Southern Football League

[fisho mcspaz]

Reynella vs MVP- 25 points
Aldinga vs Marion- Sharks to win under the magical influence of Cornes, McGregor, and whoever signed up to play this week. I don't know, two goals or something. I really have no idea what's going on. But it'd be f***ing sweet if we did win (I'm going to try and not think about the potential Tiser story - 'Fairy Tail Finish' (sharks have tails, yeah?), 'Rams Flock To Aldinga, Are Swallowed' (my brain is broken), or perhaps something short and sweet, like 'Jawsome Victory!' ) ...so I'll tip them and hope for the best.
Edwardstown vs Pt Noarlunga- 100 points
Flaggies vs OSB- 120 points
Valley vs Christies- 60 points
Morphett Vale vs Brighton- 15 points
Noarlunga vs Cove- 30 points

[woodublieve12]

That's what I'm talking about!!!!

[85 WAS A GOOD YEAR]

I heard tonight Ty Allen is playing for Morphie Parks v Reynella Anzac Day in order to get some more match fitness seeing as Glenelg ressies have a bye

[fisho mcspaz]

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/r ... 6895466977

This 3-year no-poaching rule the SFL is going to implement for Aldinga juniors - any truth to this? Because I can think of several reasons why NOT to enforce such a rule, mainly that it's unfair to the kids. Seriously - if they don't want to play senior footy for Aldinga, they've got reasons, and it's not just due to lack of success at A grade level. I would say it depends predominantly on the coach (A grade coach, that is), and also on where their mates play, on the atmosphere at the club, a number of smaller factors.

Secondly, if the kids leave, it's not to other clubs in the SFL. Most go to the GSFL. I can't see that this rule is going to change anything in that regard - I think that the kids will see it as an imposement, as a restriction, and ultimately it will discourage them from playing footy. It's up to the club to give them the incentives to want to stay and play - it's not up to the league to try and force them to stay. I presume that such a rule would have to be agreed upon by both league and club, and I can't comment on Aldinga's position in this - I simply don't know, to be honest - but if it were up to me, I'd scrap it. One, because it's pointless - it won't stop kids from leaving for the GSFL - and two, because I think that the kids will see it as an attempt to force their hand, basically telling them where they have to play football. Our juniors had a great year in 2013 and are continuing on the same path this year - SFL, please, don't muck it up for them.

[Look Good In Leather]

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/rucci-dogged-commitment-keeps-struggling-amateur-clubs-afloat/story-fni5f22o-1226895466977

This 3-year no-poaching rule the SFL is going to implement for Aldinga juniors - any truth to this? Because I can think of several reasons why NOT to enforce such a rule, mainly that it's unfair to the kids. Seriously - if they don't want to play senior footy for Aldinga, they've got reasons, and it's not just due to lack of success at A grade level. I would say it depends predominantly on the coach (A grade coach, that is), and also on where their mates play, on the atmosphere at the club, a number of smaller factors.

Secondly, if the kids leave, it's not to other clubs in the SFL. Most go to the GSFL. I can't see that this rule is going to change anything in that regard - I think that the kids will see it as an imposement, as a restriction, and ultimately it will discourage them from playing footy. It's up to the club to give them the incentives to want to stay and play - it's not up to the league to try and force them to stay. I presume that such a rule would have to be agreed upon by both league and club, and I can't comment on Aldinga's position in this - I simply don't know, to be honest - but if it were up to me, I'd scrap it. One, because it's pointless - it won't stop kids from leaving for the GSFL - and two, because I think that the kids will see it as an attempt to force their hand, basically telling them where they have to play football. Our juniors had a great year in 2013 and are continuing on the same path this year - SFL, please, don't muck it up for them.

That rule is already in place, for all clubs.

[Dazza44]

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/rucci-dogged-commitment-keeps-struggling-amateur-clubs-afloat/story-fni5f22o-1226895466977

This 3-year no-poaching rule the SFL is going to implement for Aldinga juniors - any truth to this? Because I can think of several reasons why NOT to enforce such a rule, mainly that it's unfair to the kids. Seriously - if they don't want to play senior footy for Aldinga, they've got reasons, and it's not just due to lack of success at A grade level. I would say it depends predominantly on the coach (A grade coach, that is), and also on where their mates play, on the atmosphere at the club, a number of smaller factors.

