Ron Fuller on club zones

[DOC]

Has anything changed?
Wednesday 14 March - By Ronny's Blog

During the week I went to my pigeon hole at work and in it was an interesting article about zones and population of clubs in the SANFL sent to me by a long time supporter.
Just for your reminder the current system is based on population via the census, although it is stated that it ought to be based on population and participation of male youths between 13 and 18 in the clubs zone.
The recent participation stats say that South is last with only 60 teams from clubs or schools.
For your information this is the list in order of participation.

Glenelg 112 teams from clubs or schools.
Norwood 110
West 95
Sturt 93
Eagles 83
Port 77
North 68
Central 62 &
South 60.

The article I spoke of in my pigeon hole was from the News dated February 28, 1929 & it read.

SOUTH OFFICIALS INDIGNANT

REJECTION OF CLAIM FOR LARGER AREA

Will consider withdrawal from league

“ By its decision the South Australian National Football League has sacfificed South Adelaide” said J.L. Kay. ( secretary of South)
He was referring to the league having rejected a recommendation of a committee to give South more territory.
South have the smallest area, the smallest population and the smallest number of residential dwellings of any district according to Mr. Kay.
Officials will consider seriously whether the club will withdraw from the league.
Interesting statistics showing the territory allotted to each league club, the respective population and dwellings, and the area of vacant land available for expansion were placed by South before the committee which considered the question of the redistribution of districts.

The statistics are as follows.
Population Dwellings Area in acres Vacant land in acres.

Sturt 58, 362 13,823 17,797 11,280
Norwood 54, 971 12,874 15,080 11, 430
Port 45, 727 11,181 13,432 8,332
Torrens 44, 726 8,117 8,673 5,132
North 40,187 10,030 5,156 2,610
Glenelg 24, 144 5,635 16, 740 12,513
West 23, 216 5,760 7,587 5,500
South 21,580 4,803 1,263 150

( This was before Central and Woodville came in but there are many similarities. )

This was further reported.

“ I have it on good authority that Sturt was prepared to make the sacrifice, provided Norwood were. The latter club, however, would only voluntarily concede their portion on condition that South handed back to them Kent Town and Hackney, areas transferred to South seven years ago and having a population of nearly 5,000 people. Thus Norwood would have shown a profit on the transaction.
In the circumstances it was voted upon, and for some obscure reason the league delegates decided that South Adelaide must continue to struggle against the odds. There is just a possibility that something may be done for the city team when the new league executive assumes control after the annual meeting on Monday march 18.
I have no hesitation in saying that the majority of football followers would like to see South Adelaide given better treatment by the league.
Followers of football were astounded when it became known that the league had declined to rearrange the football areas.
The officials of South Adelaide Club concerned are more than astounded. So keenly do they feel what they term the injustice of the controlling body that it is likely that the committee will convene a meeting of members with a view to discussing the disbandment of the club.”

In conclusion Mr. Kay said: “Is there any incentive for officials and players to fight on under such overwhelming odds year after year when the serious position of the club, after having been placed at length before the controllers of the game in this state, is treated with apparent indifference.”

The zones did not change until much later and South didn’t disband of course but it is obvious who was running the competition in those days despite a “New league executive “ which was probably the equivalent of the current Commission.

Although it was from 1929, has anything really changed?

Let’s hope history doesn’t repeat itself.

Ron Fuller.

[topsywaldron]

A new slogan for the Panthers?

'South Adelaide - Eighty Three Years of Complaining about Zones'

[HOORAY PUNT]

Well done to the supporter that "dropped it off " . He has done well , he is 143 !

Maybe Ron might want to stop hiding behind letters and come out and state what he is really trying to get at.

Oh and maybe he might wish to have a look at how poorly South have worked their area in the past and then focus on how to better do it in the future. A very very fertile bit of soil South sit/sat on .

[am Bays]

Bloody hell here we go again, stuck for topics again Ronny? Gone to the top of the pile (or should it be scraping the bottom of the barrel again) and going to start working through them all again? When can we anticipate the AFL team in the SANFL musings again???

Simple question for Ron? How many of those participants at the clubs in the Glenelg zone can ctually play for Glenelg??? Here a news flash for your Ronny, not all!! Glenelgs number of clubs is inflated by the fact that we have three clubs/schools located within a combined distance of 400 m of Westies zone: PHOS Camden 100 m, Immanuel College 50 m (right on the boundary actually - Morphett Rd), Westminster College 250 m. I know of kids who play for schools aligned to the Glenelg FC (Sheidow Park), but residentially they are tied to Westies.
Also how many of those clubs schools have double ups? That is how many kids play school footy on a Saturday but club footy on a Sunday?? I knew of a kid who lived at Aldinga but went to school and played club footy in our zone (so played in the Glenelg development squads last year) but now he has moved to Aberfoyle park so will end up being a Westies kid.

