WAFL accepts Freo & WC reserves

[PhilH]

At the risk of getting back on topic...


Attached is a letter from the West Perth Falcons to their members

http://www.westperthfc.com.au/latest-news/letter-from-the-president/

A key point is that because the WAFC (West Australian Football Commission) owns the licences of all 9 WAFL clubs (along we the 2 AFL clubs for the time being) the 7 non aligned WAFL clubs can do little to stop the alignments happening, starting in part next year and taking full effect in 2014.


This is similar to AFL Tasmania who issue licences for teams to compete in their state league. This led to the circus around North Hobarts and Hobarts tender for just one "inner city" licence from 2014.

I dont know for sure but I would suspect that NEAFL as a modern AFL run state league is set up in the same way. Not sure about VFL.


From a SA Footy perspective I guess the SANFL clubs still maintain a direct say on their competition. So the same changes that occurred in WA could not happen here unless agreed to my a majority of the clubs.

The issue will be the pressure applied and what the financial consequences would be.

[JamesH]

The SANFL owns the trademarks of all the clubs through the properties division it set up in the eighties. Through this the SAFC can essentially run the clubs......The famous black and white prison bar jumber or sturts SFC can be taken over by the league.

The biggest difference between SA and WA is that the AFL clubs are voting members of the WAFC.

[topsywaldron]

The famous black and white prison bar jumper can.. be taken over by the league.

Luckily for Port fans the SANFL have their interests at heart then isn't it?

[FOURTH ESTATE]

The seven non-aligned WAFL clubs are set to boycott pre-season practice matches against the two aligned teams next year after talks on the league's new partnering model stalled yesterday.

Dubbed the G7, the non-aligned clubs were offered $7000 compensation yesterday for the loss of Eastern States recruited AFL talent under the revised model which will involve East Perth being aligned to West Coast and Peel to Fremantle from 2014.

Seven days earlier, the G7 demanded 50 per cent more money in the ongoing battle with the WA Football Commission over compensation.

The clubs told WAFC officials they were seeking $155,000 each, $55,000 more than the $100,000 extra they had been granted by the WAFC as a sweetener for when the club-alignment model starts in 2014.

WAFL Council of Presidents chairman Haydn Raitt said the G7 had been negotiating with the WAFC in good faith to ensure clubs could endorse a detailed model that was in the best interests of the competition and clubs involved.

"The non-aligned clubs expected that the first step in finalising a suitable model was for the WAFC to agree to a financial model that has been put to it by the non-aligned clubs," Raitt said.

"It is now apparent that the negotiations with the WAFC have stalled and that leading into the 2013 season we remain concerned that the integrity of the WAFL competition will be severely compromised and we are fearful that club supporters and members, football fans and the media may become disillusioned with the competition.

"We have therefore agreed to implement a number of actions aimed at bringing negotiations to a satisfactory conclusion so that we have an agreed model in place as soon as possible."

Eagles Shannon Hurn, Scott Lycett, Will Schofield, Matt Rosa and Blayne Wilson, who were all former Peel squad members, will take up with the Royals next year in a transition year, along with West Coast new recruits Jamie Bennell, Jamie Cripps, Cale Morton and Sharrod Wellingham.

Fremantle squad members Zac Clarke, Hayden Crozier and Jayden Pitt will switch from East Perth to Peel, the Dockers' partner club. Joining Clarke, Crozier and Pitt at the Thunder will be Dockers recruits Jack Hannath, Danyle Pearce, Tanner Smith and Matt Taberner.

A feature of the 2013 WAFL fixtures released yesterday was an emphasis on avoiding direct clashes with AFL matches involving WA clubs.

Three games will be played on Anzac Day and two on Good Friday, with the traditional WA Day derby between East and South Fremantle on Sunday, June 2, avoiding a clash with the match between West Coast and Richmond at Patersons Stadium on WA Day (June 3).

[Wedgie]

Thanks for the update, interesting times!

[DOC]

They will probably end up playing against each other. I expect a lot more to come on this topic.

