The Adelaide Crows have announced that they will absolutely have a reserves team next year, but it will not be in the SANFL.
It looks as though the Adelaide Football Club will enter it’s seconds team into the SAAFL (South Australian Amateur Football League). Some would call this a win for the local leagues; a win for football tradition in a David and Goliath struggle.
But how short-sighted and narrow-minded can some people be?
I must admit off the bat that I am somewhat compromised in this argument. I am, since the age of three, a Crows supporter. I grew up with stories of Tony Modra’s high marks and great goal kicking all over the news, and vividly remember walking away from the TV in ’98, stating “That’s it, we’ve lost it,” and then crying my eyes out two quarters later with absolute joy.
However, I am also a proud South Australian. I’m a North Adelaide Roosters fan, which still pains my Dad who’s a Sturt man, and annoys my Grandad who’s a Woodville-West Torrens fan. And as such, I am immensely proud of having such a strong league right here in SA, where great players like Farmer, Robran, Ebert and Cornes made their names.
But I am also a realist. And reality bites sometimes, but one should never argue with it. If you ignore the realities of a situation, you are setting yourself up for disaster.
And the reality is the decision made by the Crows to not wait on and trust the result of a vote made by the SANFL clubs and instead make the move to a non-professional league is a bad decision- not for the Crows, who get their wish by having all of their clubs players together and playing regardless of their competition, but for the SANFL.
The Crows officially needed a vote of Yes from 6/8 of the SANFL clubs to succeed in their bid to enter a team (the Port Adelaide Magpies not being privy to such a vote due to their merger with the Port Adelaide Power), but announced that they would not imposition any club by accepting anything other than a unanimous bid.
With news coming through that three clubs have declared their opposition to the vote (Central Districts, Norwood, and WWT Eagles), the Crows have taken the decision making away from the SANFL.
For those of you celebrating a win for tradition, let me give you some reasons why this is a very bad thing.
Firstly, the financials.
The Crows reserves team would have played every game as the away team, and declared they would not make any money from any game played, essentially giving the clubs a twice a year free game. They would also guarantee a gift to each club of roughly $35k a year for 15 years. Struggling clubs like Sturt could really use that kind of cash!
The reserves team would also not be branded as the Crows, but instead have a new identity, with a unique Guernsey and sponsors, which gives greater opportunity for financial gain. New sponsors means greater corporate exposure, and more merchandise provides the opportunity for more money to be made and then donated to the league.
The next big issue for my mind is over players.
It’s understood one of the biggest sticking points for at least one of the ‘No’ camp clubs, Norwood, is the problem of top-up players. These would be players aged 18-22 borrowed from other clubs for an agreed period of time to fill up the inevitable holes that would open in the Reserves Teams list.
That’s understandable, fine. Clubs don’t wont players to leave their clubs and go to an AFL rival. Okay. But their happy with losing players to the amateur leagues?
The Crows taking their squad listed players out of the league means roughly 40 senior listed players, and seven rookie listed players would leave the league. That’s a big clutch of quality players just gone from the competition. Yes, the clubs would have lost these players to the Crows Reserves any way, but at least this would leave the players and their skills and abilities in the SANFL.
And this brings me to the biggest problem with the ‘No’ camp. They don’t seem to realise that the player drain which the SANFL is currently experiencing right now will only get a lost worse once the Crows are in the SAAFL.
Players are already jumping ship to play in country leagues for big money. Some are past it, and looking for a good pay check in return for a relaxed game of footy without all the training and semi-pro pressure.
But a lot of these players are still of high quality, and looking for a big pay check from cashed up country leagues. This is a serious problem for the league, and the situation has now become a hell of a lot worse.
The Crows take their players, including their SANFL regulars out of the comp. But they’ll still need players to fill up a full Reserves team.
If you were a young bloke, quite capable of playing good footy but you’ve missed your chance at being drafted, wouldn’t you be looking seriously for any back door into the AFL? Blokes in this position would be falling over each other to get out of the SANFL and onto the Crows Reserves list.
The clubs have guaranteed they won’t lose their players to a rival club. Good on ‘em. Instead, they have given the green light to players getting out of the SANFL.
The player drain will continue, and a massive cash injection and opportunities for greater corporate exposure is gone.
In five to ten years time, when we look at the state of the ‘best state league in the country,’ will we be looking at a league bereft of quality players? Will the struggling Sturt Football Club still be battling on? Will the games still be on free to air TV?
