AFL Reserves Discussion...

[Aerie]

Slaven claimed it didnt he Aerie/LEH ????


What about Chiggy Pseudo/Ecky/Dutchy ???

Claimed what? Sorry, haven't read too much of the above in detail. Slaven stated he would've preferred the status quo, but given the Reserves teams were coming in, what on the rails wrote was spot on:

A No majority would have stopped it but the fear of the Crows taking their money into the SAAFL (I think it was a bluff personally?) along with media exposure for the SANFL significantly reduced, relevance of the comp down graded even further than it presently is and the fear funding money from the AFL by-passing the SANFL and being channelled into the SAAFL would result in the death of 2 clubs and ultimately the League saw the Yes vote prevail. The Commission, the SANFL and AFL "spin doctors" did well!

As far as I know, Slaven was always a Yes vote to have the Crows Reserves in the SANFL.

[RB]

the minute the Crows forced the issue there was threat either way to the SANFL and it's clubs, and I kinda think the SANFL might have given themselves the best chance to survive this way.

So in other words the league directors were gutless and couldn't be bothered doing the hard yards.

[JK]

the minute the Crows forced the issue there was threat either way to the SANFL and it's clubs, and I kinda think the SANFL might have given themselves the best chance to survive this way.

So in other words the league directors were gutless and couldn't be bothered doing the hard yards.

Your opinion not mine

[Aerie]

YOU !!!

LOL! As much as I was against the AFL Reservers coming in, I think looking at the reasons the clubs decided to vote Yes on are all real and valid. I had cocenrs too about the SANFL if we were competing in the same City against a lesser league but with AFL influence and media attention tied to it what would happen to the SANFL ultimately.

That is my opinion also. Who knows whether the decision made will help or hinder and same for if the alternate decision had been made. However I can see why the clubs voted this way. I don't like having AFL reserves in the SANFL in the slightest, but the minute the Crows forced the issue there was threat either way to the SANFL and it's clubs, and I kinda think the SANFL might have given themselves the best chance to survive this way.

My thoughts too, both what OTR and JK wrote.

[RB]

YOU !!!

LOL! As much as I was against the AFL Reservers coming in, I think looking at the reasons the clubs decided to vote Yes on are all real and valid. I had cocenrs too about the SANFL if we were competing in the same City against a lesser league but with AFL influence and media attention tied to it what would happen to the SANFL ultimately.

That is my opinion also. Who knows whether the decision made will help or hinder and same for if the alternate decision had been made. However I can see why the clubs voted this way. I don't like having AFL reserves in the SANFL in the slightest, but the minute the Crows forced the issue there was threat either way to the SANFL and it's clubs, and I kinda think the SANFL might have given themselves the best chance to survive this way.

My thoughts too, both what OTR and JK wrote.

The league directors have mostly justified their vote by saying that if the Crows had a reserves side elsewhere, the SANFL would be threatened. IMO this argument just doesn't cut it. I don't see how the 'Ravens' playing in e.g. the SAAFL will have much of an effect on the SANFL, which barely gets any mainstream media coverage anyway. And don't tell me that the 10,000 hardy souls at games on the weekend are going to stop going because the 2 or 3 AFL players in each game won't be there next year.

I get where you're coming from JK, but I think the SANFL is a great competition, that was only about 5 yrs ago averaging close to 4K/game. Throw in the GFC and the rise of the price of tickets, and the SANFL in 2013 compares OK with that. With the money we're apparently going to get out of Adelaide Oval, and the development of the land at West Lakes, I believe we're in a strong position. Certainly we're in a position to stare down the Crows.

I think it would be disappointing if the league directors have voted yes because of perceived threats.

[therisingblues]

North were strongly NO at first but changed as did Norwood. Both clubs must have eventually got more information and North must have got it before Norwood.
Seems to be the same information...... even a NO majority would make no difference.

OTR you are wrong Norwood were very concerned about the financial state of those 3 clubs as would ALL SANFL clubs.

I also repeat my personal opinion .... NO !!!!

To be fair, I was being "flippant" re my Norwood comment.

A No majority would have stopped it but the fear of the Crows taking their money into the SAAFL (I think it was a bluff personally?) along with media exposure for the SANFL significantly reduced, relevance of the comp down graded even further than it presently is and the fear funding money from the AFL by-passing the SANFL and being channelled into the SAAFL would result in the death of 2 clubs and ultimately the League saw the Yes vote prevail. The Commission, the SANFL and AFL "spin doctors" did well!

Yep, the "more information" consisted of threats, and more threats.
The Crows are a cowardly bunch to resort to such methods. I know football is half business, but the other half consists of tradition, passion, sportsmanship, loyalty in the face of overwhelming opposition; so many things that blur and dissolve the shape of purely cold business dealings and the Crows have thrown them all away.

[UK Fan]

Slaven claimed it didnt he Aerie/LEH ????


