-
AFLW 2024 - Round 8 - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
SFL – MSJFL proposed merger. Has the VAFA been stiffed?
- Thread starter AM
- Start date
- Tagged users None
- Thread starter
- #252
The vote I was referring to was 16 against 10 for - see below. That's a clear majority of clubs opposed to the merge.
You'll see in the following excerpt from the St Bedes Prez that subsequent to the clear rejection, the MSJFL had set up a committee to "look to the future development of the MSJFL" which should be permitted to run its course with input from all interested parties not circumvented or pressured by one.
superfreak
Premiership Player
No need to resort to put downs bedford. Just because your mob would be a Div 1 struggler! 
Return of the Pies
Team Captain
This post is a greally good summary IMO. There is a lot to be said for clubs being able to have a smooth transition from junior to senior ranks, regardless of where the senior club is based. There are a lot of ammo people on here who make a number of assumptions that the VAFA would do things better than the SFL from an admin perspective. This may or may not be the case, but I don't think it's conclusive either way.
Clearly this debate wouldn't be happening if things were working perfectly well within the MSJFL. And it's also an assumption to think that just because clubs were opposed to an SFL/MSJFL merger, that they wouldn't favour some kind of re-structure of the junior system.(eg. separate SFL junior comp).
In fact, maybe the fact that the comp is so big (26 clubs or so?) is the reason it is difficult to administer. If it was smaller, the current admin structure may work?
It's an interesting debate, but there is so much alarmist talk on here it's laughable. People fear change by nature, and all have their own agendas. The only body who can be truly independant on this is AFL Vic, as their agenda is (or should be) for the greater good of the game. That must give their stance a fair deal of credibility?
Rooster1979
Team Captain
Ammo Man, I'm trying to work out why there was a 16-10 vote against, and then 14 clubs looking to join the new league. (Assuming both numbers are correct). What would cause the change of vote?
It's a long bow, but is it possible some of the clubs weren't interested in a merge and only a new league or more likely that they've changed their vote in the last week.
There is no doubt the SFL is looking after it's own interests here, and that as other leagues have shown, having a junior league and better affiliations between junior and senior clubs with a clear pathway helps the long term prospects of a league.
The point I am trying to make is that simply because this is a positive for the SFL, does not mean it's nessesarily a nagative for the VAFA or more importantly it's member clubs. IF the junior comptetition is improved, and better run, that is a positive for every club in the area. There would be challenges for the VAFA, but none couldn't be overcome.
Kid's are still more likely to stay at their junior club regardless of where the seniors play. Hampton Rovers and Ormond kids already have the oppurtunity to change clubs and play for cash in the SFL, but they don't because they're great clubs and have a clear pathway to senior football.
AFL Victoria would not allow an SFL run junior league to exclude clubs because the seniors are affiliated with the VAFA. It just wouldn't happen, no matter how much they wanted to.
The pathway of umpires would be an issue, but the VAFA would have to tap into new areas of recruitment, like the DDJFL and YJFL. It wouldn't be impossible to set up new programs or perhaps an academy, like the EFL has
It is possible that over time somce VAFA clubs would want to allign themselves with the SFL so the juniors are in the same league. This would only be the case though if the SFL offers a viable alternative. The standard in the SFL isn't at, or likely to get to a point where any A-C clubs would ever jump ship, but for D1-D4 VAFA clubs and Div 2-3 SFL clubs genuine competition between the leagues is great news. If the VAFA continues to perform as well as it has, why would any clubs want to leave? Personally, I'd be happy to have that extra pressure on the VAFA to continue to perform for it's member clubs. As Sniper has said a few times, clubs in the lower grades can feel overlooked and unloved by ther VAFA at times.
It's a long bow, but is it possible some of the clubs weren't interested in a merge and only a new league or more likely that they've changed their vote in the last week.
There is no doubt the SFL is looking after it's own interests here, and that as other leagues have shown, having a junior league and better affiliations between junior and senior clubs with a clear pathway helps the long term prospects of a league.
