by southernbulldog » Sat Dec 16, 2017 3:25 pm
by Brodlach » Sat Dec 16, 2017 3:27 pm
Brodlach wrote:Rory Laird might end up the best IMO, he is an absolute jet. He has been in great form at the Bloods
by goddy11 » Sat Dec 16, 2017 7:07 pm
Spargo wrote:amber_fluid wrote:Dutchy wrote:Booney wrote:
Kelly said the former stipulation had not contemplated that all 21 AFL-listed players would be available, resulting in no top-up players lining up in a league match.
“The provisions of the licence agreement … were included to ensure that the teams of each (AFL) club were playing the line and wanting to win,” Kelly said.
“Both clubs have honoured this principle and demonstrated through their players a commitment to the contest and respect for the competition.
“Ultimately, the SANFL has agreed with Port Adelaide that it is appropriate that the marquee player be able to be selected before an AFL-listed player on the occasion that 21 are available for SANFL selection.”
With 46 on the list they didn't add up that 22+21 = 43??? and this scenario was a possibility???
Policy on the run, and they still use the "integrity" word, these blokes are almost worse than Politicians!
The reality is they changed the rule for one bloke!
Ridiculous
You couldn’t make this shit up
by Grenville » Sat Dec 16, 2017 7:23 pm
Brodlach wrote:Dallas Hill
by DOC » Sat Dec 16, 2017 7:25 pm
by therisingblues » Sat Dec 16, 2017 8:31 pm
by therisingblues » Sat Dec 16, 2017 8:35 pm
amber_fluid wrote:Dutchy wrote:Booney wrote:
Kelly said the former stipulation had not contemplated that all 21 AFL-listed players would be available, resulting in no top-up players lining up in a league match.
“The provisions of the licence agreement … were included to ensure that the teams of each (AFL) club were playing the line and wanting to win,” Kelly said.
“Both clubs have honoured this principle and demonstrated through their players a commitment to the contest and respect for the competition.
“Ultimately, the SANFL has agreed with Port Adelaide that it is appropriate that the marquee player be able to be selected before an AFL-listed player on the occasion that 21 are available for SANFL selection.”
With 46 on the list they didn't add up that 22+21 = 43??? and this scenario was a possibility???
Policy on the run, and they still use the "integrity" word, these blokes are almost worse than Politicians!
The reality is they changed the rule for one bloke!
Ridiculous
by Kahuna » Sat Dec 16, 2017 8:49 pm
therisingblues wrote:Incredible.
Originally only Port were allowed a marquee. And if my understanding was correct, he was to be temporary.
Now both AFL clubs are to be allowed them on a permanent basis.
How is this happening at the same time Glenelg is being told their cap has been reduced owing to ongoing debt?
Surely in this situation the SANFL clubs should ALSO be allowed a marquee player, outside the current rules which apply to player recruitment, i.e. the cap?
by UK Fan » Sun Dec 17, 2017 9:54 am
Kahuna wrote:therisingblues wrote:Incredible.
Originally only Port were allowed a marquee. And if my understanding was correct, he was to be temporary.
Now both AFL clubs are to be allowed them on a permanent basis.
How is this happening at the same time Glenelg is being told their cap has been reduced owing to ongoing debt?
Surely in this situation the SANFL clubs should ALSO be allowed a marquee player, outside the current rules which apply to player recruitment, i.e. the cap?
Excellent post, nailed it.
fester69 wrote: I'm full of "pish and wind" !!You can call me weak !!
MW wrote: Well call me a special asshole!.
Booney wrote: I'm a happy clapper **** stick.
by the wizard » Sun Dec 17, 2017 12:46 pm
by heater31 » Sun Dec 17, 2017 1:19 pm
Did he buy the house when Tippett wanted out?the wizard wrote:I'm hearing Jesse white ex Collingwood will be in town early new year owns a house at prospect ?
by DOC » Sun Dec 17, 2017 4:44 pm
heater31 wrote:Did he buy the house when Tippett wanted out?the wizard wrote:I'm hearing Jesse white ex Collingwood will be in town early new year owns a house at prospect ?
by Hazbeen » Sun Dec 17, 2017 7:49 pm
Grenville wrote:Brodlach wrote:Dallas Hill
The lad can play, can be very hot and cold though. If he kicks 5 against us this season I will chuck the toys out of the cot.
by GMcG » Mon Dec 18, 2017 11:47 am
Grenville wrote:Brodlach wrote:Dallas Hill
The lad can play, can be very hot and cold though. If he kicks 5 against us this season I will chuck the toys out of the cot.
by northerner » Mon Dec 18, 2017 1:21 pm
by sib » Mon Dec 18, 2017 1:39 pm
therisingblues wrote:Incredible.
Originally only Port were allowed a marquee. And if my understanding was correct, he was to be temporary.
Now both AFL clubs are to be allowed them on a permanent basis.
How is this happening at the same time Glenelg is being told their cap has been reduced owing to ongoing debt?
Surely in this situation the SANFL clubs should ALSO be allowed a marquee player, outside the current rules which apply to player recruitment, i.e. the cap?
I would suggest that the Crows and Power be made to pay for the 8 SANFL marquee players. Some clubs can only do so much with the existing cap while others are being told to tighten their belts, then the SANFL just gift the AFL reserves a ticket to go spend more money to compliment their million dollar lists? It is time the SANFL clubs were offered an equal concession.
by Hazydog » Tue Dec 19, 2017 1:28 pm
sib wrote:therisingblues wrote:Incredible.
Originally only Port were allowed a marquee. And if my understanding was correct, he was to be temporary.
Now both AFL clubs are to be allowed them on a permanent basis.
