SA Footy

southernbulldog wrote:Jakob Thomson maybe shorter than Marsh but he has a good leap ,hes a good kick and does a bit around the ground and hes not frightened to throw his weight around either.May as well look at him i reckon we have nothing to lose by giving him a go .

he's very close,
the coach gave him the best player award.

gazzamagoo wrote:I'll give you an idea as to why.
I was talking to one of the Norwood players back in the club after the match (BTW, thank you Norwood for ALL of your players coming back for presentations), he is/was a Central supporter, dad played for us, his reason for not wanting to play for us?
"Can't be stuffed travelling all that way for training & playing",
and that's a HUGE problem we now have, I know it never used to be a problem in the early 2000's, but kids have changed, times have changed.
And, apart from the brief successful period we had, it was a problem before that for years as well.
We need to dangle a much larger carrot but we need money & resources to do that.
The changing of the guard at the end of this season might be a step in the right direction, who knows & only time will tell.

Id be going and having a chat with South, they have faced the same issue but have taken a long term approach to turn their club and zone around, they now attract players and their junior program is the best going around, they have engaged heavily with their local clubs/leagues. A lot of this stuff didn't cost $'s or extra resources, it was just some very smart planning and strategy. Obviously they haven't achieved the ultimate success yet but you get the feeling they aren't far away.

southernbulldog wrote:Jakob Thomson maybe shorter than Marsh but he has a good leap ,hes a good kick and does a bit around the ground and hes not frightened to throw his weight around either.May as well look at him i reckon we have nothing to lose by giving him a go .

Marsh is not good enough for SANFL league footy.
Thomson should have been given an opportunity in the league trials.

Dutchy wrote:

gazzamagoo wrote:I'll give you an idea as to why.
I was talking to one of the Norwood players back in the club after the match (BTW, thank you Norwood for ALL of your players coming back for presentations), he is/was a Central supporter, dad played for us, his reason for not wanting to play for us?
"Can't be stuffed travelling all that way for training & playing",
and that's a HUGE problem we now have, I know it never used to be a problem in the early 2000's, but kids have changed, times have changed.
And, apart from the brief successful period we had, it was a problem before that for years as well.
We need to dangle a much larger carrot but we need money & resources to do that.
The changing of the guard at the end of this season might be a step in the right direction, who knows & only time will tell.

Id be going and having a chat with South, they have faced the same issue but have taken a long term approach to turn their club and zone around, they now attract players and their junior program is the best going around, they have engaged heavily with their local clubs/leagues. A lot of this stuff didn't cost $'s or extra resources, it was just some very smart planning and strategy. Obviously they haven't achieved the ultimate success yet but you get the feeling they aren't far away.

Or go and get Tony Bamford

JK wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

gazzamagoo wrote:I'll give you an idea as to why.
I was talking to one of the Norwood players back in the club after the match (BTW, thank you Norwood for ALL of your players coming back for presentations), he is/was a Central supporter, dad played for us, his reason for not wanting to play for us?
"Can't be stuffed travelling all that way for training & playing",
and that's a HUGE problem we now have, I know it never used to be a problem in the early 2000's, but kids have changed, times have changed.
And, apart from the brief successful period we had, it was a problem before that for years as well.
We need to dangle a much larger carrot but we need money & resources to do that.
The changing of the guard at the end of this season might be a step in the right direction, who knows & only time will tell.

Id be going and having a chat with South, they have faced the same issue but have taken a long term approach to turn their club and zone around, they now attract players and their junior program is the best going around, they have engaged heavily with their local clubs/leagues. A lot of this stuff didn't cost $'s or extra resources, it was just some very smart planning and strategy. Obviously they haven't achieved the ultimate success yet but you get the feeling they aren't far away.

Or go and get Tony Bamford

But he didnt play for centrals so they wont want him or send him packing after a year because he wanted to change things.

On the positive side, the Under 18s had their first win for the season, and a very comfortable one (27 scoring shots to 9!). They had been very close the previous two weeks, losing on the last kick of the game to South and losing by under a goal to West.
The Ressies also had a very comfortable win against Norwood (18 scoring shots to 5 to lemons).

As said by a number of other posters, if we had a couple of tall players who could take contested marks we would be extremely competitive. Without those, we will struggle to win any more games this year though. At least we have not been blown away by any side, with our biggest loss being by 34 points.

Cheers

Had East's goal been allowed, would it have made any difference to the result of the game? Its not that the margin for the game was less than 5 points.

Last season had the goal that was kicked on the siren at the end of a quarter (can't remember which quarter) not been allowed, would it have made any difference to the result of the game?

