The never ending No AFL in the SANFL whinge thread

[Magellan]

Here it is, from behind the Great Paywall of Murdoch. Make of it what you will. I'll say this, though: for all his spruiking, I wonder if he went on the weekend, or if he'll go this Sunday?

A SIDE has hardly dominated a competition when, over a three-year period, it has a win-loss record of 27-27 and one draw ... has it?

Adelaide’s SANFL side finished eighth in 2014, seventh in 2015 and this year fourth at the end of the home and away season.

On the weekend the SANFL Crows played in their first final in three years and happened to play their best game for the year. As a result, they won.
If they played like they had the game prior they would have been knocked out in the elimination final. It’s not exactly the form line of a Hawthorn is it?

The Crows played Central District in the final — a side that had not only beaten them twice this year but beat them by a record 55 points in Round 13.
Central had every reason to be confident going into the game.

Unfortunately, coach Roy Laird chose to publicly focus on the SANFL’s decision to “bend over” to allow Cameron Ellis-Yolmen to play instead.

CEY had played 16 SANFL games this year and only two AFL games — one a result of Rory Sloane’s suspension a week prior. The Crows could have played Sloane and Brodie Smith on the weekend but didn’t.

I’m not sure what Roy tried to achieve by this but it came across poorly and the SANFL felt the need to fine him as a result.

I would highly doubt that his comments had a positive impact on his players. In fact I would say there is every chance it had a negative effect.
Just for the record, the Crows had 10 players 21 years old and younger. Eleven of them had no AFL experience at all. Six had played 20 AFL games or less and only five had played an AFL game this year.

Three others were ‘top up’ players who have only played a handful of SANFL games between them.

The Crows are having their best year in the SANFL, winning twelve games and losing, seven so hardly dominating.

The AFL team has had the least amount of injuries of any side in the competition and as a result has a strong team in the SANFL.

It’s no different to any other SANFL side having an injury-free year. When you do, your team goes well. When you don’t, they don’t play so well.
South Adelaide, unfortunately, has injuries to several of its best players this week ... is that the Crows’ fault? I don’t think so.

South has beaten the Crows twice this year like Central had. South won by 38 points against the Crows only 10 days ago. Surely they won’t have the same negative attitude as Central did.

Like Central, both of those wins were at their home ground because of the fact that every Crows match in the home and away season is an away game.

Finals, however, are played at Adelaide Oval, which is where they should be. Surely that’s where the players would want to be as well?
Even in the AFL the finals are compromised slightly. Take Geelong finishing above Hawthorn but having to “host” their final at the Hawks’ home ground the MCG on Friday night.

Whether Central or other clubs agree with the Crows and Port being in the SANFL, surely it’s time to move on isn’t it?

The SANFL made the decision and the clubs have to get on with the job. The SANFL would have thought long and hard about this decision given that it was clear that some clubs were against it.

The SANFL bosses must have thought it was in the competition’s best interest to have the AFL clubs in, otherwise they wouldn’t be.
The Crows pay each SANFL club $50,000 a year, so $400,000 total annually, just to play in the competition. That’s big money for the clubs and big money for Adelaide. Could the SANFL clubs do without it?

Isn’t it better having 10 teams and not nine?

’m sure the players from the other eight sides love shaping up against the AFL teams to test themselves out.

I remember my dad picking me up from school early so I come down and play for Westies on Norwood’s Garry McIntosh as a 16-year-old. I was extremely nervous but also very excited about the challenge and I am still here to tell the story.

Like it or not, the SANFL has been on the decline since the Crows came in back in 1991. Just like every state-based league since the VFL turned national and became the AFL.

Crowds have been falling away since then. The Crows predicted bigger crowds but they unfortunately haven’t come. Channel 7, however, is very happy with the television numbers when they broadcast their game of the week.

On the weekend they had an audience of about 100,000 viewers over the two games.

It is crucial that the two AFL sides have reserves teams. To have them train and play together with the same coaches and gamestyle is a big winner.

It is also important for the SANFL itself that the AFL sides perform well, given that proceeds from AFL crowds flow through to the SANFL coffers.

But back to the SANFL finals — the rules are set, the Crows and Port are in the competition.

Let’s not get emotional about one week of footy, let’s enjoy the SANFL finals for what they are.

