How is the percentage worked out on sportingpulse?

Salisbury B's 124 for, 21 against - 85%?

Wouldnt it be 590%?

I may be too dumb to work it out, but i thought it is For / Against x 100.

That's the Victorian way, a bit like white behind posts, 4 premiership points and banana kicks

All foreign to me

For the life of me can't work out why these clubs keep taking these guys back, they go from club to club around the port and surrounds. Rosewater's a grade on weekend 5 out of 22 from prelim final 18 months ago.massive turnover of players and clubs just don't seem to think ahead.they think short term success is the key to good club. most coaches think of themselves and their own success. They know they have small window of opportunity for a premiership and will accept all and pay whatever they think is needed.the clubs may still be there in years to come but the floaters that come and go are the reason clubs like Kilburn Brahma Lodge Rosewater West Croydon Mitchell Park Salisbury West etc good 1 year and bad for next 3. the floaters dont care as they move on again and don't actually care how the clubs are left. Until the clubs have some balls and address these problems they will continue in the same manner and only a matter of time until some clubs are gone. Kilburn were very close salisbury west have gone close wingfield gone. frustrates the hell out of me that these clubs keep going over same mistakes continually and don't learn.

and why do coaches still continue to put guys in the paper as best when they have played minimal game time and clearly not in the best? do they think other clubs don't know who the good players are in each side these days?

and feel sorry for the guys who have to hear the usual bullsh*t coachs say " if you do the preseason you'll get picked and the guys that don't won't start, this year we have the numbers so they can't just turn up when they want" but yet round 1 have guys who train 1 and "float" in from other clubs picked in higher grades and ones that hardly missed don't get game - and no I'm not a player, just can't stand bullsh*t

:shock:

What is this, I don't even

Well, well , well word on the ol facebook grapevine is another "star quality player" set to leave SFL!! Unbelievable! Great player and if true will be a Huge void to fill, his ex club needs to have a good hard look at themselves.
Huge breaking news, great contribution to this forum, you should be commended...

Give us a name or it's rubbish

Have to love Mawson Lakes form, we have been trying to get a clearance for a "c" grader. Looks like they are going to take the 10 day's before we even get a answer and we have rang them only to get the run around. :shock: The lad going to miss 2 games.

Had all pre-season to get the clearance submitted

Who's WE? (assuming FP) I didn't even realise you were playing back in town :lol:

I see the scores have been wiped but womens intuition tells me that this may not be the last we hear of it.

only the last couple of years!

That's why I knew what happened, we were told about it Sunday, Why won't it be the last we hear of it? The rule is there in black and white!

Nothing here says they broke a rule:

16 SANFL PLAYERS PLAYING IN SAAFL
16.1 A player who is registered in accordance with Clause 10.2 and whom plays for a team competing in the SANFL competition shall not require a transfer to resume playing for the Member Club to whom they are registered provided they have previously been transferred to their Member Club from their immediate last Australian Football club.
16.2 A player who is listed on an SANFL club’s 1 - 35 player list in the current playing season shall submit written permission from his SANFL club to The League prior to him playing for his Member Club.
16.3 When a registered player of a Member Club plays a league or reserves match for an SANFL club, which then has a bye in the following SANFL minor round, such player shall not play (with the exception of The League Under 18’s Divisions) in that round for such player’s Member Club or for any other Member Club unless the player has played a combined minimum total of twenty five (25) or more Senior and Junior matches with such Member Club.
(a) The player shall submit written permission from his SANFL Club to The League prior to him playing for his Member Club.
(b) Junior football is deemed as matches played from the year in which the player turns 13 years of age.
16.4 On a SANFL bye round, players playing in SANFL Under 18’s may play with their Member Club in any Division after advising in writing and receiving approval from The League prior to him playing for his Member Club.
16.5 An SANFL state match where the SANFL clubs do not play is considered as a SANFL club bye.

16.1 - no transfer needed, resuming playing for existing member club
16.2 - not on 1-35 player list as they are top-up players
16.3 - there was no bye, so this is not relevant
16.4 - not U/18 or bye, so not relevant
16.5 - no state match

Is there another rule?

