interesting

All discussions to do with the SANFL

Re: interesting

Postby Interceptor » Wed Mar 09, 2011 5:04 pm

Eagles and Freo uniting in an attempt get reserves sides in the WAFL.

SA clubs next?
User avatar
Interceptor
League - Top 5
 
 
Posts: 2989
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 10:51 pm
Location: London, UK
Has liked: 7 times
Been liked: 25 times

Re: interesting

Postby PhilH » Wed Mar 09, 2011 7:38 pm

Personal Thought

1) I would rather have Crows and Power reserves sides playing in the VFL (teach them how to travel)
than
destroy the integrity of our SANFL league competition any further by having them enter the comp.

2) Of all the battles re SA Footballs Future this is the one that has the power to wreck the status of our comp.
User avatar
PhilH
League - Top 5
 
 
Posts: 3253
Joined: Sun Oct 30, 2005 12:04 am
Has liked: 11 times
Been liked: 163 times
Grassroots Team: Happy Valley

Re: interesting

Postby HOORAY PUNT » Wed Mar 09, 2011 7:57 pm

I dont think it will happen to be honest.

How would point 1 work ? Teach them how to travel ? You surely are joking ?
HOORAY PUNT
 

Re: interesting

Postby PhilH » Wed Mar 09, 2011 8:28 pm

Yes I am to an extent.

I dont really want any change in this area

But if the Crows/Power want to have their own teams so they can "develop" the players better then send them to the VFL. By doing so they will play in a similar competition (ie majority of players are AFL listed surplus and the aim is to develop not win premierships) plus they can develop the experience of regular interstate travel.
User avatar
PhilH
League - Top 5
 
 
Posts: 3253
Joined: Sun Oct 30, 2005 12:04 am
Has liked: 11 times
Been liked: 163 times
Grassroots Team: Happy Valley

Re: interesting

Postby PhilH » Wed Mar 09, 2011 8:31 pm

Plus one big differences between U18, TAC cup or suchlike is the fact that if you play AFL for a SA team you will be travelling every 2nd week. History shows that for most clubs (inparticular non victorian ones) this takes some time to get used to.
User avatar
PhilH
League - Top 5
 
 
Posts: 3253
Joined: Sun Oct 30, 2005 12:04 am
Has liked: 11 times
Been liked: 163 times
Grassroots Team: Happy Valley

Re: interesting

Postby Go Legs » Wed Mar 09, 2011 9:47 pm

We are having the same discussion on the legs forum as we speak.

My comments from that forum follows.

"G'day TM, good to hear from you by starting up a conversation.

I think this has been on the agenda for sometime with the 2 SA clubs of the AFL, but outwardly they are saying no everything works well within the SANFL clubs.

Where I sit (no conspiracy theory HBT) the whole purpose of Port Power combining with Port Magpies was enforced on the SANFL by the AFL to get :

1.The Power into the black
2. Eventually undermine the SANFL and WAFL insistance of AFL players being allocated a club in the SANFL/WA to guarantee a game when not selected to play
within the SANFL

As for the effect of having both clubs fielding a side each in the SANFL league (Not seconds, or under 18's etc) I raise these queries:

1. Wouldn't this upset the balance of having seconds play against the same rival at the same ground on a week by week basis
2. Cannot see any untoward effect on the under age comps.
3. AFL Clubs are only allowed 32 players on their list, plus rookies, where are all the other players coming from ?
4. Would the AFL reserves side be subjected to the same salary caps etc as the current SANFL clubs
5. Would the AFL reserves side be subjected to the same rules of ability to play in Finals, must have played min 5 games in the year/season to play finals.

The list goes on but that just an opening comment.

My gut feel is if this must happen, then let the AFL take it upon themselves to run their own comp as per that in Victoria at the moment, all transit costs
being born by the AFL and leave the SANFL/WANFL to their own strong comps permanantly taking out all AFL players and rookies.

