Hound,
A big difference was that Adelaide and Glenelg did not need to have a vocal issue on the position. None of the other clubs (Sturt, Kensington, TTG etc.) decided to get involved with an issue that only personally involved two clubs: Port Adelaide and West Torrens. The fact that Adelaide and Glenelg took a position that they wanted to see two of their brethren clubs kicked out of the competition is a disgrace.
What will be hypocritical will be if the Glenelg's or Adelaide's boards were to squeal if their club's position was ever threatened by SACA policy, something that now may have become a possibility due to Glenelg's financial position, according to certain members of the SACA hierarchy unfortunately. If this was ever to happen, you would find that West Torrens and Port Adelaide would do everything they could to help Glenelg survive. This is what the actions of Glenelg and Adelaide should have been, not the opposite that actually happened.
BP2
Please read the GDCC, WTDCC, Pt ACC and ACC annual reports and then tell me who is struggling financially out of the 4 clubs
, The GFC financial position has no bearing on the GDCC financial position. I didn't see ACC's email to members but GDCC's got plastered on this forum
and all it said was that they felt they as a club could survive as a stand alone club and that a parliamentary inquiry was not beneficial and would have no impact on SACA's decision. Like I have said before I didn't envy the positions the WT and Pt A volunteers were put under, hopefully they had a celebratory drink
Anyway now that a decision has been made, I am hearing ET are splashing the $$ at recruits