chocko's contempt for the sanfl

All discussions to do with the SANFL

Re: chocko's contempt for the sanfl

Postby Booney » Fri Jun 22, 2007 5:25 pm

Perhaps getting a procedure out of the way to allow these guys to perform to their optimum for their primary employer may have been good for their development?
If you want to go quickly, go alone.

If you want to go far, go together.
User avatar
Booney
Coach
 
 
Posts: 61692
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2005 1:47 pm
Location: Alberton proud
Has liked: 8210 times
Been liked: 11940 times

Re: chocko's contempt for the sanfl

Postby mighty_tiger_79 » Fri Jun 22, 2007 5:27 pm

Booney wrote:Perhaps getting a procedure out of the way to allow these guys to perform to their optimum for their primary employer may have been good for their development?



and thats worked a treat so far
Matty Wade is a star and deserves more respect from the forum family!
User avatar
mighty_tiger_79
Coach
 
Posts: 60962
Joined: Tue Jan 03, 2006 7:29 pm
Location: at the TAB
Has liked: 13446 times
Been liked: 4646 times

Re: chocko's contempt for the sanfl

Postby Booney » Fri Jun 22, 2007 5:28 pm

Hindsight is a wonderful thing,you should try marketing it....
If you want to go quickly, go alone.

If you want to go far, go together.
User avatar
Booney
Coach
 
 
Posts: 61692
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2005 1:47 pm
Location: Alberton proud
Has liked: 8210 times
Been liked: 11940 times

Re: chocko's contempt for the sanfl

Postby doggies4eva » Fri Jun 22, 2007 6:06 pm

Booney wrote:Perhaps getting a procedure out of the way to allow these guys to perform to their optimum for their primary employer may have been good for their development?


Booney, fess up - are you Chocko's love child? :?
We used to be good :-(
User avatar
doggies4eva
League - Best 21
 
 
Posts: 2473
Joined: Mon Dec 05, 2005 2:23 pm
Location: In front of a computer screen
Has liked: 0 time
Been liked: 0 time

Re: chocko's contempt for the sanfl

Postby BPBRB » Fri Jun 22, 2007 6:12 pm

Topsy - you would be one of the most fickle and pedantic posters on this site as well as one of the most anti-North. Seriously you missed my whole point. I noticed you haven't given Wedgie a bake for the ame reasoning in his post?

As for your "gun" recruit - he shopped himself around and not only North knocked him back after some ludicrous pay demands. but at least 2 other clubs including Port (if you can beleive that given their recent recruiting). Good luck to him and Norwood if he got what he wanted.

P.S. Re-couped your costs from "giving us" Ryswyk yet? :lol:
BPBRB
 

Re: chocko's contempt for the sanfl

Postby Barto » Fri Jun 22, 2007 9:57 pm

Chocko is always a good source of comedy.

Perhaps he should've been invited to the 1967 commemoration and he could've taken himself back 40 years and turned on the waterworks for authenticity's sake.
It's all the SANFL's fault.
User avatar
Barto
Veteran
 
 
Posts: 3736
Joined: Sun Feb 19, 2006 4:40 pm
Location: Fremantle
Has liked: 3 times
Been liked: 6 times

Re: chocko's contempt for the sanfl

Postby Dutchy » Fri Jun 22, 2007 10:00 pm

Booney wrote:Perhaps getting a procedure out of the way to allow these guys to perform to their optimum for their primary employer may have been good for their development?


how do you explain giving Logan a rest, when he has missed half the season????
User avatar
Dutchy
Site Admin
 
 
Posts: 46250
Joined: Sat Nov 05, 2005 8:24 am
Location: Location, Location
Has liked: 2648 times
Been liked: 4314 times

Re: chocko's contempt for the sanfl

Postby Hondo » Fri Jun 22, 2007 10:29 pm

bayman wrote:you missed one point hondo & that was i said they should have a reserves team in the vfl not sanfl


No I don't think it matters which league they play in - either way it takes all those guys out of the other SANFL plus another 20-30 players. That's the impact I am talking about.

The best solution I have heard is Sojourner's one about keeping them all in the SANFL reserves to keep the integrity of the league comp intact.
Last edited by Hondo on Fri Jun 22, 2007 10:46 pm, edited 1 time in total.
In between signatures .....
User avatar
Hondo
Coach
 
 
Posts: 7927
Joined: Fri Feb 16, 2007 9:19 pm
Location: Glandore, Adelaide
Has liked: 70 times
Been liked: 32 times

Re: chocko's contempt for the sanfl

Postby Hondo » Fri Jun 22, 2007 10:43 pm

Wedgie wrote:
Sojourner wrote:I am tipping that if you ask most Crows supporters who they barracked for prior to the Crows in the VFL-AFL they are going to give you a similar answer!

