by CENTURION » Tue Jul 09, 2013 8:30 am
by UK Fan » Tue Jul 09, 2013 9:12 am
TimmiesChin wrote:UK Fan wrote:TimmiesChin wrote:Jim05 wrote:That would be my preferred option.
I think it works quiet well ATM, obviously some minor issues that could be handled better but I think in terms of development it works well
That seems to then suggest ports proposal is 'closer' to what you want than the crows.... the only difference in ports and your model being where about a dozen AFL reserves players play each week?
What would port fans prefer
A) Port reserves take over port magpies in SANFL but you lose reserves, 18s , 16s plus recruiting zones.
B) Port Magpies removed from league. Port power reserves compete in SANFL reserves. You keep 18s 16s and traditional recruiting zones(something crows won't have).
Well Let's be honest, if there is no league side, there's very little point in underage sides as there's no longer a pathway.
Both options also mean less players involved in sanfl footy at senior level as there are less places available.
Would you be happy if the current arrangement continued as is?
fester69 wrote: I'm full of "pish and wind" !!You can call me weak !!
MW wrote: Well call me a special asshole!.
Booney wrote: I'm a happy clapper **** stick.
by beenreal » Tue Jul 09, 2013 9:16 am
kickinit wrote:um port only want to move the players they pay and some they have recruited from interstate in their team. The SANFL clubs are the ones that want to get rid off Port's zone. Do you seriously think removing 100 kids from your jnr's is good for the league. Hey I understand if port could recruit directly from their jnr's that it would be a issue, but with the national draft they can't do. The SANFL can't give a reason because they don't have one for it.
by on the rails » Tue Jul 09, 2013 9:20 am
by UK Fan » Tue Jul 09, 2013 9:22 am
kickinit wrote:um port only want to move the players they pay and some they have recruited from interstate in their team. The SANFL clubs are the ones that want to get rid off Port's zone. Do you seriously think removing 100 kids from your jnr's is good for the league. Hey I understand if port could recruit directly from their jnr's that it would be a issue, but with the national draft they can't do. The SANFL can't give a reason because they don't have one for it.
fester69 wrote: I'm full of "pish and wind" !!You can call me weak !!
MW wrote: Well call me a special asshole!.
Booney wrote: I'm a happy clapper **** stick.
by TimmiesChin » Tue Jul 09, 2013 9:49 am
UK Fan wrote:Yep I'm happy with current structure.
I don't want the maggies to die but unfortunately it seems inevitable that your AFL club will sacrifice you for the greater good. Which was inevitable as soon as the one club merger was approved IMHO !!
by rod_rooster » Tue Jul 09, 2013 9:58 am
kickinit wrote:rod_rooster wrote:kickinit wrote:um port only want to move the players they pay and some they have recruited from interstate in their team. The SANFL clubs are the ones that want to get rid off Port's zone. Do you seriously think removing 100 kids from your jnr's is good for the league. Hey I understand if port could recruit directly from their jnr's that it would be a issue, but with the national draft they can't do. The SANFL can't give a reason because they don't have one for it.
Once again, the SANFL don't have to give a reason. It's up to Port and the Crows to convince the SANFL as to why things should change. It is the AFL clubs trying to convince the SANFL to do something not the other way around.
Basically, the two AFL clubs are trying to force something on the SANFL. If they say no the reason isn't important. No means NO.
Um so your saying it the crows or power pushing for port to lose the jnr sides? No it's the sanfl clubs trying to force this on port, that's why according to what you have said the sanfl need to convince us why this is needed
by am Bays » Tue Jul 09, 2013 10:07 am
by areaman » Tue Jul 09, 2013 10:18 am
beenreal wrote:They can spruik on about their many versions of "uncompromised" and "integrity" all they like. Reality is they constantly accuse us of being selfish but it's all about creating an opportunity to get their grubby hands on our zones.
by Booney » Tue Jul 09, 2013 10:34 am
am Bays wrote:Oh FFFS!!
Give 'em reserves teams, all their listed players and the Crows top up players from the u/18s not selected in other clubs league teams. Both reserve teams play in the SANFL ressies competition.
Port keep their zone and the Magpies play as the league team - their juniors still have a pathway to their AFL team - even though we know it's not the case but if they want to believe it who am I to stop them....
