I can't bring myself to say "it's your own fault, told you so" or any of that crap.
Sure, the powers that be have f%#ked up, but to lose Glenelg would be a devastating blow to the SANFL and I hope they can pull through.

What seems true though is the damage done to the league by the AFL and the loans to Port etc have certainly added to lack of funds a available from SANFL to support the clubs who make its existence viable in the 1st place. Not that I'm advocating the SANFL should just bail out clubs who have been poorly managed, but having a stronger SANFL would certainly help.

I'll take up a membership. I know it is f%^k all in the scheme of things but I love the SANFL and it will be poorer without Glenelg or any other of the sovereign teams that's for sure.

Panther Pack wrote:Have South been on tv since Round 1?

That would depend on how many times you've played either Adelaide Reserves or Port Adelaide reserves

A perfect day for footy in Adelaide today and quess what my team has a bye.
Well done SANFL.
Go and watch another SANFL game or local footy?
That's not the point Phil and VP is right. The program is a disgrace this year and does nothing to promote SANFL or encourage people to follow the league.
You might be gagged these days but that doesn't mean you should get flippant.

The number of byes, when one of the promises was completely the opposite, the TV scheduling, which was going to bring so much sponsorship and exposure, yet mostly focusses on matches involving AFL Reserves teams, and the general lack of media interest has done nothing to promote the SANFL throughout the state.

Without speaking for him, VP is a Rooster supporter, and wants to watch his team, not go watching two other teams he might only have a passing interest in.
Your reply is crap, and dismissive.

I'm off to dinner at the in-laws tonight and it should provide some interesting conversation

Their whole family were born and lived in Crumlin, Northern Ireland but are pro Republic of Ireland

Odd and confusing I know
Well that balances the Republic one I know from Dublin who is pro English ;)
I'm pro Guinness

Mr Beefy wrote:#Bregret

I've had a few, but then again too few to mention

Or as Edith Piaf would say.......

More people regret England going out of the Euro's than Britain going out of The EU

Spot on and precisely my point.

Okay, I see his and your points and you are right...

I will take you to task on the 'gag' comment however, as that is not the case at all...

It just gets a bit mundane seeing the same complaint rolled out every couple of weeks. We get it...

Posting the same message, time and time again, on a public footy forum, isn't going to change it for this season, at least...

The League would be well and truly aware of what has transpired this season and the feedback from the clubs has been very strong...

I would suspect he wont be having this same gripe next season and that there will hopefully be all 5 games being played in the same round...
It isn't the same mundane complaint rolled out every week Phil.
Firstly, I and many others don't see it as "mundane", but equally VP isn't rolling out the same complaint week after week. He is complaining every time his team had a senseless bye.
Granted, with the number of byes each club has this season it is easy till think he is complaining every week. ;)

Interesting Article in the Messenger



SANFL match day crowds slump in wake of AFL reserve sides. Officials try to explain why

David Penrose, Weekly Times Messenger, Messenger Community News
an hour ago

SANFL crowds have slumped 16 per cent since the introduction of AFL reserves sides but league officials say strong television ratings and a growing online following indicate their “product is very strong”.

Figures show the league average attendance for the opening 13 rounds this season was 2486, compared with 2942 at the same stage in 2013 — the final season before Adelaide and Port Adelaide reserves entered the competition.

This season’s mark is the lowest since Port joined the AFL in 1997, and down 1000 fans a game on the 13-round average of 3612 in 2001.

SANFL general manager Adam Kelly said crowds were only one way to measure success of the competition.

He said television ratings were healthy, online traffic was growing and club membership numbers were on the up.

But crowds have fallen again in 2016 and a fortnight ago just 938 people — the lowest recorded crowd in SANFL history — watched South Adelaide celebrate its 140th anniversary against Port Adelaide at Noarlunga.

The game was broadcast live on Channel Seven.

“(The) game between South and Port drew an average (television) audience of in excess of 39,000,” Kelly said.

“One in three people watching free-to-air TV were watching SANFL — and that tells us that the product is very strong.

“We’ve got almost 55,000 people using our app which is about 50 per cent more than last year and our social media audience is well above comparable competitions in other states.”

Despite the crowd figures suggesting the opposite, he said the addition of the AFL sides in 2014 had added interest to the competition.

“Some of our best attendances and television ratings have involved those teams,” Kelly said.

Crowds this season are down 5 per cent from 12 months ago, when an average of 2614 people attended games.

