Dwert wrote: Yes the WAFC can. Will the AFL machine allow them too though?
Sorry Dwert I was being extremely sarcastic. I have copied an email I sent to Gary Walton in December, 2014. Unfortunately, as some posters on here may be aware, I can include G Walton's response as legal representation for the WAFC ensured that the unexpurgated response from G Walton was removed from the site and I will not compromise the new owner of this site by posting his response. Has anything of a positive nature changed in the past two years or is likely to change in the current season?
Here is the email in its entirety save two words (my name):
Attn Gary Walton
Dear Sir,
It was with much disbelief and dismay I read your Q&A in today’s Sunday Times. I am a member of Swan Districts and whilst I suspect that some of my fellow Swans’ supporters might agree with my comments the views expressed are my own and under no circumstances do I represent them as the official views of the Swan Districts Football Club
Where does one start? Perhaps with your most damning answer to the reason for the lowest crowd at the Grand Final since the 1930s. It is incomprehensible to me that you can attribute the bad weather as the primary cause for the poor attendance at the WAFL GF. This ignores the angst and genuine anger of the vast majority of WAFL supporters, and I include significant numbers of supporters of the club which formerly was a separate entity known as East Perth, toward the host club alignment. If you care to look at any of a number of topics on ozfooty.net you will realise that a boycott of the WAFL GF had been mooted and supported for many months. You and the WAFC should be eternally grateful that Swan Districts were playing in the Colts’ GF and West Perth were playing in the Reserves’ Grand Final; without those two teams participating the WAFL GF attendance would have been fewer than 10,000. To further emphasise the acrimony toward the host club alignment and the real reason behind the poor attendance may I ask what percentage of the crowd left by quarter time of the League GF? As I was leaving after the Reserves GF the outflow was significantly higher than the inflow of supporters coming to watch the League GF.
Further if it was and I quote “It was a terrible day” perhaps you can try to rationalise the decision to rope off significant portions of the upper levels of the stands which would force those attending to sit in the open on such “a terrible day”.
Perhaps I can pose another task for you which relate to the financial viability of the WAFL clubs in the context of the host club alignment. How do you expect, for example, Swans’ supporters to continue to support the WAFL when we are faced with the prospect of being forced to go to Rushton Park next season to watch Connor Blakely, Ethan Hughes and possibly Clancee Pearce play against us? If you think Swans’ supporters relish that prospect then you are most assuredly deluding yourself.
The next point I would like to make concerns your answers to the questions relating to your response about the WAFL legends’ comments vis a vis the host club alignment and where the WAFL will be in ten years’ time. You said that you considered their views but the commission is an independent body to make the “best decision on behalf of football in WA”. You also stated that at the core of the WAFL competition is to have nine sustainable clubs. One may ask how is the host club alignment decision in the best interests of WA football and provides 9 sustainable WAFL clubs?
Now we get to the incredible assertion that the 2014 WAFL competition “was great”. How did you come to that conclusion? Was it because we had the lowest attendance at a WAFL GF since the 1930s? Could it have been because of the almost 20% drop in attendances at “East Perth’s” home game? Perhaps it was Fremantle’s complete disdain of the WAFL competition when they forced Peel to start a WAFL match two short? Maybe you take it as a positive outcome to alienate the vast majority of WAFL supporters through the implementation and continuance of the host club arrangements.
Now we come to the TV broadcast for next year. The mind boggles. On one hand you have suggested that the naming rights for the WAFL will be wrapped up with the broadcast deal and on the other hand you state that an amount has to be raised for the production costs. So not only will the WAFL clubs be forced to pay for the broadcasting of the WAFL Channel 7 will get naming rights to the WAFL. Exacerbating this will be the “flexible” timeslots. Of course this is but an euphemism for what the Eagles and Dockers want, through Channel 7, in terms of timeslots for their two host club aligned teams they will get. Not a scintilla of concern or consideration for the integrity of the WAFL competition, the other WAFL clubs and their supporters.
I could continue for a considerable time, but suffice to say I think you get the gist of my disdain for your answers and by implication your lack of concern for the viability and integrity of the WAFL competition.
May I thank you for your consideration of this email and I sincerely hope to not only receive a considered response but also a change in the attitude and direction of the WAFC toward the WAFL competition.
Regards,