Dutchy wrote:If you are interested in developing your kids to play Saturday football then it is critical, without it kids miss out on playing footy.

Problem is a number of clubs are not developing kids to play Saturday football, they are disregarding Saturday football completely

saintal wrote:Sedan-Cambrai knocked off Gum by 5 goals. Won the B grade by 10 goals also. Well done SC.

Gum with a few problems it seems.

Wow, great effort by a team that was kicked out briefly for not being competitive enough

anyone from ironbank confirm or deny winners of an triple m competition were driven up to ironbank to hear the great man jars address his troops before the game against blackwood? surely this is a joke
No, true. It's about grassroots footy so why wouldn't you use Jars? They also had lunch etc on the way up. A bit of exposure for HFL too.

At least the exposure is for the right reasons, not to make headlines about a club in trouble ala Aldinga, Callington, Port Elliot etc

Growing rumours around that this was a pre-planned move by Brahma Lodge, going back as early as December... Just so happened the stars aligned for Brahma with the 0-3 start and the work was an easy excuse to use to get rid of him.

Wanted only for his sponsorship and ability to recruit players, I'm told 2x replacement coaches were contacted and signed last year for when this happened.
Please kick this peanut off of SA Footy FC.

Everyone seems a bit too sensitive

BLFC have not released anything, so either he is still the coach or it is just laziness/amateur on their part. Nothing even on their Facebook page.

If there is no media release, then it is up to the public to fill in the gaps - this is significant place for speculation, so if there is no official word then it is fair game.

Play on!

Footy Chick wrote:Says you.

Says common sense.

Heard talk of this last night , I'm speechless ,dumbfounded and disappointed , personally I would rather win the spoon than resort to this

Understand the sentiment, but without bending the rules I am not sure how you are going to keep recruiting Tiwi Island boys, unless they are coming to play B-Grade.

I hear there is a certain peanut that likes to get up in the face of a certain AFL coach plays for a team in the SFL that wears the same colours!
I hope he is ready to cop it!!!
Wonder if his teammates will Help ...

Good publicity for the Hackham Football Club :roll: - http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/sport/afl/luke-helps-man-at-centre-of-confrontation-with-alastair-clarkson-a-hawk-at-heart/story-fnii00l5-1227326244720?sv=50d8e70997df8952ff722fe7f364939b

Heard talk of this last night , I'm speechless ,dumbfounded and disappointed , personally I would rather win the spoon than resort to this

Understand the sentiment, but without bending the rules I am not sure how you are going to keep recruiting Tiwi Island boys, unless they are coming to play B-Grade.
Nothing to do with Tiwi lads we only have Moreen (1pt) , think it's more about the imbalance should Johncock (2) and Betts (3) both be called up to Crows SANFL duties ,having 3 of our players on the Crows top up list creates all sorts of scenarios week to week ,
Regardless Of the reasoning I'm against this course of action
Seriously just f**k the whole points system off , it's a load of crap , the game survived 125 yrs without it , clubs can't attract quality players to the comp because of it ,sponsors and members deserve better for their money ,
Wouldn't it be nice if the Redcoats had the lollies to tell the CFL to shove the points and let the clubs get on with it
:butthead:
Oh well it is what it is and we have to get on with it ](*,) ](*,) :weedman:

The point system can work if it's followed. Look at the results in the GSFL. No club has ever been awarded extra points since it's inception.
Is there any difference to before the points system? I didn't know there was a problem that needed restrictions like that.

If that's correct, then I think a lot less of Russell Ebert than I did previously. If there's no significant or demonstrable link between a life member and that club, then it really cheapens the whole idea of it. I couldn't imagine Russell accepting this, unless of course he's not even aware that he's now a life member!!

I guess it comes down to each clubs own conscience as to how this occurs, but if I was on the committee of a club, I certainly would vote against it and actively encourage others to as well.

The situation has been created by the poorly justified points system which unnaturally restricts clubs ability to recruit. As a result it encourages clubs to unnaturally modify their own rules to cater for it.

