The never ending No AFL in the SANFL whinge thread

[Jim05]

The thing you are forgetting Timmy is that the SANFL are part owners of AO and without them the move to AO would never of been made possible. The SANFL is entitled to claim rent off the AFL sides as long as they are tennants. The two AFL sides dont even get a say on the SMA. Id be more than happy for the SANFL to just collect rent of them for eternity, at a decent rate of course

Incorrect, the SANFL hold a lease to AO, at no stage have the SANFL bought AO. The government own AO and at any time can take that lease away from the SANFL.

80 year lease though so they are in effect the landlord. Do you really think the SANFL would move away from AAMI without having a guarantee at AO?
The move to AO was dependant on the SANFL agreeing to move if they had said no you would still be stuck at AAMI so you actually should be thanking the SANFL

Yes they are the landlord, but as I said you are incorrect in saying they are part owner. The SANFL can't go out and sell AO can they? You do realise it was in the SANFL best interest to allow the move to AO. If the SANFL had said no the AFL license would of been removed from the SANFL and AO would of still gone a head. Imagine were the SANFL would be now if that had happened.

Not so sure it would of gone ahead.
Port were the only ones keen to move, I get the feeling if the SANFL said no the Crows would of been happy to stay at AAMI and the project wouldnt of gone ahead.
Instead of Port always blaming the SANFL they should be thanking them for getting them to a great new home

[UK Fan]

The thing you are forgetting Timmy is that the SANFL are part owners of AO and without them the move to AO would never of been made possible. The SANFL is entitled to claim rent off the AFL sides as long as they are tennants. The two AFL sides dont even get a say on the SMA. Id be more than happy for the SANFL to just collect rent of them for eternity, at a decent rate of course

Incorrect, the SANFL hold a lease to AO, at no stage have the SANFL bought AO. The government own AO and at any time can take that lease away from the SANFL.

80 year lease though so they are in effect the landlord. Do you really think the SANFL would move away from AAMI without having a guarantee at AO?
The move to AO was dependant on the SANFL agreeing to move if they had said no you would still be stuck at AAMI so you actually should be thanking the SANFL

Yes they are the landlord, but as I said you are incorrect in saying they are part owner. The SANFL can't go out and sell AO can they? You do realise it was in the SANFL best interest to allow the move to AO. If the SANFL had said no the AFL license would of been removed from the SANFL and AO would of still gone a head. Imagine were the SANFL would be now if that had happened.

The part where you think the AFL can do anything without SANFL approval ie take the licences off them. Under what authority could they do this ???

As pointed out to you many many posts ago. The SANFL control football in SA at all levels.

The AFL can not buy or bypass this authority like you keep suggesting/hoping.

Adelaide Oval happened due to ALP winning the state election. If Libs had won we'd have a new roofed stadium that the SANFL wouldn't have to lease.

The AFL had zero say/authority in this matter.

[kickinit]

The part where you think the AFL can do anything without SANFL approval ie take the licences off them. Under what authority could they do this ???

As pointed out to you many many posts ago. The SANFL control football in SA at all levels.

The AFL can not buy or bypass this authority like you keep suggesting/hoping.

They own the license, they could of taken those licenses at any time.

So you think the SANFL controls the AFL in SA? The AFL controls the AFL and the SANFL has no say on it.

[whufc]

"The SANFL (South Australian National Football League) is the premier League and governing body for Australian Rules Football in South Australia.

The SANFL grows and promotes football throughout South Australia from indigenous communities, school and club footy right through to League level.

We are the custodians for footy in South Australia and as such, we are the organisation that works in the best interests of football to realise its full potential at all levels.

It is a significant responsibility, as football is an industry that generates half a billion dollars to the state's economy annually and employs 1500 people - and it's a game that is played and enjoyed by hundreds of thousands more.

The SANFL's key objective is to build and protect the long-term future of the game at all levels - the ten SANFL clubs, and the game at community level throughout South Australia"

[JohnnyG]

2100 to Alberton on Saturday tells the tale, Magpies fans have walked away and Power fans have not filled the void.

For only around 3% of the Power members to turn up to the game on a fantastic day without their AFL team playing speaks volumes for the competition and where it is headed.

Official?