What about Chiggy Pseudo/Ecky/Dutchy ???

Claimed what? Sorry, haven't read too much of the above in detail. Slaven stated he would've preferred the status quo, but given the Reserves teams were coming in, what on the rails wrote was spot on:

A No majority would have stopped it but the fear of the Crows taking their money into the SAAFL (I think it was a bluff personally?) along with media exposure for the SANFL significantly reduced, relevance of the comp down graded even further than it presently is and the fear funding money from the AFL by-passing the SANFL and being channelled into the SAAFL would result in the death of 2 clubs and ultimately the League saw the Yes vote prevail. The Commission, the SANFL and AFL "spin doctors" did well!

Did Dlaven claim the commission would overrule SANFL clubs if crows were voted against ????


As far as I know, Slaven was always a Yes vote to have the Crows Reserves in the SANFL.

[JK]

I get where you're coming from JK, but I think the SANFL is a great competition, that was only about 5 yrs ago averaging close to 4K/game. Throw in the GFC and the rise of the price of tickets, and the SANFL in 2013 compares OK with that. With the money we're apparently going to get out of Adelaide Oval, and the development of the land at West Lakes, I believe we're in a strong position. Certainly we're in a position to stare down the Crows.

I think it would be disappointing if the league directors have voted yes because of perceived threats.

Mate I very much agree with you, I love the SANFL and think it's a fantastic competition.

I also think that if the Crows lined up in the SAAFL (for example) they would have:
1. Been able to go after ANY sponsors they like. There are many sponsors in the SANFL who support clubs purely through their allegiance to them, but there are many who don't and expect to see a commercial return on their investment. To that end the Crows could well look more appealling due to the size of their member-base and national profile.
2. They would have been able to prevent the Matt Suckling, Andrew Ainger, Nathan Gordon types from ever making it to a SANFL club by offering better $ and opportunity.
3. The guaranteed income from the Crows might help some clubs that are financially under the pump

The way it stands the SANFL has retained some control.

If we'd gotten to (say) 8 years down the track with only 6 sides in the comp, then it was dead anyway.

[JK]

I get where you're coming from JK, but I think the SANFL is a great competition, that was only about 5 yrs ago averaging close to 4K/game. Throw in the GFC and the rise of the price of tickets, and the SANFL in 2013 compares OK with that. With the money we're apparently going to get out of Adelaide Oval, and the development of the land at West Lakes, I believe we're in a strong position. Certainly we're in a position to stare down the Crows.

I think it would be disappointing if the league directors have voted yes because of perceived threats.

Mate I very much agree with you, I love the SANFL and think it's a fantastic competition.

I also think that if the Crows lined up in the SAAFL (for example) they would have:
1. Been able to go after ANY sponsors they like. There are many sponsors in the SANFL who support clubs purely through their allegiance to them, but there are many who don't and expect to see a commercial return on their investment. To that end the Crows could well look more appealling due to the size of their member-base and national profile.
2. They would have been able to prevent the Matt Suckling, Andrew Ainger, Nathan Gordon types from ever making it to a SANFL club by offering better $ and opportunity.
3. The guaranteed income from the Crows might help some clubs that are financially under the pump

The way it stands the SANFL has retained some control.

Understand the economy hasnt been kind and ticket prices suck, but the fact remains that there's not enough coming in through the gate .. To have 1800 as the biggest crowd in Round 20 (and it wasnt either of the games involving the Top 4) does not instil a heap of confidence in the future.

If we'd gotten to (say) 8 years down the track with only 6 sides in the comp, then it was dead anyway.

[Aerie]

The league directors have mostly justified their vote by saying that if the Crows had a reserves side elsewhere, the SANFL would be threatened. IMO this argument just doesn't cut it. I don't see how the 'Ravens' playing in e.g. the SAAFL will have much of an effect on the SANFL, which barely gets any mainstream media coverage anyway. And don't tell me that the 10,000 hardy souls at games on the weekend are going to stop going because the 2 or 3 AFL players in each game won't be there next year.

I get where you're coming from JK, but I think the SANFL is a great competition, that was only about 5 yrs ago averaging close to 4K/game. Throw in the GFC and the rise of the price of tickets, and the SANFL in 2013 compares OK with that. With the money we're apparently going to get out of Adelaide Oval, and the development of the land at West Lakes, I believe we're in a strong position. Certainly we're in a position to stare down the Crows.

I think it would be disappointing if the league directors have voted yes because of perceived threats.

I was more convinced by the relevance to the actual players. Young footballers, mostly, want to play AFL. Keeping that link and making sure the SANFL has the best players living in SA, outside the 44 playing AFL for Port or Crows on any given weekend, still playing and wanting to play SANFL is more important than the average Joe supporter.

The game has always been about the players. If the players put on a good show, we'll go along and watch them, not the other way around.

