TOPIC:

Cheers JT. I have no complaints about the wafl coverage and I reckon you do a fantastic job. Your passion and knowledge have always been first class and it is true that the wafl punches above its weight in coverage- mainly thanks to you. If I have to read about home and away on page three every day or get past kerry’s campaigning against payroll tax to get to your stuff , well so be it iI guess!!!

It would seem the West are well and truly meeting the demand of the public in regards to WAFL.

JT wrote: FYI

As WAFL supporters, you are entitled to your views on the quality and quantity of The West Australian’s coverage of the league.

However, as one of the main WAFL reporters at the newspaper, I can point to the fact that we mostly provide two pages of coverage in both the Pregame and Game lift-outs on Fridays and Mondays, at least one page with listed teams on Saturdays, a weekly online column on thewest.com.au and other news – tribunal, injuries, etc - throughout the week.

That often means that at least 12 stories are published every week – all on a league that exists in the shadow of the AFL.

I can also tell you that I have never been instructed to write stories in any particular way to suit the views of the newspaper, the WAFL or Channel 7. I am sure our other reporters would say the same thing.

Our reporters are passionate about football, including the WAFL, and want to see it thrive.

Keep buying and reading The West Australian and you can help in that regard.

See you at the football,

John Townsend

John I think it's fantastic that you've taken time to post on here. I've enjoyed your work and see you as one of the few journos in WA who actually promote the WAFL which is reinforced by the fact I see you at many WAFL games. I thought your piece on Peel loading up it's GF team with 17 Freo players in 2016 was one of the best I have read being clear, concise and well researched. Clearly I had a vested interest being a Subi supporter but you certainly didn't miss the WAFC. Keep up the good work. My disappointment with The West is that new Editor-in-Chief DeCeglie has decide to make the online version of the paper pay per view. I think it's counter productive and may lessen revenue rather than increase it. Obviously internal modelling has been done which would suggest its revenue positive but I'd be interested to see what has happened at other papers where they've done the same. I get the Weekend West delivered but won't be paying for the weekday version out of principle like most on here from what I can gather.

JT wrote: FYI

As WAFL supporters, you are entitled to your views on the quality and quantity of The West Australian’s coverage of the league.

However, as one of the main WAFL reporters at the newspaper, I can point to the fact that we mostly provide two pages of coverage in both the Pregame and Game lift-outs on Fridays and Mondays, at least one page with listed teams on Saturdays, a weekly online column on thewest.com.au and other news – tribunal, injuries, etc - throughout the week.

That often means that at least 12 stories are published every week – all on a league that exists in the shadow of the AFL.

I can also tell you that I have never been instructed to write stories in any particular way to suit the views of the newspaper, the WAFL or Channel 7. I am sure our other reporters would say the same thing.

Our reporters are passionate about football, including the WAFL, and want to see it thrive.

Keep buying and reading The West Australian and you can help in that regard.

See you at the football,

John Townsend

Thanks for coming on Ozfooty to respond JT and first of all I want say I do appreciate your passion for the WAFL because us diehards do wonder about the dying coverage of the WAFL.

But I must highlight some facts, a couple of which are out of your control.

1. Perth Now (Sunday Times online version) abandoned the WAFL once 7West Media took ownership and you know how important the Sunday Times has been traditionally to the WAFL.
2. WA Today used to cover WAFL. Not anymore for the last few years.
3. I see already this weekend the only story covering the Perth v Peel game is headlined by Harley Bennell's injury has been tagged as a subscriber only story while the other 4 games were covered subscriber free. So it seems you are choosing which topics to be tagged as requiring subscription and others not. See attached.

thewest.com.au/sport/fremantle-dockers/f...-wafl-ng-b881238712z

So I ask is the WAFL going to be subscriber free or is it just a matter of time before ALL WAFL news requires subscription?

I dont agree with everything you write JT but I must admit I wholeheartedly agreed with your comments on the WAFL scoring drought of recent times last Tuesday which is doing nothing for spectator entertainment.
Oh to have some forward thinking coaches in the WAFL who dont follow every trend of the afl (more than likely wanting to join the afl gravy train for assistant/line/stoppage coaches)and had an all out attacking game plan that tried to introduce the ability for teams to kick 20 goals a game as we all saw back in the late 70s & 80s.

To be honest BH...I don't think the 6/6/6 rule has helped scoring which it was supposed to do as even at AFL level, the level hasn't been great.

BC wrote: To be honest BH...I don't think the 6/6/6 rule has helped scoring which it was supposed to do as
even at AFL level, the level hasn't been great.

I agree BC. I think the WAFL should go further and also follow the 18s/Colts rule of 2 players from each team must be Inside 50 at all stoppages, throw ins, kick ins from behinds etc as it may finally encourage coaches to leave players in their forward line like the good old days.
It astounds me that you can have all 36 players on the field in one sides forward 50 as I witnessed on Saturday and expect to score as more often than not the opposition will have outliers ready for that quick release from the back 50 and in it goes again, it is god damn ugly football.
We will never see another 100 goal a year forward again in the WAFL (be lucky to see 50 goals a year) as we all grew up with no matter who you supported, the other thing is no wonder goalkicking has not improved of late when we are asking forwards to run mini marathons each week up and down the ground as most are stuffed by the time they get a shot at goal.

Beasley Hutton wrote:

BC wrote: To be honest BH...I don't think the 6/6/6 rule has helped scoring which it was supposed to do as
even at AFL level, the level hasn't been great.

I agree BC. I think the WAFL should go further and also follow the 18s/Colts rule of 2 players from each team must be Inside 50 at all stoppages, throw ins, kick ins from behinds etc as it may finally encourage coaches to leave players in their forward line like the good old days.
It astounds me that you can have all 36 players on the field in one sides forward 50 as I witnessed on Saturday and expect to score as more often than not the opposition will have outliers ready for that quick release from the back 50 and in it goes again, it is god damn ugly football.
We will never see another 100 goal a year forward again in the WAFL (be lucky to see 50 goals a year) as we all grew up with no matter who you supported, the other thing is no wonder goalkicking has not improved of late when we are asking forwards to run mini marathons each week up and down the ground as most are stuffed by the time they get a shot at goal.

Hahaha...very true BH. I guess Whiskas aka Buddha Hocking was a visionary when coaching at Peel when he sent the entire team to the defensive end of the ground to stop the opposition from scoring.

BC wrote: Agreed Mike...it beggars belief that a television station would go to the trouble of putting together a full outside broadcast just for one player...oh well...that's channel Eagle I guess and any exposure of the WAFL is welcome given it seems beyond the capability of the WAFC. What's also galling is that both the WAFL and Dockers are played at the same time so they've bumped Freo to be replayed at 2:30. It just goes to show where Channel Eagle's allegiances lay. Why they couldn't broadcast Freo live at 11:45 then keep the East Freo v WCER game at close to its original time of 2:30 is a mystery. It's no big deal to me as I'll watch the Dockers live on Fox then head down to South Walyalup Oval to cheer on the mighty Lions but it must be a pain for Freo supporters who don't have Fox.

That’s ridiculous BC, ch 7 did not delay the telecast of the Dockers game so they could telecast Naitanui, only Foxtel could show the Freo Melbourne game live, just like the Eagles Sydney game was delayed by three hours

You could be right ToOl as I only vaguely remembered seeing Freo scheduled for live coverage at 11:30 on the day in the previous Sunday's TV guide...but could have been mistaken. Notwithstanding that, I still find it mildly amusing that Channel Eagle would set up an entire outside broadcast with all the costs that go with it to cover one player's return from injury...unbelievable. I wonder how it rated?