SA Footy

Booney, we patronise the SANFL, I think what happens within that competition should be up to us rather than outsiders, regardless of majority.

Quality > Quantity.

VB sells more nationwide but it doesn't mean it's the only beer we should be allowed to drink or should VB be able to dictate to us how our preferred beer is brewed.

More people that care are against the AFL clubs being in the SANFL anyway, the majority of Crows or Power supporters don't even watch it.

The catalyst for the WWT merger was the financial health of each club. Im sure the formation of the Crows probably expedited the process, but cant see how it wouldn't have happened regardless. If the other clubs have managed to survive in their own right this long, then I can't see how any further mergers would have been required back then.

JK wrote:The catalyst for the WWT merger was the financial health of each club. Im sure the formation of the Crows probably expedited the process, but cant see how it wouldn't have happened regardless. If the other clubs have managed to survive in their own right this long, then I can't see how any further mergers would have been required back then.

Not Woodville mate, only Torrens were up the creek. Woodville just wanted success and an easier way to maintain viability.
Torrens were about 1 million in debt from memory.

Wedgie wrote:

JK wrote:The catalyst for the WWT merger was the financial health of each club. Im sure the formation of the Crows probably expedited the process, but cant see how it wouldn't have happened regardless. If the other clubs have managed to survive in their own right this long, then I can't see how any further mergers would have been required back then.

Not Woodville mate, only Torrens were up the creek. Woodville just wanted success and an easier way to maintain viability.
Torrens were about 1 million in debt from memory.

Yeah I knew Torrens were in strife, but I thought whilst not as dire, the Warriors were battling financially also?

JK wrote:

Wedgie wrote:

JK wrote:The catalyst for the WWT merger was the financial health of each club. Im sure the formation of the Crows probably expedited the process, but cant see how it wouldn't have happened regardless. If the other clubs have managed to survive in their own right this long, then I can't see how any further mergers would have been required back then.

Not Woodville mate, only Torrens were up the creek. Woodville just wanted success and an easier way to maintain viability.
Torrens were about 1 million in debt from memory.

Yeah I knew Torrens were in strife, but I thought whilst not as dire, the Warriors were battling financially also?

No more than any other club. IIRC it was as Wedgie said. Torrens got financial viability and Woodville got history and success out of the deal.
I'd also suggest there's have been no merger without an AFL entry. Torrens had not even done a public appeal for cash. As soon as the entry was announced they just stuck up their hand and said "Now we're stuffed, there's no way to save us."
Can anyone remember a cash drive by Torrens? I think had they asked, supporters of the other 9 clubs would have donated.

I agree that of the two parties it was Torrens that was financially rooted - but my memory is that Woodville was the party that initiated merger talks. Happy to hear the actual history from somebody who knows.

JK wrote:

Wedgie wrote:

JK wrote:The catalyst for the WWT merger was the financial health of each club. Im sure the formation of the Crows probably expedited the process, but cant see how it wouldn't have happened regardless. If the other clubs have managed to survive in their own right this long, then I can't see how any further mergers would have been required back then.

Not Woodville mate, only Torrens were up the creek. Woodville just wanted success and an easier way to maintain viability.
Torrens were about 1 million in debt from memory.

Yeah I knew Torrens were in strife, but I thought whilst not as dire, the Warriors were battling financially also?

Overstated.
Between $300 & $400K was the total debt - that's my understanding.
Norwood were the most financial Club, followed by Woodville - despite their lack of on-field success.
Torrens had been a 'basket case' for around a decade, due to mismanagement - The Board was full of political infighting & 'factions'.
Thebby was appallingly run down & in need of a major 'face-lift' - with their debt problems, the Club couldn't afford to do it.

It was the fear of the changing face of Footy in SA (due to the emergence of the AFL Team) that acted as the catalyst - it is my understanding that Bill Sanders was influential (at least initially) in progressing the 'talks'.

