TOPIC:

I think its always interesting to compare ourselves with the SANFL. I guess we both see ourselves as similar in a sense, up against the Vics. Though the WAFL has serious bragging rights over the SANFL and the VFL considering we have knocked them both off in State games the past few years.

In terms of comparison this year with the WAFL & SANFL, of course the SANFL's average crowds are higher than ours, but not by that much really. I did write them down a while back, but I think I chucked the piece of paper out that I wrote it on. But the difference was about 500 or so per game.

The Adelaide Crows have their own side in the SANFL, and they have only won 1 game from 9 matches. Port Adelaide fair better sitting third with a 7-2 record. The SANFL ladder is no where near as close as the WAFL ladder, with 3 SANFL sides running away with the competition, whilst they have the bottom 3 clubs having so far won just 3 games from 23.

The WAFL competition is hugely close, given East Fremantle are second last and just two games behind second placed West Perth. Subiaco are obviously the standout side, but I sense they are not unbeatable. The WAFL has a bunch of teams all on 6 wins, and the final positions can be taken by 8 teams. Perth the only side out of it.

Looking at the SANFL & WAFL crowds during the recent Monday long weekend rounds, our crowds certainly stack up.

SANFL CROWDS LONG WEEKEND ROUND
Central Districts vs Port Adelaide 2,433 (Saturday)
Norwood vs West Adelaide 3,985 (Sunday)
Sturt vs Adelaide Crows 3,569 (Sunday)
Glenelg vs Nort Adelaide 3,409 (Monday)
South Adelaide vs WWEagles 2,173 (Monday)
TOTAL FOR 5 GAMES : 15,569

WAFL CROWDS LONG WEEKEND ROUND
Claremont vs Peel 1,303 (Saturday)
Swan Dists vs Perth 2,108 (Saturday)
East Perth vs West Perth 4,021 (Monday)
East Frem vs South Frem 7,209 (Monday)
TOTAL FOR 4 GAMES : 14,641

It does show that the local WA derbies are still a very good crowd puller, and that is a concern because it over shadows many figures. I think the average "normal" games in the SANFL are quite well attended, and that probably shows the SANFL have got it as right as they possibly can. And it does show that the WAFL are right off the pace and have their heads quite squarely jammed up their own backsides. The SANFL have reduced the impact of their AFL clubs introduction into their SANFL league, by not seeing a local club being overtaken by the Crows. Port Adelaide Magpies are far less impacted given that Port Power are an offshoot of the Port Magpies themselves. The result is the SANFL retains some form of integrity, by means of their traditional clubs retain their identity. This format also draws attention to the SANFL from the general AFL fan, otherwise deemed not achievable, by having a Crows and Port club competing in the league. I think their crowds have not "dropped off", which is the gauge for which to judge such a change.

In the WAFL we could have had the exact type of model, and retained all the above things mentioned, and not see crowds drop off. Instead we went the opposite way and the decline today I think is just the start. Unless we do something about it quick.

The WAFL are fortunate our competition this year is incredibly close compared to the SANFL. And none of it is because of anything the WAFL or WAFC have done. They just hit a little jackpot there. If our competition was where the SANFL's is this year in terms of tightness, it could paint a very ugly picture (or uglier that it already is.)

Anyway I guess its good for the WAFL supporters to know their teams are at least in with a chance, unlike those in the SANFL this year who this early on must prepare for missing out. You only have to look at the WAFL games over the next few weeks, its impossible to pick a clear winner in almost every game. Imagine how much better it would be, and how better the crowds would be if we had this and the SANFL type format. It could make our state league the most prominent football league outside the AFL. I have no doubt about that.

Jardine it is an interesting précis of the WAFL and SANFL competitions. Whilst mathematically the WAFL competition is closer if one analyses the WAFL competition I am not so sure that it is as close in reality. I note we moved from 7th to 3rd in one week. However, Subiaco are three games clear on top. The sham of clubs East Perth and Peel will be dependent on how many AFL players they have playing for them. If they have 15-18 AFL players how many clubs will be able to compete against them? Similarly, if one or both of Fremantle or Eagles make the AFL Grand Final and if East Perth and/or Peel make a Sunday WAFL what sort of a farce will it be?

Again your suggestion does not address the problem of players like Connor Blakely playing against Swans rather for Peel.

With respect to the crowd figures if you take at the Derby figure our crowds are not really comparable with the SANFL crowds. I don’t know but I wouldn’t think they would have had a SANFL crowd of fewer than 1,000 which is what we have had this season.

