Hackham in 2012

[Glenmandownunder]

Watched Hackham V Kangarilla lat week
Was impressed by Hackham's new look.
Can't understand why the so called leading clubs of the SFL are dening clearances to the whipping boys of the league.
Don't they want the weaker clubs of the league to grow stronger?

[Straight Line]

No and they will also be the first to complain about an uneven comp

[Zelezny Chucks]

Who are the stronger clubs denying clearances to weaker clubs?

Are the players seeking a clearance financial?

Have the players spoken to the club or have they just put a clearance in?

[Glenmandownunder]

Who are the stronger clubs denying clearances to weaker clubs?

Are the players seeking a clearance financial?

Have the players spoken to the club or have they just put a clearance in?

Reynella, Port Noarlunga, Old Noarlunga, Happy Valley & The Cove
As far as I know all the clubs have been spoken too, They are holding them on some rule to do with juniors not leaving a club until they have played so many years of senior footy.
Reynella are holding a lad that that has not kicked a ball for them in about 4 yrs.
Happy Valley are holding a lad that only came over to footy from soccer a couple of years ago.
Cove are holding 2.

[Straight Line]

So you are telling me an 18 year old has too play for the club were his parents signed them as a child. What the

[vics01]

The 3 year rule was bought in at the behest of the struggling clubs to supposedly stop the stronger poaching juniors. The stronger clubs are now invoking the rule.

After years of screaming about juniors being stolen after they have put in the hard yards some are doing what upset them. We wont mention money.

One way to fix the issue would be for the clubs to ask the SFL to drop the rule.

I think you will find nearly all the players mentioned were recruited while playing at south adelaide??

[Straight Line]

When did this rule come in probably when the lower clubs didn't have any juniors. It was to keep juniors at the stronger clubs hence what is going on now.

[Zelezny Chucks]

When did this rule come in probably when the lower clubs didn't have any juniors. It was to keep juniors at the stronger clubs hence what is going on now.

Did you read anything Vics wrote?

If it's in the rules then they are within their rights to do it, MVFC lost a bunch of 18's to Aldinga a couple of years ago but let them go without any hassle had we wanted to we could have made it difficult but didn't see the point.

Obviously these clubs see value in trying to change the kids mind and that is their perogative. Should we just change the rules every year to suit whoever whinges loudest?

[Glenmandownunder]

All these so called stronger clubs are always saying they want the league to be stronger,
But as soon as the weaker clubs try to improve by recruiting, they make things hard for them....

[Yank Man]

C'mon let the kids play.

[Straight Line]

I have been told that the clubs have spoken to the kids and some by the kids parents and still they won't clear them. I dont think the hawks got within 30 goals these clubs last year and as Z Chucks wrote they let a group go to aldinga prob for the good of the game. This league needs all teams to be at least competitive.

[Glenmandownunder]

Happy Valley are holding back a lad that only came over to footy from soccer a couple of years ago and looks like going back to the round ball game, rather than play for them again.........

[Glenmandownunder]

If these clubs are so strong, Why do all these kids want to leave?????

[Straight Line]

If these clubs are so strong, Why do all these kids want to leave?????

I believe to play with their mates, Its as simple as that!

[Straight Line]

Did the lads get cleared?

[1919]

All these so called stronger clubs are always saying they want the league to be stronger,
But as soon as the weaker clubs try to improve by recruiting, they make things hard for them....

It's not always that easy and not always the strong clubs just trying to be difficult. Common sense should always come into play but there are some interesting and to my mind ridiculous situations being played out by at least one of the weaker clubs (note, I'm not referring to Hackham). One factor being that clubs put a lot of time and effort into making the kids feel welcome and developing them as footballers as well as raising funds to run their clubs themselves without handouts from controlling bodies of Sports and Social clubs. They are then are expected to stand back and let them go when when one of the weaker clubs have the nerve to offer the kids (that are yet to even play senior football) upto $150 per game? How long will the clubs focusing on developing their own players remain competitive when loosing their 'self developed' players to such situations? Maybe a sensible pay scale system needs to be in place for such situations and if the young players still want to go 'play with their mates' for the reduced dollars, the let them.

After all, the original intent of the current rules was all about being able to retain players the clubs have developed themselves.

[Look Good In Leather]

I think there is a bigger picture here rather than just holding kids back from transferring to lower clubs. A number of the kids seeking clearances I am led to believe were previously in the underage teams at South Adelaide.

All of our clubs encourage our most promising youngsters to have a crack at the next level, we actively encourage kids to go to the local league clubs to further their careers and maximise their potential. Sadly it seems it is a one way street. There does not seem to be any diplomatic effort from the league clubs to encourage players to return to their home clubs. They expect us to recommend them kids to take from us but give very little back - we may get a coaching clinic once a year if we are lucky.

We encourage our kids to go out to the league clubs in good faith, and receive very little in return - all that happens is the kids that don't make it to the AFL, particularly those who reach reserves level, end up in a culture where they are effectively put on show and advertised to the highest bidder, whilst in the meantime have been prised away from the ties built up with their home club. The usual argument given is that it is up to the clubs to maintain a relationship with the player to ensure they return, my answer is it would be much easier to retain a relationship if they never went there in the first place and were surrounded by your club culture.

I am still for encouraging kids to better themselves at the next level, unfortunately I can see the potential where clubs will in the future discourage, either actively or by stealth, players from going out to the league clubs. Our clubs do not exist merely to supply South Adelaide, West Adelaide and Glenelg with players, as much as the AFL want you to believe that is our purpose (regularly using derogatory terms such as "Grassroots" and the like), our clubs value winning an A-Grade Premiership as much as the league clubs value winning a league premiership and as much as AFL clubs value winning an AFL Premiership. Why should our clubs sacrifice their chances of success by giving up their best talent to league clubs with more money and get nothing in return. Just because we are smaller does not mean we are irrelevant.

I fully support Reynella, Port Noarlunga, Noarlunga, Happy Valley and Cove in their efforts to retain their best talent, each of those clubs have had good junior programs with very hardworking people putting in effort in order to secure their future. Clubs should not be penalised for doing the right thing. I am sympathetic to Hackham's situation but I am sure there are many kids in Reynella, Noarlunga, Valley & Coves second teams which are currently stuck in a Sunday team played in front of three men, a dog and a couple of trees which would not be welded on.

[Numbers]

A possible rule that may fix this is that a player requesting a clearance TO a lower ranked club (A grade premiership table) should be granted automatically! Provided they are financial! This would protect the lower clubs from having their talent poached & would assist them in attracting recruits while also creating a better league!

Pretty easy to police & helps create a better league!

In the end, if you have the right environment players will want to stay so shouldn't hurt clubs much either!

[Straight Line]

A possible rule that may fix this is that a player requesting a clearance TO a lower ranked club (A grade premiership table) should be granted automatically! Provided they are financial! This would protect the lower clubs from having their talent poached & would assist them in attracting recruits while also creating a better league!

Pretty easy to police & helps create a better league!

In the end, if you have the right environment players will want to stay so shouldn't hurt clubs much either!

Agree. I heard Noarlunga cleared a lad after an interview and the lad from Pt Noar is just subs. The other lads I dont know but for the kids sake lets hope they can play.

[Glenmandownunder]

How many Good players have been poached away from Hackham in last few years with the promise of dollars & the chance to play in a winning team?
Quite a few that I know of.
Hackham have also recruited from the SAAFL. the Hills League, the Whyalla League & the NTFL this year.
I say good luck to them.