SA Footy

Posted: **Thu Apr 10, 2014 5:25 pm**

Footy Smart wrote:
johnny bravo wrote:
mickey wrote:
Mr Beefy wrote:PAOC will take over Kilburn Oval *

*may have not learnt that

I think you will find that there is at least 1 other football club and a host of soccer clubs already working to move in when/if Kilburn fall over

Name Names

Hasnt one already organised to play there on the odd weeks (non Kilburn A grade games)?

A foot in the door so to speak FS

Posted: **Thu Apr 10, 2014 5:30 pm**

Footy Chick wrote:Yes, very good but slightly incorrect

Can everyone start talking about how much Rosewater are allegedly forking out this year and then we'll see how relevant Mr Beefy thinks it really is

water off a ducks back, esp if they are as far off the mark as they were last year. This year I cant comment cos I dont know.

Posted: **Thu Apr 10, 2014 5:40 pm**

Would hardly say went to town on brahma and kilburn. What was said is you can't always be at the top....someone has to finish bottom and when it's your turn you accept it. Doesn't matter how strong the losses are. Rosie's went through it and no one complained, we went with what we had. Kilburn are now seeing what neglecting juniors do and putting everything into an a grade side only. You can't cry poor when things turn sour! Brahma lodge went with payney and he had a fair following of players....he bought most to the club... And had very good success for 3 or 4 years...did the club think they were all going to stay when he left?? Unfortunately for them they didn't....so now they should go through hard times, not ask to drop down grades. That's my opinion, others will think different and say no point getting flogged but they didn't say we should go up 2 grades cos we are too good. Goes both ways

Posted: **Thu Apr 10, 2014 6:18 pm**

I think the crux of the issue is that there isn't a crux.

There isn't any single one thing which is causing this.

I know for Mitchell Park we've gone from ~100 players on the books and 3 sides to 35 and one side.

Of the ~50 that have left.

~10 would have retired, as in, actual proper retirement
~20 have moved on to play at other clubs of that 20, 5 would be to play higher and get the most of themselves, 5 because they weren't happy with the club and 10 because of following one of their mates
~20 have just walked away from the game and don't want to play this year

Does $$$ have anything to do with it. Maybe. If we paid players perhaps some of those 20 that aren't playing might have stayed. Which in turn keeps a couple of their other mates.

Does demographics and simple market fluctuations have an influence - of course, people being people move and change and adapt.

Does an apathy for the sport and risk of injury have an impact - yep!

All of these things combine into what is a bit of a soup, really.

Posted: **Thu Apr 10, 2014 11:31 pm**

Has the points system had a negative effect on grass roots football? Is it more of a coincidence that when this came in, it made college sides stronger and the less aussie rules populated area weaker?

Posted: **Thu Apr 10, 2014 11:53 pm**

easy TIGA wrote:Has the points system had a negative effect on grass roots football? Is it more of a coincidence that when this came in, it made college sides stronger and the less aussie rules populated area weaker?

The college sides are extremely advantaged under the points system.

The points system was brought in by the CFL to protect the SANFL, and the SAAFL adopted it to protect the old scholars bloc.

Posted: **Fri Apr 11, 2014 7:37 am**

easy TIGA wrote:Has the points system had a negative effect on grass roots football? Is it more of a coincidence that when this came in, it made college sides stronger and the less aussie rules populated area weaker?

Has it? Why do you say that?

Posted: **Fri Apr 11, 2014 9:25 am**

Look Good In Leather wrote:
easy TIGA wrote:Has the points system had a negative effect on grass roots football? Is it more of a coincidence that when this came in, it made college sides stronger and the less aussie rules populated area weaker?

The college sides are extremely advantaged under the points system.

The points system was brought in by the CFL to protect the SANFL, and the SAAFL adopted it to protect the old scholars bloc.

Hahahaha. What a ridiculous assertion.

Tell us your version of the implementation of the Points System.

I (absolutely not being aligned with any college side) think it's the best thing that's happened to the Amateur League for a long time. The only problems it has are:
1. For many clubs detailed records of junior games are a new concept. We have to scratch our head for how many games a junior played 5 years ago, if someone came and played for us 15 years ago we'd have very little idea.
2. The Junior Games category should be expanded. The 25 games between 14 and 16 can be too hard to meet for many players as that is the age group they're whisked away to Norwood/State Squads/Etc. We've had blokes who have played well over 100 junior games for our footy club, never played for another (non-SANFL) club but still be worth points because they only played 20 games in the relevant period. The rule should be re-drafted to 25 games between 14 and 16 or 100 games in total.
3. Get rid of the Son of a Life Member rule. How many life members wouldn't have their own children playing junior footy at a club they're life members at? Pointless duplication and is asking to be exploited.

And no Easy Tiga, it benefits clubs who do something for the game of football at a developmental and grassroots level (and Adelaide Uni, it benefits Adelaide Uni alot). It hurts clubs who give nothing back in the hollow pursuit of lower grade glory.

Posted: **Fri Apr 11, 2014 9:30 am**

Mr Beefy wrote:
easy TIGA wrote:Has the points system had a negative effect on grass roots football? Is it more of a coincidence that when this came in, it made college sides stronger and the less aussie rules populated area weaker?

Has it? Why do you say that?

Because it gives them access to an exceptionally large number of zero pointers without having to do the ground work (ie running junior teams). Even a large junior program will not produce that amount of zero pointers.

