Now that the gloves are off between Hawthorn and the Devils in the battle for the hearts and minds of Tasmania’s north, it’s worth considering the surprising and continued silence from the AFL on what has become a sore spot for the game’s 19-year-old club.
Just months after the Devils settled a discrimination and vandalism dispute over their new Hobart home ground at Macquarie Point.the new club faces another crisis. Tasmanian CEO Brendon Gale on Tuesday doubled down his claim to this legend 12 months ago that Hawthorn should leave the state at the end of next season.
For Gale to spark a debate this week was not timely, but it is a debate that the game’s bosses should have resolved for his club before now. The AFL’s inaction now sees Gale’s Devils at risk of being seen as the bad guys when they have worked so hard to unify the government.
Quite simply, the Tasmanian team that will play its VFL debut in Hobart on Saturday wants Hawthorn to leave the state after 2027 according to a business case approved by 18 clubs in 2024. Hawthorn, who won 80 per cent of their games in Launceston and will reap more than $9 million from the state government to share their two-year contract with UTA for two years. games per year.
The central office’s failure to take a stand in a debate that has confused Tasmanian football fans and divided the market it vowed to unite underscores the lack of effective leadership that has often characterized Dillon’s time in the job. Except it points to something – from the Devils’ position – more alarming, that the AFL is entertaining a two-team format.
Hawthorn boss Ashley Klein this week confirmed the AFL was working on a two-team market in Launceston from 2028, the first season the Devils will play most of their games at UTAS. This is despite a business case approved by the clubs and the commission, and a strong position taken by the Tasmanian board that, for the club to be strong and sustainable, it needs the whole of government behind it. The claims have shocked and baffled the Devils, and are even more confronting given that Macquarie Point Stadium won’t be ready until at least 2031.
Dillon was not available for comment.
Klein told this newspaper: “Our understanding is that the AFL is doing an analysis on what our proposal would look like if Hawthorn were to stay. On what it would be for Hawthorn, for the Devils, and for football in the state and for tourism.
“Our intention and what we want after 25 years of a 100-year history is to continue to play football in Tasmania. Everything we have done for the community, grassroots football and our brand shows how united we are. We could not stop the Devils, we would leave the community and the grassroots partnership for a new team. We see the partnership moving forward as a partnership to move forward. Tasmania we think will be better for the game and better for the state.
“I can appreciate that they (Devils) have taken a different approach, and if I were Brendon (Gale) I would be following the same path. But there is no other state in Australia that has a whole home sports market.”
Klein’s comments contradict last week’s lengthy meeting in Hobart between Tasmanian chairman Grant O’Brien and his board, and new AFL Commission chairman Craig Drummond and Dillon’s No. 2, Tom Harley. Devils bosses then reiterated their desire for the AFL to finally take a stand and clarified that Hawthorn’s current deal with Tasmania would be final.
O’Brien said the suggestion the AFL was investigating the prospect of a two-team model in Tasmania was news to him. He likened the situation to that of Geelong participating in the GMHBA Stadium.
Speaking to the legend from North Hobart Oval on the eve of the sold-out VFL clash with Coburg, O’Brien said: “I think the time has come when Hawthorn doesn’t want to leave but the prospect of having two teams based on our population is like suggesting two teams playing away from Geelong. I’m sure Geelong is not happy about that.
“The 19th license proposal has never been a two-team proposal, and it was made clear in the taskforce report. If there is any doubt about that it is up to the AFL to clarify.
“Hawthorn has been good for the state and Hawthorn has taken a lot of benefits from the government. But it’s a bit difficult from an integration point of view to see a team playing out of Hobart and two teams playing out of Launceston. Hawthorn, in fairness to them, have a government sponsorship, but the agreement was that from 2028 the Tasmanian Football Club would be clean.”
It’s true the new club has work to do in Launceston and the lack of clarity over Hawthorn’s future doesn’t help. The Hawks will leave their Tasmanian logo on their bases in 2027 but have now reached a new and separate two-year sponsorship deal with Launceston City Council.
For years, the AFL privately blamed divisions across the state for the game’s failure to support the Tasmanian team and now the Hawks continue to muddy the waters, thanks to the AFL’s inaction.
The Devils last month signed one of the sport’s most lucrative long-term sponsorships – a seven-year partnership with homegrown Blundstone worth an estimated $24 million – but the financial support from the north is nowhere near that matchup in the south of the state.
Hawthorn boasts a Tasmanian membership of 8000. As the head office is well aware, Tasmanian football fans are all flocking to another AFL club and indeed failing to take a stand on Hawthorn’s future is only harming the Devils’ progress. Ditto the state government, which has pledged $12 million a year to the Devils for 12 years.
Hawthorn points to the fact that the Tasmanian government – in fact both parties – supported a two-party model in Launceston in the run-up to last year’s election. But neither side wanted to risk losing Hawthorn’s votes. And Hawthorn’s future is not with the government; it is up to the AFL, which dictates the schedule for the home and away season.
So Drummond and Dillon need to take a stand. Likewise, O’Brien and Gale don’t want to be seen as the new club that kicked Hawthorn out of the state. Not only would that be bad for business and bad for the Devils’ image, but it’s an unfair idea because it’s wrong.
The AFL’s 19th license proposal is regulated by the AFL. All his plans were supported by a one-team model in a state with a population of about 580,000. The game’s head office may have a new chairman but the delay in action should not be blamed on a change in leadership. A specific call for Hawthorn to leave Tasmania should have been made in 2025. And any business analysis carried out by the AFL on behalf of the Hawks where Tasmania is concerned should consider a farewell tour and a bigger future at the MCG.
Stay tuned for the best AFL news in the country. Subscribe to the Real Footy newsletter.
Caroline Wilson is an award-winning Walkley columnist and former senior football writer for The Age.Connect through email address.
