The never ending No AFL in the SANFL whinge thread

All discussions to do with the SANFL

Re: The never ending No AFL in the SANFL whinge thread

Postby Booney » Wed Apr 19, 2017 11:09 am

Ronnie wrote:Excellent article by former Labor Senator Chris Schacht today in the paper. Details the set up of both SA based AFL clubs who are controlled wholly by the AFL.
No members (only ticket holders) No AGMs, all Board Members appointed or vetted by the AFL Commission. No members therefore no meaningful input into how these clubs are actually run and managed. You hand over serious money to hold a ticket to the games is the extent of it. These clubs are effectively franchise outlets of the AFL Commission, based in Melbourne.

Another reason why it is completely inappropriate to have these two AFL outlets in a legitimate footballing competition such as the SANFL.
I find it staggering that this situation is tolerated let alone largely ignored by the masses as it apparently has been.


The Port Adelaide Football Club has a 10 person board. 8 are appointed by the AFL, 2 are nominated to the AFL by the club membership. I don't believe at any time has either of the club membership nominated board members been declined by the AFL.

The last AGM was held Friday February 3, 2017, I was there.

Someone hasn't done their homework very well.
PAFC. Forever.

LOOK OUT, WE'RE COMING!
User avatar
Booney
Coach
 
 
Posts: 58213
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2005 1:47 pm
Location: Alberton proud
Has liked: 7467 times
Been liked: 10755 times

Re: The never ending No AFL in the SANFL whinge thread

Postby tipper » Wed Apr 19, 2017 12:34 pm

Booney wrote:
Ronnie wrote:Excellent article by former Labor Senator Chris Schacht today in the paper. Details the set up of both SA based AFL clubs who are controlled wholly by the AFL.
No members (only ticket holders) No AGMs, all Board Members appointed or vetted by the AFL Commission. No members therefore no meaningful input into how these clubs are actually run and managed. You hand over serious money to hold a ticket to the games is the extent of it. These clubs are effectively franchise outlets of the AFL Commission, based in Melbourne.

Another reason why it is completely inappropriate to have these two AFL outlets in a legitimate footballing competition such as the SANFL.
I find it staggering that this situation is tolerated let alone largely ignored by the masses as it apparently has been.


The Port Adelaide Football Club has a 10 person board. 8 are appointed by the AFL, 2 are nominated to the AFL by the club membership. I don't believe at any time has either of the club membership nominated board members been declined by the AFL.

The last AGM was held Friday February 3, 2017, I was there.

Someone hasn't done their homework very well.


thats splitting some pretty fine hairs there Boon. the membership get to vote for 2 out of ten? not exactly a controlling interest is it? seems more like a token to make it seem like the members get a voice.

not that i can really talk. the North board are (nearly) all voted on by the members and they dont listen to them anyway, so not really any different in the end i suppose.......
tipper
League - Top 5
 
 
Posts: 2854
Joined: Thu Nov 20, 2008 9:45 am
Has liked: 359 times
Been liked: 531 times
Grassroots Team: Peake

Re: The never ending No AFL in the SANFL whinge thread

Postby Booney » Wed Apr 19, 2017 12:46 pm

tipper wrote:
Booney wrote:
Ronnie wrote:Excellent article by former Labor Senator Chris Schacht today in the paper. Details the set up of both SA based AFL clubs who are controlled wholly by the AFL.
No members (only ticket holders) No AGMs, all Board Members appointed or vetted by the AFL Commission. No members therefore no meaningful input into how these clubs are actually run and managed. You hand over serious money to hold a ticket to the games is the extent of it. These clubs are effectively franchise outlets of the AFL Commission, based in Melbourne.

Another reason why it is completely inappropriate to have these two AFL outlets in a legitimate footballing competition such as the SANFL.
I find it staggering that this situation is tolerated let alone largely ignored by the masses as it apparently has been.


