Re: Points System Is Crucifying Country Footy

Rough · Post by **Rough** » Sat Jul 04, 2015 2:35 pm

Pretty sure it drawing a long bow to say that Callington over recruited and over paid their group and thus caused their demise. FMD they must have recruited poorly.
Also a bit harsh for some blokes to consistently refer to their recruits as over paid mercenaries. It is a different time we live in and plenty of people get a lot out of watching and playing along side really talented footballers, myself included. (not the playing part, too fat and old for that)

cracka · Post by **cracka** » Sat Jul 04, 2015 5:55 pm

Ye Olde Place Kick wrote:
cracka wrote:
Mr Beefy wrote:Charge entry fees? So SAAFL clubs have more cash, causing country clubs to pay even more for their recruits?

Or causing country clubs to just use locals & NOT pay anything for recruits, there's a radical idea. Country clubs have been recruiting & overpaying players for 40 years so the blame for rising costs cant all be put on the APPS.
Maybe instead of APPS, clubs should have a local player scheme (LPS) where they have to use 75% (16 of 21 players) local, to qualify a player either has to have played junior footy at a club or live in the area, I know some clubs can offer work & accommodation as part of a package & rort the system.

Have thought the same re clubs using locals with a limit of 3/4 imports. I know this would be impossible for most clubs but here's a idea Cracka. Perhaps the HFL and the Southern League could get together and form an Independent league with some of their smaller clubs, where there was a limit on imports. Yes the standard wouldn't be as high but it would allow them to play within their means, be more competitive and allow towns to keep their club and not amalgamate just to keep up with far bigger population based clubs.

Yeah HFL & SFL are very similar leagues so some form of competition between us could be good, I've thought of having 3 divisions between the leagues, travel would be the biggest issue. That's probably another topic.
Regarding this topic, I just think there has to be some form of regulation or rule that prevents open slather recruiting of players & spending of dollars. So until a better solution than APPS can be thought of (which I haven't seen on here), I think we should stick with it, maybe with some tinkering.

shoe boy · Post by **shoe boy** » Wed Jul 08, 2015 8:07 am

THE "BOYS CLUB" or some would say SACFL must be taking the piss ! Reg 31 total player payments is the most disturbing legislation I have ever seen and am sure ALL GRASS ROOTS football clubs must fight this blatant abuse of power for no reason than to prop up an ailing competition.

Who elects the BOYS CLUB ?
Who did we have before SACFL?
What salary are these elected ? board members on ?
Who do they answer to? SAAFL? SANFL? AFL?
Is this board transparent ?

Mr Beefy · Post by **Mr Beefy** » Wed Jul 08, 2015 8:50 am

shoe boy wrote:THE "BOYS CLUB" or some would say SACFL must be taking the piss ! Reg 31 total player payments is the most disturbing legislation I have ever seen and am sure ALL GRASS ROOTS football clubs must fight this blatant abuse of power for no reason than to prop up an ailing competition.

Who elects the BOYS CLUB ?
Who did we have before SACFL?
What salary are these elected ? board members on ?
Who do they answer to? SAAFL? SANFL? AFL?
Is this board transparent ?

http://www.sacommunityfootball.com.au/fileadmin/user_upload/Forms/SACFL_Constitution_7_March_2014.pdf

RooShootOhh · Post by **RooShootOhh** » Wed Jul 08, 2015 11:49 am

Curious to know, with the new Salary Cap and Player Payment caps....

1- On the assumption all payments are declared to the ATO
2- Is the cap on Individual Player Payments ($500 unless marquee player of $1000) a restriction of trade?

Now keep in mind I agree with what they are trying to achieve in reducing player payments etc, I support a salary cap being in place (no matter how hard it will be to Police), but no matter whether I agree with it, I wonder if it can be done legally???

If a club are only allowed to spend $3k per week, But only have 9 points, that 1x $1000 2 x $500 = $2k spend
Yet the next club have 15 Points, thats 1 x $1000 4 x $500 = $3k

Why should a club, who has been more successful (judging by allocated points) not allowed to spend the allocated budget??? Why can they not pay their 3 players $1k each, it still sits inside their weekly $3k allowance???