But Kelly pointed to Central District (up 29.9 per cent from 2082 to 2705) and Woodville-West Torrens (up 15.4 per cent from 2132 to 2461) recording increased crowds this year compared with last.

Overall only four SANFL games have pulled a crowd of more than 4000 people this season, the same as 2015, but well down on 14 in the opening 13 rounds of 2012.

Many disaffected fans have blamed the two AFL alignments, a lack of continuity in fixtures — teams have five weekends off in a 23-week minor round — and rule changes for the declining interest.

Kelly defended the rule changes — which include a free being paid against the last player to kick or handball the ball before it went out of bounds — and said this season’s competition had been attractive viewing.

“Scoring over the year has increased by 10 per cent and stoppages are down,” he said.

He said the SANFL would work with clubs to market matches.

“That includes looking at the numbers of byes in the season and when our games are scheduled.”

Kelly said attendances were just part of clubs’ revenue streams and payments from the sale of Football Park, which start in October, would help long-term viability.

****, I can't believe what I've just read.
"Crowds aren't only one way to measure success" what a joke.
"TV audiences are healthy", well whoopdedoo, that'll put bread on the table will it, when the SANFL actually pays to be broadcast. And thank **** 55,000 are using the app. That'll bring in a shed load of revenue for each club.

The league is truly lost.
As long as there are idiots like this spruiking this kind of bullshit the SANFL is truly lost.
Reading this shite makes me sadder than England losing to Iceland.

daysofourlives wrote:Is Harry Dear starting to show signs of making it at the next level?
Might be time for him to come home like Jack

Get back to the Centrals v Port Reserves thread you and take Dear with you.

Wolf Pack wrote:It's quite simple.
They were outplayed.

No need to get technical WP

Maybe the constant ribbing from the crowd contributed to him hoofing it out on the full when he should be kicking goals. Having said that, his inability to hit a barn door with a cows arse won't do his chances a lot of good an I think he's milked it for about as long as he could.

If he is delisted then he'll just have to take the bull by the horns and moove on. There will plenty of other cattle in the same predicament, but any serious talk of him joining an SANFL club is pure bullocks. He,d have to take a massive pay cut to even steak a claim, and even after that I couldn't see a stampede of clubs chasing his signature. Having said that, it's all Chinese whispers about who herd what.

Home, away, neutral, whatever, Sturt way too good and will give the Adelaide Reserves a decent slapping
Double Blues by 35-40 points


Carn Sturt

Bays played a good game and were able to add to their percentage!!!

South have been enjoying those pie floaters a little bit too much this winter.

Is Ron Fuller still with the MFS? Could be a chance to return to the Panfers???

Is Gotch in trouble???
Maybe they should look at re-connecting with Don Scott.
Surely Rob Pyman is still in the mix?
:lol:
Would that be a Pymix

Ugh, decide to stay home today and see Port v West is on TV. Who the hell chooses these games, this would be the last game today I'd want to see.
Also good to see no live video streams on today, the one thing the SANFL did right last year they hardly do this year. Idiots!
Oh well, V8s and AFL for me today, way to promote your product SANFL!

Im sure Big Phil will have some valid reason to defend his employer.
Wonder what the heirachy at Centrals think of BP becoming a SANFL stooge
Bit unfair that

North are close but not quite there, very reminiscent of the year before Francou took the Cocks into a GF, a massive improvement on the McGregor debacle. I'm hoping for bigger and better things in 2017
Agreed. We're taking a bit of time to adapt to a new coaching approach and philosophy (you might say we're learning one completely from scratch given McGregor offered diddly-squat), but once it sinks in hopefully it'll yield big dividends.
I thought the diddling and squatting was during Jarman's reign ;)

Game on 107.9 Life FM from 1.30pm
Don't want to split hairs Phil, but aren't these the Port Adelaide Reserves, the reserve team to Port Adelaide who play in the AFL. Surely the history went when the old Port Adelaide SANFL club went. Port Adelaide Reserves only has a history of 2 and a bit years so you couldn't have played them 72 times unless you had a busy off-season.

Time

Eagles 10.13
Adelaide reserves 8.5

Westies to pull off* a shock this week.
Bloods by 10-15 points

We should never have been in a position for an umpire to decide a match.
But the last two bullshit frees to Rioli sadly highlight the standard of umpiring in the SANFL.
I'm devastated by the result, but I might be more devastated by my realisation the SANFL is dying.

