Tasmania need to forget 19th licence bid if AFL change rules again

The stage is largely set with the AFL cast as an increasingly demonstrative and demanding partner with the state government stooping to new levels of contortion as they promise themselves it will be worth it.

The best relationship advice I ever got was that if it proved repeatedly difficult, it probably wasn't worth it, but that light-bulb is yet to click for the state government.

There is an increasing sense of fatigue surrounding Tasmania's bid for an AFL franchise.

After the state government unveils a concentrated advertising campaign, gets a four-time premiership coach on-board and a bi-partisan political push for their proposed team, the AFL seemingly delights in unveiling a new hoop to jump through.

Despite the AFL agreeing money is not a factor for a new Tasmanian team, factors which relate to money seemingly are a significant issue.

"If it's going to be a 19th licence, there's a lot to go through, there'll be a new stadium," AFL chief executive Gillon McLachlan said.

"Whether it's contingent or however you want to frame it, and I'll take responsibility for this, this team needs and will have a new stadium if it wants a licence. And I think Tasmanians will expect that, north and south.

"That's just my view, and I think the premier understands that and I think agrees, and every Tasmanian I have spoken to agrees as well."

While some in the media believe McLachlan sees Tasmania as one of the final acts to underline his legacy, it seems like the posts have shifted time and time again.

READ MORE: 'Needless' and a 'pipedream': Hobart stadium idea slammed, questions raised on AFL bid

The Tasmanian government has pledged $150 million for the bid including $50 million in a high performance centre, and $10 million per year for a decade and Rockliff reiterated how serious he was about the bid.

The $150 million was meant to underline it but apparently the AFL will only feel the love if a shiny new stadium is waiting on the foreshore.

Presumably Rockliff and the government are not far off singing for their supper when the AFL commission next meets.

At what point does the AFL have to show Tasmania how much it values the Apple Isle?

When does the country's most powerful sporting body apologise for leaving a heartland state out in football wilderness for decades?

The new stadium is just the latest desire for the AFL and Premier Jeremy Rockliff was at pains to show us, once again, how it will all be worth it.

What can also change a state is utlising that exact funding to support our health services, help boost our education system and fund more public housing.

While politicians have adopted the 'forgo avocado toast, buy a house' fiscal policy in recent years, re-directing money for a third major sport stadium to pertinent public issues seems, almost, democratic.

In various guises, the state government went to the election last year with mandates on all those aforementioned areas and the AFL team was also taken to the election.

In the background of this, we have heard about how nurses are battling for a pay rise at the bargaining table after being on the frontline of a global pandemic for two years.

Apparently, there are some things the government will play hard-ball over, just never the ones you would expect.

Somehow, after the all the past two years was meant to teach us, football and entertainment is set to benefit while the vulnerable members of our community scrape by day-to-day.

READ MORE: Rep coach hopeful injured skipper will be right for game two

What should be also known is that budgets, much like waistlines after Christmas, tend to blow-out and sport stadiums are the rule rather than the exception.

While Rockliff pointed to Adelaide Oval and the new Perth Stadium, the former was over-budget from the original $450 million dollars promised and the latter went up to from an estimated $1 billion dollars to $1.6 billion dollars.

The new stadium, which is proposed for the Hobart Regatta Ground foreshore, has yet to have a shovel buried into it or a Blundstone laid upon it, yet, already, there is doubt on the cost of the stadium.

Right to information documents obtained by Labor showed that site specific costs, including the the floating aspect of the stadium, have not been full specified.

While they have not yet figured out the split between state funding, federal funding and private investment, even an economic layman could see there are red flags on the horizon.

Even without that bottom line discussion, the Adelaide and Perth grounds are the main venues for the sport in their state. Will Launceston have to forgo games to make Hobart's sporting spaceship viable?

It would take a gold medal degree of verbal gymnastics to explain why Launceston should get less games when it is the only Tasmanian stadium to sell-out an AFL game in the past two seasons.

The true answer is that the bottle-necked, under-accommodated Southern city is once again coasting by on its capital city status in the race for a sporting side.

While the supremo may point to similar deals being done with GWS Giants and the Gold Coast Suns, that is the reason we are all here squabbling over a hypothetical football side.

READ MORE: NTFA hold their nerve over SFL in representative triumph

The AFL had the choice over a decade ago to reward a heartland football state, instead it chose to burden the league with two sides it is struggling to make relevant.

Tasmania's football landscape, from the players within it to the clubs and supporters, would benefit from an AFL side but the degree of difficulty keeps rising as we reach the curtain call of August.

Why does Tasmania flagellate itself for a sporting partner which only reciprocates love when it needs something?

One can only guess that when McLachlan says every person he's spoken with agrees with him, he was looking in a mirror.

Our journalists work hard to provide local, up-to-date news to the community. This is how you can continue to access our trusted content: