SA Footy

tipper wrote:

heater31 wrote:

MW wrote:Thanks for the info mate
What was Ports involvement in all of this? Did they just sit back and let Crows take the blame and take the same model or were they involved in the negotiations with SANFL also?

They pretty much sat back and let the Cows do all the dirty work. Only when it looked like getting up did Port speak up and ask for a similar arrangement.

probably the smartest thing the club has ever done.

Yep... 'once bitten'
They were never going to allow the 'blame' to fall onto them after 1990's experience.
Smart, weren't they?

Having said that, ask the 'true' Maggies supporters how they feel about the PAP's taking over their Club.

FWIW
Port tried muscling their way in before the Crows bid and were voted down unanimously.
Then the Crows, with considerably more clout, tried their hand, and were unanimously voted down also.
The details of what happened next will possibly emerge in years to come, but another vote was hastily arranged, and 6 of the directors suddenly swapped their previous position on the entries. 6 being the minimum vote they required.

Dutchy wrote:

MW wrote:How many Crows AFL supporters actually support another SANFL side?
I have no interest in crows res games but happily go to westies

Thats the general feel with my mates who are Crows fans but follow their SANFL club, however the concern is the next generation who are being brought up to follow both in both competitions....and why wouldn't they? Try telling a 10 yo that he should follow one team in the AFL and another in the SANFL.

Where are the next generations of SANFL fans coming from?

That was most likely the case anyway. The group of kids 10-15 years old who are 5-10 years away from making their own decisions with their money and time are less likely to have a real interest in the SANFL at the moment because, in the main, their parents ( Dad ) no longer has the same interest in the SANFL.

That's not the people in this thread, that's the 120,000+ PAFC and AFC members in SA along with I would guess 10,000-15,000 or more North, West Coast, Hawthorn etc members who live in SA and have the AFL as their main priority.

Agree with that Booney although my daughter is a mad Crows and Westies fan but that would only be my influence. I doubt she could name 5 other SANFL teams.

bennymacca wrote:Do you think the fact that there is no home games has an effect?

I've said a few times, if Adelaide were given half of Ports zones to recruit top ups from, played in the SANFL league with a cap on AFL listed at 14/15 ( whatever ) and had an SANFL reserves team, based themselves at Thebby ( instead of living rent free at Football Park with the SANFL funding the stadium up keep ) then we would have 10 teams in the SANFL league and reserves and the league side could be capped with AFL listed.

Do I think that home games for the Crows SANFL side would work, probably not now, it might have if there was a "home base" to begin with.

goddy11 wrote:JTC. To add to your point, what does Port actually give back to the SANFL. They pay no fees to SANFL clubs, play matches at Alberton, discourage their supporters from travelling to away games ala the South game at Noarlunga. At least the old Magpies added to player development.

That just reinforces my argument that the powers that be (no pun intended) at the SANFL are incompetent and not capable of running the league.
Personally, I'm not interested in any of the rumours that might be put out there, lining their own pockets, setting themselves up for an AFL number, etc, as they are all irrelevant to the main fact.
What is relevant to me though is their inability to say No, or if they genuinely believed having AFL Reserves in was better for the league, is their inability to broker a decent deal for their SANFL clubs that meant both AFL clubs played to the same set of rules. And their failure to see the true value of the SANFL League to the AFL clubs.

If they had it would have meant $150k p.a. to each SANFL club from each AFL club.
Allowing the SANFL clubs to use the fees on players by increasing the salary cap to $650k, which would help stop the drain of quality players to the ammos
No home games and no Reserves Reserves for Port
Adelaide and Port to fund any shortfall in sponsorship revenue for the TV deal and each club to have the same number of appearances as the two Reserves.
I'm sure there would be many other proviso's

And that those same people who were devoid of any ideas when "negotiating" the deal, are also devoid of any ideas now. Even if they voted to kick the AFL Reserves out right now, they simply have no ideas. The league would flounder because there just isn't anyone at the SANFL driving it forward. There is no one there that I'd have the least bit of confidence in to run any of my businesses let along something as important as the SANFL.

The pro AFLites would say "we told you so", completely missing the point that the only reason it failed was because of the incompetents running it.

Booney wrote:

bennymacca wrote:Do you think the fact that there is no home games has an effect?