Clearly the model has been based on the Ammo's and their every club gets 15 points rule, it is no coincidence the maths work out perfectly to fit their model, and again, country footy has been neglected by pathetic management.

Mr Beefy · Post by **Mr Beefy** » Wed Jul 08, 2015 11:58 am

You're assuming that only players worth 3 points get paid? A "marquee" player might be worth 4 points, or might be worth less points because they have played at club for a number of years.

cracka · Post by **cracka** » Wed Jul 08, 2015 12:02 pm

RooShootOhh wrote:Curious to know, with the new Salary Cap and Player Payment caps....

1- On the assumption all payments are declared to the ATO
2- Is the cap on Individual Player Payments ($500 unless marquee player of $1000) a restriction of trade?

Now keep in mind I agree with what they are trying to achieve in reducing player payments etc, I support a salary cap being in place (no matter how hard it will be to Police), but no matter whether I agree with it, I wonder if it can be done legally???

If a club are only allowed to spend $3k per week, But only have 9 points, that 1x $1000 2 x $500 = $2k spend
Yet the next club have 15 Points, thats 1 x $1000 4 x $500 = $3k

Why should a club, who has been more successful (judging by allocated points) not allowed to spend the allocated budget??? Why can they not pay their 3 players $1k each, it still sits inside their weekly $3k allowance???

Clearly the model has been based on the Ammo's and their every club gets 15 points rule, it is no coincidence the maths work out perfectly to fit their model, and again, country footy has been neglected by pathetic management.

That's assuming they don't already have any points players.

shoe boy · Post by **shoe boy** » Wed Jul 08, 2015 12:17 pm

Mr Beefy wrote:You're assuming that only players worth 3 points get paid? A "marquee" player might be worth 4 points, or might be worth less points because they have played at club for a number of years.

Mr Beefy when is your next board meeting with the SACFB ?

Mr Beefy · Post by **Mr Beefy** » Wed Jul 08, 2015 1:00 pm

shoe boy wrote:
Mr Beefy wrote:You're assuming that only players worth 3 points get paid? A "marquee" player might be worth 4 points, or might be worth less points because they have played at club for a number of years.

Mr Beefy when is your next board meeting with the SACFB ?

Who?

shoe boy · Post by **shoe boy** » Wed Jul 08, 2015 2:06 pm

Mr Beefy wrote:
shoe boy wrote:
Mr Beefy wrote:You're assuming that only players worth 3 points get paid? A "marquee" player might be worth 4 points, or might be worth less points because they have played at club for a number of years.

Mr Beefy when is your next board meeting with the SACFB ?

Who?

Sorry Bully , THE BOYS CLUB or some know them as THE SOUTH AUSTRALIAN COMMUNITY =))

FOOTBALL LEAGUE .

daysofourlives · Post by **daysofourlives** » Wed Jul 08, 2015 6:57 pm

RooShootOhh wrote:Curious to know, with the new Salary Cap and Player Payment caps....

1- On the assumption all payments are declared to the ATO
2- Is the cap on Individual Player Payments ($500 unless marquee player of $1000) a restriction of trade?

Now keep in mind I agree with what they are trying to achieve in reducing player payments etc, I support a salary cap being in place (no matter how hard it will be to Police), but no matter whether I agree with it, I wonder if it can be done legally???

If a club are only allowed to spend $3k per week, But only have 9 points, that 1x $1000 2 x $500 = $2k spend
Yet the next club have 15 Points, thats 1 x $1000 4 x $500 = $3k

Why should a club, who has been more successful (judging by allocated points) not allowed to spend the allocated budget??? Why can they not pay their 3 players $1k each, it still sits inside their weekly $3k allowance???

Clearly the model has been based on the Ammo's and their every club gets 15 points rule, it is no coincidence the maths work out perfectly to fit their model, and again, country footy has been neglected by pathetic management.

Clearly everything is based on consultation with the SAAFL and their needs.
It is the amateur league crucifying country footy because they're a bunch of amateur footy clubs who are years behind the professionalism of the country clubs.
There is no loyalty in the amateur league forcing them to pay almost 100% of their playing lists meaning that they cant compete at the top end for gun players.

