TOPIC:

My point is that the WAFL, as an organisation, ceased to exist when the WAFC was formed. The term WAFL is nothing more than the name of a competition. In South Australia, there is a SANFL board, whose primary goal is to run the state competition. It is a separate group from the SA Footy Commission and even seems to have a significant say in the make up of the Commission board. Take the time to read the SANFL website. It outlines specific goals and objectives of the SANFL. Then look at the WAFL and the WAFC sites. I could not find any such goals or objectives for the WAFL. Also note on the WAFC website, there is a page listing WAFC life members. Why are these wonderful servants of the WAFL and WANFL now officially referred to Commission life mebers? How can a Commission have members, let alone life members? If I was blessed enough to have the honour of life membership of the WAFL or WANFL, I would be furious at that distinguished honour being changed to life membership of the commission. My point is that there IS no WAFL. It is simply a name. And I'm gravely concerned, like many, that the competition known as the WAFL will die unless the WAFL as an organisational body is reinstated so the competition can be overseen by a group of passionate people dedicated primarily to the state competition. The WAFC, who are the current governing body of the WAFL, have, as their primary goal, the two AFL teams and the development of AFL players. The WAFL competition is not, and never will be, their primary goal. The WAFL is the only football competition in the state that does not have its own governing body. It is time for the WAFL to be reinstated as a separate body to the commission or I fear the WAFL will die.

swan42 wrote:

Country member wrote: I always get confused when discussing the WAFC and the WAFL. In my eyes, the WAFL is just a name given to a competition. The WAFC oversee the development of football and footballers in this state AND organise the WAFL competition. Who cares what the WAFC are called? After 30 years without a WAFL, this may be a perfect time to create a WAFL once again. A group of passionate, dedicated people whose prime purpose is to run a viable, exciting state competition, who, like the organisers of all competitions throughout the state, work with the WAFC to promote the game and the development of players at all levels. The WAFL ceased to be 30 years ago and was taken over by the WAFC. The competition is unlikely to survive until the WAFL is resurrected. The WAFC's primary goal is the AFL, and that is fair enough. It is time the WAFL became its own body once again, being managed by a group of people whose primary goal is the WAFL competition.

CM I have no idea what WAFL club you support or even if you support any. If you do support a WAFL club, you have about 6 games to go and watch and most likely another year or two to go and watch them. After that the WAFL will be as dead as the proverbial dodo and who will be blame for its demise? The WAFC and the VPL .

You'll be right Swan Ellenbrook goes all right in C: grade Amateurs.

Country member wrote: My point is that the WAFL, as an organisation, ceased to exist when the WAFC was formed. The term WAFL is nothing more than the name of a competition. In South Australia, there is a SANFL board, whose primary goal is to run the state competition. It is a separate group to the SA Footy Commission and even seems to have a significant say in the make up of the Commission board. Take the time to read the SANFL website. It outlines specific goals and objectives of the SANFL. Then look at the WAFL and the WAFC sites. I could not find any such goals or objectives for the WAFL. Also note on the WAFC website, there is a page listing WAFC life members. Why are these wonderful servants of the WAFL and WANFL now officially referred to Commission life mebers? How can a Commission have members, let alone life members? If I was blessed enough to have the honour of life membership of the WAFL or WANFL, I would be furious at that distinguished honour being changed to life membership of the commission. My point is that there IS no WAFL. It is simply a name. And I'm gravely concerned, like many, that the competition known as the WAFL will die unless the WAFL as an organisational body is reinstated so the competition can be overseen by a group of passionate people dedicated primarily to the state competition. The WAFC, who are the current governing body of the WAFL, have, as their primary goal, the two AFL teams and the development of AFL players. The WAFL competition is not, and never will be, their primary goal. The WAFL is the only football competition in the state that does not have its own governing body. It is time for the WAFL to be reinstated as a separate body to the commission or I fear the WAFL will die.

Agree with what you're saying CM, the WAFL needs better representation in the form of its own governing body seperate to the WAFC. Unfortunately under the current model, when challenged to make the right decision for the WAFL competition as a whole, the clubs have continued to make decisions with perceived short-term benefits for their own club. These passionate representatives of the WAFL clubs have consistantly broken ranks in regards to the host club agreements and other issues.
If past form continues then enough WAFL clubs will sell out and support the WAFC changing its name to AFLWA on the proviso that each WAFL club gets more annual funding. They'll probably support the WAFL comp changing its name if enough coin is put on the table.