Say it was 3121 and every single one of them was a Power member, still only 6% of your membership turned up!

dont tell me that power supporters have other allegiances other then the magpies. Heaven forbids!!!

so what sort of club is that? are you 1 club, 2 clubs, 10 clubs...??

[Apachebulldog]

Yee haaa there are 251 comments on the Adelaide Now site Wazzas article has created a POWER SURGE !!!

[dedja]

is that 753 comments?

[Apachebulldog]

LOL nope it was my stupid computer some pink writing came up and i kept submitting LOL

[UK Fan]

The part where you think the AFL can do anything without SANFL approval ie take the licences off them. Under what authority could they do this ???

As pointed out to you many many posts ago. The SANFL control football in SA at all levels.

The AFL can not buy or bypass this authority like you keep suggesting/hoping.

They own the license, they could of taken those licenses at any time.

So you think the SANFL controls the AFL in SA? The AFL controls the AFL and the SANFL has no say on it.

As Dedja said you are embarrassingly wrong.

[kickinit]

The part where you think the AFL can do anything without SANFL approval ie take the licences off them. Under what authority could they do this ???

As pointed out to you many many posts ago. The SANFL control football in SA at all levels.

The AFL can not buy or bypass this authority like you keep suggesting/hoping.

They own the license, they could of taken those licenses at any time.

So you think the SANFL controls the AFL in SA? The AFL controls the AFL and the SANFL has no say on it.

As Dedja said you are embarrassingly wrong.

So your saying the SANFL control the AFL in SA? That the AFL has no say what happens at AFL level in SA?

[UK Fan]

"The SANFL (South Australian National Football League) is the premier League and governing body for Australian Rules Football in South Australia.

The SANFL grows and promotes football throughout South Australia from indigenous communities, school and club footy right through to League level.

We are the custodians for footy in South Australia and as such, we are the organisation that works in the best interests of football to realise its full potential at all levels.

It is a significant responsibility, as football is an industry that generates half a billion dollars to the state's economy annually and employs 1500 people - and it's a game that is played and enjoyed by hundreds of thousands more.

The SANFL's key objective is to build and protect the long-term future of the game at all levels - the ten SANFL clubs, and the game at community level throughout South Australia"

See if you can get an adult to explain the above to you kickinit. The answers to all your questions are above. A big hint the first sentence. You'll note it doesn't state (except AFL) anywhere.

Who was against the AFL creating the crows in 1987 like originally planned ????

Who blocked Ports entry into the AFL in 1991??? And why once blocked there was nothing the AFL could do to assist Ports entry ???

Who brought the second AFL licence and sold it to Port Adelaide in 1996 after accepting numerous bids ? ??

Who did the AFL negotiate with so they could purchase the two SA-AFL licences ???? And why ???



When you answer the above then we will go to the next part of the lesson.

[kickinit]

"The SANFL (South Australian National Football League) is the premier League and governing body for Australian Rules Football in South Australia.

The SANFL grows and promotes football throughout South Australia from indigenous communities, school and club footy right through to League level.

We are the custodians for footy in South Australia and as such, we are the organisation that works in the best interests of football to realise its full potential at all levels.

It is a significant responsibility, as football is an industry that generates half a billion dollars to the state's economy annually and employs 1500 people - and it's a game that is played and enjoyed by hundreds of thousands more.

The SANFL's key objective is to build and protect the long-term future of the game at all levels - the ten SANFL clubs, and the game at community level throughout South Australia"

See if you can get an adult to explain the above to you kickinit. The answers to all your questions are above. A big hint the first sentence. You'll note it doesn't state (accept AFL) anywhere.

I fully understand what was posted. As you said the big hint in the first sentence. Did you notice that the last 3 words? IN SOUTH AUSTRALIA. Meaning they are the governing body for all competitions in South Australia. The AFL is a Australia wide competition. Just so you understand.

ACT and NSW governing body is AFL NSW/ACT
NT governing body is AFL NT
Queensland Governing body is AFL Queensland
SA governing body South Australian Football Commission
Tasmania governing body is AFL Victoria
Victoria governing body is AFL Victoria
WA governing body is WA football commission

The SANFL only have a say on the leagues that based in SA, anything outside of this is out of their control e.g. the AFL. The AFL is the governing body for Australia Football and that is why all of the governing body listed above follow the laws of the game, which are set out by the governing body the AFL.

