First time since 2014 that a Lockleys A grade team hasn't been coached by Zwecky. Just saying.

Why do some run with "the league allowed this and that" when it comes to finals permits. The finals qualifying rules are very fair and very clear. Permits are mostly approved for a 50/50 player (e.g. 9A and 9B) and even then you are only confident of getting the permit if most or all of the lower grade games are at the back end. Anything over 50/50 is unlikely unless exceptional circumstances. Do the same research that Bedge has done and it takes you about 15 minutes to work out what the numbers are before you start to squeal. Do some coaches and club people not realise that a player could have played his last 8 in A grade but if he played the first 9/10 in B grade then he is qualified to play B grade finals - no permit required - end of story.

Campbelltown can still get a bit heavy when wet but its now a great place to watch footy with fantastic facilities capable of handling a large crowd. And the car parking attached to the church and school just across the side road makes it a great finals option. Things have worked out well for the lower placed Gaza though after also getting to play there on Saturday.

I know Steve Waugh started the concept of wearing the same baggy green forever until he finally got some running repairs rather than replacing it. A few have carried on with what Waugh started. But Travis Head's SA baggy looks bloody horrible and surely he could try and get it re-dyed or something. I respect the ethos of continuing to wear the original you were presented, but have a little pride in how you present yourself as the team captain.

Renshaw isn't even opening for QLD. Batting 5 so hardly in the frame to open at Test level.

Good for our league I know but a bit of a sad state of affairs for the SANFL that the public are getting more information in the mainstream media about coaching appointments and recruits in the AdFL than the SANFL.

Ian Chappell is 78 years of age. People receive a pension and don't work at that age because their physical and mental state is in decline. Not to mention someone who has spent the majority of his life on planes and sleeping in hotel beds. Surely that adds a few more years.

He went on for too long with Channel 9 so shouldn't be anywhere near a microphone with the ABC. Just a grumpy old man these days and sad that his status and brand as a great Australian Captain and batter is being damaged.

Jim Maxwell is 71 and whilst he still has a great voice and manner with his commentary he is also seriously losing the plot with some of his comments and memory lapses.

Brighton Bombers play Glenunga on 19/3 and PHOS Camden on 26/3 - both at Kenilworth.

I see some clubs maybe having trials on weekend of 12/3 and even the week before. Not sure why clubs bother with a trial on the long weekend or even the week earlier. Just too many unavailable players to provide much value and just one more chance for blokes to get injured in an age when clubs have more players getting injured across a season than previous eras.

I assume Hope Valley weighed up the pros and cons of the clash with the first ever Friday night Showdown.

I don't like the general term of Sling tackle. That is a term borne out of junior footy where lads were getting tackled by the jumper and slung around and let go of at a bit like a hammer throw.

You rarely see blokes tackled by the jumper in senior footy these days but when they do the stretch of the modern jumpers can add to the potential for those tackles going wrong. Just ask us at Brighton after Round 1. Not sure if it was because it was a warm day on a fast track and whether opposition were more keen to take on the approaching tackler but you can go half a season without a bloke grabbing jumper only in a tackle and we had 3 in one game that resulted in suspensions.

There have been a few driving forward tackles that have resulted in suspensions and a few where benefit of doubt has been given due to the momentum of the tackler and the player with the ball. But these tackles are not the real problem area.

The main area of concern and the strong action from the AdFL with Dangerous Tackles (which should be the only term for any unnecessary tackle that causes or has the potential to cause injury) is where the tackler has both feet planted, lifts the opposition player, swings him around, and uses his body weight to drive him hard into the ground. Whether it's shoulder or head that makes initial contact with the ground is a lottery. These are tackles that seem to go beyond an instinctive action and the tackler makes a conscience decision to tackle in that manner.

It's hard to work out if we are genuinely seeing more of these tackles or just paying alot more attention to the end result of a tackle. What is becoming an issue is officials, players and spectators from clubs who have copped DT suspensions are now calling it out for any tackle that is on the edge of a DT which is putting pressure on umpires to bring out a card for tackles that probably shouldn't be carded and just be awarded a free kick. But on the other hand they are still missing ones that should be carded such as one I've seen on video from last Saturday (not the Brighton game).