Now the structure has been reset, the SANFL has to make sure we get the best available to the SANFL to keep standard up, keep crowds coming and keep the SANFL strong.

[RB]

I think it's almost as dead with a Crows reservists team that if it had only 6 teams.

[UK Fan]

YOU !!!

LOL! As much as I was against the AFL Reservers coming in, I think looking at the reasons the clubs decided to vote Yes on are all real and valid. I had cocenrs too about the SANFL if we were competing in the same City against a lesser league but with AFL influence and media attention tied to it what would happen to the SANFL ultimately.

That is my opinion also. Who knows whether the decision made will help or hinder and same for if the alternate decision had been made. However I can see why the clubs voted this way. I don't like having AFL reserves in the SANFL in the slightest, but the minute the Crows forced the issue there was threat either way to the SANFL and it's clubs, and I kinda think the SANFL might have given themselves the best chance to survive this way.

Big fan of both of you boys but thats absolute crap fellas. THis was never done with SA footballs best interest at heart.

If this was done as the best thing for SA football why wasnt entering our reserves even allowed to be discussed ????

We have been railroaded, bluffed ,scared, bribed to agree.

$50K a year is not enough to save any club. IT wouldnt even pay half a senior coaches wage FFS!!!!!!

I honestly cant believe how well you have allowed our league to be destroyed OTR. I thought you would have bohdan hung drawn and quartered for what he has done.

BTW Meggsy Edwards is your sell out North. I have no evidence apart from I dont trust the prick.

[Aerie]

Did Dlaven claim the commission would overrule SANFL clubs if crows were voted against ????

No, not at the info night and not anywhere else publicly as far as I'm aware.

Like I said, I think he was always a Yes vote anyway, not necessarily out of fear, but because he thinks it will be the better thing.

[RB]

2. They would have been able to prevent the Matt Suckling, Andrew Ainger, Nathan Gordon types from ever making it to a SANFL club by offering better $ and opportunity.

On that, today Rucci had this in his 'Roast' today:

NORWOOD midfielder Matt Suckling is watching history repeat through this debate. He came to The Parade from a traditional Victorian suburban club, Port Melbourne, in a VFL that is being converted to an AFL reserves competition. Now he is to see the SANFL fall the same way. His thoughts:

"I COME from the Victorian environment where the VFL is a prehistoric VFA but it is so diluted by the AFL clubs now that it has killed that competition and lacks any type of integrity. I'm not saying that is going to happen here ... but I don't think SA has the population to sustain SANFL football with AFL influence.

"You are going to get (a change in the supporter flow) ... (kids who have) their mum and dads followed SANFL clubs, they're growing up barracking predominantly for the Crows. Their one bit of alignment to the SANFL clubs was their mum and dad. But if they've got a reserves side that is playing in the SANFL, then they are less inclined to want to support (their parents' SANFL) team and more follow the AFL team."

And at the end of the day, I can't see more than a handful of Crows fans making the trek down to Noarlunga on a cold, windy Saturday afternoon to follow the reserves.

[JK]

I think it's almost as dead with a Crows reservists team that if it had only 6 teams.

Well I can respect that opinion too and must admit I do have my own fears toward that also.

[Aerie]

I think it's almost as dead with a Crows reservists team that if it had only 6 teams.

Perhaps. I just hope for the SANFL's sake people give it a go with an open mind and see what they think when they're watching a game next year. Especially a game between two traditional SANFL clubs.

[RB]

I think it's almost as dead with a Crows reservists team that if it had only 6 teams.

Well I can respect that opinion too and must admit I do have my own fears toward that also.

Just remembered the word Dion Hayman used - 'soulless'. I can't top that.

[JK]

2. They would have been able to prevent the Matt Suckling, Andrew Ainger, Nathan Gordon types from ever making it to a SANFL club by offering better $ and opportunity.

On that, today Rucci had this in his 'Roast' today:

Yep I heard the Suckers interview on Thursday night and thought he made an excellent point.

Still, the Crows are paying $400k per season to be in the SANFL .. There's 5-8 players they could have bought as top-up's that wouldn't have made it to the SANFL. Noone initially comes across for the the love of a new club, it's all about the job and football wage opportunity.

[RB]

There's 5-8 players they could have bought as top-up's that wouldn't have made it to the SANFL.

If it were 30 Mat Sucklings we were missing out on, I could understand, but 5-8 doesn't really worry me. I guess it's subjective re where to draw the line.

[JK]

There is a heap of Norwood members bemoaning the fact that the club voted against their wishes - No problem, I can understand their emotional distress and sympathise with them, truly I do.

However the Norwood members survey was completed by 642 of our 3211 members, and statistical fact's are as follows:

75 said they would cease being a member - %11.7 of respondents (and %2.3 of the entire current membership)

240 (%37.5) said they didn't want the Crows at either League or Reserves level.

All of that highlight's a minority and surely not compelling enough for the Board to vote No if they were in any doubt?