TOPIC:

Ok we have the alignment clubs now and while giving them their own sides was a better option this is what we are stuck with.
But for the life of me there is a couple of things that I cannot fathom how the G7 presidents did not insist on to a point where they would boycott games unless this was in place.

1) Salary cap - WAFL club salary cap is approx 360k. East Perth and Peel by being aligned to the AFL clubs still have a cap of approx 260K I believe. How on earth did this happen? How did the G7 clubs agree to this? East Perth and Peels Salary Cap should be no more than 1/3 of the other teams cap. 120K. By aligning with an AFL club you should have to rely on that AFL club to have success. Thats the penalty for being aligned.

2) Coaches should have to be paid by the WAFL club not be the AFL club, if the Eagles and Dockers want to pay for their own coaches then they should have to pay for all the coaches in the WAFL. It is another cost advantage for East Perth and Peel that they don't have to pay. It is just ridiculous.

3) The G7 clubs should have triple the player points system that East Perth and Peel do. In fact the system should be discarded as East Perth and Peel are way over the points cap with all their AFL listed players.

How on earth did the G7 accept these things? All they had to do was say we will boycott all games against these clubs and then follow through on it. What the hell is the WAFC going to do? No comp is not good. The G7 had a lot more power than they thought they had. Starting to think the G7 presidents are all pretty weak and also might have their hand in the AFL door.

Yep - pretty much what it is mate

Greatwhiteshark wrote: Ok we have the alignment clubs now and while giving them their own sides was a better option this is what we are stuck with.
But for the life of me there is a couple of things that I cannot fathom how the G7 presidents did not insist on to a point where they would boycott games unless this was in place.

1) Salary cap - WAFL club salary cap is approx 360k. East Perth and Peel by being aligned to the AFL clubs still have a cap of approx 260K I believe. How on earth did this happen? How did the G7 clubs agree to this? East Perth and Peels Salary Cap should be no more than 1/3 of the other teams cap. 120K. By aligning with an AFL club you should have to rely on that AFL club to have success. Thats the penalty for being aligned.

2) Coaches should have to be paid by the WAFL club not be the AFL club, if the Eagles and Dockers want to pay for their own coaches then they should have to pay for all the coaches in the WAFL. It is another cost advantage for East Perth and Peel that they don't have to pay. It is just ridiculous.

3) The G7 clubs should have triple the player points system that East Perth and Peel do. In fact the system should be discarded as East Perth and Peel are way over the points cap with all their AFL listed players.

How on earth did the G7 accept these things? All they had to do was say we will boycott all games against these clubs and then follow through on it. What the hell is the WAFC going to do? No comp is not good. The G7 had a lot more power than they thought they had. Starting to think the G7 presidents are all pretty weak and also might have their hand in the AFL door.

Thats what caused this mess in the first place the G7 Presidents thought they had more power than they did not the other way around.
They should have accepted the first proposal of letting them come into the comp on there own.
They were always going to enter the comp one way or the other and the lesser of the evils was letting them come in with there own team...they would have struggled.

I do agree on your salary cap and points system,the G7 clubs should be on a much better and higher deal.

The 2 afl clubs should be forced to pay there leftover players(players not on an afl list) the bare minimum that way allowing the g7 clubs to recruit all the top shelf recruits.
Forcing them to top up there lists with country and amateur players or unwanted wafl players from other clubs.

30yeardrought you are correct-G7 thought they had more power.
i dont blame them
Bottom line amongst all you write is that the WAFC did what they wanted and they did it because it is waht FFC and WCE wanted.
There was a total disregaurd for the G7 clubs and the footy public alike.

The G7 accepted it because the WAFC told them if you threaten boycotts and forfeits again we will hand the media this manilla folder full of emails showing 6 of the 7 clubs had negotiated with the AFL clubs to become an aligned team.

The G7 backed down because it would be pretty embarrassing, especially for 1 or 2 who had been overly critical, if everyone found out they were not angry about the arrangement but they were angry they missed out.

Barney wrote: The G7 accepted it because the WAFC told them if you threaten boycotts and forfeits again we will hand the media this manilla folder full of emails showing 6 of the 7 clubs had negotiated with the AFL clubs to become an aligned team.

The G7 backed down because it would be pretty embarrassing, especially for 1 or 2 who had been overly critical, if everyone found out they were not angry about the arrangement but they were angry they missed out.

Been hearing this since day dot Barney, probably the truth is a couple of other clubs looked at it.
But as usual people keep saying it but no one can ever confirm anything.

So what if some clubs publically refuted the alignment and then had discussions under the table.......cant believe the WAFC held this over them........so what is a bit of embarrassment and loss of face.....its only footy! Bit soft on the G7 part if this true......held to ransom......FMD......these clubs are too soft......

Barney wrote: The G7 accepted it because the WAFC told them if you threaten boycotts and forfeits again we will hand the media this manilla folder full of emails showing 6 of the 7 clubs had negotiated with the AFL clubs to become an aligned team.

The G7 backed down because it would be pretty embarrassing, especially for 1 or 2 who had been overly critical, if everyone found out they were not angry about the arrangement but they were angry they missed out.

I'm guessing our club was one of the six?

Freezin wrote: So what if some clubs publically refuted the alignment and then had discussions under the table.......cant believe the WAFC held this over them........so what is a bit of embarrassment and loss of face.....its only footy! Bit soft on the G7 part if this true......held to ransom......FMD......these clubs are too soft......

Agree Freezin, It doesn't matter anyway because East Perth and Peel were the ones that did it. Makes no difference who or how many were interested.

There would of been no embarrasment anyway, the Eagles and Dockers or even East Perth and Peel would not produce any emails as it would make them look silly and be seen as bully's.
The Presidents are weak and for them to agree to these parameters makes me wonder if some other kick backs are not coming there way.

It seems as though, we, the supporters, have been lied to in regard to this deal by everyone - The WAFC, The WAFL, and even our own clubs.

Disheartening.