Hands off the SANFL - In what way?

[Apachebulldog]

Good info there Country Cousin but i think most of us astute footy followers of over forty years have known of the demise of most state leagues.

Like i have said in the past the AFL is just one big voracious beast that destroys anything in its path and at the same time seduces and beguiles the naive sporting public.

[redandblack]

Thanks, JK, I think that sums it up perfectly.

I suppose I'm trying to say we should be doing exactly that: supporting the SANFL as an independent entity.

I'm suggesting that tilting at the AFL windmill just weakens the argument, when the message should be aimed at reinforcing the clubs' commitment to independence.

As I said before, I only admire the posters who get involved in this campaign and I'll be right behind* Pseudo when the big march is needed

[topsywaldron]

I suppose I'm trying to say we should be doing exactly that: supporting the SANFL as an independent entity.

I'm suggesting that tilting at the AFL windmill just weakens the argument, when the message should be aimed at reinforcing the clubs' commitment to independence.

If I was fired up I'd accuse you of sophistry rnb.

Surely to push the SANFL's independence is to also tilt at the AFL? If nothing else has been proved over the last ten years it's that the AFL governs mainly in the interests of the AFL. Where that intersects with the interests of Australian Football the AFL is happy to take credit but promoting the game outisde the elite level certainly ranks fairly low on their priorities.

[redandblack]

sophistry, topsy, surely not (well, not on this topic, anyway)

I'm not convinced that the AFL has done much damage to us or is particularly interested in doing so, apart from minor things occasionally.

The SANFL is now healthier than it has been for a long time and I think working with them produces better results than manning the barricades.

I'm still to hear of anything terrible the AFL has done, or will do, to the SANFL, despite giving people ample opportunity to post some facts to prove they have or will do.

[topsywaldron]

Arbitrary 20K transfer fee on VFL players?
Removing player development funding a few years back?
Continued pressure to halve salary cap?
Installing Chandler as manager?

[redandblack]

Thanks topsy, I think you're the first to bring up some actual points

1 As you know, not only on VFL players, but SANFL and WAFL also, so it works both ways (surely not sophistry)

2 They haven't removed development funding. It's currently about a million dollars a year, but I'll find out exactly what's happened there. I do agree, though, that we're not well treated in thius area, so one to you.

3 Disappointly, that's again just supposition or hearsay.. Hasn't happened, but if it did, it shows the SANFL stood up to them successfully, so what's the problem?

4 Again supposition and incorrect, unless you have something to back that up.

At least you had a crack, mate, so thanks

[Sojourner]

Thanks, sjt. I support your actions and comments.

Sojourner, I suppose the point of my post is to find out what we actuaklly are fighting. You've made statements about the SANFL being forced to hand over its licences by the AFL, that they're preparing a second attempt and that Les Stevens (whose letter I support) is being stood over by Demetriou.

Do you have any evidence at all to back any of this up, except for what Mr Rucci has written, which I think is not factual at all?

Let me try and answer each point,

1, The licences, no I dont have any actual evidence to suggest that the AFL have a plan to make the SANFL cede the licences to the AFL clubs, it comes from articles written by Rucci and others such as Caroline Wilson who have all made various comments on the deal that the Cows and the Smears get from the SANFL. Leading me to believe that "where there is smoke there may be fire".

2, The WAFL rejected the proposal outright to admit Freo and W/C reserves to the WAFL, those clubs are indeed coming up with a second proposal - http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/sport/ ... on-agenda/

3, The comment re Les Stevens comes from a post I read on here, which clearly is not backed up by any written statement from the CDFC, the AFL, the SANFL or anyone else, so yes I do not have any actual evidence to back that claim up either!

[CENTURION]

Thanks, sjt. I support your actions and comments.

Sojourner, I suppose the point of my post is to find out what we actuaklly are fighting. You've made statements about the SANFL being forced to hand over its licences by the AFL, that they're preparing a second attempt and that Les Stevens (whose letter I support) is being stood over by Demetriou.

Do you have any evidence at all to back any of this up, except for what Mr Rucci has written, which I think is not factual at all?

Let me try and answer each point,

1, The licences, no I dont have any actual evidence to suggest that the AFL have a plan to make the SANFL cede the licences to the AFL clubs, it comes from articles written by Rucci and others such as Caroline Wilson who have all made various comments on the deal that the Cows and the Smears get from the SANFL. Leading me to believe that "where there is smoke there may be fire".

2, The WAFL rejected the proposal outright to admit Freo and W/C reserves to the WAFL, those clubs are indeed coming up with a second proposal - http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/sport/ ... on-agenda/

3, The comment re Les Stevens comes from a post I read on here, which clearly is not backed up by any written statement from the CDFC, the AFL, the SANFL or anyone else, so yes I do not have any actual evidence to back that claim up either!

The post from Les Stevens was a direct copy & paste of his letter to the CDFC supporters.

[Hazydog]

Thanks topsy, I think you're the first to bring up some actual points

1 As you know, not only on VFL players, but SANFL and WAFL also, so it works both ways (surely not sophistry)

2 They haven't removed development funding. It's currently about a million dollars a year, but I'll find out exactly what's happened there. I do agree, though, that we're not well treated in thius area, so one to you.

3 Disappointly, that's again just supposition or hearsay.. Hasn't happened, but if it did, it shows the SANFL stood up to them successfully, so what's the problem?

4 Again supposition and incorrect, unless you have something to back that up.

At least you had a crack, mate, so thanks

But didnt the SANFL salary cap get significantly reduced a few years back under pressure from the AFL??

[DOC]

I don't think it has been reduced but they have lobbied for its decrease and opposed any rises in it.

[Pseudo]

No worries, Mr Beefy, I wasn't referring to the VFA discussion.

