SA Footy

Why were individual club concession submissions allowed in the voting process for the Crows Reserve side ??

The club directors were charged with the duty to make the best decision for the league as a whole. When individual submissions were allowed it made a mockery of that ideal. Individual club votes could then be bought by bowing to those requests.
There is no better example than Norwoods 180 degree back-flip from a solid "NO" to a "YES. I hear 12 out of their 14 concession requests were granted.

I think the SANFL is now be obliged to make all the individual club concession requests and replies public.

Otherwise Concession can just be viewed as just another name for Corruption.

dogbreath wrote:[size=150]Why were individual club concession submissions allowed in the voting process for the Crows Reserve side ??[/size]

The club directors were charged with the duty to make the best decision for the league as a whole. When individual submissions were allowed it made a mockery of that ideal. Individual club votes could then be bought by bowing to those requests.
There is no better example than Norwoods 180 degree back-flip from a solid "NO" to a "YES. I hear 12 out of their 14 concession requests were granted.

I think the SANFL is now be obliged to make all the individual club concession requests and replies public.

Otherwise Concession can just be viewed as just another name for Çorruption.

to put it simply it was in the best interests of SA FOOTY to allow these concessions to be approved because we needed the Crows in the competition

a load of bollocks basically

Think you are right on the money here Dogbreath..... money being the key word.
Club fines and recruiting suspensions have been lifted as well.

SDK wrote:Think you are right on the money here Dogbreath..... money being the key word.
Club fines and recruiting suspensions have been lifted as well.

Haven't Norwood done rather well out of it all
And is it right that Cancer Season ticket holders get in free to the SANFL?
If that's true it's a complete farce and we have had our Dates spat on from behind

mighty_tiger_79 wrote:to put it simply it was in the best interests of SA FOOTY to allow these concessions to be approved because we needed the Crows in the competition

a load of bollocks basically

How will all this help this forum?

Yeah, but with Olsen and Trigg involved what did you expect!!!!!!

SAFOOTY.NET
Home of the most SHAFTED footy fans around SA ( EXCEPT Norwood )

holden78 wrote:SAFOOTY.NET
Home of the most SHAFTED footy fans around SA ( EXCEPT Norwood )

They did quite well out of it ... What a farcical situation.

dogbreath wrote:I think the SANFL is now be obliged to make all the individual club concession requests and replies public.

Totally agree, in the name of transparency.

Have never rated commission or Davies, but the depths they have gone to this time is flabbergasting. Can only assume clubs and media will do all they can to expose and fix this, or move vote of no confidence in commission

Bet Uby Faquoull happens .... it's more fixed then an Italian league game at the end of the season

holden78 wrote:

SDK wrote:Think you are right on the money here Dogbreath..... money being the key word.
Club fines and recruiting suspensions have been lifted as well.

Haven't Norwood done rather well out of it all
And is it right that Crows Season ticket holders get in free to the SANFL?
If that's true it's a complete farce and we have had our Dates spat on from behind

Is that fact Holden78. I am a Crows member and haven't received any communication outlining that.

eaglehaslanded wrote:Is that fact Holden78. I am a Crows member and haven't received any communication outlining that.

Whatever the AFC administration say then I'd believe the opposite anyway.

GO THE WESTERN BULLDOGS

Mark_Beswick wrote:GO THE BULLDOGS

They are getting into Sando on the radio............................snigger

Maybe we are seeing why the cats let Sando go and chose Scott instead. Some say he has problems on match days. Let's blame Trigg anyways he is a d..........

has been wrote:Maybe we are seeing why the cats let Sando go and chose Scott instead. Some say he has problems on match days. Let's blame Trigg anyways he is a d..........

Geelongs list was slighly ahead of Adelaides. His biggest problem on match day is his senior players not standing up when it matted in the last quater. He gave them the biggest bake at quarter time could hear it from level 3.

Interesting that west get concessions and commission is sacked with west people, shipway, Olsen, macaffrie, kerrin ...

If legal challenge is correct, these guys may have just dug their own graves

Bunton wrote:Interesting that west get concessions and commission is sacked with west people, shipway, Olsen, macaffrie, kerrin ...

If legal challenge is correct, these guys may have just dug their own graves

Doesnt every club get these concessions?
Surely every club that loses a home grown player to the Cows will be compensated in some way as they should

Jim05 wrote:

Bunton wrote:Interesting that west get concessions and commission is sacked with west people, shipway, Olsen, macaffrie, kerrin ...

If legal challenge is correct, these guys may have just dug their own graves

Doesnt every club get these concessions?
Surely every club that loses a home grown player to the Cows will be compensated in some way as they should

The point was Jim, that Norwood weren't allowed to recruit out of their zone, as a punishment for cheating. This should not have been "traded" for letting the crows in (particularly on such poor terms).
Not sure what concessions every other club gets for losing crows players. Either it's one of those details not deemed worthy of providing info on or there is no concession (for others) or more secret deals have been done.