GINEVER GONE

[LPH]

Preferential or equitable....?

So now you want equitable treatment... yet Webber & his club wanted to go alone (bugger the rest)... Hmmm, interesting thought process

[Booney]

Anywho.

I think with South,Central and West to come after the State game Port will give ginever until than to try and turn things around.

[UK Fan]

Preferential or equitable....?

So now you want equitable treatment... yet Webber & his club wanted to go alone (bugger the rest)... Hmmm, interesting thought process

and what a great plan it was Bruce Webber. DUMB DUMB DUMB.

Let Ginever stay please. I could'nt think of anyone better to have the spoon handed to at the maggies. Like when Garry Mcintosh won the spoon for Norwood.

[beenreal]

Preferential or equitable....?

So now you want equitable treatment... yet Webber & his club wanted to go alone (bugger the rest)... Hmmm, interesting thought process

Everyone knows that the AFL came courting BOTH Port Adelaide AND Norwood. If Port had said NO, then all the mud would now be thrown at Norwood, because without a doubt, they would have gone ahead.

Perhaps if your club had a more enviable history the AFL might have pursued you. Then again, perhaps not.

[NO-MERCY]

IMO Ginever won't get sacked

1. Its not Ports style ....

I'm not certain cos its a while back, but didn't the great Russell Ebert get sacked mid year to bring back Cahill

No he wasn't sacked midyear he was just not reappointed at the end of year once his contract expired.

[dedja]

Herb got the boot after the Maggies hit the post 6 times when they were beaten by the Bays in a final, so it was definitely at the end of the season.

[SABRE]

Preferential or equitable....?

So now you want equitable treatment... yet Webber & his club wanted to go alone (bugger the rest)... Hmmm, interesting thought process

Everyone knows that the AFL came courting BOTH Port Adelaide AND Norwood. If Port had said NO, then all the mud would now be thrown at Norwood, because without a doubt, they would have gone ahead.

Perhaps if your club had a more enviable history the AFL might have pursued you. Then again, perhaps not.

Garbage ‘beenreal’ !
Don’t you dare tar Norwood with your traitorous brush.

We were asked first and did the right thing. And look where it got us. Over 100 years
of effort up in smoke. Even had to sell our buildings to avoid bankruptcy while the
morally bankrupt could preen their egos on the national stage, having betrayed
South Australia.

God knows the back stabbing actions of those bastards nearly sent everyone belly-up.
Loss of crowds, players, sponsors, officials, you name it ! Especially SA's autonomy
and independence.

Port people who try and defend the indefensible continue to make matters worse.
Most of South Australia will never rest while Port Adelaide exists without punishment!

NEVER FORGOTTEN, NEVER FORGIVEN.

Go get ‘em ‘LoudEagleHooligan’, you are 100% correct !

[dedja]

Constance, pass us another pale mate ...

[Macca19]

[quote="LoudEagleHooligan]
Your point on 'debt' & supporter base is laughable considering the current average attendances of PAFC @ home matches.[/quote]

The point is completely valid. If you get the froth out your mouth and shit out your eyes you would realise this.

As a result of PAFC's actions, the following occurred;

1. 2 SANFL clubs were forced to merge & a BYE was introduced

So you think that if Port didnt chase the AFL, the SANFL entered talks with the SANFL in 1993 with a team entered in 1994, then both Woodville and WT would still exist? What ******* difference would another 2 years have made to the fact that both WT and Woodville were on a hiding to nothing with minimal support and no money? If you think both clubs would have survived if the SANFL did it their way then you are the one thats ******* deluded. Big time.

2. PAFC continued in the SANFL & the 'F**K the Crows campaign' began - remember the T-Shirts?

So whats wrong with Port continuing in the SANFL? You think it would have been in the SANFLs best interest to boot out its number 1 drawcard, number 1 most supported and number 1 most successful club? Great idea.

3. Scott Hodges held out for MORE MONEY (no doubt getting an 'ear full' from his father-in-law) before committing to the Crows

Again, what is the drama with this point? He held out for more money. So what?