As for the PRS & 'Player Drain' - it was becoming unworkable.
How bazar that a Victorian in Rudi Mandemaker was actually on the scheme!
Wedgie is correct, however, when he suggests the Draft does the same in terms of losing talent over the border.
IMHO, what is most sad about the Draft is the fact that the majority of Cows players are actually from Victoria!
How ironic - oh, for a PRS now!

Hindsight is wonderful thing.
The addition of the 'Adelaide Football Club' to the VFL was first mooted by Basheer & Whicker in 1981.
Had we actually been allowed to join then, who knows, the current problem may not have arisen.
Let's face it - the Brisbane Bears would NOT have been considered, had SA fielded a side in the VFL - the VFL hastily 'invented' the Bears because they wanted more TV coverage. How ridiculous to call a Team from the Gold Coast, Brisbane! Was doomed from the start.

As for bagging Centrals supporters for refusing to watch their side play a Team of Professionals - that misses the point.
I would hazard a guess that the same supporters refused to attend Minor Round games v the Cows - how is it suddenly different because its a Final?

FWIW, this season is the 1st season in 41 years that I personally haven't attended an SANFL Game - that includes 1988 to 1990 when I lived interstate & 1998 to 1999 when I lived in London! No doubt there are others in 'the same boat' & THAT is both sad & the point of the 'anti-AFL' sentiment.
The 'Occupation' is wrong... Viva the Resistance!

Wedgie wrote:

JK wrote:The catalyst for the WWT merger was the financial health of each club. Im sure the formation of the Crows probably expedited the process, but cant see how it wouldn't have happened regardless. If the other clubs have managed to survive in their own right this long, then I can't see how any further mergers would have been required back then.

Not Woodville mate, only Torrens were up the creek. Woodville just wanted success and an easier way to maintain viability.
Torrens were about 1 million in debt from memory.

Much of it to the Tax Office, I believe.

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.

Thanks for that more informed history lesson and perspective LPH. it rang a few bells as I read it.
Can you remember if Torrens actually rattled the can publically at any stage? I don't have any recollection of making a decision about if I should take out a membership or not. I do not believe that they ever put it to the public like "Bail us out, or we may not be here tomorrow." It all happened so swiftly, I remember some highlights of the meeting held at Thebby, and one old fella called out "If it has to be, then for God sake keep the Eagle!" to which the room erupted in applause. But the option seemed to be that SA will enter a team in the AFL, therefore it is a question of do we merge or do we die.
A very stark contrast with the desperation to survive shown by clubs since the entry, no matter how bad the financial circumstance.

therisingblues wrote:Thanks for that more informed history lesson and perspective LPH. it rang a few bells as I read it.
Can you remember if Torrens actually rattled the can publically at any stage? I don't have any recollection of making a decision about if I should take out a membership or not. I do not believe that they ever put it to the public like "Bail us out, or we may not be here tomorrow." It all happened so swiftly, I remember some highlights of the meeting held at Thebby, and one old fella called out "If it has to be, then for God sake keep the Eagle!" to which the room erupted in applause. But the option seemed to be that SA will enter a team in the AFL, therefore it is a question of do we merge or do we die.
A very stark contrast with the desperation to survive shown by clubs since the entry, no matter how bad the financial circumstance.

I certainly don't recall in 1990 a public pledge by West Torrens for financial support. I remember hearing the news of the merger and being quite surprised that there wasn't the tin rattling that we had seen with other financially strapped clubs in the VFL, such as Richmond's 'Save Our Skins' campaign from that season or the 1989 pledge to keep Footscray alive.

LPH wrote:Hindsight is wonderful thing.
The addition of the 'Adelaide Football Club' to the VFL was first mooted by Basheer & Whicker in 1981.
Had we actually been allowed to join then, who knows, the current problem may not have arisen.
Let's face it - the Brisbane Bears would NOT have been considered, had SA fielded a side in the VFL - the VFL hastily 'invented' the Bears because they wanted more TV coverage.

