mighty_tiger_79 wrote:just get your club runner to run with Warrior

Would love to see that.

Can tell the posters that haven't played much footy with comments downplaying the presence of a runner consistently on the field, reinforcing roles, tactics and encouragement.

None of that justifies racial vilification.

I'm glad you found that article for me, because that's one thing I remember Walsh talking about and I thought, I like that thinking. If only somehow we could get a coach who could win a flag by that thinking, then everyone else would be trying to do it, but better.

Yes its a good article. Glad you enjoyed it.

Another article in the same mould, which laments the passing of Phil Walsh as a man ahead of his time. The article from the fine Guardian newspaper discusses modern tactics and is basically a book review for a new book Time and Space: the tactics that shaped Australian Rules football and the players and coaches who mastered them by James Coventry. Definitely on my list which tries to explain the current tactics, zones etc.... Seems to discuss more than just the Victorians, and intriguing for North Fans, references Ken Farmer as vastly underrated as a pivotal coaching legend in the development of the game.

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/blog/2015/jul/15/understanding-afl-tactics-russell-jackson

North cant take a trick with Craig who is a decent ruckman out with a groin strain - that will help greatly as one of our real deficiencies is ruck.

Our other problem is the Forward line, and without Retzy its a bit of a worry. You can depend on Goody and Edmead for a couple but the rest are hit and miss. Of course their job is not helped by the often terrible forward entry passing.

The last time we played North we scored 18 goals, 6 by Stevens and 3 by Retzlaff. Since then Stevens has not done much although he did kick a goal last week, and of course Retzlaff is out. I think North were at their lowest ebb last time and playing at home the scoreline flattered us. Our backline is playing well and I can't see North kicking a big score, but unless we have someone firing like the last time we beat North, I cant see us kicking a bagful either.

Centrals by 20.

Hate these matches

Im always torn between my love and Loyalty to the crows and my love for Norwood. Being only 8 when the Crows came in I have grown up with them going every week. I only spent the years from 5-8 going to Norwood matches with Dad. Once the crows entered we switched to going to crows matches and it wasnt until I was older enough to go by myself to Norwood games that I started to go again.

Im so torn

Great post, well expressed and honest, but go with Norwood. Plenty of opportunities to support, see and hear about the Crows in this town.

From a personal perspective, good to know that the brainwashing your Dad did during those 5-8 years has seen the support for the SANFL through. Exactly what Im doing to mine, poor little buggers have no choice. :D

One thing that really gets to me with commercial organisations is their petty bullshit. Channel 7 in Perth refusing to broadcast WAFL games involving West Perth because they're sponsored by Channel 9. It's like The Advertiser here still refusing to refer to Subiaco Oval as Domain Stadium and continually calling it Patersons Stadium because real estate website Domain is the competition to realestate.com.au now owned by News Corp. Pathetic.

Anyway Channel 9 in Perth has offered to broadcast WAFL finals games involving West Perth if Channel 7 continues to refuse to show their games.

The WA Football Commission remains optimistic that WAFL clubs playing in the Finals will be broadcast on Seven Perth, following an offer from Nine to broadcast WAFL Finals if Seven refuses to feature West Perth Football Club, sponsored by Nine.

Nine Perth’s sponsorship with West Perth Football Club has seen Seven refusing to broadcast matches featuring the Falcons.


http://www.tvtonight.com.au/2015/07/nine-perth-offers-to-broadcast-wafl-finals-amid-logo-gate.html

Newcorp = Murdoch = Fox

Geez its nice in these days of risk management to have such a ballsy move by both West Perth and Nine Perth.

In SA IMO the move to channel 7 has been a poor strategy by the SANFL, although I acknowledge that the ABC were probably going to stop broadcasting. We should have gone that last year with the ABC and kept the 300K and invest in some decent cameras ready to start live streaming. The NBN is going to deliver a stack of bandwidth in the next 3 years, data costs are going to drop and if you had 2 games live broadcasted by App only, you would think with the advertising revenue it would at least be revenue neutral. Its time the SANFL was ahead of the game.

I think though the measures being put in place regarding total player payments in amateur and country leagues might help this though.

Ultimately though it is about playing on an even playing field, but it wouldn't be, the richer community clubs would be better resourced than the poorer community clubs and then the whole thing is funded by pokies and chook raffles.....

Yes the salary cap hopefully will be a game changer, and get some common sense back into the club boards at country and amateur level.

I think the aspect of someone trying to get the best out of themselves is being discounted. The majority of guys running around the SANFL know they are not going to get an AFL gig, and are playing in the comp to be the best they can be. Not everyone does something for maximum dollar or advantage. Im sure a lot of comments about the SANFL are either from someone who hasn't played football, or have totally forgotten. The feeling of group success and reward for effort is extremely strong. I can see it in my kids just starting out in sport, its heady stuff.

