SA Footy

LPH wrote:http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/sport/afl/local-footy-sa/sanfl/dominant-crows-a-reason-to-be-concerned-for-sanfl/news-story/3877ca6a862adc97724fbdcc2693435b

Err... hate to say we told you so

W Partland a lone voice in the afl centric media. A lot of respect for his efforts. Sick of seeing dimwits in the comments throwing out the same old ficticous line about how the SANFL would be gone weren't it not for the afl teams.

Go the Crows
Win the flag by 30goals you Chardonnay cocksucking ****

When you look at the history of our competition and what it meant to everyone involved to win a premiership.....
To think that a team who treat it as a practice hit out could raise the Thomas Seymour Hill, is an absolute disgrace!!!!
The day the AFL wins a premiership in our comp is the day I hand back my membership to a club I have supported for 30 years.

Just ban both reserves teams from finals and the Magarey.
Simple.

The clubs that voted for it won't see the folly of the decision until they are thrashed in a prelim or GF by the reserves.

Until then clubs like mine will continue to say it's all good.

If South go out, they have to have the balls with the Dogs to go public and start a campaign to remove them. We know they have balls as they voted no, so I hope they do it.

Crows have reason to play well for the next two weeks, so South and probably Sturt may pay the price.

CUTTERMAN wrote:Just ban both reserves teams from finals and the Magarey.
Simple.

I sympathise but how does that work, you end up with a three team finals series or a 7th placed team in the five.

Both crap options.

The teams are in the league fully or aren't, it's binary to me.

csbowes wrote:

CUTTERMAN wrote:Just ban both reserves teams from finals and the Magarey.
Simple.

I sympathise but how does that work, you end up with a three team finals series or a 7th placed team in the five.

Both crap options.

The teams are in the league fully or aren't, it's binary to me.

Everyone can play for the minor premiership and then the reserves teams bow out. During the season you have two ladders one that doesn't include the reserves. Top 4 or five of that ladder play finals. Port and Adelaide can go please themselves.

CUTTERMAN wrote:

csbowes wrote:

CUTTERMAN wrote:Just ban both reserves teams from finals and the Magarey.
Simple.

I sympathise but how does that work, you end up with a three team finals series or a 7th placed team in the five.

Both crap options.

The teams are in the league fully or aren't, it's binary to me.

Everyone can play for the minor premiership and then the reserves teams bow out. During the season you have two ladders one that doesn't include the reserves. Top 4 or five of that ladder play finals. Port and Adelaide can go please themselves.

As I said, it means the 7th best team makes the finals in some years. It's just another way of clearly showing we have no idea what we are doing. If the teams are in, they play finals and win medals. Otherwise if they don't, then the SANFL teams will just rest and rotate players through the AFL games to be better placed themselves for SANFL finals. That would also hurt the competition.

Fact is you don't stick Manchester United in the A-League because you can. There has to be compelling reasons why it's good for all. The league presidents, I say, don't want the Crows going to the grannie and that in itself would prove they know this isn't a good arrangement. We are all hoping South win just to avoid what would be the inevitable outrage.

It's not an ideal set up and it's largely because of the AFL refusing to structure a nationally tiered system of promotion and relegation. They myopically focus on the top tier and totally ignore and undermine anything below it. It's a massive failing by such a wealthy organisation and in time it will be its undoing. Again and again the AFL is found to be lacking in any real leadership by example, instead falling back on its Demitriou-esque model of do as I say not as I do. Leadership starts at the top and filters down, if you insist that a salary cap is one of the strengths of the comp then by default it MUST filter down to the other levels. By default the reserves teams break the salary cap and hence don't qualify for finals.
It's the best of a poor situation. It's not perfect but until the AFL pull their finger out of their ar$es then we have to try and retain some sort of integrity where we can.

I rang the SANFL during the week, though expressing my opinion was no doubt pretty futile. I emailed the SANFL in the second quarter of yesterday's game, though no doubt the email will go nowhere.

I suggest members of the bendover clubs, should both email and phone their clubs and the SANFL. It might be futile (you never know), but at least they have your views on record (again after the meetings three years ago). Now you can say you were right. We now have the failed results of the experiment.