[PhilH]

Looks like an agreement has been reached.

$140K more to each club and some restrictions on out of zone recruiting for East Perth & Peel the main parts


This from the President of the West Perth Football Club

LETTER FROM THE PRESIDENT
Posted on 29/01/2013
After three months of strong debate and negotiation the nonaligned WAFL clubs (of which WPFC are one) finally agreed to terms and conditions for the WAFL competition in 2013 and 2014.

I wish to remind you all that this was not West Perth’s preferred outcome. We believed and had made the point strongly on a numerous occasions that the WAFL competition would be better served with out the influence of the host clubs or stand-alone teams from the two WA based AFL clubs.
[i]
A host of logistical and statistical information was used to support our case. This information was provided by extremely knowledgeable club delegates including Chief Executive Officer’s, Club Treasurers, Football Managers and Coaches.

At the end of the day the decision to introduce host clubs was taken out of the WAFL club’s hands. The WAFC approved the constant requests from the WCE and FFC to have all their players play at one club.

I am pleased to announce however that the deal negotiated will see West Perth (and all nonaligned clubs) receive an additional $140,000 cash per annual plus CPI for the next five years beginning 2014. The WAFC will also pay an additional $10,000 per annum to a newly established “WAFL Competition Fund.”

Other notable changes include:

•Should any player from WPFC be Rookie listed in the 2013 draft and beyond to WCE or FFC then a draft payment of $15,000 will be made to WPFC
•$7,000 payment for 2013 from the WAFC for the now defunct reverse order preseason draft.
•East Perth and Peel will not be able to recruit players from outside their District for the 2014 season.
•EP and Peel will have their salary cap reduced by $75,000
•WCE and FFC to sign Statuary Declarations for the WAFC with reference to rules, regulations and guidelines as stipulated by the WAFC and WAFL clubs themselves.
This outcome is substantially better than the initial deal put to us back in October and then again in November and December.

Importantly and I highlight this to you all: The WAFL CEO’s will play a leading role in all decision making pertaining to our WAFL competition as we now move forward. Any reviews or changes to our competition will be driven and largely decided upon by club CEO’s.

Our disappointment at the handling of this whole affair has been stated quite clearly and acknowledged by the WAFC Chairman Frank Cooper and his fellow Commissioners.

The funding will provide a much needed cash injection to WPFC and will ensure that our club stays true to its members and supporters. It will also ensure that the WPFC will continue to deliver on our District Model meaning: WPFC give as many young men as possible the chance to play league football and the opportunity to possibly graduate to the AFL.

We must keep the mighty West Perth Football Club alive, strong and vibrant.

I urge you all to resign your memberships now and show your true passion and support for our great club at our first home game of the season against East Perth on Saturday March the 16th.

Brett Raponi

PRESIDENT

[beenreal]

Very well written from a club perspective. And that's what it is, all about the WPFC and what's best for the WAFL.

The AFL clubs are doing no different. They are doing what is best for them. In the current climate any club that doesn't control the development of their players will be at a disadvantage.

And I'll question again, if there is no advantage to having control over players through a Reserves competition, why do WAFL, SANFL, etc. clubs have them. Surely it would be cheaper to farm non required players out to the Amateur Leagues?

[whufc]

Very well written from a club perspective. And that's what it is, all about the WPFC and what's best for the WAFL.

The AFL clubs are doing no different. They are doing what is best for them. In the current climate any club that doesn't control the development of their players will be at a disadvantage.

And I'll question again, if there is no advantage to having control over players through a Reserves competition, why do WAFL, SANFL, etc. clubs have them. Surely it would be cheaper to farm non required players out to the Amateur Leagues?

Massive difference is if u were farming guys out to amatuer clubs these amatuer clubs now have the resources to offer guys more money than what they would be getting at SANFL reserves level. You would struggle to put a side on the park mid year if u were a struggling league side as these guys would have the easy option of playing finals etc etc for their amatuer club getting paid more money.

