SA Footy

They are saying the pros for the Crows to join with Uni Blacks are -

> They can drop a player to the Ammos
> They can develop players within the same structure and not be reliant on SANFL clubs to provide players.

Both of these reasons where given as pros for the SANFL clubs to vote the Crows into the SANFL!!!!

AFL clubs never liked SANFL clubs playing their players in the SANFL reserves, now they want the option?

They promoted the ability to pick a top up player form the SANFL clubs, develop them and then hand them back a ready made SANFL player, this will no longer happen under the new plan.

SANFL no longer run football in this state, the boys club at the Crows do....

bennymacca wrote:

areaman wrote:

bennymacca wrote:As I said, you can't be that "died in the wool" if you chuck a tantrum and leave when something doesn't go your way.

I'd be pretty concerned about anyone who blindly accepts what happens and doesn't question and evaluate what their club does.

Dyed in the wool refers to support for the team and players no matter how poorly they are performing.

Dyed in the wool does not mean blind acceptance of the bad decisions and administration of the club.

Would you still support the Crows if they decided to relocate to Darwin or Hobart?

Yep I would support them. I would be pissed off no doubt but I don't think chucking in the towel is the appropriate response

Nothing they could do to make you lose interest?

Location change, name change, fraudulent conduct etc?

NO NO NO NO

Dutchy you are just WRONG

how can you possibly come up with an assumption like that???

its good for football in this state, its been sensational for the state league and will be fantastic for the Ammos

imagine when the Ammos get to play a match before the Crows play GWS at Adelaide Oval next year

areaman wrote:

bennymacca wrote:

areaman wrote:

bennymacca wrote:As I said, you can't be that "died in the wool" if you chuck a tantrum and leave when something doesn't go your way.

I'd be pretty concerned about anyone who blindly accepts what happens and doesn't question and evaluate what their club does.

Dyed in the wool refers to support for the team and players no matter how poorly they are performing.

Dyed in the wool does not mean blind acceptance of the bad decisions and administration of the club.

Would you still support the Crows if they decided to relocate to Darwin or Hobart?

Yep I would support them. I would be pissed off no doubt but I don't think chucking in the towel is the appropriate response

Nothing they could do to make you lose interest?

Location change, name change, fraudulent conduct etc?

Yep of course there are things that could do that.

But the addition of a few teams for the comp is not on that list

Dutchy wrote:They are saying the pros for the Crows to join with Uni Blacks are -

> They can drop a player to the Ammos
> They can develop players within the same structure and not be reliant on SANFL clubs to provide players.

Both of these reasons where given as pros for the SANFL clubs to vote the Crows into the SANFL!!!!

AFL clubs never liked SANFL clubs playing their players in the SANFL reserves, now they want the option?

They promoted the ability to pick a top up player form the SANFL clubs, develop them and then hand them back a ready made SANFL player, this will no longer happen under the new plan.

SANFL no longer run football in this state, the boys club at the Crows do....

At last years info night at Glenelg, one of the reasons given by Chiggy for his support of the admission of garbage into the SANFL was that the Clowns had threatened to join the ammos instead. Chiggy believed this threat was dinkum and voted yes in part to keep interest and media attention in the SANFL.

Now the Clowns want to infect the Ammos anyway.

Wonder how Chiggy feels now...

Pseudo wrote:

Dutchy wrote:They are saying the pros for the Crows to join with Uni Blacks are -

> They can drop a player to the Ammos
> They can develop players within the same structure and not be reliant on SANFL clubs to provide players.

Both of these reasons where given as pros for the SANFL clubs to vote the Crows into the SANFL!!!!

AFL clubs never liked SANFL clubs playing their players in the SANFL reserves, now they want the option?

They promoted the ability to pick a top up player form the SANFL clubs, develop them and then hand them back a ready made SANFL player, this will no longer happen under the new plan.

SANFL no longer run football in this state, the boys club at the Crows do....

At last years info night at Glenelg, one of the reasons given by Chiggy for his support of the admission of garbage into the SANFL was that the Clowns had threatened to join the ammos instead. Chiggy believed this threat was dinkum and voted yes in part to keep interest and media attention in the SANFL.

Now the Clowns want to infect the Ammos anyway.

Wonder how Chiggy feels now...

Little?

bennymacca wrote:
Yep of course there are things that could do that.

But the addition of a few teams for the comp is not on that list

you really think that the resistance to the reserves sides is due to 'the addition of a few new teams for the comp"?.... if so you have completely missed every point ever made against the concept.

i would have had no problem whatsoever if the sanfl wanted to admit another TEAM to the comp to bring it to an even number of ten. put a new side in the hills, make it a country rep side, hell, even admit a team from the territory, i couldnt care less where they came from as long as they had the same playing field as the rest of us.

these "new teams" as you call them are not teams. they are reserves sides from another competition. they have no business being in the sanfl league competition. they have different rules to the rest of the sides, and different priorities. they should never have been admitted.

