The never ending No AFL in the SANFL whinge thread

[whybother]

dard and hard

[Wedgie]

According to Koch the SANFL rigged it so they'd come last.
With that sort of intelligence at the top it's no wonder what's down the bottom.

[Hazydog]

Love this quote from Duncanson…

““Get a new stadium deal at Football Park – a negotiation that confirmed we needed a new stadium. If we’re not getting 22,000 to Football Park, we were writing a cheque (to the SANFL). We were at a stadium our people did not want to go, even when we were winning.”

They never had a problem filling it when they were winning GF’s in the SANFL days…what a cop out statement .. Port supporters (like all other clubs) just didn’t turn up when the team was average.

[am Bays]

Love this quote from Duncanson…

““Get a new stadium deal at Football Park – a negotiation that confirmed we needed a new stadium. If we’re not getting 22,000 to Football Park, we were writing a cheque (to the SANFL). We were at a stadium our people did not want to go, even when we were winning.”

They never had a problem filling it when they were winning GF’s in the SANFL days…what a cop out statement .. Port supporters (like all other clubs) just didn’t turn up when the team was average.

Or for the majority of years Chocco was coaching them in the VFL.

[Jimmy_041]

Love this quote from Duncanson…

““Get a new stadium deal at Football Park – a negotiation that confirmed we needed a new stadium. If we’re not getting 22,000 to Football Park, we were writing a cheque (to the SANFL). We were at a stadium our people did not want to go, even when we were winning.”

They never had a problem filling it when they were winning GF’s in the SANFL days…what a cop out statement .. Port supporters (like all other clubs) just didn’t turn up when the team was average.

Gobsmacked at this: "We were at a stadium our people did not want to go, even when we were winning.”

Try driving there from the other side of town

[Dutchy]

They want an even playing field? Start charging them $400k pa and take away their home ground - just like the Crows - who actually respect the SANFL.

[am Bays]

Scene at the Port club tonight:

Right, so were agreed then, apart from:
Upgrading change rooms at Football park for us for (basically turned Changeroom one (warm up area), Change room two (meeting room) and the 1st Crows gym (lockers and medical rooms) into their Change rooms
New match day benches with better IT functionality*
Developing better/Expanding the Corporate areas at footy park for corporate revenue*
Building more seats*
Facilitating transfer of non-port drafted players back to the Magpies
Selling football park so AO could be upgraded*
Softening reserve team player eligibility rules to include rookies, extending contract periods and lowering age limits in for the 2023 season* to improve the competitiveness of our reserves teams
And bailing us out to the tune of $16.25 Million whilst the license holder of Port Adelaide Football Club

What has the SANFL ever done for us???

* yes that benefited the Crows too who actually made profits of which 75% went back to the SANFL. as the license holder, for footy in this state

[wenchbarwer]

Koch gives off strong Cleese vibes, too. And not the funny part, either...

[dedja]

…
And bailing us out to the tune of $16.25 Million whilst the license holder of Port Adelaide Football Club

Actually it was around $40M.

The SANFL was $45M in debt when it negotiated and agreed to the AO deal that included selling Football Park, without which it wouldn’t have survived.

Remember the AO deal also saved the SACA, who were $90M in debt at the time.

So the SANFL went from being debt free, owning a significant asset, to being on its knees, pretty much solely due to propping up Port.

[am Bays]

…
And bailing us out to the tune of $16.25 Million whilst the license holder of Port Adelaide Football Club

Actually it was around $40M.

The SANFL was $45M in debt when it negotiated and agreed to the AO deal that included selling Football Park, without which it wouldn’t have survived.

Remember the AO deal also saved the SACA, who were $90M in debt at the time.

So the SANFL went from being debt free, owning a significant asset, to being on its knees, pretty much solely due to propping up Port.

I'm only counting the money that directly went to Port to keep them from going "brown"

Given other entities benefitted from the redevelopments at Footy Park you cant put it all on Port

(see, I can be balanced and reasoned in this discussion )

[RB]

They want an even playing field? Start charging them $400k pa and take away their home ground - just like the Crows - who actually respect the SANFL.

Even then, bit hard to say it's an even playing field when their salary cap is 30 times larger than the dinkum clubs.

[dedja]

Onya Studley …

Would love to be a fly on the wall next time he sees Chad.

https://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/opi ... dba8ea294b

Sorry, Kochie. It’s the AFL, not the SANFL crushing Port Adelaide’s big plans | Graham Cornes

The Power chairman’s SANFL spray teeters between irrational and hysterical. An apology would be a good idea, writes Graham Cornes.

For all the good he has done for Port Adelaide, David Koch can be a real pain in the neck.
This week’s toxic rant when he savaged the SANFL and blamed it for the Port’s reserves poor performance teeters somewhere between irrational and hysterical.

“The SANFL have got what they wanted, they wanted Port to be last, they rigged the rules and we can’t wait to be out of there”, he said on his regular spot on FIVEAA. He then went on to question the integrity of the SANFL.