[CENTURION]

Very well written from a club perspective. And that's what it is, all about the WPFC and what's best for the WAFL.

The AFL clubs are doing no different. They are doing what is best for them. In the current climate any club that doesn't control the development of their players will be at a disadvantage.

And I'll question again, if there is no advantage to having control over players through a Reserves competition, why do WAFL, SANFL, etc. clubs have them. Surely it would be cheaper to farm non required players out to the Amateur Leagues?

Massive difference is if u were farming guys out to amatuer clubs these amatuer clubs now have the resources to offer guys more money than what they would be getting at SANFL reserves level. You would struggle to put a side on the park mid year if u were a struggling league side as these guys would have the easy option of playing finals etc etc for their amatuer club getting paid more money.

it's already happening. Damian Hynes is a classic example, can't get a league game, goes to Seaton Ramblers on $700 per game PLUS a job! And he's not even on an AFL list.

[whufc]

Very well written from a club perspective. And that's what it is, all about the WPFC and what's best for the WAFL.

The AFL clubs are doing no different. They are doing what is best for them. In the current climate any club that doesn't control the development of their players will be at a disadvantage.

And I'll question again, if there is no advantage to having control over players through a Reserves competition, why do WAFL, SANFL, etc. clubs have them. Surely it would be cheaper to farm non required players out to the Amateur Leagues?

Massive difference is if u were farming guys out to amatuer clubs these amatuer clubs now have the resources to offer guys more money than what they would be getting at SANFL reserves level. You would struggle to put a side on the park mid year if u were a struggling league side as these guys would have the easy option of playing finals etc etc for their amatuer club getting paid more money.

it's already happening. Damian Hynes is a classic example, can't get a league game, goes to Seaton Ramblers on $700 per game PLUS a job!

Exactly it's a struggle to keep players already nevermind giving them to these clubs every week to use.

[UK Fan]

Very well written from a club perspective. And that's what it is, all about the WPFC and what's best for the WAFL.

I wish to remind you all that this was not West Perth’s preferred outcome. We believed and had made the point strongly on a numerous occasions that the WAFL competition would be better served with out the influence of the host clubs or stand-alone teams from the two WA based AFL clubs.
[i]
A host of logistical and statistical information was used to support our case. This information was provided by extremely knowledgeable club delegates including Chief Executive Officer’s, Club Treasurers, Football Managers and Coaches.

At the end of the day the decision to introduce host clubs was taken out of the WAFL club’s hands.

[CENTURION]

Very well written from a club perspective. And that's what it is, all about the WPFC and what's best for the WAFL.

I wish to remind you all that this was not West Perth’s preferred outcome. We believed and had made the point strongly on a numerous occasions that the WAFL competition would be better served with out the influence of the host clubs or stand-alone teams from the two WA based AFL clubs.
[i]
A host of logistical and statistical information was used to support our case. This information was provided by extremely knowledgeable club delegates including Chief Executive Officer’s, Club Treasurers, Football Managers and Coaches.

At the end of the day the decision to introduce host clubs was taken out of the WAFL club’s hands.

no choice when you have a gun held to your head.

[UK Fan]

AFL clubs are doing no different. They are doing what is best for them. In the current climate any club that doesn't control the development of their players will be at a disadvantage.

And I'll question again, if there is no advantage to having control over players through a Reserves competition, why do WAFL, SANFL, etc. clubs have them. Surely it would be cheaper to farm non required players out to the Amateur Leagues?

So I'm sorry port magpies fans all those promises we made about the merger are null and void.

Don't be selfishly bitter and try and blame supporters long memories for this decision. It is for the best of all of us.

Bryan Leys

[beenreal]

Very well written from a club perspective. And that's what it is, all about the WPFC and what's best for the WAFL.

The AFL clubs are doing no different. They are doing what is best for them. In the current climate any club that doesn't control the development of their players will be at a disadvantage.

And I'll question again, if there is no advantage to having control over players through a Reserves competition, why do WAFL, SANFL, etc. clubs have them. Surely it would be cheaper to farm non required players out to the Amateur Leagues?

