Will Ports Proposal be passed by the SANFL Clubs?

[Thiele]

I dont think so.

[eddie eagle]

There is no way in hell I'd want my club to vote for anything that assists the Backstabbing traitors of SA Footy in any way. Going by the AGM Q&A I fear that they might and that would be disgraceful. Where were Port when North & Sturt were struggling?

[Reddeer]

I hope not

[Booney]

There is no way in hell I'd want my club to vote for anything that assists the Backstabbing traitors of SA Footy in any way. Going by the AGM Q&A I fear that they might and that would be disgraceful. Where were Port when North & Sturt were struggling?

Perhaps the club has put more head than heart into its decision making?

[Hondo]

Apparently there's a Rucci report saying there's now no vote tonight now because the clubs have deferred the decision back to the SANFL Commission to decide in 30 days.

This right?

Found it ....

http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/sport/por ... public_rss

[CUTTERMAN]

Previously it's been Adelaide, then the Power, now it looks like it's going to be North Adelaide he has in his sights for his petty grievences. Aside from that, the Adelaide Now polls are devicive and ask the questions which direct the required answer for the the article.

[Barto]

Apparently there's a Rucci report saying there's now no vote tonight now because the clubs have deferred the decision back to the SANFL Commission to decide in 30 days.

This right?

Found it ....

http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/sport/por ... public_rss

Christ on a bike, it may as well be a thread from the Port forum at Big Footy rather than "journalism".

[am Bays]

Interested to read Rucci reporting that a posse of past magpies players, officials and supporters will be congregating ouside Footy Park in a "guard of honour" for the SANFL Directors to walk through/past. Interesting strategy, one word out of place to Garry Metcalfe and I can assure the Port horde that if he was wavering it will help make up his mind and not in the way they would hope.

For what it is worth, Garry refused to reveal which way Glenelg would vote at last nights AGM, due to confidentiality agreement with the other clubs. He did say that Glenelg's decision is only based on is it appropriate for an SANFL club and AFL to merge and is that in the best interests of Footy in this state. Other factors such as 1990 will have nothing to do with our decision (or a Port horde at Footy Pk).

[Wedgie]

I found that interesting as it's possible to get into the meeting room from at least a dozen different ways, the directors and SANFL people will only walk past them if they choose to.

[on the rails]

Interested to read Rucci reporting that a posse of past magpies players, officials and supporters will be congregating ouside Footy Park in a "guard of honour" for the SANFL Directors to walk through/past. Interesting strategy, one word out of place to Garry Metcalfe and I can assure the Port horde that if he was wavering it will help make up his mind and not in the way they would hope.

For what it is worth, Garry refused to reveal which way Glenelg would vote at last nights AGM, due to confidentiality agreement with the other clubs. He did say that Glenelg's decision is only based on is it appropriate for an SANFL club and AFL to merge and is that in the best interests of Footy in this state. Other factors such as 1990 will have nothing to do with our decision (or a Port horde at Footy Pk).

Good luck in getting Port people to believe anything other than what they choose to believe!

[Dogwatcher]

Today's articles really pasted Bohdan Jaworskyj (apologies on spelling) and suggested he look at Dave Boyd's vote in 1990.
Rucci is assuming that a Port/Port merger is what is best for SA football in both of those pieces.
Why is it the best for SA football?
I'm not advocating a stance for or against but nowhere in his articles did he explain why a Port/Port merger is best for football in this state.
Maybe he did and I just missed it, apologies if so.

[Barto]

Today's articles really pasted Bohdan Jaworskyj (apologies on spelling) and suggested he look at Dave Boyd's vote in 1990.
Rucci is assuming that a Port/Port merger is what is best for SA football in both of those pieces.
Why is it the best for SA football?
I'm not advocating a stance for or against but nowhere in his articles did he explain why a Port/Port merger is best for football in this state.
Maybe he did and I just missed it, apologies if so.

Rucci is naturally suggesting what is best for Port.

[Dogwatcher]

Correct but is it best for SA football.
I'm just following his line of argument.

[on the rails]

Today's articles really pasted Bohdan Jaworskyj (apologies on spelling) and suggested he look at Dave Boyd's vote in 1990.
Rucci is assuming that a Port/Port merger is what is best for SA football in both of those pieces.
Why is it the best for SA football?
I'm not advocating a stance for or against but nowhere in his articles did he explain why a Port/Port merger is best for football in this state.
Maybe he did and I just missed it, apologies if so.

Not one of his articles has suggested any benefit to SA Football other than the suggestion that it could improve the PAFC by $1 million a year and ultimately lessen the burden on the SANFL. However if it takes on a club like the Magpies that needs to be financed to put teams on the park plus they allegedly need to spend on the POW to be more commercially viable - that will soon eat into any $1 million annual saving surely? Rucci or Port Adelaide have yet to publically show financial "in's and out's" and supposed benefits and this is one area that caused great concern amongst most of the other 8 SANFL clubs when presented with the proposal - the figures don't add up and in fact may cause the SANFL to pump more money into the PAFC which would also mean the Magpies in truth under the proposed merger arrangements.

[redandblack]

Correct, otr.

Neither Port club is in any financial position to do anything other than go cap in hand to the SANFL.

Seeing they're like that, the SANFL is correspondingly less able to pour funds into them in return.

[beenreal]

Interested to read Rucci reporting that a posse of past magpies players, officials and supporters will be congregating ouside Footy Park in a "guard of honour" for the SANFL Directors to walk through/past. Interesting strategy, one word out of place to Garry Metcalfe and I can assure the Port horde that if he was wavering it will help make up his mind and not in the way they would hope.

For what it is worth, Garry refused to reveal which way Glenelg would vote at last nights AGM, due to confidentiality agreement with the other clubs. He did say that Glenelg's decision is only based on is it appropriate for an SANFL club and AFL to merge and is that in the best interests of Footy in this state. Other factors such as 1990 will have nothing to do with our decision (or a Port horde at Footy Pk).

Good luck in getting Port people to believe anything other than what they choose to believe!

Right back at you!

[TimmiesChin]

For what it is worth, Garry refused to reveal which way Glenelg would vote at last nights AGM, due to confidentiality agreement with the other clubs.

Well this statement probably makes it clear which way the bays will vote.

He did say that Glenelg's decision is only based on is it appropriate for an SANFL club and AFL to merge and is that in the best interests of Footy in this state.

I'd suggest thats the correct approach. If clubs come to the same conclusion, but can honestly say the above was their criteria, then the result will be the correct one.

[grant j]

Probably a dumb question but
IF the "Admin" merger goes thru does this mean the annual dividend from the Adelaide Crows to the Magpies will go directly to Port Power??

and if the merger doesn't solve their financial problems (which it probably wont) how many times will the SANFL be obligated to bail the PAFC ( both Power & Magpies) out???

[Barto]

and if the merger doesn't solve their financial problems (which it probably wont) how many times will the SANFL be obligated to bail the PAFC ( both Power & Magpies) out???

Would it be continuously if the SANFL own the licence?

[JK]

Probably a dumb question but
IF the "Admin" merger goes thru does this mean the annual dividend from the Adelaide Crows to the Magpies will go directly to Port Power??

I made comment about this in one of the other threads and don't think it's a dumb question at all ... Given the Magpies would receive $xoo,ooo in reduced costs above the other SANFL clubs AND the Crows concerns (which I'd imagine would exist) about forwarding a dividend to an AFL rival, I reckon any agreement would need to see the Magpies cough this up.