VAFA General Discussion

Remove this Banner Ad

Reader mode

Log in to remove this ad.

GE Saint said:
It's been a while since I have commented on here and probably should change my name to GE Gryphon, but I have had enough of the potshots from a usually measured AM.

Lets get a few fact straight.

Firstly AM's comment "Grow a pair and develop your own"

We grew a pair and developed our own only to be stopped at every turn by surrounding clubs including Ormond.

Over 10 years we developed an Auskick program from scratch to over 150 kids on a Friday night and Saturday Morning. We applied for admission to the SMJFL four years in a row only to have the goalposts moved each year with influence from surrounding clubs. During this time we were lucky to have Bentleigh JFC agree to let us play under their banner at Packer Park and had 8 teams up and running within four years. We spent over $20K in legal fees, and appealed to the AFL and AFL Victoria only to be told that the they had no influence over the SMJFL's rules and there was nothing more that could be done. At our last application we were told that we would not be able to have a junior clubs until every club within 10kms had a full complement of teams. The definition of a full complement was 10 teams for every ground a club had access to. Most clubs within our area have less than 15 teams with access to 3 grounds, so it was never going to happen.

When Bentleigh was advised by the council that they needed to have more teams playing on their grounds or risk losing use them, they told us if we wanted to continue to use their banner we would have to play at their grounds. Although appreciative of their help, we still had the goal of having a junior club at Packer Park and pursued a relationship with St Paul's until the SMJFL provided the final guidelines to having a junior club and we threw in the towel.

As a side note, one of the main reasons Oakleigh Districts left the SFL was that they could not have a junior club under the new admission rules and the EFL would provide that opportunity.

Ormond Junior football club very much influential in stopping us having a junior football club and their ex president wrote the current rules regarding the admission of clubs to the SMJFL. Although Bedford has his belief that the senior club had no objection to us having a junior club, this is 100% not correct.

When our Vice President contacted their senior club for support for our Junior club he was directly told that they would not support it as they did not want our club to have juniors, they did not want us to survive and wanted our ground as an additional ground for the growth of "their" junior club. This was not the first time we had heard this from them. Around 2010 or 2011 our president was contacted by the then Ormond President with the offer of an amalgamation. The only problem was it was not an amalgamation he was after, it was a take over. The terms were, Ormond keep our name, ground, song, you get your initials on the back of our jumper and we take your ground for "our" juniors.

Let's now turn to the relationship with McKinnon Secondary.

This all started when a group of Mckinnon Students were unhappy with the culture at their respective clubs and wanted to build something of their own. They approached the leaders at the school and a process was started which resulted in them asking us to have a joint venture. As our junior ambitions had been blocked we embraced this relationship and to date it has been successful in reinvigorating the club both on an off the field.

We have not targeted anyones under 17's we have targeted McKinnon Secondary students to come and play in the "Old McKinnon/Glen Eira" under 19 team. This is not unlike how De La Salle may target, students to play under 19s for them. The only difference is that De La have a bigger catchment area whereas ours is targeted around McKinnon and really only draws from the juniors of 3 or 4 clubs. Bentleigh seem to be able to hold onto their McKinnon Secondary players and have had 2 under teams consistently over the years

Having meetings with potential under 19 teams with food and drink is hardly a new thing. I was a Murrumbeena/Ormond Junior and was taken out by a De La Old Boys group in the 90's, the aim was for us to come and play under 19s the next year. Most of the people on this board who have commented on this issue are either Ormond affiliated or have a history of potting our club on Bigfooty.

We will continue to work hard on fostering our relationship with the school and provide a pathway for kids to play football with their school mates.
Click to expand...
I've posted it before OAFC had NO objection to any club having juniors , remember there are5 major junior clubs in a 5 K radius and your combine is a mixture of clubs and names.
The offer from a high ranking Ormond person for a merger was done on his own accord and was totally rejected by the committee at the time FACT and it was out of line !
I believe 1 McK student drove the whole Old McK thing.
You target Ormond / St Pauls juniors who have come through juniors and even auskick in some cases . The school footy coach is from your amalgamations and the pressure put on the kids is disgusting .
You are intending to have 2 Under 19's and that will leave 2 clubs without 19's that is bulls hit ' no wonder your club has no decent history . I wonder who's next to bring in .
 
GE Saint said:
"My only response to your club having been unsuccessful in being able to structure a junior program in the first instance is to persevere until your presentation has sufficient force it cannot be refused. Rather than raid other clubs, particularly other amateur clubs, particularly district ones."