I reckon the Bears still would've been admitted.

Hazydog's linked article below may mention this, but the reason the Bears (and the Eagles) came in to the VFL was that by 1986 it was on the bones of its arse. Fitzroy, Geelong, Footscray, Collingwood, Melbourne, North Melbourne and Richmond were all technically insolvent and the corporate regulator had his finger on the trigger about to shut the league down. Expansion was the only way to save the VFL. The license revenue from the new teams to prop up struggling clubs saved the comp.

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/s ... o1x0m.html

Therefore the Bears may still have been formed in 1987 even if there was an earlier SA team. Even if it did become financially sound by 1986, the rest of the league certainly wasn't.

Magellan wrote:Hazydog's linked article below may mention this,.

I'd love to take the glory - but I assume you meant Wild Dog!

Very interesting article all the same. The Vics were struggling big time.

Hazydog wrote:

Magellan wrote:Hazydog's linked article below may mention this,.

I'd love to take the glory - but I assume you meant Wild Dog!

Ah shit!

Reckon I was close - I take it he/she's a relative, since you've got the same last name.

Sadly, there was no such 'can rattling' in 1990 - to my recollection.
That would be unsurprising if you look at the demographic of supporters - predominantly 'older' people (WTFC at least).
Neither side had what one would consider 'healthy' support - so it did make sense.

The Merger was 'railroaded' quickly.
That is probably due to the haste in which the Cows were formed - if you recall, they 1st trained out of a tin shed.
The uncertainty that was around then (re: how it would all go, joining the expanded VFL Competition - 'AFL' if you will?) contributed to the hastily organised Merger between the two Clubs. The Torrens Board clearly saw an 'out' of their debt crisis, Jeff Niemann & Rex Sellars were influential in the 'ins n outs' - Sanders had other more pressing issues (i.e. the Cows) & the deal was done quickly & seemingly painlessly, although I personally beg to differ. What is unquestioned is that it was Woodville who approached West Torrens (initially at least) & badda bing, badda bang, the deal was done.
I recall there was also an 'incentive payment' from the SANFL to encourage the Merger.

The Members of both Clubs were given the positive spin from their Boards & there really wasn't much debate about it - unlike North & Sturt.
But where North & Sturt differed was the Cows were already established & successful - in 1990, no-one was really sure if they would actually be a success. Also, North & Sturt had strong supporter bases of their own as well as other Club supporters suggesting against a Merger - this was not the reality of the 'Eagles' situation.

Personally I was upset by the Merger, but 'jumped on the Cows' Bandwagon & bought a Season Ticket (remember the clip card?) in the Outer.
I also bought a Blue, Gold & Green Scarf (still have it actually) - but it was never really the same, until the Flag in 2006.
Even going back to Thebby for the odd game wasn't the same 'feel' - I always felt the 'Eagles' were more Woodville than Torrens.

LPH wrote:... The Members of both Clubs were given the positive spin from their Boards & there really wasn't much debate about it ...

Now where have I heard that before? Oh yeah....

Pseudo wrote:

LPH wrote:... The Members of both Clubs were given the positive spin from their Boards & there really wasn't much debate about it ...

Now where have I heard that before? Oh yeah....

Yep... hence my 'voice' @ the Club - all to no avail, sadly
And it remains the reason that I have not returned to Oval Avenue since - no voice given to the Members

Magellan wrote:

Hazydog wrote:

Magellan wrote:Hazydog's linked article below may mention this,.

I'd love to take the glory - but I assume you meant Wild Dog!

Ah shit!

Reckon I was close - I take it he/she's a relative, since you've got the same last name.

All one happy family at the Ponderosa Magellan

At least there's one voice that doesn't cower to the spineless SANFL/AFL pathetic f%^&*!


https://au.sports.yahoo.com/afl/video/w ... nal/#page1


I posted in the cd v full timers thread, but thought worthy of this thread also.