ONE Port Adelaide Football Club

[Portology]

Frustration will spill out. People who feel trapped by an unjust authority are going to lash out. That situation is the SANFL clubs' doing (note the plural, I don't blame the Magpies for being brought into a separate existence, I just don't think it is fair let alone financially reasonable for the PAFC community to remain deliberately split). For those who support PAFC as well as a non-Magpies SANFL club you only need to choose which comp is more important to the future of football in SA. If you want to play SANFL as it exists for the next 100 years go for it, but if your priority is for SA teams to be the best in the AFL vote to stop bleeding them to continue arrangements that prop up the SANFL above where it ought to be. If folding PAMFC back into PAFC is a first step to freeing both Port and the Crows, lets do it. If not, why bother ?

I'll take a leaf out of the book used by the new independent members of parliament:

I'll vote for your "one PAFC" government if...

- PAFC share proceeds of any AAMI asset sell off details TBA*
- PAMFC become PAFC reserves, details TBA*
- PAFC to gain full and direct ownership of it's AFL license timeframe TBA*
- PAFC to retain all rights to PB and Magpie trademarks/copyrights in SANFL comp including right to substitute PB/Magpie with any other design of our choosing
- PAFC reserves to play all home games as curtain raiser to PAFC AFL games
- One PAFC club membership admits to all home games, no special "SANFL-only" membership package deal
- No special restrictions on commercial arrangements or sharing of football operations, information or administrative infrastructure between seniors and reserves (ie operate as a single club multi team - see "VFL" for working examples of these structures).

How many of these natural conditions for a "single club" would get up and why/why not ? If any at all, do you believe that if we started with some subset of these conditions could we ever work forwards to the full set ? There is our answer staring you in the face (and the source of frustration, given past experience working with SANFL).

* these obviously bring Crows into play. they too have a big stake in the future health of SA footy (never more to be equated with "SANFL"). they too have plenty to gain from their Freedom, even if they mostly don't see it yet.

 

[Portology]

PB - it won't end if the PAMFC folds. People will say 'the Power' killed them, the 'real port' is dead etc etc. Won't solve anything in the short to medium term.

So in addition to having a confusing split imposed on our supporter base we have to publicly try to save that which was born out of the split, our second highly public attempt now. I have confidence if PAMFC fold now it will start to be reported SANFL were living in the past, were trying to continue something that had passed out of their control and nearly brought down PAFC 'who dared to try leaving the SANFL nest', as well as holding back the Crows. The story of the Crows is aligned with our story, between AFL supporters of both clubs there are enough Advertiser readers for the true story to be worth telling from their cold hard Advertiser point of view and then repeated and then take hold - as you say eventually.

 

[MotlopRules]

I'm becoming increasingly offended by your attitude towards wanting the club other people follow to fold. I'm not fussed by the Magpies but some people are. It's people like you on both sides of the Port Adelaide debate that contribute to the bitterness.

I don't know, I kind of agree with PB in a way. Not with the brutality of killing off the Magpies, but with the common sense that suggests that the PAFC would be better off without them. I also think we need to be firm about this. Saying 'the club other people follow' in my mind almost recognises the legitimacy of the PAMFC, whereas I think we as a supporter base and a club need to take a really strong line and say look, we are the PAFC formerly known as the Magpies, we moved to the AFL in 1997, and there is no Port in the SANFL. Just take a stand and don't give an inch to those people who clearly have an identity crisis and will probably never fully accept Port in the AFL anyway, regardless of the arguments put to them.

I can see why that ruthless attitude might offend people who have an emotional attachment to the Maggies, but in the same way I don't have much time, and I don't think the club should either, for people who put more stock in the recently created PAMFC than Port Adelaide.

We either need to completely and totally absorb the PAMFC so that we are one club in all respects, or utterly distance ourselves from them and treat them with indifference if not outright hostility (as in, they are a newly created club that has no claim or relationship to our history). None of this wishy washy, we're sort of the same club but we're not, gotta respect Magpie supporters, gotta help our 'brother' or whatnot.

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

If you don't want the PAMFC around then unless you are a member of the club then you don't have a say. Only the members of the club get a vote.

The PAMFC isn't going to die off. People will step in to stop it. And football clubs shouldn't just die off because its tough for someone else. One alternative is private ownership. The SANFL can't stop that as they don't own the PAMFC's licence. They don't have any control over the PAMFC board or constitution and rules like they do with the PAFC. So death is a long way off.

