by Harry the Horse » Tue Mar 01, 2016 11:41 am
by Footy Chick » Tue Mar 01, 2016 11:53 am
Harry the Horse wrote:There's a few people here who get it. Plenty of other SANFL clubs have cried poor and been saved by rattling the tins. But Glenelg is the first one to hit the skids, having betrayed its members and as part of a competition drowning in apathy. I seriously doubt there are enough people who'll dig deep enough into their pockets to save a side so they can go and watch them play four games against AFL reserves teams per year. The competition is not like it was, it's not what we want and I doubt it ever will be again. I suspect Glenelg will disappear, And they won't be the last ones. You reap what you sow in this world and those responsible at the Bay are going to have to live with that.
Gatt_Weasel wrote:if they (Walkerville) dont win the flag ill run around the block of my street naked :) you can grab a chair and enjoy the view
by stan » Tue Mar 01, 2016 12:02 pm
Booney wrote:stan wrote:RustyCage wrote:From all the reserves teams blaming going on in here I take it Glenelg were in making profits year after year before 2014?
I think the point is that Glenelg has been struggling for a bit but the issue with the AFL reserves coming in has turned away alot of passionate supporters. These are the types of people who the clubs need dueing this time to help save them.
Imagine if the full forward walked away because the coach didn't listen to how he wanted the game plan structured. Goodbye and good riddance.
by Magellan » Tue Mar 01, 2016 12:17 pm
cracka wrote:So the actual blame for the AFL reserves in the SANFL & the ultimate downfall of the SANFL should all be put on the 6 clubs that voted yes & not the crows or power for wanting into the SANFL.
by DOC » Tue Mar 01, 2016 12:23 pm
by whufc » Tue Mar 01, 2016 12:35 pm
Booney wrote:stan wrote:RustyCage wrote:From all the reserves teams blaming going on in here I take it Glenelg were in making profits year after year before 2014?
I think the point is that Glenelg has been struggling for a bit but the issue with the AFL reserves coming in has turned away alot of passionate supporters. These are the types of people who the clubs need dueing this time to help save them.
Imagine if the full forward walked away because the coach didn't listen to how he wanted the game plan structured. Goodbye and good riddance.
by RB » Tue Mar 01, 2016 12:36 pm
Booney wrote:Imagine if the full forward walked away because the coach didn't listen to how he wanted the game plan structured. Goodbye and good riddance.
by whufc » Tue Mar 01, 2016 12:38 pm
cracka wrote:Wedgie wrote:RustyCage wrote:From all the reserves teams blaming going on in here I take it Glenelg were in making profits year after year before 2014?
Thats not the point, the point is the reserves teams have contributed to clubs going downhill and also contributed to the people who could help turn things around no longer being there.
For eg. I was a part of the Roosters Against Merger group in the 90s, in the early 2000s I organised the Rooster Rally which a lot of people credit helping turn the fortunes of the club around, I've also been a runner up for Volunteer of the Year award, went interstate twice following North, have been a part of the Presidents group twice, I created and ran the clubs official website for years and created a club unofficial site/forum as well as safooty which has helped build/keep interest in the club/comp and used to be a volunteer SANFL acreddited photographer, etc etc.
Thanks to the reserves debacle I wouldn't lift a finger to help North if something happened these days, I struggle to get motivated to travel 5 mins to see them play and I helped organise my daughter a gig as a trainer/physio at South. I only go to games to catch up with mates. I'm sure Glenelg and other clubs have many people like me.
Please don't interpret my post as blowing my own trumpet as I did it all out of love and passion of which I have none now which is a big point of what the point is.
So the actual blame for the AFL reserves in the SANFL & the ultimate downfall of the SANFL should all be put on the 6 clubs that voted yes & not the crows or power for wanting into the SANFL.
by therisingblues » Tue Mar 01, 2016 12:41 pm
Booney wrote:stan wrote:RustyCage wrote:From all the reserves teams blaming going on in here I take it Glenelg were in making profits year after year before 2014?
I think the point is that Glenelg has been struggling for a bit but the issue with the AFL reserves coming in has turned away alot of passionate supporters. These are the types of people who the clubs need dueing this time to help save them.
