Compromised

All discussions to do with the SANFL

Re: Compromised

Postby Ronnie » Mon Apr 08, 2013 5:51 pm

Is the AFL reserves push into the SANFL now dead in the water?
Ronnie
Reserves
 
Posts: 805
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2006 7:57 am
Has liked: 8 times
Been liked: 90 times

Re: Compromised

Postby Dogwatcher » Mon Apr 08, 2013 5:57 pm

topsywaldron wrote:
Dogwatcher wrote:Another quality contribution.


Don't be bitter sweetheart.

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


Which is all you offer.
How about..."well, that's a pretty poor comment, here's why that's BS and I think", rather than your regular smart arse response that provides nothing to the topic other than further evidence your outright smugness?
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 Hazydog » Mon Apr 08, 2013 6:24 pm

Settle down ladies. I was merely pointing out the potentially unfair advantage one side may get over the other from circumstances beyond both of their control. Yes it may work out to the favour of different clubs at different times but in the ideal world it would be better if the problem wasnt their at all wouldnt it? Is not the title of the thread compromised? For what is worth North probably would have been too good without the AFL listed players- they are developing well under Francou. Who knows, they may be on the verge of a sustained period of success. (Maybe 12 GF's on the trot or something like that?)
Players win touches, Teams win matches, Clubs win Premierships.
User avatar
Hazydog
League Bench Warmer
 
 
Posts: 1221
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2005 10:02 pm
Location: Paralowie
Has liked: 158 times
Been liked: 219 times

Re: Compromised

Postby topsywaldron » Mon Apr 08, 2013 6:28 pm

To Rucc's credit, that hurt, he wrote about as sensible an article as anyone in the mainstream media's written about the whole issue.
'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 6:32 pm

Agreed. He had some fair points on 5AA on Saturday morning as well.
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 kickinit » Mon Apr 08, 2013 6:43 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.


yep then the afl can state no player aligned with a sanfl club can ever play in the afl and see how long the comp last.
We're on this journey together, One Heart, One Club and they will Never Ever Tear Us Apart.
kickinit
League - Top 5
 
 
Posts: 2997
Joined: Wed Mar 23, 2011 8:19 pm
Has liked: 38 times
Been liked: 95 times

Re: Compromised

Postby JK » Mon Apr 08, 2013 7:02 pm

kickinit wrote:
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.


yep then the afl can state no player aligned with a sanfl club can ever play in the afl and see how long the comp last.


Yes, because the AFL would benefit by removing South Australia's pool of players from their competition :roll:
FUSC
User avatar
JK
Coach
 
 
Posts: 37457
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2005 10:11 am
Location: Coopers Hill
Has liked: 4480 times
Been liked: 3022 times
Grassroots Team: SMOSH West Lakes

Re: Compromised

Postby wild dog » Mon Apr 08, 2013 7:47 pm

I think the current situation with AFL players is fine if we disregard this backdoor manoeuvring to get Power listed players to the Magpies. Crouch's development is an excellent example of the fast tracking that the SANFL can provide, and a guy like Jonathon Giles benefitted by a longer development utilising the SANFL reserves and then league.

The problem IMO is the posturing to ruin this current status quo by adding a discreet AFL reserves team. We could keep the Power at bay, but when Sanderson came over and publically stated his desire for his own reserves team it tipped the balance. Now we have the situation exemplified in this thread where passionate SANFL fans don't want AFL players at all in the SANFL. Why would the SA AFL teams risk ruining a model which while not perfect, is very close to it.
User avatar
wild dog
Under 18s
 
 
Posts: 550
Joined: Wed Sep 19, 2012 11:56 am
Has liked: 56 times
Been liked: 180 times
Grassroots Team: Smithfield

Previous

Board index   Football  SANFL

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests

Around the place

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