I've said a few times, if Adelaide were given half of Ports zones to recruit top ups from, played in the SANFL league with a cap on AFL listed at 14/15 ( whatever ) and had an SANFL reserves team, based themselves at Thebby ( instead of living rent free at Football Park with the SANFL funding the stadium up keep ) then we would have 10 teams in the SANFL league and reserves and the league side could be capped with AFL listed.

Do I think that home games for the Crows SANFL side would work, probably not now, it might have if there was a "home base" to begin with.

I reckon they have been GIVEN enough already without letting them have an absolute takeover. JUST GET RID OF THEM Fine in the AFL but stinks in the SANFL

johntheclaret wrote:

goddy11 wrote:JTC. To add to your point, what does Port actually give back to the SANFL. They pay no fees to SANFL clubs, play matches at Alberton, discourage their supporters from travelling to away games ala the South game at Noarlunga. At least the old Magpies added to player development.

That just reinforces my argument that the powers that be (no pun intended) at the SANFL are incompetent and not capable of running the league.
Personally, I'm not interested in any of the rumours that might be put out there, lining their own pockets, setting themselves up for an AFL number, etc, as they are all irrelevant to the main fact.
What is relevant to me though is their inability to say No, or if they genuinely believed having AFL Reserves in was better for the league, is their inability to broker a decent deal for their SANFL clubs that meant both AFL clubs played to the same set of rules. And their failure to see the true value of the SANFL League to the AFL clubs.

If they had it would have meant $150k p.a. to each SANFL club from each AFL club.
Allowing the SANFL clubs to use the fees on players by increasing the salary cap to $650k, which would help stop the drain of quality players to the ammos
No home games and no Reserves Reserves for Port
Adelaide and Port to fund any shortfall in sponsorship revenue for the TV deal and each club to have the same number of appearances as the two Reserves.
I'm sure there would be many other proviso's

And that those same people who were devoid of any ideas when "negotiating" the deal, are also devoid of any ideas now. Even if they voted to kick the AFL Reserves out right now, they simply have no ideas. The league would flounder because there just isn't anyone at the SANFL driving it forward. There is no one there that I'd have the least bit of confidence in to run any of my businesses let along something as important as the SANFL.

The pro AFLites would say "we told you so", completely missing the point that the only reason it failed was because of the incompetents running it.

Olsen couldn't run a chook Raffle, the crook

Reddeer wrote:Olsen couldn't run a chook Raffle, the crook

Someone mention North Adelaide? I thought I read something about a chook rabble that was crook.

johntheclaret wrote:

goddy11 wrote:JTC. To add to your point, what does Port actually give back to the SANFL. They pay no fees to SANFL clubs, play matches at Alberton, discourage their supporters from travelling to away games ala the South game at Noarlunga. At least the old Magpies added to player development.

That just reinforces my argument that the powers that be (no pun intended) at the SANFL are incompetent and not capable of running the league.
Personally, I'm not interested in any of the rumours that might be put out there, lining their own pockets, setting themselves up for an AFL number, etc, as they are all irrelevant to the main fact.
What is relevant to me though is their inability to say No, or if they genuinely believed having AFL Reserves in was better for the league, is their inability to broker a decent deal for their SANFL clubs that meant both AFL clubs played to the same set of rules. And their failure to see the true value of the SANFL League to the AFL clubs.

If they had it would have meant $150k p.a. to each SANFL club from each AFL club.
Allowing the SANFL clubs to use the fees on players by increasing the salary cap to $650k, which would help stop the drain of quality players to the ammos
No home games and no Reserves Reserves for Port
Adelaide and Port to fund any shortfall in sponsorship revenue for the TV deal and each club to have the same number of appearances as the two Reserves.
I'm sure there would be many other proviso's

And that those same people who were devoid of any ideas when "negotiating" the deal, are also devoid of any ideas now. Even if they voted to kick the AFL Reserves out right now, they simply have no ideas. The league would flounder because there just isn't anyone at the SANFL driving it forward. There is no one there that I'd have the least bit of confidence in to run any of my businesses let along something as important as the SANFL.

The pro AFLites would say "we told you so", completely missing the point that the only reason it failed was because of the incompetents running it.

Fine Post. I particularly agree with your statement about the rumours and innuendo and in the hope of actually trying to get a grass roots campaign together, this discussion has to start to take a more practical course.

