Compromised

All discussions to do with the SANFL

Compromised

Postby Mark_Beswick » Fri Apr 05, 2013 8:15 am

On top of all the reasons we shouldn't have an AFL side in the SANFL league rotations is that word compromised.

We will have top up players not deserving of a league game against their name playing at league level. They will have father-son rights in the future.
Kids will be credited league games that would otherwise have had to earn their stripes with their league clubs, not given games to make up the 21 required for a game. Its the same reason those old night cup gaes are not as valued as H&A premiership point games.
Mark_Beswick
Reserves
 
 
Posts: 782
Joined: Thu May 04, 2006 10:06 pm
Location: Lockleys
Has liked: 3 times
Been liked: 13 times

Re: Compromised

Postby JamesH » Fri Apr 05, 2013 12:13 pm

Football isnt football at any level any more

The amateur league pays,
Country footy is more attractive than league footy for some
There is no incentive to play or go to games anymore as there is back-to-back footy on TV
JamesH
Under 16s
 
Posts: 382
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2006 10:09 pm
Has liked: 0 time
Been liked: 0 time

Re: Compromised

Postby SANFLnut » Fri Apr 05, 2013 1:52 pm

Surely that has already occurred with the introduction of the Crows and Power? SANFL league games post 1990 are very different on your cv than those in the 80s and earlier. There would be heaps of current league regulars that would not have got a sniff in the 80s.

I'm not happy with having AFL teams in SANFL comp because they can't be trusted to try. Once their senior team is not going to play finals they will shut up shop very quickly. They have pulled 6,8,10 players out from SANFL clubs combined in a week before and no reason they won't do it in the last couple of rounds with their own team. Would certainly rather play Power reserves in rd 23 this year rather than round 1.
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: Compromised

Postby Ronnie » Fri Apr 05, 2013 2:20 pm

SANFLnut wrote:Surely that has already occurred with the introduction of the Crows and Power? SANFL league games post 1990 are very different on your cv than those in the 80s and earlier. There would be heaps of current league regulars that would not have got a sniff in the 80s. I'm not happy with having AFL teams in SANFL comp because they can't be trusted to try. Once their senior team is not going to play finals they will shut up shop very quickly. They have pulled 6,8,10 players out from SANFL clubs combined in a week before and no reason they won't do it in the last couple of rounds with their own team. Would certainly rather play Power reserves in rd 23 this year rather than round 1.


To a small degree. I remember thinking (with respect to old Woodville supporters) how some of their lesser players from the early 80s were really getting league games by default almost. In essence to me league football has stayed true to it's standards over many years. M Beswick has raised an excellent point, if so called 'top up' players are juniors shoved straight into league football just to fill a side it's hard to think of a better way to cheapen the notion of what a league game really is about.
It's also hard to believe that the AFL club's can think that a serious competition should even consider devaluing their own competition, whatever the power imbalance is.
Ronnie
Reserves
 
Posts: 806
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2006 7:57 am
Has liked: 8 times
Been liked: 90 times

Re: Compromised

Postby SDK » Fri Apr 05, 2013 3:17 pm

Ask players like Luke Brown, Mitch Grigg, Tom Jonas, even Taylor Walker where they would prefer to play when they are not in the Crows or Power A team ! These players grew up as Norwood players and still have strong affinity with the club as such will try and thus improve their performance as opposed to playing for some meaningless souless manufactured reserves side.
I am using Norwood players as an example only because I know them. The same principal applies to Eagles, Centrals, North etc. Would Ian Callahan, Brad Symes, etc prefer to play for Centrals or what !!!?????
SDK
League - Best 21
 
 
Posts: 2384
Joined: Sat Apr 28, 2007 5:03 pm
Has liked: 0 time
Been liked: 51 times

Re: Compromised

Postby teaoby » Fri Apr 05, 2013 3:49 pm

I think they would like to play wherever they have the greatest chance to get picked for the AFL side who is their employer, and in all those guys eyes the pinnacle of current day football.