Yeah, but they'd be the same people who like going to movies as opposed to being fair dinkum died in the wool real football supporters.


What a stupid, judgemental comment FFS

According to you I am not a 'fair dinkum' / 'died in the wool' / 'real' / INSERT CLICHE / INSERT CLICHE football supporter.

I'd love to hand out badges to the guys who think sticking with some VFL team they sort-of cared about in the 1980s over the SANFL's representative team in 1991 makes them better/INSERT CLICHE supporters than those that chose to support the Crows.

Wedgie wrote:As long as Port and the Crows remember that the SANFL own their licenses and its the 9 SANFL clubs that make up the SANFL.


..... but no SANFL fan is allowed to support them if they supported a VFL team before 1991 .... sorry, you can but then you're not a REAL supporter, just someone who likes to knit ...

Wedgie, if you were super-passionate about the Cats then fair enough you stuck with them. In fact, I'll go out on a non-judgmental limb and say that's OK.

But don't make the mistake of assuming you are any more of a football supporter than me or any other Crows or Power supporter.

Let's take this outside / to the AFL Board :lol: :axe:
In between signatures .....
User avatar
Hondo
Coach
 
 
Posts: 7927
Joined: Fri Feb 16, 2007 9:19 pm
Location: Glandore, Adelaide
Has liked: 70 times
Been liked: 32 times

Re: chocko's contempt for the sanfl

Postby Dirko » Fri Jun 22, 2007 11:01 pm

What I still can't figure out is this...the Victorian clubs...including the one I support have a affiliated side in the VFL where ALL there players not in the league side play. In my mobs case it's the Nothern Bullants, Essendon the Bendigo Bombers etc etc...
So when they play they play WITH teammates from their employer, against other OPPOSITON teams..sounds good. When someone gets dropped back to the SANFL, say to Norwood (Massie), then Norwood play Glenelg, Massie is on Douglas and hey presto, you have your OWN teammate from your EMPLOYER as your Opposition. Yeehaa, or even better you get Tommy Logan playing along side Douglas for the Bays, only for them both to be recalled and watch em clobber each other in the Showdown. :-s :-s :-s
The joy of being on the hill drinking beer cannot be understated
User avatar
Dirko
Coach
 
 
Posts: 11456
Joined: Sat Jul 29, 2006 7:17 pm
Location: Snouts Hill
Has liked: 6 times
Been liked: 2 times
Grassroots Team: SMOSH West Lakes

Re: chocko's contempt for the sanfl

Postby bazza1 » Sat Jun 23, 2007 12:20 am

both the crows and the power "own" the players contracted to their clubs, they can do what they like with them
My drinking club has a cricket problem!
User avatar
bazza1
Reserves
 
 
Posts: 975
Joined: Fri Mar 09, 2007 10:04 pm
Location: the swamp
Has liked: 10 times
Been liked: 12 times
Grassroots Team: North Haven

Re: chocko's contempt for the sanfl

Postby Squawk » Sat Jun 23, 2007 1:49 am

bazza1 wrote:both the crows and the power "own" the players contracted to their clubs, they can do what they like with them


That's the bottom line.

I think we get disappointed though at the inconvenience that comes with Port Power and the Crows selections week to week. Because Adelaide has had a lot of injuries this year they have been making regular changes to their side as well as 'preserving' their fit players. Last week Meesen had to play at West reserves and Pfeiffer at Eagles reserves coz Nwd had the bye. Form and fitness were the reasons. This week Campbell was pulled out - obviously not for form or fitness but preservation. Pfeiffer was brought in to the league team. Obviously for fitness though. Cockshell's form IMHO has not warranted continued league selection but he keeps getting picked (Choco?). Not on selection radar therefore a form issue. Lower was played on Tredrea in Round 1. (Choco?). I've only observed the Nwd situations but no doubt it is the same for everyone.

