Why the sale of home games to WA is a “shocking deal” for North Melbourne

North Melbourne’s expected foray into Western Australia is not a great deal for the club from a football point of view.

That is the opinion of Kane Cornes, who while admitting it makes sense commercially, feels this greatly disadvantages the Kangaroos from a sporting sense.

It is understood that the Roos will play home games against West Coast and Fremantle in Perth and possibly Bunbury across a three-year spell. It will likely net the club a total of $6 million.

Cornes believes that if North wants to begin climbing the ladder after five years down the bottom, playing two home games in Perth is detrimental to that goal even if the mooted money is much needed.

“Shocking deal for the football arm of the club,” Cornes said on SEN Breakfast.

“Of course North Melbourne have had to do things differently and the relationship with Hobart where they’ve got a terrible and hopeless win-loss record. They’ve had to do things like this.

“A great deal commercially for all parties. It makes sense for the AFL, it certainly makes sense for Tourism WA and it makes sense for both of the WA clubs who essentially get 12 home games. It does tick a lot of boxes.”

Cornes is adamant that a powerful competition such as the AFL simply should not be having clubs taking home games interstate in this day and age.

He feels for the North Melbourne faithful who may only get to see seven home games in Melbourne next year due to the ongoing relationship with Hobart which will continue to take a few games.

“I just feel sorry for North Melbourne fans in a league where we shouldn’t have to be doing this now,” he continued.

“The league has enough money and resources and a gigantic TV deal that we should not be in a position right now in 2024 where a club has had to sell two home games as far away as you can go and play.

“The disadvantage that has for the football aspect. We thought North would have turned things around from a football point of view, they’re not that far away from doing that and becoming a really relevant and competitive club again.

“This makes it hard.

“How do North fans feel about investing in your club, going through all the hard times, then you think we’re starting to see some signs that this could be a much better ride in the next five years… and you get seven home games.

“The best thing for the AFL to do here is to cut another cheque for $2 million and say, ‘North, take your nine home games (in Melbourne)’.”

Co-host Sam Edmund wonders if three years of commitment to WA will be harmful, particularly if Alastair Clarkson’s side has improved to a point where they’re in the finals mix in 2026 or 2027.

Edmund asked: “If it is a three-year deal, is it too long?

“By then they’ll be thinking, ‘We’re in the window, we should be contending’. So it’s one thing to do it now when you’re rebuilding and money is important, but when you’re in the nitty-gritty and there might be a one-win difference between third and sixth, if you’re the football department you can’t be happy with that.

“You’re going to be contending by then so you’re giving up two games.

“Will they still have to play away games in Perth? They’re selling their home games, they’re going to have play an away game there as well. So it could be three or four trips to Perth.”

Furthermore, Cornes commented on the possibility of the Roos playing back-to-back games in WA which he feels would be “brutal”.

“It’s a brutal, taxing fixture,” he said.

“They’ll spend two weeks there, be away from family. It’s brutal.

“This is why it will never be even, as much as the AFL thinks it wants to be even.

“They’ve got no hope of having an even fixture when you are enticing North Melbourne to go and play like this.

“I understand it, it’s just not ideal.”