Adelaide has a relatively small number of power brokers, and football is a very powerful force in this state. I have been fortunate enough to attend a commission dinner and the group are a very personable bunch, none more so than John Olsen. I believe he generally appreciates the competition and wants to see it thrive. The SMA is within the top 100 companies within the state and moving up the ladder. This issue is not about star chamber conspiracy theories, its about a group who thought they were doing the best by the competition. Have a look at the commission http://www.sanfl.com.au/sanfl/sa_football_commission/ and you will see a bunch of traditional and not so traditional SANFL people; they have tried to diversify which is often encouraged, but have they diversified or obtained a very conservative cautious approach? Are they just following a mainstream conservative business approach? It would certainly appear so. Did they get out negotiated, well as you have pointed out they could have done a hell of a lot better. One success was not caving into the AFL clubs and keeping the SMA deal relatively intact.

Unfortunately for them and us, they have got it so very wrong with the integrity of the comp and have alienated the intangible, the people who make the SANFL atmosphere, the rusted on supporter. This competition will become very beige in a couple of seasons if we keep on losing them.

Politics will play a part in any organisation, and football in particular. If there is a properly organised opposition to this, these guys will listen.

wild dog wrote:

johntheclaret wrote:

goddy11 wrote:JTC. To add to your point, what does Port actually give back to the SANFL. They pay no fees to SANFL clubs, play matches at Alberton, discourage their supporters from travelling to away games ala the South game at Noarlunga. At least the old Magpies added to player development.

That just reinforces my argument that the powers that be (no pun intended) at the SANFL are incompetent and not capable of running the league.
Personally, I'm not interested in any of the rumours that might be put out there, lining their own pockets, setting themselves up for an AFL number, etc, as they are all irrelevant to the main fact.
What is relevant to me though is their inability to say No, or if they genuinely believed having AFL Reserves in was better for the league, is their inability to broker a decent deal for their SANFL clubs that meant both AFL clubs played to the same set of rules. And their failure to see the true value of the SANFL League to the AFL clubs.

If they had it would have meant $150k p.a. to each SANFL club from each AFL club.
Allowing the SANFL clubs to use the fees on players by increasing the salary cap to $650k, which would help stop the drain of quality players to the ammos
No home games and no Reserves Reserves for Port
Adelaide and Port to fund any shortfall in sponsorship revenue for the TV deal and each club to have the same number of appearances as the two Reserves.
I'm sure there would be many other proviso's

And that those same people who were devoid of any ideas when "negotiating" the deal, are also devoid of any ideas now. Even if they voted to kick the AFL Reserves out right now, they simply have no ideas. The league would flounder because there just isn't anyone at the SANFL driving it forward. There is no one there that I'd have the least bit of confidence in to run any of my businesses let along something as important as the SANFL.

The pro AFLites would say "we told you so", completely missing the point that the only reason it failed was because of the incompetents running it.

Fine Post. I particularly agree with your statement about the rumours and innuendo and in the hope of actually trying to get a grass roots campaign together, this discussion has to start to take a more practical course.

Adelaide has a relatively small number of power brokers, and football is a very powerful force in this state. I have been fortunate enough to attend a commission dinner and the group are a very personable bunch, none more so than John Olsen. I believe he generally appreciates the competition and wants to see it thrive. The SMA is within the top 100 companies within the state and moving up the ladder. This issue is not about star chamber conspiracy theories, its about a group who thought they were doing the best by the competition. Have a look at the commission http://www.sanfl.com.au/sanfl/sa_football_commission/ and you will see a bunch of traditional and not so traditional SANFL people; they have tried to diversify which is often encouraged, but have they diversified or obtained a very conservative cautious approach? Are they just following a mainstream conservative business approach? It would certainly appear so. Did they get out negotiated, well as you have pointed out they could have done a hell of a lot better. One success was not caving into the AFL clubs and keeping the SMA deal relatively intact.

Unfortunately for them and us, they have got it so very wrong with the integrity of the comp and have alienated the intangible, the people who make the SANFL atmosphere, the rusted on supporter. This competition will become very beige in a couple of seasons if we keep on losing them.

Politics will play a part in any organisation, and football in particular. If there is a properly organised opposition to this, these guys will listen.[/quote]
I'll bet they wont

Booney wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

MW wrote:How many Crows AFL supporters actually support another SANFL side?
I have no interest in crows res games but happily go to westies

Thats the general feel with my mates who are Crows fans but follow their SANFL club, however the concern is the next generation who are being brought up to follow both in both competitions....and why wouldn't they? Try telling a 10 yo that he should follow one team in the AFL and another in the SANFL.

Where are the next generations of SANFL fans coming from?

