Southern Football League

[rock]

Heard Happy Valley are using old obselete contracts to sign their players for 2012. This could be an issue as someone like Petersen-Grey may still be up for grabs. Would certainly give Mt Lofty a chance to hold onto him if they were able too.

Wouldn't he just have stayed at Mt Lofty if he wanted to? If he's done a pre-season with HVFC, can't see why he'd change his mind now. Don't know much about him, but all I've heard is positives from those that have played with and against him.

Im told the move is money orientated as he was going to go with Coleman to MV but wasn't offered enough. So if Lofty were to find some coin for him I'm sure he'd consider it.

[footballmad]

Heard Happy Valley are using old obselete contracts to sign their players for 2012. This could be an issue as someone like Petersen-Grey may still be up for grabs. Would certainly give Mt Lofty a chance to hold onto him if they were able too.

Wouldn't he just have stayed at Mt Lofty if he wanted to? If he's done a pre-season with HVFC, can't see why he'd change his mind now. Don't know much about him, but all I've heard is positives from those that have played with and against him.

Im told the move is money orientated as he was going to go with Coleman to MV but wasn't offered enough. So if Lofty were to find some coin for him I'm sure he'd consider it.

Rock your knowledge is astounding!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[MatteeG]

A quick scroll through the clearances, seems to be a lot 'Denied'. Is this poor paperwork or clubs being hardnosed?

Hackham and Valleys appear to have the most activity so far.

[leftpeg]

A quick scroll through the clearances, seems to be a lot 'Denied'. Is this poor paperwork or clubs being hardnosed?

Hackham and Valleys appear to have the most activity so far.

Looks like Hackham's recruitment scheme of targeting other SFL clubs 18-20 year olds is coming back to bite them.

So far hackham have had 3 clearances of their 18-20 year old recruits denied, with 1 still pending

NOARLUNGA HACKHAM Bennett, Jason Denied 02/02/12 07/02/12
REYNELLA HACKHAM Bollenhagen, Jarrad Denied 02/02/12 03/02/12
HAPPY VALLEY HACKHAM Daish, Anthony Denied 02/02/12 07/02/12
ALDINGA HACKHAM Bradley, Jarrad Pending 02/02/12

Seems the other clubs are denying the clearances using the rule about junior players needing to play 3 years of senior footy before they can leave without being denied. (can someone clarify this rule)

This rule has been used on a number of occasions recently resulting in young blokes missing large amounts of games due to their clearances being held up..

Should clubs be letting these young players go, who don't want to play at their current club, or force them to not play footy at all

[MatteeG]

Moe- I see the twisties maybe sporting some new Home shorts this year?

Cant imagine it'll look better than the whites, but proof will be in the viewing....

[Esteban Vihaio]

A quick scroll through the clearances, seems to be a lot 'Denied'. Is this poor paperwork or clubs being hardnosed?

Hackham and Valleys appear to have the most activity so far.

Looks like Hackham's recruitment scheme of targeting other SFL clubs 18-20 year olds is coming back to bite them.

So far hackham have had 3 clearances of their 18-20 year old recruits denied, with 1 still pending

NOARLUNGA HACKHAM Bennett, Jason Denied 02/02/12 07/02/12
REYNELLA HACKHAM Bollenhagen, Jarrad Denied 02/02/12 03/02/12
HAPPY VALLEY HACKHAM Daish, Anthony Denied 02/02/12 07/02/12
ALDINGA HACKHAM Bradley, Jarrad Pending 02/02/12

Seems the other clubs are denying the clearances using the rule about junior players needing to play 3 years of senior footy before they can leave without being denied. (can someone clarify this rule)

This rule has been used on a number of occasions recently resulting in young blokes missing large amounts of games due to their clearances being held up..

Should clubs be letting these young players go, who don't want to play at their current club, or force them to not play footy at all

Hackham should make a deal with a club in the saafl club, say Elizabeth.. Player gets cleared to Elizabeth,, then three weeks later, put in a clearance from Elizabeth to hackham

[Waterboy]

A quick scroll through the clearances, seems to be a lot 'Denied'. Is this poor paperwork or clubs being hardnosed?

Hackham and Valleys appear to have the most activity so far.

Looks like Hackham's recruitment scheme of targeting other SFL clubs 18-20 year olds is coming back to bite them.

