SA Footy

Posted: **Thu Apr 24, 2014 3:19 pm**

Reynella vs MVP- Reynella by 21 points- A repeat of the GF result
Aldinga vs Marion- Marion by 80 points- still too good for the Sharkies. Hope they have a big day on the gate etc though, and the general interest in the local community can start something good for them.
Edwardstown vs Pt Noarlunga- Towns by 7 points- Towns have had a slow start but looking for them to improve here.
Flaggies vs OSB- Flaggies by 42 points, hopefully build on last week. Will be interesting to see the A grade in the clash guernsey if worn.
Valley vs Christies- Vikings by 44 points- Christies to be overrun in the last quarter.
Morphett Vale vs Brighton- Emus by 20 points. Morphies usually lift for these celebration games.
Noarlunga vs Cove- Cove by 8 points. Cove have surprised with their form despite the well documented losses, I can see them snagging one here.

Posted: **Thu Apr 24, 2014 7:55 pm**

Reynella vs MVP- 25 points
Aldinga vs Marion- Sharks to win under the magical influence of Cornes, McGregor, and whoever signed up to play this week. I don't know, two goals or something. I really have no idea what's going on. :rolleyes:

But it'd be f***ing sweet if we did win (I'm going to try and not think about the potential Tiser story - 'Fairy Tail Finish' (sharks have tails, yeah?), 'Rams Flock To Aldinga, Are Swallowed' (my brain is broken), or perhaps something short and sweet, like 'Jawsome Victory!' :Hangman:

) ...so I'll tip them and hope for the best.
Edwardstown vs Pt Noarlunga- 100 points
Flaggies vs OSB- 120 points
Valley vs Christies- 60 points
Morphett Vale vs Brighton- 15 points
Noarlunga vs Cove- 30 points

Posted: **Thu Apr 24, 2014 11:04 pm**

That's what I'm talking about!!!!

Posted: **Thu Apr 24, 2014 11:09 pm**

I heard tonight Ty Allen is playing for Morphie Parks v Reynella Anzac Day in order to get some more match fitness seeing as Glenelg ressies have a bye

Posted: **Fri Apr 25, 2014 12:34 pm**

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/r ... 6895466977

This 3-year no-poaching rule the SFL is going to implement for Aldinga juniors - any truth to this? Because I can think of several reasons why NOT to enforce such a rule, mainly that it's unfair to the kids. Seriously - if they don't want to play senior footy for Aldinga, they've got reasons, and it's not just due to lack of success at A grade level. I would say it depends predominantly on the coach (A grade coach, that is), and also on where their mates play, on the atmosphere at the club, a number of smaller factors.

Secondly, if the kids leave, it's not to other clubs in the SFL. Most go to the GSFL. I can't see that this rule is going to change anything in that regard - I think that the kids will see it as an imposement, as a restriction, and ultimately it will discourage them from playing footy. It's up to the club to give them the incentives to want to stay and play - it's not up to the league to try and force them to stay. I presume that such a rule would have to be agreed upon by both league and club, and I can't comment on Aldinga's position in this - I simply don't know, to be honest - but if it were up to me, I'd scrap it. One, because it's pointless - it won't stop kids from leaving for the GSFL - and two, because I think that the kids will see it as an attempt to force their hand, basically telling them where they have to play football. Our juniors had a great year in 2013 and are continuing on the same path this year - SFL, please, don't muck it up for them.

Posted: **Fri Apr 25, 2014 1:01 pm**

fisho mcspaz wrote:http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/rucci-dogged-commitment-keeps-struggling-amateur-clubs-afloat/story-fni5f22o-1226895466977

This 3-year no-poaching rule the SFL is going to implement for Aldinga juniors - any truth to this? Because I can think of several reasons why NOT to enforce such a rule, mainly that it's unfair to the kids. Seriously - if they don't want to play senior footy for Aldinga, they've got reasons, and it's not just due to lack of success at A grade level. I would say it depends predominantly on the coach (A grade coach, that is), and also on where their mates play, on the atmosphere at the club, a number of smaller factors.

Secondly, if the kids leave, it's not to other clubs in the SFL. Most go to the GSFL. I can't see that this rule is going to change anything in that regard - I think that the kids will see it as an imposement, as a restriction, and ultimately it will discourage them from playing footy. It's up to the club to give them the incentives to want to stay and play - it's not up to the league to try and force them to stay. I presume that such a rule would have to be agreed upon by both league and club, and I can't comment on Aldinga's position in this - I simply don't know, to be honest - but if it were up to me, I'd scrap it. One, because it's pointless - it won't stop kids from leaving for the GSFL - and two, because I think that the kids will see it as an attempt to force their hand, basically telling them where they have to play football. Our juniors had a great year in 2013 and are continuing on the same path this year - SFL, please, don't muck it up for them.

