VFL - better than the SANFL?

[Hazydog]

Interesting quote from an article on the AFL website regarding the Gold Coast FC's debut season in the VFL.

"VFL is considered the premier football competition outside AFL level and the GCFC will take on iconic clubs such as Geelong and Collingwood at home."

http://goldcoastfc.com.au/news-and-medi ... ty/page-1/

[nickname]

Well I guess it'd be a harder sell saying they were joining the 2nd best comp outside the AFL.

[sjt]

This ties in pretty well with some posts under "Is the SANFL board just "yes men" to the AFL ? "

It's pretty obvious the AFL is determined to strengthen the VFL ahead of other comps, so a majority of listed AFL players not playing AFL on any given weekend, are still playing in a high standard comp.

This confirms many postings under the other thread. AFL always VFLcentric!

[Country Cousin]

Rewritten without the inevitable spin, that would read. "The VFL is considered the AFL reserves competition."

[whatever]

Not according the the players I have spoken to that have played in both leagues.

[Purple Cobra's]

Considering most teams are made up of AFL listed players most weeks then the standard should be better.

[Barto]

Rewritten without the inevitable spin, that would read. "The VFL is considered the AFL reserves competition."

Beat me to it.

[StrayDog]

Interesting quote from an article on the AFL website regarding the Gold Coast FC's debut season in the VFL.

"VFL is considered the premier football competition outside AFL level and the GCFC will take on iconic clubs such as Geelong and Collingwood at home."

http://goldcoastfc.com.au/news-and-medi ... ty/page-1/

A entry by an occasonal SAFooty poster on the same topic in August, 2008 at Wikipedia's "Victorian Football League" Discussion tab/page.

(NB: An entry which, I strongly suspect, read and partially parroted in a mischievous and superficial claim to VFL "superiority" on their "official" website not long after.)



"References to AFL listed players and club affiliations, crowd sizes (particularly finals), relative salary caps, club turnovers (financial and player), "State" match results, etc, etc, have been used by devotees of the respective leagues as de facto measures of their league's superiority.

So what parameters do we use?

The truth is the SANFL and current VFL competitions operate in unique - in Aussie Rules terms - environments with different structures with (at this time at least) no competitive, club level interaction other than the occasional trial game. There are, in fact, no indisputable measures nor agreed parameters for determining outright "superiority". In the current structural landscape, simply claiming one competition as indisputably superior to another is at best anecdotal and speculative, at worse parochial and arrogant."

[Apachebulldog]

What a load of rubbish !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[whatever]

Considering most teams are made up of AFL listed players most weeks then the standard should be better.

Really how many of the better SANFL players are on AFL lists.

Most of the AFL listed players playing state league are under 21 which means they are not the better players in the team.

VFL have a lot more of these kids playing thus decreasing the standard of the competition.

[CUTTERMAN]

Interesting quote from an article on the AFL website regarding the Gold Coast FC's debut season in the VFL.

"VFL is considered the premier football competition outside AFL level and the GCFC will take on iconic clubs such as Geelong and Collingwood at home."

http://goldcoastfc.com.au/news-and-medi ... ty/page-1/

A entry by an occasonal SAFooty poster on the same topic in August, 2008 at Wikipedia's "Victorian Football League" Discussion tab/page.

(NB: An entry which, I strongly suspect, read and partially parroted in a mischievous and superficial claim to VFL "superiority" on their "official" website not long after.)


"References to AFL listed players and club affiliations, crowd sizes (particularly finals), relative salary caps, club turnovers (financial and player), "State" match results, etc, etc, have been used by devotees of the respective leagues as de facto measures of their league's superiority.

So what parameters do we use?

The truth is the SANFL and current VFL competitions operate in unique - in Aussie Rules terms - environments with different structures with (at this time at least) no competitive, club level interaction other than the occasional trial game. There are, in fact, no indisputable measures nor agreed parameters for determining outright "superiority". In the current structural landscape, simply claiming one competition as indisputably superior to another is at best anecdotal and speculative, at worse parochial and arrogant."