That's why reunification makes sense. It was an artificial split from the start and that artificial split should be corrected. The sooner the better for everyone who supports Port Adelaide football.

 

[*PAF]

...

I come from a North Adelaide back ground and no matter the club at ANY level you just dont let football clubs die if there are alternative options that are mutually beneficial.
...

... The PAMFC isn't going to die off. People will step in to stop it. And football clubs shouldn't just die off because its tough for someone else.
...

...
It was an artificial split from the start and that artificial split should be corrected. ...

X2 to all of the above.

 

[wapower]

I don't know, I kind of agree with PB in a way. Not with the brutality of killing off the Magpies, but with the common sense that suggests that the PAFC would be better off without them. I also think we need to be firm about this. Saying 'the club other people follow' in my mind almost recognises the legitimacy of the PAMFC, whereas I think we as a supporter base and a club need to take a really strong line and say look, we are the PAFC formerly known as the Magpies, we moved to the AFL in 1997, and there is no Port in the SANFL. Just take a stand and don't give an inch to those people who clearly have an identity crisis and will probably never fully accept Port in the AFL anyway, regardless of the arguments put to them.

I can see why that ruthless attitude might offend people who have an emotional attachment to the Maggies, but in the same way I don't have much time, and I don't think the club should either, for people who put more stock in the recently created PAMFC than Port Adelaide.

We either need to completely and totally absorb the PAMFC so that we are one club in all respects, or utterly distance ourselves from them and treat them with indifference if not outright hostility (as in, they are a newly created club that has no claim or relationship to our history). None of this wishy washy, we're sort of the same club but we're not, gotta respect Magpie supporters, gotta help our 'brother' or whatnot.

We all know the history of the PAFC/PAMFC MotlopRules. I would have preferred that the PAMFC weren't brought into the SANFL in the first instance or worked as the SANFL arm of the PAFC (which should have been the case from the outset).

What I will not do is sit by and not vocalize when someone else believes a club should "F-OFF and die" because I'd be devastated if the PAFC were to fold. Some people feel that way about the Magpies in spite of whatever hostilities or problems we have with them.

That might not be our club but it's someone else's.

 

[Natman]

If you don't want the PAMFC around then unless you are a member of the club then you don't have a say. Only the members of the club get a vote.

The PAMFC isn't going to die off. People will step in to stop it. And football clubs shouldn't just die off because its tough for someone else. One alternative is private ownership. The SANFL can't stop that as they don't own the PAMFC's licence. They don't have any control over the PAMFC board or constitution and rules like they do with the PAFC. So death is a long way off.

That's why reunification makes sense. It was an artificial split from the start and that artificial split should be corrected. The sooner the better for everyone who supports Port Adelaide football.

How would you see the administration and corporate governance working - a separate company for the PAMFC in the general ledger with overheads and admin costs charged on an agreed % and with a separate board or a sub-committee of the current board making business decisions?

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

How would you see the administration and corporate governance working - a separate company for the PAMFC in the general ledger with overheads and admin costs charged on an agreed % and with a separate board or a sub-committee of the current board making business decisions?

If it's a merger then something like that, but 2 legal entities and 2 sets of accounts with some admin charges from one entity to the other. If joint marketing is allowed then some split of both revenue and associated costs in each set of accounts. If you have 2 legal entities then you need two separate boards but might have one or two members of PAFC board on PAMFC board and vice versa.

If it's a reunification then there isn't any need for separate companies, boards and set of accounts - just have to run the general ledger well as AFL wants AFL only info from the clubs.

 

[MotlopRules]

We all know the history of the PAFC/PAMFC MotlopRules. I would have preferred that the PAMFC weren't brought into the SANFL in the first instance or worked as the SANFL arm of the PAFC (which should have been the case from the outset).

What I will not do is sit by and not vocalize when someone else believes a club should "F-OFF and die" because I'd be devastated if the PAFC were to fold. Some people feel that way about the Magpies in spite of whatever hostilities or problems we have with them.

That might not be our club but it's someone else's.

Yeah, I agree with you. I guess I just wanted to emphasise that any merging/acquisition of the PAMFC should only be done if it is in Port's best interests. But I'm sure those in charge already know this.

 

[Power Pete]

I joined up when it started. Lets get all Port Adelaide members and supporters to join the ONE PAFC. The more the merrier and the more the stronger. Spread the word and go you good thing!

 

[tribey]

Look no further than tribey's quotes.

I read a few more yesterday. Talk of "the Power have turned their back on the Magpies" and "I will only agree with a merger if we have control of Alberton and not the new tenants".

