Are the Eagles damaging Football? Can anything be done?

[Albert Park]

Every week it gets worse, a new revealtion of disgracefull behaviour , a new outburst of arrogance and continued defiance of the accepted code of conduct. This isnt the whole West Coast club but there is a core that is hurting AFL as surely as they are hurting their own club

The AFL seem unwilling to take on the "Princes of Perth" and the West Coast Club committee and management appear powerless to do anything against a group of players who scorn discipline and sully their status as role models. This will bring our game into disrepute and reflect on all who play and follow it: unless something is done to make the West Coast committee, management, members and fans change their club back to the standard of sportsmanship and responsibiliuty they once enjoyed.

Here is a suggestion:
Appoint an independent , intervention committee of respected past players and officials whose role it is to return the club to the AFL's best practices and if necessary remove the core element of bad influence

What would make the Eagles agree to this???

The 15 other clubs could agree , for the rest of the Home and Away season (rounds 5 to 22) to foreit all games played against the Eagles at home on Subiaco.
Just dont turn up. Play them only when they are away without the home ground/crowd advantage and with the disadvantgae of travelling

Sure they will get the four points for every game BUT they wont get the gate receipts at Subiaco and the Eagles fans wont get a chance to see them play at home. The loss of match practice could also have an effect on the players' form

Meanwhile the other teams will only miss one or two games and save a fortune in not having to travell to Perth to play them.

When the West Coast committee start losing money and the members and fans miss live games at Subiaco; when the whole club realise they have become pariahs in the eyes of the rest of the AFL community they may think that cleaning house is a better option.

I rease there are issues to be worked out but go ahead and point them out or offer a better suggestion

[CureTheSane]

Any publicity......

[Albert Park]

Any publicity......

Do you mean like the "Any Publicity" that plagued Rugby League for the last few years?
And who is the "Any publicity" good for?

[CureTheSane]

It's all good for the AFL in the end.

Just a few non Afl people may tune in to the next Eagles Vs Freo game when the media promote it as a grudge match.

I know I'll be watching a game I normally wouldn't.

Actually, I won't because we won't see 2 non Vic teams play on FTA Tv in Vic.....

[hammo]

The AFL has not ruled out charging West Coast with bringing the game into disrepute and removing draft picks or, more drastically, stripping the Eagles of premiership points.

With the premiers facing a dressing-down at AFL headquarters in Melbourne next Sunday, the Herald understands the AFL Commission raised the prospect of the heavy sanctions in a bid to tackle the Eagles' litany of on- and off-field problems.

http://www.realfooty.com.au/news/news/swans-wary-of-wounded-demons-says-roos/2007/04/23/1177180569194.html

Draft picks would cause minimal damage considering their current list so the deduction of points would be a fitting punishment in my opinion.

Teach the scum a lesson for their blatant disregard of the image of the game.

[Chow-Chicker]

This is interesting. Heard a question that is difficult to answer. What if it were a lesser player, and a non reigning premier club....would the AFL acted a lot more quicker and more severely on this issue?

[goswannie14]

This is interesting. Heard a question that is difficult to answer. What if it were a lesser player, and a non reigning premier club....would the AFL acted a lot more quicker and more severely on this issue?

They wouldn't need to. Think Carlton and the problems there afew years ago. The club acted swiftly and decisively, they handled it well. WC just close their eyes and hope the problem goes away.

I agree with your statement that it is because of their success that the AFL has done nothing.

[laughingnome]

This is interesting. Heard a question that is difficult to answer. What if it were a lesser player, and a non reigning premier club....would the AFL acted a lot more quicker and more severely on this issue?

The higher you are (no pun intended), the further you have to fall. If it were a less successful club they would have no problem sanctioning their players, but if the club (and the problem players) are running hot on the field it takes a lot more gumption to rein them in. Collingwood had a similar problem with player discipline in the 70's if I recall my parents correctly - certainly nothing as bad as the West Coast at the moment but the same principle - a successful team doesn't really want to damage their success by punishing players.

[Wardy]

Yes the shenanigans that have been going on at WC have damaged the AFL brand - but as usual I doubt the AFL will have the backbone to do anything meaningful about it. Draft picks as mentioned earlier wont make the slightest bit of difference to West Coast, and they know it. - stripping competition points however would be far more damaging - and at the same time it would send out a message to other clubs that if you @@@@ up and bring the game into disrepute - you will suffer the consequences.

