One-Eyed Richmond Forum
Football => Richmond Rant => Topic started by: Phil Mrakov on October 21, 2011, 02:28:07 AM
-
Tigers ditch Darwin
Caroline Wilson
October 21, 2011
RICHMOND has placed football ahead of finances and foregone next season's contracted game in Darwin, having on-sold the game to Melbourne in a decision which will cost the club an estimated $500,000.
In a move certain to prove a big winner among the Tiger faithful - not to mention the football department - Richmond chief executive Brendon Gale confirmed yesterday the club had negotiated an exit agreement with the AFL upon learning the Demons harboured long-term plans for a presence in the Northern Territory.
Advertisement: Story continues below
"We entered into an agreement and had every intention of meeting our obligations,'' Gale told The Age. ''However, circumstances have changed and that has allowed us to bring this home game back to Melbourne."
Gale said the Tigers would continue to honour its obligations in Cairns - where the club is contract to host home games against the Gold Coast until 2013 - but that all other Richmond home games would be played in Melbourne.
While the Darwin deal was struck before Gale took over as CEO, he was criticised by supporters two months later when the Tigers lost its second sold home game in northern Australia to the fledgling Suns.
Gale denied the decision to abandon a home fixture in the Northern Territory was pushed by coach Damien Hardwick and his football department, insisting the cash-strapped club had received the AFL's blessing after receiving a multimillion-dollar boost from broadcast rights distributions. ''Damien and his team certainly don't blame the fixture for that loss,'' said Gale.
''Following discussions with the AFL, it became apparent that the Melbourne Football Club was interested in Darwin as a longer-term strategic play and … it made sense for them to take up this opportunity.
"The decision to play in Darwin was made in the best interests of the club … and there are some short-term financial implications. However, the support of the AFL through the Club Future Fund Distribution now provides us with the resources that we think will allow us to hit key commercial targets.''
The Darwin deal was a four-club agreement struck between the AFL and the Northern Territory government in 2009, which would feature six games played over three years involving Melbourne, the Western Bulldogs and Richmond, with each hosting two games and Port Adelaide, at least until the end of 2011, earning money as the away team.
Melbourne has already hosted its two games but will replace the Tigers in 2012, with the Bulldogs sticking to their commitment.
AFL executive Simon Lethlean said the deal with Darwin was in place until 2014, but that the home clubs had not been negotiated beyond next season. ''Melbourne has made its presence felt in the Northern Territory community and done some good work there and the club is keen to continue that, so we were happy to make the change,'' said Lethlean, who added that Port Adelaide could forgo one of next year's two ''away'' spots at TIO Stadium in place of the Gold Coast Suns.
With the Tigers now only playing one ''away'' home game in Cairns, Gale has lobbied hard for the club to host nine of its remaining 10 home games at the MCG. Lethlean said the AFL had guaranteed the Tigers a minimum of eight MCG games with at least one at Etihad.
With the club also guaranteed the Thursday night MCG Melbourne season-opener against Carlton, the Tigers have achieved a number of coups. Gale said the Fighting Tiger Fund would continue to raise funds for football and eliminate the club's multimillion-dollar debt over the next 12 months.
The outstanding broadcast rights deal achieved by the AFL in May has proved a considerable boost to Richmond, which proved a financial winner in the equalisation distributions, with the club awarded an additional $4.7 million above the $3.25 million awarded as a base dividend to all clubs.
''It won't happen overnight,'' said Gale, ''but if our increased investment in football delivers improved performance on-field, we will be able to capitalise and build the financial muscle of this club. "We felt it would be better for the club to concentrate on one interstate market, which will be Cairns for the next two years."
http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-new...#ixzz1bKVQPQjg (http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-new...#ixzz1bKVQPQjg)
-
This will please a few people here.
Knowing the AFL, they will probably now make us play Port at Etihad so we won't get to play at our true home ground anyway ::).
-
ps. Onya daniel with the scoop about this on OER :thumbsup.
-
great news
-
This will please a few people here.
Yep, fantastic news. Now we just have to consign our "home" games at Cairns to the garbage can of history, and we'll be right.
-
If you see kay!!
-
This will please a few people here.
Knowing the AFL, they will probably now make us play Port at Etihad so we won't get to play at our true home ground anyway ::).
I don't mind this. Don't we need like 30,000 to break even to play at the G? Pretty easy to achieve if we're on a roll... But hey, anything can happen ;D at least we'll still have the local crowd at Etihad and we don't have to worry about traveling and climate conditioning... And busted lights.
-
and Al throwing cans
-
That effort last year was the biggest joke of a Game/Venue ive ever seen.
I was so embarrassed i dragged my pregnant wife to that debacle. I can handle a loss but that E grade venue was rubbish
Gale/Dimma good work.
