Concerning Times in the SANFL?

[TheReporter]

Concerning Times in the SANFL?

As 2008 draws to a close when the SANFL bragged about increasing attendances one wonders is the SANFL really on an upward spiral or are there some underlying concerning circumstances that are covering up a crisis in our beloved competition?

Reports abound that 4 of the "power" clubs of our competition which were involved in the finals this year have made large financial losses in the previous year, consisting of hundreds of thousands of dollars. 3 CEOs/General managers have resigned and 2 clubs have asked the SANFL for assistance be it financially or for professional guidance. Other clubs not regarded as "power" clubs are also allegedly showing big losses with only 2 or 3 clubs in the entire competition looking in a solid state. Very concerning when reports abound 1 or 2 clubs are doing extremely well financially.

Allegedly the SANFL find themselves caught between a brick and a hard place having already set a precedence earlier thie century in not providing financial assistance to North Adelaide when they were on the brink of closing their doors. Can they professionally and/or morally be seen to show favouritsm and assist clubs in crisis when already setting a precedent not that long ago?
If they do they will be seen to favouring some clubs over others, if they don't then the entire competition will be put at risk as without intervention we may see a plight akin to the National Basketball League where clubs are falling over left, right and centre thus eroding a huge portion of our great competition.

Rumours abound that at least one more club has thrown itself into turmoil with blatant salary cap breaches which may result in their board's president resigning. This will in effect mean more than half of the clubs in the competition have been caught for salaray cap breaches this decade making the whole salary cap in the SANFL seeming pointless.

More will be revealed in the coming months as clubs make their financial reports public but it will be interesting to see if the SANFL put a positive spin on it like they have on crowds in recent years which have despite increases been covering concerns (you can't have Glenelg, Sturt, Port and Norwood making the finals every year) or will they admit there is an issue publicly and show the leadership and provide the assistance required to help get these clubs out of the hole they've found themselves in?

Its hard to see the SANFL "winning" whichever way they go but these are concerning times for fans of most clubs and with the current financial worldwide crisis its hard to see things improving amongst some clubs in a hurry.

All is not doom and gloom however, reports abound that at least 2 clubs virtually have a license to print their own money, ironically one of these clubs is one of the minority that hasn't been found to breach the salary cap. Would the SANFL crack down harder on some clubs IF they were found to be flouting the salary cap rules?

Interesting times ahead for SANFL fans.

[am Bays]

More will be revealed in the coming months as clubs make their financial reports public but it will be interesting to see if the SANFL put a positive spin on it like they have on crowds in recent years which have despite increases been covering concerns (you can't have Glenelg, Sturt, Port and Norwood making the finals every year) or will they admit there is an issue publicly and show the leadership and provide the assistance required to help get these clubs out of the hole they've found themselves in?

I don't see a problem with that...

Not sure if you are refering to Glenelg as one of the clubs in "trouble", What I do know after a a downturn in trade due to renovations and smoking legislation our income streams from our licensed premises are back to 2007 levels when we made a $100 000 profit. Stupid me went to Bay on Thursday night expecting to be able to et a table, nope - booked out (the day before) so we are back on track especially when our game day income was way up in 2008 compared to 2007.

So if we are one of teh clubs to make a loss in 2008 quietly confident it won't occur in 2009.

[dash61]

Have heard all the same stories breaking, the league is very worried.

Factors that can and have made it worse!
1: In the past 2 years the number of players not recruited into the AFL from our comp and the downturn in monies paid back to our clubs has hit hard.
2: Downturn in some of the clubs returns from pokies.
3: Poor decision making financially by some of the clubs.
4: As from this year the higher transfer fees for players coming from the VFL into our league, thanks to the AFL trying to protect the VFL and not giving a hoot about the SANFL, $15K transfer fees per player hurt.
5: Salary Cap, Ok most will say here we go again, the facts are the power clubs here in the SANFL are increasing offers to players and forcing the costs of recruiting players higher and higher, for those who say abolish the salary cap, this financial problem causes the lower clubs and less wealthy clubs problems competing on an even playing field. As mentioned above the league may be forced to get VERY serious about the salary cap to reign in the madness what players get paid and offered. The answer could be a player points system.

So enough of the cap but as supporters of the best comp in Australia, we should worry ecause we dont want a 6 or 7 team competition in the future.

[Punk Rooster]

A 17th & 18th AFL team will impact heavily on the SANFL.

[Punk Rooster]

All is not doom and gloom however, reports abound that at least 2 clubs virtually have a license to print their own money, ironically one of these clubs is one of the minority that hasn't been found to breach the salary cap. Would the SANFL crack down harder on some clubs IF they were found to be flouting the salary cap rules?