Maybe its the last of the socialist in me, but I get depressed reading about the dollar side of players motivations, and the trade talk stuff. The whole cattle auction side of the AFL draft and trade underlies the reason why the AFL exists - Money. That this system thrives and is commonly expected at lower grades including amateur levels is disturbing. Surely making the SANFL a community driven competition and something alternative, where character and deeds are rewarded by something other than immediate financial gain will ensure the SANFL's success.

Im in the middle of that predicament now. I have 2 kids who adore the game and love Centrals. The kids at their school love footy and it is a fantastic environment, however the only teams you support are the Crows or Port. The Crows dominate.

My kids understand the SANFL and AFL although they are still perplexed as to why Adelaide is also in the SANFL. Their friends have no idea and its funny to watch them react with curiosity to my kids supporting a different team. The SANFL has lost so much ground on this that it will take a lot to gain some traction. I think it can still happen, but it has to be smart and the AFL teams must leave. Get away from the idea of big media, that ship has sailed, however net streaming is well and truly here. Data will continue to drop in price as the NBN is rolled out. The SANFL must invest in this space now, get smart with their APP design and start to get digital product out there.

Kids love collecting the player cards. Why not develop interactive player cards, they don't have to be fancy, business card size which should keep the price low, say 10 per club, have a QR code on the back and kids can hold it up to their tablet and watch some footage. It is not hard nor expensive, and this is the time to do it. Devote a budget for development, incorporate a scholarship for SANFL players, and develop innovative digital product.

I'm not sensitive I'm realistic and have an understanding of modern football programming and who runs these program's. I'm sorry if you don't. As for their motivations, does it really matter. Whether you, Graham Cornes or any other poster like the idea doesn't bother me at all and that's fine. Nobody has to like it but my point is it is being built to cater for it's ever growing market.

I guess my intellectual weakness inhibits me from explaining to you clever folk. Sorry was that immature, us Hipsters tend to do that when we are out thunked :roll:

The matter of difference is the motivation. As I tried to indicate in my previous post, the AFL will chuck some dollars at to get positive coverage, whack a brand on it and then claim they are the custodians. They want to be owners of Australian Rules Football, that is their MO.

Anyone who cant see that women's sport will continue to gain prominence has their head in the sand. The development of a semi professional league is a good thing. Its interesting, good for girls & young women and as I said before, anything that can change stereotypical thinking has to be encouraged. However I would hate to see it develop as a copy or pale imitation of the mens league. Most professional men's sport has developed to the point where it is mundane, clichéd and based totally on money. AFL is almost an infomercial. You cant get away from it. The developers of professional women's sport should look at organisations such as the AFL or FIFA to work out exactly what you should not do.

Perhaps some are staying away because they are indifferent to the competition but times change and rivalries change, move on. The challenge for the SANFL and the clubs is to put on a product which entices the fans out to the local game. I witnessed an excellent game 2 weeks ago between the Eagles & the Crows. If there were more of that standard you would have supporters flocking back to the grounds.
This is a comment from 'Walter' published at the end of Faulkner's article, and it touches on the perception that non-SANFL people (and based on its context, I'll assume Walter is a Crows supporter) have for the competition.

The most offensive and patronising thing is the 'move on' sentiment. Stop sooking about your league, times change, so harden up and get with the program, right? A lot of people have 'moved on' following the introduction of the Crows and Port in the last 25 years. They have accepted its place as a second tier competition. Moreover, they have spent (and continue to spend) a lot of time, money, and passion investing in their clubs, and to have a Johnny-come-lately tell you that you should disregard what it means to you is, well, flat-out offensive. When the boot is on the other foot and Crows are on the receiving end of unfavorable administrative decisions from above, then let's see who has the courage to 'move on'.

I find it amusing and annoying that those who spend the least amount of time participating in the SANFL seem to be the most opinionated voices in terms of how it should be managed and administered.

Hear Hear, My sentiments exactly. Moving on is the easiest thing to do. Its easy to follow a local AFL team. So much media exposure, participating remotely, watch the game in HD with mates and family, taxpayers to fund brand new facilities and transportation, kids easily entertained and forget about it after the game.

The worst thing about the current state of the SANFL is I care. I care about the club, about the people within the club, their jobs and the impact of the last couple of seasons. Its easy to just follow the AFL and totally depersonalise the thing, become a Walter and boo and cheer from my brand new Adelaide Oval seat or in front of my HD TV. I sponsor my club, try to attend all the events, spend at the auctions, spend at the lunches, donate to improvements, buy and sell the raffle tickets and to a lesser extent volunteer my services when they are required. I wonder what Walter does?

Although Rucci is being deliberately provocative, I think there is one point he makes which does make a little bit of sense.

It is completely fair enough that a lot of people feel like their passion for the comp has been diminished because of the introduction of the Reserves teams, but complaining that crowds are down and will continue to go down and then not showing up yourself creates a self fulfilling prophecy.

SANFL teams arguably need their supporters more than ever, so I think a few of you are having a bet each way by complaining that crowds are going down, but yet not going yourself either, even to non reserves games.


