Dogwatcher wrote:That's the NRL model.
I meant U21 State Comp as in SA / VIC Metro / Vic Country / WA etc like the current U18 National Carnival. I believe this may be the result of that meeting Big Phil was talking about. I hope not.
by Aerie » Mon May 19, 2014 2:02 pm
Dogwatcher wrote:That's the NRL model.
by TimmiesChin » Mon May 19, 2014 2:10 pm
UK Fan wrote:Determined by the AFL clubs?
Yeah, thats fair. They have proven themselves to be totally selfless in all things.
UK Fan wrote:Once again just like AAMI, you signed the agreement and are unhappy about it within a season. Forgive me for thinking that your clubs are worse negotiators than Neville Chamberlain.
by Aerie » Mon May 19, 2014 2:13 pm
Big Phil wrote:Great article from Warren Partland in today's paper...
http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/sport/afl ... 6922482960Warren Partland wrote:Quit the charade, Magpies are dead...
THE Port Adelaide Magpies are in name only and are not the true Magpies.
Port Adelaide and the SANFL can voice their disapproval as much as they want but the charade is already over after just eight rounds.
They ceased to be the Magpies when they were given a licence to include Eagles, Roosters, Bulldogs and Tigers in the side.
Paul Stewart is a Woodville-West Torrens product, last year Cameron Hitchcock was in the Glenelg jumper and Sam Colquhoun learned his football at Central District. State league clubs are now playing against players they developed who signed with the Power for the AFL.
The Power, just like the Crows, wanted teams in the state league so they could keep their players together. Any club with a second side calls it their reserves under the same label.
The Crows didn’t come up with the Galahs or Pigeons for their second side. They stuck with the Crows and while they prefer the team be tagged its state league side, it is still acknowledged as their reserves.
So why is the Power reserves called the Magpies, especially when products of other state league programs are involved? And don’t they want to be known as the one club?
The difference between the Crows and Power reserves is the more favourable conditions offered to Port Adelaide, which was allowed to retain key personnel from last year’s Magpies outfit.
Next year, Port Adelaide will lose its zones and under age teams. However, the damage is already being done on the evidence of the past six weeks.
The Power reserves have won their past six games by a combined 423 points at an average of more than 70. Their past two wins were by 50 and 60 points against Sturt and South Adelaide respectively. Those two teams sat second on the ladder underneath the Power reserves going into those battles.
The Power reserves have also beaten the Eagles by 58 points. It is the Eagles’ only loss.
When the Crows were given the green light to field a team in the state league and Port Adelaide was allowed to keep its reserves at Alberton and not spread throughout the competition, there were plenty of nerves of an AFL team domination.
Already clubs are relying on Power injuries to bring it back to the pack.
No doubt if the Power reserves win the grand final the club will claim it as an extension of the Magpies’ proud history. Yeah, right.
by smac » Mon May 19, 2014 2:25 pm
TimmiesChin wrote:smac wrote:Why should the 2 AFL clubs have a say on SMA? I wouldn't appoint a tenant in my rental property as my agent to manage the property.
Because like it or lump it, the two AFL sides are the biggest party involved in Adelaide Oval and should at least have a voice.
Wky was it again that the SANFL originally left Adelaide Oval and set up footy park. Wasn't it because they were the biggest source of revenue of Adelaide Oval but where getting no input ? (or something like that).
by Booney » Mon May 19, 2014 2:31 pm
by TimmiesChin » Mon May 19, 2014 2:42 pm
smac wrote:TimmiesChin wrote:smac wrote:Why should the 2 AFL clubs have a say on SMA? I wouldn't appoint a tenant in my rental property as my agent to manage the property.
Because like it or lump it, the two AFL sides are the biggest party involved in Adelaide Oval and should at least have a voice.
Wky was it again that the SANFL originally left Adelaide Oval and set up footy park. Wasn't it because they were the biggest source of revenue of Adelaide Oval but where getting no input ? (or something like that).
They got a seat at the negotiating table for their lease. If they ****** that up, whose fault is it?
by dedja » Mon May 19, 2014 3:48 pm
by smac » Mon May 19, 2014 4:13 pm
TimmiesChin wrote:smac wrote:TimmiesChin wrote:smac wrote:Why should the 2 AFL clubs have a say on SMA? I wouldn't appoint a tenant in my rental property as my agent to manage the property.
Because like it or lump it, the two AFL sides are the biggest party involved in Adelaide Oval and should at least have a voice.
Wky was it again that the SANFL originally left Adelaide Oval and set up footy park. Wasn't it because they were the biggest source of revenue of Adelaide Oval but where getting no input ? (or something like that).
They got a seat at the negotiating table for their lease. If they ****** that up, whose fault is it?
Firstly, who said they ****** things up. Situations change over time, which is why they should have a voice.
