TOPIC:

Freezin wrote: .....as if the SDFC or any other WAFL club / fan in the same position wouldnt do the same thing and think nothing of it....What most WAFL folfk want to know is how in fark did Cl, SD and WP get 29 million and the other three just as needy G6 clubs, got nothing?.....would of thought with that vast SD fan base and ever popular Steel Blue drinking hole known as the "can shed", the SDFC could of had a whip round and raised that sum alone and more themselves after one home game

FRom the Swan Districts President Peter Hodyl and on the clubs website:

Presidents response to today's West Australian, 8 Feb 2017;

For the second time Mr Duffield has printed an article criticizing football in WA in relation to moving the AFL games to the new Burswood Stadium. It is clear he has no understanding at all about football in WA which covers Auskick to AFL. His views clearly come from looking through his rose coloured AFL glasses only from one of the many Media corporate suites he enjoys around the country and unfortunately like many 'self proclaimed' media experts writes a good story rarely based on any facts whatsoever.

I for one have never seen Mark Duffield attend any WAFL games in my time as President of the Swan Districts Football Club so maybe Mark should take the time to understand the challenges football in WA faces and I am not talking about our two WA based AFL (VFL) teams, although the AFL is trying to skin them as well with 'equalisation' measures.

In Marks article he has made comment on $100 million 'compensation offer' over ten years. Sorry Mark this is not for the upkeep of Domain Stadium, it is to ensure ALL football in WA continues to provide the opportunities it currently does which in turn provide the elite players he enjoys watching from his gifted viewing position. I am talking about Auskick, Amateurs, Country, WAFL, Female, Veteran's, 9's etc. Football in WA is not just AFL, Fremantle and West Coast Eagles.

Mark has also asked about what the AFL contribution is, well maybe Mark should do what a real investigative journalist does and 'ask the question' instead of waiting to be spoon fed from the AFL in a crafted press release. The AFL directly provides less than $3 million per annum (pittance) to football in WA whilst at the same time pumps 10's if not 100's of millions into 'non football' states NSW and QLD. Their argument that the AFL game contributes through WCE and Femantle is completely flawed as this funding is specifically related to the profits of both WCE and Fremantle and the income from Stadium revenue.

Current funding to the WAFC is derived from operating Domain Stadium, Royalties from WCE and Fremantle and the AFL. WCE and Fremantle contribute the most in the form of licence agreements. Lets make this clear, licence agreements, not donations, not out of the goodness of their hearts but the agreement between the WAFC and the AFL to compensate grassroots football for the loss of revenue to Football in WA due to the introduction of the AFL. Football in WA agreed, for the good of the national games advancement, to allow a WA based team to join the then VFL, this has since morphed into the AFL. This funding will now be significantly reduced as the WAFC loses the income generated by the use of Domain Stadium and potential loss of profits of both Fremantle and WCE due to the AFL's proposed 'equalisation' measures. Where is the $11 million shortfall to run football in WA to come from? Again, not talking about WCE and Fremantle but WA football.

The Mark refers to some $29 million in grants to WAFL clubs Swan Districts, West Perth and Claremont. Well I would like Mark to show me where on the Swan Districts balance sheets or P&L's one red cent we have received from the WA government? Not one red cent has the Swan Districts Football Club received so I suggest Mark go back to journalism school to learn about clarifying facts before shooting his mouth off. Instead of criticizing the grass root WA football clubs maybe he should be congratulating them on what they can and have achieved with the meagre funding they receive through their commitment to a national competition. These achievements include many significant community programs across a vast array of non football areas and partnered by many significant organizations throughout WA to simply make our communities better. Female football has been growing steadily over a number of years which would not have been possible without the commitment of grass root clubs.

Currently Female Football is all the rage with the AFL and Media basking I the glory of it's initial success the last week or so. The Swan Districts Football Club has had a Womens football team for 10 years and has embraced this as part of our football club. In it's first year we entered both League and Reserves teams due to the great response to this initiative. A youth girls team was introduced in 2012 so the Swan Districts Football Club had already developed a female pathway to enable our great game to be enjoyed by all. This is evidenced with nine of our 2016 players recruited into the inaugural AFLW competition including three marquee players at Adelaide and Fremantle. What funding assistance has the Swan Districts Football Club received from the AFL or the WAFC over this period of developing the game? $0.00. Our club has provided facilities, access to our AFL experienced coaches and training staff, mentoring, and inclusiveness which has helped build the desire amongst women to play leading to the AFLW creation. Congratulations to all the girls playing football at club and AFL level and you would think the Swan Districts Football Club would at least get a letter, certificate, acknowledgement or even maybe a bag of footballs from the AFL in appreciation for the efforts in making the AFLW a reality. No, not even a magnetic board.....