Dogs72 wrote:I rang the SANFL during the week, though expressing my opinion was no doubt pretty futile. I emailed the SANFL in the second quarter of yesterday's game, though no doubt the email will go nowhere.

I suggest members of the bendover clubs, should both email and phone their clubs and the SANFL. It might be futile (you never know), but at least they have your views on record (again after the meetings three years ago). Now you can say you were right. We now have the failed results of the experiment.

Love the activist sentiment Dogs 72, but from a North Adelaide point of view it would be futile. In fact I think I heard the club is investing it's pokie war-chest into CSIRO research on whether it can bend over further to accommodate the AFL sides.

As Tipper (I think) posted yesterday the North hierarchy are happy to go down with the ship on this one. Not surprising for a club that, IMHO, prioritises the generation of AFL talent and pokie profits as it's own equivalent of a 'premiership' over cultivating on-field success and considering the views of its members and their desire to see finals success. And a president who wants a cushy SANFL gig.

As for the league, I'm sure you're well aware that website hits, twitter account hashtags, and high scores on all Candy Crush platforms are at record highs so the league's actually in great shape. But your email is important to Mr Olsen and I'm sure he values your cooperative and constructive thoughts, and a personally emailed pro-forma response from a generic league email account might be sent back to you if Mr Olsen can (a) distinguish his arse from his elbow, and (b) be bothered getting the necessary permit from the Adelaide Crows.

Magellan wrote:

Dogs72 wrote:I rang the SANFL during the week, though expressing my opinion was no doubt pretty futile. I emailed the SANFL in the second quarter of yesterday's game, though no doubt the email will go nowhere.

I suggest members of the bendover clubs, should both email and phone their clubs and the SANFL. It might be futile (you never know), but at least they have your views on record (again after the meetings three years ago). Now you can say you were right. We now have the failed results of the experiment.

Love the activist sentiment Dogs 72, but from a North Adelaide point of view it would be futile. In fact I think I heard the club is investing it's pokie war-chest into CSIRO research on whether it can bend over further to accommodate the AFL sides.

As Tipper (I think) posted yesterday the North hierarchy are happy to go down with the ship on this one. Not surprising for a club that, IMHO, prioritises the generation of AFL talent and pokie profits as it's own equivalent of a 'premiership' over cultivating on-field success and considering the views of its members and their desire to see finals success. And a president who wants a cushy SANFL gig.

As for the league, I'm sure you're well aware that website hits, twitter account hashtags, and high scores on all Candy Crush platforms are at record highs so the league's actually in great shape. But your email is important to Mr Olsen and I'm sure he values your cooperative and constructive thoughts, and a personally emailed pro-forma response from a generic league email account might be sent back to you if Mr Olsen can (a) distinguish his arse from his elbow, and (b) be bothered getting the necessary permit from the Adelaide Crows.

Yep, it was me. It was the response when i asked at the info night about this scenario. Loss of crowds, loss of memberships. Answer was "we will close the doors"....

The answer may have changed since, but i doubt it. Maybe ill have a couple of jamiesons this arvo and fire off something to the virtual runner anyway. Cant hurt can it?

On a similar topic, i pointee out to someone a few weeks ago, crowds have been terrible and memberships are dropping too. Their response "north makes a profit without people at the games". Sadly ot seems to be tje prevaling attitude of those in charge at prospect. **** the other clubs basically

Magellan wrote:

Dogs72 wrote:I rang the SANFL during the week, though expressing my opinion was no doubt pretty futile. I emailed the SANFL in the second quarter of yesterday's game, though no doubt the email will go nowhere.

I suggest members of the bendover clubs, should both email and phone their clubs and the SANFL. It might be futile (you never know), but at least they have your views on record (again after the meetings three years ago). Now you can say you were right. We now have the failed results of the experiment.

Love the activist sentiment Dogs 72, but from a North Adelaide point of view it would be futile. In fact I think I heard the club is investing it's pokie war-chest into CSIRO research on whether it can bend over further to accommodate the AFL sides.