I'm pleased to hear North are in a very strong position then.

[redandblack]

Very good and accurate summary, Reporter.

[Wedgie]

Definately concerning times and a good additional point by Punky about the new AFL teams.

PS Tassie, you'll be happy to know I popped into the Bay yesterday for a quick coke and poke.* Awesome set up there, I hope North emulate it, they lost my patronage as Pale wasn't on tap though.

[Wedgie]

Could I guess that clubs could be broken down into the following categories?

Immediate big trouble:
Port, Sturt

Poor financial 2008 but reasonably sound overall:
Glenelg, West, South, Norwood.

Rich and good 2008:
Central, North

(Im unsure where the Eagles fit into this as Im not sure how they've done this year financially but obviously in one of the bottome 2 categories.

Administrative issues:
West, Norwood
(possibly others, maybe Sturt, South, Port, Eagles, Glenelg?)

[Mark_Beswick]

If any of these clubs falls through, thats it for me with footy. I guess if worse comes to worse, an SANFL club could threaten to sell its 11% stake in AAMI Stadium / Sell its 11% share in Crows or Power. Afterall, the SANFL owns both AFL Licenses and Power should remember this - Return a profit or perhaps the clubs will not renew the sublease and start a 2nd compositie side when this agreement sublet lapses.

I think there are more twists and turns than the current test to come with many SANFL clubs. Also, the new boudaries have been allocated to SANFL clubs to comment on - I think there may be some unhappy campers when they are made public.

[redandblack]

That's good news about the boundaries, Mark. It would be a nice change for Westies to not have the least numbers in its zone for a change.

I agree also about the competition. If the SANFL are serious about it, they will at least try to look as if they're mildly interested in enforcing their own laws.

[blueandwhite]

I can assure you that any of the proposed boundary changes, which I've heard include shifting the Glenelg/South boundary to within 1.2kms of Hickinbotham Oval will be vigorously opposed.

Ive also heard that one particular league club is on a COD basis with it's CocaCola deliveries.

[am Bays]

I can assure you that any of the proposed boundary changes, which I've heard include shifting the Glenelg/South boundary to within 1.2kms of Hickinbotham Oval will be vigorously opposed.

So you want all the new kids that have moved into Seaford over the last five years and keep your existing boundary?

Having an opposition club within a km of its home ground was what Glenelg had to deal with in the previous boundaries - West had everyhing North of ANZAC hwy including the suburb named GLENELG North . You got part of the Morphett Vale area off us in the last redistribution. Not saying you shouldn't have but as Adelaide sprawls out South as a club that has alligned itself with the Southern area can reasonably expect to have its boundary moved south.

Hey R&B well give you back West Beach and you gaive us Braeville so Wedgies son can play for the Bays....

[am Bays]

That's good news about the boundaries, Mark. It would be a nice change for Westies to not have the least numbers in its zone for a change.

I agree also about the competition. If the SANFL are serious about it, they will at least try to look as if they're mildly interested in enforcing their own laws.

Serious question R&B what are the numbers, population or 15 yo boys? Genuinely curious in the facts.

[smac]

Be nice if they consider the footballing participation rates this time around but my breath isn't being held.

And as for boundaries, no one can compete with the time when the Port/Centrals boundary was the train line alongside Elizabeth Oval!

[redandblack]

Firstly, TM, anything I can do to strengthen Wedgie's bond with the Bays would be my pleasure

Secondly, I don't know the exact figures, but the Boundaries Commission go into the demographics of each Club's zone very thoroughly. For a long time, West have had the smallest number of eligible young lads in their zone. Ranked from 1 to 9, they have been at 9 for many, many years.

[redandblack]

Be nice if they consider the footballing participation rates this time around but my breath isn't being held.

And as for boundaries, no one can compete with the time when the Port/Centrals boundary was the train line alongside Elizabeth Oval!

True, but many clubs would love to have their country zone next to their metro zone, instead of hundreds of kilometres away.

[smac]

Fair call. That is a bonus.

But to 'share' the players in the Central Districts Junior Football League with Port Adelaide Magpies is a real pain in the @rse.

[Wedgie]

My son's alligned to South so the wrong 2 clubs are haggling.

[Mickyj]

(Im unsure where the Eagles fit into this as Im not sure how they've done this year financially but obviously in one of the bottome 2 categories.

I have no idea Wedgie but the terms deep pockets and short arms have been applied to the Eagles by a few people .
I do know they have semi closed down the Communtiy club until they can get a bar manager.

[Pseudo]

And as for boundaries, no one can compete with the time when the Port/Centrals boundary was the train line alongside Elizabeth Oval!

Yeah, Port Adelaide was only dominant for decades because of the high quality kids coming out of the DSTO and RAAF base....