SA Footy

well according to the story about it on the ch 7 news with the supposed merger & them to be using 'the power' logo in the sanfl ......this should not happen the design maybe but not the logo, they should always be known as the magpies

Will be sad if the wharf/prison bar design and the magpies moniker is no longer.

Thinking about it logically though, if the PAFC are to take over the Magpies, the Magpies staying as the Magpies wouldnt make much sense.

This is an absolute disgrace and should not be allowed. I'm not talking about the prison bar guernsey either. Port Magpies should be left to fold. The merger between the Power and Magpies must not be allowed.

eaglehaslanded wrote:This is an absolute disgrace and should not be allowed. I'm not talking about the prison bar guernsey either. Port Magpies should be left to fold. The merger between the Power and Magpies must not be allowed.

Thiele wrote:

eaglehaslanded wrote: ... The merger between the Power and Magpies must not be allowed.

Keep the AFL rubbish out of our SANFL.

footnote: Even if it did happen, why should the Magpies change guernsey & logo? That would defeat the purpose of keeping them alive in the first place.

A touch of irony in an Eagles supporter suggesting let Port fold

G wrote:A touch of irony in an Eagles supporter suggesting let Port fold

I pose this question do you G. Would you want to lose one of your home grown North boys to that mob at Alberton because he was a Power listed player. I damn well know I wouldn't want a Salter, Stewart, Broadbent playing for Port against my Eagles.

G wrote:A touch of irony in an Eagles supporter suggesting let Port fold

Why?

eaglehaslanded wrote:

G wrote:A touch of irony in an Eagles supporter suggesting let Port fold

I pose this question do you G. Would you want to lose one of your home grown North boys to that mob at Alberton because he was a Power listed player. I damn well know I wouldn't want a Salter, Stewart, Broadbent playing for Port against my Eagles.

Feel free to keep up with the times. Home grown players will stay at their original club.

Macca19 wrote:

eaglehaslanded wrote:

G wrote:A touch of irony in an Eagles supporter suggesting let Port fold

I pose this question do you G. Would you want to lose one of your home grown North boys to that mob at Alberton because he was a Power listed player. I damn well know I wouldn't want a Salter, Stewart, Broadbent playing for Port against my Eagles.

Feel free to keep up with the times. Home grown players will stay at their original club.

He walked straight into that one read the paper EHL

Dutchy wrote:

Macca19 wrote:

eaglehaslanded wrote:

G wrote:A touch of irony in an Eagles supporter suggesting let Port fold

I pose this question do you G. Would you want to lose one of your home grown North boys to that mob at Alberton because he was a Power listed player. I damn well know I wouldn't want a Salter, Stewart, Broadbent playing for Port against my Eagles.

Feel free to keep up with the times. Home grown players will stay at their original club.

He walked straight into that one read the paper EHL

Even if he did, his jaded view of all things Port Adelaide would block his sight.

I can see why they would want to squash the identity issue once and for all.

Currently, there's 2 options out there which allows people to pick and choose which Port Adelaide is which. I can understand why they would want to be seen as one club with teams in 2 competitions.

I can also see why many would want the PAM/prison bars to stay. So it will be interesting to see if this story is true and, if so, if the SANFL commission agree to it.

It sounds like Bucky Cunningham is heavily involved in the background brokering whatever solution is decided.

So the power will get there wish by seeing the power jumper in the SANFL.

I think its a great idea

Now we can get away from this charade where the Power try to be a club for all South Australians.

They are Port ferals in both leagues and I cant see an Eastern suburbs kid barracking for them

Booney wrote:Even if he did, his jaded view of all things Port Adelaide would block his sight.

You couldn't be further from the truth Booney. I don't have any more gripes with Port Adelaide than any other club. It's as simple as this I don't believe either SA based AFL club should be allowed to have a team in the SANFL.

Then you are completely missing the point. The 'merger'will be for off field operations there at this point will be no joint on field efforts.
It will be a miracle if the other 8 clubs allow the off filed merger, let alone the likelihood of a full merger.

sounds like "EVERYTHING MUST GO" down at Alberton.

Booney wrote:Then you are completely missing the point. The 'merger'will be for off field operations there at this point will be no joint on field efforts.
It will be a miracle if the other 8 clubs allow the off filed merger, let alone the likelihood of a full merger.

Dont the Power charge the magpies rent for Alberton. SO thats another revenue stream for the Power cut off. Great work PAFC.

Macca19 wrote:Will be sad if the wharf/prison bar design and the magpies moniker is no longer.

Thinking about it logically though, if the PAFC are to take over the Magpies, the Magpies staying as the Magpies wouldnt make much sense.

I disagree.

I thought that this was the way forward to retain the Magpies branding, otherwise it would fold.

To me it makes no sense, not to retain the Magpies branding.
Why would the Magpies want to accept that either?

I cannot see the other clubs allowing the Power brand into the SANFL without a fight. And I don't want to see it either.

This tangent is one that isn't what I understood was intended by such a merger.

Leaving the on field brands independent is what I would guess most footy supporters would like to retain.

I think most clubs will allow this to happen but it's going to depend on the details obviously. If it is, and stay's the way Booney suggests then I can't see a problem. The thought that comes to mind is that this could well be an iceberg, and we're just seeing the top part.
Again, the problems I fear are-
1. Power players bred in the SANFL stay with their local clubs.
2. Power drafted interstate players still go thru the mini draft.
3. Port Magpies do not have access to Power training & medical facs.
4. Power still have to give back a dividend to the SANFL, NONE of it goes back to PAM directly.
5. Powers' licence must ALWAYS be retained by the SANFL, if it is owned directly by the Power surely all of this goes out of the window.

These are off the top of my head, maybe others can add to it.

Barto, can you give us an insight to how things work between Freo and the 2 WAFL Freo teams. Have their supporters been disgruntled with the advent of an AFL team, a failed one at that. What have been the issues? What are the things that are different and what do they do differently.