Has the AdFL been heavy handed with the severity of suspensions? Some clubs and casual observers might have been thinking that way in the early part of the season but when your players are on the receiving end of these tackles then those thoughts become a bit more balanced. The minimum suspension for any dangerous tackle has generally been 2 games and there has possibly been a handful of lads who have been a little unlucky to get a 2 week holiday. But the overwhelming evidence is that players who have been suspended have changed their tackling habits for the better so maybe the suspension has done them and their club a favour.

First game was in the A grade in Round 12. Didn't play Round 13. Broadview C grade received a forfeit in Round 14 and they put him on the Team Sheet which is dodgy as anything but because he didn't play Round 13 then the rules probably can't prevent a club from doing it. Plays A grade Round 15 and cops a 3 game suspension for striking which means he finishes the minor round on 3 games and 1 game short of finals qualification.

Not sure about the rest of you but I'm thinking stiff bikkies. You bring a guy in for the last 7 games to replace a mercenary so you were already rolling the dice with getting 4 games into him. You then pull a swifty with the Round 14 situation so he's really only played 2 games. Broadview's heavy recruiting of high profile players suggests they were very determined to get promoted to Division 1. It seems that determination has now turned to desperation.

Which is how it should be for a club that has won 5 games across it's last 3 seasons. Isn't that the whole purpose of how a league allocates points. And of course a club then needs to apply a moral "Compass" to their point allocation.

Ah shucks bring out the tissues. Did you want them to line up the WOS Committee and boo at them. Booing a team to express displeasure at a clubs actions has been happening for 100 years.

Lets get the facts right though. His latest beef is with the Independent Review Panel that has been set up to deal with Code of Conduct issues. Warner was seeking to have his current ban on any leadership roles lifted. This was supported by Cricket Australia. This is where I'm a little unclear but it seems Warner's issue is how they want to conduct the hearing and has decided to withdraw his application. Cricket Australia have again come out in support of his stance with this. So he's not actually biting the hand that feeds him on this particular issue. But his statement about impact on wife and family etc. is a bit cringey.

Agree with all that SMG said. Was always taught to be on the move with feet out of crease at the moment of release with bat still grounded. At bowlers release point you switch your eyes to the striker bring your bat towards you and continue to move forward. A bowler who doesn't release and then tries to run you out is actually trying to deceive the batter so under the recent rule changes I reckon should be penalised 5 runs just like a fielder or keeper can now do for trying to deceive.

The reason why mankading was never considered in the spirit of the game is because I believe the original mankad by Mr Mankad was similar to what Zampa tried on. What batters have then done over the years is take advantage of the so called 'spirit' aspect and more and more have started leaving the crease well before the bowlers normal release e.g. The cheating SAffer with Starc. That's why the new rule has been crafted to say there is no spirit issue for running a batter out who is taking the piss but that you can't deceive them by pretending to complete the bowling action which is exactly what Zampa did. As SMG said Rogers may have been slightly out just before the normal Zampa release point but there was very little in it and he may have still got the bat down behind the crease if Zampa tried to run him out within the rules.

They've made some decent changes to the laws of the game in recent times with one exception being the one that allowed the Neser catch to stand.

PlayHQ or any other future system for the PlayHQ haters will unlikely ever be able to automatically determine APPS. The APPS rules are very simple if you recruit a regular A grader from another club in AdFL or elsewhere in SA but starts getting quite tricky when you consider some of the other points scenarios. eg. Whether a lad who is Under 21 has played more than 20 games at SANFL U18/Reserves level in last 2 years has a different points outcome than if they didn't; player who has played mostly B grade at another club but still played at least 5 A grade games in last 2 years will attract 1 point if they are changing leagues but 0 points if switching club in same league; and the list goes on with some of the technical aspects. But as others have said, if you are flying close to the upper limit, it is dangerous not to check with the league or SANFL Community.

The frustrating thing with AFL & SANFL banging on about volunteer fatigue and thinking it's about clubs struggling with the necessary supply of volunteers to run canteen, BBQ, boundary & goal etc. etc. which are the highly visible volunteer roles yet they are completely overlooking the invisible roles where volunteers are burning the midnight candle with Salary Cap contracts and spreadsheets, Player Points calculations and enquiries, Police Checks etc etc. These are all the things that have been thrust upon us by the same people that are expressing concern about volunteerism at clubs.