And will we still look back to this time and think “Well, at least we preserved tradition.”
vocans
Guest
The Power reserves team being Port worries me because the SANFL is a gateway for local young players who will want to have some prospect of playing senior SANFL footy, but will be kept out by Power hopefuls. That's a real problem for Port and I'm very surprised they seem to favour the idea. I can't see an 11th team, the SANFL branch of the Power, as anything but one team too many. But that would be the outcome if they didn't join Port. Maybe I'm wrong about that - it woud be good if I was. Then the same comments about the Crows below would apply to them too. The Crows fielding a 10th team makes sense to me but only if they have enough players to permanently field a team. That suggests they'd need a SANFL reserves team as well, because the players would need to be match fit and practised.
Jack Russell
Roar Guru
Not sure where you pulled those figures out of, the Foundation day round drew about 14,500 people across 4 matches. Although this year, only 1 game was on Foundation day, the WAFL got scared because there was an AFL match scheduled that night so only played East Perth v West Perth and drew about 5,000 to that game. The Fremantle derby was held on the Sunday.
Viv R
Guest
More people would watch local leagues games than AFL games on any weekend - tell him he's dreaming! More people watch the one AFL game on TV on Friday night alone than attend all local league games around the country. SANFL or SAAFL? Is there really that much difference these days as it's all just parklands footy? Cannot wait for the Crows vs Adelaide University at Thebby next year and I will definitely be supporting the Blacks! ps I have 250+ games as a South Adelaide supporter, so I have done my time at the local grounds, but would be happy for the Crows to take them over as their reserves team.
Dmak
Guest
The Crows in the VFL is a harebrained idea that has been brought up repeatedly. The VFL does not want the Crows in their league as it would be a very expensive venture . Teams would be required to pay the costs associated with interstate travel (Flights and Accommodation) Most players in the VFL (and many of the top up players in the Crows Reserves) have day jobs so players would be required to take time off work in order to travel to these games. Many of the VFL team would not survive if they were required to find the extra money that would be required if Adelaide was in the league. Having the Suns in the VFL only worked as they were funded by the AFL. By playing locally in the SAAFL the Crows would be able to spend this money on actual player development. Also another point that is brought up constantly that it was the addition of the AFL teams into the VFA that killed that league. The truth is by the dying days of the VFA many of the clubs had folded or were in the prpcess of folding for financial reasons as it started to become much more expensive to run their clubs due to increased player costs. The SANFL seems to be suffering from this phenomenon and the quality of the league is suffering as the best young players enter the AFL and players that dont make it in the AFL go bush as you can make more money playing for a bush league club then in any of the 2nd Tier comps like the SANFL.
Johnno
Guest
Wow some of you people lack pride in the SANFL, and clearly put the Crows first. It's a good thing the die-hards and the SANFL didn't share your views.
me, I like football
Guest
That's funny
me, I like football
Guest
Which AFL fans? more people would watch non AFL football games than AFL football games on any given weekened. and by a fair margin
George
Guest
I don’t see why the Crows wouldn’t just play in the VFL, Nathan Bassett (biased or not) said the costs would be about $350,000 p.a. Considering that Kurt Tippett was paid $200,00 under the table which also incurred a fine of $300,000, I’m sure they can stomach it. Beats the hell of playing old scholars teams IMO.
TW
Guest
This is part of a news release last year on the WAFL situation. However this year in one incident the West Perth footy club changed their signs for an upcoming match against their deadly rivals East Perth to read East Perth as "The West Coast Eagles". The Footy Commission and WAFL jumped all over them and the signs were removed. Have no idea why crowds are down but the comp itself is close with 4 teams on 36 points vying for 3rd and 4th position - Only Claremont and West Perth are safe as top 2. Quote ---- WEST Coast and Fremantle have secured alignment deals with WAFL clubs East Perth and Peel Thunder respectively, ending the AFL clubs' long-running battle to have their own reserves teams. The historic deal was announced by the WA Football Commission on Wednesday and will be in place for the 2014 season, with a minimum term of five years. Fremantle and West Coast will pay $450,000 a year each to the WAFC which will be used to invest in improving the seven 'non-partnering' clubs' on and off-field resources. The WAFC will also establish a $350,000 WAFL development fund that will benefit all nine WAFL clubs. West Coast and Fremantle will be required to provide the league coach for their partner clubs and "enhance their partnering WAFL clubs' on and off-field standing". The agreement also states that the AFL clubs will "ensure that every effort is made to enhance the competitiveness of their partnering WAFL club on every occasion they play". All AFL-listed players allocated to WAFL clubs in 2012 will remain at their existing clubs, except those at Peel Thunder and East Perth, who will transfer to the respective partnering club of their AFL team. All newly drafted interstate recruits will be allocated to East Perth or Peel Thunder. However, AFL players recruited from non-partnering WAFL clubs will remain at that club through 2013. The WAFC will maintain the right to review the partnering system and make "appropriate changes to maintain an even (WAFL) competition." End of quote---
Dan
Guest
Johnno, have a snickers
Nathan
Guest
'VFL bully spirit' Considering that the Adelaide Crows only exist because of the bullying of Port Adelaide on the part of the SANFL, your comment is rather ironic.
