WAFL FANS UNITE! - Say NO to Reserves Teams

[Military_man]

Well according to some of the wafl clubs there is room for legal action against the wa football commision. It was an underhanded deal to the disadvantage of the other wafl clubs and they been offered pittance for compensation.. Down at Shark park we are very upset and a massive legal fight is about to be mounted.. The only satisfaction i have in all of this is the dominance of claremont in the wafl will now cease to exist..

 

[The_Wookie]

the West Australian reported that the WAFL clubs were holding a meeting to thrash out the details as they had not expected any deal to be finalised and expected more consultation.

“They were expecting we would come back with a proposal that would then go into a further consulting phase” – Frank Cooper​

The Article also quoted the WAFL Council of Presidents, Hayden Raitt, as saying

“It did get a rough reception but we are meeting on Friday to short list the things that we believe they missed and resubmit them.
At the end of the day, the commission can do it without our consent anyway and we could end up with nothing.
I think we will all have a look at it from a sensible point of view. The commission has done rather a good job, they have just missed out some smaller detail. I think they tried to put a good deal to the WAFL and to help the WAFL”​

Media and references

• Nov 1, 2012 – “Clubs move to finetune AFL deals” – The West

 

[pablo668]

Claremont were also once an Eagles aligned club.
Claremont have also had an unfair advantage over clubs like East Perth because of the fact that they have been gifted such a strong zone. Interesting to see that the two teams who played off for this years Grand Final, both have the strongest zones. On Grand Final day, both participating teams had more AFL listed players than in any of the East Perth premiership teams in 2000-2002

I hated every moment of the alignment of Claremont and the Eagles.

Claremont has had a very strong zone for a very long time, as I said previously, the majority of AFL players on our list(s) were developed by us.
Perhaps there needs to be something done about the zones in WA so that the currently weaker clubs in the WAFL get a better deal, but this arrangement is going to do nothing for the WAFL.

I have no idea on the actual number of AFL listed players East Perth had in their flag sides back then. I do know that they went from easybeats who hadn't won a flag in over 20 years to a dominant force in the WAFL, while being aligned to the Eagles. Hardly a coincidence.

 

[Beetlebum]

I have no idea on the actual number of AFL listed players East Perth had in their flag sides back then. I do know that they went from easybeats who hadn't won a flag in over 20 years to a dominant force in the WAFL, while being aligned to the Eagles. Hardly a coincidence.

Oddly it occurred in what was arguably the Eagles worst period, at least 2000/2001.

 

[pablo668]

Oddly it occurred in what was arguably the Eagles worst period, at least 2000/2001.

Yeah good point. I remember reading an article in the paper around that time where some East Perth players were saying that their success was more due to a good core group of players they had at the club at the time, rather than just being aligned with WCE and having access to AFL listed players.

Unless I'm mistaken Tony Micale was coaching there at that time as well, that must have helped.

 

[The_Wookie]

The Saga continued on November 2 with The West Australian reporting that the Council of WAFL presidents were deeply dissatisfied with the WAFC accusing them of ignoring due process, having a lack of integrity and respect for the WAFL. The WAFL clubs would also like a limit placed on the number of AFL listed players that can play at any one time. The Council issued a statement that included:

"Due process has clearly not been followed and we now question the lack of transparency, accountability and openness in the decision making of the WAFL. In addition, the COP has lost confidence in the senior administration of the WAFC, including the football affairs committee"

- Haydn Raitt​

• Nov 2, 2012 - Questions remain on AFL listed Players - The West

 

[Ted38]

Looks like it's a goer despite all the whingeing from the other Clubs, maybe they should accept the decision and concentrate on making their own Clubs more successful particularly those ones who waste too much by having DUD'S running them, coaching them and playing for them.

 

[pablo668]

Looks like it's a goer despite all the whingeing from the other Clubs, maybe they should accept the decision and concentrate on making their own Clubs more successful particularly those ones who waste too much by having DUD'S running them, coaching them and playing for them.

Yeah, someone from the Mark Duffield school of thought.
How can a move by the AFL clubs be called a mere whinge when it will unbalance and stuff up a very good competition with a long and rich history?
It goes way past being a whinge. It's a legitimate complaint by clubs and people who will be negatively affected by an arbitrary decision made from on high by people who possibly know better but couldn't care less for the local comp.
What has that got to do with how well or poorly the WAFL clubs are run?

Seems to me that 'whinge' is the term of choice for those with no counter argument to the damage that this move is going to do to the WAFL.