The Port Adelaide Football Club has a 10 person board. 8 are appointed by the AFL, 2 are nominated to the AFL by the club membership. I don't believe at any time has either of the club membership nominated board members been declined by the AFL.

The last AGM was held Friday February 3, 2017, I was there.

Someone hasn't done their homework very well.




thats splitting some pretty fine hairs there Boon. the membership get to vote for 2 out of ten? not exactly a controlling interest is it? seems more like a token to make it seem like the members get a voice.

not that i can really talk. the North board are (nearly) all voted on by the members and they dont listen to them anyway, so not really any different in the end i suppose.......


The article ( well the content of the article as posted by Ronnie ) reports that the PAFC holds no AGM and the members are "ticket holders" who don't vote on the make up of the board of directors, that's not true.
PAFC. Forever.

LOOK OUT, WE'RE COMING!
User avatar
Booney
Coach
 
 
Posts: 58213
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2005 1:47 pm
Location: Alberton proud
Has liked: 7467 times
Been liked: 10755 times

Re: The never ending No AFL in the SANFL whinge thread

Postby tipper » Wed Apr 19, 2017 1:04 pm

Booney wrote:
The article ( well the content of the article as posted by Ronnie ) reports that the PAFC holds no AGM and the members are "ticket holders" who don't vote on the make up of the board of directors, that's not true.


its 80% true on the board makeup though, with an afl veto on the remaining 20% if they dont like who you vote in. completely wrong on the agm obviously, although i dont know why PAFC would bother if the members cannot then make a change at board level without permission from the afl overlords....
tipper
League - Top 5
 
 
Posts: 2854
Joined: Thu Nov 20, 2008 9:45 am
Has liked: 359 times
Been liked: 531 times
Grassroots Team: Peake

Re: The never ending No AFL in the SANFL whinge thread

Postby Ronnie » Wed Apr 19, 2017 3:34 pm

Fair enough Boon you attend what is called an AGM (in all honesty it is a member information session) and I believe get to hear the financials. Maybe even get to vote for a puppet of the AFL for a small percentage of spots on the Board. It's unbelievable that an organization with claims to a long and proud history would settle for this. You've swapped one overlord for another.
Does this all really matter, not really sure :?
Ronnie
Reserves
 
Posts: 795
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2006 7:57 am
Has liked: 8 times
Been liked: 84 times

Re: The never ending No AFL in the SANFL whinge thread

Postby Booney » Wed Apr 19, 2017 4:15 pm

Ronnie wrote:Fair enough Boon you attend what is called an AGM (in all honesty it is a member information session) and I believe get to hear the financials. Maybe even get to vote for a puppet of the AFL for a small percentage of spots on the Board. It's unbelievable that an organization with claims to a long and proud history would settle for this. You've swapped one overlord for another.
Does this all really matter, not really sure :?


It's not your fault Chris Schit got it wrong.
PAFC. Forever.

LOOK OUT, WE'RE COMING!
User avatar
Booney
Coach
 
 
Posts: 58213
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2005 1:47 pm
Location: Alberton proud
Has liked: 7467 times
Been liked: 10755 times

Re: The never ending No AFL in the SANFL whinge thread

Postby Magellan » Thu Apr 20, 2017 9:15 am

Here 's the article in all its glory:

Chris Schacht: Adelaide Football Club, Port Adelaide Football Club and SACA members must demand constitutional change


WHO runs the Adelaide and Port Adelaide football clubs?

If you think it is the 120,000 souls who form the two South Australian AFL clubs’ membership bases, then you are wrong.

The AFL Commission is the sole owner and controlling shareholder of the Crows and Power.

This means the 120,000 members spread across the great divide in SA football share one common theme.

They do not have any effective say in who manages and operates their clubs.

It is absolutely ironical that the two AFL football clubs in South Australia are not owned by any South Australians. They are owned by the AFL Commission, which has at present no South Australian as a director.

