is the SANFL dying a slow death ?

with the disrespectful way the Power are changing players to ''ONE CLUB'' i feel it is only a matter of time before this great competition we all love will perish into nothing more than a ''feeder'' with winning not the main agenda, UNLESS A STOP IS PUT TO THIS DICTATORSHIP OUR LEAGUE IS DOOMED


so in your opinion is the SANFL dying a slow death ?

The SANFL has already moved a long way down the path of being a feeder competition as it is. I refer back to a previous topic http://www.talkingfootysa.com/t1322-the-state-of-football . I would like to know exactly what the SANFLs "ensuring the future of football in South Australia" means exactly? Once the AFL clubs own their licenses then wouldn't the 9 SANFL clubs form the sole level of the SANFL governing bodys responsibility?

I take a different view on this. By the end of the year the SANFL should have made a decision on where AFL players will be playing in the SANFL if at all. I cant see them allowing the AFL reserves to play in the league comp as the SANFL will lose legitimacy and alienate many SANFL supporters a lot of who will walk and be lost to Aussie Rules forever. If they decide to allow them to play in the reserve comp or decide no AFL players at any level in the SANFL then the Magpies unfortunately will no longer be a league side and we will go to an 8 team competition. I cant see Port maintaining a league and a reserve side any more. As far as I'm concerned Port can stack the Magpies this year with AFL players (they are after all their players) but it will be a moot point next season.

The SANFL has resembled a feeder competition since 1991.

Mannyredleg wrote:If they decide to allow them to play in the reserve comp

I dont understand why the SANFL would have an obligation to facilitate either of the local AFL clubs in any of their competitions or grades? If Port and Crows own their own licenses then wouldnt the responsibility to aid them fall to their parent body which would then be the AFL?

SANFL
1877 BC
1990 BC

B...efore
C...rows

Footy Follower is spot on
Unfortunately the competition as a product has progressively got worse ever since 1990

Scrappy wrote:SANFL
1877 BC
1990 BC

B...efore
C...rows

Footy Follower is spot on
Unfortunately the competition as a product has progressively got worse ever since 1990

On what I have read there is actually 4 distinct eras of SA footy

1877-1897 - Pre Electorate SAFA
1897-1990 - Electorate SAFA and then from 1907 SANFL
1991-1996 - Adelaide Crows and SANFL
1997-current day Adelade Crows, Port Adelaide (the Power) and SANFL

I wonder what the landscape would look like if Port gained entry to the AFL in 1990.

Scrunch wrote:

Mannyredleg wrote:If they decide to allow them to play in the reserve comp

I dont understand why the SANFL would have an obligation to facilitate either of the local AFL clubs in any of their competitions or grades? If Port and Crows own their own licenses then wouldnt the responsibility to aid them fall to their parent body which would then be the AFL?

I agree with this also, we owe them nothing. From next season let them take all of there players and go play elsewhere and not in the SANFL, end of problem.

This is an issue I consider and grappple with almost daily and my answer lies in two parts.

- A slow decline (it won't die) is is the most likely occurance if you look at the growing nationalisation / & globilisation of sports coverage and the condition of other state sporting leagues. This before you even get into SA specific issues.



- It doesn't have to be that way. Adapt, Improvise & Overcome. The world is full of niche players that thrive in the same market as the big boys because they offer something different that people want.

As an example ie the global decline in newspapers which translated to major structure changes at News Ltd which in turn has meant less SANFL coverage in The Advertiser in recent years (loss of Monday Morning Centreman and game by game previews being prime examples). However this year the league (Zac Milbank) and clubs are much more proactive with their own content and communications and are filling that content hole.

I alway suggest that the SANFL should look at College Sports and Minor League Baseball in the US to see plentiful examples of how a lower level of sport can still attract great community support if the package is right.

PhilH wrote:This is an issue I consider and grappple with almost daily and my answer lies in two parts.