Great footy at one of the best stadiums in the world with spring weather to top it off.

If the Crows beat South Adelaide then good luck to them. If they lose, they’re out and congratulations to South.

Let’s not focus on whether they should be there or not, three years after the decision was made.

[Booney]

Interesting to see Ruccuito's piece in today's Advertiser talking up why the Crows reserves are good for the league. Curious as to why a Crows board member felt the need to use its key propaganda agent to push its agenda at this time of the year, when surely from a Crows' point of view it is axiomatic that the reserves are a great idea? Conversely, why would the Advertiser want to publish a story on this when it could fill the paper with oodles of pre-elimination final material?

Perhaps the rumblings and meetings in the last week or so have some people worried? Maybe, but probably unlikely. The more plausible explanation is that the airing of views contrary to the interests of the most important sporting franchise in this state really irks the powers that be, and they feel the need to silence any criticism. Be thankful it's only footy and not politics.

One who has a clear agenda to do what he sees as best for the Adelaide Football Club, it's his first and most important interest.

Whilst board positions are honorary and not paid and people clearly need to make a living it's very hard for someone to juggle board and club allegiance with unbiased media commentary, even the brightest of people attempting to do this struggle.

Does Riccuito have a regular column in the Advertiser? I don't read it enough to know.

Like you I rarely read the Tiser so I can't help you there.

Having said that, how long would it take Ruccuito to pen an article?

[Magellan]

Interesting to see Ruccuito's piece in today's Advertiser talking up why the Crows reserves are good for the league. Curious as to why a Crows board member felt the need to use its key propaganda agent to push its agenda at this time of the year, when surely from a Crows' point of view it is axiomatic that the reserves are a great idea? Conversely, why would the Advertiser want to publish a story on this when it could fill the paper with oodles of pre-elimination final material?

Perhaps the rumblings and meetings in the last week or so have some people worried? Maybe, but probably unlikely. The more plausible explanation is that the airing of views contrary to the interests of the most important sporting franchise in this state really irks the powers that be, and they feel the need to silence any criticism. Be thankful it's only footy and not politics.

One who has a clear agenda to do what he sees as best for the Adelaide Football Club, it's his first and most important interest.

Whilst board positions are honorary and not paid and people clearly need to make a living it's very hard for someone to juggle board and club allegiance with unbiased media commentary, even the brightest of people attempting to do this struggle.

Does Riccuito have a regular column in the Advertiser? I don't read it enough to know.

Like you I rarely read the Tiser so I can't help you there.

Having said that, how long would it take Ruccuito to pen an article?

A lot longer than the ghostwriter who translated his thought(s) into words. Kenny McGregor still working there?

The last time Roo was asked to 'write an article on his computer for the Advertiser' it took them weeks to scrub the texta marks off the monitor.

[Ronnie]

Nearly a full page given to Riccuito to push his Crow wish list, even if it is to the detriment of the SANFL. He did exactly the same thing when the new stadium deal was being negotiated and the Crows wanted more money. If he thinks the interests of the Crows are in any way under threat he just uses his media profile and blasts away. I would love to know who actually writes and collects the stats for him because he comes across as barely coherent on radio.
He's a Board member of AFC and a media commentator. I would've thought the two are incompatible but in this day and age apparently not. Just witness Brayshaw at North Melbourne and a few others.

[whufc]

I thought the Crows only had two top up players in their side on the weekend

Please tell Riccuito at least knows the SANFL plays with 21 players

[tipper]

well i didnt see anything new in that article. yet again he misses the point. it isnt about them winning one game, it never was. it is that they shouldnt be in the competition at all. he is either deliberately misinterpreting the resistance, or he is just that stupid. maybe someone needs to write the message in crayon for him....

and i also didnt see anything in the article claiming that the reserves sides are good for the league. just that they are good for the afl clubs (which somehow magically translates into being good for the sanfl?)

[Booney]

Nearly a full page given to Riccuito to push his Crow wish list, even if it is to the detriment of the SANFL. He did exactly the same thing when the new stadium deal was being negotiated and the Crows wanted more money. If he thinks the interests of the Crows are in any way under threat he just uses his media profile and blasts away. I would love to know who actually writes and collects the stats for him because he comes across as barely coherent on radio.
He's a Board member of AFC and a media commentator. I would've thought the two are incompatible but in this day and age apparently not. Just witness Brayshaw at North Melbourne and a few others.

