Page 1 of 1
ARticle from the West re NT team playing in the WAFL
Posted:
Thu Sep 06, 2007 11:04 amby Rushby Hinds
The NTAFL has had talks with South Australian football officials about joining the SANFL. But it is believed the Top End committee favours the WAFL
http://www.thewest.com.au/default.aspx?MenuID=12&ContentID=39599
Re: Article from the West re NT team playing in the WAFL
Posted:
Thu Sep 06, 2007 11:15 amby Benchwarmer
Not much support over this neck of the woods, though the idea of having the NT side playing a few trial matches next year might smooth the way for a future berth in the WAFL.
Truth be told, the WAFL still has issues with Peel Thunder and to add to it all is the malaise down at Lathlain Oval with Perth under-performing and seemingly rudderless. The WAFL would actually be better going to 8 clubs rather than 10.
Re: Article from the West re NT team playing in the WAFL
Posted:
Thu Sep 06, 2007 11:55 amby LPH
Benchwarmer wrote:Not much support over this neck of the woods, though the idea of having the NT side playing a few trial matches next year might smooth the way for a future berth in the WAFL.
Truth be told, the WAFL still has issues with Peel Thunder and to add to it all is the malaise down at Lathlain Oval with Perth under-performing and seemingly rudderless. The WAFL would actually be better going to 8 clubs rather than 10.
So would the SANFL !!!
Re: Article from the West re NT team playing in the WAFL
Posted:
Thu Sep 06, 2007 6:11 pmby RustyCage
LoudEagleHooligan wrote:Benchwarmer wrote:Not much support over this neck of the woods, though the idea of having the NT side playing a few trial matches next year might smooth the way for a future berth in the WAFL.
Truth be told, the WAFL still has issues with Peel Thunder and to add to it all is the malaise down at Lathlain Oval with Perth under-performing and seemingly rudderless. The WAFL would actually be better going to 8 clubs rather than 10.
So would the SANFL !!!
Why?
Re: ARticle from the West re NT team playing in the WAFL
Posted:
Thu Sep 06, 2007 6:42 pmby Grahaml
Best thing for the SANFL is a 10th team. 10 team comps seem to work better so long as there is the basis for 10 teams. And at this stage the idea of a tassie team coming in would be great. So long as we can shore up corporate dollars to pay for the extra expense of the teams flying in and out all the time. Many details to be sorted out but if they can get something worked out so it's not a financial disaster it would be magnificent for the competition. It would also, with an effective salary cap increase make the SANFL clearly the number 2 comp in the country.
Re: ARticle from the West re NT team playing in the WAFL
Posted:
Thu Sep 06, 2007 7:03 pmby Benchwarmer
Having seen all three states leagues in the flesh, SANFL IS number 2 in the country. End of story.
Re: ARticle from the West re NT team playing in the WAFL
Posted:
Thu Sep 06, 2007 7:53 pmby Grahaml
Perhaps, but it's not a clear break like there is from state leagues to AFL. I'd love to see a clear break from AFL to SANFL, then from the SANFL to the WAFL/VFL et al. And I think it's achievable because our clubs are on the verge of being able to pay much larger salaries to players, and the standard will go up with that. On top of that, making it a 10 team comp with a viable 10th team from interstate will dramatically improve our standing again.
Re: ARticle from the West re NT team playing in the WAFL
Posted:
Fri Sep 07, 2007 11:32 amby Benchwarmer
Believe me, on a scale based on factors professionalism, crowds and community interest, the SANFL would be about a 9, the WAFL and VFL would both be about 7 to 7.5.
On the representative front, the VFL overtakes the WAFL, but then again the Black Swans don't seem to take the matches as seriously as they should - especially seeing the squad we sent over this year to Melbourne. The form side at that stage, East Perth (having just knocked over the unbeaten Subiaco and in the middle of a great run of form) did not have a guernsey amongst their best players and the underperforming name players getting a gig and playing like cardboard cutouts when there were better players more deserving of recognition.
Re: ARticle from the West re NT team playing in the WAFL
Posted:
Fri Sep 07, 2007 1:58 pmby Dan The Man
Benchwarmer wrote:Believe me, on a scale based on factors professionalism, crowds and community interest, the SANFL would be about a 9, the WAFL and VFL would both be about 7 to 7.5.
You gave the VFL a bit of a generous rating there.I went to a Port Melbourne v Werribee match @ Northport Oval and there would have been lucky if there was 200 people there.No atmosphere at all.There is more atmosphere @ the amateurs than the VFL.
Re: ARticle from the West re NT team playing in the WAFL
Posted:
Fri Sep 07, 2007 3:21 pmby Benchwarmer
Their crowds are very low compared to the other two - they only top the thousand when they add the TV audiences watching particular games (LOL) and when players like N.Buckley play a game for Williamstown, etc.
I agree with the atmosphere. I went to a Eastern League Division 4 game on a Saturday then a Sunday VFL game the next day a couple of years ago and there were more people, better atmosphere and much cheaper and better quality food on offer at the EFL game. Then again the VFL is literally a Reserves competition.
I suppose I am looking at other areas where the VFL does better than the WAFL in the off-field sense to balance the marks up.
Re: Article from the West re NT team playing in the WAFL
Posted:
Fri Sep 07, 2007 3:55 pmby LPH
pafc1870 wrote:LoudEagleHooligan wrote:Benchwarmer wrote:Not much support over this neck of the woods, though the idea of having the NT side playing a few trial matches next year might smooth the way for a future berth in the WAFL.
Truth be told, the WAFL still has issues with Peel Thunder and to add to it all is the malaise down at Lathlain Oval with Perth under-performing and seemingly rudderless. The WAFL would actually be better going to 8 clubs rather than 10.
So would the SANFL !!!
Why?
Let me see ... Hmmm...
1. Hate the BYE, could have 21 rounds, home & away & a 'neutral ground' for the 3 games
2. Final 4 like the 'old days, every team gets a week off at some point (i.e. 1st Semi week 1, 2nd Semi week 2, Preliminary Final Week 3, Grand Final Week 4)
3. Some clubs ARE in for a REAL financial issue over the next 10 to 15 years
4. Could then get rid of U17's & U19's, go to an U18's comp. Play ALL 3 Grades @ same location.
5. No need for a STUPID, HALF ARSED attempt to 'import' a team from Tassie or NT...pointless in my view, our competion CAN NOT afford it.
Re: Article from the West re NT team playing in the WAFL
Posted:
Fri Sep 07, 2007 5:05 pmby Ian
LoudEagleHooligan wrote:Benchwarmer wrote:The WAFL would actually be better going to 8 clubs rather than 10.
So would the SANFL !!!
are you volunteering your club?
Re: Article from the West re NT team playing in the WAFL
Posted:
Fri Sep 07, 2007 5:10 pmby Ian
LoudEagleHooligan wrote:2. Final 4 like the 'old days,
Which old days are you refering to, the final 5 was around a long time
LoudEagleHooligan wrote:4. Could then get rid of U17's & U19's, go to an U18's comp. Play ALL 3 Grades @ same location.
That one does make sense.
Re: ARticle from the West re NT team playing in the WAFL
Posted:
Fri Sep 07, 2007 7:02 pmby spell_check
Leave it as is, the current set up is fine. I'd only advocate a 10th team from the country or interstate if there were 22 rounds. But it sounds like it would only be 18, so leave the comp as is.