So yes, they can do what they like with them in terms of availability. The worse scenario is the other one - the instructions to select players in league teams and the demands to play them in certain positions. TYhe difference is that both clubs are trying to win a flag but it becomes much harder for the SANFL team to do so when requested to play players in certain positions or in certain match ups, and then the frustration sets in when the AFL clubs have a bye and just pull their players out to ensure they aren't injured. HOWEVER - are they also told not to have a shower on the weekend - just recently that poor Richmond player fell over in his bathroom, banged his head and is out for the season with bleeding on the brain!
Steve Bradbury and Michael Milton. Aussie Legends.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nRnztSjUB2U
User avatar
Squawk
Assistant Coach
 
 
Posts: 4665
Joined: Tue Jul 04, 2006 3:00 pm
Location: Coopers Stadium
Has liked: 0 time
Been liked: 3 times

Re: chocko's contempt for the sanfl

Postby September Specialists » Sat Jun 23, 2007 6:59 am

NFC wrote:So why is Adam Thomson playing tonight? Is Williams saying he's no chance to play in their next match?


Tell me how can anyone justify saying let's rest a soft receiver like Lonie because he might get injured and let a ball winner play like Thomson play especially when they know that Salopek is out for the next 5 weeks or so.

After all Port do have quiet a few receivers in their afl team.

Am i missing out something here, or perhaps someone could say why Thomson isn't playing AFL at the moment. Is he out of favor with the coaches or what?
September Specialists
Mini-League
 
Posts: 5
Joined: Sun Apr 22, 2007 11:45 pm
Has liked: 0 time
Been liked: 0 time

Re: chocko's contempt for the sanfl

Postby Hondo » Sat Jun 23, 2007 9:30 am

Just assume you will never have your AFL-listed player available. Then when he is, look it as a lucky bonus considering he was a 14/16 chance to get drafted interstate and be playing somewhere like Port Melbourne if he hadn't made his AFL side.

Then if he isn't (for WHATEVER reason), then you won't get so worked up about it.

Don't ever forget once they are in the AFL system they have already left your club, in some ways. They don't belong to an SANFL club anymore.

..... then build a bridge because this will keep happening forever ....
Last edited by Hondo on Sat Jun 23, 2007 9:31 am, edited 1 time in total.
In between signatures .....
User avatar
Hondo
Coach
 
 
Posts: 7927
Joined: Fri Feb 16, 2007 9:19 pm
Location: Glandore, Adelaide
Has liked: 70 times
Been liked: 32 times

Re: chocko's contempt for the sanfl

Postby Booney » Sat Jun 23, 2007 9:31 am

Hondo on FIRE!
If you want to go quickly, go alone.

If you want to go far, go together.
User avatar
Booney
Coach
 
 
Posts: 61692
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2005 1:47 pm
Location: Alberton proud
Has liked: 8210 times
Been liked: 11940 times

Re: chocko's contempt for the sanfl

Postby Macca19 » Sat Jun 23, 2007 9:58 am

September Specialists wrote:
NFC wrote:So why is Adam Thomson playing tonight? Is Williams saying he's no chance to play in their next match?


Tell me how can anyone justify saying let's rest a soft receiver like Lonie because he might get injured and let a ball winner play like Thomson play especially when they know that Salopek is out for the next 5 weeks or so.

After all Port do have quiet a few receivers in their afl team.

Am i missing out something here, or perhaps someone could say why Thomson isn't playing AFL at the moment. Is he out of favor with the coaches or what?


To me, I think its obvious that the club has asked him to work on one or two facets of his game. They had an interview with someone last week, cant remember off the top of my head, and they said they wanted to see him put together 2-3 really really good performances so he could realy work his way into the Port side. They said he was inline to play then he got injured and his form since hes been back has been good as well. Id expect he'll play soon.
Macca19
League - Best 21
 
 
Posts: 1961
Joined: Fri Oct 28, 2005 10:54 pm
Has liked: 5 times
Been liked: 10 times
Grassroots Team: Ports

Re: chocko's contempt for the sanfl

Postby Macca19 » Sat Jun 23, 2007 10:07 am

sjab wrote:What I still can't figure out is this...the Victorian clubs...including the one I support have a affiliated side in the VFL where ALL there players not in the league side play. In my mobs case it's the Nothern Bullants, Essendon the Bendigo Bombers etc etc...
So when they play they play WITH teammates from their employer, against other OPPOSITON teams..sounds good. When someone gets dropped back to the SANFL, say to Norwood (Massie), then Norwood play Glenelg, Massie is on Douglas and hey presto, you have your OWN teammate from your EMPLOYER as your Opposition. Yeehaa, or even better you get Tommy Logan playing along side Douglas for the Bays, only for them both to be recalled and watch em clobber each other in the Showdown. :-s :-s :-s


It has its positives and negatives. A negative is that if you have numerous players in the one position then it can be hard for them to develop.