“Given their track record you would want to see it in writing and signed before you believe anything that comes out of their mouths basically.”

It’s an extraordinary attack on the character of good people who devote their working hours and much of their personal lives to ensure that the SANFL remains viable and second only to the AFL as the best football competition in the country.

Kochie never struck me as mean-spirited but that is straight-out nasty, if not defamatory.

So the Port reserves won the wooden spoon this year.

It can happen to any team, even one with the vaunted history of the Port Magpies. Oops, sorry. They’re not the Port Magpies any more.

All that tradition was wiped away as the famous emblem was discarded. How did that happen?

Quietly, surreptitiously, maybe in the dark of night when they thought nobody would notice, the Magpie was spirited away.

Koch, even accuses the SANFL of “rigging the rules” so Port will finish bottom.

For an intelligent man it is a ridiculous accusation and one that can be immediately dispelled by the facts.

In the past decade Port’s SANFL team has played off in three grand finals. Two of those they lost by less than a goal. It would take a genius to “rig” those games.

(Although Chad Cornes, who coached Port in the 2017 finale, might claim that they were competing against more than the players in the Double Blue guernsey on that day).

Nobody rigs anything, but there has to be rules and recruiting restrictions placed on the AFL teams.

After all, they are professional teams with access to players and resources that are beyond the budgets of SANFL clubs. Unrestricted recruiting would see the AFL teams far too dominant in the SANFL.

But that is one of Port’s biggest gripes.

They haven’t been able to access high-end talent. They are allowed to list four rookie-age players, the 19-year-olds who were overlooked in the draft. Last week’s Rising Star nominee, Logan Evans, is a prime example of that.

But don’t blame the SANFL if the energy and the recruiting focus hasn’t been on its reserves team and they couldn’t attract better talent.

It is Port’s lack of focus on its reserves team that has seen it plummet to the bottom of the ladder.

Even the great clubs are destined to have poor years so look inside for the reasons, not outside for excuses.

Port Adelaide, and to a lesser extent the Crows, have been lobbying the AFL to establish a national reserves competition.

The brutal truth, which Kochie refuses to confront, is that the AFL don’t want a reserves competition.

The word from AFL House is that the cost outweighs any benefit. That’s not hard to understand.

What would it cost to fly and accommodate 18 (soon to be 19) reserves teams around the country? Besides, what development could you get that was any better than for young footballers to be playing against men in the SANFL? For all his bluster and rhetoric, we will not be seeing a national AFL reserves competition in the immediate future.

No such threat has been made.

It is true, however that the SANFL has been lobbying the AFL for more funds to develop the game.

Compared to other states, particularly those north of the Murray, South Australia does not receive excessive development funds.

And in Victoria, the Under-18 competition receives significant, if not all its funding from the AFL. However, Australian football is facing a talent drain in the men’s game and this will only worsen with the introduction of the new team from Tasmania.

No threats have been made but the SANFL is definitely asking for more development resources.

Perhaps the most mischievous, misleading, even snide comment Koch made, was about the SANFL’s Future Fund that was established after the sale of Football Park.

“And I just want to know where the West Lakes future fund went because the SANFL clubs should be rolling in money really”, he said.

Well David you should know.

The first tranche of those funds was used to pay down the SANFL’s debt, much of which, if you need reminding, was acquired by Port Adelaide’s debt which had been guaranteed by the SANFL.

Remember when the tarps covered the empty seats at Football Park to impersonate the crowd? And they were the days when that “Charitable Trust” fund was established to hide money from the SANFL.

Every year the Adelaide Football Club paid its dues to the SANFL (80 percent of the club’s profit) but Port found ways to hide it.

The second tranche of those monies was distributed to the SANFL clubs to pay down their debts and to invest in new facilities. The third tranche, which is yet to be fully obtained by the SANFL will be used for long-term facility investment.

Port Adelaide has always had a “them against us” mentality. It was Port Adelaide against the world.

That passion served them well and drove them to great successes.

Largely it was a healthy rivalry, be it Port versus Norwood, Port versus Westies, Port versus Sturt or Port against Glenelg.

However it turned particularly ugly in 1990 when Port tried to undermine the SANFL and go alone into the AFL.

Rivalry became enmity.

Over the years we’ve seen it manifested in those Showdowns.

Strangely however the SANFL does enjoy a good working relationship with Port Adelaide’s executive team but how much of the constant sniping and undermining from the Chairman can the relationship stand?

Perhaps an apology might help to soothe the troubled waters.

[am Bays]

Should change my user name back to 1980 Tassie Medalist in homage to the great man!

We said Cornesy!!

[Mic]

How have the rules for the Power Reserves in the SANFL rules changed since 2019 that has apparently made it so hard for them?

[dedja]

https://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/opi ... f300e1e8e7

SANFL clubs on alert as stars on Port, Crows hit list | Andrew Capel | The Advertiser


First Port Adelaide bags the SANFL.

Now it is trying to bag some of its state league rivals’ best players.

