AFL Reserves
- Thread starter Geoffa32
- Start date
- Tagged users None
I don't support Fremantle or West Coast having reserves teams unless there is an AFL wide reserves competition.
Having a reserves team in the NEAFL is an option but the clubs should look into whether or not playing in an inferior competition is worth having a reserves team. If they believe it is then they should go for it.
More gutlessness from WA then.
What do you propose when all the Melbourne sides have reserves sides in what they call the VFL, and the Qld and NSW sides are in the NEAFL ?
I mean, apart from whine about how the Eastern Staters are doing you over by refusing to let you have a reserves side.
I'm not whining about a reserves side. I don't want a reserves side.
I also think the rape of the VFA is an absolute disgrace.
On the matter of the VFA, I agree, and thats why I think there should be a NEAFL South with the AFL reserves, Wangaratta, Bendigo, Fitzroy Gorillas and so on it it ... which will let the VFA be the VFA.
Howvere, as things stands, it sounds like you're happy for WCE and Freo to not have reserves sides. Good luck with that.
When the premiership winning sides develop their draftees thru a reserves team, can you/we really want the WA AFL sides to develop their draftees as second best?
Is it realistic to expect the WAFL to include Dockers or Eagles reserves teams ...
I'd prefer the status quo but the AFL allowed the Cats a reserves side, then Collingwood, next year the Bombers .. how can the AFL introduce/institutionalise inequality you might ask? Too late mate, yet you are back in the VFA days. More of the same forward thinking management maybe?
The horse has bolted .. WA footy fans expect the WA clubs to match it with the best, so be honest with yourself, the current AFL/WAFL relationship is for the high jump. IanW makes a good case for a national comp.
An AFL Reserves comp should not include the Gorillas, the Cheetahs, the Polly Waffles - keep the standard high.
If the Hawks win this year then what?
Kwality,
Like with most of these debates, you've actually got it backwards. You want the non-reserves sides in there, because otherwise there are too many 18-21 year olds playing against each other.
Was it the AFL or the AFL Victoria (I think these are two 'separate' bodies, with the VAFL controlling the VFL competition)? The AFL seem to be very quiet on the whole reserves team issue. If they believe it's imperative for all clubs to have their own reserves team for player development then why aren't they doing something about it?
The independence of the 2nd tier of footy in Vic is murky. The changes that saw the elimination of Reserves teams in the 90s & the replacement of the 3rds by the TAC competition was certainly driven by the AFL & any independence by the Vic body was subject to the AFL holding the purse strings.
I believe the control issue is semantics. Geelong & Collingwood have an advantage with a reserves team according to Mick Malthouse, & both clubs have dominated Grand Final day in recent years. Does your club want to be competitive ?
Yes, the AFL is quiet on the issue, but its hardly a transparent body.
I believe the control issue is semantics. Geelong & Collingwood have an advantage with a reserves team according to Mick Malthouse, & both clubs have dominated Grand Final day in recent years. Does your club want to be competitive ?
Yes, the AFL is quiet on the issue, but its hardly a transparent body.
Rubbish Ian.
Giving the Gorillas a gig introduces even more fixturing problems (beloved by the AFL).
Kwality,
There are no fixturing issues. There are literally hundreds of grounds in Australia suitable for reserves players to play on. Many of them are even close to airports you can fly interstate sides into.
- Moderator
- #63
The Governance of the VFL was never murky, just most people never cared enough to work it out.
The VFA was a wholly independent body when it became the VFL, and it was the VFA/VFL that allowed the VFL affiliation scheme - the AFL could not force it to accept it, partially as a means to bring AFL money into its system and assist some struggling VFL clubs with survival. It became AFL Victoria when the VFA accepted AFL representation on its board, along with funding, but was still an independent body. As of last March, this independence ended when AFL Victoria and its assets were acquired in their entirety by the AFL.
All clubs have had the option to have independent reserve teams, the VFL moratorium was only announced last year for this season to 2013. Hawthorn have said they dont want it, Carlton made an effective takeover of the Bullants, Essendon will have thiers next year, as will Richmond (probably). St Kilda have indicated they want their own. North and the Bulldogs presumably dont have a spare 400k a year to fund their own and will likely perservere with affiliations for some time to come unless reserves are forced on them.