 

[Ted38]

Yeah, someone from the Mark Duffield school of thought.
How can a move by the AFL clubs be called a mere whinge when it will unbalance and stuff up a very good competition with a long and rich history?
It goes way past being a whinge. It's a legitimate complaint by clubs and people who will be negatively affected by an arbitrary decision made from on high by people who possibly know better but couldn't care less for the local comp.
What has that got to do with how well or poorly the WAFL clubs are run?

Seems to me that 'whinge' is the term of choice for those with no counter argument to the damage that this move is going to do to the WAFL.

I can assure you that I am not from his or any other journo/football writer school of anything. Conversely , your argument has the distinct flavour of the Cometti school of thought about it, but I'm sure you are above that.
I'd be interested to hear of your solution to the situation as to how the two AFL Clubs can solve their problem of finding the best way to ensure that their players can get the best experience and match fitness when they are not playing in the AFL.
Perhaps you would prefer that the two AFL Clubs have nothing to do with the WAFL at all? There are those who follow the WAFL that would be very keen to see that happen and obviously the people who run the WAFL can't seem to agree on a suitable solution. So what's the answer?

 

[pablo668]

I can assure you that I am not from his or any other journo/football writer school of anything. Conversely , your argument has the distinct flavour of the Cometti school of thought about it, but I'm sure you are above that.
I'd be interested to hear of your solution to the situation as to how the two AFL Clubs can solve their problem of finding the best way to ensure that their players can get the best experience and match fitness when they are not playing in the AFL.
Perhaps you would prefer that the two AFL Clubs have nothing to do with the WAFL at all? There are those who follow the WAFL that would be very keen to see that happen and obviously the people who run the WAFL can't seem to agree on a suitable solution. So what's the answer?

I could agree to that, if I knew exactly what Comettis train of thought was, he seems to disagree with the alignments, yet he seemed a little vague on the specifics.
What the solution is? When the two AFL clubs present a fait accompli to the entire WAFL, because they perceive there to be an advantage in a certain type of set up for their developing players and second string players? Despite what it will do to a decent 2nd string comp they will be playing in?
Buggered if I know.
The AFL clubs want their players all in one place despite what it will cost the WAFL. That's all they want and they couldn't give a damn about what damage it will cause the WAFL.
How does one negotiate or compromise with this as a starting point?

I personally think the present system is fine, not broken. Especially for the clubs who produce many AFL listed players. They should get some service from them. With the alignment, we'll lose those players and get nothing from them at all, after putting in club time and effort into their development.

 

[Military_man]

One of my major concerns with all of this is the wa football commision board has 2 former East Perth players on it and played a major part in deciding to align west coast with East Perth and then you got Grant Dorrington who is a former player and coach of East Perth still calling the shots at the commission .. So i would have to say this has to be a conflict of interest surely.. They want to hand East Perth a few more premierships. The whole thing wreaks.. I'm starting to think now that maybe they should have allowed west coast and freo have a reserves side but not allow them to play finals footy due to the unfair advantage.. Now we got to endure another landslide of premierships from East Perth.

 

[Pat Holywell]

If you are against the WAFC announcement in relation to the agreement between West Coast, Fremantle, East Perth and Peel Thunder please sign my petition: www.savethewafl.com and spread the word!

 

[royaldave]

I hated every moment of the alignment of Claremont and the Eagles.

Claremont has had a very strong zone for a very long time, as I said previously, the majority of AFL players on our list(s) were developed by us.
Perhaps there needs to be something done about the zones in WA so that the currently weaker clubs in the WAFL get a better deal, but this arrangement is going to do nothing for the WAFL.

I have no idea on the actual number of AFL listed players East Perth had in their flag sides back then. I do know that they went from easybeats who hadn't won a flag in over 20 years to a dominant force in the WAFL, while being aligned to the Eagles. Hardly a coincidence.

So tired of explaining the myth, but I don't think I've done it on this site yet ...

We were hardly easybeats back then ....

If you look back, 1996 we were runners up to Claremont (who had 10 AFL players in their GF side), we made the finals in 97 and 98, 99 we were 2nd last yes - but that was blamed on a disrupted pre-season thanks to us letting Perth Glory use Perth Oval too much. It was principally why we "temporarily" moved to Leederville Oval for 2000.