Just days after Port chairman David Koch went rogue on radio, accusing the SANFL of getting “what they wanted’’ when his club finished with the wooden spoon for the first time since 1900 and declaring “we can’t wait to be out of there’’, the eight stand-alone clubs’ greatest fears are being realised.

They are having to fend off attractive approaches from SA’s two AFL clubs to their star players.

Glenelg ace Matthew Allen is understood to be the latest big-name SANFL player that Port has targeted for its state league side as the new concessions that both it and Adelaide appear poised to be granted to stay in the local league become clearer.

While there is some more wheeling and dealing to be done, they will be handed some generous concessions after threatening to jump ship to the VFL or a potential AFL reserves competition.

They include access to up to six under 21 and four over-age listed players from SANFL rivals, along with the potential to sign delisted AFL players, either from their own clubs or from interstate.

A decision is expected to be announced in the next month.

The new recruiting rules will greatly enhance Port and Adelaide’s ability to build strong SANFL top-up lists, although they will be limited to taking one player from each local rival.

It has put the SANFL’s stand-alone clubs on red alert and had them moving swiftly to re-sign their key players to stop them from relocating to Alberton or West Lakes.

While Allen is believed to have rejected Port’s advances, Woodville-West Torrens – knocked out of the SANFL finals by Glenelg on Sunday – has urgently inked new deals with a host of key players.

They include star captain Joseph Sinor (who had his jaw broken in the elimination final against the Tigers), James Rowe, Connor Ballenden, Zane Williams, Luke McKay, Max Beattie, Adam D’Aloia, Cam Fleeton, Patrick Weckert, Zac Buck, Jordan Moore, Jordan Lukac and Max Litster.

Other clubs are following suit.

The stand-alone clubs are fuming at Koch’s comments on radio FIVEaa, which also included him saying the league “rigged the (AFL club SANFL concession) rules’’ and had him publicly questioning where the money from its West Lakes future fund was going and why the state league clubs aren’t “rolling in money’’.

Highly-respected Eagles chief executive David Couzner said his club felt that Koch’s disrespectful comments had driven a further wedge between Port and the stand-alone clubs.

“David’s negative comments make it hard for the SANFL management and SANFL clubs to foster a positive relationship with Port Adelaide, given that he thinks so little of the league,’’ Couzner said.

“It’s essential for all parties, including Port’s management, to approach these discussions with mutual respect if we are to move forward together.

“As a club, we commenced signing our players in July to ensure we maintained our talented list and to prevent both Port and Adelaide from accessing them.

“Typically, we would sign players in late August and September, but with the proposed changes, we felt it necessary to lock our list away as early as possible, which we successfully achieved.”

Port and Adelaide this year had access to four players under the SANFL Rookie Program but chose only one each.

Port selected Norwood’s Logan Evans, who it later selected in the AFL mid-season draft, while the Crows chose father-son prospect Tyler Welsh, who it could claim at this year’s national draft.

Redlegs chief executive James Fantasia, who spent years in the AFL administration system with Adelaide, the Western Bulldogs and Hawthorn, has argued that SA’s two AFL clubs should not be allowed to rob SANFL clubs of players but should instead recruit from interstate clubs.

This, he says, would in turn bolster the standard of the SANFL.

“That would add to our pool of players, not take from the existing pool,’’ he said.

SANFL clubs fear that if Port and Adelaide’s supplementary player concessions are too generous they could be almost impossible to beat when they have most of their AFL-listed players available for games.

While Port finished bottom for the first time in 124 years this season, winning only four matches, it has played in three SANFL grand finals in the past 10 years.

The Crows missed the finals this year but have played in three preliminary finals in the past six seasons.

In contrast, South Adelaide has made only six preliminary finals – and one grand final – since winning its last flag in 1964.

A 12-person SANFL working group will in the next month finalise the concessions that Port and Adelaide will be offered before it is ratified by the SA Football Commission.

The group includes SANFL chief executive Darren Chandler, executive general manager football Matthew Duldig, SA Football Commissioners and three club CEO’s – Sturt’s Sue Dewing, North Adelaide’s Craig Burton and Central District’s Greg Edwards.

[Jim05]

GAGF

[Dogs64]

Why the $%&! would they give them one single concession!!! These SANFL clubs and commission better not roll over again.

[Aerie]

They should only be allowed to take players from the top 4 clubs.

[southernbulldog]

They shouldnt take players from anywhere,
Chandler and his mates will rollover because they have no balls.
It is their job to look after the real SANFL clubs not the AFL sooks particularly Port

[MJP1993]

They shouldnt take players from anywhere,
Chandler and his mates will rollover because they have no balls.
It is their job to look after the real SANFL clubs not the AFL sooks particularly Port

A footy friend thinks Port wish to be Perl thunder that’s Fremantles second team going for their second flag in a row .
Few years ago an eagles fan who is in with port told me that port don’t want a magpies team in the SANFL they want to take over the eagles play their seconds in the eagles . If that happens I’ll stop being a eagles member and attending the SANFL