Massive difference is if u were farming guys out to amatuer clubs these amatuer clubs now have the resources to offer guys more money than what they would be getting at SANFL reserves level. You would struggle to put a side on the park mid year if u were a struggling league side as these guys would have the easy option of playing finals etc etc for their amatuer club getting paid more money.

it's already happening. Damian Hynes is a classic example, can't get a league game, goes to Seaton Ramblers on $700 per game PLUS a job!

Exactly it's a struggle to keep players already nevermind giving them to these clubs every week to use.

Different situation, the players currently farmed out to the Amateurs, ie. those who can't crack the Reserves Team are still contracted and paid by their SANFL club. The argument that the Reserves Grade is in place to keep players out of Amateur clubs' hands is a nonsense. It's there so SANFL clubs can control the development of their players.

And not every uncontracted player is going to be getting $700+ per game. There are limits to what players can be paid in the Amateur comp.

[JK]

Very well written from a club perspective. And that's what it is, all about the WPFC and what's best for the WAFL.

The AFL clubs are doing no different. They are doing what is best for them. In the current climate any club that doesn't control the development of their players will be at a disadvantage.

And I'll question again, if there is no advantage to having control over players through a Reserves competition, why do WAFL, SANFL, etc. clubs have them. Surely it would be cheaper to farm non required players out to the Amateur Leagues?

Your points are fair BR, all clubs would consider it the best course of development for their players to be under the same roof, and I don't think it's unreasonable a club looks out for their interests first and foremost.

Using that same principal though, means the SANFL shouldn't allow Crows and Power reserves sides in its competition, by virtue of looking at the best interests of its own product imho.

[UK Fan]

Very well written from a club perspective. And that's what it is, all about the WPFC and what's best for the WAFL.

The AFL clubs are doing no different. They are doing what is best for them. In the current climate any club that doesn't control the development of their players will be at a disadvantage.

And I'll question again, if there is no advantage to having control over players through a Reserves competition, why do WAFL, SANFL, etc. clubs have them. Surely it would be cheaper to farm non required players out to the Amateur Leagues?

Your points are fair BR, all clubs would consider it the best course of development for their players to be under the same roof, and I don't think it's unreasonable a club looks out for their interests first and foremost.

Using that same principal though, means the SANFL shouldn't allow Crows and Power reserves sides in its competition, by virtue of looking at the best interests of its own product imho.

Applause!!!

[Booney]

Very well written from a club perspective. And that's what it is, all about the WPFC and what's best for the WAFL.

The AFL clubs are doing no different. They are doing what is best for them. In the current climate any club that doesn't control the development of their players will be at a disadvantage.

And I'll question again, if there is no advantage to having control over players through a Reserves competition, why do WAFL, SANFL, etc. clubs have them. Surely it would be cheaper to farm non required players out to the Amateur Leagues?

Your points are fair BR, all clubs would consider it the best course of development for their players to be under the same roof, and I don't think it's unreasonable a club looks out for their interests first and foremost.

Using that same principal though, means the SANFL shouldn't allow Crows and Power reserves sides in its competition, by virtue of looking at the best interests of its own product imho.

True that is. I think the SANFL would want though, what is deemed "best" for its two potential biggest revenue streams, its two AFL clubs.

What is best for the SANFL, Adelaide and Port, and SA Footy fans in general are three different things and will never be the same. Someone is going to lose out.

[smac]

The deals to get rid of the licences are done, from what I understand (just not yet executed - this will happen closer to the AO move I believe).

This means the revenue stream is Adelaide Oval, not AFC/PAFC.

This means AFC/PAFC can go root their boot.

[Dutchy]

The deals to get rid of the licences are done, from what I understand (just not yet executed - this will happen closer to the AO move I believe).

This means the revenue stream is Adelaide Oval, not AFC/PAFC.

This means AFC/PAFC can go root their boot.

How are Port going to finance the purchase of their licence?