Brayshaw, Matthews, McGuire, Koch, Ruccuito to name but a few.

[Magellan]

To me, his article smacks of desperation, particularly given the timing. If the reserves are so great, then there's no need to comment. Clearly something's catalysed the penning of his article to put forth the 'other' side of the story. It also comes across as a bit of thought bubble and less of a reasoned argument for why they should be there and a justification for the benefits they have purportedly provided.

Of course, if he writes a weekly column then that takes some of the wind out of my argument (hence my earlier question).

Booney's point that he's a club board member acting in the best interests of his club is fair, and yes, that's his job. But not everyone gets access to publish their views via the biggest paper in town like a club powerbroker with a strong media profile. If the 'Tiser were serious about this (yes, yes, I know, please keep your giggles to yourselves) they'd do a point-counterpoint segment where Roo's pro views could be addressed by an anti-reserves advocate, and put the facts out there for the public to decide.

[mighty_tiger_79]

The Advertiser should give the same space to Roy or Kris to respond.

[Dogs72]

Here it is, from behind the Great Paywall of Murdoch. Make of it what you will. I'll say this, though: for all his spruiking, I wonder if he went on the weekend, or if he'll go this Sunday?

A SIDE has hardly dominated a competition when, over a three-year period, it has a win-loss record of 27-27 and one draw ... has it?

Adelaide’s SANFL side finished eighth in 2014, seventh in 2015 and this year fourth at the end of the home and away season.

On the weekend the SANFL Crows played in their first final in three years and happened to play their best game for the year. As a result, they won.
If they played like they had the game prior they would have been knocked out in the elimination final. It’s not exactly the form line of a Hawthorn is it?

The Crows played Central District in the final — a side that had not only beaten them twice this year but beat them by a record 55 points in Round 13.
Central had every reason to be confident going into the game.

Unfortunately, coach Roy Laird chose to publicly focus on the SANFL’s decision to “bend over” to allow Cameron Ellis-Yolmen to play instead.

CEY had played 16 SANFL games this year and only two AFL games — one a result of Rory Sloane’s suspension a week prior. The Crows could have played Sloane and Brodie Smith on the weekend but didn’t.

I’m not sure what Roy tried to achieve by this but it came across poorly and the SANFL felt the need to fine him as a result.

I would highly doubt that his comments had a positive impact on his players. In fact I would say there is every chance it had a negative effect.
Just for the record, the Crows had 10 players 21 years old and younger. Eleven of them had no AFL experience at all. Six had played 20 AFL games or less and only five had played an AFL game this year.

Three others were ‘top up’ players who have only played a handful of SANFL games between them.

The Crows are having their best year in the SANFL, winning twelve games and losing, seven so hardly dominating.

The AFL team has had the least amount of injuries of any side in the competition and as a result has a strong team in the SANFL.

It’s no different to any other SANFL side having an injury-free year. When you do, your team goes well. When you don’t, they don’t play so well.
South Adelaide, unfortunately, has injuries to several of its best players this week ... is that the Crows’ fault? I don’t think so.

South has beaten the Crows twice this year like Central had. South won by 38 points against the Crows only 10 days ago. Surely they won’t have the same negative attitude as Central did.

Like Central, both of those wins were at their home ground because of the fact that every Crows match in the home and away season is an away game.

Finals, however, are played at Adelaide Oval, which is where they should be. Surely that’s where the players would want to be as well?
Even in the AFL the finals are compromised slightly. Take Geelong finishing above Hawthorn but having to “host” their final at the Hawks’ home ground the MCG on Friday night.

Whether Central or other clubs agree with the Crows and Port being in the SANFL, surely it’s time to move on isn’t it?

The SANFL made the decision and the clubs have to get on with the job. The SANFL would have thought long and hard about this decision given that it was clear that some clubs were against it.

The SANFL bosses must have thought it was in the competition’s best interest to have the AFL clubs in, otherwise they wouldn’t be.
The Crows pay each SANFL club $50,000 a year, so $400,000 total annually, just to play in the competition. That’s big money for the clubs and big money for Adelaide. Could the SANFL clubs do without it?