-
Tigers come home
richmondfc.com.au
Fri 21 Oct, 2011
Gale said that following discussions with the AFL, it became apparent that Melbourne Football Club was interested in Darwin as a long-term strategic plan and, as such, it made sense for them to take up this opportunity.
“Given the AFL’s support for the change, we felt it would be better for the Club to concentrate on one interstate market, which will be Cairns for the next two years,” Gale said.
“There are some short-term financial implications, however, the support of the AFL through the recently established Club Future Fund Distribution now provides us with the resources that we believe will allow us to hit key commercial targets in the coming years.
“If our increased investment in football delivers improved performance on-field, we will be able to capitalise and build the financial muscle of the Club.”
Read full article at: http://www.richmondfc.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/6301/newsid/125368/default.aspx
-
As much as I'm glad we'll be playing our home game back in Melbourne, the club will have to use the additional AFL funds to recoup now $500k from this (minus what we make from the game in Melb. next year) plus about $300k from not having the Royal Oak revenue anymore.
-
Very happy with this decision although was looking forward to heading up to Darwin in 2012. was going ot make a decent trip of it this time round
But I must say I am very surprised at the same time, cannot beleive the AFL let us out of it ;D
As for Cairns, pretty clear the Club intends to honour that contract = 2 more years
-
Seems like a few on demonland aren't to thrilled with there club picking up this game.
-
Seems like a few on demonland aren't to thrilled with there club picking up this game.
When have they found the time to leave the ski lodge. Maybe the range rovers have gone in for some servicing. Who knows. I need to drink more beer. ;D
-
Very happy with this decision although was looking forward to heading up to Darwin in 2012. was going ot make a decent trip of it this time round
But I must say I am very surprised at the same time, cannot beleive the AFL let us out of it ;D
As for Cairns, pretty clear the Club intends to honour that contract = 2 more years
You can look forward to Cairns instead, WP, although only if our players learn to play on a ground where the trade winds blow straight down the ground for a six goal with-the-wind-advantage. You don't get anything like that at the G or Ethihad.
The boys should be out a Craigieburn training when there is a good Melbourne northerly wind blowing.
-
and Al throwing cans
You say that as if there is something wrong with it :huh
-
Looks like I've gotta find another excuse to come up and visit you Al! :'(
-
not too sure if I'll get away this year so I'm spewing.
what do ya do though?
que sera, sera
-
Good job, Darwin is junk but Cairns is worth keeping.
:gotigers
-
I reckon there's gotta be a catch as to why the AFL were so obliging?
Extra interstate away game perhaps :huh
-
we are the away side?
-
we are the away side?
In Darwin? No that will be Port
But I rekcon we could get an extra interstate away game to say Perth
We had 4 this year I reckon we will get at least 5 in 2012 now
-
so melbourne were not due to play port up here this year?
-
i think that is right
over three years two games each. melb 2010 2011 us 2011 2012
-
so melbourne were not due to play port up here this year?
No Tigers & Bulldogs were the teams in 2012, Tigers have "on sold" their 2012 game to the Dees
Rich, Melb & Bulldogs were to play 6 games between them over 3 years = 2 games each
Was to be
2010 - Dogs & Dees
2011 - Tigers & Dees
2012 - Tigers & Dogs
Now it will be Dogs & Dees
-
I forgot about footscray.
Easy enough to do.
-
not too sure if I'll get away this year so I'm spewing.
what do ya do though?
que sera, sera
Was actually grandstanding with my last post Al. #4 goes to Afghanistan around Mar/Apr so will be up there for that.
-
I'm really annoyed at this decision
-
I'm really annoyed at this decision
Why tony_m?
-
Crap decision for mine as well. If it was a commercially sound decision to play there then that should still be the case now.
Smacks of popularity over prudence for mine.
-
I'm really annoyed at this decision
Why tony_m?
Crap decision for mine as well. If it was a commercially sound decision to play there then that should still be the case now.
Smacks of popularity over prudence for mine.
spot on TBR - thats 500k that would be going into the footy department whether it be high performance, extra coaches or whatever - winning or losing 1 game in 2012 by a side that is at best going to struggle to play finals is not going to determine whether or not we win a premiership... and last I checked we were still about 3.5-4mill in debt.
Bite the bullet, one more game FFS... and in the process we gift the pathetic cheating melbourne football club a 500k freebie, basically allowing them to get away with spending beyond their means.
In a nutshell we caved - this club hasnt changed and will flip flop and panic under duress, you can put lipstick on a pig but in the end shes still a pig...
-
Crap decision for mine as well. If it was a commercially sound decision to play there then that should still be the case now.
Smacks of popularity over prudence for mine.