Bedford played for Mannum on 6/5 but played at SPOC on 13/5 & 20/5. It appears he has decided Mannum OUT and SPOC IN as his aligned Community Club which he is quite entitled to do at least prior to 30 June.

If Bairstow was in his crease and the ball deflected away after hitting the stumps and they pinched a bye we would all be saying fair play, the ball wasn't dead, and stupid from Carey. So with Bairstow out of his crease surely it's simply a case of stupid from Johnny and sorry but that's out.

What is the spirit of the game these days? Players reviewing when they have clearly edged the ball. Short pitched bowling to stem the run rate with fields that border on Bodyline field placings. Wicketkeepers claiming catches when the ball has clearly bounced into their gloves. Faking a throw when you don't even have the ball in your hands - recently outlawed with penalty runs against.

Trying to clean up the league? I think they have absolutely achieved cleaning up the league and are maintaining that by sending out a strong message with the length of suspensions for what has become a small number of reportable offences each week when you consider how many games are played across the league. It's actually a pleasure to watch a game of AdFL footy without some of the macho BS that players used to engage in and still do in some other leagues.

It was the old push and shove and other little cheap shots that would lead to more serious incidents as the game went on. Whilst I still get a little frustrated with how liberal some of the umps are with dishing out yellow cards you can see how effective this can be in putting a stop to something that could escalate later in the game. Massive improvement in spectator behaviour has also helped with a greater sense of calm out on the field.

They were never not cracking down on game day permits. The previous issue with some falling through the cracks plus the successful WOS challenge last season was the auto approve setting that the league had in place for transfers and permits. Which is fair enough with the amount of transfers and permits (particularly with the SANFL set up these days) that go through the ADFL. But just because computer says YES doesn’t mean the rules say YES. They now remove auto approve once the season is a few rounds old. Without knowing the full story with the Lockleys lineup on Friday night but one suspects some blokes played as part of the whole promotion that needed to be cleared (can’t do after 30 June) or weren’t bothering to register for a single game. Not sure how this promotes the league though. I believe these Marmalade blokes have moved to Melbourne and Lockleys have just been a convenience on their pathway of self promotion and media opportunities. Good luck to them but I’m sure the league has far more important things on their plate as we approach finals.

All forfeits default as 60-0 because that is the base rule for forfeits built into PlayHQ as it was for the systems that became before that. But any league has the right to have Regs around a fairer process for forfeits. For a number of years the SAAFL Regs have been the average for and against differential for the forfeiting club once they’ve played everyone once. For a team that hasn’t won a game that is simply their average losing margin. After Round 9 Brahmas was 134 hence why any forfeits from Round 10 give the other team a 134 to 0 win.

The Goody Saints folk should stand proud of 33 consecutive seasons in D1 with 10 or whatever number of flags they have won. But it shouldn't be treated like a death in the family. 20% of D1 gets relegated every season and it's getting harder and harder to stay in the top 8 from year to year as seen by the 4 Premiers from 2017 to 2020 (ROC, TTG, PNU, Goody) all being relegated to D2 since. TTG have got themselves back up and the next 3 weeks will determine if PNU and/or ROC can get themselves back up for 2024. Although pretty sure that Golden Grove will ensure there is only one other promotion spot up for grabs.

Goodwood played in a D1 Prelim only last season which highlights that it's such a fine line between being a challenger or scrapping to avoid relegation in D1. We've been one of those scrappers since being in D1 and it makes for a stressful back-end of the season that would be nice to steer clear of next season. Probably the strangest thing about Goodwood's relegation is that their B grade are undefeated (if you don't count the win taken off them) and their C grade only lost 4 games and still a chance of a flag if they can get past the undefeated PAOC C grade.

Each team plays 9 matches WHUFC. 6/3 or if lucky 5/4 with superior NRR is what is required to make semi-finals.

In the other game yesterday Pakistan won by 21 runs on DLS finishing at 1/200 from 25.3 overs after NZ made 6/401.

How would you feel make 400 in a 50 over game and lose :evil: :evil:

Australia 2006 says hello. Interesting how the record books treat the Pakistan win.