[UK Fan]

"The SANFL (South Australian National Football League) is the premier League and governing body for Australian Rules Football in South Australia.

The SANFL grows and promotes football throughout South Australia from indigenous communities, school and club footy right through to League level.

We are the custodians for footy in South Australia and as such, we are the organisation that works in the best interests of football to realise its full potential at all levels.

It is a significant responsibility, as football is an industry that generates half a billion dollars to the state's economy annually and employs 1500 people - and it's a game that is played and enjoyed by hundreds of thousands more.

The SANFL's key objective is to build and protect the long-term future of the game at all levels - the ten SANFL clubs, and the game at community level throughout South Australia"

See if you can get an adult to explain the above to you kickinit. The answers to all your questions are above. A big hint the first sentence. You'll note it doesn't state (accept AFL) anywhere.

I fully understand what was posted. As you said the big hint in the first sentence. Did you notice that the last 3 words? IN SOUTH AUSTRALIA. Meaning they are the governing body for all competitions in South Australia. The AFL is a Australia wide competition. Just so you understand.

ACT and NSW governing body is AFL NSW/ACT
NT governing body is AFL NT
Queensland Governing body is AFL Queensland
SA governing body South Australian Football Commission
Tasmania governing body is AFL Victoria
Victoria governing body is AFL Victoria
WA governing body is WA football commission

The SANFL only have a say on the leagues that based in SA, anything outside of this is out of their control e.g. the AFL. The AFL is the governing body for Australia Football and that is why all of the governing body listed above follow the laws of the game, which are set out by the governing body the AFL.

Wrong .

The SANFL control all football leagues in SA!!! The SANFL sanctions AFL games in SA. Without SANFL approval AFL in SA would not exist. It's a working agreement the AFL negotiated with the SANFL to have its game played in SA. Because without SANFL approval guess what ????

Do you want to know why the SANFL sanctions AFL games in SA ???? It makes the SANFL $$$$$

Go thru my questions one by one and ask yourself ??? If the AFL controls everything in its league.

Why did the SANFL choose who it gave AFL licences to. Why didnt the AFL choose ???

Why did the AFL pay for control of SAs-AFL licences ???? Why didn't they just take control of the AFL licences and save themselves $15 million.

Why isn't Alberton allowed to be used for Port home games ???

Why is the SANFLs salary cap higher than every other state leagues when the AFL wanted them uniform nationwide ???

Why doesn't the SANFL have a melee rule if AFL sets the rule in Australia ??

Why hasn't the AFL elected who is on Port/Adelaide's board FFS???

If something happens in aussie rules in South Australia. the SANFL are apart of it even AFL. Otherwise it's not official.

You have to be the dumbest man alive not to grasp this concept yet.

[SimonH]

I fully understand what was posted. As you said the big hint in the first sentence. Did you notice that the last 3 words? IN SOUTH AUSTRALIA. Meaning they are the governing body for all competitions in South Australia. The AFL is a Australia wide competition. Just so you understand.

ACT and NSW governing body is AFL NSW/ACT
NT governing body is AFL NT
Queensland Governing body is AFL Queensland
SA governing body South Australian Football Commission
Tasmania governing body is AFL Victoria
Victoria governing body is AFL Victoria
WA governing body is WA football commission

The SANFL only have a say on the leagues that based in SA, anything outside of this is out of their control e.g. the AFL. The AFL is the governing body for Australia Football and that is why all of the governing body listed above follow the laws of the game, which are set out by the governing body the AFL.

I just wish that you could have used the phrase 'governing body' more often in that post. If all 'governing bodies', including the SA Football Commission, just blindly follow the chief 'governing body', the AFL, on the laws of the game, then good luck to your SANFL team in running out with 22 men and complaining about how short your 50 metre penalties are, next weekend.

[Maddawg]

The part where you think the AFL can do anything without SANFL approval ie take the licences off them. Under what authority could they do this ???

As pointed out to you many many posts ago. The SANFL control football in SA at all levels.

The AFL can not buy or bypass this authority like you keep suggesting/hoping.

They own the license, they could of taken those licenses at any time.

So you think the SANFL controls the AFL in SA? The AFL controls the AFL and the SANFL has no say on it.

