The never ending No AFL in the SANFL whinge thread

[Brendan M]

Back to the footy, two excellent (and physical) games on Sunday. Great to see three less fashionable, but no less authentic, clubs still in the race.

[wild dog]

Passions are rising.

His latest argument is that SANFL supporters had a go at Port over the tarps and the reason that Port supporters weren't going to games was because they were protesting how the club was being run. So SANFL supporters are hypocrites for protesting about the reserves and having a go at Port about the tarps.

He also said the Crows should be in on the same model as the Power and that the Power shouldn't lose their academy side because that's not fair to all the sons of Port greats that are in the team.

So Rucci is saying Power supporters boycotting games at West Lakes to protest about how Port Power was being run, is comparable to SANFL supporters boycotting games because it has become a reserves competition. Its an interesting proposition firstly, because I never knew that Power supporters were boycotting games. Is this well known?

Secondly, the argument from most on this site is that the SANFL is being boycotted due to issues of the competition integrity presented by the top up player issues, 3 club rules etc.. Officially however, crowd drops are being blamed on weather and the success of the revamped Oval. The boycott or worse still, loss of interest over the integrity issue is being totally dismissed. The only organisation brave enough to publically state it is Central Districts. The good thing about Ruccis argument to Cennals is that by making that hypocrite whinge and comparison, he is actually validating the integrity reason. By comparing the drop in Power crowds and SANFL crowds, he is acknowledging that SANFL crowds are dropping as a result of a boycott. If not, why would they be hypocrites?

I know of the two issues in my biased opinion, the so called Power boycott is conspiracy theory at its finest. Even if there was a fraction of a substantial element to it, the AFL was always there as Ports guarantor. There is no guarantor for the SANFL. If Rucci is sneering at genuine concern about competition integrity, it reflects poorly on his character and motivations.

[Booney]

Port supporters, like all football supporters, have an element of very fickle fans. Every club does, it's undeniable.

The reason Port fans weren't going to West Lakes is because :

1) We were shit through 09/10/11
2) We were playing a shit style of football
3) Because of 1) and 2) we got the worst draw as far as time slots went in the history of the world. Rightly so. You play shit in front of shit crowds you don't get prime time slots. In 2012 I remember having 5 of our 11 home games at 12:40 Sunday and 3 at 4:10 Sunday. It was horrible.

Rucci, as far as I can see here, is completely wrong. I don't know anyone who stayed away because of the administrators of the time.

[FlyingHigh]

Have heard the comment on a couple of very rare occasions supporters stayed away because they had to take a stand against the club, but don't know whether that meant administrators or on-field performances.
If true is an extreme cop-out from a club's supporters who the rest of us are told are unique and we show revere for their loyalty.

[johntheclaret]

So the apocalypse still hasn't happened!!! Why do you people keep blaming the AFL sides, I think you should clean up your own backyards first. How many of the other 8 teams have improved their membership base? Face the facts that the SANFL is just a breeding pond for the AFL.

SANFL always has and always will be a breeding ground for the AFL, we don't dispute that fact, but thats just part of the competition, its not the 100% sole purpose that Port and the Crows - and the AFL - would like. It should also be a genuine 2nd tier comp for 2nd tier players, either guys with AFL aspirations, retiring/delisted AFL players or grassroots footballers that want to play the highest level they can. Clubs that the local community can engage with in suburbia and support on an even playing field.

Sadly it is all skewed to the AFL wants...and thats what has pissed off many.

I remember when mods.... Oh never mind

[johntheclaret]

So you want a complete takeover. Typical port arrogace
Just go some where else. Sooner the better and for the SANFL sake it cant come quick enough

Well no he said the exisintt zone halved for Adelaide.

Booney maybe alot of things but he isnt an arrogant flog. Just a flog [emoji6]

It's ok stan, I'm used to people just shooting from the lip at me being a Port fan. I'd expect most to read before that fire a shot, but that's a dying skill too.

I read it and it is arrogant.
What you are saying is effectively dilute the SANFL even further by giving the Adelaide Crows 2 more squads, a Reserves Reserves squad and an Academy squad. Forget about zones.
That'd be even worse than it is now.
I'm never sure if you are genuine or just a clever troll sometimes Booney

[johntheclaret]

Back to the footy, two excellent (and physical) games on Sunday. Great to see three less fashionable, but no less authentic, clubs still in the race.