Grassroots football is the lifeblood that puts bread on Marks table. The AFL supplies the butter, and probably cream donuts in his corporate media box so if he really wants to solve this impasse he should focus his attention on the inequality of funding the AFL applies throughout Australia, put his media pressure where it is best suited to ensure football in WA can continue to nurture the game itself and not just the elite he enjoys watching so much. But it is clear Mark knows which side of his bread the butter is on.



Regards

Peter

Freezin wrote: .....as if the SDFC or any other WAFL club / fan in the same position wouldnt do the same thing and think nothing of it....What most WAFL folfk want to know is how in fark did Cl, SD and WP get 29 million and the other three just as needy G6 clubs, got nothing?.....would of thought with that vast SD fan base and ever popular Steel Blue drinking hole known as the "can shed", the SDFC could of had a whip round and raised that sum alone and more themselves after one home game

The "grant" that we recieved freezin was an incentive to go ahead with the major ground redevelopment, handing over control of all that extremely valuable land in exchange for cash to build new premises. The govt will get more back on that than the 10 mill they handed over, pretty simple property development mathematics I would think. Duffield is misleading by suggesting that it is a gift to prop us up.
I think history will show us to be the pioneers of WAFL ground redevelopment and all clubs wishing to do the same thing will also recieve "grants". ( probably a good thing that we got the ball rolling when the govt had plenty of dough and the property market was booming though!)
And a bloody good reply from Hodyl, I hope he sends it to the West.

also good timing Tiger of old with your local member, might not have been on the cards had you waited a few years

Freezin wrote: .....as if the SDFC or any other WAFL club / fan in the same position wouldnt do the same thing and think nothing of it....What most WAFL folfk want to know is how in fark did Cl, SD and WP get 29 million and the other three just as needy G6 clubs, got nothing?.....would of thought with that vast SD fan base and ever popular Steel Blue drinking hole known as the "can shed", the SDFC could of had a whip round and raised that sum alone and more themselves after one home game

Yep this needs further investigation, Duffield needs to get more detail out on this.

Swandog wrote:

Senior Seagull wrote:

Swandog wrote:

BC wrote: maybe so SD although I still can't see how Subi is rorting anyone as they buy seats at AFL games on a commercial basis but even if you can't get your simpleton head around that, Subi's arrangement hasn't cost the WAFC or the tax payer a single cent....can your mob say the same?

Ok then who payed for all the Subi oval redevelopments then??? Tax payers! So you are wrong

So the redevelopment was just for the Subiaco FC? But we have no members and no supporters according to the great black and white unwashed, yet multiple millions were spent to bring the capacity up to 42500 seats just for the SFC? Really your comment makes no sense at all and that's saying something given some of your previous rants about Subi. Take a second and just consider for a moment that maybe ... just maybe the development of Subi oval could have been for the introduction of the extended VFL and later the AFL comp. What a shame the WAFL/C decided so many years ago that Subiaco oval would be the league headquarters when we all know it should have been out on the hallowed turf/mud of Bogundean oval.

Ok then so none of the 42,500 ppl use the $ubi bar during AFL games and ALL other events there then?? Not to mention seats allocated so $ubi can sell packages etc

So that's the Subi FC bar that was built on Subi FC leased land back in 1971 when we were finally granted permission to have our own bar license, that all other clubs had had for many decades? The fact that the WA govt and the WAFL decided to make Subi oval WAFL HQ and do the redevelopments had nothing to do with the SFC, in fact until we got the clubrooms and the license it was a severe financial constraint for 60-70 years that all other clubs did not have to deal with. Subi oval also hosted the WAFL offices and their social rooms under the old WAFL members stand and they were the only ones who had a license. Yes we now benefit by the fact that we were already established at Subi oval being the primary lease holder before the expanded VFL & AFL came along, but that's a very fortunate circumstance and I understand the envy experienced by the other clubs.
As for the seats, they were not allocated, given or gifted to the SFC, the club buys them from the WAFC each season and then sells them in packages as any club would do in the same circumstances.

