AFL Reserves Discussion...

[RB]

According to Olsen, '(t)he alternative to this course of action exposes the SANFL to reduced corporate interest and reduced media coverage while also threatening the relevance of the competition as the best outside of the AFL.'

What an utterly defeatist attitude. You can make bad decisions based on good reasons or bad decisions based on bad reasons. Fear is the worst reason of all IMO for destroying the SANFL as we know it. One can only hope the clubs aren't scared into voting yes by this sort of bulls**t from the commission.

[TimmiesChin]

According to Olsen, '(t)he alternative to this course of action exposes the SANFL to reduced corporate interest and reduced media coverage while also threatening the relevance of the competition as the best outside of the AFL.'

What an utterly defeatist attitude. You can make bad decisions based on good reasons or bad decisions based on bad reasons. Fear is the worst reason of all IMO for destroying the SANFL as we know it. One can only hope the clubs aren't scared into voting yes by this sort of bulls**t from the commission.

Didn't Olsen also sell off ETSA to the highest bidder..

[Dogwatcher]

According to Olsen, '(t)he alternative to this course of action exposes the SANFL to reduced corporate interest and reduced media coverage while also threatening the relevance of the competition as the best outside of the AFL.'

What an utterly defeatist attitude. You can make bad decisions based on good reasons or bad decisions based on bad reasons. Fear is the worst reason of all IMO for destroying the SANFL as we know it. One can only hope the clubs aren't scared into voting yes by this sort of bulls**t from the commission.

Didn't Olsen also sell off ETSA to the highest bidder..

Don't start an SA politics argument, please. Leave it at SANFL politics

[tipper]

According to Olsen, '(t)he alternative to this course of action exposes the SANFL to reduced corporate interest and reduced media coverage while also threatening the relevance of the competition as the best outside of the AFL.'

What an utterly defeatist attitude. You can make bad decisions based on good reasons or bad decisions based on bad reasons. Fear is the worst reason of all IMO for destroying the SANFL as we know it. One can only hope the clubs aren't scared into voting yes by this sort of bulls**t from the commission.

those reasons are invalid anyway, when the afl starts their own reserves comp in a few years (which we all know will happen), we will be faced with those exact problems then anyway. personally i would prefer that we face them now, before we completely destroy our comp, and on our own terms, rather than in a couple of years time after we have ruined crowd numbers and the afl sides leave us a shell of what we once were.

face it now and be pro active in managing any fallout, rather than reactive after our fate is no longer in our hands.

[smac]

I take heart from this received in an email this morning.

I think the clubs will tell the commission to choke on it.

[Booney]

So Port look to have officially pulled out. Should make some here happy.

That happened several weeks ago and there was hardly a mention of it on here.

[topsywaldron]

I take heart from this received in an email this morning.

I think the clubs will tell the commission to choke on it.

And hopefully a vote of no confidence in the commission to follow.

[smac]

I take heart from this received in an email this morning.

I think the clubs will tell the commission to choke on it.

And hopefully a vote of no confidence in the commission to follow.

Absolutely. If they want to pants down and bend over for the AFL clubs whilst negotiating their sale, I have no faith in their actions once the licence is actually gone.

[topsywaldron]

Does anyone know the process for removing the commission?

Can it be done?

Given a majority of clubs appear to support the recommendation though it's not as if there's a will for it happen though.

[tipper]

So Port look to have officially pulled out. Should make some here happy.

That happened several weeks ago and there was hardly a mention of it on here.

there was barely a mention as the fight is not over. i know its hard for port people to accept, but the whole "NO AFL IN THA SANFL" was never just about the power. it is against any afl reserves side. the posts focused mainly on port early on as they were in the media with their wants more, and they had people on here spruiking their line. bit hard to argue against the crows when no one is chanpioning their line (until recently)

sorry to shatter the illusions of the anti port conspiracy brigade

[on the rails]

Does anyone know the process for removing the commission?

Can it be done?

Given a majority of clubs appear to support the recommendation though it's not as if there's a will for it happen though.

The Directors elect the "Independent" Commission members so the first task is for Clubs to change their League Director (normally the President / Chairman) to a anti-AFL Director and then the Directors can boot the Commission out.

Looking at the politics of the SANFL - it is unlikely any of the current Directors except for Joe Tripodi would stand up to them? Pity Gary Metcalfe stood down from the Bays to seek a spot on the Commission. It is now clear why he didn't get on.

