TOPIC:

Found this in another part of the forum originally posted by Footy Fever, thought it might be more relevant here.... Any truth to this rumour????

Hi Guys,

Heard today that Kelmscott are being looked at for paying players in 2014, apparently they had guys come to them from Boddington who were being paid to play.

Can anyone confirm??

Was told that if found guilty for a 2nd time after being caught paying fuel vouchers that they will be relegated to C4.

Which means there will be a flow on affect through the grades with whitfords returning to A grade, Bullcreek to B grade etc etc.

Has anyone else heard anything about this?

Most likely North Freo kicking up a stink again because they lost the GF

Xavier2 I wouldn't listen to the rumours because I'm sure they wouldn't be silly enough to do it again....
If that's true I'm not sure what the process is in regards to them being relegated. Their was an incident last season where the club only received a fine and the player suspended. I'd be embarrassed if my club ever did this, for one I'd rather put the money into the club and ensure all players feel the benefits not just those playing league,

doubt they are dumb enough to get caught again so easily. Very easy for the footy commission to figure out who's paying based on the transfers. Bunch of blokes transferring from a country club would be a massive red flag. even then you still have to prove it.

There is a fair bit of ex sunday league influence at the footy commission, we have seen there reluctance to punish or investigate Maddington in the past, so I reckon Kelmscott would be safe.

You would think if anything was done Whitford would still be relegated and Scarbs promoted. Whitford were not affected by the ongoings in B grade, only fair a B grade team would rightly benefit from any decision.
Too difficult for the WAAFL to deal with, best bet would be to put it in the too hard basket.

Same old story every year we hear someone is paying players.

Same old rhetoric no one wants to have a crack at the Sunday league Clubs and it's always them that cheat?

I am from an old Sunday League Club.

When I played in the 90's and early 2000's we could not get players to our clubs (we were allowed to pay)as they were getting better offers in the "amateurs".

This is fact as I was a committee member and playing by the rules within our league.

You are seriously dreaming if you think that the top end A grade clubs as well as a lot of lower grades are not enticing players with dollars or contra etc.

Either grow the balls to make an official complaint through your own club channels or suck it up.

I will throw this out there and ask for any other ideas / solutions from you all?

Maybe all clubs should be allowed to pay and have a salary cap?

The higher the grade the higher the cap?

Your input?

Disco Knight wrote: Same old story every year we hear someone is paying players.

Same old rhetoric no one wants to have a crack at the Sunday league Clubs and it's always them that cheat?

I am from an old Sunday League Club.

When I played in the 90's and early 2000's we could not get players to our clubs (we were allowed to pay)as they were getting better offers in the "amateurs".

This is fact as I was a committee member and playing by the rules within our league.

You are seriously dreaming if you think that the top end A grade clubs as well as a lot of lower grades are not enticing players with dollars or contra etc.

Agree with a salary cap for each grade with A grade clubs at the top of the scale working down, get it out in the open and end all the speculation on who's paying who. We all know that players are getting paid in ammo's. As for Kelmscott they have a B grade premiership at league level but their Reserves and Colts can't get near it, you don't need to be Einstein. Good luck to them as I don't have an issue with players getting a financial reward if a club considers them worth it.

Either grow the balls to make an official complaint through your own club channels or suck it up.

I will throw this out there and ask for any other ideas / solutions from you all?

Maybe all clubs should be allowed to pay and have a salary cap?

The higher the grade the higher the cap?

Your input?

You couldn't attract players to SFL not because players were getting better offers in WAAFL but because Saturdays was a better completion Hence why after all the trash talk thrown around when SFL died "we are better we should all be in A grade we are that good blah blah" old SFL clubs are only in grades lower than A with the 1 side bouncing between A and B every year.

If WAAFL sides payed players A grade would be dominated by the same couple of sides i.e North Freo, Wembley, Uni, Wesley Curtin, CBC etc every year and Kelmscott wouldn't even get an opportunity to make B let alone A grade.

It comes down to a clubs reputation and recruiting not how much they pay players. Uni and Wesley Curtin can draw from their prospective Universitys and Wesley get a hell of a lot of talent from the college. NF, North Beach draw from the clubs reputation and success.

Turtle thanks for your input.

Leaving all the trash talk aside I gave you a perspective of an old SFL problem and yes Saturdays may have been a factor also. But the point in question was money as per the thread comments earlier.

I am not bagging the WAAFL at all far from it.

I have put to the footy community a scenario and then options open for discussion and input for a solution.

What constructive input do you have other than going back to SFL V WAAFL arguments?

turtle wrote: You couldn't attract players to SFL not because players were getting better offers in WAAFL but because Saturdays was a better completion Hence why after all the trash talk thrown around when SFL died "we are better we should all be in A grade we are that good blah blah" old SFL clubs are only in grades lower than A with the 1 side bouncing between A and B every year.

If WAAFL sides payed players A grade would be dominated by the same couple of sides i.e North Freo, Wembley, Uni, Wesley Curtin, CBC etc every year and Kelmscott wouldn't even get an opportunity to make B let alone A grade.

It comes down to a clubs reputation and recruiting not how much they pay players. Uni and Wesley Curtin can draw from their prospective Universitys and Wesley get a hell of a lot of talent from the college. NF, North Beach draw from the clubs reputation and success.

Your first paragraph depends what era you are talking about, SFL dropped right away in the 2000, but late 80's and 90's streets ahead of Amateurs, and don't think for one minute that blokes were attracted to just wanting to play on Saturday's the SFL money was drying up, Kelmscott an example there, their whole Sporting Club fell over.

Your second part of the paragraph is ridiculous, when SFL came over to WAAFL, the comp and some clubs were on their knees, hence lot of players had already left SFL as it was not the best comp anymore. The only thing more ridiculous was the SFL people at that time demanding they should be in the top grades, when the SFL had slipped a long way.

I recall going to a State Amateur game SA v WA, way back, which SA smashed WA in, at that time Amamteurs was a long way behind SFL. bar a few clubs in A Grade

The point I was trying to make was don't think that all WAAFL clubs in A grade pay out the big bucks to bring success.

A salary cap would push the smaller clubs even further away from making the top grades and even kill some off when then run into debt to pay players. Players will always deviate towards big clubs with big reputations. Take for example North Freos 5ths they would give all clubs in C grade a run for their money.....why? Depth due to size of the club and the reputation of the club.

Having said that some clubs do pay out big bucks but its laughable as they are the sides who don't end up getting anything out of it.