West Australian football in crisis
Roar Rookie By Jason Cave, 15 Jul 2008 Jason Cave is a Roar Rookie
- Tagged:
- AFL, Dockers, Eagles, Fremantle, Fremantle Dockers, Richmond, Richmond Tigers, Sydney, West Coast, West Coast Eagles
Related coverage
The poor performance of both Fremantle and West Coast so far this year indicate that West Australian football is in major trouble.
I’ve already expanded at length about the Dockers in another article, so there’s no need for me to say more on Freo.
But West Coast is in the most serious trouble since coming into the AFL in 1987.
You’d never have thought that eighteen months after winning the flag against Sydney, they’re on the bottom end of the ladder.
Remember, too, there are thirteen players from the 2006 premiership on the Eagles list, and most of them played yesterday against Richmond – and put in a shocker.
Not too long ago, there were calls for a review of Victorian football after most of the Victorian-based clubs failed to make the eight.
Now it looks like the same could be said for West Australian football as well.
Love this article? Nominate it for The Roar’s Armchair Sports Writer Award. Or vote now for this week’s nominated articles.
Recommend this story.
- Explore:
- AFL, Dockers, Eagles, Fremantle, Fremantle Dockers, Richmond, Richmond Tigers, Sydney, West Coast, West Coast Eagles
July 15th 2008 @ 10:58am
Kazama said | July 15th 2008 @ 10:58am | Report comment
I strongly disagree. Yes, on the field West Coast and Fremantle are struggling, but off of it they are a hell of a lot safer than some of the other teams in the competition. Crowds still seem healthy too: this weekend West Coast v Richmond attracted 37,085 people, while in comparison Port v North Melbourne only got a paltry 19,851. Good infrastructure and fan support are crucial in order to have a competitive team in the first place, and given that Freo and the Eagles both have this I feel that next season will be much brighter for both sides. Remember, half of 2007′s top 8 (including premiers Geelong and runners up Port Adelaide) missed the finals in 2006. Both sides already have a good core group of players (whether they are currently performing or not), so I feel that with the high draft picks both sides will recieve this season there’s no reason why 2009 shouldn’t be a better year for the two WA teams.
Looking at it from another perspective, once again WA has one of the strongest crop of youngsters about to enter the AFL via this year’s draft. Certainly, WA has the best and largest amount of talented kids outside of Victoria. I hear that WAFL crowds are up as well. Hardly the signs of a state in crisis.
So while things may look grim this season, I fully expect that the WA teams will be able to turn things around next season and the sport will only get stronger in WA if the state continues to produce quality players.
July 15th 2008 @ 12:57pm
Lazza said | July 15th 2008 @ 12:57pm | Report comment
What’s the point of having so many talented kids in WA? They go into a national draft and are told where they must play. No advantage for WA teams?
You don’t have to do anything to improve except finish as low as possible and get those draft picks. If WA fans don’t mind watching rubbish teams then finish bottom for a few years and you’ll get the cream of the crop.
Like all Socialist systems the AFL rewards failure and punishes success. My club, the Crows, have over achieved in the last few years because fans here won’t tolerate failure. Our reward? Without access to quality recruits we’re not going to win a premiership anytime soon.
July 15th 2008 @ 1:03pm
Michael C said | July 15th 2008 @ 1:03pm | Report comment
Lazza -
the lure back home is often strong. It’s still a case that the WA clubs are over represented by WA ‘natives’, likewise the SA clubs by SA ‘natives’. My NOrth Melbourne lost Scott Welsh and Byron Pickett back to SA even after premierships, we lured Peter Bell over after Freo cut him after 1 season, but, the home state lured him back again, – again, after 2 premierships. It MAY just be a matter of time before Daniel Wells heads back – - he’s said all the right things so far, but, you never know.
Point is – - while that’s the case – then, clubs outside of WA are less likely to recruit the WA kid in a toss up between a local and a WA boy. Or – - if recruited, are aware that perhaps they might be looking more towards a mutually benefiicial trade with a WA club in the future.
FOr now – this year in the draft, one might expect, should Freo, WCE and Melb hold the last 3 places, that Freo and WCE would got for Natanui and Rich, and Melb for Jack Watts – - sticking nicely on the home state basis.
July 15th 2008 @ 1:09pm
Redb said | July 15th 2008 @ 1:09pm | Report comment
Lazza,
Double teaming you know. But I would point out that Essendon were in the finals approx 18 years out of 25 years under Sheedy winning 4 Grand Finals, 3 runners up in that time. Not ocne did we finish bottom or get the best shot at early draft chopices. This year we have risen again fof the bottom without top pick draft choices.
Unlike the EPL which favours the 4-5 major teams who have the dollars, the AFL is actually a fairer comp that shares the spoils around.
