SA Footy

I find a certain club maintains a strange relationships with certain feeder clubs of theirs.
For example, some clubs seem to get preferrential treatment from this particular SANFL club, whereas others seem to get shafted.
I offer the scenario of a junior developed at a "shafted club" no longer being required by the SANFL club (depsite being a promising junior), yet rather than being left to go back to his "shafted club", is told to train & play with a "preferred club" to stay under consideration of the SANFL club.
What bollocks- if they were dead keen on him, he'd be on the active senior list.
This same SANFL club seems to enjoy shafting this particular minnow, as when a senior player retired to this particular local club, the SANFL slapped an outrageous "release fee" on this player- which the club was forced to pick up.
Not the sort of way to foster a successful relationship surely?
This local "shafted club" has quite a reasonable juniors program in place- would hate to see the club hold a grudge against the SANFL club....

Punk Rooster wrote:I find a certain club maintains a strange relationships with certain feeder clubs of theirs.
For example, some clubs seem to get preferrential treatment from this particular SANFL club, whereas others seem to get shafted.
I offer the scenario of a junior developed at a "shafted club" no longer being required by the SANFL club (depsite being a promising junior), yet rather than being left to go back to his "shafted club", is told to train & play with a "preferred club" to stay under consideration of the SANFL club.
What bollocks- if they were dead keen on him, he'd be on the active senior list.
This same SANFL club seems to enjoy shafting this particular minnow, as when a senior player retired to this particular local club, the SANFL slapped an outrageous "release fee" on this player- which the club was forced to pick up.
Not the sort of way to foster a successful relationship surely?
This local "shafted club" has quite a reasonable juniors program in place- would hate to see the club hold a grudge against the SANFL club....

Punky, this has been going on for years. You're probably talking NAFC, I'd suggest that Broadview will again become the flavour of the month. When Jars was there it was Gaza. Most other clubs in their zone get SFA and the clubs kids get told a crock of sh^t and under duress they believe the club and do as they suggest.

Perhaps the SANFL club would prefer the players they are keeping an eye on to be playing in a side in Div 1 rather than one that finished 7th out of 10 in Div 4.

rod_rooster wrote:Perhaps the SANFL club would prefer the players they are keeping an eye on to be playing in a side in Div 1 rather than one that finished 7th out of 10 in Div 4.

lol- Broadview are in Div 2 & arguably struggling...

Punk Rooster wrote:

rod_rooster wrote:Perhaps the SANFL club would prefer the players they are keeping an eye on to be playing in a side in Div 1 rather than one that finished 7th out of 10 in Div 4.

lol- Broadview are in Div 2 & arguably struggling...

Fair enough but still better than a struggling div 4 side surely.

rod_rooster wrote:

Punk Rooster wrote:

rod_rooster wrote:Perhaps the SANFL club would prefer the players they are keeping an eye on to be playing in a side in Div 1 rather than one that finished 7th out of 10 in Div 4.

lol- Broadview are in Div 2 & arguably struggling...

Fair enough but still better than a struggling div 4 side surely.

The player wasn't originally from the struggling Div 2 club.
Why would he not return to his feeder club?
If the SANFL club was really concerned with his development, he would be playing reserves footy under their watchful eye & direction.

Gator-Aid wrote:

Punk Rooster wrote:I find a certain club maintains a strange relationships with certain feeder clubs of theirs.
For example, some clubs seem to get preferrential treatment from this particular SANFL club, whereas others seem to get shafted.
I offer the scenario of a junior developed at a "shafted club" no longer being required by the SANFL club (depsite being a promising junior), yet rather than being left to go back to his "shafted club", is told to train & play with a "preferred club" to stay under consideration of the SANFL club.
What bollocks- if they were dead keen on him, he'd be on the active senior list.
This same SANFL club seems to enjoy shafting this particular minnow, as when a senior player retired to this particular local club, the SANFL slapped an outrageous "release fee" on this player- which the club was forced to pick up.
Not the sort of way to foster a successful relationship surely?
This local "shafted club" has quite a reasonable juniors program in place- would hate to see the club hold a grudge against the SANFL club....

