city with the population of Australia .This makes it terribly hard (costly) to tackle .From a business point of view it is much easier to tackle and capture smaller cities .IMO there is a business case for the Southern hemisphere expansion much in the way the rugby has done it .I wouldn't be jumping up and down just yet as the AFL has only invested in a small number of countries where there seems to be a reasonable chance of some return .That return at the moment is a pathway to the AFL .It is not a league as an adjunct to the AFL .

---
Brett Northey - Co-founder and Chief Editor of WFN

International clubs in AFL by 2032?

Authored by: Tondam
on Saturday, July 09 2011 @ 09:04 am ACST

I agree. The old VFL had a golden opportunity to cement footy as the number 1 sport in Canberra back in the 1960s. The place was crawling with ex-pat Melbournians who moved up there when departments moved. I remember seeing 1000s attend suburbian crowds and the standard was very good. That was the time to strike but of course that was well before the game went national. Still a bit of foresight by the VFL could have helped make AFL the predominate code. But not all is lost. If the GWS experiment doesn't work they could always relocate down to Canberra or maybe increase the number of GWS games held in Canberra.

---
Brett Northey - Co-founder and Chief Editor of WFN

International clubs in AFL by 2032?

Authored by: Troy Thompson
on Sunday, July 10 2011 @ 10:15 am ACST

Central to Rory's issues are that international development comes at the expense of Canberra (or Tassie for that matter). No one here wants to deny Canberra their earnt place in Australia's footy makeup, I believe (and imagine others here do too) that there really is no connection. We are all for footy development whether it be in Canberra or elsewhere.

If in time a team does happen to be located somewhere like NZ it will be on it's merits on a commercial basis more than any other consideration, just as a team in Canberra would be.

Until such time, enjoy your local footy, promote it and support it wherever you are.

---
Brett Northey - Co-founder and Chief Editor of WFN

International clubs in AFL by 2032?

Authored by: Brett Northey
on Sunday, July 10 2011 @ 10:56 am ACST

Agreed. It's easy to get sucked into the Canberra vs Auckland type argument, but in reality the AFL has shown they want more clubs provided they offer something to improve the competition, either more TV viewers or a local rilvary or putting a club in their heart of a development area like GWS. Like it or not, that's the reality, it won't put a club somewhere that doesn't offer anything substantial to the AFL brand, so again, like it or not, that is what a prospective new club needs to prove.

---
Brett Northey - Co-founder and Chief Editor of WFN

International clubs in AFL by 2032?

Authored by: Harley Vague
on Sunday, July 10 2011 @ 11:59 am ACST

The AFL have signalled a change away from reducing the number of clubs to that of that of increasing the spread of AFL by way of new clubs or relocation .The creation of the GC and GWS clubs was one of timing .The GC can be seen as a good case of not following in Canberra's inaction .

The number of AFL clubs stands at 18 .IMO the structure of the league will have to be addressed before the addition of new teams unless it is by relocation .On that note I find it a little strange that an (again) strong Hawthorn is the team with strong links to Tasmania and NZ yet it can be secure representing Melbourne East .Are we missing the boat with better fits ?.

---
Brett Northey - Co-founder and Chief Editor of WFN

International clubs in AFL by 2032?

Authored by: Brett Northey
on Sunday, July 10 2011 @ 12:17 pm ACST

Well you have to wonder now that North Melbourne have signed to play games in Hobart whether THIS time they will actually ultimately move there. They flirted with ACT, Sydney, Gold Coast, and now Tassie.

Certainly if there were less Melbourne teams or some relocate that will in theory make in more likely for areas like Canberra to get a side, in my opinion.

---
Brett Northey - Co-founder and Chief Editor of WFN

International clubs in AFL by 2032?

Authored by: Tobietta Rhyman
on Monday, July 11 2011 @ 05:31 pm ACST

Too many Melbourne based clubs, yes, but can we not move North Melbourne please? Don't send them somewhere random- they sponsor our women's team! And don't merge them with Melbourne because they sponsor the VWFL. I vote we send Collingwood to Antarctica as a political move to sure up Australia's territory claims there. And send the Hawks over to Tassie. They seem to like it there :-)

---
Little Pommy Girl

---
AFL England Women's Football Co-ordinator; WFN Female Football Writer

International clubs in AFL by 2032?

