by Aerie » Thu Dec 04, 2014 8:08 pm
by JK » Fri Dec 05, 2014 2:04 am
Aerie wrote:Was disappointing hearing John Olsen essentially say the SANFL clubs will not see any cash in the foreseeable future for the sale of West Lakes. Surprise, surprise. The only reason I can now see the SANFL clubs remaining somewhat relevant is to give decent competition to the Port and Crows Reserves and of course, to continue to develop players to get drafted.
by mighty_tiger_79 » Fri Dec 05, 2014 9:41 am
by stan » Fri Dec 05, 2014 12:40 pm
mighty_tiger_79 wrote:so basically the AFL have won
by Hazydog » Fri Dec 05, 2014 12:57 pm
Aerie wrote:Was disappointing hearing John Olsen essentially say the SANFL clubs will not see any cash in the foreseeable future for the sale of West Lakes. Surprise, surprise. The only reason I can now see the SANFL clubs remaining somewhat relevant is to give decent competition to the Port and Crows Reserves and of course, to continue to develop players to get drafted.
by mighty_tiger_79 » Fri Dec 05, 2014 3:24 pm
by kickinit » Sat Dec 06, 2014 1:47 pm
stan wrote:mighty_tiger_79 wrote:so basically the AFL have won
I wouldnt say that exactly. Its true that most young players want to play at the top level and thats the AFL. But in terms of survival etc I think the SANFL will be ok. The key is Adelaide Oval in which the SANFL have 4 seats on the SMA that is 8 overall. The AFL clubs have no say and really the AFL has no say in regards to the SMA. Hence the SANFL is well placed in this regards.
But the issue is that you have Honest John talking about feeder comps and really, 71mil which every way you look at it is very interesting to hear that the clubs wont see anything. So where is the money going? Because the SANFL dont need to prop up Port anymore as they are not the SANFL's problem. Its an AFL problem now.
by stan » Sat Dec 06, 2014 2:30 pm
kickinit wrote:stan wrote:mighty_tiger_79 wrote:so basically the AFL have won
I wouldnt say that exactly. Its true that most young players want to play at the top level and thats the AFL. But in terms of survival etc I think the SANFL will be ok. The key is Adelaide Oval in which the SANFL have 4 seats on the SMA that is 8 overall. The AFL clubs have no say and really the AFL has no say in regards to the SMA. Hence the SANFL is well placed in this regards.
But the issue is that you have Honest John talking about feeder comps and really, 71mil which every way you look at it is very interesting to hear that the clubs wont see anything. So where is the money going? Because the SANFL dont need to prop up Port anymore as they are not the SANFL's problem. Its an AFL problem now.
The SANFL have 4 seats at the moment.
by Aerie » Sat Dec 06, 2014 6:28 pm
by kickinit » Sun Dec 07, 2014 10:12 am
stan wrote:kickinit wrote:stan wrote:mighty_tiger_79 wrote:so basically the AFL have won
I wouldnt say that exactly. Its true that most young players want to play at the top level and thats the AFL. But in terms of survival etc I think the SANFL will be ok. The key is Adelaide Oval in which the SANFL have 4 seats on the SMA that is 8 overall. The AFL clubs have no say and really the AFL has no say in regards to the SMA. Hence the SANFL is well placed in this regards.
But the issue is that you have Honest John talking about feeder comps and really, 71mil which every way you look at it is very interesting to hear that the clubs wont see anything. So where is the money going? Because the SANFL dont need to prop up Port anymore as they are not the SANFL's problem. Its an AFL problem now.
The SANFL have 4 seats at the moment.
Yeah thats what I said. Let me know if that changes, I doubt it will.
by Reddeer » Sun Dec 07, 2014 1:34 pm
by kickinit » Sun Dec 07, 2014 3:26 pm
Reddeer wrote:How can he be regarded as independent if he has spent 14 years on an AFL clubs board. The infiltration is completed.
Thanks Olsen
by stan » Sun Dec 07, 2014 6:39 pm
kickinit wrote:stan wrote:kickinit wrote:stan wrote:[quote="mighty_tiger_79"]so basically the AFL have won
I wouldnt say that exactly. Its true that most young players want to play at the top level and thats the AFL. But in terms of survival etc I think the SANFL will be ok. The key is Adelaide Oval in which the SANFL have 4 seats on the SMA that is 8 overall. The AFL clubs have no say and really the AFL has no say in regards to the SMA. Hence the SANFL is well placed in this regards.
But the issue is that you have Honest John talking about feeder comps and really, 71mil which every way you look at it is very interesting to hear that the clubs wont see anything. So where is the money going? Because the SANFL dont need to prop up Port anymore as they are not the SANFL's problem. Its an AFL problem now.
The SANFL have 4 seats at the moment.
Yeah thats what I said. Let me know if that changes, I doubt it will.
by Jim05 » Sun Dec 07, 2014 7:23 pm
by Bounce of the ball » Sun Dec 07, 2014 7:39 pm
Jim05 wrote:Any truth that South are in strife?
Hearing a decent loss recorded this year.
Find it hard to believe, dont they pay nothing at Noarlunga?
by Wedgie » Sun Dec 07, 2014 8:02 pm
Armchair expert wrote:Such a great club are Geelong
by stan » Sun Dec 07, 2014 8:08 pm
Wedgie wrote:Hurley getting one of the SANFL spots on the SMA board is disaterous news for the SANFL clubs!
by Jim05 » Sun Dec 07, 2014 8:10 pm
Wedgie wrote:Hurley getting one of the SANFL spots on the SMA board is disaterous news for the SANFL clubs!
by JK » Sun Dec 07, 2014 8:18 pm
Jim05 wrote:Any truth that South are in strife?
Hearing a decent loss recorded this year.
Find it hard to believe, dont they pay nothing at Noarlunga?
by RB » Sun Dec 07, 2014 8:24 pm
Wedgie wrote:Hurley getting one of the SANFL spots on the SMA board is disaterous news for the SANFL clubs!
Competitions SANFL Official Site | Country Footy SA | Southern Football League | VFL Footy
Club Forums Snouts Louts | The Roost | Redlegs Forum |