Do the Crows need stable and strong Port Power?

[Geoffa32]

Re: Does the Crows need stable and strong Port Power?

Yes, correct. That's exactly what they did. They even tried to rebrand the new club as Port Power and then thought better of it and then did a dodgy job in then trying to deny it ever really happened, whilst still calling themselves the real thing.

They did it in a half-arsed manner and it is a millstone around their necks for the rest of time.

PAFC wins sub-license
PAFC creates a new entity, PAFC (AFL) Ltd As a joint venture with SANFL 50/50.
PAFC changes name to PAMFC
PAFC (AFL) Ltd starts as a business, employing staff & players
PAFC (AFL) changes name to PAFC
PAMFC continues playing in SANFL after paying $1 to the SANFL
PAFC starts in AFL

Apart from the bit I added you are spot on. The SANFL has 50% stake in the Power, yet in reality control it. If the Power were stronger financially the relationship may be a bit different.

 

[P.A.F.C]

Re: Does the Crows need stable and strong Port Power?

Explain to me how the same club that existed in 1996,

• now has a board split 50/50 SANFL/CLub appointed but did'nt then
• has to have its budget approved by the SANFL
• has no say in where it plays home games, and thus hamstrung on negotiating stadium deals.
  [*]has its players go to different SANFL clubs when not playing AFL
• has the same father son rule as the Crows, but not the exVFL clubs
• upon bankruptcy has to distribute the assets 50/50 with the PAMFC and SANFL.
• Has an identical club constitution to the Crows, bar the board representation and distribution of assets.
• Has less than 5000 members in 1996 then 35000 in 1997. Also none of these members are allowed the right to any club constitutional changes.

The actual name/colours/nickname does not mean a thing. It is the constitutional structure of the club that defines it.

All of those points mean nothing, and it's odd considering you were banging on about legal stuff before. Quick example, in bolded. Just pretend for a second that the PAFC went from the SANFL to the AFL and the PAMFC were the newly formed club. Why the hell would Port care about what SANFL club some of its player are aligned to? The PAMFC are not related to the PAFC, so how is this evidence that the PAFC aren't the old PAFC? Mind boggling

 

[Geoffa32]

Re: Does the Crows need stable and strong Port Power?

All of those points mean nothing, and it's odd considering you were banging on about legal stuff before. Quick example, in bolded. Just pretend for a second that the PAFC went from the SANFL to the AFL and the PAMFC were the newly formed club. Why the hell would Port care about what SANFL club some of its player are aligned to? The PAMFC are not related to the PAFC, so how is this evidence that the PAFC aren't the old PAFC? Mind boggling

When Port were launched its 1990 bid it was going to pull out of the SANFL, completely. Its reserves were to play in the then AFL Reserves comp.

My point isnt that its players dont go to PAMFC, it is that as a club the Power can not decide which clubs its players drafted from interstate go to. Like the Crows they are drafted by the SANFL clubs in a mini draft. The Power has little control over the fringe players. Look at Lobbe, played out of position at the PAMFC, untill the Power negotiated with the SANFL to move him to Westies.

You say that the legal stuff does not matter. The constitution of a club is what defines it. Not the club name, marketing or even a newspaper article.

Tell me your reason why, apart from club name and a few admin/coaching/support people working with the Power in 1997 from the Magpies in 1996 your AFL club is the one from 1870?

Or perhaps we can let the words of Roger James settle this

Roger James says he had always viewed the Power as a new club "I understand Port's background but as far as I'm concerned the Power was started from scratch, has only been in the (AFL) competition for 11 years and was made up of players from every SANFL club, to me, its heritage goes back to 1997 and that's why I question the decision to wear a Magpies jumper."

Or Current CEO

"It's about respecting where we've come from as a club," Haysman said. "We're one of the few clubs outside Victoria that can boast we're born from a club which was here in 1870. So we would celebrate that, be proud of that and embrace our heartland supporters in the Port Adelaide area."

Or Adam Kingsley who commented that Burgoyne and Lade are in the top five players to have ever played at the club on FiveAA after their retirements.