- A slow decline (it won't die) is is the most likely occurance if you look at the growing nationalisation / & globilisation of sports coverage and the condition of other state sporting leagues. This before you even get into SA specific issues.



- It doesn't have to be that way. Adapt, Improvise & Overcome. The world is full of niche players that thrive in the same market as the big boys because they offer something different that people want.

As an example ie the global decline in newspapers which translated to major structure changes at News Ltd which in turn has meant less SANFL coverage in The Advertiser in recent years (loss of Monday Morning Centreman and game by game previews being prime examples). However this year the league (Zac Milbank) and clubs are much more proactive with their own content and communications and are filling that content hole.

I alway suggest that the SANFL should look at College Sports and Minor League Baseball in the US to see plentiful examples of how a lower level of sport can still attract great community support if the package is right.

Some interesting points here and some valid ones. However I am not sure the SANFL are plugging holes. They could do it a lot better .

The other issue I see is the person currently running the AFL seems content with destroying the game at levels below the AFL. Very very foolish.

When there are problems in organisations you look at the top. I think the same for sport.

waddayamean wrote:

PhilH wrote:This is an issue I consider and grappple with almost daily and my answer lies in two parts.

- A slow decline (it won't die) is is the most likely occurance if you look at the growing nationalisation / & globilisation of sports coverage and the condition of other state sporting leagues. This before you even get into SA specific issues.



- It doesn't have to be that way. Adapt, Improvise & Overcome. The world is full of niche players that thrive in the same market as the big boys because they offer something different that people want.

As an example ie the global decline in newspapers which translated to major structure changes at News Ltd which in turn has meant less SANFL coverage in The Advertiser in recent years (loss of Monday Morning Centreman and game by game previews being prime examples). However this year the league (Zac Milbank) and clubs are much more proactive with their own content and communications and are filling that content hole.

I alway suggest that the SANFL should look at College Sports and Minor League Baseball in the US to see plentiful examples of how a lower level of sport can still attract great community support if the package is right.

Some interesting points here and some valid ones. However I am not sure the SANFL are plugging holes. They could do it a lot better .

The other issue I see is the person currently running the AFL seems content with destroying the game at levels below the AFL. Very very foolish.

When there are problems in organisations you look at the top. I think the same for sport.

every time i've heard Andrew Demetriou on Adelaide radio & he's been asked he's said we need a strong SANFL, WAFL & VFL for the future of football both at AFL level & those levels below

i never know whether to believe him or not, sometimes i feel like writing a letter & ask questions but think the secretary would read & then bin it so i don't bother

PhilH wrote:This is an issue I consider and grappple with almost daily and my answer lies in two parts.

- A slow decline (it won't die) is is the most likely occurance if you look at the growing nationalisation / & globilisation of sports coverage and the condition of other state sporting leagues. This before you even get into SA specific issues.



- It doesn't have to be that way. Adapt, Improvise & Overcome. The world is full of niche players that thrive in the same market as the big boys because they offer something different that people want.

As an example ie the global decline in newspapers which translated to major structure changes at News Ltd which in turn has meant less SANFL coverage in The Advertiser in recent years (loss of Monday Morning Centreman and game by game previews being prime examples). However this year the league (Zac Milbank) and clubs are much more proactive with their own content and communications and are filling that content hole.

I alway suggest that the SANFL should look at College Sports and Minor League Baseball in the US to see plentiful examples of how a lower level of sport can still attract great community support if the package is right.

A. The SANFL could better protect their league and their members. Although perhaps the license issue could be sorted prior to that happening.
B. the clubs being more media proactive with its members is great but how does that target new audiences?
c. Are the College sports affiliated in some respect with the highest level?

I don't believe those of us who care about the SANFL have delusions of grandeur that it could rival the AFL. But what we need to find and fight for is an acceptable slice of the pie.