That's the worst crowd number I've ever been a part of. Somehow the numbers will be fudged to save the SANFL from total embarrassment but the 938 at Noarlunga puts this crowd to shame. 800 if lucky.
Norwood's front running fans given up and Glenelg supporters knowing their club is on death's door not bothering to turn up.
Sad situation all round.

A bit harsh. Arctic weather, live TV and lots of AFL on TV. Why would anyone come out. I must say the free at the end was harsh considering the condition. Even if the free was there, the good umpires have a feel for the game at crucial times. No one would have complained with a ball up.
"Even if the free was there" ! If the free was there a good umpire would pay it, no matter how crucial the time was. A free is a free.

JTC. To add to your point, what does Port actually give back to the SANFL. They pay no fees to SANFL clubs, play matches at Alberton, discourage their supporters from travelling to away games ala the South game at Noarlunga. At least the old Magpies added to player development.
That just reinforces my argument that the powers that be (no pun intended) at the SANFL are incompetent and not capable of running the league.
Personally, I'm not interested in any of the rumours that might be put out there, lining their own pockets, setting themselves up for an AFL number, etc, as they are all irrelevant to the main fact.
What is relevant to me though is their inability to say No, or if they genuinely believed having AFL Reserves in was better for the league, is their inability to broker a decent deal for their SANFL clubs that meant both AFL clubs played to the same set of rules. And their failure to see the true value of the SANFL League to the AFL clubs.

If they had it would have meant $150k p.a. to each SANFL club from each AFL club.
Allowing the SANFL clubs to use the fees on players by increasing the salary cap to $650k, which would help stop the drain of quality players to the ammos
No home games and no Reserves Reserves for Port
Adelaide and Port to fund any shortfall in sponsorship revenue for the TV deal and each club to have the same number of appearances as the two Reserves.
I'm sure there would be many other proviso's

And that those same people who were devoid of any ideas when "negotiating" the deal, are also devoid of any ideas now. Even if they voted to kick the AFL Reserves out right now, they simply have no ideas. The league would flounder because there just isn't anyone at the SANFL driving it forward. There is no one there that I'd have the least bit of confidence in to run any of my businesses let along something as important as the SANFL.

The pro AFLites would say "we told you so", completely missing the point that the only reason it failed was because of the incompetents running it.

JTC. To add to your point, what does Port actually give back to the SANFL. They pay no fees to SANFL clubs, play matches at Alberton, discourage their supporters from travelling to away games ala the South game at Noarlunga. At least the old Magpies added to player development.
That just reinforces my argument that the powers that be (no pun intended) at the SANFL are incompetent and not capable of running the league.
Personally, I'm not interested in any of the rumours that might be put out there, lining their own pockets, setting themselves up for an AFL number, etc, as they are all irrelevant to the main fact.
What is relevant to me though is their inability to say No, or if they genuinely believed having AFL Reserves in was better for the league, is their inability to broker a decent deal for their SANFL clubs that meant both AFL clubs played to the same set of rules. And their failure to see the true value of the SANFL League to the AFL clubs.

If they had it would have meant $150k p.a. to each SANFL club from each AFL club.
Allowing the SANFL clubs to use the fees on players by increasing the salary cap to $650k, which would help stop the drain of quality players to the ammos
No home games and no Reserves Reserves for Port
Adelaide and Port to fund any shortfall in sponsorship revenue for the TV deal and each club to have the same number of appearances as the two Reserves.
I'm sure there would be many other proviso's

And that those same people who were devoid of any ideas when "negotiating" the deal, are also devoid of any ideas now. Even if they voted to kick the AFL Reserves out right now, they simply have no ideas. The league would flounder because there just isn't anyone at the SANFL driving it forward. There is no one there that I'd have the least bit of confidence in to run any of my businesses let along something as important as the SANFL.

The pro AFLites would say "we told you so", completely missing the point that the only reason it failed was because of the incompetents running it.
Would that be enough for you to accept the AFL reserves sides or would you prefer them not in the SANFL at all

Personally, not at all. They do compromise the league and their aims are different to those of the genuine SANFL clubs.
The AFL Clubs make no secret that one of the core reasons for wanting to have a Reserves team and wanting it to play in the SANFL was to ensure that all their players were being trained in their footballing ethos and style. They didn't want other coaches influencing their players into playing different game styles.
The also make it clear they want to use the reserves for different reasons than to win a flag. Bringing back key AFL squad players from injury, resting them for AFL games, and the development of their own players are higher on their list of priorities than winning a flag ever will be.