It would be nice to see these guys continue to play for their local club, but lets be honest the SANFL has endured for the last 20 years of AFL in South Australia and it will continue to through this imo! look on the bright side, it will give you an added team to loathe!
beards dont kill people, people with beards kill people
User avatar
teaoby
Reserves
 
 
Posts: 919
Joined: Thu Aug 28, 2008 2:10 pm
Has liked: 1 time
Been liked: 11 times

Re: Compromised

Postby Ecky » Fri Apr 05, 2013 4:15 pm

But it is very hard to loathe a team that doesn't care if they win or not when they play against you.

It doesn't matter what the level of sport is, when one team isn't trying 100% to win then everyone loses interest in the game very quickly - both players and spectators.

That is the big issue here that those in favour of the proposal don't seem to understand. At the moment, even though there are AFL listed players in the SANFL, they at least (or 99% of them do...) respect the clubs they are playing for and do their best to help their team win, and even if they don't truly care, they are in a very small minority so it has very little impact on the competition. But as soon as a team is in the competition purely for developmental purposes, the whole atmosphere around the games will change and the true integrity of the competition that has always existed in 100+ years will be gone.
John Olsen, June 2012 wrote:"Reserves teams in the SANFL for the two AFL clubs is not negotiable.
We will not compromise the SANFL competition (with AFL reserves teams)."
User avatar
Ecky
2022 SA Footy Punter of the Year
 
 
Posts: 2736
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2005 10:26 am
Location: Wherever the stats are
Has liked: 12 times
Been liked: 78 times
Grassroots Team: Adelaide Lutheran

Re: Compromised

Postby PhilH » Fri Apr 05, 2013 6:12 pm

Some would say we would have a form of "tanking" (ie winning not the main aim) in up to 40% of our games each week.

Or you could at least refer to it has having 40% of matches like the NAB Cup where one team thinks that yes winning is nice but its not the main goal.
User avatar
PhilH
League - Top 5
 
 
Posts: 3253
Joined: Sun Oct 30, 2005 12:04 am
Has liked: 11 times
Been liked: 163 times
Grassroots Team: Happy Valley

Re: Compromised

Postby SDK » Fri Apr 05, 2013 8:38 pm

All reasons to xxxx off out of our SANFL we dont want it !
SDK
League - Best 21
 
 
Posts: 2384
Joined: Sat Apr 28, 2007 5:03 pm
Has liked: 0 time
Been liked: 51 times

Re: Compromised

Postby FlyingHigh » Sat Apr 06, 2013 11:43 am

SANFLnut wrote:Surely that has already occurred with the introduction of the Crows and Power? SANFL league games post 1990 are very different on your cv than those in the 80s and earlier. There would be heaps of current league regulars that would not have got a sniff in the 80s.

I'm not happy with having AFL teams in SANFL comp because they can't be trusted to try. Once their senior team is not going to play finals they will shut up shop very quickly. They have pulled 6,8,10 players out from SANFL clubs combined in a week before and no reason they won't do it in the last couple of rounds with their own team. Would certainly rather play Power reserves in rd 23 this year rather than round 1.


Agree. This is why they have to be in the SANFL reserves.
FlyingHigh
Assistant Coach
 
Posts: 4909
Joined: Wed Jun 14, 2006 11:12 am
Has liked: 87 times
Been liked: 182 times

Re: Compromised

Postby SANFLnut » Sat Apr 06, 2013 1:12 pm

Perhaps the "saviour" of the SANFL will be allowing them into SANFL comp and then charging them with a Melbournesque crime of tanking games. Fine each of them ,say $250k (obviously Port just submit an IOU) and then ban them from the comp on a second offence.
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: Compromised

Postby Groucho » Sun Apr 07, 2013 11:05 pm

We don't want them at all. Even having them in the reserves competition comprises the League. Apply to VFL or SAAFL even the WAFL or NEAFL.
No crows or Power in the SANFL. Period.
User avatar
Groucho
Under 18s
 
 
Posts: 731
Joined: Sat Dec 16, 2006 12:04 am
Location: Hope Valley
Has liked: 106 times
Been liked: 160 times

Re: Compromised

Postby FOURTH ESTATE » Mon Apr 08, 2013 9:31 am

We in the SAAFL don't want them either!!!!
2017, 2019 & 2020 PREMIERS
RICHMOND, RICHMOND, RICHMOND.