I don't blame these people for their ignorance because at various stages I and many others have also had the wrong end of the pineapple in the past, but shit, it does not help.

 

[PowerLover]

We all need a united Port Adelaide family.

The distrust from the SANFL and the Clubs comes from both ignorance and damage done by our past administrators. Our club has found a port adelaide solution for a port adelaide problem.

This is a no brainer

 

[FishingRick04]

We all need a united Port Adelaide family.

The distrust from the SANFL and the Clubs comes from both ignorance and damage done by our past administrators. Our club has found a port adelaide solution for a port adelaide problem.

This is a no brainer

a united Port, could help the SANFL. Stop Centrals domination and become competitive again in the AFL plus get a bigger attendance at games.

 

[tribey]

a united Port, could help the SANFL. Stop Centrals domination and become competitive again in the AFL plus get a bigger attendance at games.

One of the more bizarre arguments against any merger is the congenital fear-based paranoia from the likes of North Adelaide that a united PAFC is attempting to retake the SANFL by stealth.

Uhmm?

Anyone taken a look at Centrals lately? Absolutely untouchable on and off the field at that level. Have filled the power vacuum we left once the old soldiers of the -1996 era rode into the sunset and the dregs of the coffers we left behind were exhausted just nicely.

Apart from the sound financial sense a united Port Adelaide would make for all parties - the SANFL and the other 8 clubs included - wouldn't some counterweight, any counterweight to the Centrals juggernaut be a good thing?

But no, let's continue to be scared of the spectre of the old Port boogeyman while seemingly being content with Centrals choking the life out of the competition.

 

[Portia]

Wait, what? We care about Centrals doing well in the SANFL?

 

[FishingRick04]

Wait, what? We care about Centrals doing well in the SANFL?

No just a feable attempt to try and create a few more "for" arguments

 

[tribey]

No just a feable attempt to try and create a few more "for" arguments

I like to think of it as a sound evaluation of the limited thinking of the more backward SANFL CEOs

 

[Portology]

One of the more bizarre arguments against any merger is the congenital fear-based paranoia from the likes of North Adelaide that a united PAFC is attempting to retake the SANFL by stealth.

Uhmm?

Anyone taken a look at Centrals lately? Absolutely untouchable on and off the field at that level. Have filled the power vacuum we left once the old soldiers of the -1996 era rode into the sunset and the dregs of the coffers we left behind were exhausted just nicely.

Apart from the sound financial sense a united Port Adelaide would make for all parties - the SANFL and the other 8 clubs included - wouldn't some counterweight, any counterweight to the Centrals juggernaut be a good thing?

But no, let's continue to be scared of the spectre of the old Port boogeyman while seemingly being content with Centrals choking the life out of the competition.

Prospect, still partying like it's 1989, eh ? Some at Prospect are still cranky about Centrals taking bits of their zone back in the '60s and some at Centrals still remember when they used to waste their energy being cranky at Port having a suburban zone out to Salisbury - then they went and did something about it on and off field when we left the field open.

 

[SellerIsCrap]

Bump, Bump.

 

[Jabsy]

You anticipating some kind of press coverage or something tomorrow?

 

[Fazualdo]

Email from the website today, up to 10,600+ registrations. Asked for any feedback/visions to be emailed back signed by George.

Gee PB your entilted to your opinion, but do you have to be so aggresive about it? You must realise that most of us older supporters will always see the 2 clubs as one and for me personally one of my favourite moments of our AFL journey was when we wore the prison bar strip for heritage round.

Ideally, eventually I'd like to see the Magpies as the reserves team, it could only be of benefit to the Power as it would give them the ability to instill game plans and positional changes to those not currently in the AFL side. The most difficult part of this is working out what to do with players from other SANFL clubs.

 

[Heyzeus]

Just a logo that I made up for a united Port that could be used by both teams and represents them equally, with the Power keeping the double V jumper in the AFL and the Magpies keeping the PB jumper in the SANFL. I was somewhat inspired by the side-by-side design in the AC Milan logo (see below), but I think the angular shield is much stronger and a better fit for a footy club.

 

[Enviable Tradition]

The prison bars have never been in the logo before and probably dont need to be now so long as the Maggies keep wearing it in the SANFL. I think a simple V design based logo would be best as we probably wouldn't be able to use the magpie on our logo anyway.

 

[edgie]

Don't like the different shades of grey in the background for each logo

 

[Portia]

I don't know why we should be bothered about representing two sides equally if they are supposed to be one club anyway.