by Lame Choice » Thu May 19, 2016 9:40 pm
by heater31 » Thu May 19, 2016 9:56 pm
Lame Choice wrote:Nice two page spread in the SACA stumps mag on AUCC. Great PR for the club on the back of SACA media. No mention of the back room deals with Council and SACA about shafting western suburbs with new grounds to effectively force mergers to make it fit. The stench is getting stronger.
by Lame Choice » Thu May 19, 2016 10:09 pm
heater31 wrote:Lame Choice wrote:Nice two page spread in the SACA stumps mag on AUCC. Great PR for the club on the back of SACA media. No mention of the back room deals with Council and SACA about shafting western suburbs with new grounds to effectively force mergers to make it fit. The stench is getting stronger.
I guess we will find out if your allegation is correct on November 30.....
by Tony Clifton » Thu May 19, 2016 11:34 pm
Lame Choice wrote:Nice two page spread in the SACA stumps mag on AUCC. Great PR for the club on the back of SACA media. No mention of the back room deals with Council and SACA about shafting western suburbs with new grounds to effectively force mergers to make it fit. The stench is getting stronger.
by Tony Clifton » Thu May 19, 2016 11:35 pm
heater31 wrote:Lame Choice wrote:Nice two page spread in the SACA stumps mag on AUCC. Great PR for the club on the back of SACA media. No mention of the back room deals with Council and SACA about shafting western suburbs with new grounds to effectively force mergers to make it fit. The stench is getting stronger.
I guess we will find out if your allegation is correct on November 30.....
by Eagles2014 » Thu May 19, 2016 11:36 pm
heater31 wrote:Lame Choice wrote:Nice two page spread in the SACA stumps mag on AUCC. Great PR for the club on the back of SACA media. No mention of the back room deals with Council and SACA about shafting western suburbs with new grounds to effectively force mergers to make it fit. The stench is getting stronger.
I guess we will find out if your allegation is correct on November 30.....
by oyster » Thu May 19, 2016 11:45 pm
Eagles2014 wrote:heater31 wrote:Lame Choice wrote:Nice two page spread in the SACA stumps mag on AUCC. Great PR for the club on the back of SACA media. No mention of the back room deals with Council and SACA about shafting western suburbs with new grounds to effectively force mergers to make it fit. The stench is getting stronger.
I guess we will find out if your allegation is correct on November 30.....
Seeing the Parliamentry Enquiry results are due Nov 30, can SACA please do the right thing for once and tell both Clubs ASAP that they will be in the comp for next year at least, so the players know where they are playing and can get on with planning for this season. Think that's the least they can do!
by bulldogproud2 » Thu May 19, 2016 11:48 pm
heater31 wrote:How does it not concern Adelaide? You lot have continually slandered the Club and insinuated that they received preferential treatment from a SACA Staff member. Far as I can see it does concern ACC........ Our club accreditation is far from perfect but it does score very well after sailing pretty close to the wind for a couple of years things are on the improve and with a bit of luck perhaps the successes of the early 2000's will return unlike your flash in the pan success 1 time in the last 50 seasons.
Mean while you wonder why your club is getting singled out? How about stop poaching other club's juniors to prop up your First Grade Team and heck while you are at it get a full compliment of junior sides as it stands presently as all the other clubs currently fulfill......
by heater31 » Thu May 19, 2016 11:48 pm
Tony Clifton wrote:Lame Choice wrote:Nice two page spread in the SACA stumps mag on AUCC. Great PR for the club on the back of SACA media. No mention of the back room deals with Council and SACA about shafting western suburbs with new grounds to effectively force mergers to make it fit. The stench is getting stronger.
Is it really the Port Adelaide team in the photo?
by C Horse » Fri May 20, 2016 8:26 am
by Tony Clifton » Fri May 20, 2016 8:52 am
by bulldogproud2 » Fri May 20, 2016 10:21 am
C Horse wrote:Before I start here, this is not meant to stir up sh*t, nor is it an attack on the WT people that post on these boards.
Having read that SACA 'article' (press release, whatever it is) it's pretty clear to me what is going to happen.
According to SACA, merger has been on West Torrens radar since Nov. 2014. (believe what you will)
All along this process, West Torrens have consistently advised that they would be willing to consider a merger (true).
Merger talks were held between Woodville & West Torrens (true) but did not progress.
Clubs presented their case on 29 Feb. Following this they had to state their formal position to SACA by a date in March.
Woodville - advised they wanted to stand alone (true). They are.
Port - advised they wanted to stand alone (true).
West Torrens - advised they would consider a merger (true).
Given WT have led with merger essentially the whole time, how can they now make so much noise about having to merge??
For those who have seen the series Little Britain, the Eagles are doing their best "only gay in the village" impersonation.
The last official word from SACA to WT and PA (as I understand it) is that they had to agree to merge for the 2017/18 season (that's the one after next) by June 6 (or 8?) or one of them would be removed from the First Grade competition for 2016/17 (not the entire SACA comp, just the Men's First Grade).
A parliamentary enquiry has been established to look into SACA's conduct over the whole process.
There has been mention of racism on these boards.
I sincerely hope that "eligible male" isn't the "racist" term referred to - because that's got no legs.
Note that the establishment of a parliamentary enquiry does not preclude SACA from continuing on.
Prediction time.
Not saying this is fair, or just, or whatever - but I am saying this is what I think will happen.
June 6 - WT & PA do not come to an agreement to merge for 2017/18 (WT at least believing that the parliamentary enquiry will save them??)
June - SACA announce that WT will not be invited to field a team in the First Grade comp for 2016/17. They can field 2nd,3rd,4th grade men, women's and juniors as before.
November 30 (post season start) - parliamentary enquiry finds no wrongdoing by SACA. Too little too late I'm afraid.
SACA (surprisingly) haven't fired any blanks yet and I can't see them doing so from here. Their press release certainly puts their cards on the table and I don't think they fear the enquiry anywhere near as much as some people on here think.
For West Torrens, unfortunately - their management and approach to this whole situation has been flawed from the start. While Port Adelaide were loud in not wanting to merge, Torrens were not - in fact, created the impression around the place that they were "desperate" to merge.
Let's see what happens but I think those who are of the opinion that the parliamentary enquiry will stop SACA in it's tracks are sadly misled.
by heater31 » Fri May 20, 2016 10:39 am
by Eagles2014 » Fri May 20, 2016 7:30 pm
by Tony Clifton » Fri May 20, 2016 8:17 pm
by daysofourlives » Fri May 20, 2016 11:15 pm
by heater31 » Fri May 20, 2016 11:18 pm
daysofourlives wrote:So what happens if as expected SACA push on and there is no merger happening and WT find themselves in B Grade what will be the point of the parliamentary enquiry? I dare say there is no coming back from there given all their A Graders will move on. Is that a risk WT are prepared to take?
by oyster » Fri May 20, 2016 11:20 pm
daysofourlives wrote:So what happens if as expected SACA push on and there is no merger happening and WT find themselves in B Grade what will be the point of the parliamentary enquiry? I dare say there is no coming back from there given all their A Graders will move on. Is that a risk WT are prepared to take?
by Aerie » Sat May 21, 2016 9:46 am
by oldeagle » Sat May 21, 2016 4:37 pm
Competitions SANFL Official Site | Country Footy SA | Southern Football League | VFL Footy
Club Forums Snouts Louts | The Roost | Redlegs Forum |