No matter which club is involved the AFL should come down hard on them - be consistent rather than mamby pamby hand bag carrying nancy boys, which is what Andy D and Co seem to be.

[573v30]

I doubt Andy D would even punish them, he'll probably give some meaningless lecture...

[j s]

The 15 other clubs could agree , for the rest of the Home and Away season (rounds 5 to 22) to foreit all games played against the Eagles at home on Subiaco.
Just dont turn up. Play them only when they are away without the home ground/crowd advantage and with the disadvantgae of travelling

Sure they will get the four points for every game BUT they wont get the gate receipts at Subiaco and the Eagles fans wont get a chance to see them play at home. The loss of match practice could also have an effect on the players' form

Meanwhile the other teams will only miss one or two games and save a fortune in not having to travell to Perth to play them.

A few things wrong with your argument...

1) The AFL is contractually obligated to 7/10 (and hence to Foxtel) to play 8 games each round. They would have to pay back a chunk of the $780M

2) WC games at Subi are virtual total sellouts to members so very little revenue loss, though they might have to return some corporate funding

3) AFAIK the AFL funds the travelling costs of teams though I imagine most clubs spend more than the AFL provides.

#1 is the real showstopper though.

[Lucky Knickers]

The AFL needs a strong WCE club. They attract a heaps of sponsorship dollar and are critical to ongoing success of the WAFL in staving off carve outs to other codes and sports.
What the AFL needs to do is bring the WCE back into the fold and ensure that they, along with all clubs, have clear and consistent boundaries about what is and is not acceptable as a holder of an AFL franchise. It's my view that that is what the AFL commission is now attempting to do by proposing they assume responsibility for punishment of player conduct. IMO that makes sense as each player has a contract with the AFL.
Many clubs have failed in recent years to apply a consistent and high standard of dealing with player misconduct of a colourful and varied nature over the years. Cast your mind back to Mick Malthouses' press conference about different strokes for different folks as to player punishment. He was happy to play Tarrant/Johnson. It is all about how good a player you are. Port Adelaide and Brogan, Holland putting a woman in a headlock over a taxi. Stone me for it but you could even criticise the Swans for not taking stronger action over MOL and the payoff. WCE not taking action against it's elite players is entirely consistent with other clubs.
I'm not excusing the club, however, I imagine that in the absence of a strong moral and ethical code issued by the sports' governing body, trying to balance and appease all the stakeholders in a modern footy club isn't as easy, or black and white, as we'd like it to be.

[Albert Park]

A few things wrong with your argument...

1) The AFL is contractually obligated to 7/10 (and hence to Foxtel) to play 8 games each round. They would have to pay back a chunk of the $780M

2) WC games at Subi are virtual total sellouts to members so very little revenue loss, though they might have to return some corporate funding

3) AFAIK the AFL funds the traveling costs of teams though I imagine most clubs spend more than the AFL provides.

#1 is the real showstopper though.

Thanks for pointing it out, i knew there would be contractual issues.
However, if the AFL stood to lose money to 7/10 there would be an intervention overnight. The AFL are required to put on a game for the TV but do the other clubs HAVE to play. They could turn up and claim 22 injuries (jet lag?? )

My whole point is : The only way to get the AFL to seriously look to the future of the game rather than their adulation of these spoiled players and their indulgent club is if the AFL looks like losing money

The American Major League had contracts for far more than 780 million but when the Baseballers went on strike the League had NO games being played anywhere.
The difference here is this would be not for the benefit of players but to end the risk of a half a dozen arrogant superstars who seem intent on ruining the public image of the game

[reigning premier]

I really don't think they're damaging football at all. Well at least not in their market they're not. Their supporters, sponsors and WA public in general couldn't give a flying @@@@ what they do. To them, they're untouchable. It's really a big brew ha ha over here on the east coast that matters little to them or their legions of adoring fans.

The AFL can rumble and mumble as much as they want, but in the end, they know the same. They're only carrying on now to placate the media and the fans in the east. They don't have the moxsy or the legal position to do bugger all.

Inevitabley, it will catch up with them all. But let's face it, they'll fall on their own sword rather than be pulled into line by the AFL.