Punky, this has been going on for years. You're probably talking NAFC, I'd suggest that Broadview will again become the flavour of the month. When Jars was there it was Gaza. Most other clubs in their zone get SFA and the clubs kids get told a crock of sh^t and under duress they believe the club and do as they suggest.

a bit off topic, but I wonder how NAFC treat Hope Valley/Gepps Cross etc?

Whilst I sympathise with you Punk (and Fitzroy) as RR said league clubs will want their players not in their best 21 for ressies playing as high as possible Div 1 or 2 amateurs.

Now you can argue the toss over the merits of how its been done and why Broadville (one could argue Geps Cross would be a better option) but seriously you can't blame a league club recommending that a player go to a Div 2 club rather than a Div 4 despite teh fact he came from teh Div 4 club.

Punk Rooster wrote:

rod_rooster wrote:

Punk Rooster wrote:

rod_rooster wrote:Perhaps the SANFL club would prefer the players they are keeping an eye on to be playing in a side in Div 1 rather than one that finished 7th out of 10 in Div 4.

lol- Broadview are in Div 2 & arguably struggling...

Fair enough but still better than a struggling div 4 side surely.

The player wasn't originally from the struggling Div 2 club.
Why would he not return to his feeder club?
If the SANFL club was really concerned with his development, he would be playing reserves footy under their watchful eye & direction.

I would have thought if an SANFL club was interested in a particular player but they didn't have room for that player due to the new structure with the under 18 comp that they would want them playing at the next best standard available. That would give them a better chance to truly evaluate that players ability. That would suggest the SANFL club would want the player to play at a div 1 club so choosing a div 2 club as you have suggested is an odd choice.

1980 Tassie Medalist wrote:Whilst I sympathise with you Punk (and Fitzroy) as RR said league clubs will want their players not in their best 21 for ressies playing as high as possible Div 1 or 2 amateurs.

Now you can argue the toss over the merits of how its been done and why Broadville (one could argue Geps Cross would be a better option) but seriously you can't blame a league club recommending that a player go to a Div 2 club rather than a Div 4 despite teh fact he came from teh Div 4 club.

There are players in Div 4 capable of playing SANFL.
My argument is there is not such a drop in quality between Div 1-Div 4, as there is in Div 1-Div1 Reserves.
I guess the course of action taken by an SANFL club would affect where feeder clubs recommend their players to go in the future.

rod_rooster wrote:Perhaps the SANFL club would prefer the players they are keeping an eye on to be playing in a side in Div 1 rather than one that finished 7th out of 10 in Div 4.

Div 2, 4 , 10, who gives a shit, basic manners would require the club to at the very least contact the people who trained up the bloke from an 8yo & guided him there to tell them the current status of the player & why he was directed where he was.

Perhaps the same SANFL club could maybe look after their junior sides a little better & not just open the golden corridor to blokes who, just by chance mind you, have the same surnames as past players, junior coaches, vice presidents sons & office staff, or at least make them pass the same time trials as the great unwashed vying for a spot. Strangely enough none of the u19's from last year fell in this category & all bar one were cut.

You could almost understand their position if the player was recruited/poached from another junior league, but to treat a feeder club of 20 years with such blatant contempt just shows the ongoing bias provided by that clown factory. Shogun & Dolphin Treasure the true heart & soul of the new improved hirachy could show just a little gratitude.

Punk Rooster wrote:

1980 Tassie Medalist wrote:Whilst I sympathise with you Punk (and Fitzroy) as RR said league clubs will want their players not in their best 21 for ressies playing as high as possible Div 1 or 2 amateurs.

Now you can argue the toss over the merits of how its been done and why Broadville (one could argue Geps Cross would be a better option) but seriously you can't blame a league club recommending that a player go to a Div 2 club rather than a Div 4 despite teh fact he came from teh Div 4 club.

There are players in Div 4 capable of playing SANFL.
My argument is there is not such a drop in quality between Div 1-Div 4, as there is in Div 1-Div1 Reserves.
I guess the course of action taken by an SANFL club would affect where feeder clubs recommend their players to go in the future.

This is where i am not qualified to judge so i will have to accept your view on that.

Sheik Yerbouti wrote:

rod_rooster wrote:Perhaps the SANFL club would prefer the players they are keeping an eye on to be playing in a side in Div 1 rather than one that finished 7th out of 10 in Div 4.