 

[aneale]

Re: Does the Crows need stable and strong Port Power?

All of those points mean nothing, and it's odd considering you were banging on about legal stuff before. Quick example, in bolded. Just pretend for a second that the PAFC went from the SANFL to the AFL and the PAMFC were the newly formed club. Why the hell would Port care about what SANFL club some of its player are aligned to? The PAMFC are not related to the PAFC, so how is this evidence that the PAFC aren't the old PAFC? Mind boggling

They mean everything, your club is not run by Port, it's not run by it's members, it's run by the SANFL. the Power couldn't be further away from the PAFC if it tried. Where were your U17's? U19's?, where did the PAFC special development squads go?

If you were old enough for the vote, you are just another one of the sheep who got sucked in and sold your soul for some shiny trinkets to be a Corporate franchise, forever selling out what made you the Port Adelaide Football Club.

At least we know, accept and are proud of what we are. Port fans are in denial of the first two of these.

 

[P.A.F.C]

Re: Does the Crows need stable and strong Port Power?

You have failed at my task. I said, imagine if the PAFC joined the AFL, with the PAMFC being the new club. Why does PAFC players not going to the PAMFC prove anything? You say we were going to pull out of the SANFL completely, well that's what we did. Therefore, we couldn't give a rats tossbag over which SANFL club our players are aligned to.

We went from the SANFL to the AFL, it's a different league in many ways. Of course we're going to change how things are done, you muppet. My god, we try for years to make it into the AFL, get in, and are now a different club because we can't control what SANFL club Matthew Lobbe is aligned to.

We are the same club because we tried to get into the AFL and succeeded. The AFL or SANFL weren't the ones trying to get us into the AFL for all those years. We were the ones trying, and we made it. Still the Port Adelaide Football Club, not the Port Adelaide Magpies Football Club.

 

[Go the Guts]

Re: Does the Crows need stable and strong Port Power?

The showdown ledger never has never will concern me.Its only 4 pts if we had lost that final and future finals against them that would have /will peeve me

Fair enough. It does concern me though, hence why I posted that.

 

[Geoffa32]

Re: Does the Crows need stable and strong Port Power?

You have failed at my task. I said, imagine if the PAFC joined the AFL, with the PAMFC being the new club. Why does PAFC players not going to the PAMFC prove anything? You say we were going to pull out of the SANFL completely, well that's what we did. Therefore, we couldn't give a rats tossbag over which SANFL club our players are aligned to.

We went from the SANFL to the AFL, it's a different league in many ways. Of course we're going to change how things are done, you muppet. My god, we try for years to make it into the AFL, get in, and are now a different club because we can't control what SANFL club Matthew Lobbe is aligned to.

We are the same club because we tried to get into the AFL and succeeded. The AFL or SANFL weren't the ones trying to get us into the AFL for all those years. We were the ones trying, and we made it. Still the Port Adelaide Football Club, not the Port Adelaide Magpies Football Club.

You didnt just leave the SANFL though. The SANFL formed a partnership with the PAMFC who were then the PAFC to form the Power. See Aneale's post.

"You" got into the AFL because the SANFL wanted the Port name and thus its supporters to support its second AFL club. Generating income through being forced to use its stadium.

 

[aneale]

Re: Does the Crows need stable and strong Port Power?

You have failed at my task. I said, imagine if the PAFC joined the AFL, with the PAMFC being the new club. Why does PAFC players not going to the PAMFC prove anything? You say we were going to pull out of the SANFL completely, well that's what we did. Therefore, we couldn't give a rats tossbag over which SANFL club our players are aligned to.

We went from the SANFL to the AFL, it's a different league in many ways. Of course we're going to change how things are done, you muppet. My god, we try for years to make it into the AFL, get in, and are now a different club because we can't control what SANFL club Matthew Lobbe is aligned to.

We are the same club because we tried to get into the AFL and succeeded. The AFL or SANFL weren't the ones trying to get us into the AFL for all those years. We were the ones trying, and we made it. Still the Port Adelaide Football Club, not the Port Adelaide Magpies Football Club.

That is without doubt the stupidest and nonsensical reason I have ever heard.