Jim05 · Post by **Jim05** » Wed Jul 08, 2015 7:14 pm

daysofourlives wrote:
RooShootOhh wrote:Curious to know, with the new Salary Cap and Player Payment caps....

1- On the assumption all payments are declared to the ATO
2- Is the cap on Individual Player Payments ($500 unless marquee player of $1000) a restriction of trade?

Now keep in mind I agree with what they are trying to achieve in reducing player payments etc, I support a salary cap being in place (no matter how hard it will be to Police), but no matter whether I agree with it, I wonder if it can be done legally???

If a club are only allowed to spend $3k per week, But only have 9 points, that 1x $1000 2 x $500 = $2k spend
Yet the next club have 15 Points, thats 1 x $1000 4 x $500 = $3k

Why should a club, who has been more successful (judging by allocated points) not allowed to spend the allocated budget??? Why can they not pay their 3 players $1k each, it still sits inside their weekly $3k allowance???

Clearly the model has been based on the Ammo's and their every club gets 15 points rule, it is no coincidence the maths work out perfectly to fit their model, and again, country footy has been neglected by pathetic management.

Clearly everything is based on consultation with the SAAFL and their needs.
It is the amateur league crucifying country footy because they're a bunch of amateur footy clubs who are years behind the professionalism of the country clubs.
There is no loyalty in the amateur league forcing them to pay almost 100% of their playing lists meaning that they cant compete at the top end for gun players.

Hit the nail on the head Daisy.

Bag & Sledge · Post by **Bag & Sledge** » Thu Jul 09, 2015 1:47 pm

daysofourlives wrote:
RooShootOhh wrote:Curious to know, with the new Salary Cap and Player Payment caps....

1- On the assumption all payments are declared to the ATO
2- Is the cap on Individual Player Payments ($500 unless marquee player of $1000) a restriction of trade?

Now keep in mind I agree with what they are trying to achieve in reducing player payments etc, I support a salary cap being in place (no matter how hard it will be to Police), but no matter whether I agree with it, I wonder if it can be done legally???

If a club are only allowed to spend $3k per week, But only have 9 points, that 1x $1000 2 x $500 = $2k spend
Yet the next club have 15 Points, thats 1 x $1000 4 x $500 = $3k

Why should a club, who has been more successful (judging by allocated points) not allowed to spend the allocated budget??? Why can they not pay their 3 players $1k each, it still sits inside their weekly $3k allowance???

Clearly the model has been based on the Ammo's and their every club gets 15 points rule, it is no coincidence the maths work out perfectly to fit their model, and again, country footy has been neglected by pathetic management.

Clearly everything is based on consultation with the SAAFL and their needs.
It is the amateur league crucifying country footy because they're a bunch of amateur footy clubs who are years behind the professionalism of the country clubs.
There is no loyalty in the amateur league forcing them to pay almost 100% of their playing lists meaning that they cant compete at the top end for gun players.

Well said Days!!
The Points system and Salary Cap along with the rules of the Salary Cap has just created a huge extra workload for someone at a club!!
I wonder if the Community Footy League will send some funds to the country clubs to pay the treasurers, secretaries and footy directors for the extra work they have now created for country clubs?

sideview · Post by **sideview** » Thu Jul 09, 2015 1:56 pm

Staff

SANFL 30 staff + 10 teams

CFL - 1.5 staff ( Kym Ireland resigned believe they have replacement but not started) receptionist and I believe Leanne Grantham has resigned also so 1.5 staff for 260 clubs.

Who's going to monitor 260 clubs?

Mythical Creature · Post by **Mythical Creature** » Thu Jul 09, 2015 2:16 pm

Bag & Sledge wrote:
daysofourlives wrote:
RooShootOhh wrote:Curious to know, with the new Salary Cap and Player Payment caps....

1- On the assumption all payments are declared to the ATO
2- Is the cap on Individual Player Payments ($500 unless marquee player of $1000) a restriction of trade?

Now keep in mind I agree with what they are trying to achieve in reducing player payments etc, I support a salary cap being in place (no matter how hard it will be to Police), but no matter whether I agree with it, I wonder if it can be done legally???

