AFL rejects Port's bailout plea

[Hodges 153!]

That's what it looks like to me. Haysman has come onto the scene and looked at our 'unsustainable business model' and as a result has immediately gone on the front foot to negotiate a better stadium deal. This started in November last year which indicates to me that he hasn't been able to get very far (if anywhere) and is now 'going public' and to the AFL to force the hand of the SANFL.

It's even possible that Haysman has worked with the AFL quite closely, because it hasn't taken AD very long to come out and say to the SANFL that they need to sort it out (as in, he/the AFL have been/are very much aware of the exact position of the club vs SANFL and are happy to help the club force the SANFL's hand by publicly telling them to 'help out').

Sure, that's speculation on our part, but the pieces fit the puzzle imo.

I thought exactly all of the above yesterday as well.

 

[FOOOOTY]

This is exactly what North, Melbourne and the Bulldogs had to go through before the AFL would part with a cent.

We didnt ask for cash simply to reduce our debt either, which is what PA are doing..

 

[Steve Dore]

.... The AFL knows that the SANFL is the biggest 'custodian' of footy in SA and as such, screwing the SANFL is screwing SA footy.

The AFL is not trying to screw footy in SA, quite the opposite in fact. See my post above re the AFL's national program and the SANFL's resistance to it.

The worse thing for footy at all levels in SA at the moment is the egos at the SANFL.

 

[JD-Roo]

I know a chunk of the PA board is put there by the SANFL but is anyone on the SANFL a Port person?

 

[FOOOOTY]

So surely they have the same responsibility to the PAFC that they do to all the Victorian clubs that they renegotiate for and bail out.

This is why I have always been against AFL handouts to struggling clubs, because we have always known that when push came to shove, they would be one-way; that we have paid for the Dees, Dogs and Roos every year and now we need a bit of cash we're being told to **** off.

This is a ****ing rort, and anyone who thinks the AFL's position is a fair or just one is a ****ing idiot.

Theres a big difference simply put.

WB: 1/16th ownership of AFL
NM: 1/16th ownership of AFL
Mel: 1/16th ownership of AFL
PA: 0 ownership of AFL
SANFL: 2/16th ownership of AFL

 

[rooboy]

mate its no secret and we dont hide from the fact that the crows have a much larger supporter base than we do

and im sure that those crow supporters who did vote would have been against any help from the AFL

why? because they hate us...

I voted for you......but I still hate you.I just want you to be around to hate.

 

[Phhht]

The AFL is not trying to screw footy in SA, quite the opposite in fact. See my post above re the AFL's national program and the SANFL's resistance to it.

I disagree. The AFL has consistently spent dollars on 'new' markets such as NSW + QLD over more traditional bases such as SA, WA + Tas. I dont have the figures at hand but when you look at how much funding SA receives compared to NSW or QLD it puts into perspective how much they feel they need to look after SA footy.

The worse thing for footy at all levels in SA at the moment is the egos at the SANFL.

Dont disgaree with this. The one point I believe that needs to be considered however is that if we (SA footy) had to rely on the AFL rather than the SANFL, SA footy would become a basketcase fairly quickly.

The SANFL commission and much of its ego does need to be rained in but the SANFL commission is a good thing for SA footy. But never forget the egos of such luminaries such as AD and AA..... imagine them controlling SA footy...god help us all.

For the PAFC, it needs the AFL to put pressure on the SANFL to get a better slice of the pie, no doubt about it. But ultimately, it comes down to where the dollars will come from. A bit of give and take from all parties (SANFL + AFL + PAFC) is needed. The PAFc is simply using a tactic to push its cause.

 

[Steve Dore]

I know a chunk of the PA board is put there by the SANFL but is anyone on the SANFL a Port person?

Brian Cunningham, former PAFC player and CEO, is on the SANFL Commission but there are also a number of Port haters.

 

[Spadge]

I voted for you......but I still hate you.I just want you to be around to hate.

ok well maybe not all crows supporters voted against us... but you'd have to agree that the majority of them would have

 

[Steve Dore]

I disagree. The AFL has consistently spent dollars on 'new' markets such as NSW + QLD over more traditional bases such as SA, WA + Tas. I dont have the figures at hand but when you look at how much funding SA receives compared to NSW or QLD it puts into perspective how much they feel they need to look after SA footy. ......

Did you read my post in relation to the SANFL's refusal to join the AFL's national program?

