The never ending No AFL in the SANFL whinge thread

[StrayDog]

Just reiterating the SANFL's place nowadays is the lead in ABC news bulletin report on the competition this morning:

"In the SANFL, Brad Crouch is unlikely to play again this season..."

I dunno, the near bottom Bays beating the reigning premiers and premiership fancy might have been a good lead.

Yeah, I heard that this morning on 891 and was thinking the same thing.

In context, FWIW, this is the same mob that spent about twenty minutes leading into the 7:30 news brief this morning stroking off over last night's episode of a commercial television talent quest.

[Mic]

Darryl
"I am sitting at the game and think it is so sad watching so many kids at a SANFL game wearing crows guernseys which is not good for the SANFL competition going forward is the club reconsidering voting the crows and power out of the SANFL?"

Football Operations
"Hi Darryl, even though the conditions of entry are reviewed annually, I’m not sure the clubs will get another vote any time soon on that. I suggest the opportunity for that to occur will come about if the AFL set up an AFL Reserves competition nationally."

-Posted on North's website's Virtual Runner page.

[wild dog]

Nothing like being proactive.

[Pseudo]

Had a look in the Sunday Mail today to find some match previews.

Found some two page spreads on the local arsehole teams in the Victorian league. Found some whole-page articles given over to matches between interstate teams in the Victorian league; several of these in the second half of the sport liftout, behind the race details. A couple of opinion pieces by native South Australians on the state of the Victorian league. Results of U/18 matches tucked away on pg 52 among results from the suburban leagues. Ben Hook's sad excuse for a column.

No SANFL preview.

A full round of games being played on the Sunday, and not one word about it in the print media. Not even a recognition of "today's games" under the ladder on page 29.

Is this the "increased media exposure" that our club delegates swore would be forthcoming once the garbage teams were admitted into the league?

[PhilH]

Pseudo, it WAS there, about 1/4 of a page near the top of Page 50, you did have to look hard to find it.

[Pseudo]

Cheers Phil, found it now.

Nevertheless the point remains: a few token paragraphs with the coach of one of the eight clubs does not a SANFL preview make.

[prowling panther]

Cheers Phil, found it now.

Nevertheless the point remains: a few token paragraphs with the coach of one of the eight clubs does not a SANFL preview make.

Very disappointing the Sunday Mail reports on our competition maybe a free helicopter ride for the sports editor could persuade him.

"The last time I took a helicopter to a Liberal function was during the Vietnam War"

[spell_check]

Thought I'd keep this thread going by posting the following. The number of AFL listed players for the Adelaide reserves team by match; the opposition; and the margin of the match. To add colour, yellow is a win, grey is a loss, and the fawny colour is a draw

[johntheclaret]

In that case they should be limited to no more than 13 next year and kicked out the year after

[Jim05]

In that case they should be limited to no more than 13 next year and kicked out the year after

It seems like we wont have the balls to kick them out so limit them to no more than 11 and if they dont like it they can leave on their own free will. Win, win situation.
Would also tighten finals qualification to 50/50, once you have played more AFL than SANFL you are ineligible

[Hazydog]

In that case they should be limited to no more than 13 next year and kicked out the year after

It seems like we wont have the balls to kick them out so limit them to no more than 11 and if they dont like it they can leave on their own free will. Win, win situation.
Would also tighten finals qualification to 50/50, once you have played more AFL than SANFL you are ineligible

I'm as anti AFL in the SANFL as anyone- but limiting how many listed players they could use would surely complete the farce wouldn't it? Where would half a dozen of them that were ineligible play?

[Jim05]

In that case they should be limited to no more than 13 next year and kicked out the year after

It seems like we wont have the balls to kick them out so limit them to no more than 11 and if they dont like it they can leave on their own free will. Win, win situation.
Would also tighten finals qualification to 50/50, once you have played more AFL than SANFL you are ineligible

I'm as anti AFL in the SANFL as anyone- but limiting how many listed players they could use would surely complete the farce wouldn't it? Where would half a dozen of them that were ineligible play?

Who cares where they play, not our problem. If we cant get them out of the comp our number 1 priority should be making sure there is no chance of them winning a flag or being competitive. You think attendence is low now, wait until one of them wins a Premiership

[Dutchy]

Thought I'd keep this thread going by posting the following. The number of AFL listed players for the Adelaide reserves team by match; the opposition; and the margin of the match. To add colour, yellow is a win, grey is a loss, and the fawny colour is a draw

Nice one Spelly, has already hit John Casey's twitter.