Now a few of you probably arent reading this sentence because you are already frothing at the mouth, but I think there is also another reason why interest might be down. It has probably been mentioned before, but seeing how the crows players went at SANFL clubs was a reason for me to keep interested. I used to check the scores of the random norwood game just to see how the crows lads have went.

Now I only have to go and check the crows reserves score (along with the centrals score too).

Yes its a dilemma benny, one which appears as though you don't have to face with any real emotional investment. I suppose your posts are handy to demonstrate the disregard that so many of the AFL followers have for SANFL. The end of one of the oldest continuous surviving sport leagues, that some of us grew up in, participated in and now witness the demise of. This year on all levels, has been a farce. Rucci on the other hand sits in the winners seat, having watched his club not only betray the competition, but in the last couple of years, actively participate in its path to oblivion. This despite the fact that the SANFL bankrolled years of Ports losses. Its a very hard act to watch.

You're use the phrase "self fulfilling prophecy" incorrectly though. What many of the diehards are doing is more than a "cut your nose of to spite your face" act. Becoming a reserves competition to them is the end of the competition, its not the race for the premiership, and I totally understand and sympathise with their behaviour.

First half of the game was a street fight, with a massive amount of tackles laid from both sides. In the second half, it looked as though Norwood ran out of Legs, and Centrals run and confidence lifted. We broke Norwoods zone time and time again, and finally started to nail the goals. You could see in the first half how Norwood would control the press, and then kick over the top and scored. Its been so frustrating watching this happen to Centrals over the last 2 to 3 years. All that hard work pushing forward being blown in 30 seconds of football. However we have learnt. Centrals plan was to get fitter and tackle and tackle until they were down, and it worked. It worked at the Parade earlier in the year, and on Sunday. Roy is getting the guys to understand how to break the Bassett and Collins game plan down. We have to continue to work on the teams that don't play the hard defensive press as their plan A and B though. It would be good if we can go on in this final series, but if not watch out next year.

Losing Phillips just before the game and Baulderstone no doubt would have hurt the Legs. We have had our best ball user in Jansen out for a few weeks and key forward Retzlaff out intermittently for the last 6 weeks or so. We have been able to set up a game without them. IMO the biggest out for us was 18 yo Milera who went out with a medical condition but hopefully will be back against Port. He has speed, composure and skills, and as we saw is capable of kicking a bag. A pity he did not get to play in his first final, as he is a confidence player and was in rare form. Hope he can put the little scare behind him, and nail it this weekend.

Interesting to note, rumour coming out of Elizabeth last night, Central was prepared to boycott Sunday's match if Gray was allowed to play.

=))

"We might have done something if something that didn't happen, did happen!"
There speaks a true Port man

Centrals might have voted no AFL in the SANFL......... Oh hang on a minute...

Thanks mate! :D

Anyway, I'm off to prepare a rumor about something that didn't happen, but I'll have it covered anyway.

Sensitive to demonstration of principles hey.

Interesting to note, rumour coming out of Elizabeth last night, Central was prepared to boycott Sunday's match if Gray was allowed to play.

=))

"We might have done something if something that didn't happen, did happen!"


So if a guy who played 10 SANFL games was permitted to play your club would have forfeited 12 months work. :roll: :lol: Now I am all for rumour and innuendo on this site, the forum is built on it but let's draw the line at cosmic fantasy :lol:

OK can I try one....Early last year Boon came over my house to buy some drills. If our Mrs didn't have us on a time line we were going to clear the State of Bikies and use the drills to shut their club rooms and then enter and win Australia's next top models. I get it now, this is fun ;)

Yeah someone mentions its a rumour and you guys get all uppity. Think skinned even to the suggestion of a principled stance. Central Districts Football Club is the only club which is publically standing up and saying this current situation is not acceptable. It would not surprise me in the least if heated discussions were taking place over any bending of the rules for Port Power. Boycott, yeah a bit over the top, but who could blame them.

Yes, the reserves will be 8 teams, 4 games per week. Excellent maths.

Hopefully you can add up that one team, per week, will have the league and the reserves playing at different locations. Meaning support staff can't be at both. Now, that won't work, will it?

The SANFL clubs have managed an 8 team comp with the U/18s playing at different venues for a few years now. No reason the reserves couldn't play curtain raisers to the juniors once in a while - particularly since they'd also be on an 8-team fixture.

Nevertheless "Adelaide needs a reserves-reserves team so the SANFL clubs don't have to play separate reserve games" is possibly the flimsiest reason I have yet seen in favour of interloper interests.

Oh dear Russell Ebert. It's not to keep the AFL clubs happy, FFS, it's to work towards a point where the SANFL has a more even playing field, by reducing the number of AFL listed players at SANFL league level.

Now while "kick them out" is your only answer, that isn't happening soon, so work towards a better outcome than the one we have. Wouldn't that be a good move?


Quote "Just kick them out, that'll be the best move - Naive SA Footy poster"

Yes you are talking ideology vs pragmatic solution seeking. This is football, I would have thought ideology fits in quite well with vocal and passionate supporters. Wouldn't you agree that consistently trying to appease and find the middle ground has just resulted in the mess we find ourselves in?

