Ideas to better the AFL

[Kwality]

Sorry, what are you on about?

Zoning Slatts, not a Vic view, a national view.
Vic is geographically a very small % of the country, which is relevent IF you are looking nationally yet you want the zones based on the history of providing footballers to the AFL, or are you still rooted in the VFL - imagine ignoring a GREAT like Stephen Michael?

Have you checked out the Swans/Pilbara link ?
On #116 I offered:
WA footy is zoned, e.g Swan Districts & the Pilbara
http://www.swandistrictsfc.com.au/vswans/


Did the sponsors attract your eye?
Its about the community, the development, diddly squatt with each one would have a similar cut of draftees - Slatts, zoning is much much more than what AFL clubs get out of it - & still we have people like you in denial, denial that leaving WA footy in its well managed hands, rather than centralising control for no gain.

Zoning has to do more than give a preference in the draft & to suggest zones can be set based on yesteryear is cloud cuckoo land stuff.
Its like suggesting the Dockers & Eagles should get preference on WA kids because they fund it, sounds good but ...

 

[Slattery_20]

I've still got no idea what you're on about?
Zoning half of WA to each WA club actually would give the WA clubs a huge advantage.

 

[The_Reaper]

I've still got no idea what you're on about?
Zoning half of WA to each WA club actually would give the WA clubs a huge advantage.

That is the point

It's all about building community and giving clubs more of a local feel.

 

[Kwality]

Zoning in WA is not a problem, alive & well & producing results.

Zoning in Vic is non existent SO to fix Vic, Slatts wants to change WA - its a Vic problem, why doesnt Vic fix it?

Classic example of why it is just a power grab for the AFL to run WA footy.

 

[Slattery_20]

Zoning in WA is not a problem, alive & well & producing results.

No it isn't. Not to AFL clubs, anyway.

For the 3489263496th time (bit slow obviously), thread is about AFL, hence my comments are about the AFL and it's clubs.

Just that if you split up the entire country into 20 zones, for the 20 AFL clubs, there wouldn't be much input at all. There wouldn't be much resources put into the areas. They'd be spread very thin on the ground.


Don't particularly care about the WAFL (or SANFL or VFL etc etc). I'm sure there's a forum for you, somewhere.

 

[Howard Littlejohn]

No it isn't. Not to AFL clubs, anyway.

For the 3489263496th time (bit slow obviously), thread is about AFL, hence my comments are about the AFL and it's clubs.

Just that if you split up the entire country into 20 zones, for the 20 AFL clubs, there wouldn't be much input at all. There wouldn't be much resources put into the areas. They'd be spread very thin on the ground.


Don't particularly care about the WAFL (or SANFL or VFL etc etc). I'm sure there's a forum for you, somewhere.

And many of us don't see the AFL in isolation from the game as a whole. Making the AFL better does not necessarily make the sport overall stronger or better. Nor do imposing national structures becaiuse of screw-ups, sometimes AFL inspired and always AFL approved, in Victoria's and Tasmania's situations do anything for the game.
As an aside, I don't see zoning at a national level would necessarily enhance the AFL or the game.

 

[Slattery_20]

Making the AFL better does not necessarily make the sport overall stronger or better.

Of course not... in principle.

Nor do imposing national structures becaiuse of screw-ups, sometimes AFL inspired and always AFL approved, in Victoria's and Tasmania's situations do anything for the game.

however I very rarely see a good, coherent case made for these criticisms.
A lot of it seems to boil down to just plain ranting on state-based lines. WA people rant on that the AFL want to take everything off them, Tas people want the AFL to set them up a team, SA people know there's a problem but seem split on whether it's from the SANFL, club or AFL.
Which is why I thought it was maybe a good idea to steer this thread along the lines of purely AFL improvements that could be applied to all 20 clubs.

As an aside, I don't see zoning at a national level would necessarily enhance the AFL or the game.

Genuinely torn.
Part of me wants the genuine Essendon kids, the Toys/Trengoves/Caddys of this world, at Essendon; part of me would be bloody miffed if we missed out on a top pick that we needed, because they happened to be born (literally) on the wrong side of the tracks.
And I think it's incredibly ugly how the zones were used/abused/bought through the 70s/80s.
Bit of a minefield re- how you'd implement it, so pretty happy to see it left well alone.

 

[Team DJ]

Flick the Roos and Dogs,

18 teams means far too much distance between the best and worst teams.

Move Port Power to Tasmania

 

[Kwality]

No it isn't. Not to AFL clubs, anyway.

For the 3489263496th time (bit slow obviously), thread is about AFL, hence my comments are about the AFL and it's clubs.

Just that if you split up the entire country into 20 zones, for the 20 AFL clubs, there wouldn't be much input at all. There wouldn't be much resources put into the areas. They'd be spread very thin on the ground.


Don't particularly care about the WAFL (or SANFL or VFL etc etc). I'm sure there's a forum for you, somewhere.

Herein lies the problem Slatts no better displaying the problems Victoria brings to our game.

 

[Slattery_20]

Now you're just quoting my post and saying "that's why Victoria is the problem". Is this meant to be a troll?

 

[pazza]

A change that can be easily made. The 50 m penalty needs to be refined. Too often inconsequential acts are resulting in 50m penalties.

So tho create the defining line - unless it is a reportable incident, the penalty is 25m.

 

[AM]

A change that can be easily made. The 50 m penalty needs to be refined. Too often inconsequential acts are resulting in 50m penalties.

So tho create the defining line - unless it is a reportable incident, the penalty is 25m.

Geez! They do that in the VAFA, Pazza. Were you aware of that?

 

[pazza]

Geez! They do that in the VAFA, Pazza. Were you aware of that?

Where do you think I got the idea from? And for what it's worth, it works!

 

[Yorkes_87]

Better the Afl? They could start by scrapping most of the new rules in the last 10 years, scrap the expansion clubs, bring Fitzroy back and bring back Waverley. There's my dollars worth.

 

[Colonial]

Better the Afl? They could start by scrapping most of the new rules in the last 10 years, scrap the expansion clubs, bring Fitzroy back and bring back Waverley. There's my dollars worth.

Say goodbye to the massive tv deal, and watch as the NRL and FFA take over. National is the be all and end all. The good old days are only good when you look back through misty eyes.

Yes i see the sarcasm in your post

 

[Yorkes_87]

Say goodbye to the massive tv deal, and watch as the NRL and FFA take over. National is the be all and end all. The good old days are only good when you look back through misty eyes.

Yes i see the sarcasm in your post

There's another one. Bring back the free to air deal, I have Foxtel but feel for those who don't this year more than ever. This is a more serious note.

 

[Kwality]

There's another one. Bring back the free to air deal, I have Foxtel but feel for those who don't this year more than ever. This is a more serious note.

Reduce the Hawks pay packet, 50% + - Buddy goes home ... FTA only hello??