Not sure what the fuss was with Inglis even when Carey was fairly new into the Aussie system. Classic case of blokes out of the side are rated higher than blokes in it. At international level all performances good or bad are noticed and analysed but at state and franchise level only the good performances seem to get noticed not the failures which are often far more regular with some of these ‘rated’ fringe players. Renshaw a classic example of this.

Maxwell has to play. And surely horses for courses with the batting order. Marsh bats 3 or 4 if the openers get away otherwise he bats 5 after Smudge and Marnus. If those 2 rescue a poor start with a not so great run rate then you have March, Maxwell and Inglis who could get you 150 in the last 15 overs.

Now that we have come out the other side of Covid (I think) the return of the mass player movements to country leagues is back on and seemingly bigger than ever. Here's the big catch with what a city-based country player can earn. A player in 2024 can be paid 85c per KM for every KM over 100KM in the round trip for a game (up from 75c).

And to keep it simple the distance is calculated on the location of the home ground. Using Wallaroo as an example. That is a round trip of 322KM from Adelaide. So a player can be paid 222 @ 0.85 = $188 for travel that doesn't get counted in the Cap. So when you hear of a player getting $500 per game then it might only be $300 per game for salary cap purposes and the other $200 being the legal travel payment.

This to me is the biggest issue with the salary cap rules for us city clubs losing players to the country. And I don't think many city slicker footy people are aware of the generosity of the travel allowance - well you are now if you are reading this. This also means that a player could just be receiving a tidy amount for travel without getting paid a cent to actually pay. The whole travel thing is even more curious when you consider that most city based players car pool or even get mini bussed to games.

Again using Wallaroo as an example. If they have 10 players travelling from the city, that's $1880 per week in addition to the $3275 per week Salary Cap they can quite lawfully pay. It is true that a city club that apply travel allowance to a country based person to play in the city but that's pretty rare.

This puts into some perspective that many country clubs accused of paying overs are probably quite legal due to the benefits of the travel allowance. I know it's designed to help keep country clubs and leagues going and my appreciation of the importance of footy to country towns has changed from a "stuff em" attitude some years back, but I think this is a significant free kick to leagues beyond the closer country areas.

The D6 & D7 forums in November & December are always an early Christmas present for SA Footy enthusiasts.

Which is why clubs should park the big announcements that either get forwarded to that page I won’t mention or that page swipes off the club FB pages. Unless a bloke is training with you come March why bother. Half of the posted recruits aren’t even bona fide A grade players so how about we put an end to the wankfest and let everyone see who is new to the club come Round 1. It’s community footy FFS. Too many wannabees getting their 15 minutes of fame. Let’s welcome X to the club with lovely partner Y and child Z blah blah blah. I repeat FFS!

Why is it always Inglis for Carey. Inglis averages 33 in FC cricket and 18 in ODI. He hasn't played a red ball match since March 2023. Nothing about his keeping indicates being a better gloveman than Carey. Any one of 4 or 5 Aussie keepers can do the job to the 3 quicks but Carey's experience with keeping to Lyon, which has got better over time, is a big factor. Jimmy Pierson must get annoyed that Inglis is the man that everyone wants as Carey's replacement.

Wylie hasn't scored more than 22 in his last 7 SS digs. His first class average is now only 23 and he is a bit of a grafter. He still has a long way to go and may even be out of the WA team when SS resumes.

The lack of coverage of SS cricket means many cricket folk only seem to notice when fringe players make runs but tend to overlook all the fails in between. Blokes like Renshaw, Harris and Street also fall into that category.

Bancroft is one of the few SS regulars who has churned out consistent scores the last couple of seasons. I'm not convinced with his technique but deserves another crack. And for those who watch the shield dismissals on the CA website. Not only is he a solid back-up wicketkeeper and considered one of the best short leg fielders in world cricket but some of his slip catching for WA has been outstanding.

This obsession with the networks having things run into the news is strange these days. Other than ageing wise men like many on here - who actually watches the news anymore.

Seriously Tigerpie - criminal penalties!!! Have you been smoking those grass clippings again!

Our courts struggle to penalise real criminals let alone adding another layer to what is considered criminal activity. I think the SANFL and Community Football Board have handled these cases fairly well and dished out penalties that pass the pub test. Gaza is a whole new level of offences so will be interesting what the final wash-up is.