Secondly, if the kids leave, it's not to other clubs in the SFL. Most go to the GSFL. I can't see that this rule is going to change anything in that regard - I think that the kids will see it as an imposement, as a restriction, and ultimately it will discourage them from playing footy. It's up to the club to give them the incentives to want to stay and play - it's not up to the league to try and force them to stay. I presume that such a rule would have to be agreed upon by both league and club, and I can't comment on Aldinga's position in this - I simply don't know, to be honest - but if it were up to me, I'd scrap it. One, because it's pointless - it won't stop kids from leaving for the GSFL - and two, because I think that the kids will see it as an attempt to force their hand, basically telling them where they have to play football. Our juniors had a great year in 2013 and are continuing on the same path this year - SFL, please, don't muck it up for them.

That rule is already in place, for all clubs.

...... and has been for at least 25 years !

[fisho mcspaz]

Really? Yuck. My bad.

[fisho mcspaz]

(PS. I still think it's s***house - maybe it made more sense 25 years ago. It'd be fair enough IF all clubs were on a more even footing and money was the primary issue, but for teams like Aldinga it seems more like an attempt to force kids to stay rather than to prevent other clubs from poaching them.)

[Esteban Vihaio]

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/rucci-dogged-commitment-keeps-struggling-amateur-clubs-afloat/story-fni5f22o-1226895466977

This 3-year no-poaching rule the SFL is going to implement for Aldinga juniors - any truth to this? Because I can think of several reasons why NOT to enforce such a rule, mainly that it's unfair to the kids. Seriously - if they don't want to play senior footy for Aldinga, they've got reasons, and it's not just due to lack of success at A grade level. I would say it depends predominantly on the coach (A grade coach, that is), and also on where their mates play, on the atmosphere at the club, a number of smaller factors.

Secondly, if the kids leave, it's not to other clubs in the SFL. Most go to the GSFL. I can't see that this rule is going to change anything in that regard - I think that the kids will see it as an imposement, as a restriction, and ultimately it will discourage them from playing footy. It's up to the club to give them the incentives to want to stay and play - it's not up to the league to try and force them to stay. I presume that such a rule would have to be agreed upon by both league and club, and I can't comment on Aldinga's position in this - I simply don't know, to be honest - but if it were up to me, I'd scrap it. One, because it's pointless - it won't stop kids from leaving for the GSFL - and two, because I think that the kids will see it as an attempt to force their hand, basically telling them where they have to play football. Our juniors had a great year in 2013 and are continuing on the same path this year - SFL, please, don't muck it up for them.

That rule is already in place, for all clubs.

...... and has been for at least 25 years !

Not all clubs enforce the rule

[Tiger83]

So who won today???

[Look Good In Leather]

So who won today???

Sadly, nobody seems to care about the grand final replay today, rather there seems to be more excitement about cowbells, showbags and sausages - a pretty bad reflection on our league.

For the record Reynella 12.8 d Morphettville Park 6.9

Anyone know who won the Captain Malpas Medal?

[Look Good In Leather]

(PS. I still think it's s***house - maybe it made more sense 25 years ago. It'd be fair enough IF all clubs were on a more even footing and money was the primary issue, but for teams like Aldinga it seems more like an attempt to force kids to stay rather than to prevent other clubs from poaching them.)

No it is a safety net for running junior programs. Why put 6-12 years into a player only to have them leave unrestricted once they hit seniors?
Most clubs don't enforce it, more use it as a bargaining tool in discussions with the player and/or destination club, but still have the right to hold the player if the situation merits it.

It is a critical component of the fabric of our league, even though it was watered down last year.

[fisho mcspaz]

(PS. I still think it's s***house - maybe it made more sense 25 years ago. It'd be fair enough IF all clubs were on a more even footing and money was the primary issue, but for teams like Aldinga it seems more like an attempt to force kids to stay rather than to prevent other clubs from poaching them.)