Imagine if the full forward walked away because the coach didn't listen to how he wanted the game plan structured. Goodbye and good riddance.
by therisingblues » Tue Mar 01, 2016 12:44 pm
Harry the Horse wrote:There's a few people here who get it. Plenty of other SANFL clubs have cried poor and been saved by rattling the tins. But Glenelg is the first one to hit the skids, having betrayed its members and as part of a competition drowning in apathy. I seriously doubt there are enough people who'll dig deep enough into their pockets to save a side so they can go and watch them play four games against AFL reserves teams per year. The competition is not like it was, it's not what we want and I doubt it ever will be again. I suspect Glenelg will disappear, And they won't be the last ones. You reap what you sow in this world and those responsible at the Bay are going to have to live with that.
by therisingblues » Tue Mar 01, 2016 12:45 pm
Magellan wrote:cracka wrote:So the actual blame for the AFL reserves in the SANFL & the ultimate downfall of the SANFL should all be put on the 6 clubs that voted yes & not the crows or power for wanting into the SANFL.
Sure. The 6 'yes' clubs do deserve the blame, because they ultimately voted for it. But the Crows aren’t blameless in this. To think that is to ignore the inequitable power balance that exists between the very popular and resource-heavy Crows and a collection of semi-amateur clubs struggling with identity and relevance, and who were ripe to be taken advantage of.
Don't forget the Crows were absolutely desperate to have a reserves side, all part of Brenton Sanderson's (remember him?) plan. They would've stopped at nothing to get what they want, because, well, they always do. They're the sporting darlings of a state that loves its sport. I have no doubt that if there was an Adelaide Crows political party people would seriously vote for it.
But I digress. The Crows wanted something bad and did whatever they could, behind the scenes, to get it.
I think some have said that even if the vote was unanimous against, the Crows still would've pulled out an ace and gotten their own way anyway. I’m not so sure. The Crows know the benefit of a warm and fuzzy positive public image, and would’ve never overturned the official vote. They wanted to earn the trust of the clubs, and also reinforce the impression that the SANFL clubs’ independent decision-making was the key to the vote. So they remained in the shadows and exerted their influence until they knew the majority vote would go their way.
It might appear as if the clubs are guilty of voting for the reserves sides, but in my mind they’re guilty of being hoodwinked by a bunch of charlatans. Yes, they ostensibly voted for it, but the Crows pulled the strings. Machiavelli would be proud.
by whufc » Tue Mar 01, 2016 12:46 pm
RB wrote:Booney wrote:Imagine if the full forward walked away because the coach didn't listen to how he wanted the game plan structured. Goodbye and good riddance.
You just can't, or won't, understand, it appears.
Where do I start? Firstly, your analogy is false.
The league directors, guys like Chiggy, Kurt Slaven and Bohdan Jaworskliklkky can't possibly be compared to the coach of a football club, and the supporter groups a team of players.
The coach of a football team is appointed on account of his experience, knowledge of football gameplans, man management, and ability to motivate a team.
The club presidents, boards etc. are elected by the members to make decisions representative of the views, aims and concerns of the members. Their only authority is derived from the members, and it is their duty to act in accordance with the will of the members.
The league directors are not absolute monarchs.
To use WWTFC as an example, if Slaven had said loudly and clearly to all the members before the AGM at the start of 2013, if I'm elected I'm going to vote to insert AFL reserves teams in the SANFL, and if he had been elected, then of course he would have been right to vote that way.
But he did not do this.
Of course it isn't practical to consult with the members over every single minor decision. But given the controversy and extremely strong feelings over this issue, and given that (as I'm sure you'll agree) it would be very difficult to reverse this decision at a later date, it was absolutely vital that Slaven got the members on board before making the decision to vote in favour.
Unless I was very, very much mistaken, the atmosphere in the room during the 'Information Night', was one of hostility to the reserves sides' inclusion.
Slaven not only made the wrong decision IMO, but the lack of democracy involved is an absolute indictment of his management of the club. This is why your analogy of players not listening to the coach is false.
To put it simply, the fans owe no blind faith to the president. The opposite is true. The league directors owe all their authority to the members.
To be honest, I hardly attend WWTFC games now (I saw 22/22 minor round + finals games in 2013) not because of my disappointment in my decision, but because of the way football and football clubs have changed, and my general lack of interest in the new regime. I used to structure my weekends around the footy. Now, I don't see the Eagles as the no. 1 priority.
I believe that I am not alone in feeling that my club has abandoned me, not the other way around. The difference from 2013, apart from the reserves teams themselves? Passion. Like many, I have lost the passion. It was previously passion for my club, and the SANFL, that drove me to spend time and money at the club. Like many, I now feel blasé about attending games.
You're obviously a passionate supporter of both the Power and the Magpies, the Power's reserve side in the SANFL. You're perfectly entitled to have your own views on the introduction of the reserves teams, or not to have any views at all on it.