It could be argued it is less ethical to leave out a deserving player in favour of an undeserving/lesser player just to fit under a points cap, than it is to present an undeserving person with a particular award or honour. If this is true about Noarlunga, they have modified a "ceremonial" club rule (i.e. Criteria for Life Membership) rather than modifying an "operational" club rule (i.e. Selection Policy).

As most will know, I am not a fan of the APPS. Anything that exposes the farce it is, can be helpful.

I noticed someone suggesting that existing Life Members at Noarlunga would be unhappy, I am sure that unhappiness will quickly dissipate if it results in them winning a premiership. Club > Individual.

Are you for real Jet Airport? This is worse than I thought. :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock:

Maybe those board members should get their head out their a** and look at what is actually happening. Have heard they are "not wanting players to run the club" but time to admit you stuffed up and fix the situation before you lose more players, supporters and sponsors

Can cope with losing games but can't cope with people who are happy to be there for the glory but when the tough calls need to be made they are only there for the free p*ss. If you cant do your job then get out and let someone else who has some b*lls do it instead. :evil:

I remember the days when Happy Valley did not contribute to this forum. Now they fight it out here for everyone to see - one extreme to the other!

Im obviously not involved with HV, as I am a BDOSFC person, but I think people are very quick to have a crack at the new coach.
Surely there is more involved in the success of a club than just a coach. It is the football operations dept. the playing list, the club culture, the $ being spent.
There is a saying I would possibly use to help defend the new coach "It doesn't matter how much you polish a turd, it is never going to turn into a diamond".

I think a new coach walking into a depleted side should be given at least a year or 2 before the wolves are set on him. Or at least given the chance to show progress. but that just IMO

Taking over a team that has lost a grand total of 6 games over the past 3 seasons was always going to be hiding to nothing.
Very hard to match the predecessor's record and any slip and suddenly you are the fault.

Add to that a number of people used to having the going easy now jumping off because it's a little bit harder just increases the pressure.

Footy Chick wrote:

Lightning McQueen wrote:

Zartan wrote:Think he's talking about the Knowles's?

Is Knowles schizophrenic? He stated "both".

someone had a man's look - read the top of the page

Sexist comments have no place on this forum

No, he won't be in the box next Saturday but he wasn't sacked. He is enduring severe depression , which he wants to resolve and has resigned.
The coach last year also resigned, under a different circumstance. But no one has been sacked.
Not a great outcome balak sort ya shit out the league can't afford issues like this on top of the form
of the reigning premiers
http://blog.theregularguynyc.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/DUDE-WTF-IS-WRONG-WITH-YOU.jpg

No, he won't be in the box next Saturday but he wasn't sacked. He is enduring severe depression , which he wants to resolve and has resigned.
The coach last year also resigned, under a different circumstance. But no one has been sacked.
Not a great outcome balak sort ya shit out the league can't afford issues like this on top of the form
of the reigning premiers
http://blog.theregularguynyc.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/DUDE-WTF-IS-WRONG-WITH-YOU.jpg
Not sure what you're making a big deal about but if you're concerned about me saying he is struggling with depression, that was his wish, that people know the reason behind his resignation, to stifle the bullshit stories that can arise if you are too ambiguous with these things.
To me, I think it's good he's willing to put it out there. Dunno, maybe I'm wrong.
No I was referring to the hairy cat that responded to you.

So Mitchell Park were cheating, yet believe it to be unsportsmanlike by Angle Vale to call them out on it.

The radio show "Siren to Siren" is avoiding any mention of the biggest news story this week. 35 minutes in and no discussion about the sacked coach yet. Time to review the make up of the panel, it's not all sunshine & butterflies all the time.

Interesting that the facebook sacking announcement has been taken down, I guess they didn't appreciate the media interest!

We live in a media driven society, if smart they could turn it into free advertising by talking about what type of replacement they are looking for and giving the journalist the right lines that would be quoted. Instead they have come across in a bit of a negative light. Was obvious it would generate interest considering the media circus created last year by Aldinga.