None of this is complimentary to the aims of the genuine SANFL clubs or what the SANFL is really about.

I don't blame Adelaide or Port for wanting to have greater control over their own players and to have a league to play in that at least stretches them footballing wise. But it should be in a national Reserves League and not in a State League. I guess the fact that a national Reserves comp is possibly years away, means that the next best alternative would be the VFL. Whilst I am not advocating just 'dumping our trash in our neighbours bin', it does seem to me that the VFL is made up mostly of AFL Reserves teams now anyway, and is possibly a national reserves league in the making.

JK wrote:

johntheclaret wrote:Shut up and go away

Given you left me alone after the Burnley game, Im happy to accept that mate

Oh yeah. I forgot about that.......

Thanks for the info mate
What was Ports involvement in all of this? Did they just sit back and let Crows take the blame and take the same model or were they involved in the negotiations with SANFL also?
I think they sat back for a while and then came in later with their own deal which is why you have 10 teams but 3 different sets of rules, one for Adelaide, one for Port and one for the 8 genuine SANFL clubs.

Just another reason why the current situation is fundamentally flawed.

And why the league has 10 teams but the Reserves only has 9, which in itself is an added cost to the SANFL clubs as their league team is playing at one venue whilst their reserves team is playing at another

How many Crows AFL supporters actually support another SANFL side?
I have no interest in crows res games but happily go to westies

Could be, but if that's the case how does the inclusion of the reserves benefit the competition? Less rounds, byes, smaller crowds, totally compromised competition, no atmosphere, lack of integrity and reduced media interest beyond who will make next weeks AFL team.

The possibility of increased television audience when the Crowserves play; positives are there for the Crows and their sponsors, some spin off for the opposition sponsors I guess. Negative is once again the Crows are getting more and more exposure.

These are the things the SANFL needed to take into consideration when allowing Crows and Port to field reserves sides.
The previous model was just not working for the AFL clubs (I know that does not matter to everyone on here).
I think they did consider those points MW

IIRC some of the key promises were:
A new self financing TV deal which would be paid for by sponsorship
An increase in attendance with the Adelaide Reserves attracting an extra 4,000 fans to each of their games
Promotion of the SANFL and in particular, the promotion of the Reserves games by the Crows during the week leading up to the game.
Less byes as the competition would have 10 teams instead of 9
Playing to the line, which I guess the SANFL would have assumed meant trying their best every week.

What in reality the SANFL got was:
A TV deal costing over $1m p.a. For two years of which the SANFL are stumping up at least $300k a year to cover the shortfall.
A TV deal that didn't cost either AFL Club a bean but promotes their 2 Reserves teams in over 50% of the televised games.
A reduction in attendances as not only did they fail to deliver the magical 4,000 fans per game, but also drove genuine SANFL fans away.
Some clubs, instead of being able to cash in on the increased attendances, despite fans of Resreves teams getting in for free, actually make a loss when they play the Reserves.
Instead of increased promotion of the SANFL, media coverage has actually gone down as the two Reserves teams are taking what little media coverage the league used to get.
An increase in the number of byes as the SANFL try to artificially stretch the season out with fewer games.
Instead of playing to the line, the Reserves team have chosen to ignore the values of the SANFL by using games only to suit the AFL Clubs. Resting players at 3/4 time, etc.

I think the SANFL were either naïve or just plain stupid to believe what the Adelaide Crows were selling them, and whether they were scared of the empty threats from Adelaide or dazzled by the the lure of $50k a club and bright new dawn, either way the thing they are guilty of is gross misconduct.

What can't be argued any longer, is that their presence in the SANFL has had a damaging effect on the league and its clubs.

Why don't you actually give Sturt some credit. I watched the game. So when Hanson kicked the 3 goals in quick time was that the umpires fault. Sturt have been around the mark all year. The Crows probably played their best footy in the 2 finals they won. Sturt deserved the win and will probably beat WWT this Sunday

You all sit here and sook about the Crows and Port being in the SANFL and how much its ruining the SANFL and boo hoo . Seriously you all need to build a bridge. Its quite pathetic that 3 years has gone by and you still complain. I know from my time with an SANFL Club in recent years the players look forward to playing the Crows and Port because it gives them an opportunity to test themselves against AFL listed players.

Go and support your SANFL club. Every $ counts and you can actually watch some good football instead of wasting all your energy sitting in front of a computer eating a donut complaining about the AFL reserves in the SANFL. If you all hate the AFC and PAFC go boo them when the club you all say you love is playing them.

