South vs Sturt Review

All discussions to do with the SANFL

Re: South vs Sturt Review

Postby The Sleeping Giant » Mon Jul 18, 2011 12:01 pm

Pseudo wrote:
CENTURION wrote:...The same reason why We have embraced The Playford Alive project (as opposed to The Alan Parsons project ;) )

So bonding with Playford was a real Turn Of A Friendly Card? I'd still feel a lot safer up that way if there was an Eye In The Sky. Yet with all the recent premierships, the Dogs sure do have some Tales Of Mystery And Imagination to tell.


They play footy like a bunch of I Robots.
Cannabis is safer than alcohol
User avatar
The Sleeping Giant
Coach
 
Posts: 13693
Joined: Sat Apr 04, 2009 7:49 pm
Location: Not dying alone
Has liked: 69 times
Been liked: 193 times

Re: South vs Sturt Review

Postby Jim05 » Mon Jul 18, 2011 12:17 pm

The Sleeping Giant wrote:How seriously did the sanfl look at Darwin? Not at all. The sanfl missed the boat on grabbing the Thunder that's for sure.

I think the sticking point was the travel and hotel costs. There are some clubs in Adelaide who cant afford a bus to Noarlunga let alone a package to go to Darwin. If the NT government would cover the costs id be more than happy for them to join, would love to go up and watch the legs play every year
Jim05
Coach
 
 
Posts: 48384
Joined: Wed Sep 22, 2010 9:03 pm
Has liked: 1131 times
Been liked: 3848 times
Grassroots Team: South Gawler

Re: South vs Sturt Review

Postby SANFLnut » Mon Jul 18, 2011 12:32 pm

Jim05 wrote:
The Sleeping Giant wrote:How seriously did the sanfl look at Darwin? Not at all. The sanfl missed the boat on grabbing the Thunder that's for sure.

I think the sticking point was the travel and hotel costs. There are some clubs in Adelaide who cant afford a bus to Noarlunga let alone a package to go to Darwin. If the NT government would cover the costs id be more than happy for them to join, would love to go up and watch the legs play every year


Wouldn't have thought the Qld clubs were any better placed to cover this. I think the NT always wanted to join Qld and the line that they might join us was just part of their bargaining and negotiating for a better deal.
SANFLnut
Reserves
 
 
Posts: 880
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2009 6:06 pm
Has liked: 3 times
Been liked: 65 times
Grassroots Team: Happy Valley

Re: South vs Sturt Review

Postby The Sleeping Giant » Mon Jul 18, 2011 1:28 pm

What I think you will find is the NTFL wanted to join the sanfl but the sanfl and Adelaide being so conservative and backward passed on the idea. So the NTFL went for the 2nd best option.
Cannabis is safer than alcohol
User avatar
The Sleeping Giant
Coach
 
Posts: 13693
Joined: Sat Apr 04, 2009 7:49 pm
Location: Not dying alone
Has liked: 69 times
Been liked: 193 times

Re: South vs Sturt Review

Postby topsywaldron » Mon Jul 18, 2011 1:43 pm

CENTURION wrote:
topsywaldron wrote:
Voice wrote: Somehow your club has tapped into a method of getting players to bleed red, white and blue. I'm sure some of your players could get more coin in the Barossa or the like but they love playing for your club.


Not Justin Hardy, he took the money thanks.

you mean Heath Lawry, yes, he took the money but he also left because he couldn't hack the training committment.


as always Centurion is correct, I meant Lawry.
'People are not stupid. They know when they are being conned. And two reserves teams operating in a League competition will reduce it to a farce, a competition without a soul.'

Dion Hayman 24th July 2013
User avatar
topsywaldron
Veteran
 
Posts: 3512
Joined: Fri Nov 25, 2005 5:16 pm
Has liked: 21 times
Been liked: 218 times

Re: South vs Sturt Review

Postby Mopar Dog » Mon Jul 18, 2011 1:55 pm

The Sleeping Giant wrote:What I think you will find is the NTFL wanted to join the sanfl but the sanfl and Adelaide being so conservative and backward passed on the idea. So the NTFL went for the 2nd best option.


I thought the AFl helped the QAFl make NT thunder a better offer than the SANFL's.
Mopar Dog
Rookie
 
 
Posts: 209
Joined: Tue Mar 16, 2010 4:44 pm
Has liked: 0 time
Been liked: 0 time

Re: South vs Sturt Review

Postby The Sleeping Giant » Mon Jul 18, 2011 1:59 pm

After the sanfl said no.
Cannabis is safer than alcohol
User avatar
The Sleeping Giant
Coach
 
Posts: 13693
Joined: Sat Apr 04, 2009 7:49 pm
Location: Not dying alone
Has liked: 69 times
Been liked: 193 times

Re: South vs Sturt Review

Postby Sojourner » Mon Jul 18, 2011 2:03 pm

HOORAY PUNT wrote:Why do you go on about Mt Barker constantly. South had no choice but to move otherwise they wouldn't be here today. Sturt will be staying at Unley for the long term so are you OK if we approach the Govt for some help still ?