You can go through any game and comment over many umpire decisions that should have been different in any of the 4 quarters of a game. Would that different decision made any difference to the outcome of the game?

Had East's goal been allowed, would CD suddenly stormed home for the remainder of the quarter and Norwood run come to a standstill or would have the margin been only 6 points less?

Note: change made to second sentence.

nwdfanparade wrote:Had East's goal been allowed, would it have made any difference to the result of the game? Its not that the margin for the game was less than 5 points.

Last season had the goal that was kicked on the siren at the end of a quarter (can't remember which quarter) would it have made any difference to the result of the game?

You can go through any game and comment over many umpire decisions that should have been different in any of the 4 quarters of a game. Would that different decision made any difference to the outcome of the game?

Had East's goal been allowed, would CD suddenly stormed home for the remainder of the quarter and Norwood run come to a standstill or would have the margin been only 6 points less?

Central had all the momentum at that stage of the match. That would have been their third goal for the quarter (whilst Norwood were goalless). It is quite likely that, yes, that could well have kept the momentum going their way and they could have stormed home. However, we really lost the game in the last ten minutes of the third quarter, letting the lead blow out from 8 points to 34.
Cheers

beef wrote:

JK wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

gazzamagoo wrote:I'll give you an idea as to why.
I was talking to one of the Norwood players back in the club after the match (BTW, thank you Norwood for ALL of your players coming back for presentations), he is/was a Central supporter, dad played for us, his reason for not wanting to play for us?
"Can't be stuffed travelling all that way for training & playing",
and that's a HUGE problem we now have, I know it never used to be a problem in the early 2000's, but kids have changed, times have changed.
And, apart from the brief successful period we had, it was a problem before that for years as well.
We need to dangle a much larger carrot but we need money & resources to do that.
The changing of the guard at the end of this season might be a step in the right direction, who knows & only time will tell.

Id be going and having a chat with South, they have faced the same issue but have taken a long term approach to turn their club and zone around, they now attract players and their junior program is the best going around, they have engaged heavily with their local clubs/leagues. A lot of this stuff didn't cost $'s or extra resources, it was just some very smart planning and strategy. Obviously they haven't achieved the ultimate success yet but you get the feeling they aren't far away.

Or go and get Tony Bamford

But he didn't play for Central so they won't want him or "send him packing after a year because he wanted to change things."
don't comment when you don't know the full story.

gazzamagoo wrote:But he didn't play for Central so they won't want him or "send him packing after a year because he wanted to change things."
don't comment when you don't know the full story.

Centrals are shit, South are not ... What have I missed?

bulldogproud wrote:

nwdfanparade wrote:Had East's goal been allowed, would it have made any difference to the result of the game? Its not that the margin for the game was less than 5 points.

Last season had the goal that was kicked on the siren at the end of a quarter (can't remember which quarter) would it have made any difference to the result of the game?

You can go through any game and comment over many umpire decisions that should have been different in any of the 4 quarters of a game. Would that different decision made any difference to the outcome of the game?

Had East's goal been allowed, would CD suddenly stormed home for the remainder of the quarter and Norwood run come to a standstill or would have the margin been only 6 points less?

Central had all the momentum at that stage of the match. That would have been their third goal for the quarter (whilst Norwood were goalless). It is quite likely that, yes, that could well have kept the momentum going their way and they could have stormed home. However, we really lost the game in the last ten minutes of the third quarter, letting the lead blow out from 8 points to 34.
Cheers

I meant to say if the goal that was kicked on the siren last year was disallowed. I've changed my original post by adding that bit. Just thought I'd clarify my comment.

The result may have indeed been different; at the time, I did say I felt sorry for Norwood supporters.
Cheers

StrayDog wrote:

norwood8 wrote:Why weren’t the lights turned on? Was dark half way through the third quarter at the ground.

If they can’t afford it, surely the SANFL covers the cost as they made it the TV game.

Wouldn't have mattered who paid the power bill, judging by the spaghetti of wiring hanging from one (that I noticed) of the towers, I'm guessing they were in no state to be switched on anyway.

They get switched on most nights during the year for training, and we did play a night trial match earlier in the year.

gazzamagoo wrote:

whufc wrote:

gazzamagoo wrote:At this point in time, that looks like the only way we'll score goals, running in to an open one.
We DESPERATELY need........
another ruckman, the ruckman in the reserves is shorter than Marsh!
2 blokes over 6 foot 4 that can, if not mark the ball, keep it in the area.
Again we had more inside 50's but no-one to take the grab, it goes out as quick as it comes in.
These are the goals in the off-season, we get plenty of the ball but struggle to convert.

