SA Footy

Hmm seems ex-Sturt CEO Stuey Totham has his eyes on NT developed footballers Josh Cubillo and Patty Fittock who are currently at Sturt. Me thinks Stuey would have a fair idea on what they are on so would be in a position to make an attractive offer.

http://www.ntnews.com.au/article/2009/06/24/61245_ntsport.html

FWIW I can see Patty going back as his famiy are still up there where-as Josh's family relocated down to Adelaide.

Trevor Oliver mentioned in the article is the Oliver who played for WA in the recent State game.

Wasn't there something about a NT team wanting players from the SANFL a few months back?

The SANFL has missed an opportunity here. NT are doing well, they are a top team in QFL in their first season and improving after beginning by winning home games and losing away games. They are gradually forming as a team and improving. They will now prove to be a competitor for SANFL possible players. If they had been allowed in this would have added to the SANFL instead of detracted from it!

doggies4eva wrote:The SANFL has missed an opportunity here. NT are doing well, they are a top team in QFL in their first season and improving after beginning by winning home games and losing away games. They are gradually forming as a team and improving. They will now prove to be a competitor for SANFL possible players. If they had been allowed in this would have added to the SANFL instead of detracted from it!

Wasn't it up to the NT to join where they wanted? There was a lot of desire from the SANFL side of things to get the NT on board as far as I know.

Barto wrote:

doggies4eva wrote:The SANFL has missed an opportunity here. NT are doing well, they are a top team in QFL in their first season and improving after beginning by winning home games and losing away games. They are gradually forming as a team and improving. They will now prove to be a competitor for SANFL possible players. If they had been allowed in this would have added to the SANFL instead of detracted from it!

Wasn't it up to the NT to join where they wanted? There was a lot of desire from the SANFL side of things to get the NT on board as far as I know.

The NTAFL applied to join the SANFL but were knocked back. They then joined the QFL.

the main concern from the SANFL was the cost of flying each week and accomodation.

kookas wrote:the main concern from the SANFL was the cost of flying each week and accomodation.

Yes, because everyone damn well knows that the AFL wouldn't give money to the SANFL to help with that. No doubt the QAFL got some for it.

well Glenelg would have been set with Tiger airways

mighty_tiger_79 wrote:well Glenelg would have been set with Tiger airways

The Dogs could fly French Airways (because of the colour association of course) but they would want to get there safe and sound, even though there is no ocean between Adelaide and Darwin !!

Both the QLD and NT competitions are overseen by AFL-branded commissions.

QLD -- AFLQ
NT -- AFLNT

Had our SAFC been branded AFL-SA, then you would definitely have seen the Territory Thunder in our competition and not in the Queensland league. The AFL loves to meddle with such things.

doggies4eva wrote:The SANFL has missed an opportunity here. NT are doing well, they are a top team in QFL in their first season and improving after beginning by winning home games and losing away games. They are gradually forming as a team and improving. They will now prove to be a competitor for SANFL possible players. If they had been allowed in this would have added to the SANFL instead of detracted from it!

\

Doggies4eva you and I have had long debates about this in teh past. For mine the Thunder is where it bloody well should be in a 2nd rate competition top. IMO teh QAFL is the equivalent of A1s. Yep they have great players capable of playing league footy down here but the lack of depth in there sides exposes the weakness of their competition. Some of those players in teh QAFL who sit on teh bench would be A2 players down here at best. We saw how relatively strong the QAFL is when with AFL listed players (Brisbane 2nds players) they still got beaten by teh WAFL side last year by over 100 pts in Townsville.

So I am not surprised that they are doing well in the QAFL. I still don't think the NT Thunder side would beat many SANFL reserves sides.

am Bays wrote:

doggies4eva wrote:The SANFL has missed an opportunity here. NT are doing well, they are a top team in QFL in their first season and improving after beginning by winning home games and losing away games. They are gradually forming as a team and improving. They will now prove to be a competitor for SANFL possible players. If they had been allowed in this would have added to the SANFL instead of detracted from it!

\

Doggies4eva you and I have had long debates about this in teh past. For mine the Thunder is where it bloody well should be in a 2nd rate competition top. IMO teh QAFL is the equivalent of A1s. Yep they have great players capable of playing league footy down here but the lack of depth in there sides exposes the weakness of their competition. Some of those players in teh QAFL who sit on teh bench would be A2 players down here at best. We saw how relatively strong the QAFL is when with AFL listed players (Brisbane 2nds players) they still got beaten by teh WAFL side last year by over 100 pts in Townsville.

So I am not surprised that they are doing well in the QAFL. I still don't think the NT Thunder side would beat many SANFL reserves sides.

