Bottom line: Do you support the Foxtel Cup?

[redandblack]

CP, at the risk of confirming I've got a closed mind on this , it wasn't a major point to those clubs who agreed to join.

I'm still waiting for a decent answer to my proposition that it's just extra exposure for the sponsor.

I'm sure Mistral are happy with North Adelaide.

tipper, you're right, I'm not holding my breath for any apologies, but I've copped plenty for being right about it

[whufc]

mmmmmm....Sponsor name is on the guernsey..............................but barely visible and will definatly be struggled to been seen during action in a game.

[Booney]

mmmmmm....Sponsor name is on the guernsey..............................but barely visible and will definatly be struggled to been seen during action in a game.

Straws.....must....keep........clutching.....

[Hondo]

mmmmmm....Sponsor name is on the guernsey..............................but barely visible and will definatly be struggled to been seen during action in a game.

It's a TV event moreso than a live action event.

With lots of close ups on national TV, Mistral would surely be pretty happy with that free national exposure

Geez, 30 years ago sponsors paid money for logos that size on everyday SANFL guernseys

[Hazydog]

Who do Centrals have to prove themselves to ?

They don't have to prove it to anyone but themselves, should they wish to...

That said, since they haven't taken up the gauntlet, they can't profess to be the best team outside the AFL...

That is and remains just theory...

I think it's true, but alas I won't be able to point to any positive proof of that...

well, We are. If North, West or Port win the comp., we know it's a worthless competition to be in, as We prove every year that We are better than them (for now). WAFL sides, as we all know, aren't as good as SANFL sides, so We know We're better there as well. As for the others, let's face facts. I don't need to say any more.

I would have thought that if an SANFL team wins the Foxtel Cup - the SANFL Premier for 2011 would surely have the mantle of being the best team outside of the AFL!

[JK]

CP, at the risk of confirming I've got a closed mind on this , it wasn't a major point to those clubs who agreed to join.

So does that automatically mean it shouldn't have been a major point for those that declined?

I'm still waiting for a decent answer to my proposition that it's just extra exposure for the sponsor.

I've given you everything I've been able to give you .. Did you contact our CEO as per the information I provided? For someone who hates conspiracy theories, you seem to have trouble accepting the reasons provided by Central, Norwood, WWT, Glenelg and Sturt as to why they declined participation.

You also seem to believe they are wrong for making the decision they have, yet I would suggest those people responsible for overseeing and running these clubs are perhaps just slightly better positioned to make a decision in their clubs best interests, than say, yourself.

I know the loose lips at West Lakes can often provide Westies people with some insights to the other SANFL clubs, but it's not nearly enough for you to decide what is or isn't beneficial for any club that isn't your own.

Anything I've missed?

[tipper]

CP, at the risk of confirming I've got a closed mind on this , it wasn't a major point to those clubs who agreed to join.

I'm still waiting for a decent answer to my proposition that it's just extra exposure for the sponsor.

I'm sure Mistral are happy with North Adelaide.

tipper, you're right, I'm not holding my breath for any apologies, but I've copped plenty for being right about it

I know you have. and i guess i am fence sitting, but for some clubs, it may still be that what North have been "allocated" (their word from the link i posted, not mine) may not suit other clubs. but i am only speculating, i have no "inside" connection to any SANFL club, including North, hence me saying may, repeadtedly

once again i think it does look good, and obviously it fits whatever criteria North have in their sponsorship arrangements, so we move on. North are competing, the guernsey is recognisable as a North Guernsey (thank god we arent using last years "clash" strip, i would be mortified if we had to wear that on the national stage ) and our major sponsor is represented. Bring on teh Foxtel Cup!!

[Hazydog]

mmmmmm....Sponsor name is on the guernsey..............................but barely visible and will definatly be struggled to been seen during action in a game.

It's a TV event moreso than a live action event.

With lots of close ups on national TV, Mistral would surely be pretty happy with that free national exposure

Yep - I'm sorry WHUFC but this clearly puts any sponsorship gripes the clubs may have had well and truly to bed.

Unless I hear proof that the AFL were not going to allow Centrals to have Holden on their guernsey, we can strike this concern off the list.

[sjt]

mmmmmm....Sponsor name is on the guernsey..............................but barely visible and will definatly be struggled to been seen during action in a game.

It's a TV event moreso than a live action event.

With lots of close ups on national TV, Mistral would surely be pretty happy with that free national exposure

Yep - I'm sorry WHUFC but this clearly puts any sponsorship gripes the clubs may have had well and truly to bed.

Unless I hear proof that the AFL were not going to allow Centrals to have Holden on their guernsey, we can strike this concern off the list.

The problem was, when the clubs had to commit so many of these issues weren't resolved. There was too many unknowns.

[Hondo]

SJT

What did those unknowns matter when it was all about the SANFL premiership apparently?

If all those unknowns (that all other invitees bar 4 were prepared to trust would get sorted) were knowns would the SANFL premiership then not be as important?