If South had not moved to Noarlunga we most certainley still would be here today much to the chagrin no doubt of the SANFL and several of its clubs. We had sorted out our debt problems well before the move was made and the venue at St Marys was doing quite nicely in terms of revenue.

Go approach the SANFL for as much as you like, I am sure if the Unley Council hand them the deeds to the oval that they will be more than happy to have a look at it. Whilst you are about it why not have them compulsorly acquire several of the houses next door for a carpark and get a lights project up and running?

Much like Peel Thunder in the WAFL, the SANFL will have little option but to start a new side in Mt Barker if an existing side does not want to move up there considering its the fastest growing now suburban area of Adelaide and has massive growth forecast over the next 25 years. If SANFL is about being local with all areas represented then good luck to them, I am sure the new club will do pretty well with all that area to tap into for players and support rather than in Gods waiting room in the inner city.
Steamranger, South Australia's best ever Tourist Attraction, Treat Yourself, Let your Money Buy you Happiness!!!
User avatar
Sojourner
Veteran
 
 
Posts: 3745
Joined: Wed Nov 22, 2006 7:25 pm
Has liked: 7 times
Been liked: 3 times
Grassroots Team: Ovingham

Re: South vs Sturt Review

Postby gossipgirl » Mon Jul 18, 2011 2:04 pm

well done south, I was pretty dubious about appointing Fuller for hundreds of years but it certainly is starting to pay off.
hopefully their success continues. Really good for the competition
Adelaide Crows World champions 2017 - Crows 4.11 to Lions 4.5
gossipgirl
League - Best 21
 
 
Posts: 1672
Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2009 6:04 pm
Location: Looking for all the Boats
Has liked: 1541 times
Been liked: 57 times
Grassroots Team: Boston

Re: South vs Sturt Review

Postby am Bays » Mon Jul 18, 2011 2:20 pm

Sojourner wrote:
HOORAY PUNT wrote:Why do you go on about Mt Barker constantly. South had no choice but to move otherwise they wouldn't be here today. Sturt will be staying at Unley for the long term so are you OK if we approach the Govt for some help still ?


If South had not moved to Noarlunga we most certainley still would be here today much to the chagrin no doubt of the SANFL and several of its clubs. We had sorted out our debt problems well before the move was made and the venue at St Marys was doing quite nicely in terms of revenue.

Go approach the SANFL for as much as you like, I am sure if the Unley Council hand them the deeds to the oval that they will be more than happy to have a look at it. Whilst you are about it why not have them compulsorly acquire several of the houses next door for a carpark and get a lights project up and running?

Much like Peel Thunder in the WAFL, the SANFL will have little option but to start a new side in Mt Barker if an existing side does not want to move up there considering its the fastest growing now suburban area of Adelaide and has massive growth forecast over the next 25 years. If SANFL is about being local with all areas represented then good luck to them, I am sure the new club will do pretty well with all that area to tap into for players and support rather than in Gods waiting room in the inner city.


Given it takes the same time (20-25 m) to travel from Mt Barker to Unley as it does to travel from Aldinga (where there is massive redevelopment occuring as well) to Noarlunga are you in favour of South relcoating to Aldinga - given you think Sturt should move to Mt Barker as well. I mean there are subdivisions occuring at Myponga and Compass, hate for those kids to be disadvantaged by not having a club close by and Dingy is certainly closer for them than Noarlunga is.
Let that be a lesson to you Port, no one beats the Bays five times in a row in a GF and gets away with it!!!
User avatar
am Bays
Coach
 
 
Posts: 19763
Joined: Sat Dec 17, 2005 11:04 pm
Location: The back bar at Lennies
Has liked: 184 times
Been liked: 2130 times

Re: South vs Sturt Review

Postby HOORAY PUNT » Mon Jul 18, 2011 2:25 pm

Sojourner wrote:
HOORAY PUNT wrote:Why do you go on about Mt Barker constantly. South had no choice but to move otherwise they wouldn't be here today. Sturt will be staying at Unley for the long term so are you OK if we approach the Govt for some help still ?


If South had not moved to Noarlunga we most certainley still would be here today much to the chagrin no doubt of the SANFL and several of its clubs. We had sorted out our debt problems well before the move was made and the venue at St Marys was doing quite nicely in terms of revenue.