You are a different club because legally you are, and you shipped out what made you Port to Ethelton (even their CEO's have said they are the original Port, often, and on their website) leaving a club that didn't want to be the Port Adelaide Football Club but Port Power, realised they ****ed up and then wanted to take it all back.

Compare how Collingwood went from the VFA to the VFL and then try and convince yourself that Port is the same club, it's laughable. Also compare how Collingwood, aligned themselves with Williamstown in the VFL and that is where there players went back to, then they decided against that and the Collingwood Football Club entered a team in the VFL which it controls, it also recruits other players to join to make up the balance from it's AFL squad players. If Carlton don't like the Northern Bullants they pull them out and align with another VFL team.

Port Power can't put a Port Power in the SANFL, it also can't align them all with one Club. It has to get the SANFL's permission to move a single player.

You are not the same club because you are no longer a true club, you are a manufactured corporate entity with the same name as a name on the side of a building.

 

[P.A.F.C]

Re: Does the Crows need stable and strong Port Power?

"We" got into the AFL because we tried to for years. The SANFL knew it was the right move, and went for it. Yeah, was probably a shit deal in a lot of respects. Some changes we had to make. C'mon, calling us another club because of where our kids play SANFL and father son rules? Give us a break. But yes, some things we signed off on are bad. But it was the PAFC that ****ed up. And it is the PAFC that exist as the same club, despite being in a different competition, and run in a different way. This has nothing to do with the PAMFC.

 

[P.A.F.C]

Re: Does the Crows need stable and strong Port Power?

That is without doubt the stupidest and nonsensical reason I have ever heard.

You are a different club because legally you are, and you shipped out what made you Port to Ethelton (even their CEO's have said they are the original Port, often, and on their website) leaving a club that didn't want to be the Port Adelaide Football Club but Port Power, realised they ****ed up and then wanted to take it all back.

Compare how Collingwood went from the VFA to the VFL and then try and convince yourself that Port is the same club, it's laughable.

Of course the CEO of the Magpies has said they are the real Port. Do you really think the Magpies will draw a crowd if he comes out and says 'We are a newly formed entity produced by the SANFL, based at Ethleton, with your only reason for formation being SANFL crows.

When did Collingwood join the VFL? Pre 1900? Surely things were done different then, i'm sure a law master such as yourself could explain that. Just because some lawyers turned the PAFC into the PAFC in a way that leaves a skerrick of evidence towards your argument, doesn't mean the PAFC isn't the PAFC.

PAFC

 

[Geoffa32]

Re: Does the Crows need stable and strong Port Power?

"We" got into the AFL because we tried to for years. The SANFL knew it was the right move, and went for it. Yeah, was probably a shit deal in a lot of respects. Some changes we had to make. C'mon, calling us another club because of where our kids play SANFL and father son rules? Give us a break. But yes, some things we signed off on are bad. But it was the PAFC that ****ed up. And it is the PAFC that exist as the same club, despite being in a different competition, and run in a different way. This has nothing to do with the PAMFC.

Your a different club because the board structure changed
Your a different club because club owners changed
Your a different club because distribution of assets changed
Your a different club because the PAMFC hold the original business licence
Your a different club because your members rights changed, and the changes were not voted on, but drafted by a Lawyer.

But yeah you have the same name so must be the same club.

 

[P.A.F.C]

Re: Does the Crows need stable and strong Port Power?

When Port were launched its 1990 bid it was going to pull out of the SANFL, completely. Its reserves were to play in the then AFL Reserves comp.

My point isnt that its players dont go to PAMFC, it is that as a club the Power can not decide which clubs its players drafted from interstate go to. Like the Crows they are drafted by the SANFL clubs in a mini draft. The Power has little control over the fringe players. Look at Lobbe, played out of position at the PAMFC, untill the Power negotiated with the SANFL to move him to Westies.

You say that the legal stuff does not matter. The constitution of a club is what defines it. Not the club name, marketing or even a newspaper article.

Tell me your reason why, apart from club name and a few admin/coaching/support people working with the Power in 1997 from the Magpies in 1996 your AFL club is the one from 1870?

