WAFL Round 15

[Visro]

Well with the royals not playing this weekend not that many of our boys were playing in the WAFL. Of those that were, the following were mentioned for their performances on the WAFL website:

Hunter got three goals for Swan Districts but they went down
McCarrey got one goal for East Fremantle but the also went down

And that was it. Not too inspiring this week. I know McDougall played for Perth who went down to South Freo but from what I saw on TV he is no where near even playing his average footy. He can play a lot better than he is at the moment so I'm wondering whats up with him? Overall though, a quiet week in the WAFL for WC.

Vis

 

[Frodo]

Kasey Green had an excellent game

 

[Visro]

Who's he play for again? One of the Freo sides aint it?

What I can't understand is why the AFL players from the two WA AFL clubs dont all play in a team with their team mates? Take Adam Hunter for example. He usually plays well for SD but SD are getting beaten every week! Why can't he play for the Royals where he would most likely improve even more? Same for all the other players. I still believe the comp would be even if they did do this but it would only probably work if one team dropped out. That way, team mates could play with each other and learn to a greater extent what their team mates weaknesses and strengths are. What does everyone else think?

Vis

 

[Voice of Reason]

Good question, Visro, and apologies for my answer, which you're probably not going to like much.

I think the whole thing needs to be thought through again from the top of the AFL and the WAFL, because at the moment we have neither one thing nor the other.

Option 1 - the WAFL is merely a feeder for the AFL and its needs should be subordinated to those of the AFL clubs in the State. That might (and only might) work for the VFL in a 10 team state, but here we are talking about East Perth versus South Fremantle in a 2 team league.

Option 2 - the WAFL is a competition in its own right, albeit one notch down from the elite AFL in its playing strength. The health of the competition depends on a passionate contest between proud, evenly-matched clubs and a lot of spectator interest.

I prefer Option 2 by a distance, which implies that the Eagles squad players should be equally distributed across all WAFL clubs (including Peel). They should still train with the Eagles (probably 2 big sessions a week) and less often, but at least once a week, with their WAFL club, albeit under some Eagle direction.

I realise that at first blush this might seem to penalise the Eagles (my first interest by the way) because all the squad players don't play together at East Perth under my scenario. But I dispute this party line from the current Eagles management. I believe the squad players can learn to be better players individually at a WAFL club and with their Eagles training. Yes, there may be some short term loss because Jeremy Humm isn't used to playing with (say) Ryan Turnbull and Troy Wilson any more, but the reality is that if picked for the Eagles, he has to learn to play with Ben Cousins and Michael Gardiner and kick to Scott Cummings anyway. And, as I say, they need to train together at the Eagles.

It is bad for the WAFL for East Perth to win the flag this year and the only reason they won't is because of the stupid rules put in to mitigate Option 1 that prevent them from picking players who have played "too often" for the Eagles. That is penalising competence and I don't agree with it.

 

[Frodo]

Sharks Vis

VOR
The AFL castrates clubs by it's restrictive list policy. I would like to see an Eagles reserve team in the WAFL and a Freo one too so that the guys can learn to play together and also play against more experienced opponents. In reality the reserves would be youngsters or out of form players so they would not be an overpowering force in WAFL. But we would need a list of 50 players!
I followed Subi for years and they are still my 2nd favorite WAFL side. The only reason I go for the Royals is the Eagles connection. This really means I have no loyalty at all to the Royals, only to the Eagles players playing for them. Thus it would be better to have an Eagles reserve side.

 

[ONE EYE]

VOR please tell me how spreading the Eagles amongst the WAFL Clubs will benefit the Eagles.

Dam the WAFL. Maybe I am being a bit harsh but in 10 years time there will not be a kid who gives a rats about Subiaco, Swans or whoever.

The WAFL is not even a feeder competition. Most of the kids are drafted before they play much WAFL

If something benefits the Eagles or the Dockers for that matter it benefits the state. If it means the young Eagles play together each week for team harmony etc. then it must help the Eagles

WA relies heavily on the Egales and Dockers success. If they continue like they are WA football will go broke. So the Eagles and the Dockers must be top priority. Those who are thinking otherwise have their head up their ass, living in the past or looking to push their own barrow.