The AFL Commission has absolute power to appoint the majority of directors in each club. In the case of the Adelaide Football Club, the so-called members can elect two of the nine directors in a postal ballot.

But even after these directors are elected, their final appointment must be approved by the AFL Commission.

The remaining board members are appointed by the AFL on the recommendation of the existing directors at the two clubs. In recent months three new directors have been appointed to the Crows board. No notice was given to the members that new directors were to be appointed. Management at West Lakes did not seek registration of interest from any club member as to whom they wished to be considered for any of these vacancies.

Seven of the nine directors never have had to face a ballot by the club members.

The 60,000 members at each club are no more than subscribers who buy tickets to attend a football match at Adelaide Oval.

Recently, the Adelaide Football Club held its annual meeting at Adelaide Oval. This consisted only of the existing board members plus a representative of the AFL Commission.

The AFL, as the sole shareholder, did not send a representative to the meeting. It appointed one of the existing directors as its proxy. The session in essence was a private meeting with only the directors present.

The club’s annual report and financial statement was approved by the board, but not circulated to the so-called 60,000 members for their information. The annual report was adopted by the sole shareholder, who in this case was the AFL proxy.

If the Adelaide Football Club was a publicly listed company the annual report and financial statements would be publicly available to all members or shareholders before the meeting.

The words of the Crows club song, “we are the pride of South Australia”, are particularly ironic considering that no South Australian is a club shareholder.

By comparison, several of the original AFL clubs in Victoria, such as Hawthorn, still have a constitution which allows their members to vote for their directors. There also is a term limit on all board members including the chairman.

Clearly, the Hawthorn members are committed to ensure that their club runs well and as a result they have won four premierships in the past 10 years.

The Crows have not played in a grand final since 1998.

Either all AFL football clubs should have a membership and governance structure like Hawthorn or all football clubs have to be owned by the AFL in the same way as Adelaide and Port Adelaide. Otherwise, there is a two-tiered system of governance which is not fair.

Recently a select committee of the South Australian Parliament held a public inquiry into the governance of the South Australian Cricket Association (SACA). The report was scathing in the way the SACA board manipulated the election process of board members.

SA taxpayers have directly contributed over half a billion dollars to build a new stadium at Adelaide Oval, to the absolute advantage of the Crows, Port Power and SACA.

Taxpayers, as well as club members, have a public right to know that their sporting clubs are democratically run.

In South Australia the members of the Adelaide Football Club, Port Adelaide Football Club and SACA must demand constitutional change so that they, the members, truly have an effective say in the ownership and running of their clubs.
"Religion is like a blind man looking in a black room for a black cat that isn't there...and finding it." - Oscar Wilde
User avatar
Magellan
Coach
 
 
Posts: 5981
Joined: Sat May 12, 2007 1:04 pm
Location: Four Seasons Total Landscaping
Has liked: 757 times
Been liked: 1517 times

Re: The never ending No AFL in the SANFL whinge thread

Postby Hazydog » Thu Apr 20, 2017 3:05 pm

And meanwhile in the West... the discontent with their AFL player alignment arrangement continues to fester...

https://thewest.com.au/sport/wafl/the-t ... b88448580z

The old method of farming out players to varying WAFL clubs, (SANFL referenced as using the same method), is being warmly reminisced..
Players win touches, Teams win matches, Clubs win Premierships.
User avatar
Hazydog
League Bench Warmer
 
 
Posts: 1105
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2005 10:02 pm
Location: Paralowie
Has liked: 115 times
Been liked: 191 times

Re: The never ending No AFL in the SANFL whinge thread

Postby Pseudo » Thu Apr 20, 2017 3:59 pm

Hazydog wrote:And meanwhile in the West... the discontent with their AFL player alignment arrangement continues to fester...

https://thewest.com.au/sport/wafl/the-t ... b88448580z

The old method of farming out players to varying WAFL clubs, (SANFL referenced as using the same method), is being warmly reminisced..