So far hackham have had 3 clearances of their 18-20 year old recruits denied, with 1 still pending

NOARLUNGA HACKHAM Bennett, Jason Denied 02/02/12 07/02/12
REYNELLA HACKHAM Bollenhagen, Jarrad Denied 02/02/12 03/02/12
HAPPY VALLEY HACKHAM Daish, Anthony Denied 02/02/12 07/02/12
ALDINGA HACKHAM Bradley, Jarrad Pending 02/02/12

Seems the other clubs are denying the clearances using the rule about junior players needing to play 3 years of senior footy before they can leave without being denied. (can someone clarify this rule)

This rule has been used on a number of occasions recently resulting in young blokes missing large amounts of games due to their clearances being held up..

Should clubs be letting these young players go, who don't want to play at their current club, or force them to not play footy at all

Hackham should make a deal with a club in the saafl club, say Elizabeth.. Player gets cleared to Elizabeth,, then three weeks later, put in a clearance from Elizabeth to hackham

From the constitution

20.2.v A player cleared from the SFL to another Country or Metropolitan Club and desiring to return to the SFL in that season must return to his previous SFL Club.

[Rush a Point]

A quick scroll through the clearances, seems to be a lot 'Denied'. Is this poor paperwork or clubs being hardnosed?

Hackham and Valleys appear to have the most activity so far.

Looks like Hackham's recruitment scheme of targeting other SFL clubs 18-20 year olds is coming back to bite them.

So far hackham have had 3 clearances of their 18-20 year old recruits denied, with 1 still pending

NOARLUNGA HACKHAM Bennett, Jason Denied 02/02/12 07/02/12
REYNELLA HACKHAM Bollenhagen, Jarrad Denied 02/02/12 03/02/12
HAPPY VALLEY HACKHAM Daish, Anthony Denied 02/02/12 07/02/12
ALDINGA HACKHAM Bradley, Jarrad Pending 02/02/12

Seems the other clubs are denying the clearances using the rule about junior players needing to play 3 years of senior footy before they can leave without being denied. (can someone clarify this rule)

This rule has been used on a number of occasions recently resulting in young blokes missing large amounts of games due to their clearances being held up..

Should clubs be letting these young players go, who don't want to play at their current club, or force them to not play footy at all

Hackham should make a deal with a club in the saafl club, say Elizabeth.. Player gets cleared to Elizabeth,, then three weeks later, put in a clearance from Elizabeth to hackham

From the constitution

20.2.v A player cleared from the SFL to another Country or Metropolitan Club and desiring to return to the SFL in that season must return to his previous SFL Club.

Have heard that they have another couple of players in the same age group that they have not put put the clearance request in yet. They will receive the same answer "denied" on those as well.

[Snaparazzi]

A quick scroll through the clearances, seems to be a lot 'Denied'. Is this poor paperwork or clubs being hardnosed?

Hackham and Valleys appear to have the most activity so far.

Looks like Hackham's recruitment scheme of targeting other SFL clubs 18-20 year olds is coming back to bite them.

So far hackham have had 3 clearances of their 18-20 year old recruits denied, with 1 still pending

NOARLUNGA HACKHAM Bennett, Jason Denied 02/02/12 07/02/12
REYNELLA HACKHAM Bollenhagen, Jarrad Denied 02/02/12 03/02/12
HAPPY VALLEY HACKHAM Daish, Anthony Denied 02/02/12 07/02/12
ALDINGA HACKHAM Bradley, Jarrad Pending 02/02/12

Seems the other clubs are denying the clearances using the rule about junior players needing to play 3 years of senior footy before they can leave without being denied. (can someone clarify this rule)

This rule has been used on a number of occasions recently resulting in young blokes missing large amounts of games due to their clearances being held up..

Should clubs be letting these young players go, who don't want to play at their current club, or force them to not play footy at all

If they don't want to play there then why make it hartder than it needs to be, surely at the clearance stage the "home" club knows the players intentions at this stage of the year, so if you have had the chance to sit down with them and they still want to go then let it be. It's the SFL! How are Hackham going to improve? We all know Marty has a good footy brain and by recruiting these types of players highlights that he is not there for an immediate rise up the ladder but a gradual improvement with young kids that will then turn into quality A grade footballers and who know we may see the Hawks knocking on the 8's door in 3 years or so.

[pale ale]

Everyone goes on here about Hackham needing to improve and no one gets any pleasure in beating them easily with little interest from players that have to play against them but as soon as they look at taking one player from an opposition Club then everyone comes out firing about how dare can they take one of our Junior Stars, very creative recruiting I call it and hopefully the League steps in to inforce the clearances through for the good of footy in th SFL... Intersting that clearances are only one player per club so far so they are not raping one particular Club as happened to them quite some time ago now.