Central District Football Club has listened to its members and is the only club publically standing up to this situation. All Centrals supporters should be proud of the club, and support them at games.

I have not heard a great deal from South Adelaide about this lately.

Other supporters who do not like the situation should be demanding their club makes a change in stance. Vote, make statements and let the club know they are not acting in the best interest of your club or the competition.

Nervous but confident. Real stability for the last 6 weeks and we have been lucky so far with lack of injuries. Good luck Bloods, may the best team win.

West were on fire yesterday, they beat us at our own game and were so much cleaner when getting away from the clearances. We fumbled way too many times and our play makers like T Schiller were way down on form. Some real clangers at pivotal times allowed West to score easily. Even when we were tacking them they manage to get a kick away for a goal. It really was Wests day. My post game post was affected by way too many plastic cups of stale beer. I would love to see Westies get a premiership, their only one in 3 decades and after yesterdays effort with some quality footy, they deserve it.

Once again the Lizbeff choir was in full voice, kept me entertained and chanting away the afternoon. Westies crowd an enthusiastic bunch and why wouldn't they be. Hopefully a fair amount of neutrals make the GF.

Well done Bloods. I was surprised how good they were in the prelim with a few of their best out, and they really carried that form into the GF.

Well done South, what a result. Adelaide reserves playing bruise free football has become their pattern in both grades. You would be hard pressed to find a more fat, bloated and mediocre organisation than the Adelaide Football Club.

Agreed, even before this game Central lead the league with home crowd growth this year. Eagles currently a distant 2nd.

Everything helps and if you want a really big crowd you need a multitude of things happening.

When we (Eagles) got 4670 for a Crows game last year, the MWJFL Carnival was the foundation bringing in about 1700 but other specific promotions also brought in about 800-900 which when added to the normal 2000 that attend, gave us a great figure.

I am sure the Bulldogs worked to a similar plan and with the new scanning able to give regular updates through the day they should have a good idea who came for what.

So there is a deliberate strategy in having the junior carnivals prior to an Adelaide reserves game. Tex turns up and the crowds follow. I gather with the obvious success this will continue and will be copied by all clubs. So we will have a season to look forward to where half of the Adelaide reserves fixture will contain junior carnivals and the subsequent crowd boost.

Wild Dog ... you answered your own question

" While the kids love it and there is an extra amount spent on the canteen"

In my role this is far more important than how any 3rd party wants to spin it.

The carnival Eagles ran this year involved U8 & U9 teams across 12 clubs

EVERY U8 & U9 junior club player in the North West from Lockleys, Flinders Park and Henley up to North Haven. from the coast across to South Road came to Woodville and hopefully had a great day. (Plus Hectorville).

It probably brings hundreds of families to the ground who otherwise have no Eagles connection.

Remember our "Carnival Day" is not just a series of footy games, there is a heap of other activities organised as well around the event.

I congratulate you and your club on your effort and subsequent success. I have always admired the work ethic of the WWT FC. I also like the way our Kym Jarman does his job, a hard worker, personable, diplomatic and innovative. My kids go to most of our home games (except for the reserves) and the range of activities for them most weeks is a credit to Kym and his team. Our home games deserve to have hundreds of visiting families without the need of a Tex.

Yes I am referring to third parties and most would understand that any spin is out of your hands. It must be soul destroying hearing the talking heads boast about the crowd boost Adelaide brings when we know in effect it is the exact opposite.

source : https://business.monash.edu/__data/assets/pdf_file/0006/339198/the_economic_development_of_the_australian_football_league.pdf

In 1983, the VFL’s player rules were declared void as a common law restraint of trade (Dabscheck,1984). In addition, in the twenty years of football tween 1967 and 1986, the premiership was shared between only five of the twelve VFL clubs. Sixteen of these twenty premierships were shared between just three clubs; Carlton won six premierships in this period, and Hawthorn and Richmond five each. By this simple measure alone, it was evident that the VFL competition over this period was decidedly uneven. Moreover, by the middle of the 1980s the VFL was in serious financial trouble. Performance in terms of the VFL's objectives was poor. Attendances and club memberships were dropping, player payments had increased dramatically, half the VFL clubs were technically bankrupt and the competition was incurring heavy losses, and a group of the stronger VFL clubs were planning a breakaway to form a national competition.


If you have attended a sportsmans function with an old VFL guest speaker, they usually will tell the story of the brown paper bag full of cash. Platten happily tells the story of Carlton placing a big amount of cash in his account and him spending it on a Group A Brock Commodore, and then going to Hawthorn. The Club is a dramatisation of this type of thing going on in the 70's. The VFL was going to fail, the SANFL was in a much healthier position although obviously being damaged by the cash throw interstate. If we had stood united for a couple of more years they would have been paying us to enter the comp on our terms. Unfortunately SA faced the perfect storm of the recession we had to have and the State Bank disaster. Port double crossed the league when they thought all were united and we blinked. Now we have a local comp a shadow of its former self and with the introduction of AFL reserves, no viable alternative to independent supporters. We have one composite team in the national comp and one so called traditional club that is still to prove if it can stand on its own 2 feet. I think if you looked at the competition from the 70's and 80's with yearly attendances of 1 to 1.1 million, locally produced television and radio and compared it to now, unless you are a strident Port fan who hates the SANFL, you could not call it a successful evolution from what we once had. The VFL have not only successfully managed to remove themselves from debt by utilising the American league model, they now monopolise the game of Australian Rules and annually take hundreds of millions of dollars back to Melbourne.