But the SANFL can only deal with the cases that come before them which have mostly been whistleblower cases. Even most or all the Gaza offences could have stayed under the carpet forever if not for disgruntled ex-player(s).

amber_fluid wrote:

jo172 wrote:$186,000

Rosella 5 years

Why did they half the initial fine?
Did they say?
Got off lightly here.

Several of the original charges were dropped/not proven just before and during the previous hearing. But it still left 223 offences which the Judge has ended up landing on $186K.

As a young batsmen would you sense there's an opportunity to push for a test spot or is there a loss of faith in Australia selectors to reward performance. I feel as others there's potential opportunities to stake a claim in the batting and keeping department.

Player power in control too much? Surely an external voice, not the coach. I lack belief he can be that dissenting voice players need from time to time.

Well with the batting, no one other that Bancroft is anywhere near being worthy of rewarding with a test spot. Our bowling stocks are as good as they have ever been but quality of batting around the shield system is at an all time low.

Absolute crap those suggesting that Cummins should have ensured Carey got his ton. Anything can happen in test cricket and if Cummins got out trying to be cautious or Carey gets out early in the next over then no guarantee we win. Carey edged Henry for 4 the over before and his last single was awkwardly played. And if he wanted the 100 he wouldn’t have taken the single. What if he gets out to Henry first ball next over then Henry has 5 balls to get Lyon and Hazlewood. A win from an unlikely situation is far more important than worrying about blokes making a ton or getting a 5 for.

10 openers have batted so far in the current shield games with a highest score of 35 from Whiteman. Australia has an opening bat crisis at the moment with not much light in a long tunnel.

There are plenty of blokes playing test cricket who are Elgar’s age or older. 37 is the new 32 with cricket these days. I have no issue with someone like that being recruited to play for a couple of seasons. Whether coming off a county season is an issue but I think I read that he’s not planning to play anything other than the 4 day county matches.

So Dutchy - what would SFL, GSFL or HFL do if a club was in the Elizabeth situation?

And everyone keeps banging on about putting Elizabeth in a C grade comp but has anyone bothered to check the structures of the lower C grade divisions to see how hard that would have been. I would trust Bedge's info above others on here as to how late (if at all) that Elizabeth could have requested to play in a C grade comp. Once we got the final fixture then any changes after that would have created a BYE in C6 or C7 and would have displaced venues and game times for games at Elizabeth. Everyone becomes a genius with solutions without any lateral or logistical thinking as to how it could possibly work. Why should 7 to 9 other clubs be negatively impacted due to the self-imposed problems of a single club. The league has over 70 clubs to deal with (the most of any league in Australia) - give them a break. The league can't be held to account for the ridiculous player movements between many of those old CDFA clubs that has contributed to the current/recent Elizabeth and Smithfield situations.

This did occur to me after I posted wenchy but a bit easier in the SFL with a Sunday C grade comp where the fixture is completely independent and has no links to what happens on a Saturday. Likewise the HFL C grade comp has accommodated a one club team such as Milang but that's a Friday night / Sunday comp. And those C grade comps are a case of the "more the merrier" to keep them viable and relevant.

And my memory of the Hackham situation is that they owned their issue early and went to the league and other clubs with a solution to keep some form of senior program in place.

And the other issue with Eliz playing in a C grade comp is that they would be playing at 10.15 or 12.15 so not sure how that would work for trade at home games and/or getting players and supporters back to the club etc. - particularly when playing away. Could this have contributed to any hesitation as to what they felt was best for 2024. Having 1 team in a C grade comp and going broke in the process could make it even harder to recover from.

I’m all for it provided they also bring in Dene from the Lodge to greet the guest players with that famous handshake.

Clubs playing Elizabeth at home would much rather a B grade game for revenue purposes and better post match numbers than being worried about the integrity of the B grade comp. It’s D6R after all. Surely participation and assisting Elizabeth with being better positioned for 2025 is more important.

Sticks and anyone else on here that craves the tribunal listing. The AdFL Update is now published on the AdFL website. Click on the menu item titled ADMIN HUB then look at the box titled CLUB HUB and there is a link titled 'The Update'.

Today's weekly Thursday Update was emailed out by the boss to club officials at around 1.00pm and is already loaded on the website along with all the back copies for this season. Each week's tribunal report not only provides the suspensions for last week's games but also a summary of all suspensions for this season.