As an aside, the video links in that story are well worth a click. Vintage WAFL action.
Clowns OUT. Smears OUT. RESIST THE OCCUPATION.
User avatar
Pseudo
Coach
 
 
Posts: 11773
Joined: Fri Oct 28, 2005 11:11 am
Location: enculez-vous
Has liked: 0 time
Been liked: 1553 times
Grassroots Team: Marion

Re: The never ending No AFL in the SANFL whinge thread

Postby StrayDog » Thu Apr 20, 2017 7:02 pm

Hazydog wrote:And meanwhile in the West... the discontent with their AFL player alignment arrangement continues to fester...

https://thewest.com.au/sport/wafl/the-t ... b88448580z

The old method of farming out players to varying WAFL clubs, (SANFL referenced as using the same method), is being warmly reminisced..

I remember in the 1990s when some in the east were openly citing this model in a positive light.

Collingwood's 2010 flag, after three seasons of standalone reserves, a propaganda appetiser used to justify standalone teams / full alignments across the board, and the SANFL was on their menu.

Conveniently tucked away was the fact that Geelong's reserves, continued in the VFL in 2000 after AFL reserves disbanded, watched their seniors average about 9th until they tore "the Power" a new Size 119 pooper in 2007.
"— here I opened wide the door; —
Darkness there, and nothing more."


- Edgar Allan Poe from " The Raven "

StrayDog
League Bench Warmer
 
 
Posts: 1399
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 5:26 pm
Location: Copping a "feel for the game"
Has liked: 1132 times
Been liked: 192 times

Re: The never ending No AFL in the SANFL whinge thread

Postby saintal » Thu Apr 20, 2017 10:27 pm

Hazydog wrote:And meanwhile in the West... the discontent with their AFL player alignment arrangement continues to fester...

https://thewest.com.au/sport/wafl/the-t ... b88448580z

The old method of farming out players to varying WAFL clubs, (SANFL referenced as using the same method), is being warmly reminisced..


A good read. Not the first time an article of that nature has been penned regarding the WAFL alignments.

The other article referenced in that link also has a few points of interest stemming from a recent review:

- The WAFL’s alignment model will continue until at least the end of the 2021
- The WAFL will also be scaled back to an 18-round home-and-away competition from next season.
- The WAFC would investigate being rebranded as AFLWA in a bid to secure more AFL funding, with the WAFL keeping its own identity;
- Colts coaches will be hired directly by the WAFC with the development teams still aligned to WAFL clubs, but no longer run by them starting from 2018.
SAFC- 60 years...
StKFC- 58 years..
User avatar
saintal
Coach
 
 
Posts: 5658
Joined: Mon Jul 31, 2006 9:31 pm
Location: Adelaide Hills
Has liked: 346 times
Been liked: 428 times

Re: The never ending No AFL in the SANFL whinge thread

Postby wild dog » Thu Apr 20, 2017 11:54 pm

Magellan wrote:Here 's the article in all its glory:

Chris Schacht: Adelaide Football Club, Port Adelaide Football Club and SACA members must demand constitutional change


WHO runs the Adelaide and Port Adelaide football clubs?

If you think it is the 120,000 souls who form the two South Australian AFL clubs’ membership bases, then you are wrong.

The AFL Commission is the sole owner and controlling shareholder of the Crows and Power.

This means the 120,000 members spread across the great divide in SA football share one common theme.

They do not have any effective say in who manages and operates their clubs.

It is absolutely ironical that the two AFL football clubs in South Australia are not owned by any South Australians. They are owned by the AFL Commission, which has at present no South Australian as a director.

.........

SA taxpayers have directly contributed over half a billion dollars to build a new stadium at Adelaide Oval, to the absolute advantage of the Crows, Port Power and SACA.

Taxpayers, as well as club members, have a public right to know that their sporting clubs are democratically run.

