SA Footy

Or better still change Ports rules to match Adelaide and get rid of the academy side altogether, no home games and a £50k contribution.
That would solve the issue of playing completely different teams.
As for limiting AFL listed players, that should be a given anyway. No more than 14 max, assuming we re going to be stuck with the AFL Reserves.
Your arrogance is that you think Port has the right model and Adelaide should get it too.[/quote]

The arrogance is that port ALWAYS get what THEY want. And therein lies the problem

What annoys so many re Port and all the allowances/exemptions they've been given (and arrogantly think they're entitled to) is the spin that comes out of Alberton that paints the Power reserves as being good for the comp, having "the best interest" for the league and its clubs etc etc.
When it simply feels like they've got what they wanted (again) and are actually pointing & laughing at the rest of us behind our backs - again.

Booney wrote:

cennals05 wrote:

Booney wrote:So Souths or Wests reserves play at a different ground or on a different day to the league? How will that work with support staff, coaches, etc etc?

They can play before either the South or West League game as they won't have games before them.

West v Adelaide at Richmond. South v Port at Noarlunga.

West v South reserves at Richmond or Noarlunga. So the league and reserves of one club is playing at a different venue to the other. So coaches, support staff have to be in two places in one day?

ANOTHER PORT FAN ANOTHER STRAWMAN ARGUMENT.


Where does it state reserves sides have to play the same day as league ??? Thats right it doesnt.

Guess what Einsteen. Problem solved.


Please dont revoke AFL reserves in the SANFL as it may complicate SANFL reserves set up for match day officials.

Officially the dumbest argument Ive heard in support of AFL reserves.

Even BennyMac hasnt come up with that pearler.



TO all those who still think Booney is an impartial voice of reason that represents the PAFC, Please save yourself a lot of time and reconsider.

He is just another PAFC puppet ala Pinicchio. Everytime he lies to defend PAFC his nose grows.

If you want proof check out the honker on the guy next time you meet him.

What annoys me Spargo, is they were BOTTOM & BROKE, but then almost given a Premiership by having 20 of 21 players being Professionals!
The debt issues seem to have been 'glossed over' - wasn't there an 'advance' on a future AFL Dividend paid to keep them afloat in 2011/12?
Or was that simply absorbed by the Adelaide Oval Deal?

The irony is that the Cows (to get what Sanderson so eagerly wanted - based on the Geelong Model) gave Port more concessions they they themselves got! Port were very smart, they did no 'hard lifting' in the debate - the Cows did it all for them
Don't get me wrong - I love the fact the Cows have suffered as a result, Karma's a Bitch!
They have 100% of the blame IMHO - it was they who instigated this whole mess.

The answer to it all Booney is remove BOTH Teams, simple.
Anyone who still clings to the premise that the current situation is good for the SANFL (calling Dols) is 'avin' a laugh!
This has done nothing for the betterment of the Game or the Competition in this State - it has only benefited the 2 Corporate 'Monsters'.
Lets wait for the Balance Sheets of the 8 SANFL Clubs - or will Rucci & the SANFL put 'spin' on that too?

LPH wrote:What annoys me Spargo, is they were BOTTOM & BROKE, but then almost given a Premiership by having 20 of 21 players being Professionals!
The debt issues seem to have been 'glossed over' - wasn't there an 'advance' on a future AFL Dividend paid to keep them afloat in 2011/12?
Or was that simply absorbed by the Adelaide Oval Deal?

The irony is that the Cows (to get what Sanderson so eagerly wanted - based on the Geelong Model) gave Port more concessions they they themselves got! Port were very smart, they did no 'hard lifting' in the debate - the Cows did it all for them
Don't get me wrong - I love the fact the Cows have suffered as a result, Karma's a Bitch!
They have 100% of the blame IMHO - it was they who instigated this whole mess.

The answer to it all Booney is[b] remove BOTH Teams, simple.[/b]
Anyone who still clings to the premise that the current situation is good for the SANFL (calling Dols) is 'avin' a laugh!
This has done nothing for the betterment of the Game or the Competition in this State - it has only benefited the 2 Corporate 'Monsters'.
Lets wait for the Balance Sheets of the 8 SANFL Clubs - or will Rucci & the SANFL put 'spin' on that too?

You and I both know this isn't likely to happen anytime soon, is it?

Booney wrote:

LPH wrote:What annoys me Spargo, is they were BOTTOM & BROKE, but then almost given a Premiership by having 20 of 21 players being Professionals!
The debt issues seem to have been 'glossed over' - wasn't there an 'advance' on a future AFL Dividend paid to keep them afloat in 2011/12?
Or was that simply absorbed by the Adelaide Oval Deal?

The irony is that the Cows (to get what Sanderson so eagerly wanted - based on the Geelong Model) gave Port more concessions they they themselves got! Port were very smart, they did no 'hard lifting' in the debate - the Cows did it all for them
Don't get me wrong - I love the fact the Cows have suffered as a result, Karma's a Bitch!
They have 100% of the blame IMHO - it was they who instigated this whole mess.