That rule is already in place, for all clubs.

Posted: **Fri Apr 25, 2014 1:27 pm**

Look Good In Leather wrote:
fisho mcspaz wrote:http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/rucci-dogged-commitment-keeps-struggling-amateur-clubs-afloat/story-fni5f22o-1226895466977

This 3-year no-poaching rule the SFL is going to implement for Aldinga juniors - any truth to this? Because I can think of several reasons why NOT to enforce such a rule, mainly that it's unfair to the kids. Seriously - if they don't want to play senior footy for Aldinga, they've got reasons, and it's not just due to lack of success at A grade level. I would say it depends predominantly on the coach (A grade coach, that is), and also on where their mates play, on the atmosphere at the club, a number of smaller factors.

Secondly, if the kids leave, it's not to other clubs in the SFL. Most go to the GSFL. I can't see that this rule is going to change anything in that regard - I think that the kids will see it as an imposement, as a restriction, and ultimately it will discourage them from playing footy. It's up to the club to give them the incentives to want to stay and play - it's not up to the league to try and force them to stay. I presume that such a rule would have to be agreed upon by both league and club, and I can't comment on Aldinga's position in this - I simply don't know, to be honest - but if it were up to me, I'd scrap it. One, because it's pointless - it won't stop kids from leaving for the GSFL - and two, because I think that the kids will see it as an attempt to force their hand, basically telling them where they have to play football. Our juniors had a great year in 2013 and are continuing on the same path this year - SFL, please, don't muck it up for them.

That rule is already in place, for all clubs.

...... and has been for at least 25 years !

Posted: **Fri Apr 25, 2014 1:35 pm**

Really? Yuck. My bad. :oops:

Posted: **Fri Apr 25, 2014 1:39 pm**

(PS. I still think it's s***house - maybe it made more sense 25 years ago. It'd be fair enough IF all clubs were on a more even footing and money was the primary issue, but for teams like Aldinga it seems more like an attempt to force kids to stay rather than to prevent other clubs from poaching them.)

Posted: **Fri Apr 25, 2014 8:23 pm**

Dazza44 wrote:
Look Good In Leather wrote:
fisho mcspaz wrote:http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/rucci-dogged-commitment-keeps-struggling-amateur-clubs-afloat/story-fni5f22o-1226895466977

This 3-year no-poaching rule the SFL is going to implement for Aldinga juniors - any truth to this? Because I can think of several reasons why NOT to enforce such a rule, mainly that it's unfair to the kids. Seriously - if they don't want to play senior footy for Aldinga, they've got reasons, and it's not just due to lack of success at A grade level. I would say it depends predominantly on the coach (A grade coach, that is), and also on where their mates play, on the atmosphere at the club, a number of smaller factors.

Secondly, if the kids leave, it's not to other clubs in the SFL. Most go to the GSFL. I can't see that this rule is going to change anything in that regard - I think that the kids will see it as an imposement, as a restriction, and ultimately it will discourage them from playing footy. It's up to the club to give them the incentives to want to stay and play - it's not up to the league to try and force them to stay. I presume that such a rule would have to be agreed upon by both league and club, and I can't comment on Aldinga's position in this - I simply don't know, to be honest - but if it were up to me, I'd scrap it. One, because it's pointless - it won't stop kids from leaving for the GSFL - and two, because I think that the kids will see it as an attempt to force their hand, basically telling them where they have to play football. Our juniors had a great year in 2013 and are continuing on the same path this year - SFL, please, don't muck it up for them.

That rule is already in place, for all clubs.

...... and has been for at least 25 years !

Not all clubs enforce the rule

Posted: **Fri Apr 25, 2014 10:13 pm**

So who won today???

Posted: **Fri Apr 25, 2014 10:19 pm**

Tiger83 wrote:So who won today???

Sadly, nobody seems to care about the grand final replay today, rather there seems to be more excitement about cowbells, showbags and sausages - a pretty bad reflection on our league.

For the record Reynella 12.8 d Morphettville Park 6.9

Anyone know who won the Captain Malpas Medal?

Posted: **Fri Apr 25, 2014 10:24 pm**

fisho mcspaz wrote:(PS. I still think it's s***house - maybe it made more sense 25 years ago. It'd be fair enough IF all clubs were on a more even footing and money was the primary issue, but for teams like Aldinga it seems more like an attempt to force kids to stay rather than to prevent other clubs from poaching them.)

No it is a safety net for running junior programs. Why put 6-12 years into a player only to have them leave unrestricted once they hit seniors?
Most clubs don't enforce it, more use it as a bargaining tool in discussions with the player and/or destination club, but still have the right to hold the player if the situation merits it.

It is a critical component of the fabric of our league, even though it was watered down last year.

