“Those discussions will come, 20 or 18. The history of the AFL is that we’ve had five or six years where we’ve had an uneven number of teams … at some point there will be an even number of teams” – Gillon McLachlan, when asked whether there could be a 20th AFL team.
It was barely 20 minutes after Gillon McLachlan announced that Tasmania would become the AFL’s 19th team that the question was raised about whether there could be a 20th team in the competition.
Departing AFL CEO Gillon McLachlan, announcing Tasmania’s entry as the league’s 19th team in 2028.Credit: Getty Images
McLachlan offhandedly mentioned the possibility of 18 or 20 teams, which pricked the ears of some journalists huddled in the bleak Hobart mist – was he floating the notion of ridding the AFL of a struggling club?
Recognising his fumble and keen to avoid tarnishing Tassie’s day, McLachlan quickly backtracked.
“Oh, no I think the most likely would be 20 teams,” said McLachlan, straightening his answer and back on message. “At some point there will be an even number of teams.”
Hang on a minute, Gil. Why should the mathematical imperative of an even number dictate the shape – and geographic reach – of a competition that struggled to make a success of the 17th and 18th clubs, and which has placed the 19th team five years into the future?
The Tasmanian team is slated for 2028 at the latest. The AFL has just secured a favourable deal with Tasmania, the Rockliff government caving in to the AFL’s demand that Tasmania give up its best site on the waterfront and foot most of the bill.
The roofed stadium at Macquarie Point (“McLachlan Point” or “the Gil Mahal” as The Australian called it) faces a classically Tasmanian insurrection that will see local politicians and the novelist Richard Flanagan assembling for an anti-stadium rally on the lawn of Parliament House in Hobart next Saturday.
So, while there’s little doubt that the Tassie team will take the field in that distinctive green jumper with a map of the state – and that it will be very difficult for Bob Brown and co to Franklin damn this stadium and prevent its construction – there’s still plenty of water to flow along the Derwent before the 19th team is established.
Consideration of further expansion should be put on hold by the AFL and the clubs, for a raft of reasons. Expansion for its own sake is misguided, even if the AFL is a kind of rapacious entertainment/event corporation that is forever looking for new frontiers and franchises – not to mention friendly governments who will build it a stadium.
McLachlan is one of the most talented deal-makers in Australia. His Tassie deal was extraordinary in terms of extracting concessions from a desperate government and even getting Prime Minister Anthony Albanese on board for $240 million worth of concrete and excavation.
But when McLachlan leaves the AFL in the coming months, his successor Andrew Dillon and the AFL Commission should put a moratorium on expansion for at least a decade, focusing instead on fixing the huge potholes in their attempted colonisation of Sydney and Gold Coast, on consolidating existing clubs and getting the settings right for the AFLW and Tassie.
Here are a few reasons why the AFL should avoid talking about a 20th team, whether that’s Darwin, a third team around Perth, one in far north Queensland, Canberra or anywhere else:
1. As mentioned, expansion has hardly been a roaring success. Gold Coast have not played finals in a dozen years, while the Giants did not play before a crowd exceeding 10,000 at Giants Stadium once in 2022.
The Giants have struggled to make an impact in the Sydney market.Credit: AFL Photos
The Suns, in particular, have struggled to retain talent and the new CEO should be looking at specific measures that make those clubs more successful on field (Suns) and in appealing to a largely disinterested market (GWS mostly).
These teams are going to soak up massive dollars over the next decade, and it would be wise to get their parlous houses in order first before looking for greenfield sites.
2. The talent pool is already so thin that most clubs are only a handful of injuries away from freefall and concussion protocols mean teams may need more players on call. The mid-season draft has become a necessity, such is the shortage of ruckmen and key backs.
If the growth to 18 teams has forced clubs to convert basketballers and cricketers, how will the talent pool look when there’s 19 – Tasmania, rightly, will get the whole state as a zone – and then 20 teams?
The Suns are yet to play in the AFL finals.Credit: Getty Images
The look of footy has improved since the coaches and players adjusted to the AFL’s rule changes of 2019-20. But the de-congesting rules cannot alone overcome a talent deficit. There will be some shoddy footy coming to your screen if the AFL expands the competition as if adding interchange players, from 18 to 20.
3. What is always lost in the hoopla of a new team is the reality that every expansion of the competition contracts the possibilities of the existing clubs.
For example, Tassie’s entry – which has a moral force that cannot be denied – will see Hawthorn and North Melbourne lose their secondary markets. That’s fair enough. But how will existing clubs find new supporters and players across the continent if the AFL keeps closing off those options?
The sentimental favourite for the 20th team, clearly, would be the NT, which would bring a heavily Indigenous flavour to a team in Darwin and which could encompass the whole Top End. It is a beguiling concept.
The NT population is less than half of Tasmania’s, however. I can’t see how an NT team would be viable, unless it was funded by either the AFL or governments to a staggering degree. Given that the Tassie stadium has caused such uproar about funding priorities (health, education, housing), one can only imagine the furore that a new stadium or government-funded team in Darwin would cause given the plight of Indigenous communities.
The Suns have priority access to the NT, and will need it for a while yet. Teams can expand their fan bases, too, by finding players and playing games in regions where there’s no team. If Canberra had a team, GWS would be compromised.
Should the AFL leap from 19 to 20 teams, without massive improvements in the self-reliance of the fragile 17th and 18th clubs – plus that of North, St Kilda, the Bulldogs, Melbourne, Port Adelaide and the Lions – then the competition will be further skewed towards clubs that are subsidised by headquarters.
Finally, every time a new team comes in, the chances of each club winning a premiership are reduced. Bombarded with betting ads on AFL “futures”, fans are entitled to odds of better than 20 to 1 on winning a flag.
The competition was orderly enough when there were 15 teams, between 1991 and 1994, and in that single season of 17 clubs. Clubs are accustomed to regular byes. An odd number doesn’t necessitate expansion.
Put talk of 20 teams on hold.
Keep up to date with the best AFL coverage in the country. Sign up for the Real Footy newsletter.
