Veteran journalist and former Channel Ten commentator Tim Line has made his views on the Carter Report known in no uncertain terms during a radio interview on Friday night.
Lane's outlook has arisen after former Geelong president Colin Carter's report into the viability of a 19th AFL team in Tasmania was made public on Friday morning.
The league has also issued a statement on their findings from Carter's 31-page document.
Despite the aforesaid report suggesting that a standalone team in the Apple Isle was more than capable of being set up and maintained, Carter also put forth a pair of other options such as relocating a Victorian team south of the border or having such a team split their home games between Melbourne and Tasmania.
Speaking with Carter on 3AW prior to the commencement of Richmond's clash with GWS at Marvel Stadium, Lane stated that either of these latter proposals were insulting.
Here is the full transcript of the conversation between the pair as first published byย Fox Sportsย on Friday night.
Tim Lane: The report begins with some words of yours to Richard Goyder the chairman and Gillon McLachlan, the CEO, and you say that the case against Tasmania argues that the club will be a financial drain and that in any case Tasmanians are losing interest. I have to say I found those last four words, right at the front of your report, a gross distortion of reality. Where did that come from?
Colin Carter: Well Tim I think you have to accept that a lot of people have been opposed to the idea of Tasmania and that is the nub of the issue. It seems to me that if I had just simply prepared a report which dealt with and endorsed the arguments that people who are pro-Tasmania make, it wouldโve had no credibility. What Iโve done is dismantle one by one, all the arguments against even a 19th license report very clearly takes dozens of arguments made against it, dispatches them and says a 19th license is at a minimum what should go ahead. There are any number of people who said to me that people are losing interest down there and you wonโt get enough support ...
TL: Which people were they?
CC: Some of the people I spoke to. Iโm surprised, Iโm astonished actually that I heard a couple of people on talkback radio today ....
ย
TL: But you canโt take notice of isolated voices like that. This is aboutย something much bigger than that surely?
CC:ย Well Tim why do you think there hasnโt been a team now for the last 50 years?
TL: Because the AFL hasnโt had the will to do it.
CC:ย No, there have been a lot of arguments against it. Youโre welcome to have a view which says that none of those arguments against should have ever been listened to let alone dealt with. Iโm surprised that, given the fact Iโve come out with a clear endorsement for a team in Tasmania even, if something better isnโt established, a 19th team, that youโre attacking the messenger, I find that a bit extraordinary.
TL:ย Well I find and found reading the report, it seems to me that your options in order of preference are a relocation and a joint venture equal-first and a true Tasmanian team, a 19th team in the competition, third. Would that be fair to say?
CC: I think itโs fair to say that I firmly believe that the 19th team would be one of the smaller, less financially secure teams in the competition. I absolutely believe theyโve got a right to be there because they will not be the smallest team or the most vulnerable, but thatโs the position that I think theyโll have. Iโm simply making the case that if you want to talk about a team that is going to be at least in the middle ranks of the AFL wealth ladder, it has to have a slice of the Melbourne market as well, which means that you should at least consider that. If people donโt want to consider it -ย and by the way that decision will be made by club boards and by their members and so the AFL canโt force this down anybodyโs throat - so in that sense, Iโm not quite sure what youโre why youโre so worried. It seems to me to be pretty logical that if the teamโs going to be one of the smaller ones, one at least ought to at least point out ways in which it could strengthen its position.
ย
TL: But what youโve just said smacks of the mentality of the early commissions, of which you were a part, when they entertained and actually worked towards mergers. Graham Samuel, when he stepped down from the commission some years later, said to me that if weโd gone that route - the one that he once recommended with six clubs entering three mergers - we would have torn the heart out of the competition. He had reconsidered all of this and yet it seems to me that in preferring these kind of artificial means of setting up a team for a heartland state you are venturing back into that kind of territory where business is more important than having a heart and soul football club. Iโm not being stupid about this, I donโt imagine that you can have a team without having a reasonable business model, but there has been a task force which has come up with what Iโd have thought was a reasonable business model, and yet weโre still kind of tilting towards the idea of something which diminishes the idea of a heart and soul club.
CC: Well Tim I donโt agree with what youโve said but I obviously wonโt be convincing you. I think the business case that I was asked to look at was a good business case but included a couple of elements, for example that the additional TV revenues would more than offset the distribution which of course makes it closer to a slam dunk but that was not accepted by a number of people ...
TL: But how come the average amount of money derived per club, under the current rights agreement of $17 million, is brought down to $4 million for Tasmania?
CC: Tim you didnโt let me finish my sentence then. Thatโs a judgment and in fact what I think I did which was good, Iโve managed to establish that even if that assumption doesnโt hold true, the case for the team still stacks up. Iโm astonished that you canโt see that. If all Iโd done is accept the assumptions that have been put up and said โyeah theyโre all rightโ, people who donโt accept those assumptions would therefore say that weโve wasted their time. What Iโve done is established a good case to saying even if that assumption does not hold up, the case for a Tasmanian team is valid. Canโt you see that?
TL: Can I just in conclusion put to you by way of explanation for the strength of my feelings about this, that Iโm assured that having pushed for the development of AFLW that when Geelong werenโt included at the outset you were livid and you were kept waiting for a couple of years. I hope you understand how Tasmanians feel after waiting for a couple of decades and more.
CC: I do Tim and Iโm disappointed that having read my report you donโt see me as solidly in your camp, and perhaps Iโm hoping that the difference between us is simply I have a slightly different view to you about the way to get home on this and get through the various obstacles.
TL: Well youโve put down pegs on three different campsites, I can only see one thatโs suitable for the green jumper, but thank you for your efforts and thanks for joining us tonight.
ย
We don’t want a team to move here, we want our own team. No one here wants Hawthorn or Kangaroos as a Tasmanian team. Try talking to the footy fans of Tassie instead of a select few.