Basing a clubs zone on the number of schools/teams (partipation) is more flawed than the quantity of 15 year old males based on offical census data beacuse local clubs/school areas cross the "borders" of the SANFL club zones and some kids play for multiple teams. Hence there are more potential errors and biases which would be more inequitable by.

We have the same number of eligible kids as South have (within 5%) in our zone. We actually have less but within the tolerance levels set by the SANFL we are the same.

One has to ask what are South doing to boost participation in their zone? Have they got a new school joining their School league this year like Glenelg have because they have recognised gaps in their partipation levels in the Seacliff/Seacombe area??

Bottom line the current method of determining club zones isn't perfect but it is the fairest system there is compared to all teh other methodologies. it is the fairest because it gives all clubs the same number of resources (kids) to work with and it rewards clubs who work hard to develop their resources.

[Bunton]

Understand where you are coming from AM Bays - I'd be very nervous as well about the next boundary review if my club currently had double the amount of clubs to pick from than it next-door neighbour. Suggest is bays can't get a flag in the next few years with this current free-kick they are getting, then they never will.

[Wedgie]

Damn PHOS and Immanuel College players that live in the airport or in the factories around Mooringie Avenue.

[Slots It Through]

South may complain about the zoning, but what about the big advantage they have over other clubs having there country zone 20 mins up the road!!!
They can potentially play as many of those kids they want every week, and it costs them nothing.

[tipper]

Glenelg 112 teams from clubs or schools.
Norwood 110
West 95
Sturt 93
Eagles 83
Port 77
North 68
Central 62 &
South 60.

going by this, Centrals seem to have overcome the deficiency alright.....

[Dutchy]

South may complain about the zoning, but what about the big advantage they have over other clubs having there country zone 20 mins up the road!!!
They can potentially play as many of those kids they want every week, and it costs them nothing.

Exactly, no costs in getting them to come to the big smoke.

South should look at the positives - it has a developing young area close to its base with very strong grassroot leagues. You only get out of something what you put in and Id suggest South put little in but are the first to whinge.

[Bunton]

Bays guru's

just out of interest, can you advise exactly what Glenelg are doing in their zones that you know South are not?

[Wedgie]

Bays guru's

just out of interest, can you advise exactly what Glenelg are doing in their zones that you know South are not?

Riding on a tram.

[story of my life]

Bays guru's

just out of interest, can you advise exactly what Glenelg are doing in their zones that you know South are not?

Fostering a good relationship with the clubs in your zone would be a start

[Dutchy]

Bays guru's

just out of interest, can you advise exactly what Glenelg are doing in their zones that you know South are not?

Massie has been down in the South East regularly during the off season with an Academy based down there.

[MatteeG]

Bays guru's

just out of interest, can you advise exactly what Glenelg are doing in their zones that you know South are not?

Not shafting blokes because Daddy isnt 'in' with the panther clique...

[Bunton]

Bays guru's

just out of interest, can you advise exactly what Glenelg are doing in their zones that you know South are not?

Massie has been down in the South East regularly during the off season with an Academy based down there.

Ron Fuller has been all over SAFC zone (admit - this should not take long as zone is so small) including meeting with every GSFL club invididually at they ground last year and spoke at Kangaroo Island mail medal... next?

[Dutchy]

Bays guru's

just out of interest, can you advise exactly what Glenelg are doing in their zones that you know South are not?

Massie has been down in the South East regularly during the off season with an Academy based down there.

Ron Fuller has been all over SAFC zone (admit - this should not take long as zone is so small) including meeting with every GSFL club invididually at they ground last year and spoke at Kangaroo Island mail medal... next?

So hasnt done a thing this year, case closed your honour.

[darley16]

Regardless of the pathetic attacks on Ron Fuller and South by the uneducated above , the current zones are clearly unfair. When you have two clubs with over 100 clubs & schools and two clubs with 62 & 60 clubs and schools there is an obvious misappropriation of resources, regardless of who the clubs are at the bottom of the zone food chain.

[goraw]

well if everythings as fair as it can be, why dont the bays and south simply swap all zones then?

[Dirko]

Easiest way is to work out exactly how many schools and footy clubs are in Souths zone, and not how many participate. Work on the participation levels on the non representative schools....

[HOORAY PUNT]

Why do some South fans take the line that they are constantly being attacked as a club ? It's generally the opposite ,most people I know want South to do well and taste success considering their poor history.