How is this happening at the same time Glenelg is being told their cap has been reduced owing to ongoing debt?
Surely in this situation the SANFL clubs should ALSO be allowed a marquee player, outside the current rules which apply to player recruitment, i.e. the cap?
I would suggest that the Crows and Power be made to pay for the 8 SANFL marquee players. Some clubs can only do so much with the existing cap while others are being told to tighten their belts, then the SANFL just gift the AFL reserves a ticket to go spend more money to compliment their million dollar lists? It is time the SANFL clubs were offered an equal concession.
The original rules were.
Both Port and Crows could have One leadership Player over the age of 28 that had previously played for the club. Ours was Ian Callinan and Ports was Henry Slattery. The rest of Crows top up players came from Amatuers and SANFL reserve players. The rest of Ports top up players came from players that were on the Magpies list at the time (This included Summerton) and players from Ports old zones. Technically Ports captain should have been Slattery lol.
by sib » Tue Dec 19, 2017 3:13 pm
Hazydog wrote:sib wrote:therisingblues wrote:Incredible.
Originally only Port were allowed a marquee. And if my understanding was correct, he was to be temporary.
Now both AFL clubs are to be allowed them on a permanent basis.
How is this happening at the same time Glenelg is being told their cap has been reduced owing to ongoing debt?
Surely in this situation the SANFL clubs should ALSO be allowed a marquee player, outside the current rules which apply to player recruitment, i.e. the cap?
I would suggest that the Crows and Power be made to pay for the 8 SANFL marquee players. Some clubs can only do so much with the existing cap while others are being told to tighten their belts, then the SANFL just gift the AFL reserves a ticket to go spend more money to compliment their million dollar lists? It is time the SANFL clubs were offered an equal concession.
The original rules were.
Both Port and Crows could have One leadership Player over the age of 28 that had previously played for the club. Ours was Ian Callinan and Ports was Henry Slattery. The rest of Crows top up players came from Amatuers and SANFL reserve players. The rest of Ports top up players came from players that were on the Magpies list at the time (This included Summerton) and players from Ports old zones. Technically Ports captain should have been Slattery lol.
And if memory serves, Summerton was placed on a longer term , back ended contract so that he could receive more than the nominated $200 per game or whatever it was that top ups were entitled to - and the SANFL immediately closed the loop on that happening down the track again.
In fairness to the SANFL, in making this decision they have obviously taken into account how the "Magpies" have struggled since they transitioned to an AFL reserves team.
by Reddeer » Tue Dec 19, 2017 3:26 pm
Hazydog wrote:sib wrote:therisingblues wrote:Incredible.
Originally only Port were allowed a marquee. And if my understanding was correct, he was to be temporary.
Now both AFL clubs are to be allowed them on a permanent basis.
How is this happening at the same time Glenelg is being told their cap has been reduced owing to ongoing debt?
Surely in this situation the SANFL clubs should ALSO be allowed a marquee player, outside the current rules which apply to player recruitment, i.e. the cap?
I would suggest that the Crows and Power be made to pay for the 8 SANFL marquee players. Some clubs can only do so much with the existing cap while others are being told to tighten their belts, then the SANFL just gift the AFL reserves a ticket to go spend more money to compliment their million dollar lists? It is time the SANFL clubs were offered an equal concession.
The original rules were.
Both Port and Crows could have One leadership Player over the age of 28 that had previously played for the club. Ours was Ian Callinan and Ports was Henry Slattery. The rest of Crows top up players came from Amatuers and SANFL reserve players. The rest of Ports top up players came from players that were on the Magpies list at the time (This included Summerton) and players from Ports old zones. Technically Ports captain should have been Slattery lol.
And if memory serves, Summerton was placed on a longer term , back ended contract so that he could receive more than the nominated $200 per game or whatever it was that top ups were entitled to - and the SANFL immediately closed the loop on that happening down the track again.
In fairness to the SANFL, in making this decision they have obviously taken into account how the "Magpies" have struggled since they transitioned to an AFL reserves team.
by Booney » Tue Dec 19, 2017 4:14 pm
Reddeer wrote:Hazydog wrote:sib wrote:therisingblues wrote:Incredible.
Originally only Port were allowed a marquee. And if my understanding was correct, he was to be temporary.
Now both AFL clubs are to be allowed them on a permanent basis.
How is this happening at the same time Glenelg is being told their cap has been reduced owing to ongoing debt?
Surely in this situation the SANFL clubs should ALSO be allowed a marquee player, outside the current rules which apply to player recruitment, i.e. the cap?
I would suggest that the Crows and Power be made to pay for the 8 SANFL marquee players. Some clubs can only do so much with the existing cap while others are being told to tighten their belts, then the SANFL just gift the AFL reserves a ticket to go spend more money to compliment their million dollar lists? It is time the SANFL clubs were offered an equal concession.
The original rules were.
Both Port and Crows could have One leadership Player over the age of 28 that had previously played for the club. Ours was Ian Callinan and Ports was Henry Slattery. The rest of Crows top up players came from Amatuers and SANFL reserve players. The rest of Ports top up players came from players that were on the Magpies list at the time (This included Summerton) and players from Ports old zones. Technically Ports captain should have been Slattery lol.
And if memory serves, Summerton was placed on a longer term , back ended contract so that he could receive more than the nominated $200 per game or whatever it was that top ups were entitled to - and the SANFL immediately closed the loop on that happening down the track again.
In fairness to the SANFL, in making this decision they have obviously taken into account how the "Magpies" have struggled since they transitioned to an AFL reserves team.
STRUGGLED You're joking surely
Competitions SANFL Official Site | Country Footy SA | Southern Football League | VFL Footy
Club Forums Snouts Louts | The Roost | Redlegs Forum |