Talent is not a numbers game despite the claims of some.
AFL allocates Zones to Victorian Teams
- Thread starter TheKITC
- Start date
- Tagged users None
Talent is not a numbers game despite the claims of some.
Wait a sec....Richmond's zone means we wont get any benefit from Bachar Houli's work with encouraging Muslim football...
Surely if we're following the Northern states 'we're only doing it if it helps us' argument, Richmond should immediately stopping backing that...After all, that's it's good for the game generally (and arguably beneficial to society) is irrelevant if we don't get the benefits!
The Northern States are a growth area - its different to heartland, see WA. No entitlement there.
Fine to characterise something as self interest - the development states need developing, none of the NSW development program that gave Witts to Vic footy ..... I do agree the latest move by the AFL is a disaster for the game nationally & it will only get worse as the AFL try to deal with WA & SA.
Just a sop to Vic club powerbrokers P155ing in the pocket of their mates at AFL House.
The game needs to develop the talent in the player pool, too many guys get drafted & disappear without getting a sniff - they aren't up to it - the traditional states cant produce enough talent for 18 squads.
As for equalisation, read money - transfer money from well run, well supported, well sponsored clubs to those that 100 years on still cant pull their weight. Its a different issue to developing the game.
Vic clubs can get their filthy hands off WA and SA zones
They have a river though.
Because you also have 10 clubs each sharing one state? If we want equalisation, that's what is going to happen
If we want equalisation these zones wouldn't be happening
Perth's not as diverse as Melbourne anyway.
Defacto
Brownlow Medallist
- Sep 21, 2008
- 22,930
- 17,129
- AFL Club
- St Kilda
there are more top end indigenous players though
agree with your first statement. its a friggin joke
Marc_Remillard
Maderator
- Jan 4, 2015
- 6,783
- 7,711
- AFL Club
- Melbourne
This is just a ridiculous idea, growing the game should be done by the AFL Commission, the individual clubs shouldn't be overseeing it, they should stick to trying to win games. The AFL have tried to give the Northern state clubs an advantage and it was always going to be challenged by the other clubs, this is the result.
Bloody ridiculous
Bloody ridiculous
nah. how about we just get rid of a few of your surplus victorian teams.
that is neat & efficient equalisation... rather than stealing ground from other states to continue to prop up an unsustainable and lop-sided league.
take ownership of your own problems, and stop looking to steal stuff off other states to prop up your failing system.
telsor
Hall of Famer
and just what are we 'stealing'?
Vic clubs put more into the AFL (per club) than anyone else after all. (AFL members, buying docklands for the league, the AFL collecting the 'bonuses' the MCG pays for large crowds, etc etc).
So maybe you should actually put in for a change and stop freeloading of Victoria.
- Mar 2, 2007
- 43,126
- 61,323
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
- Other Teams
- Liverpool, Cowboys, Packers, Scorchers
Are you including the millions we pay every year to develop West Aussie talent for the whole comp in that?
telsor
Hall of Famer
While we pay to develop talent throughout the country....
Defacto
Brownlow Medallist
- Sep 21, 2008
- 22,930
- 17,129
- AFL Club
- St Kilda
strong emotive terms aside
i find it funny that people are arguing for equalisation in these zones as a reason for handing them the NT, whilst arguing against other equalisation measures
but i do agree with you. why should WCE, Freo, Ade, Port etc. be shut out from acquiring a NT zone
and this is the problem with zones, it just isnt a fair system at all and is based on political manoeuvring and lobbying
site note: wedgetail, be-careful what you wish for. remove the lower vic teams and it will just mean a larger revenue base for the bigger victorian clubs. wce would not and could not compete if that were to happen
the post i was replying to was suggesting that it was fair for vic teams to get a slice of wa. i dont particularly care about the nt, although a more logical alignment there would be with sa.
its just the mentality that victorians constantly carry that everything is fair game to poach to keep their inefficient system afloat gets my goat. If it comes out that northrn wa gets allocated to vic clubs i will go completely feral. But i wouldnt be surprised if the league tries it on given the entitlement attitudes regularly on display.
fwiw im more than confident of the wa clubs ability to compete in a rationalised competition. Love to see it happen.
Defacto
Brownlow Medallist
- Sep 21, 2008
- 22,930
- 17,129
- AFL Club
- St Kilda
i can understand your anger and i agree with you...
i dont see why victorian clubs should be allocated a WA spot if the WCE are cut out of other areas... strange one for people to argue against
but thats the problem with zones, it creates inequality as no two areas are the same
TheKITC
Cancelled
- Thread starter
- #343
My issue with these academies is rooted in clubs 'rorting' the system and muddying the draft.
I agree that the Northern academies are a fantastic idea, these clubs need to develop talent that otherwise wouldn't be in our game given how stretched the pool is with 18 clubs, they also do a lot of good work in 'spreading the AFL gospel' in areas where people either aren't participating, interested or otherwise. It's a fantastic idea to give these kids who might play other sports a grassroot level path and say,
we're going to develop and support you. The Victorian, SA, WA likewise with kids from indigenous and diverse backgrounds who might not usually be given an AFL pathway, if that's the way they are operated.