That was most likely the case anyway. The group of kids 10-15 years old who are 5-10 years away from making their own decisions with their money and time are less likely to have a real interest in the SANFL at the moment because, in the main, their parents ( Dad ) no longer has the same interest in the SANFL.

That's not the people in this thread, that's the 120,000+ PAFC and AFC members in SA along with I would guess 10,000-15,000 or more North, West Coast, Hawthorn etc members who live in SA and have the AFL as their main priority.

Agree, due to the AFL teams now in the league, prior to that there was genuine interest from kids in SANFL, at Glenelg games half the crowd was kids prior to 2014.

Scoop wrote:Just posted the following on the SANFL's Facebook page, not that I expect it to remain there long or get a reply.

"Will not be attending any further games in this final series - or watching the telecast - as there will only be one SANFL side playing each week and one professional side that should not be in the league.
Supporters are walking away in droves, the attendance in the finals clearly shows that, volunteers are walking away as they cannot see the point in giving their time up when at the end of the season AFL sides simply change gear and blow their teams off the park.
And all the while this is happening Nero fiddles as Rome burns..."

Great idea I posted a few comments last night also had a go at some of the Crow stooges who really have got no idea about the SANFL and footy in general.

I suggest every one get on board and vent your anger on the SANFL Facebook site.

Reddeer wrote:

wild dog wrote:

johntheclaret wrote:

goddy11 wrote:JTC. To add to your point, what does Port actually give back to the SANFL. They pay no fees to SANFL clubs, play matches at Alberton, discourage their supporters from travelling to away games ala the South game at Noarlunga. At least the old Magpies added to player development.

That just reinforces my argument that the powers that be (no pun intended) at the SANFL are incompetent and not capable of running the league.
Personally, I'm not interested in any of the rumours that might be put out there, lining their own pockets, setting themselves up for an AFL number, etc, as they are all irrelevant to the main fact.
What is relevant to me though is their inability to say No, or if they genuinely believed having AFL Reserves in was better for the league, is their inability to broker a decent deal for their SANFL clubs that meant both AFL clubs played to the same set of rules. And their failure to see the true value of the SANFL League to the AFL clubs.

If they had it would have meant $150k p.a. to each SANFL club from each AFL club.
Allowing the SANFL clubs to use the fees on players by increasing the salary cap to $650k, which would help stop the drain of quality players to the ammos
No home games and no Reserves Reserves for Port
Adelaide and Port to fund any shortfall in sponsorship revenue for the TV deal and each club to have the same number of appearances as the two Reserves.
I'm sure there would be many other proviso's

And that those same people who were devoid of any ideas when "negotiating" the deal, are also devoid of any ideas now. Even if they voted to kick the AFL Reserves out right now, they simply have no ideas. The league would flounder because there just isn't anyone at the SANFL driving it forward. There is no one there that I'd have the least bit of confidence in to run any of my businesses let along something as important as the SANFL.

The pro AFLites would say "we told you so", completely missing the point that the only reason it failed was because of the incompetents running it.

Fine Post. I particularly agree with your statement about the rumours and innuendo and in the hope of actually trying to get a grass roots campaign together, this discussion has to start to take a more practical course.

Adelaide has a relatively small number of power brokers, and football is a very powerful force in this state. I have been fortunate enough to attend a commission dinner and the group are a very personable bunch, none more so than John Olsen. I believe he generally appreciates the competition and wants to see it thrive. The SMA is within the top 100 companies within the state and moving up the ladder. This issue is not about star chamber conspiracy theories, its about a group who thought they were doing the best by the competition. Have a look at the commission http://www.sanfl.com.au/sanfl/sa_football_commission/ and you will see a bunch of traditional and not so traditional SANFL people; they have tried to diversify which is often encouraged, but have they diversified or obtained a very conservative cautious approach? Are they just following a mainstream conservative business approach? It would certainly appear so. Did they get out negotiated, well as you have pointed out they could have done a hell of a lot better. One success was not caving into the AFL clubs and keeping the SMA deal relatively intact.

Unfortunately for them and us, they have got it so very wrong with the integrity of the comp and have alienated the intangible, the people who make the SANFL atmosphere, the rusted on supporter. This competition will become very beige in a couple of seasons if we keep on losing them.