No it is a safety net for running junior programs. Why put 6-12 years into a player only to have them leave unrestricted once they hit seniors?
Most clubs don't enforce it, more use it as a bargaining tool in discussions with the player and/or destination club, but still have the right to hold the player if the situation merits it.

It is a critical component of the fabric of our league, even though it was watered down last year.

OK, THAT makes more sense. Sorry - I had no idea that this rule even existed, and the way the paper made it sound, I thought it would be a non-negotiable blanket restriction on all junior players. That's what I get for reading the Tiser, I guess.

[Look Good In Leather]

(PS. I still think it's s***house - maybe it made more sense 25 years ago. It'd be fair enough IF all clubs were on a more even footing and money was the primary issue, but for teams like Aldinga it seems more like an attempt to force kids to stay rather than to prevent other clubs from poaching them.)

No it is a safety net for running junior programs. Why put 6-12 years into a player only to have them leave unrestricted once they hit seniors?
Most clubs don't enforce it, more use it as a bargaining tool in discussions with the player and/or destination club, but still have the right to hold the player if the situation merits it.

It is a critical component of the fabric of our league, even though it was watered down last year.

OK, THAT makes more sense. Sorry - I had no idea that this rule even existed, and the way the paper made it sound, I thought it would be a non-negotiable blanket restriction on all junior players. That's what I get for reading the Tiser, I guess.

All it means is that clubs are entitled to refuse clearance to a junior who has not given three years of senior football service to the club, similar to if they were on a 3 year contract. There is nothing to stop a club from agreeing to clear the player, and this usually happens as in most cases this is the logical outcome for all parties.

[Esteban Vihaio]

So who won today???

Sadly, nobody seems to care about the grand final replay today, rather there seems to be more excitement about cowbells, showbags and sausages - a pretty bad reflection on our league.

For the record Reynella 12.8 d Morphettville Park 6.9

Anyone know who won the Captain Malpas Medal?

Sensible decision by both clubs and the SFL to play the sunday under 14 and 16 fixtures by both club yesterday giving the day five games of football

[Boof]

Doughty won the medal. Good win by the Flies considering they had 9 of the grand final side missing. I thought the crowd was good, pity the game was not of a better standard. Skills from both sides on a perfect day very average.
Great to see Bradshaw get through his first game in nearly 12 months in the B's.
Huge test this week for Reynella.

[petoe]

Is Cranston injured so far this season or has he retired?

[stampy]

christies defeated valleys at HV by 2pts, first win there in 20 years

[fisho mcspaz]

Aldinga lost by 5 points today. It was a good day - and I don't mean in terms of the media presence, because frankly I tried to forget that they were there at all - f*** that s***. I've been with the club for about 7 years now and it's the same every time this happens, I don't care what the hell else is going on at the time, but it's when the team suddenly gels together and takes the initiative, that's when they get in front and the crowd gets behind them. Those of you who've been behind a team in similar straits may understand. Media or no media - it has no influence over what goes on then, on the field. The Sharks worked their guts out today, they were hard at it, coughed it up a few times for sure, but for the first time in God knows how long, they were playing like a team and not just a conglomerate of blokes thrown together for two hours on a Saturday. B grade was the same. I've seen enough of Aldinga to know it doesn't last - that it's not something that's going to happen every week, and that what's wrong with our club will take far longer than a week or two to repair. But it is genuinely heartwarming to see how the mob gets behind us when things suddenly fall into place on-field. The blokes seem to genuinely respect Flints as a coach, and we'll see what happens from here. Hopefully all the inflated publicity doesn't bugger us up too much. Carn the Sharks.

[helicopterking]

Well Done Marion.
Similar position to Aldinga a few years back and didn't embarrass themselves by almost enjoying how badly they were getting smashed and nearly folded. Have worked hard with a younger group to keep them together.
Worked hard on and off the field and went to the Messenger for help. What's happened now is basically a publicity stunt. And what happens with publicity stunts is that once it's over and bigger hole awaits.
Enjoy the pity you receive for the upcoming weeks.
They are not laughing with you, they are laughing at you.