Relegation table: (pos. change)
Hahndorf - 105 (-)
Blackwood - 93 (-)
Uraidla Districts - 91 (-)
Lobethal - 84 (+1)
Mount Barker - 69 (-1)
Torrens Valley - 60 (-)
Mount Lofty District - 57 (-)
Ironbank-Cherry Gardens - 55 (-)
Echunga - 45 (-)
Onkaparinga Valley - 31 (-)

Fight it as hard as you can. The SFL has a hybrid (some participating in the Saturday program, some in the Sunday separate program, some both, some none) - it is an absolute clusterf***
Yeah I know SFL folk hate their junior program being so different from the senior one. What do we do if clubs like Uraidla & Torrens Valley can't field juniors though.

I thought fielding juniors was a requirement of Division 1, where is there a problem?
I know you're just saying that to cause controversy, you know damn well the problem with it.

Why should Onkaparinga Valley or Echunga get relegated this year when they do the right thing and field all grades, if there are others that don't?

Would this work

Division 1

Reynella
Flaggies
Morphett Vale
Noarlunga
Happy Valley
Brighton
Porties
Cove

Division 2

MParks
Edwardstown
Christies
Hackham
Aldinga
Marion
OSB

Explanation is that most of the Div 1 clubs have a full compliment of juniors plus are reasonably successful this year and.in the last 3 years.

Div 2 clubs well Morphy Parks, Edwardstown are stiff because they are going well in the As but in my.opinion they dont qualify for Div 1 unless they make more of an effort to get Saturday juniors. Christies do have a full compliment and good on Cratey and the club for building it up this well but i have them in Div 2 based on A grade performances especially this year.

Only 4 of your "Div 1" clubs have full juniors, so your reasoning for Morphy Park & Edwardstown being down conflicts with having CB down.

As for solving the problem of scores, these results would still occur:

Div 1
Reynella 14.12 (96) d Noarlunga 5.6 (36)
Reynella 24.14 (158) d Happy Valley 5.4 (34)
Port Noarlunga 18.8 (116) d Happy Valley 8.9 (57)
Reynella 31.21 (207) d Cove 6.8 (44)

Div 2
Morphettville Park 35.20 (230) d Lonsdale 9.10 (64)
Morphettville Park 13.14 (92) d Marion 5.11 (41)
Morphettville Park 21.20 (146) d Aldinga 3.8 (26)
Edwardstown 26.11 (167) d Hackham 10.11 (71)

But at least we would avoid the embarrassment of "Div 1" teams being beaten by "Div 2" teams like these:
Morphettville Park 12.15 (87) d Brighton 9.18 (72)
Christies Beach 7.12 (54) d Happy Valley 4.12 (36)

It's only 7 weeks in, it's not like we have Hamley Bridge, Kangarilla, Sedan Cambrai, Flinders University or North pines in our comp

The facts are that the majority of clubs voted for the change to u15/17 - the league for whatever reason decided to overrule it.


I also find it interesting (and somewhat disappointing) that 3 of the 6 clubs that voted against it failed to field all three grades this season (Cove, Hackham & Morphettville Park).

It could be 13/14/15/16/17 or 13/14/15/17 but 15/17 on a Saturday. 15/17/B/A is attainable for every club on a consistent basis.

I understand Flaggies concern- you have a brilliant junior setup the envy of most clubs i am sure. I know you work hard and are well run but you also have a great catchment zone. We are drawing from a much smaller area - although our numbers are smaller it doesn't mean we are not working hard.

At the moment 10 clubs have A,B, U/16 & U/14. If we change Saturday football next year to A, B, U/17 & U/15 - 10 clubs have a full set and it will be a much more manageable program - we can all then work to assist the other 5 clubs if they are willing.

As it stands, only 5 of our 15 clubs are currently capable of fielding (or willing to) all 5 Saturday sides. The U/13 age group can play on Sunday, which fits better as the majority of the kids would be of Primary school age and therefore it won't clash with their school football.

Of course, and as I said, I am assuming this ruling for Ingle Farm is related to their official club social media accounts, not private individuals.