The SANFL is a fantastic league with both AFL clubs being part of it. You all just need to accept it wont change no matter how much you all cry on this thread!!

Just get the parasites out and get back to an even playing field.

Get the SANFL to get off their arse and start promoting the league.
Sort out the bloody website and put some one in charge of it that actually knows and cares about the SANFL.
Stream one game a week. Do a proper review of the games and pay for it if you have to, but get a full page spread in the paper every Friday Night with team reviews and news of each game.

Play every Saturday 2:10pm. Maybe the odd night game early season and bank holiday Monday's/ Anzac Day.
Start getting some tradition back, after all the SANFL's been here a damn sight longer than the AFL. Let everyone know, Saturday afternoon is SANFL time. F%#k when the Crows or Port are playing.

Play each other 3 times and cut out the byes.
Play the 3rd game at a neutral ground. We have at least 2 spare ovals with Thebby and Footy Park. Why not have a carnival at footy park where schools attend along with U15's, U16's, U18's, Ressies and A Grade are all there for both teams. It might even encourage some of the kids to come to SANFL games.

Get back to playing SANFL footy instead of some AFL hybrid with players who aren't skilled enough to play it. Get back to rough and tumble, the true essence of Aussie Rules
There'd be a few out there that aren't interested in the sanitised, corporate game the AFL has to offer.

If you want to get the fans back and encourage new ones, get back the integrity of the league and give them a genuine alternative to AFL.

Just like in the UK, not everyone wants to watch the EPL.

another grub wrote:Why did port stab the other clubs in the back?

Because it was easier than stabbing them in the front ???

I blame the AFL Reserves.
There's no doubt it's got worse since they were let in.

Crows will have some tracking software that is logging every post on here so they can see who the trouble makers are.

The correlation is quite clear. If you want to improve the software performance and reduce the system crashes, then get rid or the AFL Reserves.

Lol, Mourihno. Maybe he should ask for the club to spend some more money.

Geezus, Spurs are the only undefeated team and have dropped down to 5th!
Only one point separating first to fifth, a cracking season!
Definitely need to spend more money. He inherited a heap of guys from the old regime that need to be flicked at the end of the season. The club is going nowhere when Rooney, Fellaini and Carrick are gifted games

Yeh. Spend a bit more Jim. It's worked well for the last 3 years. Hope you kept the reicept for Pogba. :lol:

I was thinking. Up until this year, if you added the money Utd paid for Di Maria to the entire amount Burnley had spent in their entire existence, it still wouldn't equal what Ut paid for pogba. (Or as my predictive text keeps trying to put 'pong about')

Mourinho is a money man, pure and simple. Most of his success is on the back of almost unlimited funds. He is the special one because he has special needs.

cossi11 wrote:Probably about time I posted in here to keep updated on the topic..

disappointing for Everton on the weekend... replicated AUFC v MV game, peppered the goals for the last 10 minutes and then Burnley go up the other end and score!!

You've got good timing, I'll give you that Cossi

Bit defensive?
Why shouldn't he be.

If someone started reporting false rumours on the radio that my business was in serious financial trouble, and it wasn't, then I'd damn well defend it too.

You of all people in your line of work should know the damage caused to companies through these kind of rumours.

Brings a whole new meaning to 'Sparks flying'.

mighty_tiger_79 wrote:How can the women possibly have double-headers....yet the men can't.....

It's every mans dream to have a double header.

Sad times, the SANFL is dying quicker than we all thought. Be interesting to see how much you will have to pay to get the stream. Once again SANFL supporters being taken for a ride. Hate to see what the comp will be like in a few years, No wonder people are heading out the the Amateurs, bit of hard biff footy, cheap food and booze and some atmosphere.

So by going by this bleak post SA footy will be closing its doors
Or am I reading your gloom and doom the wrong way
Cause all the people or most of them that are saying gloom and doom do they actually go to sanfl games any more ?
Guess if one doesn't attend one shouldn't say it's dead could be dead maybe it is but if people keeping crying it's dead with out going how do they actually know ? Just asking .
Not trying to have an argument but if honestly how do people know first hand if they aren't at games .
SAFooty has a very active amateurs board too Micky
From what I've read before, traffic is good elsewhere on the forum. Only SANFL boards are quieter than previous years which would support Locky's statement somewhat.