All the other states have joined and that is why they get more funding from the AFL than SA. The SANFL by refusing to join is denying football in SA funds from the AFL. You can't blame the AFL for the SANFL's pig headedness.

 

[Port85]

Hmm...call me a conspiracy theorist if you like, put personally I think all of this is has been used to get some leverage for the club with the SANFL and try to make the SANFL look like the bad guys and pressure them into a deal (I'm not saying Caroline Wilson's article was a deliberate "leak" of the situation, but we should be trying to use the media storm to pressure the SANFL, which I think we are doing).

The AFL understands the situation and are trying to pressure the SANFL into giving us a fairer deal, ultimately if the SANFL are not seen to be moving in a direction the AFL deems fair on PAFC, then they will probably move on giving us the handouts.

I think Haysman asked the AFL for money knowing that they would give the answer that they have. If the AFL surprised everyone and actually did give us the handout, Hays would probably have been pleasantly surprised.

 

[Phhht]

Did you read my post in relation to the SANFL's refusal to join the AFL's national program?

Yes I did but other than you saying that the SANFL have refused to agree to join the AFL's program there isn't much detail. Are we aware of what conditions come with agreeing to join the program?

Dont get me wrong I am not saying that the SANFL aren't being pigheaded in refusing to join the AFL program, I just dont have enough detail to come to that conclusion.

All I can go by is past performances. And seeing how little the AFL does for SA footy (non AFL based) I can't believe the AFL are the good guys here.

They have consistently relied on the SANFL making decent profits from the AFL licenses to basically take care of SA footy.
Now after all these years of doing SFA we are to believe that out of the goodness of their hearts they are handing out funds and all we have to do is join their program.


I know that guys like Whicker and Payze dont fill any of us with much confidence but dont forget that the guys on the other side of the river are Demetriou and Anderson.... F**k what a choice.

 

[FOOOOTY]

out of interest whats PA's stake in the SANFL?

 

[Steve Dore]

Yes I did but other than you saying that the SANFL have refused to agree to join the AFL's program there isn't much detail. Are we aware of what conditions come with agreeing to join the program? .....

Nothing too onerous. For one the SANFL has to change its name. The under age competitions also need to come in line with the rest of Australia.

AFL wants SANFL name change

You can also see from that article that the SANFL is also screwing affiliated country leagues.

.... at least three country leagues are still threatening to disaffiliate with the SANFL .....

 

[Steve Dore]

out of interest whats PA's stake in the SANFL?

That is all a bit grey these days.

The PAFC is one of the founding clubs of the SAFA in 1877 which went on to become the SANFL. In 1990 when Port tried to join the AFL the other clubs wanted Port expelled from the SANFL so Port said, "fine, just give us our 10% share of the SANFL's assets". I'm not sure how this works legally but I suspect that no member club has any claim on the SANFL's group assets.

 

[FOOOOTY]

That is all a bit grey these days.

The PAFC is one of the founding clubs of the SAFA in 1877 which went on to become the SANFL. In 1990 when Port tried to join the AFL the other clubs wanted Port expelled from the SANFL so Port said, "fine, just give us our 10% share of the SANFL's assets". I'm not sure how this works legally but I suspect that no member club has any claim on the SANFL's group assets.

So PAFC an AFL club, would have nomore stake then a 2nd tier club?, kinda screwy imo

 

[portfan36]

I definitely ain't an AFL supporter but playing devil's advecote for just a second.....

1. AFL grants 2 x licenses to SANFL.

2. SANFL is financially secure and appears to be making healthy profits primarily from the AFL competition.

3. A 'department' (for want of a better analogy) of the SANFL is struggling to meet its budget.

4. Why should the AFL provide emergency funding for an entity (the SANFL) which is making healthy profits?

5. If the SANFL was a Christopher Skase or Dr Edelstone would we view the whole situation differently.

6. We need to remember that North, Bulldogs, Melbourne weren't making sustainable profits. The SANFL is.


I am convinced this whole situation is about us (Port) desperately trying to renegotiate our deal with the SANFL. We are trying to use this whole situation to FORCE the SANFL to rejig its thinking and the AFL are also trying to erode the SANFL's powerbase in this state.