Let that be a lesson to you Sturt. You don't beat Glenelg 3 times in a row in Grand Finals and get away with it.
User avatar
FOURTH ESTATE
Veteran
 
 
Posts: 3676
Joined: Fri Jul 04, 2008 7:08 pm
Location: Front Row in the "Black Hole" of Allegiant Stadium
Has liked: 5 times
Been liked: 132 times
Grassroots Team: Broadview

Re: Compromised

Postby Hazydog » Mon Apr 08, 2013 4:22 pm

Speaking of compromised - and to highlight how the current set up compromises the League - Centrals had no AFL aligned players in either League or Reserves on Saturday night. Take Stewart & Johnston out of North's attack for starters and it looks a bit less imposing. Just another reason to remove all AFL aligned players from the SANFL all together.
Players win touches, Teams win matches, Clubs win Premierships.
User avatar
Hazydog
League Bench Warmer
 
 
Posts: 1231
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2005 10:02 pm
Location: Paralowie
Has liked: 163 times
Been liked: 224 times

Re: Compromised

Postby Wedgie » Mon Apr 08, 2013 4:36 pm

Hazydog wrote:Speaking of compromised - and to highlight how the current set up compromises the League - Centrals had no AFL aligned players in either League or Reserves on Saturday night. Take Stewart & Johnston out of North's attack for starters and it looks a bit less imposing. Just another reason to remove all AFL aligned players from the SANFL all together.

North must have had AFL players in the Under 16 and Under 18s too then with big wins happening in all 4 grades.
Its not like Central could ever be beaten by a better club at any level.
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: Compromised

Postby robranisgod » Mon Apr 08, 2013 5:22 pm

Hazydog wrote:Speaking of compromised - and to highlight how the current set up compromises the League - Centrals had no AFL aligned players in either League or Reserves on Saturday night. Take Stewart & Johnston out of North's attack for starters and it looks a bit less imposing. Just another reason to remove all AFL aligned players from the SANFL all together.


So I assume the premierships that Central one with AFL listed players like Dew, Guerra, S Cochrane and Symes were all compromised too?
robranisgod
League - Best 21
 
 
Posts: 2059
Joined: Fri Oct 30, 2009 2:36 pm
Has liked: 94 times
Been liked: 264 times
Grassroots Team: Flinders University

Re: Compromised

Postby topsywaldron » Mon Apr 08, 2013 5:31 pm

Hazydog wrote: Centrals had no AFL aligned players in either League or Reserves on Saturday night. Take Stewart & Johnston out of North's attack for starters and it looks a bit less imposing.


LMAO.
'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: Compromised

Postby Dogwatcher » Mon Apr 08, 2013 5:33 pm

Another quality contribution.
You're my only friend, and you don't even like me.
Dogwatcher
Coach
 
 
Posts: 29318
Joined: Fri Mar 24, 2006 10:29 am
Location: The Bronx
Has liked: 1425 times
Been liked: 1152 times
Grassroots Team: Elizabeth

Re: Compromised

Postby am Bays » Mon Apr 08, 2013 5:35 pm

Hazydog wrote:Speaking of compromised - and to highlight how the current set up compromises the League - Centrals had no AFL aligned players in either League or Reserves on Saturday night. Take Stewart & Johnston out of North's attack for starters and it looks a bit less imposing. Just another reason to remove all AFL aligned players from the SANFL all together.


Hooray!!!

Based on that logic, Glenelg Football Club 2008 SANFL Premiers.

We were the first club since the XXXX (date doesn't exist any more ;) ) GF not to have an AFL listed player. Centrals had Westhoff, Williams, Nash etc playing.
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: 19648
Joined: Sat Dec 17, 2005 11:04 pm
Location: The back bar at Lennies
Has liked: 182 times
Been liked: 2098 times

Re: Compromised

Postby topsywaldron » Mon Apr 08, 2013 5:39 pm

Dogwatcher wrote:Another quality contribution.


Don't be bitter sweetheart.

When a poster writes merde like that it gets what it deserves, naked derision.
'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

Next

Board index   Football  SANFL

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 14 guests

Around the place

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