The never ending No AFL in the SANFL whinge thread

[mots02]

He's not quoting you, he's quoting from the post before you.

I'm just quoting this so dedja can see it outside of his foe function...

[gazzamagoo]

Fukkit,
Eric will have to stay in his cupboard for a little while longer.

NO AFL IN THE SANFL!!

[dedja]

Fukkit,
Eric will have to stay in his cupboard for a little while longer.

NO AFL IN THE SANFL!!

Bring him out for the next televised match.

[am Bays]

Oh, well. Reserves at Elizabeth and League at the other end of the planet remains a live option. No wonder clubs find it hard to get and retain volunteers. Pure exploitation…….,

Reserves at Norwood, Seniors at Richmond this weekend

[Aerie]

Is there any stats with wins/losses relative to how many AFL listed players play?

[dedja]

Oh, well. Reserves at Elizabeth and League at the other end of the planet remains a live option. No wonder clubs find it hard to get and retain volunteers. Pure exploitation…….,

Reserves at Norwood, Seniors at Richmond this weekend

Far out, that’s further than Collingwood had to travel last week.

[knowledge]

Oh, well. Reserves at Elizabeth and League at the other end of the planet remains a live option. No wonder clubs find it hard to get and retain volunteers. Pure exploitation…….,

Reserves at Norwood, Seniors at Richmond this weekend

Last year, it was Reserves at Noarlunga and Seniors at Unley. This year, the brains trust have Reserves at Elizabeth and Seniors at Unley. Not to worry. wer'e all blessed with so many staff, it'll be a breeze.....

[mighty_tiger_79]

Is there any stats with wins/losses relative to how many AFL listed players play?

Good strike rate when I think 14+

[Jim05]

Is there any stats with wins/losses relative to how many AFL listed players play?

Good strike rate when I think 14+

Yeah, pretty sure there was some data on here a few years back that suggested 14+ was about the mark

[southernbulldog]

No decisions were made at this meeting, with the feedback to be discussed with all SANFL clubs and the SA Football Commission to determine what is best for the SANFL competition and football in South Australia.
Do Chandler and his cronies think proper SANFL fans are stupid of course a decision has been made and they have bent over and taken it as usual.I thought their role was to look after the proper 8 clubs not the AFL sooks.

[UK Fan]

It’s time for the $50k to be increased.

Bagged the league they are suppose to promote all season.

Inflation/interest rates are going up etc…

It’s not like crows can’t afford it.

[Pseudo]

Yeah, and what the smears pay should increase by 300%.

Oh, hang on....

[am Bays]

Yeah, and what the smears pay should increase by 300%.

Oh, hang on....

According to their own financial statements they can afford it now: https://www.portadelaidefc.com.au/news/ ... al-results

And given inflation I don’t think it is unreasonable if you consider the gold stand finance index the CBI (consumer Beer Index - the %age increase in a price of beer from 2014-2024) to expect an increase in the licence fee.

[goddy11]

The SANFL bending over a bit more from the sound of this.

https://www.themercury.com.au/sport/afl ... 9a2bfe92cd
SANFL to review list restrictions for Port Adelaide, Adelaide after their push for national reserves league​
The SANFL has revealed the next steps in mooted changes to help Port Adelaide and Adelaide be more competitive after peace talks avoided them abandoning the league.



The SANFL has confirmed it will review the list restrictions on Port Adelaide and Adelaide as part of a plan to keep the two clubs’ reserve sides playing in South Australia.
The Advertiser revealed on Thursday the clubs would continue to participate in the SANFL next year on the proviso the league addressed key concerns regarding top-up players and fixture equality.
The two clubs want to field stronger reserves’ sides to help bolster their development programs at the club in-line with the teams in the Victorian Football League.
The SANFL, which has strongly opposed a national reserves competition, confirmed on Friday talks on Wednesday with the Crows, Power and the AFL were productive.
SANFL chief executive Darren Chandler said the league would review the competition rules and “in particular the conditions that apply to the Adelaide and Port Adelaide Football clubs”.
It is expected Adelaide and Port Adelaide will also be given more consideration regarding their fixture requests to better manage their AFL emergencies and holdover players.

“Every year, the SANFL reviews the rules that apply to the Adelaide and Port Adelaide football clubs. This year, the review has been accelerated on the back of the AFL competitive balance review,” Chandler said.

“In reviewing these rules, the league remains committed to ensuring we continue to have the best competition outside of the AFL, and one in which every club can be competitive and have every chance of winning a premiership.

“SANFL has provided its detailed submission to the AFL, highlighting that it does not support a national reserves competition and that it believes the best structure for football in South Australia is to have the two AFL clubs in the SANFL competition.”
Chandler said the league would hold more talks with the other SANFL clubs before making recommendations to the commission for approval for 2025.

If Adelaide and Port Adelaide are not satisfied by the changes, they are certain to reignite their push to join the VFL in 2026.

“The SANFL will complete its review over the coming months, which will involve discussions with SANFL clubs, the AFL, Adelaide and Port Adelaide football clubs, other State Leagues and clubs around the nation,” Chandler said.

“As the oldest competition in the nation, established in 1877, we are extremely proud of the rich traditions of our State League competition and will ensure this is protected.