That's great! It never, and still doesn't, stop the VFL/AFL from claiming the mantle of footy heirachy in this country. The rest of the country have put up with the well worn rags of this arrogant, speculative, anecdotal and parochial fatheads commonly known as the VFL, now rehashed as the AFL. Now with the mirror of a challenge infront of them they squeal, stomp their feet and change the "parameters".
WHAT A LOAD OF BULLSHIT!

[TroyGFC]

well whens the next SANFL vs VFL state game?

[Wedgie]

IMHO the VFL is a better standard ( and better to watch) simply due to the amount of AFL footballers in it.
As far as other aspects go in crowds, passion, history, etc the SANFL is a better product.
If I had to choose one to watch and had no past affilation with any club nor any league Id choose the VFL to watch.
If the state match included each leagues best players including fringe AFL players running around in each comp they'd slaughter us!

[redandblack]

Players who have played both usually give a similar response. The VFL is a more open and fast style, but with a lot of young players. They say the SANFL is much tougher, with more mature, bigger bodies to compete against.

[Hazydog]

C'mon Wedgie - Your not trying to tell me that 18 & 19 year old AFL listed boys would be playing at a higer level than mature 100 game SANFL players?

Sure - there are some young champs running around. But there are also a few duds as well. The names Lockwood & Gilligan spring to mind immediately as AFL listed players who only played League SANFL footy at times because they were listed AFL players.

[Wedgie]

Good call r&b, the other big difference I notice is the VFL is a lot more direct and similar to the way the SANFL used to be when it was better to watch, not as much backwards, sideway and zoning crap that has crept into the SANFL.

[Wedgie]

C'mon Wedgie - Your not trying to tell me that 18 & 19 year old AFL listed boys would be playing at a higer level than mature 100 game SANFL players?

Sure - there are some young champs running around. But there are also a few duds as well. The names Lockwood & Gilligan spring to mind immediately as AFL listed players who only played League SANFL footy at times because they were listed AFL players.

Not just young kids, plenty of older players and it's not just my opinion but that of the 3 SANFL clubs recruiters Ive talked to over there watching games.
Look at players likesome of the Dogs recent recruits and players like Alleway,Gill and Allan for North who come over here and dominate at times.

[nickname]

I watch a lot of VFL footy and the two are quite close in standard really but the SANFL is a better standard in my view for the reasons mentioned above - that everything is done under far more physical pressure. The VFL, as R&B said, is a bit more open and flowing, but if that's what you enjoy most about football you might as well just watch training.
I'd also say that I didn't see any VFL side this year play the sort of quality footy Sturt did when they towelled us up at Unley this year.
Andy Collins, who is probably better positioned than anyone to make a comparison, has also stated that the SANFL is the superior comp in his view.

[beenreal]

C'mon Wedgie - Your not trying to tell me that 18 & 19 year old AFL listed boys would be playing at a higer level than mature 100 game SANFL players?

Sure - there are some young champs running around. But there are also a few duds as well. The names Lockwood & Gilligan spring to mind immediately as AFL listed players who only played League SANFL footy at times because they were listed AFL players.

Strongly disagree about Lockwood. Had he not done his back, he was well on his way to being a Port Adelaide star.

[Wedgie]

is a bit more open and flowing, but if that's what you enjoy most about football you might as well just watch training.

Let me get this straight, if you'd prefer Footy that "is a BIT more open and flowing" you might as well as just watch training?
So all of us that enjoyed watching the SANFL in the 60s, 70s, 80s and 90s that don't enjoy zone football, backwards and sideways football, poorer skills and zones/floods wasted our time in those eras going to games and should have just watched training?
You'd go watch West play 2 seasons ago but think you might as well as just watched training in 1983 instead of going to the Grand Final?
lol rightyio!
Back on topic you're always going to get a SANFL biased point of view on this site just like you'd get a VFL biased point of view except for a minority that can take emotion out of the discussion.
Here's something to think about though, in the last 3 state matches played between the 2 comps, 2 of which SA have had the home ground advantage there has been 13 points difference between the sides.
Of those teams the VFL couldn't select 50 to 100 of their better players (AFL listed players) where the SANFL couldn't select 10 to 20 of theirs.