PhilH wrote:Last season a team scored 100+, 48 times

Blimey, good effort. Which team was that then

locky801 wrote:Good to see the Roosters didnt need a trial game this weekend as they are travelling as well as last year

You've got to stop being a glass half empty man and take the positives Locky.

We've gone a week unbeaten which is more than can be said for the current premiers

Here 's the article in all its glory:

Chris Schacht: Adelaide Football Club, Port Adelaide Football Club and SACA members must demand constitutional change

WHO runs the Adelaide and Port Adelaide football clubs?

If you think it is the 120,000 souls who form the two South Australian AFL clubs’ membership bases, then you are wrong.

The AFL Commission is the sole owner and controlling shareholder of the Crows and Power.

This means the 120,000 members spread across the great divide in SA football share one common theme.

They do not have any effective say in who manages and operates their clubs.

It is absolutely ironical that the two AFL football clubs in South Australia are not owned by any South Australians. They are owned by the AFL Commission, which has at present no South Australian as a director.

The AFL Commission has absolute power to appoint the majority of directors in each club. In the case of the Adelaide Football Club, the so-called members can elect two of the nine directors in a postal ballot.

But even after these directors are elected, their final appointment must be approved by the AFL Commission.

The remaining board members are appointed by the AFL on the recommendation of the existing directors at the two clubs. In recent months three new directors have been appointed to the Crows board. No notice was given to the members that new directors were to be appointed. Management at West Lakes did not seek registration of interest from any club member as to whom they wished to be considered for any of these vacancies.

Seven of the nine directors never have had to face a ballot by the club members.

The 60,000 members at each club are no more than subscribers who buy tickets to attend a football match at Adelaide Oval.

Recently, the Adelaide Football Club held its annual meeting at Adelaide Oval. This consisted only of the existing board members plus a representative of the AFL Commission.

The AFL, as the sole shareholder, did not send a representative to the meeting. It appointed one of the existing directors as its proxy. The session in essence was a private meeting with only the directors present.

The club’s annual report and financial statement was approved by the board, but not circulated to the so-called 60,000 members for their information. The annual report was adopted by the sole shareholder, who in this case was the AFL proxy.

If the Adelaide Football Club was a publicly listed company the annual report and financial statements would be publicly available to all members or shareholders before the meeting.

The words of the Crows club song, “we are the pride of South Australia”, are particularly ironic considering that no South Australian is a club shareholder.

By comparison, several of the original AFL clubs in Victoria, such as Hawthorn, still have a constitution which allows their members to vote for their directors. There also is a term limit on all board members including the chairman.

Clearly, the Hawthorn members are committed to ensure that their club runs well and as a result they have won four premierships in the past 10 years.

The Crows have not played in a grand final since 1998.

Either all AFL football clubs should have a membership and governance structure like Hawthorn or all football clubs have to be owned by the AFL in the same way as Adelaide and Port Adelaide. Otherwise, there is a two-tiered system of governance which is not fair.

Recently a select committee of the South Australian Parliament held a public inquiry into the governance of the South Australian Cricket Association (SACA). The report was scathing in the way the SACA board manipulated the election process of board members.

SA taxpayers have directly contributed over half a billion dollars to build a new stadium at Adelaide Oval, to the absolute advantage of the Crows, Port Power and SACA.

Taxpayers, as well as club members, have a public right to know that their sporting clubs are democratically run.

In South Australia the members of the Adelaide Football Club, Port Adelaide Football Club and SACA must demand constitutional change so that they, the members, truly have an effective say in the ownership and running of their clubs.

Did the SANFL not own both Adelaide and Port Adelaide AFL Licenses?
It's ok to moan about how the AFL Commission own both SA franchises, but that's only because they were allowed to buy them.
The SANFL are supposed to be the custodians of Football in South Australia and that they've allowed the AFL to take ownership of the two SA Clubs and all the subsequent profit they make, whilst standing by and allowing the degradation of its state league is the real disgrace.

But just as an aside, say Port and the Crows don't have good AFL teams for a protracted period. Say 20 years - like a Carlton. Maybe Port fold at AFL level and the Crows lose relevance. Kids stop playing footy as there isn't anyone exciting to watch and they're sick of losing and instead take up soccer. Numbers drop, grassroots clubs fold - the gateway for people to start playing and watching footy.

Soon enough, there just isn't enough of a football market to make things viable and South Australia turns into a "Soccer State" like Queensland is a rugby state.

For football to remain the sport we all love and enjoy, we have to have strong, relevant, successful football teams at AFL level . For that to happen they need good football structures like those interstate to compete. Which includes Reserves playing in competitive comps.