[Jimmy]

Why can't the 8 clubs break away and form a new league and sack all the afl players?

[Jimmy]

The model in detail says nothing about how the Port SANFL operations will be organised. Will there be a junior grade structure or will the PAM AFL reserves team be stand alone?

"AFL clubs to commit to not recruiting support staff directly from SANFL clubs." - simply unenforceable.

"18 minor round matches over 21 weeks" - conveniently shortened to fit in with AFL scheduling.

"Reduced by $20,000 per SANFL club as acknowledgement of reduction in minor round matches" - So the dinkum SANFL players should get a pay cut to accommodate AFL teams? Good luck getting the players to agree to that.

"AFL clubs to commit to the SANFL competition for 15 years, reviewed by the SANFL on a yearly basis" TRANSLATION: AFL clubs will review their commitment on a yearly basis.

"AFC will not have a home venue; will play as away team throughout the minor round. " And what about the Port reserves team? They still get home matches? So much for equality between the AFL teams.

And the most laughable claim of all is this final piece of scaremongering:

“The alternative to this course of action exposes the SANFL to reduced corporate interest and reduced media coverage while also threatening the relevance of the competition as the best outside of the AFL.”

Bulldust, Olsen. Paying dinkum SANFL players less while expecting them to play in the shadows of their AFL counterparts will do damage to the relevance of the competition - in the eyes of the SANFL supporters and players.

Or, as smacker more succinctly put it: **** off.

Great post mate

X1000

[Booney]

Why can't the 8 clubs break away and form a new league and sack all the afl players?

You cant be serious?

[on the rails]

Why can't the 8 clubs break away and form a new league and sack all the afl players?

They could but that would take massive balls and someone or some very wealthy group to bank roll it!

[passionatelegsfan]

Why can't the 8 clubs break away and form a new league and sack all the afl players?

Because if you believe what the Adevertiser says all the SANFL clubs are on board except Norwood. Its funny you saying that though i just read a commment on Adelaide now that suggested that Norwood should leave the SANFL and go and play in the SAAFL. Personally this is what i would like to see happen in the event that the crows and power get their reserves sides. I can handle Norwood playing at a lesser level because my needs are only that Norwood exist in their own right and play in a meaningful competition. don't really give a **** abou the standard of play to be honest.

[Booney]

Why can't the 8 clubs break away and form a new league and sack all the afl players?

Because if you believe what the Adevertiser says all the SANFL clubs are on board except Norwood. Its funny you saying that though i just read a commment on Adelaide now that suggested that Norwood should leave the SANFL and go and play in the SAAFL. Personally this is what i would like to see happen in the event that the crows and power get their reserves sides. I can handle Norwood playing at a lesser level because my needs are only that Norwood exist in their own right and play in a meaningful competition. don't really give a **** abou the standard of play to be honest.

See you.

[topsywaldron]

Why can't the 8 clubs break away and form a new league and sack all the afl players?

Because if you believe what the Adevertiser says all the SANFL clubs are on board except Norwood. Its funny you saying that though i just read a commment on Adelaide now that suggested that Norwood should leave the SANFL and go and play in the SAAFL. Personally this is what i would like to see happen in the event that the crows and power get their reserves sides. I can handle Norwood playing at a lesser level because my needs are only that Norwood exist in their own right and play in a meaningful competition. don't really give a **** abou the standard of play to be honest.

Agreed.

I'd rather we had half the salary cap but still played in a competition with integrity.

[tigers34738586]

All I really know is I don't want to follow a competition that has been st up to give crow reserve players match practice, we might be crap at the moment (Glenelg)...but at least in general it is a even playing field and I can cope with it, just.......but not after this

[Spargo]

Does anyone know the process for removing the commission?

Can it be done?

Given a majority of clubs appear to support the recommendation though it's not as if there's a will for it happen though.

The Directors elect the "Independent" Commission members so the first task is for Clubs to change their League Director (normally the President / Chairman) to a anti-AFL Director and then the Directors can boot the Commission out.

Looking at the politics of the SANFL - it is unlikely any of the current Directors except for Joe Tripodi would stand up to them? Pity Gary Metcalfe stood down from the Bays to seek a spot on the Commission. It is now clear why he didn't get on.

They were never going to let him get on the commission - he's not a "yes man".
Unfortunately the bloke who replaced him at Brighton Road isn't showing a zillionth of courage right now, unlike when he was on the footy field.