Pseudo, that tells us nothing. Here's yet another opportunity for you to say exactly how the AFL have dudded the SANFL.

For such a powerful body, which IMO could do some real damage to the SANFL if they really wanted to, they seem to have done bugger-all except for a bit of tinkering around the edges.

Tell me what they've actually done, instead of 'just sayin'".

I'm interested.

"have dudded" = past tense. "done" = past tense. I suggested only that you should be more concerned with future tense. The one passage of your above-quoted reply which is phrased in the future (highlighted in bold) is in complete concordance with my point of view. Therefore you see the concerns which might have motivated a "hands off" campaign. Any loose campaign (such as it is) is pre-emptive, rather than reactive.

I am not interested in cataloguing the various evils the V/AFL has perpetrated against the SANFL - which could start as early as the undermining of the league in the late '80s, or perhaps even earlier - it has been done to death. Besides, as you say, any recent evils (post-1997) have been small fry.

[redandblack]

Mate, quote properly, fully and in context with everything else I've said.

I'm confident about the future. You agree the AFL have done next to nothing against the SANFL for at least 14 years.

I'd suggest your fears are more imagined than real.

[Pseudo]

Mate, quote properly, fully and in context with everything else I've said.

I'm confident about the future. You agree the AFL have done next to nothing against the SANFL for at least 14 years.

I'd suggest your fears are more imagined than real.

Again: "have done" = past tense. Wrong focus.

Incidentally: "next to nothing" is not "small fry". Quote properly, fully, etc.

I only hope that my fears - and those of plenty other Good SANFL Folk - are purely imaginary. Nevertheless I hope that I'm not too mature to give you a hearty "I Told You So, nyaah nyaah nyaah" when we're standing side-by-side watching the Black, red, and gold Western Suburbs Tigers play the Crows reserves in the AFL-SA feeder league.

[redandblack]

Mate, it won't come to that with you leading the SA Footy march against the infidels, as they suddenly decide, after 14 years of slumber, to destroy our competition

[whufc]

Interestingly in South Australia both crowd attendances and tv ratings are down.

To me that suggests that SA footballs problem is not just AAMI stadium. Its the style of football the AFL is. In SA supporters have another viable option in the SANFL if they want to watch 'real football'

[CUTTERMAN]

No worries, Mr Beefy, I wasn't referring to the VFA discussion.

Pseudo, that tells us nothing. Here's yet another opportunity for you to say exactly how the AFL have dudded the SANFL.

For such a powerful body, which IMO could do some real damage to the SANFL if they really wanted to, they seem to have done bugger-all except for a bit of tinkering around the edges.

Tell me what they've actually done, instead of 'just sayin'".

I'm interested.

Ok R&B, I can't give you a link to something that will give direct proof to alot of our misgivings or fears. Do we need to?
Do you need them?
If you have an aggressive person that you perceive may threaten your family are you going to wait for proof or for something more to happen? Or act in a pre-emptive manner to counter act that threat?
Yes the AFL have been powerful enough to REALLY manipulate the SANFL but has that been in their best interests? Is it really possible for them to do so with the SANFL holding so many cards in the past ie 2 strong clubs, the only fully owned and operated stadium by a footy league, holding both licenses and having a very strong state league to boot.
Seems like something that the AFL would have to think carefully about!
Now, the scenarios have changed dramatically, there's a direct push by the WA AFL clubs for reserves teams in the WAFL, the SANFL may be changing it's base, PAFC are next to broke, SA AFL teams are pushing for reserves teams in the SANFL, SANFL are apparently in debt, The Crows are apparently unprofitable and both teams are shit on the field.
So no, people may not give you something in black and white but I reckon we all know what we're smelling right now.
I do however respect your desire for facts.

[PhilH]

How about the scheduling of Saturday Afternoon AFL Games in Adelaide.

This was not done in the early years of the Crows, came in about 6-7 years back.

Causes a direct head to head threat with SANFL, country and suburban football.

However what the AFL may not have realised is that everyone loses from this arrangement

Yes some vacate the SANFL / country / suburban football for the day to go to AAMI
BUT
others choose the cheaper local product which they feel they have a closer relationship with.

Everyone loses on the Saturday, then on Sunday there is no game to go to.

Most SANFL clubs have the ability toa adjust to this with lights or Sunday matches BUT
its not as easy for suburban / country clubs.

[CUTTERMAN]

Saying that though Phil, Adelaide's preferred time slot is Saturday afternoon

[redandblack]

Thanks Cutterman.

I suppose I'm just saying that of course we should be vigilant about actual threats to our competition, but not see threats where the don't exist.

Phil, there's a difference between Demetriou doing his job, which is AFL chief, and Demetriou being out to harm the SANFL. Whether we like it or not, he's been highly successful as AFL boss, so I don't believe he would have been a total failure if he wanted to destroy the SANFL.

I don't think he understands the SANFL, but doesn't care much, as long as we don't conflict too much with the AFL.

We've got stronger, our crowds are up, our footy is great to watch and the SANFL is financially strong.

I think this thread has shown there's very little harm done b the AFL to our comp.

[whufc]

Thanks Cutterman.

I suppose I'm just saying that of course we should be vigilant about actual threats to our competition, but not see threats where the don't exist.

Phil, there's a difference between Demetriou doing his job, which is AFL chief, and Demetriou being out to harm the SANFL. Whether we like it or not, he's been highly successful as AFL boss, so I don't believe he would have been a total failure if he wanted to destroy the SANFL.

I don't think he understands the SANFL, but doesn't care much, as long as we don't conflict too much with the AFL.

We've got stronger, our crowds are up, our footy is great to watch and the SANFL is financially strong.

I think this thread has shown there's very little harm done b the AFL to our comp.

Not through a lack of trying.