Senior Seagull wrote:

Swandog wrote:

Senior Seagull wrote:

Swandog wrote:

BC wrote: maybe so SD although I still can't see how Subi is rorting anyone as they buy seats at AFL games on a commercial basis but even if you can't get your simpleton head around that, Subi's arrangement hasn't cost the WAFC or the tax payer a single cent....can your mob say the same?

Ok then who payed for all the Subi oval redevelopments then??? Tax payers! So you are wrong

So the redevelopment was just for the Subiaco FC? But we have no members and no supporters according to the great black and white unwashed, yet multiple millions were spent to bring the capacity up to 42500 seats just for the SFC? Really your comment makes no sense at all and that's saying something given some of your previous rants about Subi. Take a second and just consider for a moment that maybe ... just maybe the development of Subi oval could have been for the introduction of the extended VFL and later the AFL comp. What a shame the WAFL/C decided so many years ago that Subiaco oval would be the league headquarters when we all know it should have been out on the hallowed turf/mud of Bogundean oval.

Ok then so none of the 42,500 ppl use the $ubi bar during AFL games and ALL other events there then?? Not to mention seats allocated so $ubi can sell packages etc

So that's the Subi FC bar that was built on Subi FC leased land back in 1971 when we were finally granted permission to have our own bar license, that all other clubs had had for many decades? The fact that the WA govt and the WAFL decided to make Subi oval WAFL HQ and do the redevelopments had nothing to do with the SFC, in fact until we got the clubrooms and the license it was a severe financial constraint for 60-70 years that all other clubs did not have to deal with. Subi oval also hosted the WAFL offices and their social rooms under the old WAFL members stand and they were the only ones who had a license. Yes we now benefit by the fact that we were already established at Subi oval being the primary lease holder before the expanded VFL & AFL came along, but that's a very fortunate circumstance and I understand the envy experienced by the other clubs.
As for the seats, they were not allocated, given or gifted to the SFC, the club buys them from the WAFC each season and then sells them in packages as any club would do in the same circumstances.

Its just a freak of history that Subi ended up league headquarters for finals and eventually the eagles, it started just as subis own small suburban ground and then the league and all clubs at the time agreed to it being the place for finals and the eventually the eagles.

you can hardly blame subi for it.

Bazza wrote:

Freezin wrote: .....as if the SDFC or any other WAFL club / fan in the same position wouldnt do the same thing and think nothing of it....What most WAFL folfk want to know is how in fark did Cl, SD and WP get 29 million and the other three just as needy G6 clubs, got nothing?.....would of thought with that vast SD fan base and ever popular Steel Blue drinking hole known as the "can shed", the SDFC could of had a whip round and raised that sum alone and more themselves after one home game

Yep this needs further investigation, Duffield needs to get more detail out on this.

Have a read of the facts from Peter Hodyl in the letter above shared by Swansfanforlife, SD never received 1 cent, Duffield's article is a sham and he is a disgrace of a so called journo

Swandog wrote:

Bazza wrote:

Freezin wrote: .....as if the SDFC or any other WAFL club / fan in the same position wouldnt do the same thing and think nothing of it....What most WAFL folfk want to know is how in fark did Cl, SD and WP get 29 million and the other three just as needy G6 clubs, got nothing?.....would of thought with that vast SD fan base and ever popular Steel Blue drinking hole known as the "can shed", the SDFC could of had a whip round and raised that sum alone and more themselves after one home game

Yep this needs further investigation, Duffield needs to get more detail out on this.

Have a read of the facts from Peter Hodyl in the letter above shared by Swansfanforlife, SD never received 1 cent, Duffield's article is a sham and he is a disgrace of a so called journo

Hardly surprising. Not the 1st time, wont be the last. Be forgotten in a few days and on to the next fairy tale.

Senior Seagull wrote:

Swandog wrote:

Senior Seagull wrote:

Swandog wrote:

BC wrote: maybe so SD although I still can't see how Subi is rorting anyone as they buy seats at AFL games on a commercial basis but even if you can't get your simpleton head around that, Subi's arrangement hasn't cost the WAFC or the tax payer a single cent....can your mob say the same?