Lazza
Guest
AFL fans keep telling me they are only interested in watching the 'best in the world'? What are they doing watching this 3rd rate competition?
MrT
Guest
This whole saga has not sat well with me from the start. I can see it's a sticky situation - there are competing interests involved. I should confess that I am a Port supporter but I've always said I'd rather see a Port Maggies premiership than a Power one - and now I also say that that should be a Maggies team of Maggies players, brought up through the club, not a bunch of AFL reserve mercenaries... ANd if the Port SANFL side is AFL reserves, it doesn't leave much of a pathway for juniors coming up through the club. Anyway, I think you said it best when you said "we like to stand up to watch a game", etc. I love AFL games but I'd much rather go to a SANFL match. It's the community, the history, etc, etc. Brilliant.
Franko
Guest
Ian, the AFL don’t have the right to ‘terminate’ the owners of any AFL club, particularly one as valuable as the SANFL. In 2012 a third of the top 20 draft picks came from SANFL clubs, and 15 players overall, I would have thought that would entitle them to some assistance, since they have developed these kids. The Murray bushrangers who take the best youngsters from the O&M produced 2 players in the entire draft and none in the top 25. All that the majority of SANFL supporters are asking, is that the AFL stays out of their comp. We like to see players put their head over the ball, we like to stand up to watch a game, we like to kick the ball on the ground and listen to the coach at ¾ time, we like that we still know what a push in the back or holding the ball looks like and we like watching a very high standard of football being played. That is all brought about because our teams are competing to win, not to run blokes in to form.
Ian Whitchurch
Guest
Yes. The Port Adelaide and Adelaide AFL clubs should be owned by their members, and the Adelaide suburban competition should stand on it's own two feet. The ownership of the Adelaide and Port Adelaide AFL clubs by the SANFL is a massive conflict of interest that needs to be terminated by the AFL as soon as possible. If that means the Adealide suburban competition loses players to the Owens and Murray, or some other country league that actually has sponsors and supporters who will pay players to play there, then thats up to them to stop. Neither the Perth or the Adelaide suburban competitions deserve any support over any other "country footy" league.
Franko
Guest
Have you got anything to contribute Ian or just a slogan?
Franko
Guest
As I understand it Foundation day in WA is when their WAFL sides traditionally had their big matches South Freo vs East Freo, East Perth vs West Perth, Claremont vs Subi, that sort of thing, I believe it sometimes changes, but generally it is the ‘biggest weekend of football in WAFL’. Just some random figures I found In 2009 the Freo match pulled nearly 10,000, Perth around 5,000 In 2011 6,000 to the Perth match, 7,500 to the Freo match 2012, Freo match got 12,000 2013 they pulled 5,800 across ALL FIVE MATCHES So why the drop off? Is it because of the alignment of East Perth and Peel, which has caused a huge stir and disillusioned many? I don’t want the SANFL going the way of the WAFL or VFL. It’s a strong and vibrant comp Round 1 this year drew nearly 20,000 people to 4 matches including 7,500 Norwood vs Port, even South drew 4,500+ *rant over*
Ian Whitchurch
Guest
Franko, The SANFL has made it's bed. Lets see how they like it.
Ian Whitchurch
Guest
It's Johnno. What the heck did you expect other than an incoherent rant, full of Johnno Facts (tm) that he just made up ?
SportsFanGC
Roar Guru
Johnno another incoherent rant with little to no sense being made. Did you actually read anything of the article that Damo submitted? One question that I have - Where is it that you live? You often attempt to write with authority about a number of cities (notably Melbourne when talking Soccer and Sydney when talking RL/RU, and now Adelaide) particularly using the reference "we don't.." or "we want...".