Another SANFL Coup Attempt

[Portia]

OK, so it is getting a bit too coincidental, but these stories keep popping up the week before a home game.

Is Rucc deliberately trying to torpedo our crowds?

 

[Froggy]

I'm not sure what he expects the supporters to do, we've never had a voice because since we've been in it's a 50/50 power split so anything that Port only wanted to do gets vetoed, it's a mute point and he'd be better off pointing out this is why we feel helpless because we have no control until the AFL give us our license back.

 

[PortBrillance]

Re: The Board and management of the club

So the SANFL rename us Adelaide Power and people go jump off and follow the Port Magpies playing in....none the less...the SANFL!

wtf are you guys on. If they rename us, I'll ditch the AFL AND SANFL. SANFL are the reason we are were we are, yet some of you will happily go back to that shithouse league to support a team that plays in it.

For me, if they rename us, I will simply move to London, buy an Arsenal season ticket and forget about Australian Rules football all together

 

[FishingRick04]

Re: The Board and management of the club

So the SANFL rename us Adelaide Power and people go jump off and follow the Port Magpies playing in....none the less...the SANFL!

wtf are you guys on. If they rename us, I'll ditch the AFL AND SANFL. SANFL are the reason we are were we are, yet some of you will happily go back to that shithouse league to support a team that plays in it.

For me, if they rename us, I will simply move to London, buy an Arsenal season ticket and forget about Australian Rules football all together

If they did that I am with you, both would burn for me, I would follow my sons and that's it.

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

nivek_48 has posted this in another thread - this is what Rucci has written previously:

link

link

Thanks for that Ford. Missed that article as I was on a boat in the Kimberley's for a couple of days when Rucci wrote it.

My hunch is clause 4.9 was changed but that the rest were always there. Anyone think that clause 9.4, 11.1 and 11.7 weren't there in 1996? They read constitent with what I knew at the time. Look at the way he wrote it...

They should ask why the PAFC consitition in clause 4.9 now reads: "a `member' means a person who is a director of the company and whose name is entered as a member of the company ..."

They should consider clause 9.4 that declares they "have a right to vote in relation to the election of club NOMINEES for appointment by the league commission to the board." Sounds like the Adelaide Football Club.

They should read clauses 11 - such as 11.1 that says "the directors of the company shall be such persons as shall be appointed by time to time by the league commission and the league commission may likewise remove any director at any time."

And 11.7 that says "the league commission may in its absolute discretion decline to appoint a club nominee as a director. In that event the club membership is entitled to nominate a replacement person for appointment by the league commission as a director."

The other constitutional change that I'm aware of that members had to vote was in June 2010 when The Magpies sold their 25% share of the Port Club after the February 2010 merger failed.

 

[simba_]

Re: The Board and management of the club

yeah needless to say I think/hope we would all drop the sport if Port were dropped but that shouldn't happen because the Adelaide Power is not going to happen

I'm suspicious of the former Magpies defender coming in and people accepting it just because he played for us so must have our best interests at heart. They could be on the verge of making big changes. But clearly, nobody is going to support an Adelaide Power.

 

[tribey]

The SANFL's financial straitjacket and sublicence conditions have already conspired to whittle us into a nub barely resembling Port Adelaide anyway.

'Washington Generals' would be more apt.

A non-descript team of charlatans wheeled out on demand to give their chosen brand a suitably incompetent and prostrate opponent.

 

[simba_]

IF any change was to happen I would only accept 'Adelaide Crows II' just to see how far we could take that. I think we could make this stupid organsation believe anything.

 

[FishingRick04]

IF any change was to happen I would only accept 'Adelaide Crows II' just to see how far we could take that. I think we could make this stupid organsation believe anything.

YES YES YES, I would suppport the Adelaide Crows mark 2 and I would also go back to view of wanting anyone to win other than a Victorian team, because God dang I hate Victorians!

The SANFL should come out and stop this rumour mongering if it isn't true either.

I still can't believe a 36k support base can be treated with such contempt.

Interest Melbourne yesterday had 11k at the game and Caro was on the radio stating that the Melbourne supporters don't come as they hate Ethiad, she was condoning it as ok.

The hyporcrisy is astounding in the media

 

[Tredz]

Re: The Board and management of the club

I think this is one reason why the team is playing poorly.