The 3 levels of footy (and probably all similar codes) need to work together toward a shared vision and model. What we have at the moment is probably the best of a bad lot of options.

There are good points in all of these posts above and many of us are singing (generally) from the same song sheet I think.

It is annoying that people like our esteemed AFL CEO offer platitudes and an arrogant attitude that we are all numbats unable to understand the mechanisms of it all.

If the AFL had wanted to truly bringing the levels of footy together in aiming toward a common objective, I am sure they could have facilitated that long before now.

But the AFL management have been too focussed on their expansionist empire aspirations to pay proper attention to the dominions already within the empire. A bit akin to Richard I (aka Lionheart) maybe?

bayman wrote:with the disrespectful way the Power are changing players to ''ONE CLUB'' i feel it is only a matter of time before this great competition we all love will perish into nothing more than a ''feeder'' with winning not the main agenda, UNLESS A STOP IS PUT TO THIS DICTATORSHIP OUR LEAGUE IS DOOMED
so in your opinion is the SANFL dying a slow death ?

Dictatorship? Bloody hell bayman, ring the SANFL and ask why this is happening. Your endless grizzles on here are just pointless.

Dictatorship :

A dictatorship is defined as an autocratic form of government in which the government is ruled by an individual: a dictator. It has three possible meanings:

A Roman dictator was the incumbent of a political office of legislate of the Roman Republic. Roman dictators were allocated absolute power during times of emergency. Their power was originally neither arbitrary nor unaccountable, being subject to law and requiring retrospective justification. There were no such dictatorships after the beginning of the 2nd century BC, and later dictators such as Sulla and the Roman Emperors exercised power much more personally and arbitrarily.
A government controlled by one person, or a small group of people. In this form of government the power rests entirely on the person or group of people, and can be obtained by force or by inheritance. The dictator(s) may also take away much of its peoples' freedom.
In contemporary usage, dictatorship refers to an autocratic form of absolute rule by leadership unrestricted by law, constitutions, or other social and political factors within the state.

Booney wrote:

bayman wrote:with the disrespectful way the Power are changing players to ''ONE CLUB'' i feel it is only a matter of time before this great competition we all love will perish into nothing more than a ''feeder'' with winning not the main agenda, UNLESS A STOP IS PUT TO THIS DICTATORSHIP OUR LEAGUE IS DOOMED
so in your opinion is the SANFL dying a slow death ?

Dictatorship? Bloody hell bayman, ring the SANFL and ask why this is happening. Your endless grizzles on here are just pointless.

Dictatorship :

A dictatorship is defined as an autocratic form of government in which the government is ruled by an individual: a dictator. It has three possible meanings:

A Roman dictator was the incumbent of a political office of legislate of the Roman Republic. Roman dictators were allocated absolute power during times of emergency. Their power was originally neither arbitrary nor unaccountable, being subject to law and requiring retrospective justification. There were no such dictatorships after the beginning of the 2nd century BC, and later dictators such as Sulla and the Roman Emperors exercised power much more personally and arbitrarily.
A government controlled by one person, or a small group of people. In this form of government the power rests entirely on the person or group of people, and can be obtained by force or by inheritance. The dictator(s) may also take away much of its peoples' freedom.
In contemporary usage, dictatorship refers to an autocratic form of absolute rule by leadership unrestricted by law, constitutions, or other social and political factors within the state.

as they say ''the truth hurts'' not grizzling just saying it as i see it

have you done your 1990 homework yet ? i bet no you haven't

I'm fully aware of what unfolded in 1990. To call what is happening now a "dictatorship" is just completely unfounded.

SANFL - 8268 2088

( I trust you wont be supporting McKernan tomorrow? )

Booney, I'd be really interested if you ever wrote something about what it's like to be a passionate Magpies supporter ATM and what effect and doubts, if any, the current changes are having.

Would be a good read, I'd say.

I'll "pen" something over the weekend mate.

Thanks, I'll look forward to it.