Sadly they should have been the goals for the last 5 years. I cannot fathom how we haven’t solved that problem that is so obvious to every supporter.

I'll give you an idea as to why.
I was talking to one of the Norwood players back in the club after the match (BTW, thank you Norwood for ALL of your players coming back for presentations), he is/was a Central supporter, dad played for us, his reason for not wanting to play for us?
"Can't be stuffed travelling all that way for training & playing",
and that's a HUGE problem we now have, I know it never used to be a problem in the early 2000's, but kids have changed, times have changed.
And, apart from the brief successful period we had, it was a problem before that for years as well.
We need to dangle a much larger carrot but we need money & resources to do that.
The changing of the guard at the end of this season might be a step in the right direction, who knows & only time will tell.

That's really disappointing to hear, considering there are so many amatuer/country footballers travelling greater lengths for the right deal financially, club environment, opportunities. To me that sounds like a bit of a cop out and maybe an exuse for greater underlying reasons.

I get they have a bigger commitment but I mean jesus I train twice a week and we rotate training over our three towns so on any given week I travel to Redhill (50 minutes away) and Brinkworth (35 minutes away). I'm a 37 year old b grade hack who pays a rego fee to play but my love for playing for 'my town' with a great bunch of lads overweighs a bit of extra travel.

Surely a lot of the Melbourne type recruits were travelling reasonable timeframes to training I mean it take 30 minutes to cross the road over there.

I mean many on here thought we got plenty of recruits but it looks so far as we just pretty much got those big men position recruits wrong. Coff isn't offering anything to the league side, Hill has been injured for the most part just like last time he was at the club. Templeton is what we knew he was a fringe SANFL player.

nwdfanparade wrote:Had East's goal been allowed, would it have made any difference to the result of the game? Its not that the margin for the game was less than 5 points.

Last season had the goal that was kicked on the siren at the end of a quarter (can't remember which quarter) not been allowed, would it have made any difference to the result of the game?

You can go through any game and comment over many umpire decisions that should have been different in any of the 4 quarters of a game. Would that different decision made any difference to the outcome of the game?

Had East's goal been allowed, would CD suddenly stormed home for the remainder of the quarter and Norwood run come to a standstill or would have the margin been only 6 points less?

Note: change made to second sentence.

I don’t think the decision cost centrals the game. Just a slim chance of a late comeback at best.

Was a shocking decision.

whufc wrote:

gazzamagoo wrote:At this point in time, that looks like the only way we'll score goals, running in to an open one.
We DESPERATELY need........
another ruckman, the ruckman in the reserves is shorter than Marsh!
2 blokes over 6 foot 4 that can, if not mark the ball, keep it in the area.
Again we had more inside 50's but no-one to take the grab, it goes out as quick as it comes in.
These are the goals in the off-season, we get plenty of the ball but struggle to convert.

Sadly they should have been the goals for the last 5 years. I cannot fathom how we haven’t solved that problem that is so obvious to every supporter.

100% agree.

The clubs shortcomings are easily fixed and aren’t new or unique to other sanfl clubs

It’s time for the excuses to end.

Centrals u18's haven't played finals in the last 10 years, surely that has to be a huge part of the solution

gazzamagoo wrote:But he didn't play for Central so they won't want him or "send him packing after a year because he wanted to change things."
don't comment when you don't know the full story.

Then tell us the full story. We’ve been hearing this for months. It’s a footy forum where opinions are made on face value.
Time to put up or shut up.

Dutchy wrote:Centrals u18's haven't played finals in the last 10 years, surely that has to be a huge part of the solution

True, a fair proportion of your club's success at junior level depends upon zoning. It is no coincidence that the clubs in the lowest socio-economic areas (South and Central) have the lowest rate of success over the past 10 years. With families struggling financially, more pressure is put on teenagers to gain part-time employment to assist the family's income. This restricts their ability to play sport at any serious level.
South's fortunes began to improve when, in the 2014 rezoning, they gained considerable parts of Glenelg's old territory.
The loss of parts of Salisbury, Parafield and Para Hills from the Central District zone in this and previous rezonings really hit Central. Central were an extremely successful club in underage football prior to this. In fact, Central won 12 premierships at underage level between 1966 and 2004. Since this time, there has also been a large increase in the proportion of teenagers spending significant hours in part-time work. This, coupled with the loss of theses areas, has greatly impacted upon Central's success in underage football.
Cheers

JK wrote:

gazzamagoo wrote:But he didn't play for Central so they won't want him or "send him packing after a year because he wanted to change things."
don't comment when you don't know the full story.

Centrals are shit, South are not ... What have I missed?

Never thought I’d read that in my lifetime, probably hasn’t been said since 1964!