SA Footy

beenreal wrote:

Pseudo wrote:

beenreal wrote:OR, how about the C)orrect answer. No-one could ever accuse the AFL of being altruistic, so it was drop the "V" and charge the License fee.

Actually the C)orrect answer was "divide and conquer: target the weakest link". Which they did.

What, Norwood?

Not even close.
Hint: all they had to say was, "Join, and we'll buy you a NEW thong, to match that one you FOUND!"
SANFL as a stand alone comp was history from then on.

blueandwhite wrote:Am I the only one who cringes when the Crows refer to its reserves team, as playing in "the State league..".....

No your not. I really hate it. Its called the SANFL you ****.

Its like that crowval shit. God that was disrespectful to Adelaide Oval itself an then they called the SANFL the state league. Bloody hell, just a few things that start to annoy you.

It IS a state league though.

And the Crowval thing was pretty cringeworthy but also mountains and molehills and all that.

People have been talking state leagues for a while.
We've just been hearing it more lately.

I quite like the term State League.

What makes me cringe is the term Local Footy when applied to SANFL.

To me Local Footy is Hindmarsh v Redwood Park whereas League Football or State League Football is Central District v Eagles, Norwood v West Adelaide etc. The most cringeworthy term is when the name of the League is pronounced as a word e.g. Sanfull(or worse Snaflle ) instead of initial letters i.e. S. A. N. F. L.;

Agreed . state league is what we are .... and the best state league is what we should strive to be (not 2nd best comp to the AFL).

I much prefer the Crows (SANFL) being referred to their state league rather than reserves team.

As for Sanfulll ... I also agree but alas one of the highest ranking SANFL official's says it all the time so it's hard to tell others they are wrong.

Might start referring to SAAFL as the district league.

The Van Berlo injury is good news if anyone still cares about winning in the SANFL - it makes the Ravens significantly weaker as now their best midfielder is replaced by someone not up to SANFL standard for the whole season (probably).
Another example that the competition is now a shambles.

Dogwatcher wrote:People have been talking state leagues for a while.
We've just been hearing it more lately.

Guilty, your honour.

just need a few more Van Berlo injuries before Rd1 to really highlight what a farce this is

Yep its a farce. Some young kids going to play up a level which may or may not break him too.

yep what a farce, some kid gets to play league football that otherwise wouldnt have been, in the hope of fulfilling his dream of maybe cracking into the AFL one day.

what a farce

PhilH wrote:Agreed . state league is what we are .... and the best state league is what we should strive to be (not 2nd best comp to the AFL).

I much prefer the Crows (SANFL) being referred to their state league rather than reserves team.

As for Sanfulll ... I also agree but alas one of the highest ranking SANFL official's says it all the time so it's hard to tell others they are wrong.

The Crows and Port can use whatever euphemism for their reserves sides they like. They are what they are, teams competing for what is not their clubs' primary consideration.

For what it's worth, if I had a real issue with "Sanfull" (cringe-worthy, for sure), the fact that the Emperor indulges wouldn't make it any more difficult for me (personally) to "tell others they're wrong" if I were to ever feel so inclined. I'd have no problem with showing my complete absence of veneration for the man.

Yes they are teams.

AFL RESERVES teams .

bennymacca wrote:yep what a farce, some kid gets to play league football that otherwise wouldnt have been, in the hope of fulfilling his dream of maybe cracking into the AFL one day.

what a farce

In my view, you've got to earn a game of league football. I think if we're letting players play in the SANFL who everyone acknowledges are not up to standard, we've got a farce on our hands.

there always used to be 10 teams...

and i think we can all agree that there are many league standard footballers in the country leagues that dont play for whatever reason, but might be (or already have been) enticed back for this.

bennymacca wrote:there always used to be 10 teams...

And much fewer South Australian's playing in the VFL/AFL than there is today.

But these players aren't getting in on a talent basis. They're going to be getting league games to fill some holes in the AFL Reserves sides. Sure some of them might be okay league footballers, but they're obviously not the best on offer; their payments reflect this. Either way, they're not getting picked on talent.

This is why it would have been much better if the AFL Reserves teams were in the SANFL Reserves. Nobody would mind if hacks were getting games there. I know the SANFL isn't what it was pre-1990, but that doesn't justify giving players league games who haven't earned them. This is what people meant when they were talking about 'integrity'.

The SANFL shouldn't be a development league - that should be for the U/18s or Reserves. In my mind, as soon as it becomes about development, or 'giving guys a chance' at league level, the SANFL loses its integrity. These things are not consistent with winning at all costs.

RB wrote:But these players aren't getting in on a talent basis. They're going to be getting league games to fill some holes in the AFL Reserves sides. Sure some of them might be okay league footballers, but they're obviously not the best on offer; their payments reflect this. Either way, they're not getting picked on talent.

This is why it would have been much better if the AFL Reserves teams were in the SANFL Reserves. Nobody would mind if hacks were getting games there. I know the SANFL isn't what it was pre-1990, but that doesn't justify giving players league games who haven't earned them. This is what people meant when they were talking about 'integrity'.

The SANFL shouldn't be a development league - that should be for the U/18s or Reserves. In my mind, as soon as it becomes about development, or 'giving guys a chance' at league level, the SANFL loses its integrity. These things are not consistent with winning at all costs.

Would've been the sane option, to protect the integrity of league football, and, to give the Crows essentially what they were after. But of course, under the brinkmanship of Trigg, it was a case, allegedly, of knicking off to the SAAFL instead of accepting the Reserves option!

I've got no time for the plastic Adelaide Football Club and what it represents, but even less for some of their supporters who abandoned the SANFL when the circus came to town. They know who they are. They should hang their heads in shame.

RB wrote:The SANFL shouldn't be a development league - that should be for the U/18s or Reserves. In my mind, as soon as it becomes about development, or 'giving guys a chance' at league level, the SANFL loses its integrity. These things are not consistent with winning at all costs.

Bingo.