TOPIC:

Also, if the common complaint is right that at least Perth and EP Metro zones are weak you end up with 3 club fighting over fewer players to recruit. Only need to look at the number of Y10-Y12 teams in the central conference to see that P and EP don't have many to chose from.

Factor -- I would apply it across the board so in theory the Tigers, Subi and the Falcons would have access to one metro node and one country node: the Goldfields.

Yep, I agree we need to try and get conrol of the colts back.

In theory, having three clubs per zone could also help us quicken the development of the 'node' areas where the game tends to be a wee bit under-developped.

ArkRoyal wrote: Factor -- I would apply it across the board so in theory the Tigers, Subi and the Falcons would have access to one metro node and one country node: the Goldfields.

Yep, I agree we need to try and get conrol of the colts back.

In theory, having three clubs per zone could also help us quicken the development of the 'node' areas where the game tends to be a wee bit under-developped.

Ark I'm pretty sure the money the Afl gave the Wafc had strings attached. The Afl bankrolled the new colts comp and now owns it.
The Afl says the drafted players are well down in Wa from the start of the century.The counter argument could be that the Afl clubs should look at more mature aged rookie's. Like Tim Kelly.Menagola.Overlooked players like Black and Nelson,Wulff,Swooper,Twomey.

ArkRoyal wrote: Zones can only lead to success over time -- Subi's 1986 side had around 16 locals, all of whom debutted for our colts between 1979 -- Brian Taylor and Dwayne Lamb and 1983-4 -- MacNish and Breman. We can only get back to such a system by liftting the AFL's draft age limit.

From what I remember the Subi crisis of the last 70s early 80s lead to a major reshuffle of the zones that built the basis of the subi revival of the mid to late 80s. It also coincided with a boom in size of those new Northern suburbs in the early 80s.

I think Subi which was mainly an inner city zoned club Jolimont Shenton Park etc , lost a fair bit of that to Claremont and picked up all the Duncraig Stirling Warwick areas which were new but booming at the time with youth, they carved a bit away from WP and EP..

Southerner wrote: The Zonal system was skewed & pretty much since destroyed as from 1996/7 with the "introduction" of Mandurah - and then further fractured by two separate Alignment Model programs , the current abortion of a structure is a ridiculous shambles that makes little sense in a lot of mapped areas.
It has definitely seen the clubs' focus shift on how to replace the annual AFL raided talent.

Yep, after decades of investment in the Mandurah/Rocko area, which in the 70s was still quite sparesly populated , it was just starting to pay off with the massive urban sprawl and families moving in during the 90s, when the shambles of Peel happened, no club knows the damage done by that decision more than us.

Bazza: Ironically enough, our 1986 flag was won by the old zone -- people such as, Breman, Keene, Clint Brown came from areas includding Woodlands, Innaloo and Scarbrough.

The carine-warwick area has been a great help to the club over the years.

ArkRoyal wrote: I wonder if it would be worth breaking the state up into the following system:

Peel
SF
EF

Subi
WP
Tigers

SD
EP
Demons

This would leave us with 3 expnaded zones with all three being able to recruit players in the area

It would also give every club access to a 'zone node' which is central to the Commission's model.

The Junior competitions already use this model.

Boothead -- thanks -- the clubs need to push to implement it fully

we have got four clubs which have really stugglled in the last 25-40 years:

Perth
Ep
Peel
EF
to some extent SD

more than half the teams

The above system would help all of them.
South would get back access to the Peel region
In terms, of equalisation, the system would help Subi the least -- would not that be good for most of the lads and lasses on here?