16.4% of women 15 years or older have been victims of sexual assault from someone other than their partner in Australia. The global average is 7.2%. This statistic alone should terrify everyone in Australia. 1 in 5 women have experienced sexual violence since the age of 15 and 1 in 3 are sexually abused before the age of 16. 93% of offenders are male. So I would say we have a problem.

It doesn't help when some idiots automatically call women that have allegedly been sexually assaulted dirty slappers. I just hope it's never your wife or daughter that are one of the victims.

(The statistics are from the ABS and the National Statistics - Crime and Safety Survey).

gossipgirl wrote:Just whinging Pom syndrome .." Without the afl and crows centralS would still be 0.0 SANFL premierships .......... But a courtesy phone call should have happened

Oh the irony. Crows supporters invented whinging.

Great? :lol:

Hopefully next year a bloke says "Sucked in sheila's. Not good enough"

She's made it an "Us against them".
Don't let the correct quote or context get in the way of your cool story there.

She was talking to the owners that didn't want her to ride the horse. She had just thanked Darren Weir for sticking with her when some of the owners wanted her kicked off the horse.

"Some of the owners were keen to kick me off and Darren stuck really solidly with me"

Her comment was clearly not directed at 'everyone'.

mighty_tiger_79 wrote:Her comment to the owners is akin to Choco standing on the podium and telling Alan Scott he was wrong.

That is exactly what I thought.

Redbacks won the toss and are batting first.

SANFL clubs must budget for at least $100,000 profit each year and not fall into losses under strict new fiscal rules to control concerning club debt in the state league.

But the SANFL will not — as European football leagues do — penalise financially troubled clubs with the loss of premiership points.

Rather, the league will demand — and assist with — changes in the club’s spending or revenue sourcing.

SANFL chief executive Jake Parkinson calls the “$100,000 rule” a “risk buffer” to bring an end to the debt cycle in SA league football.

Ultimately, the new fiscal demands will stop SANFL clubs building up seven-figure debts before rushing to the SA Football Commission seeking bailout funds.

“We can’t have one or two clubs reaching a point from where there is no return,” Parkinson told The Advertiser. “That $100,000 cash surplus in the budget allows for a risk buffer.

“We will not be taking away points to enforce the policy. And we will not be holding back league — or game development — funding from the clubs, as that would be self-defeating.

“But we will demand the clubs change. First, we will ask the clubs to look at increasing revenue. If the losses continue, we will ask for new control to their football spend after benchmarking their spending against the league average.

“And if there is no change after this, the league will have to mandate restructuring of the club’s budgets.”

Parkinson added it should be the responsibility of SANFL club boards — and the expectation of club members — that their clubs start each season with the intent to make a profit.

SANFL clubs will not be able to use their cut of the AAMI Stadium sale to make up the $100,000 cash surplus expected by the league in their annual budgets.

The “$100,000 rule” this week had its first fallout at an SANFL club with Woodville-West Torrens changing its administration — and making chief executive Peter Schwarz redundant from next Friday. His exit is said to be linked to political unease at Oval Ave.

The Eagles will follow the successful Sturt model of having its club administration led by two executives — a commercial chief and a football boss.

“This new organisational structure will enable (the club) to achieve financial viability and meet the SANFL’s financial performance requirement,” the Eagles say in a club statement. “It (also) will be one that will provide sufficient resources to the football department to ensure their continued competitiveness and success on field.”

The streaming is paid for by the SANFL. I'm guessing it's outsourced? They are not volunteers that are doing their best, they are a company that are getting paid to provide a service. If it keeps going down then yes it is shit house and we can complain. After all our clubs and us are the ones paying for the service in the end.

I think the blatantly biased calls work on radio as they go into a smaller market.

The 5aa calls are fine imo. Obviously biased towards the crows and power but don't pretend not to be.

On TV it's a different matter because it's national coverage

The 5AA calls do go interstate, though.
They're part of syndicated coverage. I was listening to the AA call in Mildura earlier this year.

Pretty sure 3AW would have taken the AA call yesterday, wouldn't they?
3AW did the Bulldogs v West Coast game. They very rarely take a FIVEaa game. In fact I can't remember having to set anything up for them to take a game in the last couple of years. 6PR sometimes take the showdowns and this weekend FIVEaa are taking a game from 6PR.