4. After the continual rumblings "Port for the AFL" campaign - clearly designed to undermine the decision on the 2nd licence & foster the support from 'over the border' - some patethicly incompetent bids were put together by Norwood / Sturt & the 'cartel'

The fact that Port put together a professional bid with a strong marketing campaign compared to the 'patheticly incompetent' bids by others has what to do with anything? N/S and the cartel had their chance to make their play and they ****** it up, simple as that.

5. PAFC was given the licence - based on among other things "attracting 35 K + every week to home games (I see that's still happening)

Youve just said the other bids were 'patheticly incompetent'. Why would the SANFL give a licence to a 'patheticly incompetent' bid?

6. PAMFC was 'born' - I am still unsure which of the 2 clubs can lay claim the this so called 'Creed' of yours - very damaging promotion campaign IMHO as it alienates 'neutral' football followers in this state

Finally you make a valid point. Took a while.

7. PAFC took over Alberton Oval & forced the Magpies to move premises - to Ethelton & took the revenue from the licenced 'Port Club'

The SANFL forced the Magpies to move premises, not the PAFC.

Now IRONICALLY, PAFC are 'crying poor' & wanting help from the SANFL Clubs - I wonder (based on their current predicament) if PAMFC are keen to reduce any potential earnings from the 2nd AFL Licencee - in order to 'ease the burden' on PAFC ??? I wonder if there is not a 'pulling on the heart strings' over this issue.

If youve bothered to read or listen to whats been going on, you would have noticed that the PAFC do not and will not reduce the dividend or what the SANFL clubs recieve. They want to reduce what the SANFL themselves pocket.

[Macca19]

[God knows the back stabbing actions of those bastards nearly sent everyone belly-up.
Loss of crowds, players, sponsors, officials, you name it ! Especially SA's autonomy
and independence.

And? This would have happened anyway when the first licence was given, no matter when it was.

As for nearly sending everyone belly up...id love to see the figures, but id bank on there being more people, more sponsors and more more money going into SA football in 1991 than there was in 1990.

[Macca19]

Crikey, I love laying the boot into Port at any opportunity (probably done it 119 times) but Torrens were broke and a financial basketcase well before 1990.
The fact that they were broke and the fact that Woodville just rolled over has little to do with Port.
Did the Eagles get a win or is it a full moon this week or both?

Granted, the financial status of West Torrens was ordinary (to say the least) but ...

The fact remains that had the SANFL not had its 'hand forced', by having to quickly join the competition it had so wanted to join later NOT sooner by PAFC (& Webber), then West Torrens may well have survived in its own right.

West Torrens could've easily had monies provided in 'loans' or whatever to have stood on their feet, but ...

Webber & PAFC's UNDERHANDED, SELFISH actions put pay to any of the SANFLs plans - SA would've joined the competition (no question) but we would'ver joined on OUR TERMS not the VFL's... WTFC & WFC's merger was 'rushed' due to the fear of the SANFL 'falling over' as a result.

More deluded rubbish.

It was always going to be on the AFLs terms. The SANFL coming in and saying 'we want this and that otherwise we wont join'...you really think the AFL would have bowed down and just accepted whatever the SANFL wanted? Pull the other one. They wouldnt have cared...it would have been the SANFL that would have ended up dying anyway. With more and more players going over to play in the AFL, the SANFL was always destined for harder times, even if crowds stayed up. The retention scheme was only going to do so much and over time, with the start of the draft and the more professional era, players were always gonna end up heading over to prove themselves against the best. Was always going to happen.

Back to the point of what the SANFL wanted...they got a pretty nice deal as it was if you look at it. SA players were excluded from the draft for 2 seasons allowing the club complete access to all of SAs talent in that time and they picked up the likes of Riccuito, Modra, Hart, Wellman, Groom and some others because of this - some big names in terms of their impact at the club (considering Wellman traded for Jarman and Groom for Mcleod). Not sure what else they wanted. There was always going to be a licence fee so if the SANFL was holding out to exclude that then we'd still be waiting for a side in the AFL.

As I said in my previous post, i would bet anything that there was tons more money coming into the state through football in 91 than in 90, not to mention bums on seats.

Torrens could have got loans anyway....the SANFL moving into the AFL would have sweet zero to do with Torrens recieving loans to stay afloat. The SANFL joining the AFL may have ended with the teams merging, but it was bound to happen anyway. THIS fact cannot be denied

That FACT can ont be denied

Already has. Try again.

