AFL 2020Sport

Chariotsonfire

On the training limitations imposed by the AFL that will not allow WA clubs to train with more than two people at a time I pose the following question:

What would the AFL do if Melbourne Clubs were allowed to train in 10s and any of the four two team states were restricted to training in twos? I can imagine Eddie Everywhere copping it sweet if the AFL invoked an unfair advantage on the Melbourne Clubs in that situation.

detonator

Anyone with Eagles or Dockers memberships at $600.00 per season ticket looking to get a refund ?

To be honest I have emotionally checked out of this season.(if you can even use the word season)

Reckon I will be chasing a refund if offered.

Nevershowsurprise

Chariotsonfire said:

On the training limitations imposed by the AFL that will not allow WA clubs to train with more than two people at a time I pose the following question:

What would the AFL do if Melbourne Clubs were allowed to train in 10s and any of the four two team states were restricted to training in twos? I can imagine Eddie Everywhere copping it sweet if the AFL invoked an unfair advantage on the Melbourne Clubs in that situation.

You’ve got small mans syndrome Chariots. It’s a defeatist attitude

therealkramer

VillageKid said:

spinking said:

How do you know the AFL wont be Kramer?. As far as a superior competition who has more in the bank NRL AFL

Is the nrl even relevant outside 2 states of the country?

We will give you a team if you ask nicely. Swans are a nonentity if they’re not contending and don’t get me started on GWS. At least the Storm have a history which includes a dynasty. Both codes would have a better chance of growing grass on the moon than getting a successful Gold Coast franchise.

Gilgamesh

jum said:

Gilgamesh said:

jum said:

Thunderstruck said:

Tough on the blokes with kids/wives imo hopefully they can avoid this hub strategy.

Even tougher on the misses and Kids when Dad has no income. Which should happen in my opinion if they refuse to play. What's 5 months of your life. When you are still earning big $$$$.

And give me spell on this mental health bullshittt that the players association are pushing ATM.

NO PLAY NO PAY like the rest of the world, who have too deal with this virus.

I don't like this stance, everyone's position is different, at the moment everyone is being tarred with the same brush and if they for any reason don't want to do the hub they are letting down the nation and their duty to the game, what a load of crap.

What about a bloke who has just had a baby, his Mrs is suffering from post natal depression, they live in a state isolating them from the rest of the family. Even if their family do live local they might be able to catch up but they cant really pitch in because the elderly are the vulnerable and although we in WA are now allowed to socialise you still have to keep the 1.5m (so nappy change/bath time etc) and not all states have eased the restrictions anyhow.

I know having an 18 month old where due to circumstances we have had very minimal family help if my employer said to me you are going away, it might be 8 weeks, it might be 20 weeks, we don't know where, we don't know if your family will be able to visit at all, your Mrs at home can't have a chop out at all I'd be asking some bloody questions which is all that the players have done! I'm sure that there are some of the mindset from the initial talks that would probably sit it out with no pay if that's what it took.

People need to get of their high horses and put themselves in others shoes. They aren't going to war, the game isn't going to cease to exist if they don't play this season, there is more to life than kicking a football.

I AM NOT ON A HIGH HORSE here. I've had to lay people off work this last 8 weeks because of this dam virus on a hell of a lot less money than these players. They have wives and new babies and 1 had only just got a mortgage 3 weeks before. Hardest thing to do is pull someone in your office and lay them off for no bloody reason. These men now have no income.

Someone tell me what would be harder please. Losing a 80K a year job and having no income wife 2 kids and a mortgage or working away for ten weeks having a 2 week break then away for POSSIBLY another 10 week stint (AND THIS IS WORSE CASE SCENARIO. LIKE YOU SAID GILGA. THEY ARE NOT GOING TO WAR)

These players are paid extremely well. fair enough don't play. that is there decision. but get replacements then. They should not be paid for staying at home. which is what some of them expect. Even the 30% that they possibly might end up with on average they will still earn  more than the average Australian.

And too me that's Fuc%$#.

Don't like the hub or can't handle it. Be like the rest of Australia and find a normal job on 70K a year. And then the Teams can go find replacements. 