96 onwards saw the likes of Jeremy Barnard, Devan Perry and David Swan in the squad. They reached their peak come 2000. Throw in Troy Wilson, convince Aaron Marley to come back etc etc and it was an awesome team. There were 9 players who played in all 3 grand finals (2000-2002) and not one of them was an eagle.

 

[royaldave]

One of my major concerns with all of this is the wa football commision board has 2 former East Perth players on it and played a major part in deciding to align west coast with East Perth and then you got Grant Dorrington who is a former player and coach of East Perth still calling the shots at the commission .. So i would have to say this has to be a conflict of interest surely.. They want to hand East Perth a few more premierships. The whole thing wreaks.. I'm starting to think now that maybe they should have allowed west coast and freo have a reserves side but not allow them to play finals footy due to the unfair advantage.. Now we got to endure another landslide of premierships from East Perth.

The WAFC actually preferred Perth, it was the eagles who preferred EP. Dorrington's influence is on the wane and Kickett just arrived.

The WAFL has not been an even comp since the eagles came about with varying levels of AFL players in each side and other factors.

If a club develops a player, and has them drafted, they get PAID for them. The fact if the eagles or dockers drafts them is an added bonus for that club. They've been paid for the player, they then ALSO get FREE use of them if the eagles/dockers don't want them.

Although recognising that a lot of players get drafted from Claremont in general, the local AFL sides have had a love affair with them and EF - I think probably due to old school tie more than old club tie.

Claremont have been paying $60k less player payments than most clubs for several years.

 

[pablo668]

So tired of explaining the myth, but I don't think I've done it on this site yet ...

We were hardly easybeats back then ....

If you look back, 1996 we were runners up to Claremont (who had 10 AFL players in their GF side), we made the finals in 97 and 98, 99 we were 2nd last yes - but that was blamed on a disrupted pre-season thanks to us letting Perth Glory use Perth Oval too much. It was principally why we "temporarily" moved to Leederville Oval for 2000.

96 onwards saw the likes of Jeremy Barnard, Devan Perry and David Swan in the squad. They reached their peak come 2000. Throw in Troy Wilson, convince Aaron Marley to come back etc etc and it was an awesome team. There were 9 players who played in all 3 grand finals (2000-2002) and not one of them was an eagle.

Seems to be the cross we must bear, for you guys, pointing out the non Eagle squad members from the premiership teams back then, and for Claremont, always getting ribbed because we have so many AFL listed and former listed players in our side(s).
Just had a look through Claremonts list back then, other than maybe Nick Stone I couldn't see any players that we hadn't produced in that years premiership team. From memory you had Ryan Turnbull and Chris Gerryn both former Claremont players on your list that year.

Claremont produces a heap of AFL recruits every year. Some do ok, some don't. They come from our zone the club spends time and resources of their development. It's only fair that we get some use from them. Be it during their career with a local AFL club or once ther AFL careers are over and they choose to return and give back to the club.

 

[pablo668]

The WAFC actually preferred Perth, it was the eagles who preferred EP. Dorrington's influence is on the wane and Kickett just arrived.

The WAFL has not been an even comp since the eagles came about with varying levels of AFL players in each side and other factors.

If a club develops a player, and has them drafted, they get PAID for them. The fact if the eagles or dockers drafts them is an added bonus for that club. They've been paid for the player, they then ALSO get FREE use of them if the eagles/dockers don't want them.

Although recognising that a lot of players get drafted from Claremont in general, the local AFL sides have had a love affair with them and EF - I think probably due to old school tie more than old club tie.

Claremont have been paying $60k less player payments than most clubs for several years.

Not sure about any love affair there champ. There have been some great stoushes with the Eagles over the years involving where and when to play their squad members, as early as 88 in fact when Neesham wanted to drop some Eagles players down to the ressies cause they weren't cutting it.

Also a lot of players and staff left the club when Claremont aligned with the Eagles. On friendly terms maybe, but certainly no love affair.

 

[royaldave]

Seems to be the cross we must bear, for you guys, pointing out the non Eagle squad members from the premiership teams back then, and for Claremont, always getting ribbed because we have so many AFL listed and former listed players in our side(s).
Just had a look through Claremonts list back then, other than maybe Nick Stone I couldn't see any players that we hadn't produced in that years premiership team. From memory you had Ryan Turnbull and Chris Gerryn both former Claremont players on your list that year.

Claremont produces a heap of AFL recruits every year. Some do ok, some don't. They come from our zone the club spends time and resources of their development. It's only fair that we get some use from them. Be it during their career with a local AFL club or once ther AFL careers are over and they choose to return and give back to the club.

