TOPIC:

If the chunder can't put a competitive team on the park from within their own then piss them off for 2020 I say and let's get back to the traditional 8 team competition for this year at least.

mikeh wrote: Hypothetical question. If the WAFL was to allow crowds into games at the resumption which I think everyone agrees is the only viable option, how many people would be able to fit in to an average suburban oval like Fremantle or Leederville assuming that the Governments rules on social distancing must be followed? You would probably need a surveyor to look at each ground to find out the true answer and each oval is going to be different but my educated guess would be 1000 max. If that is true is this enough paying customers for the games to be financially viable for clubs? or should the WAFC seek an partial exemption from these strict rules to enable more people to attend?

Fremantle could easily hold 1500 - 2000 so every other ground bar maybe Claremont which would be 1000 maybe.

Lets face it most WAFL people are older and wont bother going if they are worried about going anyway and getting sick.

Btw , there was ZERo social distancing at Kings Park on Sunday.

Tiger Tales wrote: It’s a logistical nightmare for football clubs at all levels, particularly juniors and Ammos who don’t have fenced off facilities to control access and crowd numbers.

As TRSM points out, how do clubs run a regular days fixtures with each match involving 70+ players and officials.

Financially the WAFL and Ammos both need restrictions to be relaxed to the WAFC Stage 5 - crowds allowed and bar available. The clubs will all be operating with reduced income from memberships fees, sponsorship and the WAFL clubs can expect a significant reduction in WAFC payments. With no WC or Freo reserves teams that will be exacerbated with a further $900k in Licence fees lost.

Playing this season will see nearly all clubs post huge financial losses and unfortunately the impact on club incomes will be felt next year with a number of businesses struggling.

As much as I want footy back ASAP, I’d rather not have footy this year and make sure there is a viable competition with all clubs still in existence in 2021

Agree with most of that , but I would be more inclined to at least give WAFL the option of operating on a reduced fixture this year and trying to get some income rather than gathering cob webs.

We are all looking at big losses, Subi are the only club with the cash reserves to survive this, but bearing in mind the WPFC situation who seemed to have set the pace for clubs walking away from debt without any real repercussions I dont think there is much to worry about.

I do agree that next year will also be tough,

I can't understand the concept of losing money if you aren't open.
I now at Swans we have 11 full time staff just ticking along going about their business of running community programs which are all fully funded.
So please enlighten me on if there is no football being played how are these clubs losing money, what is it being spent on.

Tiger Tales wrote:

mikeh wrote: Hypothetical question. If the WAFL was to allow crowds into games at the resumption which I think everyone agrees is the only viable option, how many people would be able to fit in to an average suburban oval like Fremantle or Leederville assuming that the Governments rules on social distancing must be followed? You would probably need a surveyor to look at each ground to find out the true answer and each oval is going to be different but my educated guess would be 1000 max. If that is true is this enough paying customers for the games to be financially viable for clubs? or should the WAFC seek an partial exemption from these strict rules to enable more people to attend?

Claremont has the smallest capacity and has approximately 6000sqm of space available for spectators - more than enough for a typical WAFL crowd adhering to 4sqm distancing - but 3/4 of them will need to be out in the elements with no cover

Good info TT that simplistically equates to 1500 at CL oval, given there's very little cover in the stands, it shouldn't be a problem with being in the elements for a few hours. Peel and the new lathlain would be next smallest, peel dont attract a crowd but Perth do so they might be a bit restricted, the rest of the grounds could easily cope with 2000+ punters which in recent times is a very good attendance.

'he who pays the piper, calls the tune"

Bassendean Oval has large banks in the outer so this could hold quite a few people and you could set up social distancing signs in places like the Billy Walker and Mcdonald stand and members areas. The issue will be where people traditionally congregate ( the Swan bar and the upstairs members) for a drink. People cannot hang around there with drinks and unless the liquor licensing laws are relaxed allowing people to imbibe at other areas of the ground, this will cut off a significant source of revenue for the clubs.

The information I have received is that the deficit will be much larger if we play than if we don't play.
Costs will far outweigh any income produced.
If we get any footy don't bank on seeing it.
If it happens it happens.

Yes DF...on Subi's webinar to members the other week CEO Peter Capes said it would cost each club between $125k - $150k to play and would need to get underwritten by the state government, WAFC or a sponsor to see it go ahead.

They are holding out to see if they can get some crowds later in the year.
You can't just keep the players hanging!. They need to know either way - Yes or No. They just can't keep training with no reward ahead. Longest preseason ever!