I am sorry if that means the SANFL gets slightly compromised, but to me, the AFL teams being competitive and successful is more important than the purity and sanctity of the SANFL competition. None of you will like hearing that, but it's correct nonetheless.

FFS you talk like footy didn't exist before the AFL. I think if you look back before the Crows were created, SA had a thriving league which funnily included your mob. I think if the Crows disappeared along with your mob, then the SANFL would thrive again as SA is essentially a footy state, and fans are fickle. Those same tens of thousands that have jumped on the Crows and Port bandwagon would soon jump onto a SANFL club don't worry about that. Whether Port was part of it or not.

Well done Liverpool for making the Top 4 and well done Harry Kane for doing it again, 29 goals in 29 games after missing 9 with injury is pretty handy! Who's name is Harry Kane?
Nice for Spurs to finish off a lot better than last year. 13 goals in the last few days!

Wedgie, whilst the other supporters can toss crap, always remember that what has been achieved this year has been done with a player wage budget of less than half the top 5, our spending on transfers is the second lowest in this years EPL teams over the last 5 years.

We have more England players than any other team, we are the model the football league wishes all the teams would adopt. The. Naysayers need to get with the times for English soccer to prosper, did we win a trophy - no, did we have a bloody good year - bloody oath we did.

As the UK soccer correspondents are saying, the great over achievers this year is THFC.

I assume you are talking about Burnley.

Spurs don't come anyway near the achievements of the Clarets. Talking about punching above your weight....meh. Not even close.
UTC... 5th most profitable club in the world from a town that could fit it's entire population into old trafford and still have room for more. And we've won the same number of trophies as Spurs this year on a budget that is a 10th at best.

No mega rich foreign owners, just a group of true Burnley men who actually care about the club, and the town, and the fans. A board of down to earth directors who won't break the bank and lead the club to financial ruin, who have a maximum salary structure that encourages unity in the team and safeguards our future.

A club whose last two managers are/have been Sean Dyche and Eddie Howe. Both of which could easily be manager of the year but won't get a sniff in as your sycophantic 'UK soccer correspondents' can't see past the big 6 for anything and will no doubt give it to Conti whose only achievement is to take one of the wealthiest clubs in the U.K., with unlimited funds, a transfer kitty of 000's of millions and a wage structure of even more is it any surprise they won the league. FFS, I could have won the league with that team.

You "big boys" have nfi. United spent more on Pogba than Burnley have spent on transfers for their entire history including our time in the premier league.

If you are going to hold up a club as a glowing example of how the league would like other clubs to emulate, the you should look at the Clarets

Watched most of the North V Cows game on TV, Cows were ok but North were very ordinary to say the least.
Didn't look like a very big crowd either unfortunately for North.

I did see about 3 Cows supporters though in the crowd.
You need to look for the positives AF
Crows fans up 33% on last week ;)

Adelaide Crows. Supporters of the South Australian National Football League and the team for all South Australians.

blame your club like i do mine

And the dreamland sold to the SANFL of 5,000 more supporters, greater media exposure, promotion of the league by both AFL clubs, better programming of fixtures without the bye, and the threat that 'we'll take it all away if you vote no'.........All of that had no effect on which way the vote went ?

Having said that, you are right of course and there was no doubt a lot of politics going on in the background.

Down with the SANFL !
Down with North !
Up the Crows !

mighty_tiger_79 wrote:The app has frozen....cant get an update since 10min 2nd qtr

What do you expect. It is at Arctic Park mate, now let it go, let it go.

mighty hounds wrote:

johntheclaret wrote:Weren't Chelsea down to 10

whats your point?

It must be easier to boss a team when they have less players on the pitch than you.

I don't think it's funny - more... inevitable. Unless a significant, strategic and practical restructure is undertaken. Also keep in mind I don't associate the death of the SANFL with the death of the clubs. So whilst it is true that I have no time, sympathy or reverence for the administrative wing of the SANFL - nor their cronies, nor their anti-Port militia in the media - I do however have all of that and more for you know, the actual clubs and the people (including the supporters) therein.

All perfectly fair and reasonable.


Having said that the delusions, hypocrisy, bias and grim grip on yesteryear by sad and bitter old men in this thread...? That I do find funny in a macabre kind of way.