Not for a moment am I suggesting Junior development be forgotten. Nor do I suggest that the WAFL die. But descisions made must not be detrimental to our two AFL Clubs.

I do not have all the answers to solve the WAFL ills. Certainly they must be the States Premier Comp. They must play Interstate football, they should be playing before the AFL games to get exposure. I dont know.

The WAFL have proven what a selfish bunch of Dorks they are by looking to thorw out Peel.

By giving Junior football development back to the WAFL Clubs you will find the funds go to buying hacks to bolster their Senior side than develop future AFL Players.

VOR I do not believe that you can sincerely say that the Eagles are your first interest. I can see right through you. The Eagles Management need only be concerned with Eagles issues. They would be stupid to do otherwise.


Just dont mess with the Eagles

 

[Voice of Reason]

Frodo said "VOR, The AFL castrates clubs by it's restrictive list policy. I would like to see an Eagles reserve team in the WAFL and a Freo one too so that the guys can learn to play together and also play against more experienced opponents. In reality the reserves would be youngsters or out of form players so they would not be an overpowering force in WAFL. But we would need a list of 50 players!"

I agree with that - and that's one of the things I was driving at by saying that it needs to be thought through from the top of the AFL & WAFL. There is no question that AFL lists are too small. In an ideal world, the WAFL might be 12 teams including WCE & Freo reserves, maybe.

ONE EYE - here's my answers to your thoughts:

"VOR please tell me how spreading the Eagles amongst the WAFL Clubs will benefit the Eagles. Dam the WAFL. Maybe I am being a bit harsh but in 10 years time there will not be a kid who gives a rats about Subiaco, Swans or whoever."

Could be true - and if so that's sad. It will also kill footy in WA, which is on very tricky ground as it is - ask Karl Langdon and look at the kids playing soccer and rugby rather than footy.

"The WAFL is not even a feeder competition. Most of the kids are drafted before they play much WAFL. If something benefits the Eagles or the Dockers for that matter it benefits the state. If it means the young Eagles play together each week for team harmony etc. then it must help the Eagles."

ONLY in the short term. They play better together perhaps, but do they improve as individual players who can eventually step up to AFL? I don't think so. Is David Antonovitz (for instance) a better player now because he's played with the others at East Perth? Or would he have improved by training with the Eagles and having to play well in the WAFL with a club with some experienced players around him? Another thing - it becomes a clique of young Eagles who are paid too much and think they're better than they are. The discipline of more older players who've been around would help, not hinder.

"WA relies heavily on the Egales and Dockers success. If they continue like they are WA football will go broke. So the Eagles and the Dockers must be top priority. Those who are thinking otherwise have their head up their ass, living in the past or looking to push their own barrow. Not for a moment am I suggesting Junior development be forgotten. Nor do I suggest that the WAFL die. But descisions made must not be detrimental to our two AFL Clubs. I do not have all the answers to solve the WAFL ills. Certainly they must be the States Premier Comp. They must play Interstate football, they should be playing before the AFL games to get exposure. I dont know. The WAFL have proven what a selfish bunch of Dorks they are by looking to thorw out Peel."

Agree with the first line - but, mate, it's your system that ain't working!!! The Eagles and Dockers are struggling badly under it. It isn't working and that's why I say it needs another look. Going this way is damaging the "State's premier comp" and junior footy.

I do agree that the WAFL CLUBS are a selfish bunch of dorks for trying to throw out Peel.

"By giving Junior football development back to the WAFL Clubs you will find the funds go to buying hacks to bolster their Senior side than develop future AFL Players."

Agreed, so the way of going about this has to be carefully managed.

"VOR I do not believe that you can sincerely say that the Eagles are your first interest. I can see right through you."

