SA Footy

What restrictions do Port have in the SANFL that they wouldn't have in the VFL?

Port have had their injury issues this year which has reduced their output in some games, however compare the quality of the top ups Adelaide have compared to Port, its like chalk and cheese and no doubt a big difference in their performances.

I fail to see how playing in the best 2nd tier comp restricts their development, how is playing in a weaker league going to improve things???

Dutchy wrote:What restrictions do Port have in the SANFL that they wouldn't have in the VFL?

Port have had their injury issues this year which has reduced their output in some games, however compare the quality of the top ups Adelaide have compared to Port, its like chalk and cheese and no doubt a big difference in their performances.

I fail to see how playing in the best 2nd tier comp restricts their development, how is playing in a weaker league going to improve things???

Exactly.

AFL aligned VFL clubs have a salary cap of $110k for "top up" players, SANFL teams can pay a $200 match fee?

Armchair expert wrote:AFL aligned VFL clubs have a salary cap of $110k for "top up" players, SANFL teams can pay a $200 match fee?

$200 is the base payment for league match fees...

heater31 wrote:

Armchair expert wrote:AFL aligned VFL clubs have a salary cap of $110k for "top up" players, SANFL teams can pay a $200 match fee?

$200 is the base payment for league match fees...

So what is the cap then?

Kock forgot to mention what advantages power have. Port can play NGA listed players from other SANFL clubs in their magpies team during the year. Last year the power took Josh Burgoyne from the Eagles U18s and played him for four games in the magpies, now they have taken Nathan Barkla from the Eagles U18s and are playing him in the magpies tomorrow. No respect for SANFL clubs. They get a preview of what they might be drafting.

ferret wrote:Kock forgot to mention what advantages power have. Port can play NGA listed players from other SANFL clubs in their magpies team during the year. Last year the power took Josh Burgoyne from the Eagles U18s and played him for four games in the magpies, now they have taken Nathan Barkla from the Eagles U18s and are playing him in the magpies tomorrow. No respect for SANFL clubs. They get a preview of what they might be drafting.

Sorry, from a player development perspective that's common sense. Who cares about 18s flags it's about developing future AFL and SANFL league footballers.

To me if either Adelaide or Port want to give a four week opportunity to a SANFL player who is yet to make his league debut that can only be a good thing for that players development, draft chances and when they return to their SANFL club, that club themselves.

I'd rather that than stacking their team with 2-3 de-listed AFL blokes.

Dutchy wrote:What restrictions do Port have in the SANFL that they wouldn't have in the VFL?

Port have had their injury issues this year which has reduced their output in some games, however compare the quality of the top ups Adelaide have compared to Port, its like chalk and cheese and no doubt a big difference in their performances.

I fail to see how playing in the best 2nd tier comp restricts their development, how is playing in a weaker league going to improve things???

As far as I’m aware vfl doesn’t restrict amount of afl players that can play each game.


That’s about it.

am Bays wrote:

ferret wrote:Kock forgot to mention what advantages power have. Port can play NGA listed players from other SANFL clubs in their magpies team during the year. Last year the power took Josh Burgoyne from the Eagles U18s and played him for four games in the magpies, now they have taken Nathan Barkla from the Eagles U18s and are playing him in the magpies tomorrow. No respect for SANFL clubs. They get a preview of what they might be drafting.

Sorry, from a player development perspective that's common sense. Who cares about 18s flags it's about developing future AFL and SANFL league footballers.

To me if either Adelaide or Port want to give a four week opportunity to a SANFL player who is yet to make his league debut that can only be a good thing for that players development, draft chances and when they return to their SANFL club, that club themselves.

I'd rather that than stacking their team with 2-3 de-listed AFL blokes.

Totally disagree with you, it's basically telling clubs to get stuffed and we'll do what we want to with your players. Barkla doesn't belong to magpies or power, he hasn't been drafted by them. Why should NGAs be treated differently to others that are drafted in the national draft. They should be left to develop like other draftees, if they are good enough they will make it. Nathan was always going to play Australian Rules so he doesn't need an advantage. James Borlase was also ridiculously considered a NGA. What a joke NGA's are. If the AFL wants to equalise the competition, father/son selections should also be dispensed with.

am Bays wrote:

ferret wrote:Kock forgot to mention what advantages power have. Port can play NGA listed players from other SANFL clubs in their magpies team during the year. Last year the power took Josh Burgoyne from the Eagles U18s and played him for four games in the magpies, now they have taken Nathan Barkla from the Eagles U18s and are playing him in the magpies tomorrow. No respect for SANFL clubs. They get a preview of what they might be drafting.

Sorry, from a player development perspective that's common sense. Who cares about 18s flags it's about developing future AFL and SANFL league footballers.

To me if either Adelaide or Port want to give a four week opportunity to a SANFL player who is yet to make his league debut that can only be a good thing for that players development, draft chances and when they return to their SANFL club, that club themselves.

