TOPIC:

Or quite simply revert back to being human beings , get together with the clubs & reach an amicable solution that benefits EVERYONE

Someone mentioned that Macca's will pull rank on Ch 7. I don't think so, they are more likely to take a step back and look at the whole debacle and consider that the WAFL is not a place they want to be associated with, so we will lose a great supporting sponsor and CH 7 will look to summer repeats to fill in their Saturday arvo scheduling. Who loses then??

This needs a whole of competition solution not just be left to the 3 party's involved being WP, CH 7, & The WAFC.

I have heard conflicting comments about who was signed up first, WP say they had their CH9 deal sealed long before the CH 7 appeared others say that WP were aware of the CH 7 deal for some time and still proceeded with their CH 9 deal. The truth is always the first casualty of war!!

My opinion for what it's worth is that CH 7 should not be so bloody precious about their telecast and accept that if, as is likely the case that WP will be playing finals and a very good chance of being in the GF then as long as the only item showing Ch 9 is the jumper logo then let it be. I'd like to see the contract 7 have with the WAFC and whether it mentions the use of logo's from another CH's and whether their broadcast of finals has a clause that gives them an out if there was a clash. If not then they have no legal standpoint, but given it's just a 1 year telecast deal, they will be gone at the end of the season.

I think it was mentioned the buyout figure for removing the logo was $30k, so if it turns out that Ch 7 have the legal contract on their side, then it should be divided equally between the 10 parties ie the 9 clubs and the WAFC paying $3000 each to resolve this impasse. Unreasonable to expect the other 8 clubs to also cover WP's share. If it can be proven that WP were fully aware that the WAFC were set on signing with CH 7 prior to them signing with 9 then that's a different kettle of fish and it becomes a WP problem created by themselves and theirs to resolve. Not sure we will ever get the truth from any of the parties involved.

The WAFC will sling WPFC a few buck to remove the Ch 9 logo and if it means losing Ch 9 as a sponsor , they will have to make up the difference.

When is a contract not a contract? Suspect when its not signed.
Its vbeen bandied around that Nine will take over the the WAFL if 7 do not want to do it. WAFC could play this card and force an outcome.

The WAFC would have been better off funding the ABCTV broadcasts through the AFL clubs annual fee. God I miss the ABC, they had a great broadcast, no compromising the fixtures, every Saturday at 2pm, it was great. Outside of this I have always thought Channel 9 would be a better fit for the WAFL than Channel 7. Considering they have AFL broadcasting rights, I could never work out why they'd bother with the WAFL. This whole hanging guillotine seven have threatening is just ridiculous. Its local suburban footy, not the bloody FIFA World Cup.

jardine wrote: The WAFC would have been better off funding the ABCTV broadcasts through the AFL clubs annual fee. God I miss the ABC, they had a great broadcast, no compromising the fixtures, every Saturday at 2pm, it was great. Outside of this I have always thought Channel 9 would be a better fit for the WAFL than Channel 7. Considering they have AFL broadcasting rights, I could never work out why they'd bother with the WAFL. This whole hanging guillotine seven have threatening is just ridiculous. Its local suburban footy, not the bloody FIFA World Cup.

Agree mate...Loved the ABC who did country games and were guaranteed every week
As far as I am concerned it was a better telecast that channel 7 even though the big wigs claim 7 has a bigger viewing audience etc etc... CHN 7 broadcast is a load of shit and I cant see people jumping on board just because the channel has changed if they watched games.
Lets not forget they also replayed the weekly game on IVEIW each week.
As for the detractors of ABC They are obviously being brainwashed by the WAFC bullshit.

I would suggest the ABC also cost the WAFC nothing if not a very minor amount as it was done as a public service and paid for by the taxpayers whereas now we have to pay 1 million to a bunch of money hungry morons who also want to dictate when and how they show the games..

All history now unless the WAFC negotiates with the ABC.. and government.
Lets remember the WAFC is run by the WA Government. I wonder how Barnett feels about the WAFC spending a Million when they have run at a loss for years and the WA public is funding them.

Dream on, 7 has produced a 160% increase over ABC in audience, stop living in the past.

Growler wrote:

Bazza wrote: The WAFC will sling WPFC a few buck to remove the Ch 9 logo and if it means losing Ch 9 as a sponsor , they will have to make up the difference.

Geeez, it must be a treat living in your world BAZZA - I'd hate to be depending on the likes of your loyalty to anything of substance if all it takes is a "few bucks" to change it
WP will not dip thier heads for dollars against a sponsor that has supported them - unlike the outcomes to be seen with the WAFC eventual decisions ...... These cowards will show their yellow business ethics once again before years end I can assure you

Get your hand off it, thats what the deal will be, buying out the ch 9 contract, if it costs 30k then so be it, if wpfc want to be broadcast thats what they will do.

jardine wrote: The WAFC would have been better off funding the ABCTV broadcasts through the AFL clubs annual fee. God I miss the ABC, they had a great broadcast, no compromising the fixtures, every Saturday at 2pm, it was great. Outside of this I have always thought Channel 9 would be a better fit for the WAFL than Channel 7. Considering they have AFL broadcasting rights, I could never work out why they'd bother with the WAFL. This whole hanging guillotine seven have threatening is just ridiculous. Its local suburban footy, not the bloody FIFA World Cup.

Yeah Jars I am the same & it would have been far less than the extortion amount we were forced to pay for this Ch7 caper

No ads either

Yes the Wafl would have been far better still on the abc tv by a long way. Apart from the bleedin obvious, why are serious questions still not been answered? The so called commission could have came up with some sought of deal with the abc had they applied themselves! Instead of the amateurish, keystone cop caper currently happening.