Or perhaps we can let the words of Roger James settle this



Or Current CEO



Or Adam Kingsley who commented that Burgoyne and Lade are in the top five players to have ever played at the club on FiveAA after their retirements.

What the hell as Roger James got to do with this? Bang on about constitutional changes, legalities, then post the opinion of a former PAFC player? If I interview Troy Bond and convince him to say Adelaide are actually Fruit Tingles FC, does that make it true?

And i'm not sure why you used that Haysman quote?

 

[Geoffa32]

Re: Does the Crows need stable and strong Port Power?

What the hell as Roger James got to do with this? Bang on about constitutional changes, legalities, then post the opinion of a former PAFC player? If I interview Troy Bond and convince him to say Adelaide are actually Fruit Tingles FC, does that make it true?

And i'm not sure why you used that Haysman quote?

A former Premiership Player who was in the initial squad might have a bit of a clue as to what actually happend I would suggest. Troy Bond may suggest we are Fruit Tingles FC, but that is easily dismissed as nonsense. THere is more credence to Jame's comments comments. Particularly when put into context with other comments made by two current club employees.

Being born suggests the club is new. Hence Haysman's comment. If your CEO cant get the spin right, who can.

You can believe what you want. Plenty of people believe that some Jewish bloke turned water into wine. And praying to his dad will solve all of lifes problems.

 

[P.A.F.C]

Re: Does the Crows need stable and strong Port Power?

Your a different club because the board structure changed
Your a different club because club owners changed
Your a different club because distribution of assets changed
Your a different club because the PAMFC hold the original business licence
Your a different club because your members rights changed, and the changes were not voted on, but drafted by a Lawyer.

But yeah you have the same name so must be the same club.

We signed of on the deal that made those changes. Yes, bad move in some respects, but the PAFC ****ed it up, and the PAFC is now different because of it. But it is still the PAFC.

I didn't realise our creed was 'There is great merit and noble achievement in maintaining the same club owners. We agree that success is in our reach, but only if our method of distribution of assets remain constant throughout our history. Finally we concede there can be honour in defeat. But only if we don't hire a ****ing lawyer to make any changes at the club.'

 

[P.A.F.C]

Re: Does the Crows need stable and strong Port Power?

A former Premiership Player who was in the initial squad might have a bit of a clue as to what actually happend I would suggest.

Being born suggests the club is new. Hence Haysman's comment. If your CEO cant get the spin right, who can.

Troy Bond was a premiership player, yeah? All I have to do is get him to say Adelaide are Fruit Tingles FC, and it's true!?

Yes, the opinion of every other Port 1997 squad member doesn't matter, cause Roger James said that. In fact, club legends like Russell Ebert and Mark Williams' opinions don't matter. Roger James said it! No doubt Roger was working with the lawyers over 1996, making sure the business license wasn't to stay with the PAFC. It was only until he considered all of Geoffa's points on constitutions and legalities that he finally decided to say that.

 

[aneale]

Re: Does the Crows need stable and strong Port Power?

Of course the CEO of the Magpies has said they are the real Port. Do you really think the Magpies will draw a crowd if he comes out and says 'We are a newly formed entity produced by the SANFL, based at Ethleton, with your only reason for formation being SANFL crows.

When did Collingwood join the VFL? Pre 1900? Surely things were done different then, i'm sure a law master such as yourself could explain that. Just because some lawyers turned the PAFC into the PAFC in a way that leaves a skerrick of evidence towards your argument, doesn't mean the PAFC isn't the PAFC.

PAFC

They didn't need too, all they said was, we are the real Port, we just changed our name to include "Magpies", those who supported Port but barracked for Adelaide, or Collingwood or Essendon or anyone else for that matter know they are the real Port and still follow them in the SANFL. Many Port supporters who show no interest in the AFL know they are the real Port as they were part of the membership who were at the vote and know the score still follow them, many Port supporters who were appalled about how the Power hijacked a lot of achievements and the way people like Tim Ginever were all of a sudden labelled still follow Port in the SANFL. The crowds at Port games between 91-96 was nothing to write home about anyway, even with winning 3 flags.