As Tipper (I think) posted yesterday the North hierarchy are happy to go down with the ship on this one. Not surprising for a club that, IMHO, prioritises the generation of AFL talent and pokie profits as it's own equivalent of a 'premiership' over cultivating on-field success and considering the views of its members and their desire to see finals success. And a president who wants a cushy SANFL gig.

As for the league, I'm sure you're well aware that website hits, twitter account hashtags, and high scores on all Candy Crush platforms are at record highs so the league's actually in great shape. But your email is important to Mr Olsen and I'm sure he values your cooperative and constructive thoughts, and a personally emailed pro-forma response from a generic league email account might be sent back to you if Mr Olsen can (a) distinguish his arse from his elbow, and (b) be bothered getting the necessary permit from the Adelaide Crows.

Yep, it was me. It was the response when i asked at the info night about this scenario. Loss of crowds, loss of memberships. Answer was "we will close the doors"....

The answer may have changed since, but i doubt it. Maybe ill have a couple of jamiesons this arvo and fire off something to the virtual runner anyway. Cant hurt can it?

On a similar topic, i pointee out to someone a few weeks ago, crowds have been terrible and memberships are dropping too. Their response "north makes a profit without people at the games". Sadly ot seems to be tje prevaling attitude of those in charge at prospect. **** the other clubs basically

CUTTERMAN
It's not an ideal set up and it's largely because of the AFL refusing to structure a nationally tiered system of promotion and relegation. They myopically focus on the top tier and totally ignore and undermine anything below it. It's a massive failing by such a wealthy organisation and in time it will be its undoing. Again and again the AFL is found to be lacking in any real leadership by example, instead falling back on its Demitriou-esque model of do as I say not as I do. Leadership starts at the top and filters down, if you insist that a salary cap is one of the strengths of the comp then by default it MUST filter down to the other levels. By default the reserves teams break the salary cap and hence don't qualify for finals.
It's the best of a poor situation. It's not perfect but until the AFL pull their finger out of their ar$es then we have to try and retain some sort of integrity where we can

Unless of course it is female, so Gilligan can feel good about himself. This obsession with pumping millions of dollars into female footy to create a false elite league will eventually be the straw that broke the camels back with state league and local footy in the next few years.

Who is paying for the SA women's league in SA.
The AFL or the SANFL or the clubs and their members?

NEAFL Prelim Finals:

Sydney 15.23 (113) defeat Aspley 4.7 (31). 38 shots to 11, could have been even more of a massacre.

GWS 17.15 (117) defeat Sydney Uni 4.6 (30). Ditto.

Great for footy!

Back page of today's Sunday Mail mentions a meeting of 6 of the 8 SANFL clubs at Prospect, held "without the endorsement of the SANFL governing body". Anyone have any knowledge of this?

Kahuna wrote:Back page of today's Sunday Mail mentions a meeting of 6 of the 8 SANFL clubs at Prospect, held "without the endorsement of the SANFL governing body". Anyone have any knowledge of this?

Hello, hello, hello!
I am all ears about this. Please don't be just a rumour.
Please!
Did the article mention anything else beyond the fact that 6 of the 8 met at Prospect and the SANFL hadn't sanctioned the meeting?
If I had a bit of business nouse and a shit load more charisma I'd go for the top SANFL job. The whole system needs to be revamped, and Olsen has a track record of just taking the easy money. SANFL needs vision more than ever before.

Apparently discussed "a range of issues, with deep concerns over the future of the State League". Also mentions "the future of the independent SANFL Commission, fixturing and ongoing club funding".
Names names of attendees. South and West didn't attend.
Maybe the rumblings are increasing.

Kahuna wrote:Back page of today's Sunday Mail mentions a meeting of 6 of the 8 SANFL clubs at Prospect, held "without the endorsement of the SANFL governing body". Anyone have any knowledge of this?

Please, please tell me it's a glimmer of hope! Please tell me some club boards have found their backbone. Please tell me the SANFLs betterment, survival and growth is now their priority not their personal resumes, business interests or recruitment sanctions being lifted. Please tell me, I'll be able to take my young family to the SANFL next year rather than give up. Will the boards actually listen to their members and not try to defend the indefensible? Can they get rid of Olsen and the goose from the wafl that is only seeking afl personal advancement?