To suggest we gave up in the first instance is an insult to the countless volunteers and families who contributed to our junior club program over 10 years.

Our application to the SMJFL was compelling enough for the management of the league to accept our application, only to have it rejected by the board and member clubs. 8 Junior teams in 4 years, sustained Auskick growth and countless volunteers was very compelling. We satisfied the requirements put forward to us 3 years in a row until finally the board changed the admission rules so that we could never have a club while surrounding clubs were not running at full capacity. There is no way around this, it is now a requirement for any club wanting to join the SMJFL.

Where was your outrage when this was happening to our "District" club.

Where was your outrage when Murrumbeena's under 17s players left year after year to play at De La instead of their "District" club.

How is our situation any different to DLS, we realised that we could not survive as district club without juniors or a feeder school. McKinnon Secondary is the "Primary Feeder" as you call it to the "Old McKinnon/Glen Eira Under 19s program. The fact that they are not a private school shouldn't exclude them from being able to have an Old Boys/Girls team.

I hope our current executive continue to grow this relationship to sustain the club for years to come.
Click to expand...
One powerful reason why at least 2 local clubs aren't running at full capacity is that your club raids their juniors. Not on an individual player basis but collectively by use of inducements and promises to impressionable kids.

The comparison with De La is a false equivalence. De La is an old collegians club. It is a private school where parents choose to send their children for not only educational but religious reasons. The club is inextricably tied to the school and has been since Adam was a child which is why overwhelmingly their players are recruited from the school and their supporter base is almost exclusively old collegians. It's no accident that the VAFA fixtures a round each year to allow old collegian clubs the opportunity to play at their school where that's possible.

In some instances, the old collegians also have a financial connection to the school either via the schools themselves or by trusts et al connected to them.

McKinnon is a State Secondary School whose only connection to your club is that you have managed to form a relationship. And congratulations on achieving that and if it's in whole or part due to Ormond sitting on their hands then more fool them. But a change of one or two key personnel connected to McKinnon could flip that quite quickly. And the change of name of your U19 is little more than window dressing. McKinnon is not connected to your club as old collegians clubs are any more than Brighton Secondary School would be to Hampton Rovers.

I see no issue with you recruiting from McKinnon on an individual basis, my issue is you wilfully wrecking other clubs by ripping away the entire or substantial part of their playing list as you've done to Ormond not only this year but other years and I understand you have to St Paul's too. Cannibalising other clubs is counterproductive, leads to bad blood and if it became widespread would be detrimental to the competition.

The change to admission rules of the SMJFL is not immutable. A substantive case with force could see them amended. It's just a convenient pretext. I'd guess that if surrounding clubs had the choice, as things stand, of supporting you having a youth structure or being ravaged by inducements, coaxing et al they'd choose the former.

The other matters are largely whataboutism.
 
Last edited:
bedford said:
I've posted it before OAFC had NO objection to any club having juniors , remember there are5 major junior clubs in a 5 K radius and your combine is a mixture of clubs and names.
The offer from a high ranking Ormond person for a merger was done on his own accord and was totally rejected by the committee at the time FACT and it was out of line !
I believe 1 McK student drove the whole Old McK thing.
You target Ormond / St Pauls juniors who have come through juniors and even auskick in some cases . The school footy coach is from your amalgamations and the pressure put on the kids is disgusting .
You are intending to have 2 Under 19's and that will leave 2 clubs without 19's that is bulls hit ' no wonder your club has no decent history . I wonder who's next to bring in .
Click to expand...
Just finished a lunch with a father of a kid moving from Ormond to GE. He cited a certain individual at the Monders is the reason for the lads leaving. Apparently it's the same individual who drove the crew out 5 years ago. Maybe you should clean out your own yard.
 
I think GE are treading a fine line between what is morally/ethically right or wrong.
I know for example St Paul’s have really pushed to strengthen their relationship with the Junior club, aligning their jumpers /name and getting senior players down to junior trainings with the goal of developing a successful pathway.

I’ve seen St Paul’s announced an Under 19s coach for 2023, but now I’m hearing they might not even get one up because GE have been getting in their ears, undoing all their hard work in the process so they can get 2 teams up and leave St Paul’s with their dick in their hands.

