The 1962 Report Regarding Club Numbers

Anything to do with the history of the SANFL

The 1962 Report Regarding Club Numbers

Postby spell_check » Wed Aug 19, 2009 6:42 pm

This appeared in the Advertiser, 27/6/1975:

A report by a special committee appointed by the SANFL 13 years ago, predicted with startling accuracy the serious problems now facing the League. Special investigators Ray Kutcher, Keith Wyatt and Don Brebner wrned against the admission of Woodville and Central District to the League competition. The report, possibly the most researched and important document ever commissioned by the League, was ignored.

It was not officially received by the delegates and was never discussed at League level. The report recommended that:
* South Adelaide be excluded from the competition
* Woodville not be admitted and,
* A team from the Elizabeth area be included

In 1962 there was a growing feeling among the League delegates that games were not attracting enough spectators and that the competition needed "a shot in the arm". In October of the same year, the League delegates appointed Messrs. Brebner, Kutcher and Wyatt to investigate the immediate and long term needs of football.

After months of diligent research and collating information from Government departments, town planning authorities, the Education Department, councils and other sporting organisations, they prepared the controversial 27 page report for the delegates.

In recommending the exclusion of South Adelaide, the investigators reported that:
"the present metropolitan area has sufficient potential, for only seven teams and that three teams from the Salisbury, Tea Tree Gully and Noarlunga areas would produce an ideal 10-team competition in 20 years." It added "It is with considerable regret that we have come to the conclusion that the interests of the game demand that the southern zone (encompassing South, Sturt and Glenelg) be re-allocated on the basis that only Glenelg and Sturt share the zone."

The investigators reasoned that South did not have any substantial following, that it did not have a ground and that it was not as established as Glenelg or Sturt. "By 1971 the zone will support only two teams on a par with other league clubs" the report predicted "and already (1962) the resources are insufficient for three teams".

While suggesting Souths demise, the report recommended that a team representing the Elizabeth area be admitted to the competition in 1963 and that the South club be allocated the Elizabeth area, then earmarked for Central District.

The report was adamant that Woodville be not admitted. "Investigations show that clubs in the western area will find it hard enough to keep pace as things are. While the present western area may well be able to provide a team of League standard in the immediate future, the admission of a further team would ultimately raise problems of a very serious nature. It is felt that if another team were admitted at this time, the ultimate results would be that one or other of the four teams in the zone would eventually have to be dissolved because of the lack of suitable population".
spell_check
Coach
 
 
Posts: 18811
Joined: Fri Oct 28, 2005 11:56 pm
Has liked: 48 times
Been liked: 224 times

Re: The 1962 Report Regarding Club Numbers

Postby spell_check » Wed Aug 19, 2009 8:58 pm

And look how much of that report was correct.

-A team is now based at Noarlunga
-A team is still based at Elizabeth
-Serious problems occured in the western area in the long run
-The nearest thing to dissolution occured - the amalgamation of two of those four western teams

Imagine if the plan was adhered to? Even South moving to Noarlunga would have sufficed as the region grew within time, and then the TTG team by 1982.

But the plan wouldn't have counted on a SA team joining the VFL.
spell_check
Coach
 
 
Posts: 18811
Joined: Fri Oct 28, 2005 11:56 pm
Has liked: 48 times
Been liked: 224 times

Re: The 1962 Report Regarding Club Numbers

Postby Wedgie » Thu Aug 20, 2009 1:21 pm

Great get Spelly!

What a pity they were ignored as their foresight was incredible for the time. One can't help but think how much better and stronger the comp might now be if they were listened to.
Armchair expert wrote:Such a great club are Geelong
User avatar
Wedgie
Site Admin
 
 
Posts: 51721
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2005 8:00 am
Has liked: 2153 times
Been liked: 4093 times
Grassroots Team: Noarlunga

Re: The 1962 Report Regarding Club Numbers

Postby nickname » Thu Aug 20, 2009 2:20 pm

Very good get spelly. So who were the idiots who ignored this advice? And I wonder what the reason for their pig-headedness was.
nickname
League Bench Warmer
 
 
Posts: 1366
Joined: Tue Jan 01, 2008 5:33 pm
Has liked: 0 time
Been liked: 0 time

Re: The 1962 Report Regarding Club Numbers

Postby stampy » Fri Aug 21, 2009 11:45 am

what great foresight those blokes had. why were they commissioned to do the research and report their findings and recommendations to the sanfl if it was to be ignored?

i have been led to believe that woodville were admitted in an attempt to curb ports dominance of the competition, however it backfired and spelt the beginning of the end for west torrens. When you look at it, who where the crazy fools who were responsible for woodville being admitted? anyone with any common sense would have known that the western suburbs had their quota of clubs - crazy decision :shock:
Go The Tiges!!!
stampy
Coach
 
 
Posts: 9019
Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2006 5:21 pm
Location: at church asking for divine intervention
Has liked: 75 times
Been liked: 364 times
Grassroots Team: Christies Beach

Re: The 1962 Report Regarding Club Numbers

Postby Leaping Lindner » Fri Aug 21, 2009 10:34 pm

When the electorate system was made compulsory in 1899 there was talk in the local press of West (who had joined the SAFA in 1897) and South merging and becoming Adelaide (taking the square mile of Adelaide as their district) and further talk of letting a team from Gawler back into the competition. There was even talk of it again in 1905.
What might have been.....
"They got Burton suits, ha, you think it's funny,turning rebellion into money"
User avatar
Leaping Lindner
Assistant Coach
 
 
Posts: 4325
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2005 12:02 pm
Location: Victoria
Has liked: 17 times
Been liked: 48 times

Re: The 1962 Report Regarding Club Numbers

Postby whufc » Sat Aug 22, 2009 3:59 pm

No way i could never have brought myself to support SOUTH :shock:
RIP PH408 63notoutforever
User avatar
whufc
Coach
 
 
Posts: 28535
Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 10:56 am
Location: Blakeview
Has liked: 5904 times
Been liked: 2814 times
Grassroots Team: BSR

Re: The 1962 Report Regarding Club Numbers

Postby dedja » Sat Aug 22, 2009 4:07 pm

Easy to criticise with the benefit of nearly 50 years hindsight ... ;)
Dunno, I’m just an idiot.
User avatar
dedja
Coach
 
 
Posts: 23269
Joined: Fri Jun 22, 2007 11:10 pm
Has liked: 640 times
Been liked: 1532 times

Re: The 1962 Report Regarding Club Numbers

Postby stampy » Sat Aug 22, 2009 7:26 pm

i think you are being a tad diplomatic dedj!
Go The Tiges!!!
stampy
Coach
 
 
Posts: 9019
Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2006 5:21 pm
Location: at church asking for divine intervention
Has liked: 75 times
Been liked: 364 times
Grassroots Team: Christies Beach


Board index   Football  SANFL History Forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests

Around the place

Competitions   SANFL Official Site | Country Footy SA | Southern Football League | VFL Footy
Club Forums   Snouts Louts | The Roost | Redlegs Forum |