The two immediate benefits to the SANFL Clubs are:

1. SANFL sides no longer barked at by AFL clubs as to how they handle its players (Aka D Rodan by Port Power club officials at Norwood Oval early last year)
2. No problems of AFL players electing not to play for allocated SANFL clubs after their AFL season has ended with real support by their AFL clubs

Oh and I forgot
3. No more unsettling of SANFL clubs with coming and going of players who have their own agenda not nescessarily that of the SANFL team game plan
4. No more withdrawal of AFL players at the very last minute (almost game time)
5. No more contentious problems of AFL players travelling with the team even though there is "no intention of playing them"

For what it is worth,

Cheers,
Last edited by Go Legs on Wed Mar 09, 2011 10:03 pm, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
Go Legs
Under 16s
 
 
Posts: 420
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2008 12:22 pm
Has liked: 0 time
Been liked: 0 time
Grassroots Team: Seaton Ramblers

Re: interesting

Postby Aerie » Wed Mar 09, 2011 9:54 pm

Lets just sit back and see how it works over in Perth for a few years. Might not be a bad thing. Biggest issue would be having enough players to fill the squad and where do those extra players come from?
User avatar
Aerie
Coach
 
 
Posts: 5749
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 1:05 am
Has liked: 186 times
Been liked: 590 times

Re: interesting

Postby Pseudo » Wed Mar 09, 2011 10:10 pm

I for one will never attend a game involving an AFL reserves team in the SANFL.

Hopefully enough of you lot hold this concept in similar regard, and hopefully the brainstrust of the SANFL aren't blinded by AFL dollars so much that they don't see this.

Keep AFL shit out of our sovereign league.
Clowns OUT. Smears OUT. RESIST THE OCCUPATION.
User avatar
Pseudo
Coach
 
 
Posts: 12252
Joined: Fri Oct 28, 2005 11:11 am
Location: enculez-vous
Has liked: 0 time
Been liked: 1656 times
Grassroots Team: Marion

Re: interesting

Postby PhilH » Wed Mar 09, 2011 10:18 pm

A while back they tried to a degree in WA with an "alignment" of an AFL club with WAFL club.

Was such a "success" it was soon disbanded back to a SANFL style model.

With this experienced the WAFL clubs are unlikely to agree to something similar a second time, unless they have no choice in the matter.
User avatar
PhilH
League - Top 5
 
 
Posts: 3253
Joined: Sun Oct 30, 2005 12:04 am
Has liked: 11 times
Been liked: 163 times
Grassroots Team: Happy Valley

Re: interesting

Postby Pseudo » Wed Mar 09, 2011 10:25 pm

PhilH wrote:A while back they tried to a degree in WA with an "alignment" of an AFL club with WAFL club.

Was such a "success" it was soon disbanded back to a SANFL style model.

With this experienced the WAFL clubs are unlikely to agree to something similar a second time, unless they have no choice in the matter.

It would actually be a third time, would it not? I thought the sandgropers had tried it twice already. Barto?

Just say NO to AFL garbage.
Clowns OUT. Smears OUT. RESIST THE OCCUPATION.
User avatar
Pseudo
Coach
 
 
Posts: 12252
Joined: Fri Oct 28, 2005 11:11 am
Location: enculez-vous
Has liked: 0 time
Been liked: 1656 times
Grassroots Team: Marion

Re: interesting

Postby Wedgie » Thu Mar 10, 2011 7:33 am

If it gets rid of the bye and gives me a chance to abuse some Crows fans then it's a big YES from me, I've always been a fan of this concept, so many more pros than cons.
Armchair expert wrote:Such a great club are Geelong
User avatar
Wedgie
Site Admin
 
 
Posts: 51721
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2005 8:00 am
Has liked: 2153 times
Been liked: 4093 times
Grassroots Team: Noarlunga

Re: interesting

Postby The Sleeping Giant » Thu Mar 10, 2011 7:58 am

Would be interested in reading your pros and cons list Wedgie.
Cannabis is safer than alcohol
User avatar
The Sleeping Giant
Coach
 
Posts: 13693
Joined: Sat Apr 04, 2009 7:49 pm
Location: Not dying alone
Has liked: 69 times
Been liked: 193 times

Re: interesting

Postby nickname » Thu Mar 10, 2011 8:00 am

Wedgie wrote:If it gets rid of the bye and gives me a chance to abuse some Crows fans then it's a big YES from me, I've always been a fan of this concept, so many more pros than cons.


How would adding two teams get rid of the bye?
Also, I can't think of one 'pro' that outweighs the 'con' of destroying the integrity of the competition.
nickname
League Bench Warmer
 
 
Posts: 1366
Joined: Tue Jan 01, 2008 5:33 pm
Has liked: 0 time
Been liked: 0 time

Re: interesting

Postby Wedgie » Thu Mar 10, 2011 8:07 am

nickname wrote:
Wedgie wrote:If it gets rid of the bye and gives me a chance to abuse some Crows fans then it's a big YES from me, I've always been a fan of this concept, so many more pros than cons.


How would adding two teams get rid of the bye?
Also, I can't think of one 'pro' that outweighs the 'con' of destroying the integrity of the competition.