Actually, this ruling is for all clubs on any social media platforms, like this one for instance.

Including Mitchell Park 8)

Geddit? ;) Oh for goodness sake. I can't believe this is even an argument or that people are trying to defend it.

The SAAFL cannot punish a club for the content of an individual's social media. It's that simple.

Just like my employer and football club has no responsibility if I get a speeding fine, or punch someone, or break any other number of innumerate policies, rules and laws in my own time - UNLESS I am acting on behalf of my employer or organisation.

Think about it for second - they're effectively saying the Football Club is responsible for their players private lives, at all times, under all circumstances.

What they should have said:

1. Any registered Ingle Farm player which brings the SAAFL into disrepute by posting on Social Media will be deregistered by the Executive Committee at their discretion.

2. Any Social Media content which is administered by the club that brings the SAAFL into disrepute will result in a loss of points for all teams.

Anyway. back to footy. As clearly that's more interesting.

There are a lot of (older) league officials across a number of leagues in SA who have a very negative opinion of this site. I have heard a number openly declare their disgust that their decisions are questioned on the various forums here.

They do not realise the gift they have been given in this era. All the heresay and rumour that used to be discussed and spread at the bar, or workplaces is now communicated here, and often corrected promptly. The officials have a method to monitor what is being said, what is the perception out in the community, and act or respond accordingly.

Instead it (social media) is being viewed as an evil that must be restrained.

It could be 13/14/15/16/17 or 13/14/15/17 but 15/17 on a Saturday. 15/17/B/A is attainable for every club on a consistent basis.

I understand Flaggies concern- you have a brilliant junior setup the envy of most clubs i am sure. I know you work hard and are well run but you also have a great catchment zone. We are drawing from a much smaller area - although our numbers are smaller it doesn't mean we are not working hard.

At the moment 10 clubs have A,B, U/16 & U/14. If we change Saturday football next year to A, B, U/17 & U/15 - 10 clubs have a full set and it will be a much more manageable program - we can all then work to assist the other 5 clubs if they are willing.

As it stands, only 5 of our 15 clubs are currently capable of fielding (or willing to) all 5 Saturday sides. The U/13 age group can play on Sunday, which fits better as the majority of the kids would be of Primary school age and therefore it won't clash with their school football.

I like 13s on a sunday. u8,10,12,13 sunday . Saturday 15/17/B/A could be workable. That u13 group is probably an age when a lot of kids grow so a 1 year age group could be beneficial.

So therefore with highlighted above - A 13- 14 year old kid who has played for a club since u/8's and finds himself outside the best 25-30 players for 15's, will be forced to leave his mates and play for another footy club to continue to play footy!!! where's the development in that system??? they will either stop playing or join another league.
You cannot cut out Sun footy u/14's u/16's or whatever age, as this was set up for keeping kids in footy that are shall we say not as talented as other kids of the same age. Some clubs in our league seem to hold Sunday junior premierships in high regard :shock: and are also quite proud of not having Sat sides in underage years.

I think this is where a lot of the misunderstandings come from. At no stage has there been any proposal to remove the Sunday juniors, there have been discussions regarding the age groups, but I think we all agree there is a need for an overflow Sunday competition. The focus has been fixing the broken Saturday structure and as has been shown this year, it has become urgent.

Someone from outside the HFL will update it for you soon no doubt. :D

As you wish:

Relegation table: (pos. change)
Hahndorf - 128 (-)
Blackwood - 116 (-)
Uraidla Districts - 106 (-)
Lobethal - 84 (-)
Mount Barker - 77 (-)
Torrens Valley - 75 (-)
Mount Lofty District - 70 (-)
Ironbank-Cherry Gardens - 63 (-)
Echunga - 55 (-)
Onkaparinga Valley - 31 (-)

It's all we had to get your lads to take their mind of the game. Worked in the first half but I guess the lads got reminded of it at half time.
The third quarter by you was amazing to say the least. The oval is in fact picturesque and a delight to play on. :D

Interesting stat, we had 12 direct turnovers by foot, you only had 10. Well yeah, but if you have 300 kicks and we only have 150, that's going to happen.

