I believe that the present Commission structure has been in place for about 20 years and preceeded the arrival of the Eagles in 1987? During this period there has only been one occasion when the Clubs have voted a sitting member off the Commission.
As I remember it he was a West Coast QC, O 'connell?..and he was voted off in around 2001.
The executive of the Commission i. e. Jackson and Demetriou, were evidently not too happy about the Clubs seeking to so exercise their voting rights, as according to Caroline Wison, during a meeting of the Club Presidents with Evans, Jackson and Demetriou in 2002, the Presidents were told in no uncertain terms that the Commission expected its members to be returned with out objection by the clubs, this not withstanding the fact that 3 commissioners come up for re election by the CLUBS each year.
In any event this was the same meeting at which, again according to Caroline Wilson, the Presidents told the Commission that they expected very severe penalties to be imposed on Carlton (then facing charges relating to breaches of the TPP, which matter was to be considered by the Commission the following day)...
And so it happened, with the Commission imposing severe penalties on Carlton and the Presidents in turn, re electing all retiring commissioners which they have continued to do ever since.
This incident imo underlines the unsatisfactory nature of the relationship which exists between the Commission and the Clubs. With some notable exceptions which I am afraid doesnt include the RFC, it has become quite apparent that the Clubs have become scared to take on the AFL which under the leadership of Jackson and now Demetriou, has become a power unto itself.
As a result, instead of the Commission seeking advice from the clubs and listening to the Clubs point of view, it is now the case that decisions on such matters as widely disperate as rule changes and TV rights are made by the Commission on the advice of Demetriou, with little or no consultation with the Clubs at all.
While we are imo lucky to have wound up with a successful bid for the TV rights from 7/10, why should we have had to put up with the all too apparent and far too public bias of Demetriou against the 7/10 bid, when it is perfectly evident that 9's commitment to Rugby League has done and would have continued to do damage to the game's development in NSW and QLD?
There are numerous examples of both Jackson and Demetriou's arrogance and the Commission and therefore the game has imo become the poorer for its failure to deal with this behaviour.
Surely the time has come for the Commission to revert to a situation where it begins to listen again to what the Clubs have to say. If it doesn't then by the AFL's own Charter, the Clubs have a duty to replace existing Commissioners with those who will take the time to do so.
In the same context I wonder if it isn't about time for the Commission to look into putting its own game development aspirations to one side, in favour of a system which would reward clubs with direct draft choices from specific regions in return for game development in what would be a backflip to the days of clubs being allocated development responsibilities in specific regions.
The AFL has performed poorly in the area of game development and it is worth remembering that in the days of this kind of Club emphasis on country footy, the game was never stronger.
As I remember it he was a West Coast QC, O 'connell?..and he was voted off in around 2001.
The executive of the Commission i. e. Jackson and Demetriou, were evidently not too happy about the Clubs seeking to so exercise their voting rights, as according to Caroline Wison, during a meeting of the Club Presidents with Evans, Jackson and Demetriou in 2002, the Presidents were told in no uncertain terms that the Commission expected its members to be returned with out objection by the clubs, this not withstanding the fact that 3 commissioners come up for re election by the CLUBS each year.
In any event this was the same meeting at which, again according to Caroline Wilson, the Presidents told the Commission that they expected very severe penalties to be imposed on Carlton (then facing charges relating to breaches of the TPP, which matter was to be considered by the Commission the following day)...
And so it happened, with the Commission imposing severe penalties on Carlton and the Presidents in turn, re electing all retiring commissioners which they have continued to do ever since.
This incident imo underlines the unsatisfactory nature of the relationship which exists between the Commission and the Clubs. With some notable exceptions which I am afraid doesnt include the RFC, it has become quite apparent that the Clubs have become scared to take on the AFL which under the leadership of Jackson and now Demetriou, has become a power unto itself.
As a result, instead of the Commission seeking advice from the clubs and listening to the Clubs point of view, it is now the case that decisions on such matters as widely disperate as rule changes and TV rights are made by the Commission on the advice of Demetriou, with little or no consultation with the Clubs at all.
While we are imo lucky to have wound up with a successful bid for the TV rights from 7/10, why should we have had to put up with the all too apparent and far too public bias of Demetriou against the 7/10 bid, when it is perfectly evident that 9's commitment to Rugby League has done and would have continued to do damage to the game's development in NSW and QLD?
There are numerous examples of both Jackson and Demetriou's arrogance and the Commission and therefore the game has imo become the poorer for its failure to deal with this behaviour.
Surely the time has come for the Commission to revert to a situation where it begins to listen again to what the Clubs have to say. If it doesn't then by the AFL's own Charter, the Clubs have a duty to replace existing Commissioners with those who will take the time to do so.
In the same context I wonder if it isn't about time for the Commission to look into putting its own game development aspirations to one side, in favour of a system which would reward clubs with direct draft choices from specific regions in return for game development in what would be a backflip to the days of clubs being allocated development responsibilities in specific regions.
The AFL has performed poorly in the area of game development and it is worth remembering that in the days of this kind of Club emphasis on country footy, the game was never stronger.