In South Australia the members of the Adelaide Football Club, Port Adelaide Football Club and SACA must demand constitutional change so that they, the members, truly have an effective say in the ownership and running of their clubs.


A footballing state that more than held its own has allowed its history and culture to be binned and replaced by a two team franchise that is totally controlled from Melbourne. One small article telling it how it is, and no one really could care less. It would be great to think that as a state we have finally bottomed out and the only way is up, after the closure of Holdens that is....
User avatar
wild dog
Under 18s
 
 
Posts: 550
Joined: Wed Sep 19, 2012 11:56 am
Has liked: 56 times
Been liked: 180 times
Grassroots Team: Smithfield

Re: The never ending No AFL in the SANFL whinge thread

Postby RB » Fri Apr 21, 2017 6:35 am

saintal wrote:- The WAFC would investigate being rebranded as AFLWA in a bid to secure more AFL funding, with the WAFL keeping its own identity

This is totally contradictory...
R.I.P. the SANFL 1877 - 2013
User avatar
RB
Coach
 
Posts: 5628
Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2011 3:45 pm
Has liked: 759 times
Been liked: 1073 times

Re: The never ending No AFL in the SANFL whinge thread

Postby UK Fan » Fri Apr 21, 2017 10:02 am

Magellan wrote:Here 's the article in all its glory:

Chris Schacht: Adelaide Football Club, Port Adelaide Football Club and SACA members must demand constitutional change


WHO runs the Adelaide and Port Adelaide football clubs?

If you think it is the 120,000 souls who form the two South Australian AFL clubs’ membership bases, then you are wrong.

The AFL Commission is the sole owner and controlling shareholder of the Crows and Power.

This means the 120,000 members spread across the great divide in SA football share one common theme.

They do not have any effective say in who manages and operates their clubs.

It is absolutely ironical that the two AFL football clubs in South Australia are not owned by any South Australians. They are owned by the AFL Commission, which has at present no South Australian as a director.

The AFL Commission has absolute power to appoint the majority of directors in each club. In the case of the Adelaide Football Club, the so-called members can elect two of the nine directors in a postal ballot.

But even after these directors are elected, their final appointment must be approved by the AFL Commission.

The remaining board members are appointed by the AFL on the recommendation of the existing directors at the two clubs. In recent months three new directors have been appointed to the Crows board. No notice was given to the members that new directors were to be appointed. Management at West Lakes did not seek registration of interest from any club member as to whom they wished to be considered for any of these vacancies.

Seven of the nine directors never have had to face a ballot by the club members.

The 60,000 members at each club are no more than subscribers who buy tickets to attend a football match at Adelaide Oval.

Recently, the Adelaide Football Club held its annual meeting at Adelaide Oval. This consisted only of the existing board members plus a representative of the AFL Commission.

The AFL, as the sole shareholder, did not send a representative to the meeting. It appointed one of the existing directors as its proxy. The session in essence was a private meeting with only the directors present.

The club’s annual report and financial statement was approved by the board, but not circulated to the so-called 60,000 members for their information. The annual report was adopted by the sole shareholder, who in this case was the AFL proxy.

If the Adelaide Football Club was a publicly listed company the annual report and financial statements would be publicly available to all members or shareholders before the meeting.

The words of the Crows club song, “we are the pride of South Australia”, are particularly ironic considering that no South Australian is a club shareholder.

By comparison, several of the original AFL clubs in Victoria, such as Hawthorn, still have a constitution which allows their members to vote for their directors. There also is a term limit on all board members including the chairman.

Clearly, the Hawthorn members are committed to ensure that their club runs well and as a result they have won four premierships in the past 10 years.

The Crows have not played in a grand final since 1998.

Either all AFL football clubs should have a membership and governance structure like Hawthorn or all football clubs have to be owned by the AFL in the same way as Adelaide and Port Adelaide. Otherwise, there is a two-tiered system of governance which is not fair.

