TOPIC:

I can't talk for others but I am sick to death of the complaining about the WAFC and the favours given to the two AFL clubs. I agree totally that they seem to not care about the WAFL and the decisions they make are only for what is in the best interests of the two AFL clubs but there is an important thing that everyone seems to overlook.
The Clubs accepted the conditions!!! They didn't have to accept the conditions but they did as a collective group, they also happily take the funding given to them to allow these conditions to continue.
I think the clubs more than anyone are to blame for the position the WAFL is in and if they want change and they want to move forward and run somewhat of a decent comp then they are the only ones who can force change and they must do it as a collective group.
If they continue to think that the funding is more important than the comp and it's future then they are making things very easy for the WAFC who will continue to buy their support on every decision.
But if they want change then as a collective they must protest the WAFC and demand change otherwise they will boycott matches as a group until change occurs. It is their only option but it is a very strong option and one that will be taken notice of.
If not they need to tell their members we will not stand up to the WAFC as the money is more important and you the members and supporters need to accept that we are not important anymore and we will do as we are told.
I am filthy with the 7 non aligned clubs who complain and complain yet do nothing what so ever to stand up for their comp.
The clubs need to put up or shut up and stop blaming everyone else. If these presidents really love the WAFL and their clubs then they need to get together and fight for what is right. It is time to do this now because the way things are going there will be no comp in the future.

GWS...I agree with everything you've said that the clubs need to band together and get a better deal from the WAFC but when you get Peel and EP breaking ranks, it makes it that much tougher for the others. Also the WAFC wields enormous power and at day's end the clubs don't have a great deal of say. The majority of clubs didn't want AFL reserve teams and voted it down but had the alignment model thrown at them as a fait accompli with extra $ as a sweetener as Freo and WCE were going to get their way in some form no matter what....so I'm not sure the non-aligned clubs had much choice.

BC wrote: GWS...I agree with everything you've said that the clubs need to band together and get a better deal from the WAFC but when you get Peel and EP breaking ranks, it makes it that much tougher for the others. Also the WAFC wields enormous power and at day's end the clubs don't have a great deal of say. The majority of clubs didn't want AFL reserve teams and voted it down but had the alignment model thrown at them as a fait accompli with extra $ as a sweetener as Freo and WCE were going to get their way in some form no matter what....so I'm not sure the non-aligned clubs had much choice.

Thats fine mate, and if thats the case then they need to stop complaining and tell there members and supporters to get over it as well.

BC wrote: GWS...I agree with everything you've said that the clubs need to band together and get a better deal from the WAFC but when you get Peel and EP breaking ranks, it makes it that much tougher for the others. Also the WAFC wields enormous power and at day's end the clubs don't have a great deal of say. The majority of clubs didn't want AFL reserve teams and voted it down but had the alignment model thrown at them as a fait accompli with extra $ as a sweetener as Freo and WCE were going to get their way in some form no matter what....so I'm not sure the non-aligned clubs had much choice.

Peel and East Perth will have no one to play if they boycott matches to make sure they get a better deal.

Always intetesting to get folks insight on these matters....Everyone rightly complaining about the AFL inequality in the WAFL, others giggling at the irony of Subi fans having a vent at the AFL inequality fiasco, even though out of all theWAFL clubs, they are the only club through years of other inequality reasons,capable of competing against them most games.....touch wood as GWS states a united front is made by all the clubs.....would love to see a noted drop in AFL players per game for Peel and EP, come finals time only those AFL boys with more WAFL games played than AFL games allowed to play finals....but even then the cut off for finals should be 11 WAFL games....and perhaps put a minimum percentage on locals playing for G7 clubs too.....say 60 - 40 ratio local to non local....encourage clubs even reward them financially to play more locals than non locals.....

There is a few things that need to be done that are reasonable in my opinion.

1) Salary cap. If the cap for the Non Aligned clubs is $300'000.00 then for the aligned clubs it should be only a quarter of this which is $75'000.00

2) You must play more WAFL games than AFL games to qualify and you must play a minimum of 7 WAFL games to qualify including 2 of the last 3 rounds of the WAFL season.

These are the two sticking points for me and if they are addressed then I have no issue. This fixes the number that will qualify as it currently stands.

Agree with all you say Greatwhite, yes the clubs have to accept blame here for taking what can only be explained as "pay offs".

BUT you need to remember some very important and all powerful facts.

