The never ending No AFL in the SANFL whinge thread

[Wedgie]

Different kettle of fish Cracka, the VFA disbanded in the 90s and the VFA clubs chose to join a competition run by the VFL.

[cracka]

Different kettle of fish Cracka, the VFA disbanded in the 90s and the VFA clubs chose to join a competition run by the VFL.

But still full time footballers vs part time

[Jim05]

Different kettle of fish Cracka, the VFA disbanded in the 90s and the VFA clubs chose to join a competition run by the VFL.

But still full time footballers vs part time

Not for much longer. Will be a pure AFL reserves comp within 3-4 years

[Wedgie]

Different kettle of fish Cracka, the VFA disbanded in the 90s and the VFA clubs chose to join a competition run by the VFL.

But still full time footballers vs part time

Agreed. Not a fair comp, they have a heap of different rules but the AFL run it so they can do what they like as its their comp.

[MW]

Different kettle of fish Cracka, the VFA disbanded in the 90s and the VFA clubs chose to join a competition run by the VFL.

But still full time footballers vs part time

Not for much longer. Will be a pure AFL reserves comp within 3-4 years

There needs to be

[Jim05]

Different kettle of fish Cracka, the VFA disbanded in the 90s and the VFA clubs chose to join a competition run by the VFL.

But still full time footballers vs part time

Not for much longer. Will be a pure AFL reserves comp within 3-4 years

There needs to be

I meant the VFL will be purely a AFL Reserves comp. No plans for a national Reserves comp on the radar even

[MW]

It would become one very quickly.

[therisingblues]

If it was all the best players on Adelaides & Ports lists then yeah its totally unfair but thats not the case. Its mainly the 2nd tier & rookie listed players that play in the SANFL.

I don't have access to the actual figures myself Cracka, but I would hazard a guess that those second tier and rookie players are also on a truckload more cash than the rest of the competition.
Are you then claiming that it would only be unfair if the wealthiest players in Australia competed in the SANFL, but seeing as the reserves, while far exceeding the salary of the top paid part time footballer in the SANFL, are not the wealthiest, then it is okay?
I am sure the SANFL regulars, while they are toiling away at their boiler-making, tile-laying, teaching, marine research, or whatever it is they must do to pay their mortgage, put food on the table and send their kids to school, are thanking their lucky stars that it is only the 2nd tier full time footballers who are being trained in the state of the art facilities, tended to by the nation's best sports doctors and taught the game by Australia's highest paid coaches, that they must play against on weekends.
Yeah, sounds COMPLETELY fair to me. Glad that the Crows fans realise that it would be totally unfair for the TOP paid players on their list to be playing in the SANFL.

So going by your theory, if someone wanted to sue a major company & can only afford a lawyer who practices part time in that particular law then the company should also only be able to have a lawyer who practices part time in that particular law instead of the 20 full time professional lawyers they usually have. Welcome to fantasy land where everything has to be fair & even.

Actually Cracka, you have made me see the folly of my ways.
The injustices of the law system are the perfect justification for having different rules for different teams playing the same grade of football.
The next time someone whines to me about a doctored pitch in India, I am just going to roll my eyes at them and say "Hey, do you think a multi million dollar company should have to pay their lawyer the same as the family they are screwing over?"
And when they give me the old WTF expression I'll just say "Welcome to fantasy land brother! Hallelujah! I am off to water my garden with sand."
Honestly Cracka, at least use an argument that is relevant in some way.

[therisingblues]

Different kettle of fish Cracka, the VFA disbanded in the 90s and the VFA clubs chose to join a competition run by the VFL.

But still full time footballers vs part time

Yes, correct, and the part time footballer clubs are dying rather quickly in that comp. Have you noticed?
You will not find me on the relevant football board preaching to all the long time fans of that comp that the reserves are actually good for them. Carlton or not

[cracka]

Different kettle of fish Cracka, the VFA disbanded in the 90s and the VFA clubs chose to join a competition run by the VFL.

But still full time footballers vs part time

Yes, correct, and the part time footballer clubs are dying rather quickly in that comp. Have you noticed?
You will not find me on the relevant football board preaching to all the long time fans of that comp that the reserves are actually good for them. Carlton or not

Wont find you complaining relentlessly about the unfair advantages the AFL clubs have over the stand alone clubs on the relevant football boards either.

[cracka]

If it was all the best players on Adelaides & Ports lists then yeah its totally unfair but thats not the case. Its mainly the 2nd tier & rookie listed players that play in the SANFL.