The work experience kid must be writing the headlines this week...

Well the game was terrible but the Central supporters were great. Some of the chants at the southern end were gold. The send off the Crows players got was also great. They look honestly surprised that not everyone loves them.

If the Crows can't pull a decent crowd with no AFL on, then surely the SANFL can now see that the reserves sides are worthless to them.

Go South, Sturt, Eagles and Kangaroos!

Why is it ridiculous to have a dig at a side that hasn't had to work hard to get where they are?

Today was an example of how piss weak Crows supporters are. No AFL on and they couldn't even be bothered to show up and the ones that did show up were so pathetically quiet it was embarrassing.

What would be worse than following a merged side? Following a manufactured club that was born in a court room.

Crowd was 6645.

14 the number being bandied around.... but wait for it...will require a majority 6-2 vote by the clubs!
Well you can count Centrals as a yes. I spoke to a member of the Glenelg coaching staff a couple of weeks ago and they said Glenelg were pushing the SANFL to introduce a cap, so they are in. Just need another 4 clubs.

Well that is interesting. I was at the Adelaide Oval test match on the Saturday and overheard a group of guys say SANFL, so I joined the conversation (yes I'd had a few drinks), turned out I was talking to Adam Kelly. Firstly he was very surprised I knew who he was after someone said this guy runs the SANFL, and even more surprised that I liked the SANFL as much as I did. He told me that I would be very happy in few weeks when it would be announced that there would be a cap on players. He made it sound like it would be for the season. I said that was great but it should also be that if you don't qualify for the finals then you don't qualify. Looks like they had to bend over for the AFL sides once again.

I don't know how to describe this article, but it probably captures how a few people feel about SANFL now.

http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/messenger ... ca6c77378d

I said 2 months ago the Crows were looking seriously at this.

And TBH why wouldn't they. Why persist in a league where the majority (except for the bean counters) clearly don't want you there.
If that's the reason, then why push for the current arrangement in the first place?

If being so unloved in the SANFL is any surprise to them to this point, then they've had their heads further up their clackers than anyone has given them credit for.

It was the best option at the time. Far better than allowing pleb coaches at SANFL level to control where and how your development players are playing.

Yes Alistair Clarkson is such a pleb coach, imagine being a team that got beaten by him. You'd have to be pretty shit.

Can get scores here while SANFL app is down

https://www.flashscore.com.au/afl/australia/sanfl/

Jim05 wrote:Oh well, looks like I now have another weekend free. I normally go to the GF but not this year, hopefully plenty of other neutrals boycott it aswell

Me too. I won't be going now a reserves side is in.

If it looks like a Power Reserves team,
If it walks like a Power Reserves team,
If it talks like a Power Reserves team,
Then it’s not a Magpie

Yes we merged,
But it’s still better than being
the Power Reserves

This is the year
That the Eagles will win
Pretty sure we're a shoe-y in

I hardly think they've done their due diligence. Maybe they should have asked 3 extremely well respected ex-captains of Centrals who have all described him as the worst person they have ever met in their life.

I wonder if sponsors are paying his rent. I hear that's how they get around the salary cap.

http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/sport/afl/local-footy-sa/sanfl-club-norwood-signs-exgold-coast-player-josh-glenn-who-is-on-bail-following-an-assault-charge/news-story/d024457c7cd3ebde1ba02d16c48a9f8e

Did Norwood have any white lines left on the oval after Glenn played today?

Michael wrote:Turned it off as it is terrible and this all the sudden having to have a female commentate is simply tokenism. Wont be buying a pass next year if that is what I pay for.

Narelle has more football experience than most of the other commentators and certainly more than you.

Im a little dissapointed in Norf. They had the opportunity to do the right thing and earn the respect of all. How can they front up this week knowing they won UNFAIRLY to get there?? Just my opinion
Not just your opinion. I agree. The club will now be forever tainted like Greg Chappell was after the underarm incident. I don't know how they can rock up this weekend thinking they belong in the Grand Final.

In my belief, fairness should trump antiquated rules and regulations all the time. That's why a replay was the only fair solution. We will never know who deserved to be in the GF, however the benefit of the doubt should probably go to the team that didn't break the rules.

Champion Data notified North and the interchange steward at the 48 second mark of the 4th qtr that North had 19 players on. North sent their runner out and told Allmond to get off, but didn't tell him why. He then took 3 minutes to get off the ground.