Authored by: Harley Vague
on Monday, July 11 2011 @ 07:30 pm ACST

I'm amazed that this myth still exists .It's not that there are too many clubs in Melbourne it's the fact that they are unevenly spread .The AFL could distribute more revenue to the clubs but an even distribution only serves to make the strong clubs stronger .Mergers too have lost their popularity as people realise that one club plus one club = one club with little gain .Looking to the future ,NM stands out as the club as last out with a strategy .I hope they can lock one in .

---
AFL England Women's Football Co-ordinator; WFN Female Football Writer

International clubs in AFL by 2032?

Authored by: Troy Thompson
on Monday, July 11 2011 @ 10:13 pm ACST

Who knows the financial modelling for the future might see 23 teams playing each other once over 22 rounds with 11 matches per round and a bye. Tassie, ACT, another team in WA, another in SA and one in NZ or PNG? Certainly expanding the talent pool could mean that a high standard can be maintained. At any rate, I am happy to let the AFL worry about that. I hope the Hawks stay in Melbourne but if they decided they had to relocate they would still be my team. That may be more because I care more about my local footy than the AFL footy, wheras obviously tens of thousands of Hawks fans first priority would be their AFL club. If they were to merge though I might think twice.

---
AFL England Women's Football Co-ordinator; WFN Female Football Writer

International clubs in AFL by 2032?

Authored by: Brett Northey
on Monday, July 11 2011 @ 10:39 pm ACST

We're struggling to support 2 in SA! But a third for WA is quite conceivable.

My one worry is that with so much TV money in this and the next deal, footy departments are now huge and the players are expecting big pay. With more teams that gets spread thinner or the TV rights have to go up.

With media changing so fast it's hard to know if that is feasible. And it will need more viewers. Where will they come from? Obviously winning a bigger slice of Australia's most populous state, NSW, is a key. A bit more in QLD too. But hard to grow viewing in the other states since they are quite high already. I guess that's one reason why NZ continues to appeal to me, as getting a slice of a few million people there has to help grow the pie.

But other than going outside of Australia I do see some growth restrictions, so I don't entirely agree with cos that "too many teams in Melbourne" is necessarily a myth. I think it can support an unusually large number, such as 5 or 6 but I wonder about 9 plus Geelong. Like you said thought Troy, not something we need to worry too much about, economics and the AFL and I suspect state and national governments will have the biggest say in these things.

---
Brett Northey - Co-founder and Chief Editor of WFN

International clubs in AFL by 2032?

Authored by: Harley Vague
on Tuesday, July 12 2011 @ 11:59 am ACST

The theory is that you need 400k~500k of population catchment area to support an AFL team (and that population to be resceptive to AFL and centralised).In theory WA could have another team whilst Tasmania ,Gold Coast and Canberra would struggle .I think you can add Geelong into that mix ! Nine teams in Melbourne is at the lower end of viability but Melbourne is predicted to continue to expand .

The reality is that a third Perth team would struggle and add little to the football equation .Clubs in Tasmania , Canberra and the Gold Coast have to survive on much lower attendances if only because their stadia are small . Geelong manages well because it has the new "boutique" structure .In Melbourne it's hard to see some clubs regain market share which is the underlying problem ,the unequal sharing of resources ..

The TV rights was a sensational result but it was built on the addition of two new teams , a potential new market and FOX gambling on picking up new AFL subscriptions . Future rights will probably not change too much except if the situation is repeated with the addition of new audiences .

---
Brett Northey - Co-founder and Chief Editor of WFN

RSS news	RSS events
Twitter	Facebook

World Footy News

Search

Translate

User Functions

Events

Featured Sites

Older Stories

Friday 11-Apr

Sunday 30-Mar

Thursday 27-Mar

Friday 21-Mar

Thursday 06-Mar

Wednesday 05-Feb

Tuesday 04-Feb

Socials

Who's Online

Random Image

What's New

Articles last 2 weeks

Comments last 2 weeks

Links last 2 weeks

Advertisements