[afc9798]

Everyone goes on here about Hackham needing to improve and no one gets any pleasure in beating them easily with little interest from players that have to play against them but as soon as they look at taking one player from an opposition Club then everyone comes out firing about how dare can they take one of our Junior Stars, very creative recruiting I call it and hopefully the League steps in to inforce the clearances through for the good of footy in th SFL... Intersting that clearances are only one player per club so far so they are not raping one particular Club as happened to them quite some time ago now.

Or of course they could develop their own players through the juniors like the successful clubs do. I have no problem with a mature age player making the decision to move to another club, but I do have an issue with juniors being pillaged by another club to prop up struggling clubs. Hackham need to do their own development, which would be easier in a two division competition.

[vics01]

What is the common link with all these players??

[afc9798]

What is the common link with all these players??

Ummmmmm South Adelaide and Jason Torney?

[The Poacher]

Everyone goes on here about Hackham needing to improve and no one gets any pleasure in beating them easily with little interest from players that have to play against them but as soon as they look at taking one player from an opposition Club then everyone comes out firing about how dare can they take one of our Junior Stars, very creative recruiting I call it and hopefully the League steps in to inforce the clearances through for the good of footy in th SFL... Intersting that clearances are only one player per club so far so they are not raping one particular Club as happened to them quite some time ago now.

Or of course they could develop their own players through the juniors like the successful clubs do. I have no problem with a mature age player making the decision to move to another club, but I do have an issue with juniors being pillaged by another club to prop up struggling clubs. Hackham need to do their own development, which would be easier in a two division competition.

O.M.G.W.T.F "develop their own players through the juniors like the successful clubs do." this statement of course only applies to the lower clubs because a successful club [like yours] wouldnt take the best 5 u16's from a lower club [marion] and get them cleared to their club in the 2011 season, after not having developed them at all in the previous 3 to 5 years. Yes I can name them if you want. All 5 played in "your" saturday side and some even filled in "your" sunday side on the same weekend. Yeah I to have an issue with juniors being pillaged by a [successful] club to prop up "their" struggling club.

[afc9798]

Everyone goes on here about Hackham needing to improve and no one gets any pleasure in beating them easily with little interest from players that have to play against them but as soon as they look at taking one player from an opposition Club then everyone comes out firing about how dare can they take one of our Junior Stars, very creative recruiting I call it and hopefully the League steps in to inforce the clearances through for the good of footy in th SFL... Intersting that clearances are only one player per club so far so they are not raping one particular Club as happened to them quite some time ago now.

Or of course they could develop their own players through the juniors like the successful clubs do. I have no problem with a mature age player making the decision to move to another club, but I do have an issue with juniors being pillaged by another club to prop up struggling clubs. Hackham need to do their own development, which would be easier in a two division competition.

O.M.G.W.T.F "develop their own players through the juniors like the successful clubs do." this statement of course only applies to the lower clubs because a successful club [like yours] wouldnt take the best 5 u16's from a lower club [marion] and get them cleared to their club in the 2011 season, after not having developed them at all in the previous 3 to 5 years. Yes I can name them if you want. All 5 played in "your" saturday side and some even filled in "your" sunday side on the same weekend. Yeah I to have an issue with juniors being pillaged by a [successful] club to prop up "their" struggling club.

Can't respond to the specifics you mention as I don't know the detail, but doesn't diminish my point. Hackham, Marion etc. need to develop a culture that players want to play under and stay with the original team they came from. This would happen far more easily in a two tiered comp, where they are not going to get smacked every week by 200 points. Success breeds success, hence why players are easily lured to more successful clubs or seek those clubs out.

If what you said happened, it's not right, but if they were under 18's as I was referring to, then how did they get around the 3 year rule?

[leftpeg]

Everyone goes on here about Hackham needing to improve and no one gets any pleasure in beating them easily with little interest from players that have to play against them but as soon as they look at taking one player from an opposition Club then everyone comes out firing about how dare can they take one of our Junior Stars, very creative recruiting I call it and hopefully the League steps in to inforce the clearances through for the good of footy in th SFL... Intersting that clearances are only one player per club so far so they are not raping one particular Club as happened to them quite some time ago now.