Sent from my GT-I9305T using Tapatalk

Posted: **Fri Apr 11, 2014 9:32 am**

Look Good In Leather wrote:
Mr Beefy wrote:
easy TIGA wrote:Has the points system had a negative effect on grass roots football? Is it more of a coincidence that when this came in, it made college sides stronger and the less aussie rules populated area weaker?

Has it? Why do you say that?

Because it gives them access to an exceptionally large number of zero pointers without having to do the ground work (ie running junior teams). Even a large junior program will not produce that amount of zero pointers.

Sent from my GT-I9305T using Tapatalk

What do you call Collegiate Football?

Posted: **Fri Apr 11, 2014 9:33 am**

jo172 wrote:
Look Good In Leather wrote:
Mr Beefy wrote:
easy TIGA wrote:Has the points system had a negative effect on grass roots football? Is it more of a coincidence that when this came in, it made college sides stronger and the less aussie rules populated area weaker?

Has it? Why do you say that?

Because it gives them access to an exceptionally large number of zero pointers without having to do the ground work (ie running junior teams). Even a large junior program will not produce that amount of zero pointers.

Sent from my GT-I9305T using Tapatalk

What do you call Collegiate Football?

Enforced slavery

Sent from my GT-I9305T using Tapatalk

Posted: **Fri Apr 11, 2014 9:35 am**

I think it should just be 50 junior games, regardless of age group. Clubs who have U18s will get kids that have played more than 100 games for another junior club but want to play U18s, they play 2 seasons of U18s and then they are worth 0 points to a club because they have U18s.

Posted: **Fri Apr 11, 2014 9:37 am**

Look Good In Leather wrote:
Mr Beefy wrote:
easy TIGA wrote:Has the points system had a negative effect on grass roots football? Is it more of a coincidence that when this came in, it made college sides stronger and the less aussie rules populated area weaker?

Has it? Why do you say that?

Because it gives them access to an exceptionally large number of zero pointers without having to do the ground work (ie running junior teams). Even a large junior program will not produce that amount of zero pointers.

Sent from my GT-I9305T using Tapatalk

It said it has made them stronger, I don't see any evidence of this - I don't see Div 1 or Div 2 having a lot more college sides than they used to.

Posted: **Fri Apr 11, 2014 1:33 pm**

Would be interesting see their total numbers and any chnages over time though, both before and after the points system.

If anyone from the SAAFL has that data I will crunch it!

Posted: **Fri Apr 11, 2014 1:38 pm**

morell wrote:Would be interesting see their total numbers and any chnages over time though, both before and after the points system.

If anyone from the SAAFL has that data I will crunch it!

Doubt the SAAFL has that data.. everytime they change their systems etc it seems they fail to migrate the existing data over.. according to the new sportingpulse i've played a total of 7 games in my career :lol:

Posted: **Fri Apr 11, 2014 2:30 pm**

morell wrote:Would be interesting see their total numbers and any chnages over time though, both before and after the points system.

If anyone from the SAAFL has that data I will crunch it!

Assuming you are talking about player numbers, Quantity <> Quality

Posted: **Fri Apr 11, 2014 2:37 pm**

easy TIGA wrote:Has the points system had a negative effect on grass roots football? Is it more of a coincidence that when this came in, it made college sides stronger and the less aussie rules populated area weaker?

Posted: **Fri Apr 11, 2014 2:43 pm**

Cohiba wrote:Is that why you "deserted" a sinking ship....or was it just for the money........

Pretty sure he left on the best of terms and explained to the club at the end of last season his plans for the future.. Was very up front and open.

Posted: **Fri Apr 11, 2014 3:26 pm**

Mr Beefy wrote:
Look Good In Leather wrote:
Mr Beefy wrote:
easy TIGA wrote:Has the points system had a negative effect on grass roots football? Is it more of a coincidence that when this came in, it made college sides stronger and the less aussie rules populated area weaker?

Has it? Why do you say that?

Because it gives them access to an exceptionally large number of zero pointers without having to do the ground work (ie running junior teams). Even a large junior program will not produce that amount of zero pointers.

Sent from my GT-I9305T using Tapatalk

It said it has made them stronger, I don't see any evidence of this - I don't see Div 1 or Div 2 having a lot more college sides than they used to.

Will occur over the next few seasons if the points system remains in place.

Meanwhile, I don't notice any of the Old Scholars bloc being discussed when we are talking about these "clubs in strife"

Posted: **Fri Apr 11, 2014 3:30 pm**

Look Good In Leather wrote:Will occur over the next few seasons if the points system remains in place.

Meanwhile, I don't notice any of the Old Scholars bloc being discussed when we are talking about these "clubs in strife"

I would wager it doesn't.

The number of College sides in the top 4 divisions may increase by 1, the number of College sides in the top 2 divisions may also increase by 1. Apart from that Schools like Pultney, CBCOC, Trinity, Blackfriars, Flinders don't pose a serious threat to any of the strong clubs.

And your second point is such a logical fallacy it makes my head hurt.

SA Footy

Clubs in strife

Re: Clubs in strife

Re: Clubs in strife

Re: Clubs in strife

Re: Clubs in strife

Re: Clubs in strife

Re: Clubs in strife

Re: Clubs in strife

Re: Clubs in strife

Re: Clubs in strife

Re: Clubs in strife

Re: Clubs in strife

Re: Clubs in strife

Re: Clubs in strife

Re: Clubs in strife

Re: Clubs in strife

Re: Clubs in strife

Re: Clubs in strife

Re: Clubs in strife

Re: Clubs in strife

Re: Clubs in strife