Fundamentally I believe the difference between the WAFL and the SANFL is that one controlling body cares for and makes decisions which are positive to their competition and one controlling body which are completely and utterly devoid of such actions and decisions.

swan42 wrote: Jardine it is an interesting précis of the WAFL and SANFL competitions. Whilst mathematically the WAFL competition is closer if one analyses the WAFL competition I am not so sure that it is as close in reality. I note we moved from 7th to 3rd in one week. However, Subiaco are three games clear on top. The sham of clubs East Perth and Peel will be dependent on how many AFL players they have playing for them. If they have 15-18 AFL players how many clubs will be able to compete against them? Similarly, if one or both of Fremantle or Eagles make the AFL Grand Final and if East Perth and/or Peel make a Sunday WAFL what sort of a farce will it be?

Again your suggestion does not address the problem of players like Connor Blakely playing against Swans rather for Peel.

With respect to the crowd figures if you take at the Derby figure our crowds are not really comparable with the SANFL crowds. I don’t know but I wouldn’t think they would have had a SANFL crowd of fewer than 1,000 which is what we have had this season.

Fundamentally I believe the difference between the WAFL and the SANFL is that one controlling body cares for and makes decisions which are positive to their competition and one controlling body which are completely and utterly devoid of such actions and decisions.

Connor Blakely is not the problem.He is owned by the dockers and will play for whoever the dockers want him to play.I suppose you want Jeff Garlett to fly back and play for the swannies if he gets dropped from the Melbourne afl league team.The difference with the sanfl is they have thought this out.They gave the crows their own side with only top up players.they have to play rookies in the league side and they are nowhere close to a powerhouse.as for port power they took over the port adelaide magpies sanfl team but they have taken some of their zones to make sure they don't dominate the sanfl.The problem with the wafl is its clubs who thought they could control the eagles and dockers by not allowing them their own stand alone teams and thought they would cave in and allow their players to stay put.I have liked the idea of a stand alone west coast team with no zones and top up players and the dockers to take over peel and redistrubute their zones.10 teams no bye and back to 8 tradional clubs.much fairer system.

swan42 wrote: Jardine it is an interesting précis of the WAFL and SANFL competitions. Whilst mathematically the WAFL competition is closer if one analyses the WAFL competition I am not so sure that it is as close in reality. I note we moved from 7th to 3rd in one week. However, Subiaco are three games clear on top. The sham of clubs East Perth and Peel will be dependent on how many AFL players they have playing for them. If they have 15-18 AFL players how many clubs will be able to compete against them? Similarly, if one or both of Fremantle or Eagles make the AFL Grand Final and if East Perth and/or Peel make a Sunday WAFL what sort of a farce will it be?

Again your suggestion does not address the problem of players like Connor Blakely playing against Swans rather for Peel.

With respect to the crowd figures if you take at the Derby figure our crowds are not really comparable with the SANFL crowds. I don’t know but I wouldn’t think they would have had a SANFL crowd of fewer than 1,000 which is what we have had this season.

Fundamentally I believe the difference between the WAFL and the SANFL is that one controlling body cares for and makes decisions which are positive to their competition and one controlling body which are completely and utterly devoid of such actions and decisions.

we won two premeirships in 2000,2001 because we only had 4-6 eagles playing for us.Trust me it isn't the amount of players playing for you but the quality of players.A fully fit subi would be a more cohesive and likely gf winner.

chaddy22 wrote:

swan42 wrote: Jardine it is an interesting précis of the WAFL and SANFL competitions. Whilst mathematically the WAFL competition is closer if one analyses the WAFL competition I am not so sure that it is as close in reality. I note we moved from 7th to 3rd in one week. However, Subiaco are three games clear on top. The sham of clubs East Perth and Peel will be dependent on how many AFL players they have playing for them. If they have 15-18 AFL players how many clubs will be able to compete against them? Similarly, if one or both of Fremantle or Eagles make the AFL Grand Final and if East Perth and/or Peel make a Sunday WAFL what sort of a farce will it be?

Again your suggestion does not address the problem of players like Connor Blakely playing against Swans rather for Peel.

With respect to the crowd figures if you take at the Derby figure our crowds are not really comparable with the SANFL crowds. I don’t know but I wouldn’t think they would have had a SANFL crowd of fewer than 1,000 which is what we have had this season.

Fundamentally I believe the difference between the WAFL and the SANFL is that one controlling body cares for and makes decisions which are positive to their competition and one controlling body which are completely and utterly devoid of such actions and decisions.

Connor Blakely is not the problem.He is owned by the dockers and will play for whoever the dockers want him to play.I suppose you want Jeff Garlett to fly back and play for the swannies if he gets dropped from the Melbourne afl league team.The difference with the sanfl is they have thought this out.They gave the crows their own side with only top up players.they have to play rookies in the league side and they are nowhere close to a powerhouse.as for port power they took over the port adelaide magpies sanfl team but they have taken some of their zones to make sure they don't dominate the sanfl.The problem with the wafl is its clubs who thought they could control the eagles and dockers by not allowing them their own stand alone teams and thought they would cave in and allow their players to stay put.I have liked the idea of a stand alone west coast team with no zones and top up players and the dockers to take over peel and redistrubute their zones.10 teams no bye and back to 8 tradional clubs.much fairer system.