Politics will play a part in any organisation, and football in particular. If there is a properly organised opposition to this, these guys will listen.[/quote]
I'll bet they wont

Clearly you have been seduced by swammy lying political types who take you for everything. Just check your Electricity bill

Dutchy wrote:Agree, due to the AFL teams now in the league, prior to that there was genuine interest from kids in SANFL, at Glenelg games half the crowd was kids prior to 2014.

exactly. kids arent stupid. they can quite easily follow teams in different leagues playing the same sport. my daughter is 7 and she has never asked why we follow peake in the mallee league and North in the sanfl. she likes going to both.

however now that the reserves sides are polluting the sanfl, there is absolutely no reason for them to follow a traditional club, if they also follow the crows or power. why would they support a team that plays against one of their other teams?

It is more than disappointing to be told than the SANFL were forced into accepting AFL into its competition by threats of withholding funds if they did not get their way. I was under the impression that Blackmail was illegal

johntheclaret wrote:

goddy11 wrote:JTC. To add to your point, what does Port actually give back to the SANFL. They pay no fees to SANFL clubs, play matches at Alberton, discourage their supporters from travelling to away games ala the South game at Noarlunga. At least the old Magpies added to player development.

That just reinforces my argument that the powers that be (no pun intended) at the SANFL are incompetent and not capable of running the league.
Personally, I'm not interested in any of the rumours that might be put out there, lining their own pockets, setting themselves up for an AFL number, etc, as they are all irrelevant to the main fact.
What is relevant to me though is their inability to say No, or if they genuinely believed having AFL Reserves in was better for the league, is their inability to broker a decent deal for their SANFL clubs that meant both AFL clubs played to the same set of rules. And their failure to see the true value of the SANFL League to the AFL clubs.

If they had it would have meant $150k p.a. to each SANFL club from each AFL club.
Allowing the SANFL clubs to use the fees on players by increasing the salary cap to $650k, which would help stop the drain of quality players to the ammos
No home games and no Reserves Reserves for Port
Adelaide and Port to fund any shortfall in sponsorship revenue for the TV deal and each club to have the same number of appearances as the two Reserves.
I'm sure there would be many other proviso's

And that those same people who were devoid of any ideas when "negotiating" the deal, are also devoid of any ideas now. Even if they voted to kick the AFL Reserves out right now, they simply have no ideas. The league would flounder because there just isn't anyone at the SANFL driving it forward. There is no one there that I'd have the least bit of confidence in to run any of my businesses let along something as important as the SANFL.

The pro AFLites would say "we told you so", completely missing the point that the only reason it failed was because of the incompetents running it.

Would that be enough for you to accept the AFL reserves sides or would you prefer them not in the SANFL at all

cracka wrote:

johntheclaret wrote:

goddy11 wrote:JTC. To add to your point, what does Port actually give back to the SANFL. They pay no fees to SANFL clubs, play matches at Alberton, discourage their supporters from travelling to away games ala the South game at Noarlunga. At least the old Magpies added to player development.

That just reinforces my argument that the powers that be (no pun intended) at the SANFL are incompetent and not capable of running the league.
Personally, I'm not interested in any of the rumours that might be put out there, lining their own pockets, setting themselves up for an AFL number, etc, as they are all irrelevant to the main fact.
What is relevant to me though is their inability to say No, or if they genuinely believed having AFL Reserves in was better for the league, is their inability to broker a decent deal for their SANFL clubs that meant both AFL clubs played to the same set of rules. And their failure to see the true value of the SANFL League to the AFL clubs.

If they had it would have meant $150k p.a. to each SANFL club from each AFL club.
Allowing the SANFL clubs to use the fees on players by increasing the salary cap to $650k, which would help stop the drain of quality players to the ammos
No home games and no Reserves Reserves for Port
Adelaide and Port to fund any shortfall in sponsorship revenue for the TV deal and each club to have the same number of appearances as the two Reserves.
I'm sure there would be many other proviso's

And that those same people who were devoid of any ideas when "negotiating" the deal, are also devoid of any ideas now. Even if they voted to kick the AFL Reserves out right now, they simply have no ideas. The league would flounder because there just isn't anyone at the SANFL driving it forward. There is no one there that I'd have the least bit of confidence in to run any of my businesses let along something as important as the SANFL.

The pro AFLites would say "we told you so", completely missing the point that the only reason it failed was because of the incompetents running it.

Would that be enough for you to accept the AFL reserves sides or would you prefer them not in the SANFL at all

Its still prostitution of the league, but its a better paid deal. What we have now is the equivalent of finding someone on the side of grand Junction road.