Surely these organisations are big enough to work cooperatively, in the best interests of all parties rather than treating the two biggest revenue raisers as the enemy with a big stick, because that sort of arrangement only leads to bad times.
by dedja » Mon May 19, 2014 4:26 pm
Booney wrote:And here I was thinking there were no more revelations to unearth!
by TimmiesChin » Mon May 19, 2014 4:27 pm
smac wrote:Given crowds are up and cash is supposedly down, the only thing I can see is that they didn't do their sums properly. They can't blame AFL, SANFL, SMA or anyone else for that. They should have done those sums for themselves, shouldn't they?
by dedja » Mon May 19, 2014 4:29 pm
TimmiesChin wrote:smac wrote:Given crowds are up and cash is supposedly down, the only thing I can see is that they didn't do their sums properly. They can't blame AFL, SANFL, SMA or anyone else for that. They should have done those sums for themselves, shouldn't they?
Not everyone has Maths & Computer Science degrees hey smac.
by TimmiesChin » Mon May 19, 2014 4:36 pm
dedja wrote:TimmiesChin wrote:smac wrote:Given crowds are up and cash is supposedly down, the only thing I can see is that they didn't do their sums properly. They can't blame AFL, SANFL, SMA or anyone else for that. They should have done those sums for themselves, shouldn't they?
Not everyone has Maths & Computer Science degrees hey smac.
Hey, I've got one of them, does that mean I'm smart?
by smac » Mon May 19, 2014 4:39 pm
TimmiesChin wrote:smac wrote:Given crowds are up and cash is supposedly down, the only thing I can see is that they didn't do their sums properly. They can't blame AFL, SANFL, SMA or anyone else for that. They should have done those sums for themselves, shouldn't they?
Not everyone has Maths & Computer Science degrees hey smac.
But if the assumptions and parameters they are given to work on are incorrect .... (uplift was based on an expected crowd figure)
Using your argument that if the clubs have agreed to a deal, they should suck it up ... should the same argument be made to the SANFL clubs regarding the Crows/Port reserves ? I mean, we are what - 8 weeks in ?
The SANFL clubs should have done their due diligence. (or does this argument only work one way)
In which case this thread should be closed and everyone should just shut up and deal with it.
by bennymacca » Mon May 19, 2014 4:41 pm
dedja wrote:TimmiesChin wrote:smac wrote:Given crowds are up and cash is supposedly down, the only thing I can see is that they didn't do their sums properly. They can't blame AFL, SANFL, SMA or anyone else for that. They should have done those sums for themselves, shouldn't they?
Not everyone has Maths & Computer Science degrees hey smac.
Hey, I've got one of them, does that mean I'm smart?
by dedja » Mon May 19, 2014 4:45 pm
TimmiesChin wrote:dedja wrote:TimmiesChin wrote:smac wrote:Given crowds are up and cash is supposedly down, the only thing I can see is that they didn't do their sums properly. They can't blame AFL, SANFL, SMA or anyone else for that. They should have done those sums for themselves, shouldn't they?
Not everyone has Maths & Computer Science degrees hey smac.
Hey, I've got one of them, does that mean I'm smart?
Dunno about smart, but you should be able to do your sums using imaginary and complex number algebra.
by tipper » Mon May 19, 2014 5:00 pm
TimmiesChin wrote:(uplift was based on an expected crowd figure)
TimmiesChin wrote:In which case this thread should be closed and everyone should just shut up and deal with it.
by TimmiesChin » Mon May 19, 2014 5:17 pm
tipper wrote:wish i could complain to my landlord "i am not earning as much as i expected i would this year, lower my rent please...." and expect it to actually work
by tipper » Mon May 19, 2014 5:29 pm
TimmiesChin wrote:tipper wrote:wish i could complain to my landlord "i am not earning as much as i expected i would this year, lower my rent please...." and expect it to actually work
http://www.adelaideoval.com.au/faq/117/faqs.aspx
Who owns Adelaide Oval?
Adelaide Oval is owned by the State Government and leased to the Adelaide Oval SMA Ltd for a period of 80 years. The Adelaide Oval SMA Ltd is responsible for the management of Adelaide Oval.
by UK Fan » Mon May 19, 2014 5:30 pm
TimmiesChin wrote:tipper wrote:wish i could complain to my landlord "i am not earning as much as i expected i would this year, lower my rent please...." and expect it to actually work
http://www.adelaideoval.com.au/faq/117/faqs.aspx
Who owns Adelaide Oval?
Adelaide Oval is owned by the State Government and leased to the Adelaide Oval SMA Ltd for a period of 80 years. The Adelaide Oval SMA Ltd is responsible for the management of Adelaide Oval.
fester69 wrote: I'm full of "pish and wind" !!You can call me weak !!
MW wrote: Well call me a special asshole!.
Booney wrote: I'm a happy clapper **** stick.
by TimmiesChin » Mon May 19, 2014 5:37 pm
tipper wrote:TimmiesChin wrote:notice you also ignored my other points.....
Competitions SANFL Official Site | Country Footy SA | Southern Football League | VFL Footy
Club Forums Snouts Louts | The Roost | Redlegs Forum |