Crows get a reserves team and save truck loads of cash having to fly ressies players to an interstate competition
SANFL league competition integrity improved (not having to play AFL listed players in it).
Not what every one wants but everyone still wins.
How hard is it???
by UK Fan » Tue Jul 09, 2013 10:40 am
am Bays wrote:Oh FFFS!!
Give 'em reserves teams, all their listed players and the Crows top up players from the u/18s not selected in other clubs league teams. Both reserve teams play in the SANFL ressies competition.
Port keep their zone and the Magpies play as the league team - their juniors still have a pathway to their AFL team - even though we know it's not the case but if they want to believe it who am I to stop them....
Crows get a reserves team and save truck loads of cash having to fly ressies players to an interstate competition
SANFL league competition integrity improved (not having to play AFL listed players in it).
Not what every one wants but everyone still wins.
How hard is it???
fester69 wrote: I'm full of "pish and wind" !!You can call me weak !!
MW wrote: Well call me a special asshole!.
Booney wrote: I'm a happy clapper **** stick.
by gossipgirl » Tue Jul 09, 2013 10:41 am
by Apachebulldog » Tue Jul 09, 2013 10:58 am
by dedja » Tue Jul 09, 2013 11:09 am
by UK Fan » Tue Jul 09, 2013 11:24 am
Booney wrote:am Bays wrote:Oh FFFS!!
Give 'em reserves teams, all their listed players and the Crows top up players from the u/18s not selected in other clubs league teams. Both reserve teams play in the SANFL ressies competition.
Port keep their zone and the Magpies play as the league team - their juniors still have a pathway to their AFL team - even though we know it's not the case but if they want to believe it who am I to stop them....
Crows get a reserves team and save truck loads of cash having to fly ressies players to an interstate competition
SANFL league competition integrity improved (not having to play AFL listed players in it).
Not what every one wants but everyone still wins.
How hard is it???
There it is folks. I dont think anyone would argue with this.
fester69 wrote: I'm full of "pish and wind" !!You can call me weak !!
MW wrote: Well call me a special asshole!.
Booney wrote: I'm a happy clapper **** stick.
by Booney » Tue Jul 09, 2013 11:33 am
UK Fan wrote:Booney wrote:am Bays wrote:Oh FFFS!!
Give 'em reserves teams, all their listed players and the Crows top up players from the u/18s not selected in other clubs league teams. Both reserve teams play in the SANFL ressies competition.
Port keep their zone and the Magpies play as the league team - their juniors still have a pathway to their AFL team - even though we know it's not the case but if they want to believe it who am I to stop them....
Crows get a reserves team and save truck loads of cash having to fly ressies players to an interstate competition
SANFL league competition integrity improved (not having to play AFL listed players in it).
Not what every one wants but everyone still wins.
How hard is it???
There it is folks. I dont think anyone would argue with this.
Myself and a few SANFL presidents would
by Dogwatcher » Tue Jul 09, 2013 11:43 am
beenreal wrote: I love how it's all about the poor downtrodden youth of the Lefevre Peninsula who now won't get a look-in at senior level because of all of Port's AFL-listed players, but the Gowans Twins migrate from Melbourne and elbow their way through 10+ years of league football as nothing more than highly-paid mercenaries and no-one cries tears for Staxon de Mille and Doug Deep of Tanunda who surely would've played 500 games between them instead.
by RB » Tue Jul 09, 2013 12:28 pm
gossipgirl wrote:heres a solution thats a win win for everyone. I propose all power players and crows players play for the bays and we can then top up with essendon players that may not be playing next year. this way the bays may eventually win another game.
perhaps hirdy could replace massie as the coach as well.
you know it makes sense
by Dutchy » Tue Jul 09, 2013 12:46 pm
by mighty_tiger_79 » Tue Jul 09, 2013 12:47 pm
RB wrote:gossipgirl wrote:heres a solution thats a win win for everyone. I propose all power players and crows players play for the bays and we can then top up with essendon players that may not be playing next year. this way the bays may eventually win another game.
perhaps hirdy could replace massie as the coach as well.
you know it makes sense
Nah, Matthew Knights! You know you want him!
Competitions SANFL Official Site | Country Footy SA | Southern Football League | VFL Footy
Club Forums Snouts Louts | The Roost | Redlegs Forum |