If a club are only allowed to spend $3k per week, But only have 9 points, that 1x $1000 2 x $500 = $2k spend
Yet the next club have 15 Points, thats 1 x $1000 4 x $500 = $3k

Why should a club, who has been more successful (judging by allocated points) not allowed to spend the allocated budget??? Why can they not pay their 3 players $1k each, it still sits inside their weekly $3k allowance???

Clearly the model has been based on the Ammo's and their every club gets 15 points rule, it is no coincidence the maths work out perfectly to fit their model, and again, country footy has been neglected by pathetic management.

Clearly everything is based on consultation with the SAAFL and their needs.
It is the amateur league crucifying country footy because they're a bunch of amateur footy clubs who are years behind the professionalism of the country clubs.
There is no loyalty in the amateur league forcing them to pay almost 100% of their playing lists meaning that they cant compete at the top end for gun players.

Well said Days!!
The Points system and Salary Cap along with the rules of the Salary Cap has just created a huge extra workload for someone at a club!!
I wonder if the Community Footy League will send some funds to the country clubs to pay the treasurers, secretaries and footy directors for the extra work they have now created for country clubs?

Don't be bloody stupid :lol:

. We will need to send them extra funds to pay for the "zone coordinator" to monitor everyones cap, on top of burdening another volunteer at club level with more paperwork! :roll:

human_torpedo · Post by **human_torpedo** » Thu Jul 09, 2015 4:30 pm

Left field thought/suggestion, or it may not be left field, ill soon find out..

How about instead of points/salary cap, the league (pending distance from Adelaide and local population numbers) allocate recruit structure by category.. This is only spit balling ideas and open for interpretation to suit different leagues

Eg..
Cat A $500- $1000
Cat B $250- $500
Cat C $100 - $250
Cat D $0 - $100
Cat E - Locals (played juniors, no restrictions on payments, but still cant be more than $1000)

Say the standard model clubs would get 2 Cat A, 3 Cat B, 3 Cat C players in a side each week. No restriction on Cat D/E players..

Clubs can apply for extra allowances with category players if they miss finals for 2 years straight for example.. Leagues discretion as to how many of what category they allocate, generally an extra cat A would be the target..

It was just an idea, always will be open for breaching but a clear model that seems fairer to a clubs needs may be less appealing to rort.. Just a thought so please be gentle if you disagree

qwerty · Post by **qwerty** » Fri Jul 10, 2015 9:13 am

So the investigation/report found some clubs had been complaing that there playing budgets are unsustainable etc - How about then if you can't afford it don't pay the money and be selective with your recruiting.

The root of this problem I am confident in saying is the points system, if it didn't exist then player payments would never have escalated to the levels they have. Sure some clubs are still going to spend some money and certain players are still going to earn big $ but there would be a direct correlation with the introduction of the points system and the escalation of player payments, which has been discussed on numerous threads on this site.

The stuff they are talking about in relation to the salary cap just places more burden on local clubs and volunteers with the threat of fines, loss of points ATO investigations, give me a break who the hell do they think they are, hope all clubs have some accountants willing to chip in sometime.

Dogwatcher · Post by **Dogwatcher** » Fri Jul 10, 2015 11:01 am

http://www.bunyippress.com.au/does-the-cap-fit/

Bag & Sledge · Post by **Bag & Sledge** » Fri Jul 10, 2015 11:10 am

Player Points System and a Salary Cap with plenty of ridiculous guidelines will drive Country Associations to leave the Community Football League and go Independent.
Just one of the ridiculous rules in this new Salary Cap is that the Community Football can dictate how much a club can hand out in after match Club Player Awards... Give me a break who do they think they are??!!
Will they next be dictating how many beers or food you are allowed to sell or how much money you can take over the bars and canteens on game day?

cracka · Post by **cracka** » Fri Jul 10, 2015 12:08 pm

Bag & Sledge wrote:Player Points System and a Salary Cap with plenty of ridiculous guidelines will drive Country Associations to leave the Community Football League and go Independent.

Well that's what most forum users involved in country leagues want, isn't it? (which I often find is different to what their actual clubs want)