Was not trying to bear a cross. I merely pointed out that EP weren't easybeats leading up to the 2000 arrangement as was put earlier. This is why we won premierships in 2000-02 because we had formed the nucleus of a great side already.

Everyone who gets scared by this arrangement never looks at Claremont's performance in 1999 as any sort of yardstick.

 

[royaldave]

Not sure about any love affair there champ. There have been some great stoushes with the Eagles over the years involving where and when to play their squad members, as early as 88 in fact when Neesham wanted to drop some Eagles players down to the ressies cause they weren't cutting it.

Also a lot of players and staff left the club when Claremont aligned with the Eagles. On friendly terms maybe, but certainly no love affair.

Just pointing out that you've been fortunate to have a lot of your players drafted locally which has flow on benefits even after the AFL club has PAID you for your player. When EP does get a player drafted - and there's been one or two a year the last few years - they ALWAYS go over east. Not since Luke Webster have we had a player drafted locally (from memory). OK JON got rookie listed, but he went over east first.

 

[pablo668]

Was not trying to bear a cross. I merely pointed out that EP weren't easybeats leading up to the 2000 arrangement as was put earlier. This is why we won premierships in 2000-02 because we had formed the nucleus of a great side already.

Everyone who gets scared by this arrangement never looks at Claremont's performance in 1999 as any sort of yardstick.

I wasn't exactly claiming that East Perth were easybeats leading up to the alignment, they hadn't won a flag though at that time. And I even brought up that East Perth did have a crop of good players that weren't alignment players.
It just didn't work out at Claremont, it did at East Perth though, and three premierships on the trot and a severely un-balanced comp later and you can see why people don't want to go back to it.

It doesn't matter which way you cut it, this is not good for the WAFL and it never will be.

 

[pablo668]

Just pointing out that you've been fortunate to have a lot of your players drafted locally which has flow on benefits even after the AFL club has PAID you for your player. When EP does get a player drafted - and there's been one or two a year the last few years - they ALWAYS go over east. Not since Luke Webster have we had a player drafted locally (from memory). OK JON got rookie listed, but he went over east first.

Oh yes we have been very fortunate. We have a strong zone and have had it for 30 odd years I think. A lot of our players do get drafted locally which helps us out a lot.
I can't see the point though in any WAFL club now spending the time, money and effort in developing players that will go straight into the AFL or into the two local aligned clubs.

 

[royaldave]

Oh yes we have been very fortunate. We have a strong zone and have had it for 30 odd years I think. A lot of our players do get drafted locally which helps us out a lot.
I can't see the point though in any WAFL club now spending the time, money and effort in developing players that will go straight into the AFL or into the two local aligned clubs.

Its been the case since the eagles came about - nothing has really changed except that locally drafted players will now get taken off you. To even up the playing field it probably would have made more sense for the eagles and dockers to have their own reserve sides in the WAFL (or elsewhere) - but ultimately these options were either too fiddly or expensive and would have ultimately meant less money back to the WAFL clubs. The WAFL presidents knew this which is why they were against it so vehemently.

WAFL clubs obviously get paid for their time developing a player - but the money gotten back is peanuts in the scheme of things.

 

[Strangled Cat]

I will be following this thread with great interest as these exact issues mirror those over here in SA. As an avid SANFL fan, I have the exact same concerns as most of you do here. No one wants to see a dominant Port Magpies again with that alignment with the Power being a formality, all that's left is for the Crows to forge their alignment with another SANFL team, or even perhaps go it alone as a stand alone team in the SANFL.

The SA Football community as a whole, Crows and Port and the SANFL will be watching everything unfold over in the west very closely. I really hope this alignment doesn't stuff up your competition, I think like the SANFL the WAFL is a great competition that deserves delicate preservation due to their rich histories in their respective states. It's only a matter of time and SA Footy will be in the same predicament, once the licences for the two SA franchises are no longer owned by the SANFL.

 

[andana]

Would South Freo move the dockers off their oval now that they plan to align with Peel?.

 

[pablo668]

^^
Good question, not really sure. They do have training facilities there so..........and I think it would be ridiculous if the AFL team called Fremantle isn't actually based in Fremantle.

 

[andana]

Freo have decided to move anyway.

The 7 WAFL unaligned clubs are not going to play against E.Perth or Peel during the pre- season but those 2 clubs could just play against each other. Need to do more.