AFL teams ceased to have under 19s sides when list sized were introduced. It was this that led to the formation of the TAC Cup - from which we now draft half of all draftees into the league, so it would seem to have been the right call.
Eastern Rangers
2015 Worsfold Medalist - Rowen Powell
Such a scheme would be consistent with the existing WAFC constitution as well.
- Moderator
- #65
Article in the Advertiser on the 28th talks about the SANFL also refusing the AFL sides permission to play in the SANFL. The Advertiser estimates the costs to the play in the SANFL at $750,000 a year - DOUBLE what AFL sides pay to play in the VFL - so it becomes another way to suckle at the AFLs teat while being um "independent".
The same article also mentions that talks regarding the licenses have been halted by the SANFL until they can work out how much money the clubs will make at the new Adelaide Oval, putting off any decision until after the end of the first season there. They may not have that choice with Port much longer if Port keep losing money, since the SANFL borrowed from the AFL to keep them afloat in the first place.
Finally Patrick keane, official AFL spokesman said that the AFL expects to return all licences to the clubs.
ref: http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/sport/afl/league-halt-on-licence-debate/story-e6freck3-1226437642060
The same article also mentions that talks regarding the licenses have been halted by the SANFL until they can work out how much money the clubs will make at the new Adelaide Oval, putting off any decision until after the end of the first season there. They may not have that choice with Port much longer if Port keep losing money, since the SANFL borrowed from the AFL to keep them afloat in the first place.
Finally Patrick keane, official AFL spokesman said that the AFL expects to return all licences to the clubs.
ref: http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/sport/afl/league-halt-on-licence-debate/story-e6freck3-1226437642060
Heardy_101
LET'S GO BRANDON
Of course it would be double that of what the other teams would pay, the SA sides have the worst stadium deals and the worst returns in the whole league so naturally they would get ripped off for reserves sides as well.
Nice, but it ignores CONTROL e.g the AFL decided & the AFL funded TAC Cup resulted.
More specifically Geelong got a VFL team when? Who created this anomaly, the AFL thats who.
My concerns are fuelled by Mick Malthouses comments, Collingwood & the Eagles, leaving no doubt the Reserves team is a real plus, starting with overviewing the selection of the coaches, developing players learning only one game plan, being schooled in one (1) only game plan.
- Moderator
- #68
The VFL didnt close up shop when Geelong put a team in. ALL clubs had the ability to and didnt. Hell non victorian clubs could have entered a team - as Tasmania did for a while. It wasnt until Collingwood won the flag and geelong made several grand finals that everyone else realised they were behind. The option was ALWAYS there.
Yep & as Malthouse said a dedicated Reserves team .....
Woosha did some straight talking to the WAFL presidents:
http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/sp...-positive-after-latest-wafl-reserves-meeting/
http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/sp...-positive-after-latest-wafl-reserves-meeting/
Honestly wonder why some people are on this AFL forum, if they hate it & everything linked with it.
From what I've read of it's history, the VFA administration was a complete financial shambles, who'd held out on any & all association with the V/AFL, due in no small part to a bloody-minded approach & misplaced optimism they'd come out on top, well after the point it became obvious they wouldn't.
I see a lot of that approach in certain posters' (wink wink, nudge nudge) mindsets - just cannot accept that the AFL are actually the power in footy, and any other body/club/league person in footy, basically needs to deal with them as a fact of life.
From what I've read of it's history, the VFA administration was a complete financial shambles, who'd held out on any & all association with the V/AFL, due in no small part to a bloody-minded approach & misplaced optimism they'd come out on top, well after the point it became obvious they wouldn't.
I see a lot of that approach in certain posters' (wink wink, nudge nudge) mindsets - just cannot accept that the AFL are actually the power in footy, and any other body/club/league person in footy, basically needs to deal with them as a fact of life.
Yes & no.
AFL have actually been reticent to hand out stand-alone licenses, over the last 3-4 years. Not sure what it was like before that, but Ess have explored the option a few times, AFL vic wouldn't let us in.
Something will end up happening.
Not overly opposed to West Coast and Fremantle playing teams with the bye for matches with no premiership points.
Not a real solution IMHO - are you suggesting the AFL clubs have reserves team that only plays every 2nd week?
I'm suggesting that we only play three WAFL games every round so that three teams have the bye. Two of those teams would play Freo/West Coast.
Similar threads