That's because you don't know me, have no idea who I am and have absolutely no concept of what a loyal supporter I have been and am. Sad to hear a fellow Eagle abuse someone because they differ on HOW to best serve the Eagles and the game of footy.

"The Eagles Management need only be concerned with Eagles issues. They would be stupid to do otherwise. Just dont mess with the Eagles"

My loyalty to the club transcends the present management, who you should remember are (well) paid employees, who work there for a living, some of whom have no real loyalty. I go there for free because I love the Eagles.

 

[Frodo]

VOR,
I think that the depth of your posts and time taken to write on these subjects shows you are a true Eagles supporter. Good onya, we are fortunate to have so many excellent supporters on out board.

 

[Mr Eagle]

Two cents

Although it would be nice for WA to find a quick way to resurrect the WAFL, the fact is that it will take changes to the AFL to give it a chance. At the very least:

- the AFL should impose new restrictions on draftees. Anyone applying for the draft must have played at least 30 senior games in a recognised second-tier club (WAFL, SANFL, VFL, AFLQ, etc.) or have been senior-listed by such a club for two years.

and

- the AFL has to ensure that Eagles and Dockers home games do not migrate to Saturday afternoons.

(Can anyone give me a quick rundown of how the Victorian clubs work with their respective VFL sides (e.g. Hawthorn to Box Hill)?)

 

[Voice of Reason]

Frodo - thanks for the compliment.

Mr. Eagle - 2 damn good ideas IMHO. I do worry about the Daniel Kerrs of this world who are being exposed to heavy hits very young by toughened professionals like Ratten et al.

As for the Vics (I lived there till recently), it is in a state of flux, but they're trying to make it one VFL side aligned to one AFL side (Hawthorn/Box Hill and Melbourne/Sandringham for example).

There is the odd standalone side - I think North Ballarat Roosters are one - and there was a failed experiment where the Bulldogs were aligned to Williamstown and Werribee.

And last year Collingwood, Carlton, Essendon and St Kilda (I think) just put out a reserves side - ie they weren't aligned to a VFL club, they just fielded their reserves.

 

[Captain Random]

Re: Two cents

A couple of thoughts, sorry if I'm stating the bleeding obvious

1. Mr Eagle, the idea of draft restrictions is good but probably won't happen. Anything that hinders the AFL clubs from getting the youngsters will be resisted. To my understanding, the minimum draft age was to prevent youngsters from being lost to the system by being brought in too soon, rather than any wish to help local clubs. Maybe the WAFC needs to make the case that if the AFL doesn't introduce a minimum WAFL game rule or a higher minimum age, they may just kill the goose with the golden eggs

The trouble is, if they introduced such a rule, some cashed-up AFL club (cough*carlton*cough) may decide to challenge it as a restraint of trade

2. Removing the restrictions on AFL schedule clashes with WAFL games won't change anything really. For the WAFL, the old days are gone and they're not coming back. I think one of the main reasons is that people just can't get to see two footy games in one weekend, and if it came down to choosing between an AFL game or WAFL game, which would you choose?

About the only thing to ensure WAFL club stability (besides introducing pokies ) is to keep the costs as low as possible. The club boards need to get over squabbling like they're powerful independent clubs in some early 80's timewarp and work towards the unified survival of the comp. Or maybe WAFC intervention at club board level is on the cards? (WAFL MOB anyone?)

3. I tend to agree with you VOR, they should spread the players out. I can understand the sorts of problems that can develop with that scenario, but really, what benefit is there in playing all your ammo's in a side that dominates a minnow comp?

 

[tjrra]

Many thanks for the "Great Debate" on footy in WA, some very good comments.
I believe that changes are going to happen next year with regard to the host club setup, a report into the state of the WAFL is due out soon and because the current host club setup is unpopular with most of the clubs it will be changed.
It should go back to a setup were players from out of the state are placed at WAFL teams in the form of a reverse draft.

 

[Frodo]

Then perhaps the Eagles should put a reserve side in the VFL!
They can afford it!