Whaaaaa ( in the voice of Mo Syslack)
The his is the whinge thread. There is no footy to get back to.

[Booney]

So you want a complete takeover. Typical port arrogace
Just go some where else. Sooner the better and for the SANFL sake it cant come quick enough

Well no he said the exisintt zone halved for Adelaide.

Booney maybe alot of things but he isnt an arrogant flog. Just a flog [emoji6]

It's ok stan, I'm used to people just shooting from the lip at me being a Port fan. I'd expect most to read before that fire a shot, but that's a dying skill too.

I read it and it is arrogant.
What you are saying is effectively dilute the SANFL even further by giving the Adelaide Crows 2 more squads, a Reserves Reserves squad and an Academy squad. Forget about zones.
That'd be even worse than it is now.
I'm never sure if you are genuine or just a clever troll sometimes Booney

First of all, you may have read it, but obviously not understood it, didn't understand it at all.I didn't say give the Adelaide FC two more squads. Port's Academy side plays in the SANFL reserves.

What I suggested was that before the SANFL split up Ports zones and realigned to the other SANFL clubs, I think it should have been split in two. Adelaide get half, and Port get half. No impact on the SANFL clubs zones, as they were.

From that zone Adelaide and Port obtain top up players to their SANFL sides, thus creating an SANFL league side and an SANFL reserves side for both teams. Surely this is better for the SANFL as a whole. None of this mess with the league and reserves sides playing completely different fixtures.

Then you could limit the amount of AFL listed players in the league at any time ( say 12-14 ) with the surplus playing SANFL reserves.

The top up players could be limited to under 23, not ever having been AFL listed or from another SANFL club, basically from the zones (half zone) only. One leadership player ( Summerton / Callinan ) only.

So before you call me arrogant or a troll, make sure you get what I'm saying.

[Wedgie]

Yeah JTC, think before you call him a clever troll next time.

[Booney]

Yeah JTC, think before you call him a clever troll next time.

Oh the irony.

[johntheclaret]

Well no he said the exisintt zone halved for Adelaide.

Booney maybe alot of things but he isnt an arrogant flog. Just a flog [emoji6]

It's ok stan, I'm used to people just shooting from the lip at me being a Port fan. I'd expect most to read before that fire a shot, but that's a dying skill too.

I read it and it is arrogant.
What you are saying is effectively dilute the SANFL even further by giving the Adelaide Crows 2 more squads, a Reserves Reserves squad and an Academy squad. Forget about zones.
That'd be even worse than it is now.
I'm never sure if you are genuine or just a clever troll sometimes Booney

First of all, you may have read it, but obviously not understood it, didn't understand it at all.I didn't say give the Adelaide FC two more squads. Port's Academy side plays in the SANFL reserves.

What I suggested was that before the SANFL split up Ports zones and realigned to the other SANFL clubs, I think it should have been split in two. Adelaide get half, and Port get half. No impact on the SANFL clubs zones, as they were.

From that zone Adelaide and Port obtain top up players to their SANFL sides, thus creating an SANFL league side and an SANFL reserves side for both teams. Surely this is better for the SANFL as a whole. None of this mess with the league and reserves sides playing completely different fixtures.

Then you could limit the amount of AFL listed players in the league at any time ( say 12-14 ) with the surplus playing SANFL reserves.

The top up players could be limited to under 23, not ever having been AFL listed or from another SANFL club, basically from the zones (half zone) only. One leadership player ( Summerton / Callinan ) only.

So before you call me arrogant or a troll, make sure you get what I'm saying.

Or better still change Ports rules to match Adelaide and get rid of the academy side altogether, no home games and a £50k contribution.
That would solve the issue of playing completely different teams.
As for limiting AFL listed players, that should be a given anyway. No more than 14 max, assuming we re going to be stuck with the AFL Reserves.
Your arrogance is that you think Port has the right model and Adelaide should get it too.

[UK Fan]

Passions are rising.

His latest argument is that SANFL supporters had a go at Port over the tarps and the reason that Port supporters weren't going to games was because they were protesting how the club was being run. So SANFL supporters are hypocrites for protesting about the reserves and having a go at Port about the tarps.

The man loves a strawman argument.

So Port fans were protesting how useless Primus Haysman and Duncanson were Rucci ?????