Who's everyone? Only seen 1 person on here disagreeing with hackham's recruitment strategy.. personally I think it's a very smart strategy IF it wasnt for the 3 year rule.. and most people on here are discussing the rule, rather than hackham's recruitment.

If they don't want to play there then why make it hartder than it needs to be, surely at the clearance stage the "home" club knows the players intentions at this stage of the year, so if you have had the chance to sit down with them and they still want to go then let it be. It's the SFL! How are Hackham going to improve? We all know Marty has a good footy brain and by recruiting these types of players highlights that he is not there for an immediate rise up the ladder but a gradual improvement with young kids that will then turn into quality A grade footballers and who know we may see the Hawks knocking on the 8's door in 3 years or so.

Thats all well and good but what if a club cleared a few of their 18-20 year olds to Hackham, when they didnt have to, then 3 years down the track Hackham took that clubs spot in the 8, with those players playing a big part... think that club would be kicking themselves

[The Poacher]

Everyone goes on here about Hackham needing to improve and no one gets any pleasure in beating them easily with little interest from players that have to play against them but as soon as they look at taking one player from an opposition Club then everyone comes out firing about how dare can they take one of our Junior Stars, very creative recruiting I call it and hopefully the League steps in to inforce the clearances through for the good of footy in th SFL... Intersting that clearances are only one player per club so far so they are not raping one particular Club as happened to them quite some time ago now.

Or of course they could develop their own players through the juniors like the successful clubs do. I have no problem with a mature age player making the decision to move to another club, but I do have an issue with juniors being pillaged by another club to prop up struggling clubs. Hackham need to do their own development, which would be easier in a two division competition.

O.M.G.W.T.F "develop their own players through the juniors like the successful clubs do." this statement of course only applies to the lower clubs because a successful club [like yours] wouldnt take the best 5 u16's from a lower club [marion] and get them cleared to their club in the 2011 season, after not having developed them at all in the previous 3 to 5 years. Yes I can name them if you want. All 5 played in "your" saturday side and some even filled in "your" sunday side on the same weekend. Yeah I to have an issue with juniors being pillaged by a [successful] club to prop up "their" struggling club.

Can't respond to the specifics you mention as I don't know the detail, but doesn't diminish my point. Hackham, Marion etc. need to develop a culture that players want to play under and stay with the original team they came from. This would happen far more easily in a two tiered comp, where they are not going to get smacked every week by 200 points. Success breeds success, hence why players are easily lured to more successful clubs or seek those clubs out.

If what you said happened, it's not right, but if they were under 18's as I was referring to, then how did they get around the 3 year rule?

how is it I knew you wouldnt know the details about this situation, and that you were talking about junior football, but not this grade of junior football. typicial.

[Afterthesiren]

afc9798 - perhaps the culture at your own club has taken a slide at junior level hence these players want to move on. As I'm told Marty Clifton has coached these juniors both at Hackham and South and in recent years has created a healthy culture at junior level. These boys might want to be coached by a bloke they all respect, let them leave your club and if the culture etc is as great as you say it is... well, I guess they will return in a year or two. Marty has worked hard developing his own base of juniors but its obvious he needs to do some sort of recruiting, so where's he going to recruit from??? The Western Border League? Barossa Light? No... He will recruit from the SFL, GSFL and HFL. Why? Because he's a smart man and knows these types of players are more likely to stick around. I've heard clubs like Cove, Brighton etc bitch and moan about Hackham taking their players, well if its so good at these clubs then why would they leave? Don't tell me money because thats a crock. Get over it let these boys go play under Marty and be done with it. This particular topic will get very boring otherwise.

[pale ale]

afc9798 - perhaps the culture at your own club has taken a slide at junior level hence these players want to move on. As I'm told Marty Clifton has coached these juniors both at Hackham and South and in recent years has created a healthy culture at junior level. These boys might want to be coached by a bloke they all respect, let them leave your club and if the culture etc is as great as you say it is... well, I guess they will return in a year or two. Marty has worked hard developing his own base of juniors but its obvious he needs to do some sort of recruiting, so where's he going to recruit from??? The Western Border League? Barossa Light? No... He will recruit from the SFL, GSFL and HFL. Why? Because he's a smart man and knows these types of players are more likely to stick around. I've heard clubs like Cove, Brighton etc bitch and moan about Hackham taking their players, well if its so good at these clubs then why would they leave? Don't tell me money because thats a crock. Get over it let these boys go play under Marty and be done with it. This particular topic will get very boring otherwise.

[Dutchy]

Flaggy have big poles!