Back in 2020 either the GE coach or president (if someone can correct me please do) was going hard at a few MCK boys at local rival clubs. Keep in mind these boys are 17 going into year 12. He would take them out to dinner (which although I feel is a bit much for 19s local footy, I think is fine) and would then go round to their places and drop off Slabs of piss and bottles of whiskey. In my view that’s out of order and is doing nothing but create bad blood between clubs. Not morally right. And for what it’s worth these players took the alcohol and told them thanks but no thanks.

I do resonate with the fact GE haven’t been able to set up an SMJFL club. But there’s simply better ways to go about recruiting boys than starving all the nearby clubs of their players.
 
beebee gun said:
Just finished a lunch with a father of a kid moving from Ormond to GE. He cited a certain individual at the Monders is the reason for the lads leaving. Apparently it's the same individual who drove the crew out 5 years ago. Maybe you should clean out your own yard.
Click to expand...
Maybe you should go back to where you were
 
sammelb80 said:
I think GE are treading a fine line between what is morally/ethically right or wrong.
I know for example St Paul’s have really pushed to strengthen their relationship with the Junior club, aligning their jumpers /name and getting senior players down to junior trainings with the goal of developing a successful pathway.

I’ve seen St Paul’s announced an Under 19s coach for 2023, but now I’m hearing they might not even get one up because GE have been getting in their ears, undoing all their hard work in the process so they can get 2 teams up and leave St Paul’s with their dick in their hands.

Back in 2020 either the GE coach or president (if someone can correct me please do) was going hard at a few MCK boys at local rival clubs. Keep in mind these boys are 17 going into year 12. He would take them out to dinner (which although I feel is a bit much for 19s local footy, I think is fine) and would then go round to their places and drop off Slabs of piss and bottles of whiskey. In my view that’s out of order and is doing nothing but create bad blood between clubs. Not morally right. And for what it’s worth these players took the alcohol and told them thanks but no thanks.

I do resonate with the fact GE haven’t been able to set up an SMJFL club. But there’s simply better ways to go about recruiting boys than starving all the nearby clubs of their players.
Click to expand...
You are spot on with this , amazingly Ormond and St Pauls don't try to work against one another , play a Praccy every year . Respect for each other , not like those greg hunts
 
What is good for Ormond shouldn't be the concern of any club other than Ormond.

Every club try's to recruit, if you're house is in order no one will leave.

I can't recall a time where ormond were offering favours to a struggling Gryphons or Glen Eira back in the day- in fact those complaining here had nothing bud ridicule to throw both clubs way.

Both clubs struggled to field a twos at times whilst ormond had a thriving playing list an u19s and clubbies.

Grow up and sort out your own club instead of complaining about the success of a club you used to laugh at.
 
AM said:
One powerful reason why at least 2 local clubs aren't running at full capacity is that your club raids their juniors. Not on an individual player basis but collectively by use of inducements and promises to impressionable kids.

The comparison with De La is a false equivalence. De La is an old collegians club. It is a private school where parents choose to send their children for not only educational but religious reasons. The club is inextricably tied to the school and has been since Adam was a child which is why overwhelmingly their players are recruited from the school and their supporter base is almost exclusively old collegians. It's no accident that the VAFA fixtures a round each year to allow old collegian clubs the opportunity to play at their school where that's possible.

In some instances, the old collegians also have a financial connection to the school either via the schools themselves or by trusts et al connected to them.

McKinnon is a State Secondary School whose only connection to your club is that you have managed to form a relationship. And congratulations on achieving that and if it's in whole or part due to Ormond sitting on their hands then more fool them. But a change of one or two key personnel connected to McKinnon could flip that quite quickly. And the change of name of your U19 is little more than window dressing. McKinnon is not connected to your club as old collegians clubs are any more than Brighton Secondary School would be to Hampton Rovers.

I see no issue with you recruiting from McKinnon on an individual basis, my issue is you wilfully wrecking other clubs by ripping away the entire or substantial part of their playing list as you've done to Ormond not only this year but other years and I understand you have to St Paul's too. Cannibalising other clubs is counterproductive, leads to bad blood and if it became widespread would be detrimental to the competition.

The change to admission rules of the SMJFL is not immutable. A substantive case with force could see them amended. It's just a convenient pretext. I'd guess that if surrounding clubs had the choice, as things stand, of supporting you having a youth structure or being ravaged by inducements, coaxing et al they'd choose the former.

The other matters are largely whataboutism.
Click to expand...
Strange argument. DLS not hosting any VAFA fixture at the school in any round?
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

The context/argument appears to be.