Take Crows last year for example. Meeson, Maric, Griffin and later in the year Hudson all as ruckman all in the SANFL. Who do you play? What do you do with the others?

A few years back Port had Brooks, French, Brogan and ACkland all as ruckman.

So there are drawbacks to that arrangement as well.
Macca19
League - Best 21
 
 
Posts: 1961
Joined: Fri Oct 28, 2005 10:54 pm
Has liked: 5 times
Been liked: 10 times
Grassroots Team: Ports

Re: chocko's contempt for the sanfl

Postby youngster » Sat Jun 23, 2007 11:33 am

Macca19 wrote:To me, I think its obvious that the club has asked him to work on one or two facets of his game. They had an interview with someone last week, cant remember off the top of my head, and they said they wanted to see him put together 2-3 really really good performances so he could realy work his way into the Port side. They said he was inline to play then he got injured and his form since hes been back has been good as well. Id expect he'll play soon.


The Port selectors are correct, Thomson has been a disgrace, and on form very lucky to hold his spot in the Sturt side... :^o :^o
youngster
Rookie
 
 
Posts: 165
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2007 9:54 am
Location: At the bar
Has liked: 0 time
Been liked: 0 time

Re: chocko's contempt for the sanfl

Postby Rhino » Sat Jun 23, 2007 11:52 am

Wedgie wrote:
Sojourner wrote:I am tipping that if you ask most Crows supporters who they barracked for prior to the Crows in the VFL-AFL they are going to give you a similar answer!

Yeah, but they'd be the same people who like going to movies as opposed to being fair dinkum died in the wool real football supporters.

PS Mrs Wedgie is one, although she had no interest in the VFL/AFL before the Crows, mind you she was originally a Bays fan. For some reason some clubs seem to be impacted on by the Crows more than other clubs, North's fans reamin pretty loyal as do the Dogs fans. Eagles, Bays and to a lesser degree Norwood supporters are the opposite. Sturt supporters are pretty consistent in that they go when they're winning and don't when they're losing! :lol:


"Hey, I didn't miss a game in 2003 where I missed a game this year and in 2005!" Wedgie Quote

You were obviously one of the minority in 2003 Wedgie!! Until Jarman's return to the club, Rooster fans had dropped away in droves, as SFC's supporters did in the 90's until our return to Unley (I should know as I've missed ten games in the last ten years).

As for the Bays and Eagles, even last year when the SFC were terrible, we still outnumbered the Eagles (in a Premiership year)and Bays supporters by a considerable amount at their home decks!

It's an unfair comparison you make given that all nine clubs have their signficant component of "fair weather" supporters. The fact that Port, Sturt and Norwood have the more considerable supporter bases it stands to reason that when the old "success/failure = jump on/drop off matrix" comes into play it has a more significant effect on crowd numbers. Pure mathematics.
There is only one team I love as much as the Double Blues, the Double Blues Reserves.......
User avatar
Rhino
Member
 
 
Posts: 89
Joined: Tue Feb 07, 2006 7:12 pm
Location: Henley Beach
Has liked: 0 time
Been liked: 0 time

Re: chocko's contempt for the sanfl

Postby godoubleblues » Sat Jun 23, 2007 12:18 pm

youngster wrote:
Macca19 wrote:To me, I think its obvious that the club has asked him to work on one or two facets of his game. They had an interview with someone last week, cant remember off the top of my head, and they said they wanted to see him put together 2-3 really really good performances so he could realy work his way into the Port side. They said he was inline to play then he got injured and his form since hes been back has been good as well. Id expect he'll play soon.


The Port selectors are correct, Thomson has been a disgrace, and on form very lucky to hold his spot in the Sturt side... :^o :^o


:lol: :lol: if Choco cant work out the sort of form that Thomson is in :shock: :shock:
User avatar
godoubleblues
Coach
 
 
Posts: 6063
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2005 9:16 am
Location: Littlehampton
Has liked: 0 time
Been liked: 0 time
Grassroots Team: Millicent

PreviousNext

Board index   Football  SANFL

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 18 guests

Around the place

Competitions   SANFL Official Site | Country Footy SA | Southern Football League | VFL Footy
Club Forums   Snouts Louts | The Roost | Redlegs Forum |