Terrible situation for you and the people you have had to let go but they aren’t the same thing.

They are in a negotiation which involves over 700 people, of course there are some that are opposed and some that just won’t do what has initially been offered. To think that everyone should just shut up and do what they are told because they are getting paid is far too simplistic, we aren’t involved, we don’t know what they are opposed too, we don’t know what objections they have, we don’t know if those who don’t want to go are willing and happy to not be paid, we don’t know if they have offered an alternative.

20-30yr old me would have jumped at it, 30 plus me would be home with the family on job seeker.

We just don’t know individuals circumstances

Chariotsonfire

Nevershowsurprise said:

Chariotsonfire said:

On the training limitations imposed by the AFL that will not allow WA clubs to train with more than two people at a time I pose the following question:

What would the AFL do if Melbourne Clubs were allowed to train in 10s and any of the four two team states were restricted to training in twos? I can imagine Eddie Everywhere copping it sweet if the AFL invoked an unfair advantage on the Melbourne Clubs in that situation.

You’ve got small mans syndrome Chariots. It’s a defeatist attitude

Surely you have the intelligence to debate without resorting to insults.

Just a straight answer to the question - would the Melbourne clubs be happy to train in twos if Victoria allowed them to train in 10s and the two Queensland clubs were restricted to two only?

detonator

I can’t believe 2 vs 10 at training is being disputed in the public forum.

We have a compromised competition. Talk of playing the GF outside of the MCG.

Hubs vs non hubs. AFL jobs cut to the bone. Players salaries slashed. Talk of no draft. VFL comp probably gone. Memberships revenue possibly putting clubs in crisis.

But we have the Vics saying 2 vs 10 is unfair ?

Maybe Lachie Hunter may not have got on the pizz if he had a scheduled training session the following morning with a group of players that have some semblance of structure and looking like a normal footy session.

Mental health is real. Domestic violence cases are thru the roof because of being cooped up.

So to put 2 vs 10 as somewhat as an issue with all going on then to me that is hard to swallow.

BlacksAFake

What’s the go with The Junkyard Dog ?

Nevershowsurprise

Chariotsonfire said:

Nevershowsurprise said:

Chariotsonfire said:

On the training limitations imposed by the AFL that will not allow WA clubs to train with more than two people at a time I pose the following question:

What would the AFL do if Melbourne Clubs were allowed to train in 10s and any of the four two team states were restricted to training in twos? I can imagine Eddie Everywhere copping it sweet if the AFL invoked an unfair advantage on the Melbourne Clubs in that situation.

You’ve got small mans syndrome Chariots. It’s a defeatist attitude

Surely you have the intelligence to debate without resorting to insults.

Just a straight answer to the question - would the Melbourne clubs be happy to train in twos if Victoria allowed them to train in 10s and the two Queensland clubs were restricted to two only?

It’s a national comp, should be one set of rules for everyone.

VillageKid

BlacksAFake said:

What’s the go with The Junkyard Dog ?

He does originally come from West Perth FC BAF!  :P

spinking

Its quite possible he may have been munchin a bit more than garlic than VK

Manchild

Looked like he was on the dico bikkies

Manchild

disco

detonator

Eagles membership refunds for 2020.

Obviously they have had legal advice and us members can get a refund on the seating component of the membership.

2 main options.

Receive credits towards next years membership at the value of this years seat value (in my case $57.00 per game) To a total of games we do not get to go to in 2020. Looking like the whole season at this stage. The $50.00 membership stands. 

Or you can get a full refund of the seating value now (regardless of whether there are any spectator games later on) Minus the $50.00 membership.

BUT you are not guaranteed to have your same seat next year. Haha. This is the Eagles way of locking you into the credit option.

Personally I am very happy with the “credits” option. 

But if I was a betting man (do wild bears sh*t in the forrest) I would be betting next years seat will be going up by a minimum 20%. Cost of being an Eagles supporter. 

:-?

H-BOMBER

Serious questions.

Is the season even relevant this year?

Is anyone "frothing" for the first bounce?

What are the implications (on the afl) to scrap this season and go again business as usual next year?

oldhendo

Yes, forget the idea of Mickey Mouse footy and wait until  next year.

detonator

To be honest I have given up on this season.

