"Major Correction" needed in the SANFL - Leigh Whicker

[Big Phil]

EDIT - Silly attempt at a joke about something that is common knowledge, as per Wedgies post

[DOC]

I don't think he has to name the team involved *edited by mods* he want to if you know what I'm saying

PHIL: What does this mean?

[Booney]

It means the moderators edited what Phil had originally written.

[DOC]

It means the moderators edited what Phil had originally written.

Fair enough, but, it now does not make any sense.

[Wedgie]

I dont know what Big Phil said but its pretty common knowledge around the traps the club in question when it comes to the rumour is Norwood.

[ElizabethVCRThief]

It means the moderators edited what Phil had originally written.

Fair enough, but, it now does not make any sense.

Bear in mind it was a post by Phil, so it probably didn't make any sense to start with

[Big Phil]

It means the moderators edited what Phil had originally written.

Fair enough, but, it now does not make any sense.

Bear in mind it was a post by Phil, so it probably didn't make any sense to start with

Ha ha ha...

Because everything you post makes sense as well

[DOC]

So Norwood as well. I wonder if the club who appeared today at West Lakes had anything to say to their bitter rivals.

[SimonH]

There's been a whole lot of vague references, but can anyone point me to anything concrete about a changed/recuded salary cap for this year/ future years?

Running the SANFL comp these days should be pretty easy. Just ask yourself, 'Will the AFL like it?' If the answer's 'Yes', the idea is probably no good for the comp.

[Tassie Blues]

If it is anyone other than Centrals is the club in question they should be kicked out of the competition not for breaking the salary cap rules but for breaking the rules and still not winning the flag!

[Adelaide Hawk]

If it is anyone other than Centrals is the club in question they should be kicked out of the competition not for breaking the salary cap rules but for breaking the rules and still not winning the flag!

There's a second club as well, and you'd be amazed who that is. Let's just say there are two clubs who aren't as good at doctoring books as some others.

[Squawk]

According to C7 news tonight, the two AFL clubs are somewhat grumpy at the size of the dividend that they pay to SANFL clubs and what the clubs are spending it on.....

What a joke. The SANFL clubs own the two licences and in any case, why should they be dictated to when it comes to spending the money they get?

And all this talk about the 7 clubs who made a loss this year yet when was the last time the Power made a quid?

[topsywaldron]

the two AFL clubs are somewhat grumpy at the size of the dividend that they pay to SANFL clubs

Poor lambs. My heart bleeds for them.

Do the Po'er actually pay a dividend?

[Pseudo]

According to C7 news tonight, the two AFL clubs are somewhat grumpy at the size of the dividend that they pay to SANFL clubs and what the clubs are spending it on.....

The two AFL clubs are cordially invited to F*** Right Off.

After giving the SANFL the money which is rightfully theirs, of course.

[Barto]

According to C7 news tonight, the two AFL clubs are somewhat grumpy at the size of the dividend that they pay to SANFL clubs and what the clubs are spending it on.....

The two AFL clubs are cordially invited to F*** Right Off.

After giving the SANFL the money which is rightfully theirs, of course.

Especially the Crows. Seem to have forgotten where they came from.. again.

[Hondo]

According to C7 news tonight, the two AFL clubs are somewhat grumpy at the size of the dividend that they pay to SANFL clubs and what the clubs are spending it on.....

What a joke. The SANFL clubs own the two licences and in any case, why should they be dictated to when it comes to spending the money they get?

And all this talk about the 7 clubs who made a loss this year yet when was the last time the Power made a quid?

The SANFL own the licences, not the clubs. The clubs play in the comp controlled by the SANFL but don't, as a group, actually own the AFL licences.

Port actually paid $335K to the SANFL last year, plus the SANFL shares in the match day revenues from AAMI Stadium. Expense to the AFL clubs, income to the SANFL.

Port & Crows have to pay these dividends but don't want to see it wasted on possible excesses by the SANFL clubs. Hypothetical analogy - if you personally had to pay money to someone that was meant to benefit they (ie, child support) but they wasted it on unnecessary things you'd be concerned surely?

[nickname]

Aren't the SANFL/Commission putting a cool million into the Power to prop them up?

[smac]

Port & Crows have to pay these dividends but don't want to see it wasted on possible excesses by the SANFL clubs. Hypothetical analogy - if you personally had to pay money to someone that was meant to benefit they (ie, child support) but they wasted it on unnecessary things you'd be concerned surely?

The analogy is a good one, but if there was supposed to be some restriction on what it was spent on then that should be in the agreement. Once I pay my child support, my ex-wife does with it as she pleases. The SANFL clubs should be able to do the same unless the SANFL alters the agreement surrounding the dividend.

[Hondo]

Aren't the SANFL/Commission putting a cool million into the Power to prop them up?

No evidence of that in their financial report .... have you had a look at it? I'll stand corrected if you can show me some evidence of this.

SMAC ... I agree with your point. I think "taking an interest in how their dividends are spent" has turned into "dictating" via chinese whispers/internet forums!

I'd like to look at the SANFL financials if anybody has access to them - they aren't on the SANFL website.

[nickname]

Their financial report would only cover the last financial year presumably. The injection of money has been agreed upon.