If the WAFC does rebrand as AFLWA it will be the 6th name that the WAFL governing body has been known as since it was founded as the WAFA in 1885. The competition has survived through each of these name changes, even Westar Rules, but what it won't survive is clubs continually selling out the clubs control of the competition and as such the competitions integrity at every little hurdle that gets thrown its way.

I heard Duffield say on the radio this morning that the AFL want the WAFL name for the womens league.

Tiger Tales wrote:

Country member wrote: My point is that the WAFL, as an organisation, ceased to exist when the WAFC was formed. The term WAFL is nothing more than the name of a competition. In South Australia, there is a SANFL board, whose primary goal is to run the state competition. It is a separate group to the SA Footy Commission and even seems to have a significant say in the make up of the Commission board. Take the time to read the SANFL website. It outlines specific goals and objectives of the SANFL. Then look at the WAFL and the WAFC sites. I could not find any such goals or objectives for the WAFL. Also note on the WAFC website, there is a page listing WAFC life members. Why are these wonderful servants of the WAFL and WANFL now officially referred to Commission life mebers? How can a Commission have members, let alone life members? If I was blessed enough to have the honour of life membership of the WAFL or WANFL, I would be furious at that distinguished honour being changed to life membership of the commission. My point is that there IS no WAFL. It is simply a name. And I'm gravely concerned, like many, that the competition known as the WAFL will die unless the WAFL as an organisational body is reinstated so the competition can be overseen by a group of passionate people dedicated primarily to the state competition. The WAFC, who are the current governing body of the WAFL, have, as their primary goal, the two AFL teams and the development of AFL players. The WAFL competition is not, and never will be, their primary goal. The WAFL is the only football competition in the state that does not have its own governing body. It is time for the WAFL to be reinstated as a separate body to the commission or I fear the WAFL will die.

Agree with what you're saying CM, the WAFL needs better representation in the form of its own governing body seperate to the WAFC. Unfortunately under the current model, when challenged to make the right decision for the WAFL competition as a whole, the clubs have continued to make decisions with perceived short-term benefits for their own club. These passionate representatives of the WAFL clubs have consistantly broken ranks in regards to the host club agreements and other issues.
If past form continues then enough WAFL clubs will sell out and support the WAFC changing its name to AFLWA on the proviso that each WAFL club gets more annual funding. They'll probably support the WAFL comp changing its name if enough coin is put on the table.

If the WAFC does rebrand as AFLWA it will be the 6th name that the WAFL governing body has been known as since it was founded as the WAFA in 1885. The competition has survived through each of these name changes, even Westar Rules, but what it won't survive is clubs continually selling out the clubs control of the competition and as such the competitions integrity at every little hurdle that gets thrown its way.

Absolutely nailed it Country Member and TT.
The time bomb is ticking and each of our WAFL Presidents, Boards and to a lesser extent WAFL CEO's are all asleep at the wheel. The time is now that they need to be making a concerted united front and make a decisive break away from the current WAFC structure and control their own destiny's. If we sit back and wait we will be gone.....

Grassy Footy is no different to this current GST debate.Wa is sitting on the pineapple again.The AFL is only here for there own benefit. Offering cash with strings attached.I heard ysrda more strings than Pinnochio.
Full credit to Premier Barnett for biting the bullet and building the Stadium in tough economic time with massive state debt.But he did guarantee footy would be no worse off by moving to Burswood.We know that's not right.This is quiet opportunist by the AFL to enter at this point.

The article says a renaming of WAFC to AFLWA - the WAFL would remain as is (for now).

While I couldn't really care what that useless bunch of oxygen thieves call themselves, the point is they are supposed to be representing all levels of WA football. The reality of course is they look after the eagles and dockers to the detriment of everyone else - hence I'd suggest AFLWA is the perfect name for this bunch of charlatans and they can stop hiding behind their current fake name.

Of course the biggest concern is they would happily give away our WAFL name for a bag of silver and I'm sure this is just a matter of time.