I'll answer Magellan's question, though I think my position is pretty well known. I support Glenelg when they play the Crows in the SANFL. I support the Crows when they play anyone else. I get to as many Crows SANFL games as I can, usually if they don't clash with Glenelg or I haven't already been to 2 Football games on that weekend. This season have probably been to around 5 or 6 Crows games and now the final. Will be there again next Sunday.

As a supporter and strident defender of the Adelaide reserves in the SANFL, would you care to comment on the turn out of Crows supporters on a day that you would have thought would have been perfectly organised for them. A home game, the chance to see their up and coming as they march into the AFL finals, Van Berlo in one of his last games and no AFL games to watch.

In my opinion, it was a disastrous result for any sane defence relating to AFL reserves participation and subsequent crowd numbers. There was no atmosphere at the game; hell the players were cheering more than the supporters when they got a goal. A number of Centrals supporters boycotted as its a reserves game, yet we still vastly outnumbered Crows supporters, a club that is currently bragging has the most supporters attending a game in Australia.

2016 week1: 8,351 week 2: both at Adelaide Oval
2015 week1: 8,031 week 2: 9,247 both at Adelaide Oval
2014 week1: 12,147 week 2: 13,431 both at Adelaide Oval
2013 week1: 5,866 week 2: 9,248 both at Football Park Poor finals crowds but GF Norwood v North 36,685
2012 week 1 7,126 week 2: 10,284 both at Football Park
2011 week1: 9,192 week 2: 11,443 both at Football Park
2010 week1: 11,449 week 2: 13,162 both at Football Park
2009 week1: 10,192 week 2: 14,207 both at Football Park
2008 week1: 15,825 week 2: 22,568 both at Adelaide Oval Port v Norwood, Central v Sturt; Sturt v Norwood, Glenelg v Central
2007 week1: 11,746 week 2: 14,764 both at Adelaide Oval
2006 week1: 11,902 week 2: 9,328 both at Adelaide Oval
2005 week1: 9,434 Adelaide Oval week 2: 12,056 Football Park
2004 week1: 11,842 Adelaide Oval week 2: 13,081 Football Park
2003 week1: 6,211 Football Park week 2: 8,145 Football Park - Top 4, both stand alone games
2002 week1: 10,765 week 2: 12,467 both at Football Park
2001 week1: 10,898 week 2: 18,463 both at Football Park
2000 week1: 15,539 week 2: 20,321 both at Football Park

Norwood West defensive zone game starts to take effect from 2012.
2014 Adelaide Oval redevelopment
Important dates beyond footy. Great financial crash 2009-2013 GMH goes from 3 shifts to sharing shifts.

Forgot to add source of crowd figures http://australianfootball.com/seasons/season/sanfl/107/premiership%2Bseason/3/3/2012/basic#qualifying-final

Yeah the days prior to the Adelaide Oval redevelopment were great for watching finals double headers. Great crowds and atmosphere. The potential if the games were held on a Saturday.

Once Glenelg are in the finals crowds increase - sacking Mickan, well you still have wonder at that decision.

Get the comp right, do some decent promotion and with the new stadium the SANFL can get some great crowds.

Getting a bit of sense now into thread now. I would only watch my club as well although I will be at most of the games live. It seems good value.
Anyway for those that want coverage of all other team games, how could you watch all 5 games being played at the same time.

The criticism relates to a comparison of costs with the AFL and the quality of the product. Each game is available for replay, it does not need to be watched live. Notwithstanding my opinion that the digital pass is a positive development, if you were a fan of the league and wanted to watch each game, it would be an expensive product for what is a single camera broadcast with an amateur (although enthusiastic and enjoyable) commentary team. The AFL would make a great deal of money off of their Telstra deal; the SANFL essentially has to pay for the broadcasts although the cameras are already a locked in expense.

I like the alternative/amateur feel of the SANFL broadcasts. I like the interviews with the players which are often raw and not the highly trained media / matey stuff where each guy tries desperately to have their own shtick. Its why the realignment of the league to fit in with the AFL has been so disappointing; they had a great product. To a certain audience, the SANFL was a breath of fresh air. Hopefully this years digital pass is a start, we get a healthy subscription and companies take notice and create entire league packages, rather than the SANFL footing the bill.

One comment of Laird's surprises me a little, for some who thinks as he does,

Our Clubs must think outside the square in promoting and building new revenue streams

Does he not think the clubs are, have and will always be doing that?

