TOPIC:

anchorman wrote: I was taking the p!$$ LA.
but you are right the WAFL couldn't do without Souths or the Sharks.

I know you were.

But while I read that It dawned on me that I'd forgotten where Souths stand in all this.

It would be interesting to know what their deal is with the City of Fremantle.

anchorman wrote: I am thinking that they are very very safe at Fremantle Oval.I can not see Fremantle oval not hosting WAFL football,ever.
But others here would know more about that than I do.

I hope you're right.

I think councils take the P out of WAFL clubs to be honest. How do other sporting clubs get a better deal than we do? And why?

I don't think we could ever lose footy at Fremantle Oval. It may be this concrete jungle but it has such wonderful tradition. Its a no brainer for me with East Fremantle moving there. All problems aside they must make it work somehow. Having a game there very Saturday is a good thing. And when both Port clubs eventually get at the top end together, they will get 10,000 to a foundation day derby. Im sure they had over 11,000 just a few years ago at EFOval.

I enjoy Fremantle Oval and we used to make an afternoon of it. Coffee, lunch, markets then the footy. Its a day out.

But a very good post by LaHincha on the subject re Murdoch. Excellent

Murdoch is a no brainer in my eyes.....potential young audience, throw them a few perks to get them interested.....Freo oval whilst it's close proximity to public transport, markets, pubs etc would be handy, don't like the idea of the youngsters being forced to train elsewhere...they are part of the club or not. plus the facilities for the players would be a problem.....who gets what when and where....start a fresh at Murdoch....fresh start...going back to Freo oval whilst cheap, to me would be a backward step long term.....might even speed up a SF/EF merger out of convienance....make the WAFC work harder by keeping the WAFL clubs separate of each other, not only by name but by home grounds too.

In a perfect world we'd have footy at Murdoch and Fremantle. I love watching footy at Fremantle.

The outer wing is the best spot to watch I reckon. A bit of elevation. And Fremantle Oval is quite narrow and cigar shaped compared to other WAFL grounds - so you can see all the action on the other side of the ground really clearly.

The thing is, our equivalent cricket competition, the WACA, has 16 teams, all with their own home grounds in the metro area. They don't need to ground share and that's with high maintenance turf squares and practice pitches which must cost quite a bit. I imagine the players still pay yearly fees to play but the clubs have no members or supporter base to earn money from.

Something doesn't add up.

Port to stay but EFFC could easily disappear. Plenty of flags but sadly no followers

astro wrote: Port to stay but EFFC could easily disappear. Plenty of flags but sadly no followers

I can't see how the WAFC could allow this to happen. While WP/EP are very important to football north of the river, BOTH EF/SF are absolutely vital to footy in the port.

I really like your Murdoch model LH, it could be the re-birth of a once again powerful EFFC. If they were able to set this type of proposal up, I wouldn't worry about SFFC..they're too entrenched in Freo to die.

astro wrote: Port to stay but EFFC could easily disappear. Plenty of flags but sadly no followers

compared to who?

Plenty of supporters at Shark park they just don't travel that well.

I'm pretty sure East Fremantle are sitting top of the attendance table for 2014, so they're doing well. South on the other hand are 8th, only above Claremont.

Nevertheless, East Fremantle could do with some younger members and supporters, as could we all. I "think" Murdoch would solve that problem.