Dwert wrote:

Tiger Tales wrote:

Country member wrote: My point is that the WAFL, as an organisation, ceased to exist when the WAFC was formed. The term WAFL is nothing more than the name of a competition. In South Australia, there is a SANFL board, whose primary goal is to run the state competition. It is a separate group to the SA Footy Commission and even seems to have a significant say in the make up of the Commission board. Take the time to read the SANFL website. It outlines specific goals and objectives of the SANFL. Then look at the WAFL and the WAFC sites. I could not find any such goals or objectives for the WAFL. Also note on the WAFC website, there is a page listing WAFC life members. Why are these wonderful servants of the WAFL and WANFL now officially referred to Commission life mebers? How can a Commission have members, let alone life members? If I was blessed enough to have the honour of life membership of the WAFL or WANFL, I would be furious at that distinguished honour being changed to life membership of the commission. My point is that there IS no WAFL. It is simply a name. And I'm gravely concerned, like many, that the competition known as the WAFL will die unless the WAFL as an organisational body is reinstated so the competition can be overseen by a group of passionate people dedicated primarily to the state competition. The WAFC, who are the current governing body of the WAFL, have, as their primary goal, the two AFL teams and the development of AFL players. The WAFL competition is not, and never will be, their primary goal. The WAFL is the only football competition in the state that does not have its own governing body. It is time for the WAFL to be reinstated as a separate body to the commission or I fear the WAFL will die.

Agree with what you're saying CM, the WAFL needs better representation in the form of its own governing body seperate to the WAFC. Unfortunately under the current model, when challenged to make the right decision for the WAFL competition as a whole, the clubs have continued to make decisions with perceived short-term benefits for their own club. These passionate representatives of the WAFL clubs have consistantly broken ranks in regards to the host club agreements and other issues.
If past form continues then enough WAFL clubs will sell out and support the WAFC changing its name to AFLWA on the proviso that each WAFL club gets more annual funding. They'll probably support the WAFL comp changing its name if enough coin is put on the table.

If the WAFC does rebrand as AFLWA it will be the 6th name that the WAFL governing body has been known as since it was founded as the WAFA in 1885. The competition has survived through each of these name changes, even Westar Rules, but what it won't survive is clubs continually selling out the clubs control of the competition and as such the competitions integrity at every little hurdle that gets thrown its way.

Absolutely nailed it Country Member and TT.
The time bomb is ticking and each of our WAFL Presidents, Boards and to a lesser extent WAFL CEO's are all asleep at the wheel. The time is now that they need to be making a concerted united front and make a decisive break away from the current WAFC structure and control their own destiny's. If we sit back and wait we will be gone.....

This is great in theory mate but how? In the end without $ we are rooted unless it just turns into an Ammos comp without TV coverage and limited media coverage. The AFL hold all the aces on that front it seems

Grassy wrote:

swan42 wrote: My comments sent to Gavin Taylor is given below:

Attn Gavin Taylor

Exactly why do you and the WAFC want to DESTROY the WAFL competition? The proposal to rename the WAFL is a damning indictment on yourself and the WAFC who should be interested in maintaining a competition that is older than the AFL(VFL).

This action and the stripping of the Colts' competition shows exactly the motivation of the WA footy review. It had nothing to do with improving WA footy. Its SOLE purpose was to DESTROY the WAFL, and its history, the WAFL clubs, players, members and supporters.

I invite you to Freo Oval or the other grounds this Saturday and canvas the thoughts of true WAFL supporters concerning this proposal. Rest assured the reception will be particularly hostile.

He'll just ignore you Swan.Or have the WAFC Lawyers threaten this site to withdraw your comments.So why not read out your letter on Saturday morning on 6WF and/or 6PR?!

UPDATE: I received an email from his PA that she will be passing my email to him and that I can expect a response soon.

Swandog wrote..."This is great in theory mate but how? In the end without $ we are rooted unless it just turns into an Ammos comp without TV coverage and limited media coverage. The AFL hold all the aces on that front it seems"

I'm not sure how but the structure seems to work in South Australia. They have a SANFL board, who have a say in who makes up the SA Footy Commission Board. They have two AFL reserves teams in their competition, commercial TV coverage, much bigger crowds than WAFL games and a much closer, even competition. Clearly it can be done. I'm sure the SANFL set up also has its issues but it seems to me to be a MUCH better model.

Look at sanfl.com.au/ and compare it to wafl.com.au. It all becomes very clear.