Div 2, 4 , 10, who gives a shit, basic manners would require the club to at the very least contact the people who trained up the bloke from an 8yo & guided him there to tell them the current status of the player & why he was directed where he was.

Perhaps the same SANFL club could maybe look after their junior sides a little better & not just open the golden corridor to blokes who, just by chance mind you, have the same surnames as past players, junior coaches, vice presidents sons & office staff, or at least make them pass the same time trials as the great unwashed vying for a spot. Strangely enough none of the u19's from last year fell in this category & all bar one were cut.

You could almost understand their position if the player was recruited/poached from another junior league, but to treat a feeder club of 20 years with such blatant contempt just shows the ongoing bias provided by that clown factory. Shogun & Dolphin Treasure the true heart & soul of the new improved hirachy could show just a little gratitude.

Fair enough mate. I guess it is easy from an outsiders position to see the SANFL club's point of view but the SAAFL club has many valid points that shouldn't be discounted.

Punky its not only your club that has this policy I know of at least 1 other club that does exactly the same thing but they also went 1 step further. The club that they are sent to tries to use unethical tactics to keep him when the player that they receive gives up on his SANFL dream and wants to return to a club with his mates

Punky, would some of it be because although the feeder club is close in proximity to the SANFL club in question, they are actualy in another SANFL sides zone?

I know it still doesn't make it right as that club has a lot of jnrs residing in it's zone and still gets it's fair share of juniors even though from them even with their alliance to the 2nd SANFL club.

Ian wrote:Punky, would some of it be because although the feeder club is close in proximity to the SANFL club in question, they are actualy in another SANFL sides zone?

I know it still doesn't make it right as that club has a lot of jnrs residing in it's zone and still gets it's fair share of juniors even though from them even with their alliance to the 2nd SANFL club.

This feeder club feeds 2 SANFL clubs- based on which side of the railway line they live.
The other SANFL club returns players to us no problems at all- no recommendations to join Henley are made "so we can keep an eye on you"

Punk Rooster wrote:

Ian wrote:Punky, would some of it be because although the feeder club is close in proximity to the SANFL club in question, they are actualy in another SANFL sides zone?

I know it still doesn't make it right as that club has a lot of jnrs residing in it's zone and still gets it's fair share of juniors even though from them even with their alliance to the 2nd SANFL club.

This feeder club feeds 2 SANFL clubs- based on which side of the railway line they live.
The other SANFL club returns players to us no problems at all- no recommendations to join Henley are made "so we can keep an eye on you"

I realise it depends on where the juniors live as to which club they are aligned to, I was just wondering if the club that is shafting your club was partially due to the fact that your club is not in their zone. To me it would make even more sense to look after your club as it would be very easy for your players to end up at the SANFL club that your club is zoned to, obviously not a priority to the powers to be at that particullar SANFL club.

My son's club is zoned to West but sitting right on the boundry of both Glenelg and WWT and there are a number of juniors living in all of those zones.

I'm not sure about Glenelg but I know ad well as a good relationship with West, our club also had a very good relationship with the Eagles where we probablly have the most juniors living, you would think it would be n the best interest of SANFL clubs to maintain that good relationship with all clubs that their juniors come from no matter whose zone the club itself is in.

It would appear to be very poor form from the SANFL club in question and it's decision makers.

Has the player in question made a decision on where he will play in 09? Perhaps he would be better off playing where his roots are and coming under the eye of the club you are zoned to rather than be dicked around further.

Ian wrote: our club also had a very good relationship with the Eagles .

That's good, they'll have some more team mates cause I know that every underage young gun at The Roys from this year onwards will be gently persuaded to pull on an Eags jumper with some facts & figures about their zoned club & the treatment of juniors well & truely pointed out to the parents.

You should offer them facts and figures about the eagles as well then. Don't play with the potential footy careers of the juniors of your club because you are pissed off with North, that is hardly fair. By all means give them information, but it should be objective and equal for all clubs.

smac wrote:You should offer them facts and figures about the eagles as well then. Don't play with the potential footy careers of the juniors of your club because you are pissed off with North, that is hardly fair. By all means give them information, but it should be objective and equal for all clubs.

fair & objective treatment goes both ways