SA Footy

doggies4eva wrote:Can anyone tell me what the definition of an import is?

If a player has been recruited from interstate do they become a local player after a certain number of years- as in basketball?

This means that aging players who have played for a club for many years are not unfairly cut in their twilight years.

Will the Gowans be consiedered imports despite the fact that they have played for the dogs for the last 11 years?

topsywaldron wrote:Just another nail in the coffin for the comp and another step down the path towards being the under 21 league the AFL want every other league to be.

Chandler is a disgrace.

sjt wrote:I would like to see, why the SANFL believe it to be a good thing.

Dogwatcher wrote:Footy needs OS market

THERE were wall to wall football identities at the AFL’s industry conference, Play On – The Future of Australian Football – In Focus, held in Melbourne last week.
With the national draft, at which Berri’s Rhys Stanley was picked up by St Kilda, to be held on Saturday, there was an undercurrent of tension surrounding the event.
Kevin Sheedy was there, as was Eddie McGuire, Neale Daniher, Brett Burton, Mark Williams and Gerard Whateley among a myriad of football and media types.
Listening to them talk, while watching the way they circulated around the room was one of the more fascinating parts of the conference.
All the pre-draft talk was of the two talents Jack Watts, taken by Melbourne, and Nick Natanui, who went to West Coast; while there were plenty of rumours circulating about the plight of Ben Cousins.
The conference speakers provided an interesting and sometimes left of centre look at the game of Australian rules football and where it must head if it is to continue to prosper.
The theme that seemed to resonate over the two days was that the AFL must expand or perish in this more challenging economic climate.
The phrase “four codes, one wallet” (referring to the Australian rules’ battle with the rugby codes and soccer for hearts and minds) was introduced on day one of the conference and expanded upon by former National Football League commissioner Paul Tagliabue.
Mr Tagliabue pushed the need for the AFL to expand overseas in order to increase the talent pool available to the game, as well as to take advantage of the financial riches that can arrive from taking the game into Asia and the Middle East.
It was a theme pushed by the very next speaker Ian McLeod, the current managing director of Coles supermarkets and the former head of the Glasgow Celtic Football Club, as well as by Peter Linford, the senior commissioner to South Asia for Austrade.
The question for country people, and grassroots football supporters in particular, is where does that leave us?
If the AFL directs its energies to further building markets in western Sydney, the Gold Coast and further a field to overseas nations, will there be less money in the pot for grassroots levels?
That question was not answered at the conference and it would seem football lobby groups at grassroots levels are going to need to continue to push to make sure funding comes our way to keep the game alive in their areas – the heartland of Australian rules football.

Constance_Perm wrote:Whilst still not a perfect vehicle for doing so, perhaps the SANFL figures this will help them to try to achieve what the Salary Cap is intended for, but has been too hard for them to police?

Or perhaps the SANFL is just as money hungry as big brother hence the sub-serviance? (is that a word?)

Either way, I agree with other sentiments, poor form SANFL.

blueandwhite wrote:Instead of coming down heavy on the sanfl to diminish it to a junior comp the AFL should;

1. For a change do something about grass roots footy Australia wide.Its under threat. For example the AUskick participant numbers in the South football club zone are at an alltime low. Centrals area is not much better.These are the 2 expanding areas in SA this should ring alarm bells everywhere.

2. Forget pouring money into GWS and Gold Coast, and money hungry NRL players who cant even kick or run, and spend the money at regional level in areas which are the heartland of the game.

doggies4eva wrote:How will the Crows and Port players be treated that are drafted into SANFL clubs. WIll they be "imports" or does an import have to be club initiated?

spell_check wrote:I think we should go to 16 a side on the field to help counter the GWS and Gold Coast drain on the clubs. It should also help to spread the small amount of money allowed to players.

spell_check wrote:I think we should go to 16 a side on the field to help counter the GWS and Gold Coast drain on the clubs. It should also help to spread the small amount of money allowed to players.

HeartBeatsTrue wrote:

spell_check wrote:I think we should go to 16 a side on the field to help counter the GWS and Gold Coast drain on the clubs. It should also help to spread the small amount of money allowed to players.

As long as they expand the bench to 5 players

Seriously though that wouldnt work. 2 less on the field mean players need to work harder which means more injuries which means shorter careers which means less players wanting to play which means lowering the standard even further.