Isn’t it better having 10 teams and not nine?

’m sure the players from the other eight sides love shaping up against the AFL teams to test themselves out.

I remember my dad picking me up from school early so I come down and play for Westies on Norwood’s Garry McIntosh as a 16-year-old. I was extremely nervous but also very excited about the challenge and I am still here to tell the story.

Like it or not, the SANFL has been on the decline since the Crows came in back in 1991. Just like every state-based league since the VFL turned national and became the AFL.

Crowds have been falling away since then. The Crows predicted bigger crowds but they unfortunately haven’t come. Channel 7, however, is very happy with the television numbers when they broadcast their game of the week.

On the weekend they had an audience of about 100,000 viewers over the two games.

It is crucial that the two AFL sides have reserves teams. To have them train and play together with the same coaches and gamestyle is a big winner.

It is also important for the SANFL itself that the AFL sides perform well, given that proceeds from AFL crowds flow through to the SANFL coffers.

But back to the SANFL finals — the rules are set, the Crows and Port are in the competition.

Let’s not get emotional about one week of footy, let’s enjoy the SANFL finals for what they are.

Great footy at one of the best stadiums in the world with spring weather to top it off.

If the Crows beat South Adelaide then good luck to them. If they lose, they’re out and congratulations to South.

Let’s not focus on whether they should be there or not, three years after the decision was made.

I'm going to respond to this tonight, unfortunately I'll have to subscribe first. I'm sick of the blatant lies, they can't hide behind ignorance and lack of research. A few key points- no crowds weren't dropping before the reserves (afl spin), 100k viewers crap, is 10 teams better than 9? Not when as a result crowds have dropped 20-30%, we now have more byes, 18 games instead of 20 and integrity has been lost. The old line about the $400,000 being so important. The television cost $300k, lost revenue from 80,000 supporters no longer going since their inception- that must be about $800,000k etc etc. Fuming, sick of false propaganda and afl supporters and advocates that don't go to games or obviously know to much about the SANFL, telling me how I should think.

[zipzap]

Crows are 'lucky' they've had a good run with injuries unlike poor old South. Hmmm...if South had a tenth of the rehab facilities that the Crows enjoy and if it's players didn't have to front up for proper work the following Monday instead of getting tattoos and playing PS4 then perhaps they might have stood a chance.

[therisingblues]

Well said Dogs 72.
You have written just a few lines, yet brimming with valid points and fact.
The other side is content just to make stuff up, then disappear when confronted with such facts.

[am Bays]

Lets do a poll once and for all, should they be in the comp......

[tipper]

266 pages say no.....

[therisingblues]

Here it is, from behind the Great Paywall of Murdoch. Make of it what you will. I'll say this, though: for all his spruiking, I wonder if he went on the weekend, or if he'll go this Sunday?


The Crows played Central District in the final — a side that had not only beaten them twice this year but beat them by a record 55 points in Round 13.
Central had every reason to be confident going into the game.
Is Roo the only person in this conversation that did not predict that this would be a game where the Ravens would actually TRY to win? Everybody on this board knew the Ravens need to progress in order to keep a practice squad together for the AFL team, which is also in the finals. Watch for the change in performance if the Crows get defeated by the Kangaroos

I’m not sure what Roy tried to achieve by this but it came across poorly and the SANFL felt the need to fine him as a result.
Hmmm, truthfully expressing hte dissatisfaction felt by the majority of SANFL fans perhaps?

The Crows are having their best year in the SANFL, winning twelve games and losing, seven so hardly dominating.
Hardly TRYING either


It’s no different to any other SANFL side having an injury-free year. When you do, your team goes well. When you don’t, they don’t play so well.
South Adelaide, unfortunately, has injuries to several of its best players this week ... is that the Crows’ fault? I don’t think so.
That's not the issue, why raise it?

South has beaten the Crows twice this year like Central had. South won by 38 points against the Crows only 10 days ago. Surely they won’t have the same negative attitude as Central did.
Again, if the Ravens actually go out and TRY, they are just about unbeatable. Just shows hwo farcical their attitude has been this year that their coach leaves at 3/4 time when he feels like it, and they Comment on THAT Roo, and keep this conversation realistic!