But personally i wouldnt have been happy with that either.

tipper wrote:

cracka wrote:

johntheclaret wrote:

goddy11 wrote:JTC. To add to your point, what does Port actually give back to the SANFL. They pay no fees to SANFL clubs, play matches at Alberton, discourage their supporters from travelling to away games ala the South game at Noarlunga. At least the old Magpies added to player development.

That just reinforces my argument that the powers that be (no pun intended) at the SANFL are incompetent and not capable of running the league.
Personally, I'm not interested in any of the rumours that might be put out there, lining their own pockets, setting themselves up for an AFL number, etc, as they are all irrelevant to the main fact.
What is relevant to me though is their inability to say No, or if they genuinely believed having AFL Reserves in was better for the league, is their inability to broker a decent deal for their SANFL clubs that meant both AFL clubs played to the same set of rules. And their failure to see the true value of the SANFL League to the AFL clubs.

If they had it would have meant $150k p.a. to each SANFL club from each AFL club.
Allowing the SANFL clubs to use the fees on players by increasing the salary cap to $650k, which would help stop the drain of quality players to the ammos
No home games and no Reserves Reserves for Port
Adelaide and Port to fund any shortfall in sponsorship revenue for the TV deal and each club to have the same number of appearances as the two Reserves.
I'm sure there would be many other proviso's

And that those same people who were devoid of any ideas when "negotiating" the deal, are also devoid of any ideas now. Even if they voted to kick the AFL Reserves out right now, they simply have no ideas. The league would flounder because there just isn't anyone at the SANFL driving it forward. There is no one there that I'd have the least bit of confidence in to run any of my businesses let along something as important as the SANFL.

The pro AFLites would say "we told you so", completely missing the point that the only reason it failed was because of the incompetents running it.

Would that be enough for you to accept the AFL reserves sides or would you prefer them not in the SANFL at all

Its still prostitution of the league, but its a better paid deal. What we have now is the equivalent of finding someone on the side of grand Junction road.

But personally i wouldnt have been happy with that either.

Yeah, I'm just interested if there's a dollar value/conditions/number of AFL listed players in the side etc, point where AFL reserves would be accepted in the SANFL.

cracka wrote:

tipper wrote:

cracka wrote:

johntheclaret wrote:[quote="goddy11"]JTC. To add to your point, what does Port actually give back to the SANFL. They pay no fees to SANFL clubs, play matches at Alberton, discourage their supporters from travelling to away games ala the South game at Noarlunga. At least the old Magpies added to player development.

That just reinforces my argument that the powers that be (no pun intended) at the SANFL are incompetent and not capable of running the league.
Personally, I'm not interested in any of the rumours that might be put out there, lining their own pockets, setting themselves up for an AFL number, etc, as they are all irrelevant to the main fact.
What is relevant to me though is their inability to say No, or if they genuinely believed having AFL Reserves in was better for the league, is their inability to broker a decent deal for their SANFL clubs that meant both AFL clubs played to the same set of rules. And their failure to see the true value of the SANFL League to the AFL clubs.

If they had it would have meant $150k p.a. to each SANFL club from each AFL club.
Allowing the SANFL clubs to use the fees on players by increasing the salary cap to $650k, which would help stop the drain of quality players to the ammos
No home games and no Reserves Reserves for Port
Adelaide and Port to fund any shortfall in sponsorship revenue for the TV deal and each club to have the same number of appearances as the two Reserves.
I'm sure there would be many other proviso's

And that those same people who were devoid of any ideas when "negotiating" the deal, are also devoid of any ideas now. Even if they voted to kick the AFL Reserves out right now, they simply have no ideas. The league would flounder because there just isn't anyone at the SANFL driving it forward. There is no one there that I'd have the least bit of confidence in to run any of my businesses let along something as important as the SANFL.

The pro AFLites would say "we told you so", completely missing the point that the only reason it failed was because of the incompetents running it.

Would that be enough for you to accept the AFL reserves sides or would you prefer them not in the SANFL at all

Its still prostitution of the league, but its a better paid deal. What we have now is the equivalent of finding someone on the side of grand Junction road.

But personally i wouldnt have been happy with that either.

Yeah, I'm just interested if there's a dollar value/conditions/number of AFL listed players in the side etc, point where AFL reserves would be accepted in the SANFL.[/quote]
I understand. Personally, no, there isnt. That is all just tinkering around the edges. More money may sway some though. Doubt it would change the mind of any of the vocal antis on here though. But its worth asking