I'm sure the clubs think they are.
I think all organisations must continue to do this, even if they think they are.
Progress is better than perfection.

He mentioned in his letter "Laird over the top comments" thus he is aware that perception exists. He is acknowledging his detractors repeated sentiment that "we will fix this all up if we think outside the square and find new revenue streams" i.e. he is trying to find some common ground in his thoughtful correspondence. The trouble is his detractors - the elite schooled interbred halfwits who label themselves corporate, political or community leaders - are dismissing the bleeding obvious. If we did think outside of the square, we would be independent of the AFL and make the SANFL a genuine alternative to the current over controlled, corporatised myopic competition that the AFL is.

"Proven performer" was more intended in relation to his ability. If he has issues but they're no longer going to impact on your club, then I'd have thought you'd be happy at him becoming someone else's problem?

I'm trying to keep out of this conversation.

However, the one thing I will say is that the annoyance stems from disappointment at the opportunities afforded to Josh. It also stems from the fact that many of us wish we had half the talent he does and the opportunities he's had.
Football can give you so much if you choose to embrace it. To paraphrase - a beautiful talent is a shame to waste.

Yes well said. I am very disappointed that he decided not to play for us this year, just when it seemed Roy had managed to keep him engaged within a disciplined culture.

Onto his playing ability, the number 5 fitted him perfectly. The early games last year he had an over aggressive - which I sometimes took as mentally lazy (contradicting I know) - attack on the ball, which resulted in easy turnovers. By the end of the year though, he was up there with Holman in his impact, a SANFL gun who would not have surprised me this year if he had gone on to win a Magarey and another stint at the AFL if he wished.

I hope whatever has happened is a wake up and that he settles down; he has a stark choice to make. My instinct is that being offered an easy hand up by an enthusiastic and opportunistic party is not the way to go, but is the alternative to sit out a year and wallow any better.

Leave, stick up your middle finger, shout insults, lock arms and have a sing, but just pay the money back. Be our guests, continue to attend Adelaide Oval in your tens of thousands, have a nice feed, drink up and pay the rent. We will do the rest.

Well done West Adelaide. To the genuine West Adelaide supporter who came out to Elizabeth, you are what this great competition is about.

Another great article by the much respected author Martin Flanagan about the AFL and Australian Rules Football in general, using North Hobart as the example. Worth a read.

https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/a-vote-of-no-confidence-in-the-afl-in-tasmania-20180412-p4z9as.html

Good article. Particularly like how Martin makes a case for how different our culture and structure is to USA football.

Our game has only two levels – the AFL and grass roots. If Australian football dies at the grass roots, so will the game.

Unfortunately we had an opportunity to have a decent semi professional level and for a while in the noughties it looked possible. Seems like a pipe dream now.

Its players like Steven which makes me still want to go and watch SANFL. Dedication to playing top notch footy for the sake of the game and the club he represents. He did speak his mind when circumstances dictated that he should, and taking into account his family history, did the pragmatic thing, put his head down and played on. Congratulations on a great career, and good luck in the future.

AFL Inc has changed this rule because coaches and the football industry have poisoned the game with presses, floods and scrums to win at all costs and to minimise the size of their losses. Yet it was the custodians of football that enabled this ugliness through a simple but profound rule change - introducing the interchange system. The intent was good, make sure there are 18 fit players on the ground. The outcome is bad - constant rotations to support 18 up and 18 back for a whole game.


Abolish the interchange completely? That will have a counter effect. It will make everyone more tired and AFL players admit that when they get tired, they surround the ball to stop the ball getting out. You'll also find, as a code, we produce more athletes rather than footballers (as I'd know them) which isn't the way I want the game to go.

If you mean abolish the interchange cap, then I'd agree with that.

The point being, if you abolish the interchange, we go back to a positional based game because of physical limitations. As there are not as many chasing the ball around to make and close space i.e. zones, there will not be as many players surrounding the ball. They have experimented with capping the rotations for this reason.

Substitute players when form, tactics or injury dictates; a novel idea.

When you look at the legalities, I'm not sure they could overturn it.

1) The rule specifically states that the captain or acting captain must alert the on-field field umpire and request the count - this didn't happen. The boundary rider alerting the interchange steward or the 4th umpire isn't an official request for a head count, which is why nothing would've been done. SO calling for the 4th umpires head is stupid

Biggles and Roo carrying on this morning about how it isn't the captains problem to be doing this stuff. Fairly clueless remarks from both, considering the amount of games they've played between them.


Yes but as some astute poster indicated before, rule 5.5.1 indicates that "the" field umpire is requested to count the players. The rules may define "the" field umpire as the senior umpire, however if they do not then there could be an argument mounted that the rules are outdated. What cant be argued is that:

There are meant to be 18 players on the field, and the team who has more has a distinct advantage.

Norf had the advantage which was realised for a full 5 minutes (17% of a quarter) at which point North had the play advantage and converted this on the score board.

Godden has stated that they could not find how North were finding the loose player

The Eagles realised that there was an extra player and bought it to the attention of the 4th umpire.