The point I am trying to make is that simply because this is a positive for the SFL, does not mean it's nessesarily a nagative for the VAFA or more importantly it's member clubs. IF the junior comptetition is improved, and better run, that is a positive for every club in the area. There would be challenges for the VAFA, but none couldn't be overcome.
Kid's are still more likely to stay at their junior club regardless of where the seniors play. Hampton Rovers and Ormond kids already have the oppurtunity to change clubs and play for cash in the SFL, but they don't because they're great clubs and have a clear pathway to senior football.
AFL Victoria would not allow an SFL run junior league to exclude clubs because the seniors are affiliated with the VAFA. It just wouldn't happen, no matter how much they wanted to.
The pathway of umpires would be an issue, but the VAFA would have to tap into new areas of recruitment, like the DDJFL and YJFL. It wouldn't be impossible to set up new programs or perhaps an academy, like the EFL has
It is possible that over time somce VAFA clubs would want to allign themselves with the SFL so the juniors are in the same league. This would only be the case though if the SFL offers a viable alternative. The standard in the SFL isn't at, or likely to get to a point where any A-C clubs would ever jump ship, but for D1-D4 VAFA clubs and Div 2-3 SFL clubs genuine competition between the leagues is great news. If the VAFA continues to perform as well as it has, why would any clubs want to leave? Personally, I'd be happy to have that extra pressure on the VAFA to continue to perform for it's member clubs. As Sniper has said a few times, clubs in the lower grades can feel overlooked and unloved by ther VAFA at times.
- Thread starter
- #258
Rooster,
My beef has been the way the proposed change has been craftily manipulated by the SFL, pretty much to the exclusion of the VAFA. In my view that is unreasonable as the VAFA is materially affected by the changes. Not only does it field numerous teams in the MSJFL, it has many more clubs playing in the region covered by the SFL and has been a great friend of the MSJFL over the years.
Gaining control of the MSJFL – fully cognisant of the many benefits that will flow from the merge - has been an integral part of the SFLs strategic plan for ages and has been aided and abetted by AFL Vic.. Benefits I've mentioned ad infinitum in this thread. Remember the current SFL CEO worked at the SFL for considerable time while paid by AFL Vic.
In view of that following the majority of MSJFL clubs rejecting of the Code proposal the fair and reasonable thing is for all parties materially affected to work through the issues with the view to arriving at an amicable settlement. There is no reason why the MSJFL can't operate in 2011 as it has in the past while the issues are worked through with the best interests of the MSJFL being front and centre rather than the sectional interest of one party.
My beef has been the way the proposed change has been craftily manipulated by the SFL, pretty much to the exclusion of the VAFA. In my view that is unreasonable as the VAFA is materially affected by the changes. Not only does it field numerous teams in the MSJFL, it has many more clubs playing in the region covered by the SFL and has been a great friend of the MSJFL over the years.
Gaining control of the MSJFL – fully cognisant of the many benefits that will flow from the merge - has been an integral part of the SFLs strategic plan for ages and has been aided and abetted by AFL Vic.. Benefits I've mentioned ad infinitum in this thread. Remember the current SFL CEO worked at the SFL for considerable time while paid by AFL Vic.
In view of that following the majority of MSJFL clubs rejecting of the Code proposal the fair and reasonable thing is for all parties materially affected to work through the issues with the view to arriving at an amicable settlement. There is no reason why the MSJFL can't operate in 2011 as it has in the past while the issues are worked through with the best interests of the MSJFL being front and centre rather than the sectional interest of one party.
The Beauy Flyer
Draftee
hey bomber-bedford, there are now 16 clubs officially with the new SJFL and we are not 1 of them
Rooster1979
Team Captain
The worst possible outcome is to run 2 competitions in my opinion. It'll be reminicent of the late 90's Super League -ARL war in Rugby League, without the financial iducements to players to jump competition
While the overall standard wont drop, the competitiveness of teams will vary more wildly, and kids will be more likely to be turned away if they get flogged every week, and at the other end, the best players won't improve as much if they're not challenged
While the overall standard wont drop, the competitiveness of teams will vary more wildly, and kids will be more likely to be turned away if they get flogged every week, and at the other end, the best players won't improve as much if they're not challenged
It all comes back to the SFL working on this for months behind everyone's back, with hlp from clubs like East Malvern who have a conflict with their VP.