They do not know whether they have a job next year. Forget all the rhetoric from AFL and SANFL, when it comes to grassroots the workers do not trust management. Since Haysman left there is nothing left for the players to trust.

If anyone has gone through retrenchment and has agreements in place they will know that these can be easily broken and management has all the cards, workers do not care anymore.

If this story is true then I think it is safe to say the men in charge of footy in SA and schoolyard bullies who cannot cope with a bigger bully and do not like being beaten like they were with Adelaide Oval. Since that decision the knives are out.

There are only a certain number of people in SA who follow footy, 30% follow Port Adelaide. If there is no Port Adelaide then most of those people will be lost.

The SANFL should look to what happened to Fitzroy supporters where are they all now, they did not jump on Brisbane.

The Port Adelaide board has stuffed up but I am starting to wonder how many decisions were made to keep the SANFL happy.

Actually on reflection I think I would like the SANFL to take over. More money for me, more time on a weekend and I could very easily give up AFL football.

Thoroughly agree with this PinePower.

I'm sure there is a LOT more to this than WE (the supporters) are seeing, as Haysman said "there is more politics in football than in politics". The players and coaches etc have to sense this and must be demoralizing for all involved - as such it is sure to show up on the field also, so I'm certain it must be a significant contributing factor.

There does appear to be a concerted effort by the SANFL and certain elements of the media to destablize the club - afterall it was just a few days ago that AD publicly reaffirmed (in the strongest tone I have heard yet) the AFL's commitment to the long term success of the PAFC. This then is just another return salvo in a long running battle between the SANFL, AFL and PAFC.

Somehow the PAFC supporters need to demonstrate their dissatsifaction, anger and lack of support with the SANFL's treatment of the club. The SANFL and AFL need to get the message that the supporters are not happy with the SANFL's continued control of the club and demand self-determination via the relinquishing of the license (which I understand we paid for initially) to the club itself. As a demonstration of support for the PAFC it would be tremendous to see a full house at Adelaide Oval in a couple of weeks time. Similarly, a powerful demonstration of lack of confidence and support with the SANFL's influence in the running of the club needs to be undertaken. Maybe by fans raising their hands in the air (as in hands off our club) or simply turning their backs for the opening bounce. The demonstration no matter what it is needs to be simple, organised, concerted and above all POWERful.

 

[bomberclifford]

Thanks for that Ford. Missed that article as I was on a boat in the Kimberley's for a couple of days when Rucci wrote it.

My hunch is clause 4.9 was changed but that the rest were always there. Anyone think that clause 9.4, 11.1 and 11.7 weren't there in 1996? They read constitent with what I knew at the time. Look at the way he wrote it...

The other constitutional change that I'm aware of that members had to vote was in June 2010 when The Magpies sold their 25% share of the Port Club after the February 2010 merger failed.

I took his meaning that the change in clause 4.9 has greater impact due to the pre-existing clauses of 9.4,11.1 and 11.7

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

I took his meaning that the change in clause 4.9 has greater impact due to the pre-existing clauses of 9.4,11.1 and 11.7

Maybe that's what he meant, and that's why I don't get why he is banging on about it.

But I want to check the AGM notice tonight to see what was intended by the constitutional change.

 

[Spadge]

Adelaide Crows Mk 2 (Adelaide Power or whatever) would mean the end of my support for football in this state.....

I would probably watch footy but i would not support/spend my money on no one

 

[Alberton]

Re: The Board and management of the club

Thoroughly agree with this PinePower.

Somehow the PAFC supporters need to demonstrate their dissatisfaction, anger and lack of support with the SANFL's treatment of the club. The SANFL and AFL need to get the message that the supporters are not happy with the SANFL's continued control of the club and demand self-determination via the relinquishing of the license (which I understand we paid for initially) to the club itself. As a demonstration of support for the PAFC it would be tremendous to see a full house at Adelaide Oval in a couple of weeks time. Similarly, a powerful demonstration of lack of confidence and support with the SANFL's influence in the running of the club needs to be undertaken. Maybe by fans raising their hands in the air (as in hands off our club) or simply turning their backs for the opening bounce. The demonstration no matter what it is needs to be simple, organised, concerted and above all POWERful.

Wear all your prison bars/maggies/b&w gear this week and round 24.
Teal is the colour of submission.

Prison bars = independence from the SANFL.