“We are also proud of SANFL’s reputation as being the best competition outside of the AFL and are committed to maintaining this position into the future.”

Port Adelaide and Adelaide remain anchored to the bottom spots on the SANFL ladder with only three wins from 19 matches combined.

[am Bays]

Same article basically

[Jim05]

I’d imagine they relax the requirements for top ups so that they can recruit ones recently delisted from the AFL

[Aerie]

I'd love to see this detailed submission. Should it be made available for the public? I think so.

We have most SANFL members NOT wanting AFL sides in the SANFL. We have the two AFL sides NOT wanting to compete in the SANFL. We understand the AFL don't want to spend any money that's not necessary on South Australian football. Then we have the SANFL against a Reserves competition and wanting the AFL sides to compete in the SANFL.

It's funny how the key players with the SANFL when the Reserves push came originally about 10 years ago - John Olsen and Chris Davies - very quickly became a part of the set up of Port and the Crows in the AFL.

Would it be wrong to say most administrators at the SANFL would see administration roles in the AFL as a step up for their career? Adam Kelly is another example.

So how much of this is self preservation and personal gain and how much of this is really what is better for football in South Australia? Surely the writing is on the wall. Surely it is time to put forward an exit strategy.

What about the SANFL clubs? We only had South and Central against the decision 10 years ago. The rest of the clubs told their members what the deal was via various members information evenings.

Port Adelaide has been white-anting South Australian football for 35 years. God knows why the SANFL would want anything to do with them. Let them bring in their crowds to Adelaide Oval to make funds for the SMA. Other than that, steer clear.

The Adelaide Crows are simply inept. The spoilt, useless, adult kid that has all the inheritance and no direction.

What are the SANFL doing?

[Dogs64]

I'd love to see this detailed submission. Should it be made available for the public? I think so.

We have most SANFL members NOT wanting AFL sides in the SANFL. We have the two AFL sides NOT wanting to compete in the SANFL. We understand the AFL don't want to spend any money that's not necessary on South Australian football. Then we have the SANFL against a Reserves competition and wanting the AFL sides to compete in the SANFL.

It's funny how the key players with the SANFL when the Reserves push came originally about 10 years ago - John Olsen and Chris Davies - very quickly became a part of the set up of Port and the Crows in the AFL.

Would it be wrong to say most administrators at the SANFL would see administration roles in the AFL as a step up for their career? Adam Kelly is another example.

So how much of this is self preservation and personal gain and how much of this is really what is better for football in South Australia? Surely the writing is on the wall. Surely it is time to put forward an exit strategy.

What about the SANFL clubs? We only had South and Central against the decision 10 years ago. The rest of the clubs told their members what the deal was via various members information evenings.

Port Adelaide has been white-anting South Australian football for 35 years. God knows why the SANFL would want anything to do with them. Let them bring in their crowds to Adelaide Oval to make funds for the SMA. Other than that, steer clear.

The Adelaide Crows are simply inept. The spoilt, useless, adult kid that has all the inheritance and no direction.

What are the SANFL doing?

Exactly, pity Roy Laird isn't on the commission, he's the only one I'd trust to put the SANFLs interests first.

[Hazydog]

?[/quote]
Exactly, pity Roy Laird isn't on the commission, he's the only one I'd trust to put the SANFLs interests first.[/quote]

He’s the last bloke who would be interested in joining a group of yes men

[Dogs64]

I'm so sick of hearing the spin from Koch and co. on the inequity facing their professional teams. Unfortunately, our SANFL commission seems insipid always bending over to the AFL clubs to the detriment of the competition they're appointed to "manage". Most SANFL supporters don't understand the logic of the SANFL wanting to retain the AFL reserves, in what was a failed change in 2014 for all stakeholders (except perhaps Norwood), by any measurement or indicators. If murmurings are true, that the SANFL is going to bend over yet again and provide further concessions to Port and Adelaie based on one poor season and given the AFL don't want Port or Adelaide in a National reserves comp, it will make it a greater farce.

In the nine seasons since the failed reserve's introduction (excluding 2020 Covid when they did not compete, WWT premiers v North) the facts are.

Grand Finals Played in and won
Norwood 3 2
Sturt 3 2
Glenelg 3 2
WWT 3 1
Port 3 0
North 2 1
West 1 1
Adelaide 0 0
South 0 0
Central 0 0

(If Port hadn't lost to Norwood by 4 points in the 2014 and had won, then they'd only be behind Sturt and Glenelg by one premiership won).

Finals series played in; Norwood 7, Sturt 7, WWT 6, Port 5, Adelaide 4, Glenelg 4, South 4, Central 4, North 3, West 1 Adelaide has one wooden spoon, Port none.
The AFL reserves teams have been more "successful" than their AFL teams. Port AFL has played in 4 of 9 and Adelaide 3 of 9 finals series. In 2020 when there were no reserves teams playing Port were minor premiers and Adelaide Wooden spooners.
What Port don't like to talk about is the 9 seasons prior to the AFL reserves entering they made the finals 3 out of 9 years, no Grand finals. So, their reserves team has performed better over 9 seasons than the Magpies did (with their recruitment zones, reserves and juniors). And from 2000 to 2013 playing in 5 of 14 finals series, no Grand Finals..
Hoping the SANFL call their bluff, ignore Koch the king of spin, and stick to the facts.