The SANFL controls football in the State of South Australia from umpiring needs, officials, setting up all leagues. The AFL definetly needs the SANFL to do this. If they folded the sport of Australian Rules Football would decline in this state. Its actually a business for thje AFL, If this happened, a sport like soccer or NRL or even basketball may take some of its market share. If this occured and the TV rights were cut in half because of the decrease in interest what do you think the AFL would do.

Its a mutual arrangement they both need each other for the system to work. In fact the AFL needs the SANFL far more than they need a team like the crows or the power as they are all but franchises that can be replaced. A little bit of short term pain but definetly replaceable.

[TimmiesChin]

There's a bit of tail wagging dog, tin hat stuff going on in this thread now by the looks, here's my understanding.

The SANFL is definitely the governing body of football in SA - and plays a vital role, and up until earlier this year also (on paper at least) also had control over the two AFL club licenses.

The SANFL has now sold these licenses and no longer has the control over the licenses it once did.
the SANFL's only control over these licenses now revolves around tenancy agreements at Adelaide Oval, which it also does not own, in fact its role there is to partially populate SMA roles.

The SMA is a body funded initially by the government and a body working under a lease from the government. No-one on this forum knows the contents of that lease agreement, but I'll go out on a limb and suggest that given Adelaide Oval was redeveloped to bring AFL to the City, that somewhere in it would be some words protecting the interest of the AFL clubs, and similarly would have some words preventing these clubs picking up and moving elsewhere.

The SANFL/SMA/AFL/Government/AFL clubs are not all in this to tear each other apart. The best outcome for this state is to come to a mutually beneficial way forward.

For instance, if the AFL clubs pulled every cent out of Adelaide Oval and spent it themselves building up pokies empires - that wouldn't be helping anyone, and I'm sure the Government/AFL etc would step in. Similarly, if the SMA/SANFL/SACa set up tenancy agreements that make it prohibitive of the AFL clubs to be successful, the AFL/Government again would step in... ultimately, the more successful the AFL clubs are at the venue, the more revenue its going to raise, and the more flows to everyone. To some degree you have to ensure the revenue raisers (AFL clubs) have the ability to stay healthy to allow them to generate revenue.

[therisingblues]

In fact the AFL needs the SANFL far more than they need a team like the crows or the power as they are all but franchises that can be replaced. A little bit of short term pain but definetly replaceable.

Very good point.
The success of the Crows proves that a side can be created from nothing with no supporters, to a state phenomenon with a membership of 50,000 plus. Had those 50,000 turn coats simply refused to follow the AFL and stayed with their SANFL side, as we did, we wouldn't be in this mess. They preferred to follow a side made from nothing over teams they'd followed their whole lives.

I have never been able to get my head around that!

[JK]

Now that the AFL clubs own their own licenses, I would like to hear someone in official capacity within the SANFL come out and state that the $$ from the sale of West Lakes will be held in trust purely for the 8 foundation SANFL clubs, with none of it going toward the AFL ventures.

[TimmiesChin]

In fact the AFL needs the SANFL far more than they need a team like the crows or the power as they are all but franchises that can be replaced. A little bit of short term pain but definetly replaceable.

Very good point.
The success of the Crows proves that a side can be created from nothing with no supporters, to a state phenomenon with a membership of 50,000 plus. Had those 50,000 turn coats simply refused to follow the AFL and stayed with their SANFL side, as we did, we wouldn't be in this mess. They preferred to follow a side made from nothing over teams they'd followed their whole lives.

I have never been able to get my head around that!

Judging by your icons, you haven't refused to follow the AFL, you've just continued to follow a non SA based side, so I think its a bit rich for you to be suggesting others should have refused to follow the AFL, when you do yourself.
There's nothing wrong with following a Vic AFL side (apart form how they are travelling ATM:)), but similarly, there's nothing wrong with South Australians following a new South Australian side.
One thing I would ask, are you suggesting SA should have NOT created AFL sides at all ?

[TimmiesChin]

Now that the AFL clubs own their own licenses, I would like to hear someone in official capacity within the SANFL come out and state that the $$ from the sale of West Lakes will be held in trust purely for the 8 foundation SANFL clubs, with none of it going toward the AFL ventures.

I think that's entirely fair.