However I do have an issue with clubs getting access to players on the cheap and having priority and discounted access to players who would have already been playing the game and drafted as per any other player. This is what I have a problem with. Say Nick Riewoldt was coming through under the current system, the Gold Coast would have him as a signed sealed and delivered academy prospect. That is wrong as he would have already been good enough, interested enough and engaged with AFL footy. This is where the inherent and unfair advantage exists and is the part I hate about the whole academy system.
How do we eliminate that? I'm not sure, if they are already playing at under15 level they don't qualify? If they are good enough to have represented their state in football but not any other sport by 'x' age they don't qualify? I actually don't have the answers here but there must be a better way. Maybe someone like Heeney is a bad example because I'm not so sure about his rugby interest/skill level, but I struggle to believe players of his quality wouldn't have found their way regardless. Kieran Jack didn't need an academy and he was about as rugby as you'd think it could get. It's the players who would find it all too hard be it for whatever reason, financially, geographically etc. and have options in other sports are the ones this should really be for.
My 2c.
I agree that the Northern academies are a fantastic idea, these clubs need to develop talent that otherwise wouldn't be in our game given how stretched the pool is with 18 clubs, they also do a lot of good work in 'spreading the AFL gospel' in areas where people either aren't participating, interested or otherwise. It's a fantastic idea to give these kids who might play other sports a grassroot level path and say,
we're going to develop and support you. The Victorian, SA, WA likewise with kids from indigenous and diverse backgrounds who might not usually be given an AFL pathway, if that's the way they are operated.
However I do have an issue with clubs getting access to players on the cheap and having priority and discounted access to players who would have already been playing the game and drafted as per any other player. This is what I have a problem with. Say Nick Riewoldt was coming through under the current system, the Gold Coast would have him as a signed sealed and delivered academy prospect. That is wrong as he would have already been good enough, interested enough and engaged with AFL footy. This is where the inherent and unfair advantage exists and is the part I hate about the whole academy system.
How do we eliminate that? I'm not sure, if they are already playing at under15 level they don't qualify? If they are good enough to have represented their state in football but not any other sport by 'x' age they don't qualify? I actually don't have the answers here but there must be a better way. Maybe someone like Heeney is a bad example because I'm not so sure about his rugby interest/skill level, but I struggle to believe players of his quality wouldn't have found their way regardless. Kieran Jack didn't need an academy and he was about as rugby as you'd think it could get. It's the players who would find it all too hard be it for whatever reason, financially, geographically etc. and have options in other sports are the ones this should really be for.
My 2c.
pugthemagician
Debutant
- Sep 8, 2013
- 130
- 152
- AFL Club
- Melbourne
Actually said AFL clubs in the future will only pick indigenous kids if they had one white parent then resigned due to pressure from club.
So yeah....???
So does WA.
Come one telsor. There is no way in hell you can argue that West Coast and Fremantle are freeloaders in this competition.
Deaneus!
We Await Silent Tristero's Empire
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/a...or-racial-fracas/story-e6frf9jf-1226306434134
Have a look at the bit about academies
"Beyond warning AFL recruiting managers would ultimately recruit only Aboriginal players with one white parent, Rendell offended Mifsud and Fahour by suggesting a pre-draft academy be established for under-16 indigenous players who would be re-located in Melbourne."
Defacto
Brownlow Medallist
- Sep 21, 2008
- 22,930
- 17,129
- AFL Club
- St Kilda
Misfud was the worst thing andy d did. The bloke had no idea and was a lose cannon.
Instead of listening to bundy and taking on board his years of experience in the industry he chose to bury his head in the sand and knife him
Didnt take long for him to knife a couple at melbourne before the karma bus hit him and he was reeled in by the powers that be
Even if what bundy said was racist it shouldnt have stopped misfud from identifying the problem bundy was communicating to him. You hear racist and semi racist s**t from the older generation all the time, its just that they grew up in a different era and as such have been conditioned to it. thankfully society has progressed to where its left their views in the past. But what was lost was why the indigineous draft numbers were so low. Thankfully we are back to discussing that topic
pugthemagician
Debutant
- Sep 8, 2013
- 130
- 152
- AFL Club
- Melbourne
Misfud and Fahour being offended by the academy suggestion was not why he was forced to stand down. What was front and centre of this issue was the one white parent comment. This all came out afterwards.
My point is Rendell said something silly and stuffed up his employment. He wasn't vilified he was asked to explain, he couldn't and he fell on his sword.
I thought he acted with honour and integrity by acknowledging he stuffed up and taking responsibility.
The academy idea was and is a good concept but that was not what got him into hot water.
Im undecided whether this is a good thing. Feel like its more about the AFL trying to buy the allegience of some NT football fans and prop up Vic clubs more than anything (in terms of fans).
Would have rathered they held off on an announcement until the rest of the comps academies were ready to be announced as well because frankly it looks like the AFL is again being Vic centric.
Would have rathered they held off on an announcement until the rest of the comps academies were ready to be announced as well because frankly it looks like the AFL is again being Vic centric.
Similar threads