Ok then who payed for all the Subi oval redevelopments then??? Tax payers! So you are wrong

So the redevelopment was just for the Subiaco FC? But we have no members and no supporters according to the great black and white unwashed, yet multiple millions were spent to bring the capacity up to 42500 seats just for the SFC? Really your comment makes no sense at all and that's saying something given some of your previous rants about Subi. Take a second and just consider for a moment that maybe ... just maybe the development of Subi oval could have been for the introduction of the extended VFL and later the AFL comp. What a shame the WAFL/C decided so many years ago that Subiaco oval would be the league headquarters when we all know it should have been out on the hallowed turf/mud of Bogundean oval.

Ok then so none of the 42,500 ppl use the $ubi bar during AFL games and ALL other events there then?? Not to mention seats allocated so $ubi can sell packages etc

So that's the Subi FC bar that was built on Subi FC leased land back in 1971 when we were finally granted permission to have our own bar license, that all other clubs had had for many decades? The fact that the WA govt and the WAFL decided to make Subi oval WAFL HQ and do the redevelopments had nothing to do with the SFC, in fact until we got the clubrooms and the license it was a severe financial constraint for 60-70 years that all other clubs did not have to deal with. Subi oval also hosted the WAFL offices and their social rooms under the old WAFL members stand and they were the only ones who had a license. Yes we now benefit by the fact that we were already established at Subi oval being the primary lease holder before the expanded VFL & AFL came along, but that's a very fortunate circumstance and I understand the envy experienced by the other clubs.
As for the seats, they were not allocated, given or gifted to the SFC, the club buys them from the WAFC each season and then sells them in packages as any club would do in the same circumstances.

It will be very interesting SS if you lot are given another bar and seating area in the new stadium, expect a massive backlash if so.

Leedy wrote:

Senior Seagull wrote:

Swandog wrote:

Senior Seagull wrote:

Swandog wrote:

BC wrote: maybe so SD although I still can't see how Subi is rorting anyone as they buy seats at AFL games on a commercial basis but even if you can't get your simpleton head around that, Subi's arrangement hasn't cost the WAFC or the tax payer a single cent....can your mob say the same?

Ok then who payed for all the Subi oval redevelopments then??? Tax payers! So you are wrong

So the redevelopment was just for the Subiaco FC? But we have no members and no supporters according to the great black and white unwashed, yet multiple millions were spent to bring the capacity up to 42500 seats just for the SFC? Really your comment makes no sense at all and that's saying something given some of your previous rants about Subi. Take a second and just consider for a moment that maybe ... just maybe the development of Subi oval could have been for the introduction of the extended VFL and later the AFL comp. What a shame the WAFL/C decided so many years ago that Subiaco oval would be the league headquarters when we all know it should have been out on the hallowed turf/mud of Bogundean oval.

Ok then so none of the 42,500 ppl use the $ubi bar during AFL games and ALL other events there then?? Not to mention seats allocated so $ubi can sell packages etc

So that's the Subi FC bar that was built on Subi FC leased land back in 1971 when we were finally granted permission to have our own bar license, that all other clubs had had for many decades? The fact that the WA govt and the WAFL decided to make Subi oval WAFL HQ and do the redevelopments had nothing to do with the SFC, in fact until we got the clubrooms and the license it was a severe financial constraint for 60-70 years that all other clubs did not have to deal with. Subi oval also hosted the WAFL offices and their social rooms under the old WAFL members stand and they were the only ones who had a license. Yes we now benefit by the fact that we were already established at Subi oval being the primary lease holder before the expanded VFL & AFL came along, but that's a very fortunate circumstance and I understand the envy experienced by the other clubs.
As for the seats, they were not allocated, given or gifted to the SFC, the club buys them from the WAFC each season and then sells them in packages as any club would do in the same circumstances.

It will be very interesting SS if you lot are given another bar and seating area in the new stadium, expect a massive backlash if so.

Leedy are you really serious with that comment, I thought you were better than that. Subi had around a 100 years of history at Subi oval, nobody has any history at the Burswood site. No one except the managers of the stadium, the WA state govt and the tax payers will get anything from it.