Number 1 , all the clubs are bound by the WAFC Constitution, this was agreed to in 1989 when it was formed, the then WAFL Inc was dissolved in a financial crisis. All its power went with it as a trade off for Government Backed financial assistance,
It came at a price, the WAFL clubs lost all power to the WAFC Board , the Constitution gives them complete power to over rule the clubs , in fact the individual clubs have no power at all over the WAFC or in the WAFC.
Breaching a WAFC ruling, Boycotts etc would result in legal action against the Clubs that they would no hope of winning and send them broke with legal costs.
There is no hope for real improvement until the current WAFC Constitution and arrangement is dissolved, while they and the two AFL franchises bring the money in that will not happen.

Bazza wrote: Agree with all you say Greatwhite, yes the clubs have to accept blame here for taking what can only be explained as "pay offs".

BUT you need to remember some very important and all powerful facts.

Number 1 , all the clubs are bound by the WAFC Constitution, this was agreed to in 1989 when it was formed, the then WAFL Inc was dissolved in a financial crisis. All its power went with it as a trade off for Government Backed financial assistance,
It came at a price, the WAFL clubs lost all power to the WAFC Board , the Constitution gives them complete power to over rule the clubs , in fact the individual clubs have no power at all over the WAFC or in the WAFC.
Breaching a WAFC ruling, Boycotts etc would result in legal action against the Clubs that they would no hope of winning and send them broke with legal costs.
There is no hope for real improvement until the current WAFC Constitution and arrangement is dissolved, while they and the two AFL franchises bring the money in that will not happen.

Bazza your post is perhaps the most exquisite post ever on this forum by anyone. Please explain how you can rationalise' the clubs have to accept blame here for taking what can only be explained as "pay offs"' with 'the WAFL clubs lost all power to the WAFL Board'. Surely, you are not suggesting that the WAFL clubs should not have accepted the payments GIVEN it was the WAFC that MADE the decision (and I hasten to add I have posted MANY times it was the WAFC that made the decision)?

BC wrote: GWS...I agree with everything you've said that the clubs need to band together and get a better deal from the WAFC but when you get Peel and EP breaking ranks, it makes it that much tougher for the others. Also the WAFC wields enormous power and at day's end the clubs don't have a great deal of say. The majority of clubs didn't want AFL reserve teams and voted it down but had the alignment model thrown at them as a fait accompli with extra $ as a sweetener as Freo and WCE were going to get their way in some form no matter what....so I'm not sure the non-aligned clubs had much choice.

Summed it up well BC, as far as the Stand Alone clubs go - you are quite right if the WAFC wanted to put them it they had the power to do so. In terms of clubs breaking ranks , its really a PR exercise for the WAFC to smooth the water, the more that break ranks the easier it becomes, Peel and EP wouldn't been the only ones either.

swan42 wrote:

Bazza wrote: Agree with all you say Greatwhite, yes the clubs have to accept blame here for taking what can only be explained as "pay offs".

BUT you need to remember some very important and all powerful facts.

Number 1 , all the clubs are bound by the WAFC Constitution, this was agreed to in 1989 when it was formed, the then WAFL Inc was dissolved in a financial crisis. All its power went with it as a trade off for Government Backed financial assistance,
It came at a price, the WAFL clubs lost all power to the WAFC Board , the Constitution gives them complete power to over rule the clubs , in fact the individual clubs have no power at all over the WAFC or in the WAFC.
Breaching a WAFC ruling, Boycotts etc would result in legal action against the Clubs that they would no hope of winning and send them broke with legal costs.
There is no hope for real improvement until the current WAFC Constitution and arrangement is dissolved, while they and the two AFL franchises bring the money in that will not happen.

Bazza your post is perhaps the most exquisite post ever on this forum by anyone. Please explain how you can rationalise' the clubs have to accept blame here for taking what can only be explained as "pay offs"' with 'the WAFL clubs lost all power to the WAFL Board'. Surely, you are not suggesting that the WAFL clubs should not have accepted the payments GIVEN it was the WAFC that MADE the decision (and I hasten to add I have posted MANY times it was the WAFC that made the decision)?

No, I'm not suggesting they knock back the money, but at the end of the day its all they can extract from deal they have little or no control over and can only be described as pay offs, its not going to stop the process and the clubs take it in the end, cheap for the Eagles and Dockers when you have a fortune stashed away.

Perhaps WAFL should be asking why the WCE and Dockers are hoarding millions sitting on a asset WA Football handed over to the WAFC - 2 Afl Licences genius management of the WAFL back in the 80s. Thank God the SANFL are not a dim witted as the WAFL.