SENIOR economist Saul Eslake says the AFL's controversial cost of living allowance is another example of the league's obsession with New South Wales.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
Sydney and Greater Western Sydney are granted a 9.8 per cent cost of living allowance on top of the competition's salary cap, which many have called unfair and unnecessary.
The argument was reignited this week when it was revealed two-time Hawthorn premiership player Lance Franklin signed a nine-year deal worth $10 million with the Swans.
Mr Eslake, who is an advocate for a Tasmanian AFL team, said yesterday that the cost of living differences between Sydney and Melbourne had decreased and were not that significant.
``It illustrates the way in which the AFL's Sydney aspirations are distorting the whole competition,'' Mr Eslake said.
``The AFL make so many concessions to Sydney in the pursuit of what it calls ``promoting the national game''.
``And, of course, one of the casualties from the AFL's obsession with Sydney is Tasmania, who are denied the right to have their own team.''
Mr Eslake said Franklin's move from Tasmania's adopted team Hawthorn would have a marginal impact on crowd numbers for the club's four Launceston home and away games. He said Franklin would most likely play in Launceston against his old club or in Hobart up against North Melbourne.
``There are many football followers that would go a long way to see Buddy in action and if he stopped playing football for Hawthorn then that may have an impact on how many people are willing to go see Hawthorn games in Launceston,'' Mr Eslake said.
``The irony is, however, that if he is playing for Sydney he might get a game in Tasmania anyway because Sydney doesn't draw crowds in Melbourne and it is therefore more likely that Sydney will be drawn to play games in Tasmania.''