I make less of a deal of that than you that's where we differ. Of course they have different rules but to me the sanfl already had that in a lower form with the afl players spread out through the clubs, conflicts of interest between sanfl and afl, etc etc.

I see this as an extension of that rather than something that irrevocably changed the comp. of course you are free to disagree

bennymacca wrote:I make less of a deal of that than you that's where we differ. Of course they have different rules but to me the sanfl already had that in a lower form with the afl players spread out through the clubs, conflicts of interest between sanfl and afl, etc etc.

I see this as an extension of that rather than something that irrevocably changed the comp. of course you are free to disagree

Those players were filtered through the clubs, who were all under the same rules and challenges.

It didn't irrevocably change the comp???

all the sides had the same conflicts though. every side had afl players coming in and out. everyone had the same advantage/disadvantage potential.

this is a massive step making the situation worse for every club. if the reserves sides were elsewhere (and frankly i couldnt care where they went, as long as it was away) the sanfl sides still get the benefit of not having the disruption of afl players, and also get the benefit of not having a compromised comp.

the ressies sides are a monstrously different situation to just introducing a new team or two. surely you can see that they are in no way the same

Yeah they are different. But I don't think different automatically equals worse.

Well actually I do think it is potentially a bit worse, as I have said before. But not so bad that I would withdraw support for the competition or my club. Guess that's the point that I am making.

not saying its automatically worse. but there are many people that have pointed out the negatives. the only positives i see would have still been there if the reserves sides went elsewhere..... why gimp the comp for benefits we would still have gotten if they took their sides to the ammos?? some possible negatives which from the looks of the crows latest plan will come about anyway?? lose lose lose situation the sanfl has put itself into

I'd like to acknowledge bennymacca's contribution to the 'push' toward 100 pages.
We stagnated for quite some time between 70 odd & the low '90s but now we are powering toward the 'ton'.
Bat soon to be raised

Pseudo wrote:

Dutchy wrote:They are saying the pros for the Crows to join with Uni Blacks are -

> They can drop a player to the Ammos
> They can develop players within the same structure and not be reliant on SANFL clubs to provide players.

Both of these reasons where given as pros for the SANFL clubs to vote the Crows into the SANFL!!!!

AFL clubs never liked SANFL clubs playing their players in the SANFL reserves, now they want the option?

They promoted the ability to pick a top up player form the SANFL clubs, develop them and then hand them back a ready made SANFL player, this will no longer happen under the new plan.

SANFL no longer run football in this state, the boys club at the Crows do....

At last years info night at Glenelg, one of the reasons given by Chiggy for his support of the admission of garbage into the SANFL was that the Clowns had threatened to join the ammos instead. Chiggy believed this threat was dinkum and voted yes in part to keep interest and media attention in the SANFL.

Now the Clowns want to infect the Ammos anyway.

Wonder how Chiggy feels now...

Correct, ironically I haven't been back to the club since that meeting.....

tipper wrote:not saying its automatically worse. but there are many people that have pointed out the negatives. the only positives i see would have still been there if the reserves sides went elsewhere..... why gimp the comp for benefits we would still have gotten if they took their sides to the ammos?? some possible negatives which from the looks of the crows latest plan will come about anyway?? lose lose lose situation the sanfl has put itself into

That's just pushing the problem onto somebody else. Hardly a solution, rather just a nimby situation.

bennymacca wrote:yep I would support them. I would be pissed off no doubt but I don't think chucking in the towel is the appropriate response

Did someone just sound the Superfan horn?

smac wrote:Can you show me where Centrals have benefited from the entry of Crows and Port reserves?

Sorry @bennymacca, you seemed to have been distracted - thought I would ask this one again.

Really simple question that I don't think has an answer.

Also curious to know the answer to this for Norwood, sure a detailed breakdown of all the positives can't be too far away.

topsywaldron wrote:Also curious to know the answer to this for Norwood, sure a detailed breakdown of all the positives can't be too far away.

Saving on admin staff cost by not having to send out as many membership packages? I know that's a benefit for North thanks to me and others.

bennymacca wrote:

tipper wrote:not saying its automatically worse. but there are many people that have pointed out the negatives. the only positives i see would have still been there if the reserves sides went elsewhere..... why gimp the comp for benefits we would still have gotten if they took their sides to the ammos?? some possible negatives which from the looks of the crows latest plan will come about anyway?? lose lose lose situation the sanfl has put itself into

That's just pushing the problem onto somebody else. Hardly a solution, rather just a nimby situation.

What problem did we have? I couldn't care if you had a reserves issue. What you've actually done is put YOUR league's problem onto someone else.

Its not NIMBY when one side wants everything and whines when it doesn't.