They are playing footy for TV revenue only.

The Premiers this year will have an asterisk next to their name. 

I will watch footy and will fulfill my AFL tipping obligations but that is it I reckon.

May even bet on some games.

My only interest will be how the great man, ie “the big black panther” goes.

I have missed him. 

:x

Nevershowsurprise

H-BOMBER said:

Serious questions.

Is the season even relevant this year?

Is anyone "frothing" for the first bounce?

What are the implications (on the afl) to scrap this season and go again business as usual next year?

I am bomber, I can’t wait until footy is back. No crowd doesn’t bother me.

Playing 17 games, then finals, the premier earns it don’t worry about that. Probably more than any other premier of the past due to so many obstacles. (Reduces resources, second staggered pre season, reduced lists, hubs, broken routine)

The implications of scrapping the season and going again, it means the game goes into administration. It’s unsustainable to take a years worth of TV rights and gate and associated revenue out of the game. It would be all over. Even deferred rights would spell the end, so yep I’m very keen for the first bounce!

Manchild

No ,the game will still be played, The AFL (VFL) will go broke , who cares.

The game will survive.

Nevershowsurprise

The VFL is already broke.

Of course it will still be played, it goes into admin with a year off and comes back a skeleton that will take years to put back together. That’s the reality of missing a year.

detonator

Jeff Kennett said on the weekend that because of the economic impact of Covid  on our game, the AFL cannot afford to prop up teams that have had their hand out year after year for cash.

There are currently 6 teams that are self sufficient. 

No more rattling the tins to save clubs. 

Where do we start the culling ??? Kangaroos ??? Carlton ??? Gold Coast ??? Dockers ???

Nevershowsurprise

I reckon the Eagles should drop back to the WAFL Det, someone might have a chance of beating Subi for a flag :))

therealkramer

NRL back first. Broncos v Eels Thursday week <:-P

detonator

I would probably agree with you NSS if the Eagles weren’t one of the 6 clubs that are self sufficient.

But there is only one club in W.A that fits into the category of downgrading to survive and can challenge Subi. That club is ..........Peel Dockers. Haha 

=))

Nevershowsurprise

therealkramer said:

NRL back first. Broncos v Eels Thursday week <:-P </p>

First or not, the NRL’s the poor cousin Kramer, I actually love the game but most don’t give a Faaark about it. That’s why about 8 people go to their games

:D :D

Nevershowsurprise

detonator said:

I would probably agree with you NSS if the Eagles weren’t one of the 6 clubs that are self sufficient.

But there is only one club in W.A that fits into the category of downgrading to survive and can challenge Subi. That club is ..........Peel Dockers. Haha 

=))

They’ve already failed hahah

therealkramer

Nevershowsurprise said:

therealkramer said:

NRL back first. Broncos v Eels Thursday week <:-P </p>

First or not, the NRL’s the poor cousin Kramer, I actually love the game but most don’t give a Faaark about it. That’s why about 8 people go to their games

:D :D

The Origin series and the NRL grand final are the top rating programs year in, year out. More bums on seats implies that people aren’t watching NRL if they aren’t actually at the game.

Markovina

Peter Vlandys showing again  he is a brilliant administrator ( probably one of the best ever ) and he learnt it all at Harold Park 

Gone back to the one ref for this season - plus reverting to the 6 again rule - he wants free flowing matches - it should be interesting to view 

He makes the big calls - allways has - 

Some poster said NRL is the poor cousin - id say Gilligan is the poor cousin of Peters 

therealkramer

@Markovina I think the jury is out on the one ref & 6 again rule. How is the ref meant to rule on something he can't see? An extra set of eyes policing the ruck is needed if they insist on accompanying rules changes. It risks descending into a free-for-all or players being penalised on suspicion. It could be like it was in the 70s where a lot of stuff went unpunished.

Markovina

Well i thought Rugby League in the mid to late 80s was fantastic - that Sunday evening replay show with Ian Maurice Rex Mossop and Graeme Hughes calling the main game - i never missed it for quids 

You get a top referee like Bill Harrigan - hes not going to get bluffed out of anything