Hopefully Ajax are one that goes.hey bomber-bedford, there are now 16 clubs officially with the new SJFL and we are not 1 of them
BrianSpeaking
Cancelled
1O clubs will suit us fine, there are too many crap clubs like Murrembeena, Highett etc in the MSJFL, it will remain the choice of kids who want to play senior footy in the future in a strong quality clean comp...who the hell are East Malvern anyway???
David Andrews has quit as Pres of the MSJFL. The SFL will go it alone and ignore the vote of the clubs, it looks like all the ammo clubs will stick together with East Brighton and a few others.
- Thread starter
- #267
The SFL has displayed complete contempt for the wishes of the clear majority of MSJFL clubs as voted at a meeting of all MSJFL clubs on November 11 and for the Future Directions Sub-Committee formed to create a strategic plan for the future of that league. What a manipulative disingenuous group they’ve shown themselves to be.
The upside may be the awakening of the VAFA to the long term benefits of having a metropolitan junior presence either in association with others or in its own right.
The upside may be the awakening of the VAFA to the long term benefits of having a metropolitan junior presence either in association with others or in its own right.
I don't believe a break-away SFL Junior comp can go ahead in 2011, but it certainly can in 2012. Due to AFL Victoria guidelines stating that clubs must advise AFLV of any league changes (ie from MSJFL to SJFL) by October the previous year. So it looks like we'll be stuck with these dirty SFL clubs for at least another year unfortunately.
The Beauy Flyer
Draftee
latest update is not to good fella's - aflv have confirmed this afternoon 18 clubs have joined this breakaway group...doesnt leave much for us
Rooster 24
Cancelled
- Jul 31, 2009
- 1,507
- 543
- AFL Club
- St Kilda
Beuay Flier I’m not so sure you are in fact from Beauy. And I highly doubt there are 18 clubs on board this new venture.
MSJFL seem to be fighting back. Apologies if these don’t open. They can be found on MSJFL website.
For mine the most poignant comment in the article is as follows:
“It is clear that the SFL realises it cannot swallow a whole organisation that is both larger and better resourced than itself and is now seeking to divide us”
http://www.sportingpulse.com/get_file.cgi?id=1134295
http://sportingpulse.com/assoc_page...sk=DETAIL&articleID=14064968§ionID=116878
http://sportingpulse.com/assoc_page.cgi?client=1-4901-0-0-
MSJFL seem to be fighting back. Apologies if these don’t open. They can be found on MSJFL website.
For mine the most poignant comment in the article is as follows:
“It is clear that the SFL realises it cannot swallow a whole organisation that is both larger and better resourced than itself and is now seeking to divide us”
http://www.sportingpulse.com/get_file.cgi?id=1134295
http://sportingpulse.com/assoc_page...sk=DETAIL&articleID=14064968§ionID=116878
http://sportingpulse.com/assoc_page.cgi?client=1-4901-0-0-
- Thread starter
- #272
It's rubbish, bedford. My information is there is a good deal of angst among the SFL clubs at the ham fisted way in which the SFL has proceeded - not only disregarding the wishes of the MSJFL as expressed on November 11 but also attempting to ride roughshod over them. I'd say the most likely outcome, as of now, is that the MSJFL will operate as it did in 2010 while all parties materially affected work through the issues.
THE BEACON
Senior List
Sounds as if the only loser out of all this is junior football itself in the Bayside suburbs!!!
The one positive is that it might just shake up the MSJFL into being a better run competition, cut the numbers on the board to about 8 and bring in a full time administrator. The SFL are only doing this to try and strengthen the worst competition in suburban Melbourne.
It's a bit like the Super League war in 1995-97. Parents of prospective junior players will be asking themselves one question-do we stick with the establishment clubs (ie MSJFL) or go for the rebel league clubs (SFL)? The bayside area cannot afford to have two junior comps. In time, one of these comps will go to the wall (ie get into huge financial trouble)-just wondering which one would it be?