The captain did not make the request for a count, hence could not invoke the count procedure

Of the above, if the rules are interpreted as being outdated or lacking, the least of concern is the captain asking for a count.


2) Umpires signed off on the card afterwards

No point in crying about it after the fact if you didn't follow the correct procedure to have the infringement rectified in the first place.

If they do overturn it, the Rooster will probably cop a massive fine from the SANFL to make up for the tickets that no-one will now buy

I agree, the result should stand but the fact is Norf have cheated, whether it was on purpose or inadvertent, they have cheated. Sure the Eagles had a big lead an blew it, but they fought back and deserved to win it because the 8 points that North scored they did with an unfair advantage.

Interesting good discussion. When it comes to your kids and sport I would be the first to admit that logic takes a second place sometimes (unfortunately.) I am lucky that my lad is in a good club and the coaches have taught me a lesson or 2 in how junior teams should be managed.
......

Where does your lad play?

As a proud northern suburbs lad myself....... Glenunga. :oops: There I said it.

Interesting good discussion. When it comes to your kids and sport I would be the first to admit that logic takes a second place sometimes (unfortunately.) I am lucky that my lad is in a good club and the coaches have taught me a lesson or 2 in how junior teams should be managed.

Without guidance, I would have been a coach that would have gone for the win. What the last 3 years (6 to 9 yo) has demonstrated to me is despite the folly of some of these modified rules, by balancing out the team you really do see a magic combination of the talented and less talented. Our team was a good team, winning most games, and we all take delight in watching our kids do well. However one of the best moments for our team happened last year when one of the lads who struggles developmentally, got the ball and kicked a goal. His Dad could not help himself and ran onto the ground, all the kids ran up to him in jubilant scenes. Out of all the wins and the rousing renditions of the song, that was the most memorable moment of the past 3 seasons. A real credit to our coaches, the club and the philosophies that they have in place.

The idea is not complicated, each week have different combinations of 3 kids (complementary skills) in each zone, rotate them through each zone for the game. Emphasise helping each zone member out, but do not overdo the equal sharing stuff, individuals should be able to develop and use the ball creatively. What not to do is stack the good players in the same position to win, its obvious to most of us and as I indicated before it is only through my own education that you realise this.

I still think an extra bonus point for teams that can score over 100 points is the way to go.

Don’t change the rules just change the reward system and let the coaches work out the issue of their teams lack of scoring problem.

I'm not sure if this is your original idea UK, but if you thought of it you deserve the Nobel.

I love the Schiller lads and with Pres we get plenty of the ball. Our ruck is doing well, however we need some leg speed in the middle to stop the opposition run and switch to attack. For me the signs against the Crows in the last half were good and our fitness is fine, but we must be much more adaptive and ready to change tactics when the opposition is hammering us. The lads can run out the game, they are fit and we have good depth. I think it will be closer than 10, but cant see us getting over the line. A big test and if we do keep within a couple of goals, it will be a good sign for the remainder of the season.

Its a Top 10 as if I was a recruiter and who I believe will have the best career at AFL level. The more games I watch Gould he may move back up. I really like Dyson Hilder as Key defensive as a long term AFL prospect.

Good write up with interesting observations, thanks for sharing. I would appreciate it if you continue with this. Cheers.

I am all for playing the kids, and they will be fine in long term.
But on Saturday Fort was leading the ruck and Auckland was #2. If Hannath was sharing the ruck duties with Auckland (who still gets the same opportunities he had) then we get to use Fort where the coaches would like to use him. Fort was needed in defence on either McBean, Reynolds or Hosie who were able to exploit our lack of height in defence.
I agree Hannath wasn't always as good as he could have been, but he would be pretty handy given our struggles with height atm.

I thought too much height last year was a problem. This year the 666 rule was supposed to inject scoring and a more position based game. It made sense not to have such height and inject some pace to the forward line. Problem for us thus far is the lack of pace. I did not see Saturdays game so cant comment on the defensive man ups, but I would much rather have some hard gut running types prepared to put pressure on the opposition than a 200cm+ KPP who for whatever reason cant take a contested grab and lacked the ability to get the ball.

One of the young lads recruited from across town runs all day and never gives up on a contest and tackles hard. But he would drop 3 or 4 simple footpasses or handballs every week
Are you talking a tall here?

......
“Never before in our club’s 149-year history have more Port Adelaide supporters been attending our games,” he said. “Every second weekend on average more than 42,000 supporters collectively attend either Port Adelaide games at AFL or SANFL level.
.......

Home crowd averages: North 3274 (2093 in 2018), Sturt 3252 (3575), Norwood 3069 (2897), Glenelg 3045 (2059), Eagles 2203 (2176), West 2147 (1880), Central 2097 (1998), South 1733 (1441), Port 1705 (1956).

The spokesman reckons every second weekend they average more than 42,000 . By every second weekend I gather they are indicating Adelaide Oval games. Port Power AO average this year is 38464, last year 38227 and 2017 38136.