I don't have access to the actual figures myself Cracka, but I would hazard a guess that those second tier and rookie players are also on a truckload more cash than the rest of the competition.
Are you then claiming that it would only be unfair if the wealthiest players in Australia competed in the SANFL, but seeing as the reserves, while far exceeding the salary of the top paid part time footballer in the SANFL, are not the wealthiest, then it is okay?
I am sure the SANFL regulars, while they are toiling away at their boiler-making, tile-laying, teaching, marine research, or whatever it is they must do to pay their mortgage, put food on the table and send their kids to school, are thanking their lucky stars that it is only the 2nd tier full time footballers who are being trained in the state of the art facilities, tended to by the nation's best sports doctors and taught the game by Australia's highest paid coaches, that they must play against on weekends.
Yeah, sounds COMPLETELY fair to me. Glad that the Crows fans realise that it would be totally unfair for the TOP paid players on their list to be playing in the SANFL.

So going by your theory, if someone wanted to sue a major company & can only afford a lawyer who practices part time in that particular law then the company should also only be able to have a lawyer who practices part time in that particular law instead of the 20 full time professional lawyers they usually have. Welcome to fantasy land where everything has to be fair & even.

Actually Cracka, you have made me see the folly of my ways.
The injustices of the law system are the perfect justification for having different rules for different teams playing the same grade of football.
The next time someone whines to me about a doctored pitch in India, I am just going to roll my eyes at them and say "Hey, do you think a multi million dollar company should have to pay their lawyer the same as the family they are screwing over?"
And when they give me the old WTF expression I'll just say "Welcome to fantasy land brother! Hallelujah! I am off to water my garden with sand."
Honestly Cracka, at least use an argument that is relevant in some way.

It is relevant, lifes not fair, unless you live in fantasy land.

[johntheclaret]

Take the AFL sides out, get your integrity back, but IMO, the SANFL will become even more irrelevant to both supporters (not the die hards like on here obviously) and media alike.
People are supporting AFL first, and after that, probably an Amateur league team because of free entry (mostly), cheaper food and drink, easier access etc.

That is a worry for sure. Sadly the powers that be at SANFL seem to lack any imagination, (or simply don't care), on how to make the sanfl more relevant and offer a genuine alternative to the AFL. They seem to have accepted that the only path for the SANFL is the current one and to consider an alternative would effectively mean a move against the AFL as it would require them to remove the two Reserve Teams. I would suspect there are too many 'job preservation and personal agenda's' going on at that level for anyone to start rocking the boat. And no doubt a similar situation is happening at club level too.

But I also think it is too easy to write the SANFL off by suggesting the options are either AFL or Amatuers. The amateur leagues have gained ground and supporter base because of the poor management of the SANFL. The SANFL has failed to 'move with the times', there is no argument there, and maybe if they had looked at the competition for fans $$$$ and been a bit more innovative with pricing, scheduling, memberships and promoting the league, the picture might be completely different. They already have a hard core fan base of over 10,000 and probably the same number of occasional walk on's who might well have become more regular,or even returned to being regulars, if the SANFL would just think about what they are offering compared to other competitions.

Unfortunately as long as the AFL Reserves remain, so the league will remain irrelevant, compromised, unfair and uninteresting to many who have found a cheaper option.

[cracka]

Have any players come out and complained that it's not fair. I've only spoken to 1 SANFL coach (so hardly a representation of all of them) about this & he said they enjoy the challenge

[johntheclaret]

What cracka said.
If money decided who wins a football game, why aren't Crows and Port undefeated over the last few years?

Are you referring to the AFL Team or the AFL RESERVES Team competing in the SANFL.

I don't follow the AFL but from what I understand the draft is structured to give the bottom team upwards the first picks and ergo get the best players or the players they want to fill a particular position, with the whole process designed to keep the league 'even'. Therefore the lack of success is generally attributed to coaching, tactics employed and to some extent the injury list. What it will never be attributed to is the coach using the team for developing players, running them back into fitness, testing their potential in other positions etc.

If you are referring to the AFL RESERVES Teams playing in the SANFL, then the complete opposite is applied. The two Reserves Teams are not competing in the league to win it. I'm sure they'd be happy enough if they did but the reality is, all of those AFL listed players have one goal and that is to get into the 1st Team and play AFL, and not to compete in the SANFL.

The current equilibrium is because of this.

Theoretically it might be fair to say that maybe 30% of the AFL Reserves are capable of holding down an AFL 1st Team place whilst the other 50% are AFL reserve standard and the rest SANFL standard at best. On the other hand it might be fair to say that maybe 20% of an SANFL team would be AFL reserve standard, with maybe 65% SANFL standard and 10% - 15% SANFL reserve standard. On this basis, if the AFL Reserves really played to the line they would be too strong for any of the current genuine SANFL teams and would be expected to be playing each other in the GF more often then not. The only variable being the injury list to the AFL 1st team.