De La have an official and long standing affiliation where as GE do not.

Seems a strange argument. Clearly there is a relationship and affiliation building- nothing wrong with that.

I'm more curious as to how Ormond keeps getting ex AFL players to play for them. Beers and a feed?
 
JimmyR20 said:
The context/argument appears to be.

De La have an official and long standing affiliation where as GE do not.

Seems a strange argument. Clearly there is a relationship and affiliation building- nothing wrong with that.

I'm more curious as to how Ormond keeps getting ex AFL players to play for them. Beers and a feed?
Click to expand...
The connection with old collegian schools and their player supporter base is far deeper and more involved than developing an 'affilliation'. As was explained.

And Ormond keeping " getting ex AFL players" is arrant nonsense and just a distraction to the core issue. Are you not that bright or a troll?
 
beebee gun said:
Oh Bedford you are such a simple human being. Perhaps the only Greg Hunt is the individual at your club who is currently a subject of an investigation. The kids dislike him and his methods and want to move on because of him. Clean him out and perhaps they wont leave. Now there's a tip for you.
Click to expand...
I think you will eat your words the person you are talking about is innocent as are the other 2 falsely accused and has returned to his employment . All the accused have hosted first nation people in their homes.
In all sport not every player likes the coach or other players , it's human nature .
By the way we know who the simple troll is .
 
I will add that in my time not 1 Combine player has been approached to come to Ormond , it's not our way to go after players from a lower ranked club , we are not a Beaumaris . 1player returned last year , but he was an ormond junior right through and got a chance to play senior footy .
The player who came 2nd in the Combine's best and fairest only left for the same reason and that was to also play senior footy , which he said he wouldn't have got a look in . No hard feelings from either side and people were genuinely pleased for him .
No one is against the Combine , good luck to them and there are enough kids for all 3 clubs mentioned to have an under 19s , it's the obsession with having 2 or more .
 
bedford said:
I will add that in my time not 1 Combine player has been approached to come to Ormond , it's not our way to go after players from a lower ranked club , we are not a Beaumaris . 1player returned last year , but he was an ormond junior right through and got a chance to play senior footy .
The player who came 2nd in the Combine's best and fairest only left for the same reason and that was to also play senior footy , which he said he wouldn't have got a look in . No hard feelings from either side and people were genuinely pleased for him .
No one is against the Combine , good luck to them and there are enough kids for all 3 clubs mentioned to have an under 19s , it's the obsession with having 2 or more .
Click to expand...
Mr Bedford, Beaumaris has a hugely successful Juniors program that inevitably leads to the boys playing in other competitions, that’s life, to throw the new Senior Coach of a few weeks into the discussion between Ormond/St Pauls vs Glen Eira or whoever they are seems strange in the least
 
sainter01 said:
Mr Bedford, Beaumaris has a hugely successful Juniors program that inevitably leads to the boys playing in other competitions, that’s life, to throw the new Senior Coach of a few weeks into the discussion between Ormond/St Pauls vs Glen Eira or whoever they are seems strange in the least
Click to expand...

Is that Mr Bourke your referring to ?
They might have great juniors so why not leave others alone .


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app
 
bedford said:
I will add that in my time not 1 Combine player has been approached to come to Ormond , it's not our way to go after players from a lower ranked club , we are not a Beaumaris . 1player returned last year , but he was an ormond junior right through and got a chance to play senior footy .
The player who came 2nd in the Combine's best and fairest only left for the same reason and that was to also play senior footy , which he said he wouldn't have got a look in . No hard feelings from either side and people were genuinely pleased for him .
No one is against the Combine , good luck to them and there are enough kids for all 3 clubs mentioned to have an under 19s , it's the obsession with having 2 or more .
Click to expand...

My sons have played at Ormond and the other briefly at Glen Eira and both attended McKinnon Secondary. The youngest was pressured in a big way to play for the “old boys 19 team “ hated it as well as the coach, was not a pleasent experience and a dodgy culture which seemed to be tolerated. Just my experience.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app
 
Reader mode

Remove this Banner Ad

VAFA General Discussion

Similar threads

Mr Platinum
GoFundMe For VAFA footballer Michael Pisker
Replies
1
Views
4K
AM
A
Over The Post
Certified Legendary Thread 2023 VAFA Tipping Awards
Replies
15
Views
1K
hansie
hansie

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top