I wasn't there though, how'd we look in your opinion Q?

I thought the small oval suited both your sides. A real drop off in skill level in your B-Grade, but a great deal of endeavour and passion. Same for the A-grade, had a massive dip at the game in the first half, but noticably lacked defenders to go with our big boys and when we played our best quarter for the year so far (3rd QTR) there didn't seem anyone capable of wrestling back the momentum. I think one of your better players copped an ankle injury, which didn't help.

Hey! Enough talk about footy, we are trying to determine who is a pelican

I thought this years game was likely to be held at an SFL ground but the Port Noarlunga v Noarlunga Friday night game that went up against a South home game may have created some politics around the decision to play this weeks games at Hickinbotham. I'm happy for the GF day to stay at Hickinbotham because the crowd and traffic logistics has outgrown what any of our grounds can handle, however the crowd at an Association game is ideally suited for grounds that host minor SFL finals such as Porties, the Shoe, Bice or Aldinga. Plus it gives our blokes the sort of home ground advantage that we are entitled to as the host. Alcohol situation is surely a firthy. Morphett and Reynella play their big derbies every year to a larger crowd than Association games and the SFL and those clubs presumably manage alcohol/licensing issues.

Very true DtH. I agree but it seems the SFL Board spend more time doing their Tribe FM commentary than actually doing their jobs and trying to do the right thing for the league and representing the SFL in a positive manner. The GSFL have taken the mickey out of the SFL for more than 5 years now because they are run so much more professionally.

Funny comment, because we seem to run our league to appease the GSFL rather than our own clubs, eg.

Giving up home advantage for association games.
Letting them vote on our behalf at the SACFL even though we are the bigger league.
Playing our GF at an unappealing venue so that patrons attend their GF instead.
etc

Footy Chick wrote:The ones with the more physical jobs or self employed should have their own income protection anyway.

Exactly, why should it be the club's responsibility? The players choose to play a collision sport.
Again, we have bred society to expect someone else to take responsibility

there is probably 2 or 3 bottom sides in C4 who wont play finals or even make finals so let them be the in div 7R comp the league can offer them some discounts like umpire fees paid for by north pines and salisbury west

im sure the league could put in place measures to cover all angles
No side is ever going to agree to that, and i hardly can see North Pines/Salisbury West being keen to fork out extra $$ to pay for another clubs umpires.


why should a club have to agree salisbury west And north pines are some of the teams that caused the bye the league should tell them what to do not let these clubs who are run by nubs pick and choose where they play or how many teams they field

Leave is as it is, as was suggested at the start of the year, the League has gifted North Pines a bit of success as a parting gift. They intend for them to go the way of Wingfield Royals in 2016.

From SportingPulse:
7 R. Barnes18 T. Brown2 D. Camac4 M. Elliott6 B. Ellis24 B. Godwin-Knott1 R. Haverty12 R. Hayes23 P. Hoban5 E. Horrocks16 A. Hunter17 D. Iljcesen13 T. Keeley25 A. Killian11 S. Ogilvie8 C. Perrey10 C. Sharples20 J. Standfield9 H. Tonkin3 M. Tonkin21 T. Vitkunas19 Z. Vitkunas15 E. Williams

Labelling the whole angle vale club is a bit harsh when it was one person who made the call to call a count ( me ) Yeah understand, it was said in jest for a laugh.

Another odd thing happened with the A Grade actually.

Salisbury West took a bit long getting out of their huddle and the umpire balled it up when Mitchell Park were all ready but nobody from SW was in position. Our ruck-man grabbed it, and waited, then threw it back to the umpire once everyone was ready.

Thought it was interesting. Even the Salisbury West guy said he would've taken it and kicked it forward.

I would have appealed for a freekick for a throw

Esteban Vihaio wrote:Genuine question. Is it right that two composite sides, Noarlunga/Aldinga and Cove/Mv are higher on the ladder than Porties and the twisters in the U/18's?