1 would be added, the Powers reserves side would be the Magpies.
More supporters, more games, more coverage, more money, no byes, all good!
Integrity is fairy tale stuff and irrelevant IMHO. If anything it would gain integrity in more peoples eyes.
Just my opinion though, my opinion also is that it would never happen, it's a bit too progressive for a lot of people in this state, a bit like having a decent sports stadium! ;)
Armchair expert wrote:Such a great club are Geelong
User avatar
Wedgie
Site Admin
 
 
Posts: 51721
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2005 8:00 am
Has liked: 2153 times
Been liked: 4093 times
Grassroots Team: Noarlunga

Re: interesting

Postby nickname » Thu Mar 10, 2011 8:50 am

You should advise the AFL that integrity is irrelevant so they can stop spending so much time, energy and money on it.
nickname
League Bench Warmer
 
 
Posts: 1366
Joined: Tue Jan 01, 2008 5:33 pm
Has liked: 0 time
Been liked: 0 time

Re: interesting

Postby Wedgie » Thu Mar 10, 2011 8:57 am

nickname wrote:You should advise the AFL that integrity is irrelevant so they can stop spending so much time, energy and money on it.

Really? But so many on here tell me they try to do the opposite! :lol:
Armchair expert wrote:Such a great club are Geelong
User avatar
Wedgie
Site Admin
 
 
Posts: 51721
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2005 8:00 am
Has liked: 2153 times
Been liked: 4093 times
Grassroots Team: Noarlunga

Re: interesting

Postby gossipgirl » Thu Mar 10, 2011 9:22 am

Pseudo wrote:I for one will never attend a game involving an AFL reserves team in the SANFL.

Hopefully enough of you lot hold this concept in similar regard, and hopefully the brainstrust of the SANFL aren't blinded by AFL dollars so much that they don't see this.

Keep AFL shit out of our sovereign league.


were you away in 1991 ????
Adelaide Crows World champions 2017 - Crows 4.11 to Lions 4.5
gossipgirl
League - Best 21
 
 
Posts: 1672
Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2009 6:04 pm
Location: Looking for all the Boats
Has liked: 1541 times
Been liked: 57 times
Grassroots Team: Boston

Re: interesting

Postby The Sleeping Giant » Thu Mar 10, 2011 9:48 am

Wedgie wrote:If it gets rid of the bye and gives me a chance to abuse some Crows fans


You had me at abuse crows fans.
Cannabis is safer than alcohol
User avatar
The Sleeping Giant
Coach
 
Posts: 13693
Joined: Sat Apr 04, 2009 7:49 pm
Location: Not dying alone
Has liked: 69 times
Been liked: 193 times

Re: interesting

Postby Barto » Thu Mar 10, 2011 11:09 am

I really don't know if they've thought it through too well. If they both have a team in the WAFL, does this mean an 11 team comp or are they hoping a club falls over?

If they have a team in the league, then that has to be topped up with local players and if players are injured do they propose having a WAFL ressies as well? If not what happens to their WAFL opponents ressies that week? What about colts? Are they still expecting the WAFL clubs to do all the player development in their zone and then just top up the Freo/Eagles WAFL clubs?

It's way too messy for mine. If the Eagles want to keep their players under one club banner, then force the host club arrangement back into place. If they do this, then there may as well be no second tier state leagues at all and have an AFL reserves comp.
It's all the SANFL's fault.
User avatar
Barto
Veteran
 
 
Posts: 3736
Joined: Sun Feb 19, 2006 4:40 pm
Location: Fremantle
Has liked: 3 times
Been liked: 6 times

Re: interesting

Postby Hazydog » Thu Mar 10, 2011 11:12 am

I find this quote interesting...""We wouldn't undermine the integrity of the competition," he said. "You're in it to win."

Any AFL reserve side would have too many conflicts of interest to achieve this IMHO.

Anyway - it's been discussed at length previously and we all pretty well know the pros & cons.

If the 2 SA AFL sides decided that this was what they wanted and pursued it - I would see the outcome as a real indication as to whether the SANFL is actually in control of it's own destiny or, as some would believe, at the beck and call of the AFL.

Interesting times alright..
Players win touches, Teams win matches, Clubs win Premierships.
User avatar
Hazydog
League Bench Warmer
 
 
Posts: 1275
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2005 10:02 pm
Location: Paralowie
Has liked: 184 times
Been liked: 242 times

PreviousNext

Board index   Football  SANFL

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 12 guests

Around the place

Competitions   SANFL Official Site | Country Footy SA | Southern Football League | VFL Footy
Club Forums   Snouts Louts | The Roost | Redlegs Forum |