As an aside, I wish those 5 clubs had never used the SANFL premiership argument. It's done nothing other than divide SANFL fans. I think they should have just said they weren't interested in the concept as it was presented to them at the time and left it at that. Sometimes you can explain things too much and their long list of reasons should have been summarised into a simple one liner. Just IMO.

[redandblack]

CP, I think we're at cross purposes here.

I supported my club's decision, as do you.

I originally said that so many on here had been calling for a national comp for years. We've had threads about it at times.

My posts have generally been in defence of the competition and answering points of debate about it.

The other clubs, including Norwood, are entitled to make their own decisions and I have (hopefully) respected that. I have defended myself and Westies from the attacks on the comp and our decision. It started mainly because I felt those attacks were extremely patronising, along the lines that West had no chance of a premiership, so it was OK to play in a Mickey Mouse competition.

Along the way, I've just sought to put a contrary point of view. I have to say that the opposing point of view has shifted the goalposts many times.

I reiterate, those not taking part can suit themselves, but my argument has mainly been to debate the issue.

I think it's fair to say I've taken as much as I've given.

PS 1: I'm happy to phone Dom Shepley and will do as soon as I can.

PS2: sjt, the sponsor on the guernsey issue was known long ago, so Hazydog is correct. As usual, Hondo is the voice of reason and logic.

[topsywaldron]

As an aside, I wish those 5 clubs had never used the SANFL premiership argument. It's done nothing other than divide SANFL fans.

That's a bad thing?

I tend to figure if North, West and Port said yes we did the right thing by saying no.

[7-Dog]

With the sponsorhip that may have played apart in some teams not coming on board.

Wouldn't the deals that were in place, not have any affect to the club for 2011 in the Foxtel cup?
Meaning, North's agreement with Mistral for example. The deal was done before the Foxtel cup, so Mistral get everything out of North & vice versa for the SANFL season. Sure North do the right thing by Mistral, but are they contractually bound by it?

The only team I thought had a legitimate concern was Centrals.

[tipper]

Not disagreeing with you at all, but why would centrals have a legitimate concern where other clubs wouldnt with regards to sponsorship arrangements?

[sjt]

SJT

What did those unknowns matter when it was all about the SANFL premiership apparently?

If all those unknowns (that all other invitees bar 4 were prepared to trust would get sorted) were knowns would the SANFL premiership then not be as important?

As an aside, I wish those 5 clubs had never used the SANFL premiership argument. It's done nothing other than divide SANFL fans. I think they should have just said they weren't interested in the concept as it was presented to them at the time and left it at that. Sometimes you can explain things too much and their long list of reasons should have been summarised into a simple one liner. Just IMO.

This is getting boring. It wasn't "all about" the SANFL premiership. It's pretty simple look at the clubs (that declined)press releases (again), the reasons are there. Surely with any decision ever made you weigh up the "pros and cons", that's what they did, ffs.
As if they were ever going to knock it back with out providing reasons for their members.

[JK]

Yes R&B, I think we must be at cross purposes ... I don't recall any Westies bashing, or any of the 3 participating clubs being referred to as "scabs" or anything along those lines.

IMHO there seems to be far greater heat being placed upon those clubs who've declined from those supporting teams that have (or would have) accepted.

I agree the goalposts have shifted, on both sides of the argument(s), to suit posters' club allegiances (with some notable exceptions from a handful who were disappointed their club didn't accept the offer when presented with the opportunity).

My initial stance and comments haven't changed - I'm confident that all 8 clubs have made their decision, based upon available information at the time, that best suits their club.

I don't think it needs to be a case of right or wrong, I view it as simply "all right" .. But that is obviously not the view of others chasing vindication of their opinions, that's fair enough.

Again best of luck to West, North and Port, I think this topic (and the 3 or 4 others with exactly the same discussion) has been done to death and Im happy to dip out now until the action starts, because I think this pre-comp talk has run its race.

[redandblack]

That's fair enough, CP.

PS: As for Westies bashing, refer to your colleague Topsy's post 3 posts up as a very mild example of a recurring theme.

However, I agree with the sentiments you express.

[Hondo]

This is getting boring. It wasn't "all about" the SANFL premiership.

No, it's not boring. Well, not to me. It's interesting seeing your side of the debate duck, weave and change the story as you go (slight tongue in cheek there).

If it wasn't all about the SANFL premiership (and I actually don't believe it was even 20% about the SANFL premiership) then there are a lot of supporters out there who have made mileage out of that exact issue for what now seems no real reason. It's a gripe not necessarially just against you. I don't recall if you used the "we only care about the SANFL flag and you don't" line TBH.

What about WHUFC who says he overhead a reason (the main reason) that I don't believe was even in the official press release Classic.

[7-Dog]

Not disagreeing with you at all, but why would centrals have a legitimate concern where other clubs wouldnt with regards to sponsorship arrangements?

Because they are Holden sponsored, I don't know how much power the AFL's sponsor has in this competition.

[Wedgie]

Well at this stage of voting 58% of people who's clubs aren't even competing in the comp support it while 85% of people who's clubs are in it support it.
Overall 68% of all people support it.
Sounds like a goer so far with lots of interest!