Posted: **Fri Apr 25, 2014 10:34 pm**

Look Good In Leather wrote:
fisho mcspaz wrote:(PS. I still think it's s***house - maybe it made more sense 25 years ago. It'd be fair enough IF all clubs were on a more even footing and money was the primary issue, but for teams like Aldinga it seems more like an attempt to force kids to stay rather than to prevent other clubs from poaching them.)

No it is a safety net for running junior programs. Why put 6-12 years into a player only to have them leave unrestricted once they hit seniors?
Most clubs don't enforce it, more use it as a bargaining tool in discussions with the player and/or destination club, but still have the right to hold the player if the situation merits it.

It is a critical component of the fabric of our league, even though it was watered down last year.

OK, THAT makes more sense. Sorry - I had no idea that this rule even existed, and the way the paper made it sound, I thought it would be a non-negotiable blanket restriction on all junior players. That's what I get for reading the Tiser, I guess.

Posted: **Fri Apr 25, 2014 10:38 pm**

fisho mcspaz wrote:
Look Good In Leather wrote:
fisho mcspaz wrote:(PS. I still think it's s***house - maybe it made more sense 25 years ago. It'd be fair enough IF all clubs were on a more even footing and money was the primary issue, but for teams like Aldinga it seems more like an attempt to force kids to stay rather than to prevent other clubs from poaching them.)

No it is a safety net for running junior programs. Why put 6-12 years into a player only to have them leave unrestricted once they hit seniors?
Most clubs don't enforce it, more use it as a bargaining tool in discussions with the player and/or destination club, but still have the right to hold the player if the situation merits it.

It is a critical component of the fabric of our league, even though it was watered down last year.

OK, THAT makes more sense. Sorry - I had no idea that this rule even existed, and the way the paper made it sound, I thought it would be a non-negotiable blanket restriction on all junior players. That's what I get for reading the Tiser, I guess.

All it means is that clubs are entitled to refuse clearance to a junior who has not given three years of senior football service to the club, similar to if they were on a 3 year contract. There is nothing to stop a club from agreeing to clear the player, and this usually happens as in most cases this is the logical outcome for all parties.

Posted: **Sat Apr 26, 2014 7:51 am**

Look Good In Leather wrote:
Tiger83 wrote:So who won today???

Sadly, nobody seems to care about the grand final replay today, rather there seems to be more excitement about cowbells, showbags and sausages - a pretty bad reflection on our league.

For the record Reynella 12.8 d Morphettville Park 6.9

Anyone know who won the Captain Malpas Medal?

Sensible decision by both clubs and the SFL to play the sunday under 14 and 16 fixtures by both club yesterday giving the day five games of football

Posted: **Sat Apr 26, 2014 9:29 am**

Doughty won the medal. Good win by the Flies considering they had 9 of the grand final side missing. I thought the crowd was good, pity the game was not of a better standard. Skills from both sides on a perfect day very average.
Great to see Bradshaw get through his first game in nearly 12 months in the B's.
Huge test this week for Reynella.

Posted: **Sat Apr 26, 2014 9:33 am**

Is Cranston injured so far this season or has he retired?

Posted: **Sat Apr 26, 2014 6:12 pm**

christies defeated valleys at HV by 2pts, first win there in 20 years

Posted: **Sat Apr 26, 2014 7:28 pm**

Aldinga lost by 5 points today. It was a good day - and I don't mean in terms of the media presence, because frankly I tried to forget that they were there at all - f*** that s***. I've been with the club for about 7 years now and it's the same every time this happens, I don't care what the hell else is going on at the time, but it's when the team suddenly gels together and takes the initiative, that's when they get in front and the crowd gets behind them. Those of you who've been behind a team in similar straits may understand. Media or no media - it has no influence over what goes on then, on the field. The Sharks worked their guts out today, they were hard at it, coughed it up a few times for sure, but for the first time in God knows how long, they were playing like a team and not just a conglomerate of blokes thrown together for two hours on a Saturday. B grade was the same. I've seen enough of Aldinga to know it doesn't last - that it's not something that's going to happen every week, and that what's wrong with our club will take far longer than a week or two to repair. But it is genuinely heartwarming to see how the mob gets behind us when things suddenly fall into place on-field. The blokes seem to genuinely respect Flints as a coach, and we'll see what happens from here. Hopefully all the inflated publicity doesn't bugger us up too much. Carn the Sharks.

SA Footy

Southern Football League

Re: Southern Football League

Re: Southern Football League

Re: Southern Football League

Re: Southern Football League

Re: Southern Football League

Re: Southern Football League

Re: Southern Football League

Re: Southern Football League

Re: Southern Football League

Re: Southern Football League

Re: Southern Football League

Re: Southern Football League

Re: Southern Football League

Re: Southern Football League

Re: Southern Football League

Re: Southern Football League

Re: Southern Football League

Re: Southern Football League

Re: Southern Football League

Re: Southern Football League