[eddie eagle]

He's the lowest payed coach in the League trust me even Centrals assistant gets more than Tim.

Exactly my point about him being on a performance based contract. Ie Shit Pay for a shit effort, by a shit coach, not to mention an even more shitty outcome.


Keep it up LoudEagleHooligan, you are so far ahead of these clueless followers of the Backstabbing Traitors of SA Footy it aint funny.

[eddie eagle]

If the players are DOGGING IT, they are following their Master. Promote this DOG coach to the Port Power. his dummy is still on the floor after not being on their original list, despite wearing their guernsey in the media unveiling. WOOF WOOF

Pay his contract out & Sack him, can't be any more than $2 a week if performance based?

Perhaps if you gave that $2 to your own club a few years ago, they wouldn't now be called Woodville/ West Torrens!

Perhaps if your club has their $2 a week membership campaign they might be able to remove themselves from the bottom of the ladder or recruit a player!

[JK]

Constance, pass us another pale mate ...

Here ya go mate, don't mind if I do

[NO-MERCY]

Keep gloating you Woodville-West Torrens-Eagle mergers, gee i would be embarrassed to merg with either of your clubs & thats why Port would never go down that path.
What year did you merg 91 was it?
Was it 2 thats TWO flags since then?
Port may not of been successful since 99 but i think they won 6 yes SIX since your entry.
How many have they won in their existance?? sh!t i've lost count!
It wasn't that long ago you were all calling for your coaches ( Fuller ) head.

[dedja]

Constance, pass us another pale mate ...

Here ya go mate, don't mind if I do

Better order a keg, this is going to take a while ...

[eddie eagle]

Port may not of been successful since 99 but i think they won 6 yes SIX since your entry.
How many have they won in their existance?? sh!t i've lost count!
It wasn't that long ago you were all calling for your coaches ( Fuller ) head.

Wrong, think again Port Magpies have won the same amount of flags as the Eagles! Ie 2 definitely NOT 6!!!
Wrong - I never called for the coaches head, unlike the faithfull abusing ginever at alberton oval on sunday!

Sack Ginever Now


An excellent summary from fullpointsfooty.net

"Mergers have become a sad but inevitable part of football life, but there have arguably been few as painless as that between the erstwhile West Torrens and Woodville Football Clubs. Commencing from a position of perceived equality (unlike, for example, the Brisbane and Fitzroy arrangement which, whatever the 'official' stance, and notwithstanding the attitudes of certain less enlightened and more desperate former Fitzroy supporters, was in effect a takeover) the two previously disparate organisation have welded, almost seamlessly, into one, achieving significantly more in just over a decade and a half.....than either Woodville or Torrens managed in the preceding 40 years (see footnote 1). That said, there is sound reason to hope, perhaps even expect, that the years to come will prove to be even more productive, profitable and exciting, and that the legacy of Bills, Blight, Clingly, Hank, Head, Huppatz, Lindsay, Low, McKellar, Mills, Pontifex, Simunsen et al will endure for as long as the sport of Australian football is played.


Footnotes
1. Between 1991 and 2007, the Eagles won a total of fifteen premierships across all four grades, which is more than any other club. (Totals for other clubs: 14 Port Adelaide/Port Magpies; 12 Centrals; 7 North Adelaide; 6 Norwood, West Adelaide; 4 South Adelaide; 3 Sturt; 2 Glenelg.)

[rogernumber10]

Who says the passion is gone?

[dedja]

Who says the passion is gone?

The real deal?

[topsywaldron]

Port people who try and defend the indefensible continue to make matters worse.
Most of South Australia will never rest while Port Adelaide exists without punishment!

It's called karma baby and it's happening now as the Power's patently inadequate Board and admin, saddled with a hopelessly optimistic business plan, run off cap in hand crying poor to an organisation they once tried to royally screw.

I agree in principle with Booney's point about the pain of a club folding and not wishing it on others, my club has come perilously close in recent times. Happily, as I'm morally flexible, I'll make an exception for Port. They can GTF as far as I'm concerned.

Enjoy the rewards from your frequent flyer points to Tasmania Port 'fans'.