Recently a select committee of the South Australian Parliament held a public inquiry into the governance of the South Australian Cricket Association (SACA). The report was scathing in the way the SACA board manipulated the election process of board members.

SA taxpayers have directly contributed over half a billion dollars to build a new stadium at Adelaide Oval, to the absolute advantage of the Crows, Port Power and SACA.

Taxpayers, as well as club members, have a public right to know that their sporting clubs are democratically run.

In South Australia the members of the Adelaide Football Club, Port Adelaide Football Club and SACA must demand constitutional change so that they, the members, truly have an effective say in the ownership and running of their clubs.



And the Booney/BennyMacs of the world support above. And try to claim "we can't have it both ways".

SA footys finest.
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.


THE SKY HAS FALLEN!!!!
UK Fan
Coach
 
 
Posts: 5643
Joined: Sun Sep 14, 2008 3:41 am
Has liked: 1197 times
Been liked: 500 times

Re: The never ending No AFL in the SANFL whinge thread

Postby Ronnie » Fri Apr 21, 2017 10:28 am

The new franchises like Gold Coast and GWS are basically AFL run and administered. Some rationale exists in those markets for that. However it isn't clear why clubs in SA have so meekly surrendered their control over to AFL House.
Ronnie
Reserves
 
Posts: 795
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2006 7:57 am
Has liked: 8 times
Been liked: 84 times

Re: The never ending No AFL in the SANFL whinge thread

Postby stan » Fri Apr 21, 2017 10:28 am

UK Fan wrote:
Magellan wrote:Here 's the article in all its glory:

Chris Schacht: Adelaide Football Club, Port Adelaide Football Club and SACA members must demand constitutional change


WHO runs the Adelaide and Port Adelaide football clubs?

If you think it is the 120,000 souls who form the two South Australian AFL clubs’ membership bases, then you are wrong.

The AFL Commission is the sole owner and controlling shareholder of the Crows and Power.

This means the 120,000 members spread across the great divide in SA football share one common theme.

They do not have any effective say in who manages and operates their clubs.

It is absolutely ironical that the two AFL football clubs in South Australia are not owned by any South Australians. They are owned by the AFL Commission, which has at present no South Australian as a director.

The AFL Commission has absolute power to appoint the majority of directors in each club. In the case of the Adelaide Football Club, the so-called members can elect two of the nine directors in a postal ballot.

But even after these directors are elected, their final appointment must be approved by the AFL Commission.

The remaining board members are appointed by the AFL on the recommendation of the existing directors at the two clubs. In recent months three new directors have been appointed to the Crows board. No notice was given to the members that new directors were to be appointed. Management at West Lakes did not seek registration of interest from any club member as to whom they wished to be considered for any of these vacancies.

Seven of the nine directors never have had to face a ballot by the club members.

The 60,000 members at each club are no more than subscribers who buy tickets to attend a football match at Adelaide Oval.

Recently, the Adelaide Football Club held its annual meeting at Adelaide Oval. This consisted only of the existing board members plus a representative of the AFL Commission.

The AFL, as the sole shareholder, did not send a representative to the meeting. It appointed one of the existing directors as its proxy. The session in essence was a private meeting with only the directors present.

The club’s annual report and financial statement was approved by the board, but not circulated to the so-called 60,000 members for their information. The annual report was adopted by the sole shareholder, who in this case was the AFL proxy.

If the Adelaide Football Club was a publicly listed company the annual report and financial statements would be publicly available to all members or shareholders before the meeting.

The words of the Crows club song, “we are the pride of South Australia”, are particularly ironic considering that no South Australian is a club shareholder.

By comparison, several of the original AFL clubs in Victoria, such as Hawthorn, still have a constitution which allows their members to vote for their directors. There also is a term limit on all board members including the chairman.

Clearly, the Hawthorn members are committed to ensure that their club runs well and as a result they have won four premierships in the past 10 years.

The Crows have not played in a grand final since 1998.