[therisingblues]

Hmmm.
Person A: "I think it is unfair that part time footballers must play against fulltime professionals in the SANFL for premiership points."
Person B: "Life's not fair! What do you think this is, fantasy land? AFL clubs can do whatever they want!"

Oh, BTW:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EJqjE8dWbUk

[johntheclaret]

You come across like a clever bloke MW so I'll assume you are deliberately missing the point, but in case I'm wrong and you really aren't that smart, I'll spell it out for you.

Paying players more money doesn't make them better players.
Better players command a higher salary, just like in any other line of work.
Having a higher salary cap enables a club to attract the better players because it can pay more.
Two teams in a league where their salary cap is significantly higher than the other teams competing in the same league, have a significant advantage over those other teams.

So would you agree a team with a salary cap 100 times greater, (or whatever the exact ratio is), than another team in the same league has an advantage. Or more to the point, do you think it is fair?

If it was all the best players on Adelaides & Ports lists then yeah its totally unfair but thats not the case. Its mainly the 2nd tier & rookie listed players that play in the SANFL.

I don't have access to the actual figures myself Cracka, but I would hazard a guess that those second tier and rookie players are also on a truckload more cash than the rest of the competition.
Are you then claiming that it would only be unfair if the wealthiest players in Australia competed in the SANFL, but seeing as the reserves, while far exceeding the salary of the top paid part time footballer in the SANFL, are not the wealthiest, then it is okay?
I am sure the SANFL regulars, while they are toiling away at their boiler-making, tile-laying, teaching, marine research, or whatever it is they must do to pay their mortgage, put food on the table and send their kids to school, are thanking their lucky stars that it is only the 2nd tier full time footballers who are being trained in the state of the art facilities, tended to by the nation's best sports doctors and taught the game by Australia's highest paid coaches, that they must play against on weekends.
Yeah, sounds COMPLETELY fair to me. Glad that the Crows fans realise that it would be totally unfair for the TOP paid players on their list to be playing in the SANFL.

So going by your theory, if someone wanted to sue a major company & can only afford a lawyer who practices part time in that particular law then the company should also only be able to have a lawyer who practices part time in that particular law instead of the 20 full time professional lawyers they usually have. Welcome to fantasy land where everything has to be fair & even.

Bit confused at this post Cracka. You seem to be agreeing that having the two AFL Reserve teams competing in the SANFL is unfair, and anyone wanting the SANFL competition to be "fair & even" is in "fantasy land". Yet isn't the current structure of the AFL competition exactly that, designed to keep it "fair & even" by the order of the draft picks? You seem to want to have your cake and eat it, as my dad used to say.

[cracka]

Hmmm.
Person A: "I think it is unfair that part time footballers must play against fulltime professionals in the SANFL for premiership points, but it's okay for other leagues to do it just as long as its not the SANFL"
Person B: "Life's not fair! What do you think this is, fantasy land? AFL clubs can do whatever they want!"

Oh, BTW:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EJqjE8dWbUk

EFA
Don't worry, KG is on your side, he thinks its unfair too

[therisingblues]

I didn't mean to single that poor fella out. But I couldn't resist the irony of being told by a Crows fan that life is not fair.

[therisingblues]

Different kettle of fish Cracka, the VFA disbanded in the 90s and the VFA clubs chose to join a competition run by the VFL.

But still full time footballers vs part time

Yes, correct, and the part time footballer clubs are dying rather quickly in that comp. Have you noticed?
You will not find me on the relevant football board preaching to all the long time fans of that comp that the reserves are actually good for them. Carlton or not

Wont find you complaining relentlessly about the unfair advantages the AFL clubs have over the stand alone clubs on the relevant football boards either.

No, we will find you on the relevant football board preaching that the reserves are good for the SANFL. Oh, and if it's not, that's because life is not fair.

[cracka]

So going by your theory, if someone wanted to sue a major company & can only afford a lawyer who practices part time in that particular law then the company should also only be able to have a lawyer who practices part time in that particular law instead of the 20 full time professional lawyers they usually have. Welcome to fantasy land where everything has to be fair & even.

Bit confused at this post Cracka. You seem to be agreeing that having the two AFL Reserve teams competing in the SANFL is unfair, and anyone wanting the SANFL competition to be "fair & even" is in "fantasy land". Yet isn't the current structure of the AFL competition exactly that, designed to keep it "fair & even" by the order of the draft picks? You seem to want to have your cake and eat it, as my dad used to say.

Pretty sure the AFL gave leg ups to Brisbane, Sydney, Gold Coast & GWS that weren't fair. Also damn sure I've never complained about it