Like Central, both of those wins were at their home ground because of the fact that every Crows match in the home and away season is an away game.
Except for the Sturt game t Thebarton, at least get your facts right

Finals, however, are played at Adelaide Oval, which is where they should be. Surely that’s where the players would want to be as well?
Even in the AFL the finals are compromised slightly. Take Geelong finishing above Hawthorn but having to “host” their final at the Hawks’ home ground the MCG on Friday night.
Why is this being mentioned?

Whether Central or other clubs agree with the Crows and Port being in the SANFL, surely it’s time to move on isn’t it?
Yes, the Crows would love that. It seems they subscribe to the maxim that the customer is wrong if they are unhappy with the product.

The SANFL made the decision and the clubs have to get on with the job. The SANFL would have thought long and hard about this decision given that it was clear that some clubs were against it.
How many times did they hold the vote before the majority of directors suddenly changed their minds? They responded "No" 2 or 3 times before a hastily arranged vote suddenly delivered a "Yes". Hmmm, nothing suspicious there, and obviously no coercing occurred whatsoever

The SANFL bosses must have thought it was in the competition’s best interest to have the AFL clubs in, otherwise they wouldn’t be.
The Crows pay each SANFL club $50,000 a year, so $400,000 total annually, just to play in the competition. That’s big money for the clubs and big money for Adelaide. Could the SANFL clubs do without it?
What about the losses, lower attendances, less media coverage of the heritage clubs, the actual payment made to Channel 7 to telecast the matches? No, I think the Ravens are costing us money


Like it or not, the SANFL has been on the decline since the Crows came in back in 1991. Just like every state-based league since the VFL turned national and became the AFL.

Crowds have been falling away since then. The Crows predicted bigger crowds but they unfortunately haven’t come. Channel 7, however, is very happy with the television numbers when they broadcast their game of the week.
The facts say different
On the weekend they had an audience of about 100,000 viewers over the two games.
Average attendances increased by 50% for the Sturt and South game. The SANFL also paid for the coverage, there was no AFL on. How is this evevn remotely a positive for the Ravens? Ridiculous!

It is crucial that the two AFL sides have reserves teams. To have them train and play together with the same coaches and gamestyle is a big winner.
Not our problem

It is also important for the SANFL itself that the AFL sides perform well, given that proceeds from AFL crowds flow through to the SANFL coffers.
Pay your dues to the competition you have usurped

But back to the SANFL finals — the rules are set, the Crows and Port are in the competition.
Oh the irony!

Let’s not get emotional about one week of footy, let’s enjoy the SANFL finals for what they are.
Not just one week, been happening for three years now. GTF out of our comp!!!!!!!!!!

Great footy at one of the best stadiums in the world with spring weather to top it off.
On thank you Crows for arranging the good weather


Let’s not focus on whether they should be there or not, three years after the decision was made.
Nothing happening here folks.... look over there instead!

[JK]

Lets do a poll once and for all, should they be in the comp......

Only supporters of the remaining traditional 8 clubs should have a say in it

[Dutchy]

Anyone find it ironic how the SANFL point to TV ratings as a positive but can't guarantee there will be TV coverage in 2017?

[MW]

Nearly a full page given to Riccuito to push his Crow wish list, even if it is to the detriment of the SANFL. He did exactly the same thing when the new stadium deal was being negotiated and the Crows wanted more money. If he thinks the interests of the Crows are in any way under threat he just uses his media profile and blasts away. I would love to know who actually writes and collects the stats for him because he comes across as barely coherent on radio.
He's a Board member of AFC and a media commentator. I would've thought the two are incompatible but in this day and age apparently not. Just witness Brayshaw at North Melbourne and a few others.

Brayshaw, Matthews, McGuire, Koch, Ruccuito to name but a few.

Yeah but those others don't put down the Crows mate, no point in mentioning it on here

[Grenville]

Does Riccuito have a regular column in the Advertiser? I don't read it enough to know.[/quote]

It's second rate media hacks like Riccuito that made my decision to cancel The Shitvertiser a no brainer. A total embarrassment of a publication.

[rocketeer]

Anyone find it ironic how the SANFL point to TV ratings as a positive but can't guarantee there will be TV coverage in 2017?

Nope. Irony is the opposite of what I expect and I expect constant hypocrisy and contradiction from the SANFL.