C22 We DON'T HAVE SLAVERY on this country; Connor Blakely IS NOT OWNED by the Dockers. Your late, and I am not so sure lamented club, got into bed with the Eagles, as did Peel with the Dockers. Without those two recalcitrant clubs we WOULD NOT HAVE a host club alignment. That combined with a completely submissive WAFC is why we are in the position we are now in with the WAFL competition.

Sticking to the subject fellas, my comparison with the SANFL is because in essence they have the same alignment format as the WAFL, only they have done it better.

swan42 wrote: Jardine it is an interesting précis of the WAFL and SANFL competitions. Whilst mathematically the WAFL competition is closer if one analyses the WAFL competition I am not so sure that it is as close in reality. I note we moved from 7th to 3rd in one week. However, Subiaco are three games clear on top. The sham of clubs East Perth and Peel will be dependent on how many AFL players they have playing for them. If they have 15-18 AFL players how many clubs will be able to compete against them? Similarly, if one or both of Fremantle or Eagles make the AFL Grand Final and if East Perth and/or Peel make a Sunday WAFL what sort of a farce will it be?

Again your suggestion does not address the problem of players like Connor Blakely playing against Swans rather for Peel.

With respect to the crowd figures if you take at the Derby figure our crowds are not really comparable with the SANFL crowds. I don’t know but I wouldn’t think they would have had a SANFL crowd of fewer than 1,000 which is what we have had this season.

Fundamentally I believe the difference between the WAFL and the SANFL is that one controlling body cares for and makes decisions which are positive to their competition and one controlling body which are completely and utterly devoid of such actions and decisions.

I agree with Swan, you have picked WAFL's only big weekend crowdwise and if you take the Derby out they would not even be close to the SANFL, Sanfl crowds are consistently higher, you would be better looking at total crowd attendances for the year.

There really is no comparison wiht the way sanfl and wafl and the way theu have been managed or rathe mismanaged over the course of history, sanfl has it all over the wafc in spades, I dont think the sanfl has ever gone cap in hand to the state gov like the wafl did in the late 80's when it went bust, and th eburke gov had to bail the numpties out.

then you have the fact they owned football park, and have now done a great deal with the saca, meanwhile wafl and waca still cant organise a piss up in a brewery and the wafl does not own a single square metter of land to itself, and that is over 100 plus years of existance.

SANFL attendances 2014

Home and Away 253 201
Average 3391
Finals 72 301
GF 38, 644

As you can see WAFL is not even in the same league

Bazza wrote: SANFL attendances 2014

Home and Away 253 201
Average 3391
Finals 72 301
GF 38, 644

As you can see WAFL is not even in the same league

with vgood reason Bazza, they may have lost some of their comp to the alignment issue, but all their clubs retain identity & the influx of the AFL side of it is done the best way. In fact it probably enhances it a bit. For example having South Adelaide beat the Crows is far more appetising for fans than say here with Subiaco beating an Eagles aligned East Perth side. It only pisses everyone off and the comp as a whole suffers. As a result our crowds will be inferior until something is done.

But the reality is the South Aussies at least have more respect for their past than the morons here in WA.

jardine wrote:

Bazza wrote: SANFL attendances 2014

Home and Away 253 201
Average 3391
Finals 72 301
GF 38, 644

As you can see WAFL is not even in the same league

with vgood reason Bazza, they may have lost some of their comp to the alignment issue, but all their clubs retain identity & the influx of the AFL side of it is done the best way. In fact it probably enhances it a bit. For example having South Adelaide beat the Crows is far more appetising for fans than say here with Subiaco beating an Eagles aligned East Perth side. It only pisses everyone off and the comp as a whole suffers. As a result our crowds will be inferior until something is done.

But the reality is the South Aussies at least have more respect for their past than the morons here in WA.

sanfl is way ahead of wafl.
the facts
1.perth has 2.02 million residents and adealide only 1.30 million and still gets more people to the footy.

2.went to a ten team competition in 1964 and realised their mistake and went back to a nine team comp in 1991.(we should've got rid of peel)

3.they owned and built eastlake which the sanfl own.What did we do.Instead of redeveloping perth oval (even george g was in favour) we decicided to redevlop subi and made it into 43,000 stadium that fitted in less people.

4.they have at least listened to the afl clubs and gave them what they basically wanted.we didn't and have a alignment which is not what the eagles or dockers asked for.