TOPIC:

My understanding is that the clubs were given a choice over the weekend of starting on July 11 and playing two extra rounds or July 18 and playing just the eight with finals. It must have been the clubs chose the latter due to costs so not sure all the blame can be laid at the WAFC but agree they should have been a lot more proactive in getting things going. A July 11 commencement would have given the WAFL a head start over the AFL as clashing with an WCE/Freo derby on July 18 is not ideal in terms of media exposure and attendances.

MO -- as you and others have hinted before, it is against the natural instincts of the commission to allow the WAFL and amateurs to play -- they are both competition for the VFL master.

Beasley Hutton wrote:

Bazza wrote:

westaussieguy wrote: And now what is needed is for some Wafl media presence, wall to wall Wafl promotion and Wafl attention so that everyone knows when the bloody 2020 bounce-down is taking place!
Instead of the usual Wafl to low key to a season start.

Just heard MCGowan on ABC News Radio telling WAFL to get moving and use Optus Stadium and promote some games and events there...interesting.

We should get McGowan in as the WAFC CEO after he is finished with politics?!
He would even double his salary that he is currently on as the Premier of WA!

Haha gold BH!!

You deserve great credit along with others for advocating for an early return of the WAFL. It didn't happen by itself.

BC wrote: My understanding is that the clubs were given a choice over the weekend of starting on July 11 and playing two extra rounds or July 18 and playing just the eight with finals. It must have been the clubs chose the latter due to costs so not sure all the blame can be laid at the WAFC but agree they should have been a lot more proactive in getting things going. A July 11 commencement would have given the WAFL a head start over the AFL as clashing with an WCE/Freo derby on July 18 is not ideal in terms of media exposure and attendances.

The highlighted is exactly the reason why we are not playing any more than the bare minimum 8 game season BC. A certain couple of clubs didnt want or cant afford the extra costs involved. I think we all know which clubs they would be. The WAFC will come out and say they are all signing from the same hymn book but the reality is certain clubs have curtailed the season being extended for their own benefit.
And I should add all the bullshit about inequitable draw, having to play SU twice etc is just a smokescreen as they had no issue with SD fronting up 3 times to them virtually every season from Peel's entry in 97 up until the 10th team came in for 2019! Where were all the calls from each club about inequitable draws back then?????

BH - another area where the WAFC are useless, they should drive the agenda on fixturing to benefit the supporters, if clubs cant afford it then why are they in the comp.

MarkOlsen wrote: BH - another area where the WAFC are useless, they should drive the agenda on fixturing to benefit the supporters, if clubs cant afford it then why are they in the comp.

It makes you wonder MO whether with this whole pandemic certain clubs would have been quite happy to just can the whole season altogether!

its a joke that 2 extra rounds couldnt be fixtured due to clubs complaining about playing Subi twice.
meanwhile the ammo comp is starting and WAFL clubs and a weak WAFC left behind again

Beasley Hutton wrote:

BC wrote: My understanding is that the clubs were given a choice over the weekend of starting on July 11 and playing two extra rounds or July 18 and playing just the eight with finals. It must have been the clubs chose the latter due to costs so not sure all the blame can be laid at the WAFC but agree they should have been a lot more proactive in getting things going. A July 11 commencement would have given the WAFL a head start over the AFL as clashing with an WCE/Freo derby on July 18 is not ideal in terms of media exposure and attendances.

The highlighted is exactly the reason why we are not playing any more than the bare minimum 8 game season BC. A certain couple of clubs didnt want or cant afford the extra costs involved. I think we all know which clubs they would be. The WAFC will come out and say they are all signing from the same hymn book but the reality is certain clubs have curtailed the season being extended for their own benefit.
And I should add all the bullshit about inequitable draw, having to play SU twice etc is just a smokescreen as they had no issue with SD fronting up 3 times to them virtually every season from Peel's entry in 97 up until the 10th team came in for 2019! Where were all the calls from each club about inequitable draws back then?????

I think you're right BH but surely it wouldn't be too hard for the WAFC to fixture clubs finishing in the top half of the table last year to play each other twice and likewise the bottom half....but then again we are talking about the overpaid underachieving WAFC.

So certain clubs dont want the extra cost of a couple of extra games, FMD we will have no crowd restrictions, no social hall or bar restrictions so it just like any other season in that respect, the home club gets the gate receipts and bar/food trade just like always. Seems they might be losing money by not have extra games!!

BH, your idea of a pre-season lightning carnival at Optus is an absolute belter of an idea, reckon we would get 25k+ over the day to watch it. $5 for club members, $10 for non members, kids u/18 free, kids kick on the oval after the games finish and free public transport. Plus coverage by Ch7.