However, there's no reason why you would understand the passion of others, and your 'good riddance' mentality shows that you have failed to grasp how important the integrity, sovereignty, and soul of the competition are to other people on this forum...
by saintal » Tue Mar 01, 2016 12:47 pm
Magellan wrote:cracka wrote:So the actual blame for the AFL reserves in the SANFL & the ultimate downfall of the SANFL should all be put on the 6 clubs that voted yes & not the crows or power for wanting into the SANFL.
Sure. The 6 'yes' clubs do deserve the blame, because they ultimately voted for it. But the Crows aren’t blameless in this. To think that is to ignore the inequitable power balance that exists between the very popular and resource-heavy Crows and a collection of semi-amateur clubs struggling with identity and relevance, and who were ripe to be taken advantage of.
Don't forget the Crows were absolutely desperate to have a reserves side, all part of Brenton Sanderson's (remember him?) plan. They would've stopped at nothing to get what they want, because, well, they always do. They're the sporting darlings of a state that loves its sport. I have no doubt that if there was an Adelaide Crows political party people would seriously vote for it.
But I digress. The Crows wanted something bad and did whatever they could, behind the scenes, to get it.
I think some have said that even if the vote was unanimous against, the Crows still would've pulled out an ace and gotten their own way anyway. I’m not so sure. The Crows know the benefit of a warm and fuzzy positive public image, and would’ve never overturned the official vote. They wanted to earn the trust of the clubs, and also reinforce the impression that the SANFL clubs’ independent decision-making was the key to the vote. So they remained in the shadows and exerted their influence until they knew the majority vote would go their way.
It might appear as if the clubs are guilty of voting for the reserves sides, but in my mind they’re guilty of being hoodwinked by a bunch of charlatans. Yes, they ostensibly voted for it, but the Crows pulled the strings. Machiavelli would be proud.
by JK » Tue Mar 01, 2016 12:50 pm
RustyCage wrote:From all the reserves teams blaming going on in here I take it Glenelg were in making profits year after year before 2014?
by therisingblues » Tue Mar 01, 2016 12:51 pm
by whufc » Tue Mar 01, 2016 12:52 pm
saintal wrote:Magellan wrote:cracka wrote:So the actual blame for the AFL reserves in the SANFL & the ultimate downfall of the SANFL should all be put on the 6 clubs that voted yes & not the crows or power for wanting into the SANFL.
Sure. The 6 'yes' clubs do deserve the blame, because they ultimately voted for it. But the Crows aren’t blameless in this. To think that is to ignore the inequitable power balance that exists between the very popular and resource-heavy Crows and a collection of semi-amateur clubs struggling with identity and relevance, and who were ripe to be taken advantage of.
Don't forget the Crows were absolutely desperate to have a reserves side, all part of Brenton Sanderson's (remember him?) plan. They would've stopped at nothing to get what they want, because, well, they always do. They're the sporting darlings of a state that loves its sport. I have no doubt that if there was an Adelaide Crows political party people would seriously vote for it.
But I digress. The Crows wanted something bad and did whatever they could, behind the scenes, to get it.
I think some have said that even if the vote was unanimous against, the Crows still would've pulled out an ace and gotten their own way anyway. I’m not so sure. The Crows know the benefit of a warm and fuzzy positive public image, and would’ve never overturned the official vote. They wanted to earn the trust of the clubs, and also reinforce the impression that the SANFL clubs’ independent decision-making was the key to the vote. So they remained in the shadows and exerted their influence until they knew the majority vote would go their way.
It might appear as if the clubs are guilty of voting for the reserves sides, but in my mind they’re guilty of being hoodwinked by a bunch of charlatans. Yes, they ostensibly voted for it, but the Crows pulled the strings. Machiavelli would be proud.
Good post. The infamous Burtenshaw Q+A thread was an insight into the lack of thorough planning, consultation and research into the matter and the overall arrogant/ignorant approach adopted by the AFC. The mainstream media (i.e. the PR arm of the club) during the saga played their role perfectly to. And of course Triggy remarked that they needed unanimous support from the 8 clubs before they would consider entry, this was not received.
by Booney » Tue Mar 01, 2016 12:53 pm
therisingblues wrote:Funny how these AFL-ites have this recurring opinion how we should stand by the league, when they all jumped off it years ago.
What's the matter, worried that there'll be nobody to watch your reserves play?
by UK Fan » Tue Mar 01, 2016 12:54 pm
cracka wrote:Wedgie wrote:RustyCage wrote:From all the reserves teams blaming going on in here I take it Glenelg were in making profits year after year before 2014?