Redb
July 15th 2008 @ 1:10pm
Michael C said | July 15th 2008 @ 1:10pm | Report comment
Lazza – the socialist system.
My NOrth Melb have dared NOT bottom out, and therefore have also struggled to have early draft picks. The main quality picks come then from trading, and we only got D.Wells because of the dual aspect of W.Carey and Carlton penalties. Note therefore that Adelaide traded to get W.Carey.
I also lamented during the 90s that the AFL system seemed to assume that success would be it’s own reward – but, for a club like North Melb, the ability to translate success (premierships) to lucrative financial pay-day was far lesser than for example a Collingwood. So – - certainly, the ‘socialist system’ – that in part I support – - needed a tweak to allow for some reward other than just a trophy.
Adelaide though, has certain state based advantages – and the WA and SA clubs have seemingly exploited the rookie list far, far better than the Vic clubs. You find ways of gaining a competative advantage. For a while, some Vic clubs (inc Nth Melb) couldn’t even afford to ‘employ’ rookies (and we missed Aaron Davey).
Main surprise so far, the Crows haven’t been able to tailor a package to lure Matthew Pavlich back to Adelaide – - but, then, he’s an example that being ‘forced’ to go somewhere doesn’t necessarily kill off your choice long term – - and, so far, he’s chosen to stay where he was ‘forced’ to go.
July 15th 2008 @ 1:20pm
Millster said | July 15th 2008 @ 1:20pm | Report comment
RedB – I’ve always been curious about that point of view. That is, relating to the “fairer comp that shares the spoils around”.
Is it really fairer that a team that wins doesn’t get some benefit for winning, and isn’t able to accelerate or consolidate their success over a number of seasons? Is it really fairer that a team which is unsuccessful for whatever reason gets a ‘leg up’ by the system and is given the chance of redemption despite its failings, and beyond what it deserves in a merit-based system?
Superficially yes it is cute. And also necessary in a closed franchise competition like the AFL where maintaining internal competitiveness of all clubs is vital to the brand.
But at the most basic of philosophical levels, fairness is about merit – and the right balance of reward for effort and success. It is not about simplistic equality – which is a far more socialist concept which history has shown time and time again to lead to mediocrity.
July 15th 2008 @ 1:22pm
Millster said | July 15th 2008 @ 1:22pm | Report comment
Opps didn’t read back to Lazza’s post before but quite obviously I strongly agree!
July 15th 2008 @ 1:48pm
Lazza said | July 15th 2008 @ 1:48pm | Report comment
“You find ways of gaining a competative advantage”
Exactly, by coming last and getting access to draft picks and talent. Please, don’t tell me teams don’t expolit this by ‘tanking’.
I understand you can’t have an ‘open’ league without promotion/relegation, cup and international competitions like the EPL but do we really need this ‘Socialist’ system.
Why can’t you just have a Salary Cap like the ALeague? That would keep the competition even but give clubs flexibility with recruiting.
The ALeague has a loophole for the big clubs with the Marquee player being outside the Salary Cap. Even then, the two smallest teams made the Grand Final last season? It does work.
July 15th 2008 @ 2:06pm
Redb said | July 15th 2008 @ 2:06pm | Report comment
Millster, Lazza,
There are different systems around the world, the AFL has modelled the NFL system in the States as promotion/regulation system is deemed problematic for a small country with large travel distances. The priority draft picks is an issue and needs to be addressed by the AFL to make it less attractive to finish near the bottom, no doubt. To keep a sporting comp churning over creating differing stronger and weaker teams it is fairer and more competitive IMO for supporters.
Not sure the HAL has got it right and it only has 8 teams at the moment. However with the constant potential for players to be snapped up by overseas clubs its not running as the premier comp for the best players in the land, or else Harry kewell et al would be running around in his prime in the A League. In addition and to be fair to the HAL it is only 3 years old and very conscious of maintaining financial integrity over maximising the potential success of the 16 teams like in the AFL.
When the HAL as 16 teams and some teams are constantly cellar dwellers it will need to look at ways of getting the smaller (perhaps regional) clubs off the canvas and thus viable. It is a fickle world with new franchises, support can come and go with success and failure.
Redb
.
July 15th 2008 @ 2:06pm
Millster said | July 15th 2008 @ 2:06pm | Report comment
Ah Lazza – don’t get me started on salary caps. My pet hate, and equally socialist in my eyes!
A few months back I wrote a piece on the liberalising of the A-League salary cap by adopting many of the structures used by the American NBA in their ‘soft cap’ approach. I think they might be equally valid for any sport. Its the only way in which I can see the moderating impact of salary caps (required for many clubs) have the desired effect without squashing motivations for on-field excellence and long-term player development and retention, and without over-distorting a merit-based system.
I don’t now how to link it here but it may be worth your while to read as it was certainly a really interesting piece of research for me to do / write.