Why wouldn't they tell Allmond why he had to get off? That sounds fishy to me.

Josh Carr also said on radio during the week that Tropiano wasn't the 19th man, he was supposed to start on in the last qtr. This calls into question their explanation that they thought he was down getting treatment.

I honestly don't know how they ruled in Norths favour. There is no excuse for having a guy on for a further 3 minutes after you were notified of having 19 men on the ground.

Whilst not exactly the same there are SAAFL clubs who feed players to SANFL clubs and they've dealt with it for years.

Devils advocate here, I don't like the prospect of SANFL players leaving mid-year but clubs below the SANFL have dealt with it for years.
I think Jason Sutherland might have been a case in point going back a few years, seem to remember he was contracted with Berri and debuted for us late in the season ended with an SANFL Premiership medallion. :?:

NB: I can't remember sure how much it affected his country club at the time, so happy for fellow 'Dogs fans to rip me a new one on this point regarding its relevance.

A generation ago and a different era I realise, but I can recall the gut-wrenching frustration and anger at losing Tony Lynn to Carlton mid season one year.

This, did anyone at the time cry bloody murder on behalf of Berri? I would doubt it, they would have been thrilled for the bloke to get an opportunity at a higher level.

I believe Centrals worked closely with Berri on the situation and pretty sure Sutherland played in both the Berri flag and Centrals flag that year (2010).

Is everyone forgetting about the failed game day test? Not sure he will be able to play football anywhere.

There is a simple solution to all of this, but I doubt the 8 real clubs would have the spine to do it. The Reserves competition is made up of the 8 pure clubs, just play your best 21 in that comp and it will be back to an even playing field.

Has anyone used that F45 training? Is it any good and what is the cost? Can't seem to find anything online
I have been going to F45 for 3 years. I pay $50 a week at the CBD East one, but it really does depend on which one you go to. It is expensive but I go at least 5 times a week and it fits into my schedule better than any other gym. I also find that because I have to book into a class it makes me more accountable. Mon, Wed and Fri are cardio days and Tues, Thurs and Sun are strength. Saturday is a mix of both.

The F45 Challenge app they have is great, it's where I get most of my recipes from now. Since Covid they have also added a training part to the app, so if you can't make it to the gym you do have the option to workout at home.

Most offer a 2 week free trial when starting.

#FreeKickEagles

well, what can you say, beaten all over the ground from 12 minutes into the first qtr.

we needed to quell the influence of menzels x2 and stengle, hoping our defence would do something different after the 2nd semi, that didnt happen!

at halftime the stats showed we were in front in most kpi's except rebound 50s and was hoping we might show something in the third.........WRONG!!!

10 minutes into the third and the game was over, no marks inside 50, forard line a shambles and the final margin was just. even in the last when the game was al over the eagles defence refused to relax and let us get some cheap goals, a total team effort.

Was glad Hosie had just one kick for the match. The way he struts around every time he gets a goal, or throws his head back or arms in the air wanting a free kick every time he goes near the ball is embarrassing!

Reynolds was soft and useless, McBean given bath by a rookie, whereas Eagles key forwards kicked ten between them!
I guess we can’t all have Coke heads and people facing sexual assault charges in our forward lines. Maybe all the other teams should try harder to recruit questionable characters.

The bald umpire pretty much umpired Centrals out of the game when it mattered most in the first half.

I have watched the replay of that deliberate free kick. When first giving the free kick the umpire signals for deliberate. Then when Centrals are arguing on the mark, he changes it to a throw signal. The thing is the umpire is behind him, so I’m not sure how he could tell it was a throw. I couldn’t tell if it was or not watching it and the camera angle is pretty much what the umpire sees as well. So either the umpire realised he made a mistake and changed his decision or he guessed.

I have watched the replay of that deliberate free kick. When first giving the free kick the umpire signals for deliberate. Then when Centrals are arguing on the mark, he changes it to a throw signal. The thing is the umpire is behind him, so I’m not sure how he could tell it was a throw. I couldn’t tell if it was or not watching it and the camera angle is pretty much what the umpire sees as well. So either the umpire realised he made a mistake and changed his decision or he guessed.

What time of game was it?
About 1:51:15 in on SANFLnow.