Thats not the point, the point is the reserves teams have contributed to clubs going downhill and also contributed to the people who could help turn things around no longer being there.
For eg. I was a part of the Roosters Against Merger group in the 90s, in the early 2000s I organised the Rooster Rally which a lot of people credit helping turn the fortunes of the club around, I've also been a runner up for Volunteer of the Year award, went interstate twice following North, have been a part of the Presidents group twice, I created and ran the clubs official website for years and created a club unofficial site/forum as well as safooty which has helped build/keep interest in the club/comp and used to be a volunteer SANFL acreddited photographer, etc etc.
Thanks to the reserves debacle I wouldn't lift a finger to help North if something happened these days, I struggle to get motivated to travel 5 mins to see them play and I helped organise my daughter a gig as a trainer/physio at South. I only go to games to catch up with mates. I'm sure Glenelg and other clubs have many people like me.
Please don't interpret my post as blowing my own trumpet as I did it all out of love and passion of which I have none now which is a big point of what the point is.
So the actual blame for the AFL reserves in the SANFL & the ultimate downfall of the SANFL should all be put on the 6 clubs that voted yes & not the crows or power for wanting into the SANFL.
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.
by therisingblues » Tue Mar 01, 2016 12:54 pm
JK wrote:RustyCage wrote:From all the reserves teams blaming going on in here I take it Glenelg were in making profits year after year before 2014?
No, Glenelgs financial trouble rests on their own shoulders - whilst they might have been unlucky with things like debt level in a changed economy, they made their own decisions.
Trying to get out of the hole, as per WHUFC's example post, is likely greatly hindered by the altered state of the competition that we have today and have had for the previous two seasons.
by Mickyj » Tue Mar 01, 2016 12:56 pm
RB wrote:Booney wrote:Imagine if the full forward walked away because the coach didn't listen to how he wanted the game plan structured. Goodbye and good riddance.
You just can't, or won't, understand, it appears.
Where do I start? Firstly, your analogy is false.
The league directors, guys like Chiggy, Kurt Slaven and Bohdan Jaworskliklkky can't possibly be compared to the coach of a football club, and the supporter groups a team of players.
The coach of a football team is appointed on account of his experience, knowledge of football gameplans, man management, and ability to motivate a team.
The club presidents, boards etc. are elected by the members to make decisions representative of the views, aims and concerns of the members. Their only authority is derived from the members, and it is their duty to act in accordance with the will of the members.
The league directors are not absolute monarchs.
To use WWTFC as an example, if Slaven had said loudly and clearly to all the members before the AGM at the start of 2013, if I'm elected I'm going to vote to insert AFL reserves teams in the SANFL, and if he had been elected, then of course he would have been right to vote that way.
But he did not do this.
Of course it isn't practical to consult with the members over every single minor decision. But given the controversy and extremely strong feelings over this issue, and given that (as I'm sure you'll agree) it would be very difficult to reverse this decision at a later date, it was absolutely vital that Slaven got the members on board before making the decision to vote in favour.
Unless I was very, very much mistaken, the atmosphere in the room during the 'Information Night', was one of hostility to the reserves sides' inclusion.
Slaven not only made the wrong decision IMO, but the lack of democracy involved is an absolute indictment of his management of the club. This is why your analogy of players not listening to the coach is false.
To put it simply, the fans owe no blind faith to the president. The opposite is true. The league directors owe all their authority to the members.
To be honest, I hardly attend WWTFC games now (I saw 22/22 minor round + finals games in 2013) not because of my disappointment in my decision, but because of the way football and football clubs have changed, and my general lack of interest in the new regime. I used to structure my weekends around the footy. Now, I don't see the Eagles as the no. 1 priority.
I believe that I am not alone in feeling that my club has abandoned me, not the other way around. The difference from 2013, apart from the reserves teams themselves? Passion. Like many, I have lost the passion. It was previously passion for my club, and the SANFL, that drove me to spend time and money at the club. Like many, I now feel blasé about attending games.
You're obviously a passionate supporter of both the Power and the Magpies, the Power's reserve side in the SANFL. You're perfectly entitled to have your own views on the introduction of the reserves teams, or not to have any views at all on it.
However, there's no reason why you would understand the passion of others, and your 'good riddance' mentality shows that you have failed to grasp how important the integrity, sovereignty, and soul of the competition are to other people on this forum...
Competitions SANFL Official Site | Country Footy SA | Southern Football League | VFL Footy
Club Forums Snouts Louts | The Roost | Redlegs Forum |