Yeah, what they did was they stopped playing in the VFA, everyone moved over, their players were VFA players one season, VFL players the next, they didn't change their business name, they didn't run themselves any different, they didn't give control over to a 3rd party and they didn't leave bits and pieces of themselves in a lower comp.

The PAFC is the PAFC, they are just PAFCII, created to join the AFL.

 

[P.A.F.C]

Re: Does the Crows need stable and strong Port Power?

Hahahaha now we're a sequel!

 

[P.A.F.C]

Re: Does the Crows need stable and strong Port Power?

But yeah, that last post was just full of bullshit evidence, and shows how full of crap you and Geoffa are. Bang on about constitutions and legalities in trying to make an argument, and start referencing past players personal opinions. Chuck in a few groups of people, who believe what you want them to believe and that's one hell of an argument!

And the crowd bullshit, c'mon? Increased crowds from 96-97 prove we're a different club? FACT.

 

[Geoffa32]

Re: Does the Crows need stable and strong Port Power?

We signed of on the deal that made those changes. Yes, bad move in some respects, but the PAFC ****ed it up, and the PAFC is now different because of it. But it is still the PAFC.

I didn't realise our creed was 'There is great merit and noble achievement in maintaining the same club owners. We agree that success is in our reach, but only if our method of distribution of assets remain constant throughout our history. Finally we concede there can be honour in defeat. But only if we don't hire a ****ing lawyer to make any changes at the club.'

You do understand that the PAFC was a club that was controlled by the members. That same legal entity is the PAMFC.

Wheras the Power are a complete new legal entity. That is the point.

 

[P.A.F.C]

Re: Does the Crows need stable and strong Port Power?

My point is we made those changes. Same club, but run differently, due to consent.

 

[Geoffa32]

Re: Does the Crows need stable and strong Port Power?

But yeah, that last post was just full of bullshit evidence, and shows how full of crap you and Geoffa are. Bang on about constitutions and legalities in trying to make an argument, and start referencing past players personal opinions. Chuck in a few groups of people, who believe what you want them to believe and that's one hell of an argument!

And the crowd bullshit, c'mon? Increased crowds from 96-97 prove we're a different club? FACT.

Whats your argument. We are the same club because we wanted to join the AFL...........We signed off on a deal and "presto chango" here we are.

What is the mechanism that got you into the AFL? How did you do it?

 

[P.A.F.C]

Re: Does the Crows need stable and strong Port Power?

I got Roger James to do it. Big mistake, really.

 

[aneale]

You've always been a sequel, a new club formed by the parent club to go into the AFL. New admins, new players, new contracts.

And as for the crowds, Port were not drawing 20K crowds to SANFL games that all of a sudden meant the PAMFC had to 'tell' everyone they were the original Port to get a decent crowd in 1997. The Crows hit the SANFL crowds, even Port's, substantially.

 

[Geoffa32]

Re: Does the Crows need stable and strong Port Power?

My point is we made those changes. Same club, but different, due to consent.

Who's consent?

The only vote, was for the club to put in a tender for the new AFL licence offered by the AFL. Once the tender was accepted the membership, who owned the PAFC in the SANFL, had no say in the way the Power was formed (or entered the AFL by signing off on a deal, as you put it).

 

[ltdamn]

They've never been the same club. The Power are half owned by the SANFL, the Magpies have always been independent from the SANFL.

A few years after they were created, the Power wanted everyone to believe they were the old Maggies, and even changed the name of the incorporated company they setup in 1995 to enter the AFL so they could legitimately call themselves 'The Port Adelaide Football Club'.

http://www.search.asic.gov.au/cgi-bin/gns030c?acn=068_839_547&juris=9&hdtext=ACN&srchsrc=1

I don't understand the shame and alienation that Power supporters try to inflict on the Maggies by pretending they are nothing and not responsible for their history. The Magpies have a long and rich SANFL history, which ultimately counts for nothing in the AFL.

In decrying it from them, you leave the SANFL club with nothing of worth and the AFL club with something worth nothing. Why not leave that history with it's owners where it belongs and it means something.