The answer to it all Booney is[b] remove BOTH Teams, simple.[/b]
Anyone who still clings to the premise that the current situation is good for the SANFL (calling Dols) is 'avin' a laugh!
This has done nothing for the betterment of the Game or the Competition in this State - it has only benefited the 2 Corporate 'Monsters'.
Lets wait for the Balance Sheets of the 8 SANFL Clubs - or will Rucci & the SANFL put 'spin' on that too?

You and I both know this isn't likely to happen anytime soon, is it?

How do you know that ???

Havent you argued for the last decade AFL reserves would never happen.

And all that complained it would wore tin hats and had a "sky is falling " theory if I can quote you Mr Boon.

.

How about putting the AFL reserves in the Sanfl reserves, like lots of people wanted two years ago?

Spargo wrote:What annoys so many re Port and all the allowances/exemptions they've been given (and arrogantly think they're entitled to) is the spin that comes out of Alberton that paints the Power reserves as being good for the comp, having "the best interest" for the league and its clubs etc etc.
When it simply feels like they've got what they wanted (again) and are actually pointing & laughing at the rest of us behind our backs - again.

It's rich when some Port supporters on social media and other prominent footy forums argue that the current restrictions around top-up players and being forced to pick all fit Power players etc stink and that the Maggies are getting a rough deal. Port chose to go down this path.

These are probably the same supporters that whined when a Mason Shaw type was "left languishing" in the seconds for his allocated sanfl club, and they now realise that they're not up league standard and shouldn't be gifted a game.

A grand final and a top 2 minor round finish since the revamp. Poor bastards.

Unfortunately only 1 SANFL side has made the most of having no reserves when they play the crows. What the Eagles have done the last 2 years by having junior carnivals before the league game has been a marketing success resulting in their largest crowds for years, not to mention a massive cash injection coming from bar and food sales.

It doesn't have to be your idea to be a good idea. Maybe the other 7 clubs could do something similar and benefit.

By the way the clubs aren't whinging or complaining, just a few minority supporters. So who are the real tree huggers.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

RB wrote:How about putting the AFL reserves in the Sanfl reserves, like lots of people wanted two years ago?

how about NO!!!!

[quote="Dols"]Unfortunately only 1 SANFL side has made the most of having no reserves when they play the crows. What the Eagles have done the last 2 years by having junior carnivals before the league game has been a marketing success resulting in their largest crowds for years, not to mention a massive cash injection coming from bar and food sales.

It doesn't have to be your idea to be a good idea. Maybe the other 7 clubs could do something similar and benefit.

By the way the clubs aren't whinging or complaining, just a few minority supporters. So who are the real tree huggers.


a few minority supporters not attending SANFL matches as much anymore are why clubs are going broke!

Dols wrote:By the way the clubs aren't whinging or complaining, just a few minority supporters. So who are the real tree huggers.

Memberships down, crowd no's down, bar & food takings down, gaming revenue down, supporter morale down - yeah you're right champ, the clubs are singing from the rooftops.
Lol at the clueless, deluded world you live in.

In 2014 there were 10 games where attendances were greater than 4000, 7 of these games involved either Port or the Crows. So how will it be better without these two teams?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Dols wrote:In 2014 there were 10 games where attendances were greater than 4000, 7 of these games involved either Port or the Crows. So how will it be better without these two teams?

In 2015 the average attendance for 7 of the 8 sovereign clubs is increased by removing data involving interloper teams.

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=40557&p=2018733#p2018733

Dols wrote:In 2014 there were 10 games where attendances were greater than 4000, 7 of these games involved either Port or the Crows. So how will it be better without these two teams?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Integrity restored to SANFL firstly.
Everyone in the comp will be playing by one set of rules
Everyone in the comp will be playing to win a flag
Kids you have developed via your junior program will never compete against your club for premiership points.
Crows fans dont pay to attend so crows crowd figures irrelevant.
Teams with a salary cap of $300K wont be playing against teams with a salary cap of $10 million.

Spargo wrote:

Dols wrote:By the way the clubs aren't whinging or complaining, just a few minority supporters. So who are the real tree huggers.

Memberships down, crowd no's down, bar & food takings down, gaming revenue down, supporter morale down - yeah you're right champ, the clubs are singing from the rooftops.
Lol at the clueless, deluded world you live in.

You may want to ring Kris Grant/Roy Laird if you think SANFL clubs are happy with AFL reserves.

For clubs it's not about money over the gate, it's about money spent once they are in there. Ask the Eagles, there is only one game a year they sell out of all drink and food. Who? The magpies.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Dols wrote:For clubs it's not about money over the gate, it's about money spent once they are in there. Ask the Eagles, there is only one game a year they sell out of all drink and food. Who? The magpies.

Ask the other 7 clubs. In 2015 the smears had the second-lowest average away crowd of all ten teams.

Dols wrote:In 2014 there were 10 games where attendances were greater than 4000, 7 of these games involved either Port or the Crows. So how will it be better without these two teams?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

because they're not meant to be in the SANFL??