Tweet
This time the issue has been put on the agenda by serial cap rorters Carlton. The main backer for action is Collingwood. The issue was supposedly resolved last year.
Swans, Lions ready to defend their salary cap concessions
By Jessica Halloran
February 17, 2004
The salary cap concessions being afforded Sydney and Brisbane are expected to come under renewed attack at a meeting between the AFL commission and club presidents today.
Swans chairman Richard Colless is again likely to be on the defensive over the allowances but noted yesterday that Brisbane, who won their third consecutive premiership last year, were in a different position to the Swans.
"Sydney and Brisbane are two totally different issues, it's cheaper to live in Brisbane than it is to live in Melbourne," Colless said. "We are two totally different issues. But it's all about structuring a level playing field."
The Lions' remarkable recent success has had clubs such as Collingwood, Essendon and Carlton vehemently opposing their concessions, which were put in place to encourage players to move to Brisbane and then help the Lions retain them.
Under pressure from Victorian clubs, the AFL last year made changes to the Brisbane and Sydney clubs' cost-of-living allowances, which are effective from this season. Over three years, the Lions will now receive about half the concessions they had previously been entitled to, resulting in the club having $240,000 less to spend by 2006, while the Swans will be roughly as well off as they were under the old system.
Colless believes it is vital the Swans retain their allowances. "There's an abundance of evidence to suggest living in Sydney is more expensive," he said. "It's a tiresome issue, it's just a ridiculous distraction. You either want a team in Sydney or you don't.
"I have no idea about what is going to be raised [at the meeting]. If so, it's for the AFL commission. Rugby league and rugby union would laugh hysterically at the short-sighted and blind views [of the southern clubs]."
Colless said he would "just go and listen to what people have to say" at today's meeting.
"It's the AFL's job. It's not really my role to defend it, it's one against 15," he said. "I support whatever is in the best interests of the game. . . The question is: do we want the game to be totally national?"
Swans, Lions ready to defend their salary cap concessions
By Jessica Halloran
February 17, 2004
The salary cap concessions being afforded Sydney and Brisbane are expected to come under renewed attack at a meeting between the AFL commission and club presidents today.
Swans chairman Richard Colless is again likely to be on the defensive over the allowances but noted yesterday that Brisbane, who won their third consecutive premiership last year, were in a different position to the Swans.
"Sydney and Brisbane are two totally different issues, it's cheaper to live in Brisbane than it is to live in Melbourne," Colless said. "We are two totally different issues. But it's all about structuring a level playing field."
The Lions' remarkable recent success has had clubs such as Collingwood, Essendon and Carlton vehemently opposing their concessions, which were put in place to encourage players to move to Brisbane and then help the Lions retain them.
Under pressure from Victorian clubs, the AFL last year made changes to the Brisbane and Sydney clubs' cost-of-living allowances, which are effective from this season. Over three years, the Lions will now receive about half the concessions they had previously been entitled to, resulting in the club having $240,000 less to spend by 2006, while the Swans will be roughly as well off as they were under the old system.
Colless believes it is vital the Swans retain their allowances. "There's an abundance of evidence to suggest living in Sydney is more expensive," he said. "It's a tiresome issue, it's just a ridiculous distraction. You either want a team in Sydney or you don't.
"I have no idea about what is going to be raised [at the meeting]. If so, it's for the AFL commission. Rugby league and rugby union would laugh hysterically at the short-sighted and blind views [of the southern clubs]."
Colless said he would "just go and listen to what people have to say" at today's meeting.
"It's the AFL's job. It's not really my role to defend it, it's one against 15," he said. "I support whatever is in the best interests of the game. . . The question is: do we want the game to be totally national?"
Comment