38464 + 1705 = 40169 which is lower than 42,000, not more.

2014 Power AFL Adelaide Oval average 44,364, 2015 43,086 and 2016 39,332.

So they have not averaged more than 42,000 since the 2016 season. For the sake of state and the half billion + of public funds that it took to increase their crowds, I hope Port Power's crowds don't tank like they did in 2012 (19,911.)

Afl clubs looking to drastically cut lists to save money next year.


Down to as many as 36 so no afl reserves in our comp looking more likely.


To anyone who gave the old “they are here to stay just get over it “. You couldn’t of been more wrong

Wait, whoa, hang on, you think we're wrong because we didn't predict a global pandemic and economic disaster?

Tssk, silly us.

WAFW.

At the risk of being called a wanker by a Port tragic, what we said was when the circumstances are such that the AFL does not want to be in the SANFL, they will ditch us like a used condom on Hanson Rd.

NEAFL has been absorbed into the VFL.
NAB league is going to U17’s and U19’s so I’d expect we will have to follow suit

Hang on... weren’t we encouraged into scrapping our 17’s & 19’s to fall into line with the AFL 18’s comp?

You're spot on, and when I read that from JIm, I had a chuckle for that reason.

IIRC Kris Grant was a vocal opponent of the changes to the under 18 format based on the physical and character development of the individuals. AFL decision makers demonstrate time and time again that they are only interested in the bottom line.

The question is, how will the new expanded NEAFL / VFL competition be funded?

Personally as a paid up member and financial contributor, I don't want Kris and the board to spend too much time worrying about the message this appointment process sends to CDFC supporters. We currently have an SANFL administration where the message is effectively that the SANFL league is no longer their main priority. The SANFL exists to support what the AFL wants. If you want to attack a message that affects SANFL supporters, attack that.

We are talking about a club ran on a shoestring who do not have teams of PR executives; from my personal observations we struggle to afford a proper marketing team (come back Kym Jarman please.) There is no network of chums from Saint Knobs or Princes Polishers et al who can knock out a spin team after hours in the Adelaide Club. For the 2000 CDFC members or so, probably a couple of hundred visit the club each week. They can just knock on Kris Grants office door and have a discussion. For me without any knowledge of the process and as an outside spectator, the process was carried out with little fuss and remarkable speed. As to whether Paul was the main contender, so what. They carried out due diligence, held appropriate interviews and made a decision. It happens in the public service every week and in the private sector main contenders are targeted. To think that a public statement would read that they sacked Andrews because a better guy was available on our door step, which could then possibly invoke a clause where Andrews could demand compensation, is naïve to the extreme.

Congratulations to Paul Thomas as the new coach of Central District Football Club.

An absolute brilliant appointment, Paul was brought up at the club with his Dad being a hard at it Dogs legend, had a long and distinguished SANFL playing career and has gone on to forge a credentialed coaching resume outside of the club. A true hard at it, working class career thus far that only those originating from the Northern Suburbs can truly understand. Be it supporters, fellow players, team mates, students, ex coaches or administrators, Paul has earnt their respect.

Well done to the Club on the appointment.

https://cdfc.com.au/news/paul-thomas-to-coach-the-dogs/

Congratulations Woodville West Torrens, your club epitomizes resilience and displays a rock solid culture.

..... That said, I'm not sure singling out individual incidents of bad fan behavior is at all relevant, or elevates the Eagles to superior moral ground, since we all know and acknowledge that every club has their share of dickhead supporters. Fan behavior certainly has no bearing on what happened on the field, and which is where it matters.

I think RB's earlier post summed it up perfectly - enjoy the satisfaction of knowing you won when it counted the most.

Yep well summed up, after all we wouldn't want to actively encourage the boycotting of opposition clubs grounds based on the behaviour of individuals such as smoking ladies actions.

I don't understand the no malice commentary, both feet off the ground, aimed front on with enough time to avoid. The Crows lad was going down hard no matter the subsequent head clash. He had disposed of the ball and it was a couple of metres away at the time of impact. Why didn't Dangerfield smother the handball? Either he was too late to smother in which case he should not have bumped, or the act was malice. 200 plus game footballer in his 30's not having the experience to know what option to take, come on.

I like Dangerfield as a footballer, hard at it brilliant paced and instinctual footballer, but the fact he had been run down in the previous play and was desperate to stop the subsequent rebound indicates for me that he had the motive, the opportunity and certainly the means. He is a hardened strong footballer who was desperate to atone for his mistake (also possibly humiliation for having been run down.)

My attitude has changed over the years so I understand some of the comments, but this should not be a "hey it was a no malice hard and fair footballer just playing the game as it was meant to be." This is exactly the act that needs to be stopped to ensure Chronic Traumatic Encephalopathy (CTE) is reduced as much as possible. Anyone with 45 years football experience would have experienced big head knocks. I know I have myself and probably dealt some out. Certainly not proud of it. A guy like Dangerfield needs to lead by example, this was a very poor act on his behalf and unfortunately he needs to be punished.