Agree with you TBR. As this year, it wouldn't have made any difference to our ladder position in 2012 but the extra $$$s would've made a big difference to our FTF position. Don't like that we ditched it the moment we got some extra unexpected funds - imho we have just reduced the value of our Equalisation Fund windfall by $500k and it is certainly going to rub against the grain when they come calling next year for donations, raffles etc in the 2nd phase of FTF.
-
Cant see why we just didnt stick around for the extra 500k. Is money growing on trees at Punt Rd or something?
-
Maybe the club feels it can make up the 500,000 through extra sponsorship this year,or other revenue raising
-
Maybe the club feels it can make up the 500,000 through extra sponsorship this year,or other revenue raising
what do you mean 'extra' gigantor? isnt this 500k they have turned their back on 'extra'? ;D
-
I heard mention a number of times that we have "on sold" this home game to Melbourne.
I wonder how much we sold it for?
It wont be the full $500k that we miss out on
-
Maybe the club feels it can make up the 500,000 through extra sponsorship this year,or other revenue raising
what do you mean 'extra' gigantor? isnt this 500k they have turned their back on 'extra'? ;D
No I dont see it that way tony_m
The $500k was not an extra - it was a neccessity in a bunsiness sense
The selling of homes games in 2011 to me at least was a way for the club to recover the "nett profit" we made from the Royal Oak that we lost (ie no longer has) when that scum Mathieson signed over the pokie leases to Carlton.
As I've said previously I don't like the club selling games, in principle I am totally against it but I certainly understood why they did it and from a purely business (read bottomline) perspective the selling of the games in 2011 was the right thing for the club.
I have to say I really surprised they gave up the guarantee of $500k with no guarantee we will make the same $$$ with the game being in Melb especially in light of the fact the game will proabably end up at Etihad.
remembering suggestions already are that we are likely to get 8 MCG home games & 2 at Etihad
-
The more I think about this the more it annoys me.
Not many easier ways to tip 500 gorillas in than this.
Does a young side no harm in playing away and coming to terms with winning on the road either.
-
The more I think about this the more it annoys me.
Not many easier ways to tip 500 gorillas in than this.
Does a young side no harm in playing away and coming to terms with winning on the road either.
Have to say part of me is rapt we've given the game the flick and the game's coming back to Melb
But there's a part of me is disappointed as I was looking forward to going up there again, would have been happier to give Cairns the flick.
Actually from a business sense keeping the Darwin game made more sense with the club links to the NT via its community programs
-
It seems as thouhg a few on here are just taking every opportunity to take pot shots at the club these days. Hardwick, Gale, Cameron etc. have made mistakes, and they will continue to make them. They are human. But i would argue that they represent the most committed, respected and transparent administration we have had at Punt Road in a long time.
Plenty of positives have come out of their work in the last couple of years as they try and drag this club out of the pooer.
They deserve to be cut some slack. And im not trying to say that they are above criticism. i just think the negativity being bandied around this forum at the moment is out of whack.
-
who are you poking your Willy at?
-
Just commenting on the general vibe of the forum, D-Rod.
-
;D
-
Personally good, logically not so good, should have stuck with it! bite the bullet now while we are building and give ourselves a decent future/shot down the track. :huh
-
LMFAO at some of the hypocrites posting here :lol :lol
Lust have a quick troll back through this thread and you will soon work out who you are :wallywink :wallywink
http://oneeyed-richmond.com/forum/index.php?topic=13186.255
-
LMFAO at some of the hypocrites posting here :lol :lol
Lust have a quick troll back through this thread and you will soon work out who you are :wallywink :wallywink
http://oneeyed-richmond.com/forum/index.php?topic=13186.255
I thought you and Blaisee were working on some of my potential campaign slogans ;D
-
LMFAO at some of the hypocrites posting here :lol :lol
Lust have a quick troll back through this thread and you will soon work out who you are :wallywink :wallywink
http://oneeyed-richmond.com/forum/index.php?topic=13186.255
I thought you and Blaisee were working on some of my potential campaign slogans ;D
Sorry, got sidetracked!! Back on it ;D ;D
-
I don't think anyone is saying it was a good idea to sell the games in the first place, but it is equally bad to sell them back.
-
I don't think anyone is saying it was a good idea to sell the games in the first place, but it is equally bad to sell them back.
I agree with this :thumbsup From now on we shal be known as the "Richmond Indian givers" We shal only relinquish the name once the original length of the contract expires.......
-
I don't think anyone is saying it was a good idea to sell the games in the first place, but it is equally bad to sell them back.
I agree with this :thumbsup From now on we shal be known as the "Richmond Indian givers" We shal only relinquish the name once the original length of the contract expires.......
Probably ditch that name a year early and go back to the Tigers and people will still be unhappy we couldn't see the plan out :lol