Interesting that you did nothing but defend the ineptness of the above three whilst they were in charge and blamed everyone else(SANFL/SANFL Clubs) for Ports plight. But now when it suits your argument your happy to re-write history.


Your fans didnt go cos they are frontrunners. Always have been always will be.


SANFL fans are protesting what your club with SANFL approval did to our league /clubs.

Speak to the so easily forgotten Port Magpies fans for clarification.

If Port Magpies fans refuse to support Port reserves concept.

Why should opposition SANFL Fans???

[Booney]

So Adelaide's model is better?

[Booney]

Or better still change Ports rules to match Adelaide and get rid of the academy side altogether, no home games and a £50k contribution.
That would solve the issue of playing completely different teams.
As for limiting AFL listed players, that should be a given anyway. No more than 14 max, assuming we re going to be stuck with the AFL Reserves.
Your arrogance is that you think Port has the right model and Adelaide should get it too.

You still don't get it, do you?

If neither side has a team in the reserves competition then when Port v South takes place, who does South's two's play if Port has no SANFL reserves side? Who does West's two's play if the league is playing Adelaide, kapish?

[cennals05]

Or better still change Ports rules to match Adelaide and get rid of the academy side altogether, no home games and a £50k contribution.
That would solve the issue of playing completely different teams.
As for limiting AFL listed players, that should be a given anyway. No more than 14 max, assuming we re going to be stuck with the AFL Reserves.
Your arrogance is that you think Port has the right model and Adelaide should get it too.

You still don't get it, do you?

If neither side has a team in the reserves competition then when Port v South takes place, who does South's two's play if Port has no SANFL reserves side? Who does West's two's play if the league is playing Adelaide, kapish?

South and West Reserves can play each other.

[Booney]

Or better still change Ports rules to match Adelaide and get rid of the academy side altogether, no home games and a £50k contribution.
That would solve the issue of playing completely different teams.
As for limiting AFL listed players, that should be a given anyway. No more than 14 max, assuming we re going to be stuck with the AFL Reserves.
Your arrogance is that you think Port has the right model and Adelaide should get it too.

You still don't get it, do you?

If neither side has a team in the reserves competition then when Port v South takes place, who does South's two's play if Port has no SANFL reserves side? Who does West's two's play if the league is playing Adelaide, kapish?

South and West Reserves can play each other.

So Souths or Wests reserves play at a different ground or on a different day to the league? How will that work with support staff, coaches, etc etc?

[cennals05]

Or better still change Ports rules to match Adelaide and get rid of the academy side altogether, no home games and a £50k contribution.
That would solve the issue of playing completely different teams.
As for limiting AFL listed players, that should be a given anyway. No more than 14 max, assuming we re going to be stuck with the AFL Reserves.
Your arrogance is that you think Port has the right model and Adelaide should get it too.

You still don't get it, do you?

If neither side has a team in the reserves competition then when Port v South takes place, who does South's two's play if Port has no SANFL reserves side? Who does West's two's play if the league is playing Adelaide, kapish?

South and West Reserves can play each other.

So Souths or Wests reserves play at a different ground or on a different day to the league? How will that work with support staff, coaches, etc etc?

They can play before either the South or West League game as they won't have games before them.

[UK Fan]

Or better still change Ports rules to match Adelaide and get rid of the academy side altogether, no home games and a £50k contribution.
That would solve the issue of playing completely different teams.
As for limiting AFL listed players, that should be a given anyway. No more than 14 max, assuming we re going to be stuck with the AFL Reserves.
Your arrogance is that you think Port has the right model and Adelaide should get it too.

You still don't get it, do you?

If neither side has a team in the reserves competition then when Port v South takes place, who does South's two's play if Port has no SANFL reserves side? Who does West's two's play if the league is playing Adelaide, kapish?

We dont get it.

How about "Who gives a shite about reserves".

Hopefully you can figure the rest out.

[PatowalongaPirate]

Maybe the crowserves and powerserves can play each other every week? This would solve some problems.

[Booney]

So Souths or Wests reserves play at a different ground or on a different day to the league? How will that work with support staff, coaches, etc etc?

They can play before either the South or West League game as they won't have games before them.

West v Adelaide at Richmond. South v Port at Noarlunga.

West v South reserves at Richmond or Noarlunga. So the league and reserves of one club is playing at a different venue to the other. So coaches, support staff have to be in two places in one day?