They have won more games, so that generally happens on the ladder

I love the arguments that payments are out of control and the like. Apparently players are not worth what they are getting.

Clubs will only pay what they are prepared to, players will get paid what they are worth (simple economics that something is worth what someone is willing to pay).

My biggest issue is with the hypocritical idiots who suggest that someone should not be allowed to gain a little bit of extra income by risking their body once a week over 18-20 weeks of a year. I am sure that in their everyday job they do not offer to take a pay cut because there is someone out there in the world who does a similar job for less pay, nor forgoing earning a bit extra by getting a second job, sitting on a Board, selling things on eBay, investing, etc. I know of people who have made playing and coaching country football their primary job, how dare someone suggest that they should not be allowed to do that - if someone is willing to pay them, good luck to them.

It is all designed to protect two things; the AFL Reserves competition, a league that has no soul, no relevance and minimal future; and the Channel 9 Adelaide Football League, the behemoth league that is the result of the centralisation of metropolitan football from the 70s to the 90s, that has abandoned it's amateur principles, but wants to impose them on the rest of the state.

Change the SANFL to AFL South Australia as that is what it now represents; split up the SAAFL to re-establish district leagues with a central Amateur competition based around the Old Scholars cartel; reform the Country Football Championships into a divisional inter-league carnival rather than meaningless zones; and remove unnecessary regulatory policies (APPS, Salary Cap, Age Restrictions etc) from metropolitan and country clubs to allow them to just play football and represent their communities. Football would be a lot healthier in this state as a result.

By the way, I nominate this discussion started by Bag & Sledge for Thread of the Year.

*Channel 9 Adelaide Football League Under 23 Team

I have been told that there is going to be more information to come regarding the "Marquee Player". A regulation for 2016 (to be reviewed at the end of the season) will be implemented that defines a marquee player as someone who has played 20 AFL games or 100 SANFL games.
Effectively, if you have not played a significant amount at a high level, the SANFL is trying to ensure the only place a player can get good money is in the AFL Reserves competition.

I love how in the presentation they make a big deal about how they are saving the clubs money. They do not acknowledge, however, that they are restricting clubs from using the main tool they have to attract quality footballers. Who the hell is going to want to travel to a place like Lameroo, Bordertown, Port Pirie, Jamestown or Loxton if they cannot earn some good money in the process. Might as well play for an Amateur league club for the same money and have a sleep in.

They keep claiming this is about saving clubs, I cannot see much of a future for clubs in the Mallee, South East, Mid North, North East etc without the ability to spend a bit to attract good players. These are not the same population centres they once were, centralisation of the population means these regions do not have a lot of young families to draw from, they rely on people who are prepared to travel from the city to keep their clubs viable. Closure of bank branches, railways, regional offices, etc mean there are not as many young men relocating to the areas for work. The football club is usually the main (if not only) entertainment within these towns, the locals provide their disposable income here for their entertainment as they do not have the nightclubs, major sports, restaurants etc that their city counterparts have. How dare the SANFL pull the rug out from under these communities just to protect the AFLSA league and the Channel 9 league.

If you were watching an 8/10 standard game this year, and next year you are watching a 7/10 game

...and this here is one of the aims. Reduce the overall quality of country footy to prop up the AFL Reserves competition and the Channel 9 league.

The rubbish about saving clubs and the like is just a smokescreen.

I am totally opposed to it, and my club is positioned to be one of the biggest beneficiaries (currently not spending big, close to city so should be able to just match the $500 and be more attractive because of the lesser travel).

Is there not a ruling that if a play has been suspended for greater than 30 minutes, the match will be abandoned? Before half time being called a draw, and after half time the points going to the team leading at the time.
No a rule was implemented to allow for the game to continue once opportunity allows to try to get a result. Most ambulance removals from the playing surface take longer than 30 mins.

Good on them for trying to do something about this scourge on our game.

Scourge?

Some people want to pay someone extra money to play at their club rather than another one because they consider that their value to them. That club has the issue that they are in a regional location so in order to recruit better players they need to make it a bit more attractive. How is this a scourge?