Go approach the SANFL for as much as you like, I am sure if the Unley Council hand them the deeds to the oval that they will be more than happy to have a look at it. Whilst you are about it why not have them compulsorly acquire several of the houses next door for a carpark and get a lights project up and running?

Much like Peel Thunder in the WAFL, the SANFL will have little option but to start a new side in Mt Barker if an existing side does not want to move up there considering its the fastest growing now suburban area of Adelaide and has massive growth forecast over the next 25 years. If SANFL is about being local with all areas represented then good luck to them, I am sure the new club will do pretty well with all that area to tap into for players and support rather than in Gods waiting room in the inner city.


Now you want Sturt to approach the SANFL ? What are you going on about compulsory acquisitions for , probably going a bit far now.
So Sturt moves to Mt Barker and ignores their supporter base in Adelaide in the hope that they will all follow them up there and hope that thhe Mt Barker locals support Sturt ? Why would a person living up there stop and support Sturt if they alraeday follow another club ?

Like I said , move on from Mt Barker as Sturt won't be there.
HOORAY PUNT
 

Re: South vs Sturt Review

Postby Ronnie » Mon Jul 18, 2011 2:32 pm

Sojourner wrote:
HOORAY PUNT wrote:Why do you go on about Mt Barker constantly. South had no choice but to move otherwise they wouldn't be here today. Sturt will be staying at Unley for the long term so are you OK if we approach the Govt for some help still ?


If South had not moved to Noarlunga we most certainley still would be here today much to the chagrin no doubt of the SANFL and several of its clubs. We had sorted out our debt problems well before the move was made and the venue at St Marys was doing quite nicely in terms of revenue.

Go approach the SANFL for as much as you like, I am sure if the Unley Council hand them the deeds to the oval that they will be more than happy to have a look at it. Whilst you are about it why not have them compulsorly acquire several of the houses next door for a carpark and get a lights project up and running?

Much like Peel Thunder in the WAFL, the SANFL will have little option but to start a new side in Mt Barker if an existing side does not want to move up there considering its the fastest growing now suburban area of Adelaide and has massive growth forecast over the next 25 years. If SANFL is about being local with all areas represented then good luck to them, I am sure the new club will do pretty well with all that area to tap into for players and support rather than in Gods waiting room in the inner city.


All the inner city clubs like Sturt, Norwood, North Adelaide etc aren't about to give up 100 years of their identity to go to the outer burbs.
Having said that Sturt should look at what they can do in Mount Barker zone and that can come in various forms.
It's a balancing act though, in some ways an Oval 5km from the CBD is a better option than one miles away
Demographics change too, you would be surprised how many young families there are in places like Highgate, Goodwood etc. Older parents who have settled in their desired areas often have young kids
still at primary school.
Mt Barker to Unley is not that far anway.
Ronnie
Reserves
 
Posts: 809
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2006 7:57 am
Has liked: 8 times
Been liked: 91 times

Re: South vs Sturt Review

Postby Bunton » Mon Jul 18, 2011 2:33 pm

I think Hooray Punt is correct. Sturt will stay at Unley until either the bank closes them down due to crippling debt, or the tip they play at gets shut down for OH&S reasons.
Bunton
Under 16s
 
 
Posts: 423
Joined: Sun Nov 22, 2009 3:41 pm
Has liked: 0 time
Been liked: 5 times
Grassroots Team: Goodwood Saints

Re: South vs Sturt Review

Postby blueandwhite » Mon Jul 18, 2011 2:56 pm

"Given it takes the same time (20-25 m) to travel from Mt Barker to Unley as it does to travel from Aldinga (where there is massive redevelopment occuring as well) to Noarlunga are you in favour of South relcoating to Aldinga - given you think Sturt should move to Mt Barker as well. I mean there are subdivisions occuring at Myponga and Compass, hate for those kids to be disadvantaged by not having a club close by and Dingy is certainly closer for them than Noarlunga

Great idea! ........South move to Aldinga
why not Cape Decouedic on Kangaroo Island..?
Mate we have been on the move for 120 yrs to accommodate the whims and whinges of other sanfl clubs and the sanfl. Our original area was around Halifax St in the city and believe it or not Kent Town!!! Time for someone else to shift pal, NOT US. :evil: :evil:
Tiocfaidh ár Lá
User avatar
blueandwhite
League - Best 21
 
 
Posts: 1659
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2005 6:00 pm
Location: Cloney Harp
Has liked: 26 times
Been liked: 219 times
Grassroots Team: Jamestown-Peterborough

Re: South vs Sturt Review

Postby ORDoubleBlues » Mon Jul 18, 2011 3:53 pm

South were certainly playing for each other and giving off to the best option for the team. Wundke was great up forward with 8 goals obviously, I can see why Cross is doing so well in the Advertiser player of the year voting and Stribling - some on this site don't seem to think much of his football - is starting to play the type of football that was expected of him a few years ago and I'm not sure if that's because he has a coach who believes in him or if he has really knuckled down.