Either all AFL football clubs should have a membership and governance structure like Hawthorn or all football clubs have to be owned by the AFL in the same way as Adelaide and Port Adelaide. Otherwise, there is a two-tiered system of governance which is not fair.

Recently a select committee of the South Australian Parliament held a public inquiry into the governance of the South Australian Cricket Association (SACA). The report was scathing in the way the SACA board manipulated the election process of board members.

SA taxpayers have directly contributed over half a billion dollars to build a new stadium at Adelaide Oval, to the absolute advantage of the Crows, Port Power and SACA.

Taxpayers, as well as club members, have a public right to know that their sporting clubs are democratically run.

In South Australia the members of the Adelaide Football Club, Port Adelaide Football Club and SACA must demand constitutional change so that they, the members, truly have an effective say in the ownership and running of their clubs.



And the Booney/BennyMacs of the world support above. And try to claim "we can't have it both ways".

SA footys finest.

In fairness considering how poorly Port have been run in the past you wouldnt really want them to have run of the board now would you?
Read my reply. It is directed at you because you have double standards
User avatar
stan
Coach
 
 
Posts: 15221
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2005 8:53 am
Location: North Eastern Suburbs
Has liked: 88 times
Been liked: 1253 times
Grassroots Team: Goodwood Saints

Re: The never ending No AFL in the SANFL whinge thread

Postby Booney » Fri Apr 21, 2017 11:02 am

UK Fan wrote:
And the Booney/BennyMacs of the world support above. And try to claim "we can't have it both ways".

SA footys finest.


Remarkable that a website dedicated to talking about football is somewhere that you visit.

Most people would note it's never to talk football but just to throw grenades and scurry back under your bridge.
PAFC. Forever.

LOOK OUT, WE'RE COMING!
User avatar
Booney
Coach
 
 
Posts: 58213
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2005 1:47 pm
Location: Alberton proud
Has liked: 7467 times
Been liked: 10755 times

Re: The never ending No AFL in the SANFL whinge thread

Postby UK Fan » Fri Apr 21, 2017 11:14 am

We've had 300 pages of football discussion on this thread alone dumbass.


https://memesuper.com/download/3aa07a5e ... 5d18c.html
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.


THE SKY HAS FALLEN!!!!
UK Fan
Coach
 
 
Posts: 5643
Joined: Sun Sep 14, 2008 3:41 am
Has liked: 1197 times
Been liked: 500 times

Re: The never ending No AFL in the SANFL whinge thread

Postby Booney » Fri Apr 21, 2017 11:39 am

UK Fan wrote:We've had 300 pages of football discussion on this thread alone dumbass.

https://memesuper.com/download/3aa07a5e ... 5d18c.html


Another constructive little contribution. :lol:
PAFC. Forever.

LOOK OUT, WE'RE COMING!
User avatar
Booney
Coach
 
 
Posts: 58213
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2005 1:47 pm
Location: Alberton proud
Has liked: 7467 times
Been liked: 10755 times

Re: The never ending No AFL in the SANFL whinge thread

Postby UK Fan » Fri Apr 21, 2017 12:25 pm

Booney wrote:
UK Fan wrote:We've had 300 pages of football discussion on this thread alone dumbass.

https://memesuper.com/download/3aa07a5e ... 5d18c.html


Another constructive little contribution. :lol:


Until Wedgie comes up with a website www.blindlydefendingpafcbydummies.com.au

I Guess you're stuck with us buddy.
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.


THE SKY HAS FALLEN!!!!
UK Fan
Coach
 
 
Posts: 5643
Joined: Sun Sep 14, 2008 3:41 am
Has liked: 1197 times
Been liked: 500 times

PreviousNext

Board index   Football  SANFL

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: whufc and 24 guests

Around the place

Competitions   SANFL Official Site | Country Footy SA | Southern Football League | VFL Footy
Club Forums   Snouts Louts | The Roost | Redlegs Forum |