A truck driver may get paid $40k a year in Adelaide, but a mining site in Karratha needs a driver and is willing to pay $120k a year if he is willing to FIFO. Maybe the Australian Government should put in a cap on truck driver wages because Toll and Linfox are complaining that they are losing their best drivers to the mines, such a "scourge" it is on our trucking industry.

A couple of queries:

1. Will the community football board be providing any clerical or administration support in regards to the set up and completion of paperwork etc? Some of the technicalities in rules and ramifications of mistakes seem too extreme to allow part time volunteers to be handling

2. I've spoken to our recruits who will still be very keen to play country footy because of the atmosphere, quality of footy, change of scenery etc. we are lucky because we are only 70k's from Adelaide. Has anyone spoken to individual players at out lying clubs who won't return next year because of this?
many saying they will be receiving the same amount, just through different means

Bugga me an under 11 side losing a Grand Final.... Nobody got zapped by a lightening bolt....

https://fbcdn-video-j-a.akamaihd.net/hvideo-ak-xft1/v/t42.1790-2/11778328_507723519403911_698289480_n.mp4?efg=eyJybHIiOjk4MSwicmxhIjo1MTJ9&rl=981&vabr=545&oh=d2cadb6e256c7ac77987f967e7ad0f90&oe=55C741DA&__gda__=1439121798_b9379d93721c69220652ac0eb824dbd3

We must protect the children from the evils of competitive sport.

The basis of the AFL's 'This is our game' policy was a survey they conducted with a range of junior players with questions such as:
Do you like it when you lose?
Is it more fun when you get more kicks?
Do you like it when adults tell you that you did the wrong thing?
Do you enjoy sitting on the bench?
Do you play football because it is fun?
Pretty obvious the responses to those

Maybe a similar study should be done into our school system:
Do you like when it is school holidays?
Do you like it when a teacher tells you off for doing something wrong?
Do you like doing homework?
etc etc

S Demon wrote:Win - $150, $100, $50, Drinks Card, Demon Dollars

Loss - Drinks Card, Demon Dollars, Demon Dollars

2016 - Salary Cap says no

Must end this scourge on the game, clubs like yours are killing the game...

cracka wrote:I'd put money on Kangarilla returning to SFL if you went back to 2 divs, maybe even Blackwood would join.

Kangarilla? People complain about big scores at the moment. We would need a third division.

More meetings out in the country this week about salary cap. Still sitting at 4 leagues saying no. Our league after sending delegates last week to the big meeting with the Barossa have changed there vote back to no. Wouldn't be surprised if the salary cap is put on hold for a while. Our delegates said the community footy board people at the Barossa meeting weren't happy with the outcome. Just 2 many holes in the document. Hopefully the ammo clubs see the holes b4 voting

According to Shipway tonight, Ammos voted 59-1 in favour

footyfan82 wrote:Rumour that hackam may forfeit b grade for the second week in a row.
Can any one confirm or deny this??
Is it 2 strikes and out??

No strikes or anything

Multiple clubs forfeit their juniors for the entire season and nothing happens

With 2 rounds to play the 14/16/18/B grade final 8 is set BUT the A grade is wide open with tenth placed Porties on 16 points with Valley in 9th on 16 points and Christies 8th on 16 points who this week play 7th placed Townies on 18 points with Townies having a bye in the last round should make for a cracker of a game .

Porties - Tough draw wineys and bombers. After seeing them last week, they are missing plenty of blokes in that side, will miss 8 IMO.
Valleys- Twisties at the pasty and the not so household names of the shoeys :lol: 8 point game last week (Porties) and this week is too... still a chance for 8th.
Christies- Townys and Hackam if they don't forfeit ;), if Bice oval boys get up for Cratey this week he gets to coach on in Sept!

Think Christies in the box seat for 7th and 8th spot may come down to percentage- valley Townys Porties..... but you never know......

Huge game at Pig Park also 1 v 2, can flaggy fire a shot across the bow of the Winey's juggernaut on their home deck.....??
Cracking round of games coming up this week..... should be more of it!!

Awesome comp