Thought it was a better performance against the week before but South really marched on in the last quarter.

Seems Brodie Martin is really struggling at the moment with his decision making and confidence. Is harsh for someone who has suffered serious knee injuries but would feel at this stage his AFL career is over unless he can work his way into Crows before year is out.
R.I.P. Patrice Lumumba 1925 - 1961
User avatar
ORDoubleBlues
League - Top 5
 
 
Posts: 3276
Joined: Mon Nov 21, 2005 5:36 pm
Has liked: 2 times
Been liked: 16 times
Grassroots Team: Wisanger

Re: South vs Sturt Review

Postby HOORAY PUNT » Mon Jul 18, 2011 4:23 pm

Bunton wrote:I think Hooray Punt is correct. Sturt will stay at Unley until either the bank closes them down due to crippling debt, or the tip they play at gets shut down for OH&S reasons.



What bank Bunton and can you also inform us of the crippling debt . Look forward to your response.
HOORAY PUNT
 

Re: South vs Sturt Review

Postby Sojourner » Mon Jul 18, 2011 4:51 pm

HOORAY PUNT wrote:Now you want Sturt to approach the SANFL ? What are you going on about compulsory acquisitions for , probably going a bit far now.
So Sturt moves to Mt Barker and ignores their supporter base in Adelaide in the hope that they will all follow them up there and hope that thhe Mt Barker locals support Sturt ? Why would a person living up there stop and support Sturt if they alraeday follow another club ?

Like I said , move on from Mt Barker as Sturt won't be there.


I think you are being a bit harsh there Lester, why wouldent the Sturt faithful continue to follow Sturt if its really only such a short trip up the freeway?

I dont know that compulsory acquistion is out of the question either, why not join forces with Adelaide United and have full terraced stadium built at Unley? It would be good for the State and no doubt good for the club to play night footy at with Adelaide Oval being unavailable.
Steamranger, South Australia's best ever Tourist Attraction, Treat Yourself, Let your Money Buy you Happiness!!!
User avatar
Sojourner
Veteran
 
 
Posts: 3745
Joined: Wed Nov 22, 2006 7:25 pm
Has liked: 7 times
Been liked: 3 times
Grassroots Team: Ovingham

Re: South vs Sturt Review

Postby Bluedemon » Mon Jul 18, 2011 5:50 pm

Mopar Dog wrote:
The Sleeping Giant wrote:What I think you will find is the NTFL wanted to join the sanfl but the sanfl and Adelaide being so conservative and backward passed on the idea. So the NTFL went for the 2nd best option.


I thought the AFl helped the QAFl make NT thunder a better offer than the SANFL's.


yes they did, they all joined the new NEAFL competition
SAFooty.net, where you hear the community football news first
User avatar
Bluedemon
Assistant Coach
 
 
Posts: 4960
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 1:30 pm
Location: Goodwood
Has liked: 136 times
Been liked: 106 times

Re: South vs Sturt Review

Postby CUTTERMAN » Mon Jul 18, 2011 7:35 pm

Bunton wrote:I think Hooray Punt is correct. Sturt will stay at Unley until either the bank closes them down due to crippling debt, or the tip they play at gets shut down for OH&S reasons.

I'm not sure what your problem is Bunton but nearly every Sturt supporter on this thread has been happy for your team's increasing success and congratulated South on their victory. Yet you keep crapping on about Unley Oval wahh wahh wahh, Sturt are bankrupt, close them down, pissfartpissfart. You're like a bitchy old woman whose only friend is the dead cat in her cupboard. Try to negate the crap emanating from your gob and just enjoy your team's journey. Life can be enjoyable if you let it.
'PAFC don't want any advantages in the SANFL. It would only take away from any achievements we earned.'
Keith Thomas ABC 891 Radio, 21/6/14.
CUTTERMAN
League - Top 5
 
 
Posts: 2962
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 10:50 pm
Has liked: 214 times
Been liked: 126 times

Re: South vs Sturt Review

Postby CENTURION » Mon Jul 18, 2011 8:43 pm

wow.....I think, in closing, We can agree that Sturt won't be going to Unley.......but someone will one day.....and soon.
Member No. 988 & PROUD to sponsor The CDFC!!
User avatar
CENTURION
Coach
 
 
Posts: 11101
Joined: Sun Nov 13, 2005 3:11 am
Location: Campbelltown, 5074
Has liked: 204 times
Been liked: 112 times
Grassroots Team: Salisbury

PreviousNext

Board index   Football  SANFL

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 7 guests

Around the place

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