SA Footy

LMA wrote:The AFL have influenced this comp long before 40 kids from 2 clubs got to have a game together in suburbia. Television rights has seen the AFL given more exposure within the last 10 years making it hard for the SANFL to settle on a timeslot, AO has changed the dynamic for what fans want out of going to the footy, Country and Ammo's are paying way too much enticing players away from the SANFL, supporters are ageing, half the youth would never of heard if the SANFL. I could go on, but you blokes just keep blaming Port & Adelaide if it makes you feel better

Booney wrote:

LMA wrote:The AFL have influenced this comp long before 40 kids from 2 clubs got to have a game together in suburbia. Television rights has seen the AFL given more exposure within the last 10 years making it hard for the SANFL to settle on a timeslot, AO has changed the dynamic for what fans want out of going to the footy, Country and Ammo's are paying way too much enticing players away from the SANFL, supporters are ageing, half the youth would never of heard if the SANFL. I could go on, but you blokes just keep blaming Port & Adelaide if it makes you feel better

Conspiracy theories will not be entertained.

mighty_tiger_79 wrote:

Booney wrote:

LMA wrote:The AFL have influenced this comp long before 40 kids from 2 clubs got to have a game together in suburbia. Television rights has seen the AFL given more exposure within the last 10 years making it hard for the SANFL to settle on a timeslot, AO has changed the dynamic for what fans want out of going to the footy, Country and Ammo's are paying way too much enticing players away from the SANFL, supporters are ageing, half the youth would never of heard if the SANFL. I could go on, but you blokes just keep blaming Port & Adelaide if it makes you feel better

Conspiracy theories will not be entertained.

I understand those are valid points.
And not all blame is on Port/Ravens, atleast from my viewpoint.
The SANFL administrators have helped to kill off the league.
There are numerous options the SANFL could have done in order to stay prevalent in todays footy landscape.
However it seems the easy option was taken.

As a very simple person, I can't comprehend how the AFL, allegedly Australia's no.1 sport doesn't have a reserves competition.

Booney wrote:

mighty_tiger_79 wrote:

Booney wrote:

LMA wrote:The AFL have influenced this comp long before 40 kids from 2 clubs got to have a game together in suburbia. Television rights has seen the AFL given more exposure within the last 10 years making it hard for the SANFL to settle on a timeslot, AO has changed the dynamic for what fans want out of going to the footy, Country and Ammo's are paying way too much enticing players away from the SANFL, supporters are ageing, half the youth would never of heard if the SANFL. I could go on, but you blokes just keep blaming Port & Adelaide if it makes you feel better

Conspiracy theories will not be entertained.

I understand those are valid points.
And not all blame is on Port/Ravens, atleast from my viewpoint.
The SANFL administrators have helped to kill off the league.
There are numerous options the SANFL could have done in order to stay prevalent in todays footy landscape.
However it seems the easy option was taken.

As a very simple person, I can't comprehend how the AFL, allegedly Australia's no.1 sport doesn't have a reserves competition.

The WAFL look after 2 sides. The SANFL look after 2 sides. The VFL look after 10 sides. The NEAFL is the only thing the AFL has to fund. Simple economics.

Booney wrote:

LMA wrote:The AFL have influenced this comp long before 40 kids from 2 clubs got to have a game together in suburbia. Television rights has seen the AFL given more exposure within the last 10 years making it hard for the SANFL to settle on a timeslot, AO has changed the dynamic for what fans want out of going to the footy, Country and Ammo's are paying way too much enticing players away from the SANFL, supporters are ageing, half the youth would never of heard if the SANFL. I could go on, but you blokes just keep blaming Port & Adelaide if it makes you feel better

Conspiracy theories will not be entertained.

LMA wrote:Because they accept the ca$hish

Spargo wrote:

LMA wrote:Because they accept the ca$hish

From who?

LMA wrote:

Spargo wrote:

LMA wrote:Because they accept the ca$hish

From who?

The AFL surely would be dishing out cash to the feeder leagues

LMA wrote:

Spargo wrote:

LMA wrote:Because they accept the ca$hish

From who?

The AFL surely would be dishing out cash to the feeder leagues

RB wrote:

LMA wrote:

Spargo wrote:

LMA wrote:Because they accept the ca$hish

From who?

The AFL surely would be dishing out cash to the feeder leagues

Lol at whenever anyone uses the words 'surely would' when asked to provide evidence for their claim.

LMA wrote:Ok, so I found that the AFL granted $3million to the SANFL in 2017, $2mill for SA based community programs ie Auskick and $1mill to resource talent pathway programs for the SANFL clubs

PatowalongaPirate wrote:

LMA wrote:Ok, so I found that the AFL granted $3million to the SANFL in 2017, $2mill for SA based community programs ie Auskick and $1mill to resource talent pathway programs for the SANFL clubs

.......and $16mill to Port Adelaide.........

LMA wrote:

PatowalongaPirate wrote:

LMA wrote:Ok, so I found that the AFL granted $3million to the SANFL in 2017, $2mill for SA based community programs ie Auskick and $1mill to resource talent pathway programs for the SANFL clubs

.......and $16mill to Port Adelaide.........

Would you like to add 'surely' to that claim.

PatowalongaPirate wrote:

LMA wrote:Ok, so I found that the AFL granted $3million to the SANFL in 2017, $2mill for SA based community programs ie Auskick and $1mill to resource talent pathway programs for the SANFL clubs

.......and $16mill to Port Adelaide.........

Pseudo wrote:The smears must have flopped in that other league; the port trolls are out in numbers.....