TOPIC:

wrote:

it really is not a personal slant against 58 or anyone else or who supports , is a member of whatever
a better return to the feeder system that sustains the top and who owns the licence in the first place and to the taxpayers who bailed it out in 1989 is what this one is 

Strongly agree, WC could easily drop a couple of lousy mil into the WAFL’s coffers every year and not feel it. Problem is, I wouldn’t trust the WAFL to handle 200,000 a year, let alone 2 mil.  There would be some great lunches though.

And for the record, I’m not a member of west coast.....my money goes to EFFC.

In my opinion it all comes down to what the WAFC has the intestinal fortitude to do.  The first thing that SHOULD be done is the breakdown of who elects the WAFC.  This means that rather than the two WA domiciled AFL basically having the power to elect the commissioners their votes should be no more than 10% each.  This will mean they can't collude with only one or two WAFL clubs to get the commissioners they want.

It will also mean that the commissioners who are elected will have a primary consideration for the WAFL, WAFL clubs.  This will improve the viability of the WAFL and WAFL clubs.  This will also allow the WAFL clubs to be able to improve their relationships with junior and amateur clubs in their particular zones.

And in case there are some who say that this will weaken how competitive the Eagles and Dockers, I don't believe that is even a remote possibility.  

With Fremantle looking likely to swap home fixtures with Brisbane and play this weeks game in Brisbane to avoid another financial loss from an empty stadium, what does that mean for this weeks WAFL fixtures?

Games go ahead no crowds or WAFL clubs can’t afford it? Maybe WAFL clubs should spend some of that Jobkeeper they banked last year while no games were played and forge ahead with the fixtures, crowd or no crowd?

wrote:

No no no 58 and DF you don’t get off that easy.

Anyone who is FOR the eagles is AGAINST the WAFL.

Dockers irrelevant.

Make a choice guys, pick a side.

how are things at west coast stadium stt?

How is WC the devil yet Freo are irrelevant to the success or failure of the WAFL? 

how much does each WAFL club receive from the WAFC per annum? How does the WAFC derive the income that supports these payments? 

wrote:

With Fremantle looking likely to swap home fixtures with Brisbane and play this weeks game in Brisbane to avoid another financial loss from an empty stadium, what does that mean for this weeks WAFL fixtures?

Games go ahead no crowds or WAFL clubs can’t afford it? Maybe WAFL clubs should spend some of that Jobkeeper they banked last year while no games were played and forge ahead with the fixtures, crowd or no crowd?

big difference between 45k+ at Optus for an AFL game and 2k at a WAFL game 

If junior footy was able to  continue on Sunday the WAFL fixtures shouldn’t be impacted this weekend 

wrote:

No no no 58 and DF you don’t get off that easy.

Anyone who is FOR the eagles is AGAINST the WAFL.

Dockers irrelevant.

Make a choice guys, pick a side.

Can’t make it out with you.  Can’t decide whether you’re trying to wind people up or whether you really are as thick as you make out.  

wrote:

i dont understand. do you mean the ground we’ve been playing at for 60 years or ...no im lost...i have never heard of a ‘west coast stadium’. Should i have?

sorry it must be confusing for you stt..the oval formally known as lathlain oval/eftel oval/brownes stadium i think it might be now called mineral resources oval or maybe it is west coast stadium.

wrote:

With Fremantle looking likely to swap home fixtures with Brisbane and play this weeks game in Brisbane to avoid another financial loss from an empty stadium, what does that mean for this weeks WAFL fixtures?

Games go ahead no crowds or WAFL clubs can’t afford it? Maybe WAFL clubs should spend some of that Jobkeeper they banked last year while no games were played and forge ahead with the fixtures, crowd or no crowd?
 

Depends what the capacity limit is set at , at this stage we do not know, as the 45,000 super spreader crowd has been the only one canned at this stage and no actual limit has been set, but it makes sense that small crowds will not be impacted, 2000 - 3000 people at a WAFL ground wouldnt present the same risk so should go ahead.

I don’t understand how 45k in a stadium is safe, but 55/58k isn’t?  Do they honestly think people there are going to abide by the 1.5m rule?  Just another one of those strange laws.