I agree that the standard would be much lower in the QAFL, so being top of the ladder in that league doesn't prove that much.
The other thing though is that they will be able to recruit, and in time prevent the drain of their higher quality players to other leagues. A lot of the NT's players go on to AFL, but many more find nice possies in other leagues.
In time, if they joined the SANFL, they would have been competitive, and perhaps become very feared.
It all needed financing though, and as we all know the AFL had their hands all over this deal with the QAFL. I believe SANFL didn't stand much hope without that crucial backing.

am Bays wrote:

doggies4eva wrote:The SANFL has missed an opportunity here. NT are doing well, they are a top team in QFL in their first season and improving after beginning by winning home games and losing away games. They are gradually forming as a team and improving. They will now prove to be a competitor for SANFL possible players. If they had been allowed in this would have added to the SANFL instead of detracted from it!

\

Doggies4eva you and I have had long debates about this in teh past. For mine the Thunder is where it bloody well should be in a 2nd rate competition top. IMO teh QAFL is the equivalent of A1s. Yep they have great players capable of playing league footy down here but the lack of depth in there sides exposes the weakness of their competition. Some of those players in teh QAFL who sit on teh bench would be A2 players down here at best. We saw how relatively strong the QAFL is when with AFL listed players (Brisbane 2nds players) they still got beaten by teh WAFL side last year by over 100 pts in Townsville.

So I am not surprised that they are doing well in the QAFL. I still don't think the NT Thunder side would beat many SANFL reserves sides.

OK lets continue the debate Am Gay You raise a fair point about the standard - I don't think that they would be a top 5 side if they were in the SANFL. But I don't think they ould lose every game. Based on what I have seen (and I've been to Thunder games) they would push the bottom 2 or 3 sides especially at home. In their first game they beat the reigning premier but that was at home. The side is still coming together as a team and is a bit up and down and coping with the travel (remember when the Crows started they won at home and lost away). But the point is they will get better - and in a few years will be at a higher level, particularly if they can lure back some of the players playing SANFL, WAFL etc.

The argument that SANFL clubs couldn't afford 1 trip a year is questionable - the Thunder travel every second week and they can afford it. The travel is helping players develop and will make them a little more attractive to AFL clubs as they are demonstrating that they can handle conditions similar to that required in AFL.

Travel costs are being met largely by the AFL. This would not have been the case if NT were in the SANFL as the AFL did not want the SANFL to expand in ANY way.

21 players, plus another 5-10 coaches, doctors, physios etc is approx 26 x $?? each way for flights, plus accomodation. I would take a punt that it is $10k a pop for an away game for a SANFL side - I can think of plenty of better things for them to spend their cash on.

smac wrote:Travel costs are being met largely by the AFL. This would not have been the case if NT were in the SANFL as the AFL did not want the SANFL to expand in ANY way.

21 players, plus another 5-10 coaches, doctors, physios etc is approx 26 x $?? each way for flights, plus accomodation. I would take a punt that it is $10k a pop for an away game for a SANFL side - I can think of plenty of better things for them to spend their cash on.

So you would rather save $90K across the league than get rid of the bye, give the comp greater media exposure (due to it being beyond a simple Adelaide metro league) and the other benefits previously discussed? Thinking like that will doom the SANFL.

I would rather the club spent $10k on further development of the zone that is on their doorstep. Did you know that the CDJFL is struggling for teams?

They had less than 100 kids in total to select an association side to play against Moorabbin Saints this year - Moorabbin had 160 kids at their first tryouts. If something isn't done to address the participation in the northern suburbs then my club is doomed. I don't give a crap about footy in NT, I give a crap about footy in the northern suburbs.

And the bye is not a negative. A couple of rests a year, a couple of opportunities for interstate players to head home, a couple of opportunities for coaches to view opposition sides without being concerned about a game that day or the next, the positives far outway any negatives.

Yep, that thinking will most certainly kill the SANFL.

Unless things have changed recently you can also throw into the equation that Adelaide to Darwin return is a lot dearer than Brisbane to Darwin return.

Fair points smac, but have a look at the doggies accounts. They are in pretty good shape. I say that there is enough money in the coffers to find $10k for both projects. Maybe the additional media will attract a few more kids to play!

Wedgie wrote:Unless things have changed recently you can also throw into the equation that Adelaide to Darwin return is a lot dearer than Brisbane to Darwin return.

Things have changed!

The bye is very much an underestimated assest to competition by supporters. Having spoke to alot of the Central players they actually really enjoy having the bye as it's a chance to go back home interstate for some, for others they can go watch there old junior side, and many just spend a weekend with the family. The players see it as a mini reward for all the time and effort they do put in while being at the club, plus it's an oppurtunity to get over injuries and play as much football as possible. If anything the bye keeps the SANFL of a higher standard throughout the year.

The reserves players especially enjoy the bye as they put in at very least 14.5 hours a week in commitments to the football club. This commitment causes alot of the younger reserves players to struggle in finding jobs outside of school and study commitments. $50 being the general payment for a ressies player they are getting about $3.45 an hour, when many could be getting paid well over a hundred dollars a game in ammos/country for less commitment and less pressure. The bye is very much appreciated by these players as well.