About a month ago party leaders Jeremy Rockliff (Liberal), Rebecca White (Labor) and Cassy O’Connor (Greens) appeared in a photo together, all declaring their backing for a Tasmanian AFL team.
A rare fresher mint of multilateralism and positivity in the whiffy gob of Tasmanian politics, to be sure.
Postures aside, the rubber hit the road this week with AFL CEO Gillon McLachlan’s visit to Tasmania to discuss the AFL bid with Premier Rockliff.
The meeting was widely reported. Whilst the general reception was that Tasmania’s commitment of $150 million – $50m startup, then $10m operational funds per year for 10 years – was ‘bold’, McLachlan seemed to view it as an ambit offer.
“A good start,” he is reported as saying.
An even more vexed proposition is the ‘need’ for a new stadium in a central Hobart location.
“This team needs and will have a new stadium if you want a licence, and I think Tasmanians would expect that,” McLachland said.
“NO WE DON’T EXPECT THAT!” every Tasmanian who is not an AFL diehard yelled in unison. The biggest sticking point is simply the price tag, after recent reports that the eye-watering price tag of $750m was just a guesstimate, and probably unders at that.
There are two ways to view this must-have-a-shiny-new-playground requirement demarcation line by the AFL.
One is that they know it is not going to happen, and are hence setting up the bid to fail. Come August when the bid is formally voted on by the AFL Commissioners, there will be a lot of handwringing but ‘sorry Tassie you didn’t tick the boxes we asked of you, it’s your fault but we tried’.
The other view is that the AFL, financially battered by the COVID-19 lockdown-affected seasons, figures it might as well shoot for the moon. Yes we want. No we aren’t paying. Yes you pay. You be grateful we let you play with big boys now.
If we go with the first theory, note that the political will has already fractured with the Greens refusing to back a new stadium. Labor may well follow, but they are taking their time to shape their position.
It’s a tough one for Labor, given the strong focus of their recent strategy of calling for more investment in the basics of health, education, training, services and social support rather than fluff and fripperies. Former Labor Premier David Bartlett declared:
“Tasmania has two perfectly functional AFL stadia, better than many. This is just bullshit…the stadium proposed will cost no less than 2 billion dollars!”
Functional, arguably yes, but both Bellerive and York Park reek of the beer-stained and windswept suburban grounds of VFL days, from which the chest-thumping AFL has steadily retreated (Waverley, Football Park, all the Melbourne suburban grounds) for a bright lights big city vibe. More on that a bit later.
Public reaction has also been nigh caustic. Given the damper on sentiment of high-inflation and low wages, plus a state budget deep in the red and long on promises ‘over the forward estimates’, no-one can see where the money is coming from. Or many surmise, probably correctly, that a stadium comes at the expense of major and necessary spending on other state infrastructure and services.
“What arrogance from a sport with diminishing participation and crowds,” said sport administrator Richard Welch. “Imagine if we invest $900million over 10 years for people to ‘do’ sport not ‘watch’.”
“F*ck your $750 million football stadium!” said a commenter on Twitter, fairly representatively. “Tasmania doesn’t need a football team, or stadium!? We need housing, and hospital beds/staff & GPs. Priorities for goodness’ sake!”
“Typical bullsh*t from the AFL who clearly don’t want a team down south,” said another observer, Chris Fitzgerald. “Bellerive fits 20,000 which is more than enough for a start-up team. Give Tassie a team to grow into first and focus on stadium size later.”
The stadium issue was discussed briefly in the Carter Report published in 2021. The AFL statement at the time also gave key backing to this recommendation in the report:
The recommendation that all models should be investigated before clubs are asked to decide on a team for Tasmania and that a relocation or joint venture capturing the Melbourne and Tasmanian supporters would provide a more successful and sustainable model should also be considered. This review makes clear that the best chance of success is a team that captures both the Tasmanian and Melbourne markets.
Carter also pointed to the earlier, 2020, AFL Taskforce Report regarding a stadium. If the Save Sandy Bay Campus mob are already outraged about UTAS plans, pop a tub of hommous and crackers to see how they cope if this ever gets some steam:
As part of our consultation, Taskforce members met with Tasmanian Senator Richard Colbeck (LIB), the Federal Minister for Youth and Sport, in relation to future funding of facilities in relation to potential AFL facilities in Hobart and / or Launceston. Senator Colbeck indicated that University of Tasmania (UTAS) plans to relocate the Sandy Bay campus into the Hobart CBD may open a door to discussions for use of the vacated premises. Any use of existing premises would align with UTAS funding requests in that it would match Government preference for use by multiple organisations (i.e. UTAS and TFCL).
Taskforce members then met with UTAS Vice Chancellor Rufus Black, who indicated a high degree of enthusiasm about a conceptual partnership between Government, UTAS and an AFL entity (NB: VC Black has previous experience with AFL Club the Western Bulldogs during his tenure as Deputy Chancellor of Victoria University, a partnership which featured educational, community, sponsorship and facility sharing relationships). The Taskforce would encourage further development of this concept, which remains dependent on UTAS progress towards a campus relocation.
UTAS has indeed made much progress towards campus relocation since then. Rufus Black, one senses, could also use a powerful player in his corner in the face of public criticism.
Pointedly the Taskforce also said this about a new stadium:
The Taskforce is largely concerned with a business case that leads to an AFL licence and our work is not determined nor dependent upon a major upgrade or new stadium requirement. We do, however, raise quality of infrastructure as an opportunity to maximise the economics of the business case. In simplistic terms: a better product will attract a premium of more and higher paying supporters.
So it’s all about the money.
Or is it? The Taskforce Report section on stadia ends with this quote from Scott Verdouw, Director of Jaws Architects, who provided ‘conceptual and thought leadership’ on a Macquarie Point stadium:
“If we want world class teams to play here, we should have a world class stadium. World class stadiums don’t belong in the suburbs.”
This seems to be a pointer toward what is actually going on with high-level AFL thinking. It’s about ego. It’s about marketing. It’s about having the biggest coliseum in the state with your name up in lights. Terrified that the pie they chow on is going to feed another mouth, that’s what existing clubs want: a monument that sizzles their brand onto the rump of the country.
In other words – for Tasmanian residents and our children’s children who will still be paying for the monstrosity – an eyesore on the waterfront so everyone who comes to town knows that it’s the AFL who wears the pants.
Significant commercial investment in a stadium seems unlikely, as large stadia in Australia don’t make money.
The nearest similar recent project in a regional Australian city is the 25,000 capacity North Queensland Stadium in Townsville. First proposed for $185 million in 2011, it was finally opened in 2020 at a cost of around $300m in state and federal funding.
Given the $1 trillion deficit inherited by the new Albanese federal government, it is difficult to envisage massive federal funding for a stadium in Tasmania. So taking Townsville as a best case scenario Tasmania would likely be on the hook for $500m for the AFL’s vanity project.
At least. Plus the annual operational deficits. Depreciation, retrofits and upgrades. Opportunity cost.
Note also the time frame of 9 years from ideation to completion. If it’s stadium first, team second, then the Tasmanian AFL can is being kicked down the road for a decade. And that’s assuming we have a ‘yes’ decision soon.
It’s not hard to imagine that on this snowy night, by the light of the fire and the warmth of mulled wine in an earthen jug, that somewhere in southern Tasmania the NO AFL STADIUM stickers are already being designed.
“If you build it, they will come.” – Field of Dreams.