Make it a sea of prisonbars this weekend that even Michael Christian cant ignore.

 

[tribey]

Adelaide Crows Mk 2 (Adelaide Power or whatever) would mean the end of my support for football in this state.....

I would probably watch footy but i would not support/spend my money on no one

I've heard a whisper you resemble a coffin nail in terms of molecular sturdiness. Given my chest is balder than Danyle Pearce's arms, it would bring me great mirth to egg you on as you put the entire SANFL (bricks and mortar included) in a rear naked choke for lulz.

 

[Enviable Tradition]

What we really need is a ONE Port style campaign to take back ownership of our club. We as fans need to be waving banners, toting car stickers and emailing everyone we can to show that we have had enough and we want control of our club back from those who despise us at the SANFL clubs we flogged mercilessly for years.

 

[Adz2332]

Or a few banners whith a few umm 'choice' words on them at round 24

 

[Alberton]

Anyone know a good online petition site?

 

[Portology]

Re: The Board and management of the club

Even with the SAFC's right to veto director nominations/voting, I'd expect the AFL to have a power of veto over negative acts of vandalism on their investment. Surely the point of the "intervention" earlier this year. Rebranding is not a solution to any problem we have, it would be a hugely unnecessary negative.

If Crows would sue over a name change to "Adelaide POWER", then Centrals would sue over a name change to "Central POWER" and North would sue over "Northern POWER". That covers off potential football brands #1, #3 and #4 in the state. Done. Dead.

After all we've been through the last 5 years Port Adelaide even at rock bottom remains the 2nd biggest football brand in this state by an insurmountable margin.

Port 2010 home crowd average is 21.6k, in our worst ever season in our worst ever sequence of seasons (six of them in a row from '06).

Centrals 2010 home crowd average is 3.1k, after TEN years at the top of the SANFL.

Port season ticket for 11 home games at a minimum costs $190 (Silver), or $300-$370 (Gold-Platinum) if you want a covered seat (outside the Northern stand).

Centrals season ticket costs $165 and gets you ALL 20 SANFL H&A games PLUS one AFL game (Port or Crows).

So at twice the price for half the games (and much less than half the enjoyment factor per game this year!) with the Transport Tax of getting to/from AAMI and the Catering Tax of eating and drinking at that s**thole, and the opportunity to watch the AFL game live on high quality ad free TV every weekend, and at Port's lowest point in history, and at Central's highest point, we still get seven times their home crowds.

It is beyond any rational or irrational analysis that the AFL would want to mess with that bedrock of Port support. They would be far more interested in removing the now very obvious and stubborn barnacle clinging onto our backside.

So if the story wasn't just a Rucci beat up, what was it ?

For all the bile I've poured the SAFC/SANFLs' way over the years I still can't imagine them being stupid enough to try "go easy on your stadium deal demands Vlad or we'll vandalize the whole operation some other way."

 

[Adz2332]

Re: The Board and management of the club

Banner slogans....
"Fk off SANFL" comes to mind, simple, straight to the point

 

[Enviable Tradition]

Re: The Board and management of the club

Even with the SAFC's right to veto director nominations/voting, I'd expect the AFL to have a power of veto over negative acts of vandalism on their investment.

Actually this is a good point.

I seem to remember that the AFL have the copyright over the use of the logo's, nicknames (and colors?).

So the SANFL would have to have AFL approval to do this.

Perhaps the SANFL will breach the license conditions?

 

[PeacefulWarrior]

Does anyone have Kevin Foleys email address?

Im convinced he's one of the only people that can save this club now.

If, according to Haysey "theres more politics in football than in politics", then we very much need Kevin.

The SANFL wouldnt know what hit them. Lying, cheating, backstabbing, I'm sure Foley has been there done that and would have mastered the art of dealing with this type of parasite.

 

[PortBrillance]

In Foley, we trust.

(this coming from a Libs voter)

 

[Forzaport]

There hasnt been a peep out of the club about Rucci's story. I would've thought such a provocative story would illicit some sort of statement.

Continuing silence will only increase the speed of the rumour mill.

 

[silverfingers]

Supporters need to rise up as one now, and make a stand.
This shit has gone on long enough.
Banners, petitions, car stickers, legal action - whatever it takes to get the PAFC back to the fans.

I am ****ing furious today