[Ian]

In that case they should be limited to no more than 13 next year and kicked out the year after

It seems like we wont have the balls to kick them out so limit them to no more than 11 and if they dont like it they can leave on their own free will. Win, win situation.
Would also tighten finals qualification to 50/50, once you have played more AFL than SANFL you are ineligible

I'm as anti AFL in the SANFL as anyone- but limiting how many listed players they could use would surely complete the farce wouldn't it? Where would half a dozen of them that were ineligible play?

Who cares

[Ian]

Thought I'd keep this thread going by posting the following. The number of AFL listed players for the Adelaide reserves team by match; the opposition; and the margin of the match. To add colour, yellow is a win, grey is a loss, and the fawny colour is a draw

Crows top up.PNG (5.1 KiB) Viewed 2499 times

That is pretty damning, even the most pro ressies in the SANFL supporters would have to agree that's concerning


Can you provide the same for the Pap's ressies?

[CENTURION]

copied from the CDFC forum.
Port's actual line up saturday had 4 players omitted from their named side on Thursday evening. 3 of the 4 are afl listed .. Mitchell, Austin and Wagner. Haarsma, a top up player, was also omitted but played in their academy side. The rules for Port, according to the sanfl website, are "All PAFC AFL listed players (including Rookie listed) to play with the Port Adelaide Magpies support team should they not be in the Port Adelaide AFL team." Wagner is 189 cm, Austin is 195 cm. By omitting these two, instead of two top up players, port had a better balanced side for the conditions. All their top up players were shorter than these two. I think they bent the rules this game. Or did Wagner and Austin (and Mitchell) all suddenly develop injuries just prior to the game?

[stan]

Thought I'd keep this thread going by posting the following. The number of AFL listed players for the Adelaide reserves team by match; the opposition; and the margin of the match. To add colour, yellow is a win, grey is a loss, and the fawny colour is a draw

Crows top up.PNG

That is pretty damning, even the most pro ressies in the SANFL supporters would have to agree that's concerning


Can you provide the same for the Pap's ressies?

Pretty much as you would expect. The more AFL listed players they have the better they are.

Although in Ports case it maybe different. Surely thy only get better if Butcher was out of the side.

[stan]

copied from the CDFC forum.
Port's actual line up saturday had 4 players omitted from their named side on Thursday evening. 3 of the 4 are afl listed .. Mitchell, Austin and Wagner. Haarsma, a top up player, was also omitted but played in their academy side. The rules for Port, according to the sanfl website, are "All PAFC AFL listed players (including Rookie listed) to play with the Port Adelaide Magpies support team should they not be in the Port Adelaide AFL team." Wagner is 189 cm, Austin is 195 cm. By omitting these two, instead of two top up players, port had a better balanced side for the conditions. All their top up players were shorter than these two. I think they bent the rules this game. Or did Wagner and Austin (and Mitchell) all suddenly develop injuries just prior to the game?

Austin would have struggled but Wagner at 189 isnt that big really. Probably would have gone ok except hes not hat great.

Maybe Austin was a late withdraw which happens. Mitchell is a runner so you would think if he wasnt playing he was injured in those conditions. Maybe keeping one player over for the AFL team emergency. Austin is also a young player who has had some injuries and maybe thy decided to cotton wool him a bit due to the conditions which poins more to the farce issue than then trying to get a better side on the park.

[Harry the Horse]

Had a look in the Sunday Mail today to find some match previews.

Found some two page spreads on the local arsehole teams in the Victorian league. Found some whole-page articles given over to matches between interstate teams in the Victorian league; several of these in the second half of the sport liftout, behind the race details. A couple of opinion pieces by native South Australians on the state of the Victorian league. Results of U/18 matches tucked away on pg 52 among results from the suburban leagues. Ben Hook's sad excuse for a column.

No SANFL preview.

A full round of games being played on the Sunday, and not one word about it in the print media. Not even a recognition of "today's games" under the ladder on page 29.

Is this the "increased media exposure" that our club delegates swore would be forthcoming once the garbage teams were admitted into the league?

We all knew what would happen and so it has proved.
And now , the reality is the SANFL no longer even warrants much of the space it is getting. An aggregate crowd for the round of just over 7000 proves that.
It is now Messenger fodder and not much else.
It still has a small cult following but that will continue to wane.
Not enough people give a $h1t.
Leigh, John, Brenton, Steven, Rob, Keith, David, Joe, Nick, Bohdan, Kurt etc ... well done to you all.

[LPH]

Can't say they weren't given fair warning

"You'll be back" - how's that working for ya Kurt?

Sad days indeed