I'd rather that than stacking their team with 2-3 de-listed AFL blokes.

If it's it's all about player development for the AFL why did you post after Durdin and Turner went to the AFL "The AFL and it's mid season draft suck dicks"?

DOC wrote:

am Bays wrote:
Sorry, from a player development perspective that's common sense. Who cares about 18s flags it's about developing future AFL and SANFL league footballers.

To me if either Adelaide or Port want to give a four week opportunity to a SANFL player who is yet to make his league debut that can only be a good thing for that players development, draft chances and when they return to their SANFL club, that club themselves.

I'd rather that than stacking their team with 2-3 de-listed AFL blokes.

If it's it's all about player development for the AFL why did you post after Durdin and Turner went to the AFL "The AFL and it's mid season draft suck dicks"?

Comprehension not your strong point??

Not sure.

I looked up the use of double question marks and it said the use of multiple question marks is an attempt to place emphasis on a reply when there is no substance to it.

DOC wrote:Not sure.

I looked up the use of double question marks and it said the use of multiple question marks is an attempt to place emphasis on a reply when there is no substance to it.

Would’ve been easier for you to type, “I got nothing”

Did Koch say what his problem with the SANFL's conditions are? What does he actually want changed?

Power don't pay anything, unlike the Crows. Apart from the Eagles, they have made the GFs more than any other team since their inception in 2014. Baffling.

am Bays wrote:

DOC wrote:Not sure.

I looked up the use of double question marks and it said the use of multiple question marks is an attempt to place emphasis on a reply when there is no substance to it.

Would’ve been easier for you to type, “I got nothing”

???

DOC wrote:

am Bays wrote:

DOC wrote:Not sure.

I looked up the use of double question marks and it said the use of multiple question marks is an attempt to place emphasis on a reply when there is no substance to it.

Would’ve been easier for you to type, “I got nothing”

???

Did somebody say KFC?

Mic wrote:Did Koch say what his problem with the SANFL's conditions are? What does he actually want changed?

Power don't pay anything, unlike the Crows. Apart from the Eagles, they have made the GFs more than any other team since their inception in 2014. Baffling.

Among other things he wants better quality top up players, no limit on AFL listed players in SANFL finals.

The Crows will have 13 AFL listed players qualify for finals:

Borlase, Davis, McAsey, Nankervis, Newchurch, Pedlar, Strachan, Taylor, Worrell, Frampton, Cook, Turner and Gollant*.

*Gollant could still not qualify if he played the final 2 games in the AFL side, but that looks unlikely.

Just seeing this on the Herald sun newspaper. Does any of this money spill over to SA or is the AFL just using funds to improve Victorian facilities.


New ovals to be built weekly in AFL cash splash

The AFL will pump millions more into community footy each year thanks to a spike in broadcasting revenue, with new ovals to be built each week.
A record cash injection will see millions of extra dollars pumped into local footballevery year.

The AFL commission on Sunday announced that it will invest a further $17m into community football in 2023.

The boost lifts annual funding from the AFL’s revenue from eight to 10 per cent, marking a 35 per cent uptick on this year’s $50m investment.

Volunteers, umpires, coaches, players and clubs are all set to benefit from the $67m initiative, which rose amid the AFL’s projections of spiking broadcast and commercial revenue.

Under the multimillion-dollar pledge, at least 10 per cent of the league’s annual revenue must be poured into grassroots clubs from next year.

AFL chief executive Gillon McLachlan said the “historic” amount of funding would grow the game around the country by supporting more volunteers after its strong rebound from strict Covid regulations and periods in lockdown.

“While the game has rebounded strongly, it has still been tough for many of the volunteers who power our game and we recognise that more support is needed,” he said.

“This is the single biggest commitment ever to community football and it means that as broadcast and commercial revenue continues to grow so does the AFL’s commitment to supporting every level of community football from Auskick all the way through to the talent pathways programs.
“Footy means so much to so many people in communities right across the country and we have a vitally important role to play in protecting and growing the game for everyone involved, especially the volunteers, while ensuring more people in more places at more times can experience and enjoy our game.”

A panel will be established to oversee the cash splash, which is designed to boost the rising number of girls playing football and encourage kids and people from culturally diverse backgrounds to take up the sport.

More than 480,000 players registered for the league’s introductory program Auskick this year.

Part of the additional funding will also go towards online resources for local clubs and revised game formats for smaller teams and clubs with limited space.

The league’s executive game development general manager Rob Auld said new ovals would be built each week under the “groundbreaking” investment.

“Through this investment the AFL can take its support for community football to a new level and address challenges and opportunities associated with engaging new participants, creating inclusive environments, making it easier to participate and volunteer and developing a new oval per week, every week for five years.

“This is incredibly exciting for the game and the hundreds of thousands of Australians who are involved in and love community football.”

It comes after the league dedicated a further $8m earlier this year to bring community football back following the lockdowns.
https://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/victo ... erallPos=2