It will be an interesting couple of months with the battle lines being clearly drawn

1. SANFL position - Port need to increase crowds
2. Port position - Give a significantly better stadium deal
3. AFL - Screw SA

Youve hit the nail on the head here Phhht except for point 3. I actually agree with the AFL's stance on this one and your post above appears to agree with their stance as well. Why the hell does the AFL need to help out a subsidiary (Port) when the parent company (SANFL) is making plenty out of them. Its just creative accounting on the SANFLs behalf. As has been mentioned before, the SANFL's stadium deal with Port stinks and puts them behind the 8 ball right from the start. Im guessing it stinks for the AFC as well however they have sufficient supporters to more than break even on the deal. Its selfish powermongering at its best. We know the SANFL holds a bitter grudge towards Port for what happened in 1990 and they would have known this type of stadium deal would financially affect Port much more than the AFC due to the 70-30 supporter split here in SA.

 

[portfan36]

Thats about it, though i have changed 3.

3. AFL - Screw SANFL

Now FOOOOTY has got it right

 

[Phhht]

Nothing too onerous. For one the SANFL has to change its name. The under age competitions also need to come in line with the rest of Australia.

AFL wants SANFL name change

You can also see from that article that the SANFL is also screwing affiliated country leagues.

Going by that article it isn't really clear that the SANFL are refusing the name change. Sounds like they need a restructure to follow the AFL approved layout and some minor leagues are getting their back up over the AFL required restructure.

I am fairly sure that they (SANFL) have already changed the junior grades to the U16/U18.

I got the general perception from that article that the SANFL are wanting to adopt the changes but they are running into problems trying to implement the AFL requirements?

 

[Steve Dore]

So PAFC an AFL club, would have nomore stake then a 2nd tier club?, kinda screwy imo

The PAFC also spawned a new SANFL club, the PAMFC. The PAMFC probably inherited the PAFC's stake in the SANFL and the PAFC most likely does not have any stake in the SANFL at all. I don't really know. The whole thing is screwy thanks to the deal done between the SANFL and the AFL in 1990.

I don't believe either the PAFC or the AFC are actually affiliated with the SANFL. Neither club has a vote in appointing members of the SA Football Commission. The PAMFC has a vote.

 

[Phhht]

So PAFC an AFL club, would have nomore stake then a 2nd tier club?, kinda screwy imo

Going by the SANFL website the SANFL commission has representatives from the 9 SANFL clubs, no AFL club.

Nowhere on their site can I see ANY reference that the PAFC has any stake whatsoever in the SANFL, but I didn't spend that long looking.

Edit: Wharfie too fast, Phhht still lumbering in the straight...

 

[ADL!]

Add me to that list. SA needs 2 clubs (at least). Norwood?

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

I know a chunk of the PA board is put there by the SANFL but is anyone on the SANFL a Port person?

All the people appointed to the PAFC board by the SANFL, ie 50% of the board, are good solid Port citizen's and are usually recomended by the Port board to the SANFL.

Our new president is a SANFL apointee, apointed back in late 2005 and was an ex president of the Port Adelaide Magpies.

On the independent SA Football Commission our ex CEO Brian Cunningham (1992-2004) is one of 7 independant commissioners which includes SANFL CEO Leigh Whicker. There is the odd ex Port people who works at the SANFL like David Hutton who is the GM of Game Development and makes up the 5 or so senior executive team at the SANFL.

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

I definitely ain't an AFL supporter but playing devil's advecote for just a second.....

1. AFL grants 2 x licenses to SANFL.

.................etc

1. SANFL position - Port need to increase crowds
2. Port position - Give a significantly better stadium deal
3. AFL - Screw SANFL

A pretty good summary of the current situation with the minor change from SA to SANFL.

 

[Phhht]

All the people appointed to the PAFC board by the SANFL, ie 50% of the board, are good solid Port citizen's and are usually recomended by the Port board to the SANFL.

Our new president is a SANFL apointee, apointed back in late 2005 and was an ex president of the Port Adelaide Magpies.

On the independent SA Football Commission our ex CEO Brian Cunningham (1992-2004) is one of 7 independant commissioners which includes SANFL CEO Leigh Whicker. There is the odd ex Port people who works at the SANFL like David Hutton who is the GM of Game Development and makes up the 5 or so senior executive team at the SANFL.

Is that the same Brian Cunningham that was appointed as Chief Executive of the Port Adelaide Magpies Football Club in 1992?

Let the misinformation continue....

* Please note: this is not in anyway a reference to your post REH, just the crappola the SANFL continues to promote -see SANFL website!