The thought by most AFL supporters in this state with little to no interest in the SANFL, that the SANFL fans are all stuck in the competitions glory days is miles off the mark. We all understand we play 2nd fiddle (with daylight in between) to big brother, and that's fine, we just want our own competition to be fair and equitable, and thriving at a lower level, and dont see it as an unreasonable wish. We're happy to be the breeding ground for players talented enough to progress to AFL, although we don't want the competition to be exclusively for that purpose. We're happy to have those that fell out of the AFL because they generally help with the standard at our level. But the competition to the genuine SANFL fans requires a level playing field to be meaningful to supporters, many of whom have had multiple generations of their family involved with their club.

We don't expect our games on primetime TV, we don't expect multiple pages in the Advertiser, we don't expect the radio stations to discuss the competition for hours on end. We realise our place in the pecking order.

The problems we're faced with today aren't entirely due to the AFL clubs existence in the competition either - The biggest issue imho was/is the financial health of the clubs.

So whilst we love to reminisce about the glory years, we'd be more than happy if the comp resembled what it did 5 or 10 years ago (with or without local AFL listed players).

I don't believe there's a simple fix, just putting it out there that what we want, isn't what a lot of people make it out to be,

Pretty well put considering you are deluded, hypocritical, bitter old man. ;)

Did you get my pm?

Jase wrote:The bloody Dog Botherers have gone up... disappointing...

Sorry Jase, I forgot you were a Bantam

Been failing since round one.
Put a man on the moon 40+ years ago but we can't get the footy scores in Adelaide!
Just give us some radio coverage please.

Haven't you a smart phone. Try the SANFK app. The scores are refreshed every 25 seconds. Radio coverage is a dumb argument. Its all out there.
The app didnt work for me yesterday
That's cos yer fone wasent smart enuf ;)

Dissident wrote:Sorry, I didn't see this tag.

Has this fixed itself Pseudo?

Has anyone else noticed how much Diss looks like Magellan
Have they ever been on here at the same time

MickyJ, I made a similar comment about Port's crowd when I saw those figures in the other thread.
The figures suggest that Port is still drawing sizeable crowds, yet my own personal experience (since they became the Power reserves) has been where are these fans exactly? At Sturt games they are more numerous than Crows fans, but otherwise there just aren't that many of them about, especially compared with pre 2014.
Now, I am not saying this to get my dick out, or stir the pot, and sure, I realise that as an away crowd there would likewise, be less Sturt supporters, but there is a marked difference between what the figures say and my own observations. It would seem that Micky has had the same observation as I.
I would suggest that the old Port rivalry is still a popular draw card for opposition supporters, that seems a pretty solid assumption from my perspective. The figures would have received a healthy boost from the Power bye weekend. Photos from that match showed a good turnout of nostalgic Magpie supporters from days of yore.
Anyway, just adding to the discussion. As I have always said, a strong Port Magpies is good for the SANFL, hence this recent (perhaps, perceived?) disparity between Port crowd figures and actual support is of interest to me.
Geeze Theri. Stirring the pot with your dick :shock: You have some worrying habits, is that some weird cooking method you picked up in Fukuokay :lol: ;)

How many crows supporters at the Parade today?
My guess about 50 plus their team and entourage!
Overselling it there.
Counted about 12 nimrods in their cheer "but not too loudly" squad and maybe another 10-20 scattered around the ground. The only noise after a Carnts goal was some booing and abusive words
More to the point, how did the Redlegs CS go tin bashing without spilling their latte's ;)

Wedgie wrote:I know it's ridiculously early days but can anyone see any team getting close to Man U this year? I can't.

Nope. Only the Clarets

Disappointing draw at lowly Liverpool. Expected more from the clarets against a shakey Reds defence and a missed opportunity to move into the CL places. Oh well.

Would love to see Sturt get up over Port Power.

No chance, I think they'll beat Port Magpies though

:roll: Magpies, Power, call them what the **** you want, but they are still an AFL Reserves squad.

You could also say Magpies, Power, call them what the **** you want, but they are still Port Adelaide

The Cuckoo's would be more appropriate.

The parent cuckoo, by stealth, puts its bastard egg in another birds nest which is then conned into looking after the interloper.
The cuckoo chick is at least 3 times bigger than the sovereign chicks who, one by one are squeezed out leaving the cuckoo's chick as the biggest and strongest in the nest. Meanwhile the parent birds continue to nurture the cuckoo chick seemingly oblivious to the damage it's doing until it's too late and all the sovereign chicks are dead and the nest is abandoned.

Hang on a minute............