TOPIC:

How many times do people on here have to be told the WAFL Presidents DID NOT vote the alignments in FFS
Cooper presented to them at the meeting the alignment was now a fait accompli due to 2 clubs breaking rank and going behind the others to jump into bed with the 2 AFL teams and the only thing offered to the other 7 clubs was to get the best deal for them as it was going to be happening anyway whether they liked it or not!
What were the 7 Presidents to do cop the coming alignment and get no compensation as well sheesh! EOS

Beasley Hutton wrote: How many times do people on here have to be told the WAFL Presidents DID NOT vote the alignments in FFS
Cooper presented to them at the meeting the alignment was now a fait accompli due to 2 clubs breaking rank and going behind the others to jump into bed with the 2 AFL teams and the only thing offered to the other 7 clubs was to get the best deal for them as it was going to be happening anyway whether they liked it or not!
What were the 7 Presidents to do cop the coming alignment and get no compensation as well sheesh! EOS

End of Story...maybe but only because the clubs chose to give up all of their remaining bargaining chips when they took the cash and agreed to the alignment. More than 2 clubs broke ranks with others happy to accept the extra cash.

But the WAFL clubs lost most of their power when they agreed to an alignment from 1999-2001 before they got together and killed the alignment from 2002 to 2014. Let's not forget WCE and Fremantle proposed stand alone teams to play in the WAFL in 2011, including an option to not play finals. The clubs rejected this but 3 years later did sign off on the alignment.

We've failed to control our own destiny by being complicit to the process that's arrived here, happily recieving the AFL club provided funding but complaining about AFL club involvement. The clubs (and some supporters) need to grab a mirror, then they'll see the problem.

Something weird going on here. Redlegs last post doesn't show until I make a reply.

RedLegs wrote:
End of Story...maybe but only because the clubs chose to give up all of their remaining bargaining chips when they took the cash and agreed to the alignment. More than 2 clubs broke ranks with others happy to accept the extra cash.

But the WAFL clubs lost most of their power when they agreed to an alignment from 1999-2001 before they got together and killed the alignment from 2002 to 2014. Let's not forget WCE and Fremantle proposed stand alone teams to play in the WAFL in 2011, including an option to not play finals. The clubs rejected this but 3 years later did sign off on the alignment.

We've failed to control our own destiny by being complicit to the process that's arrived here, happily recieving the AFL club provided funding but complaining about AFL club involvement. The clubs (and some supporters) need to grab a mirror, then they'll see the problem.

What bargaining power was left? As BH said the rug was pulled from under them by the two clubs that broke ranks. Anyway the good thing is it is not set in stone and there will most likely be changes. And by the way Norwood Redlegs, who is your WAFL team?

DD wrote:

RedLegs wrote:

DD wrote:

RedLegs wrote: So how many $ a year does the WAFC give your WAFL club?
What was your clubs profit or loss last year?
How does the WAFC derive their income?
How much do WCE & FFC contribute to the WAFC's income either directly or indirectly? Royalty payments and facility usage. WAFC sponsorship incomes ie Domain Stadium naming rights. Domain sub-hire agreements etc

Lets look at the numbers or do you want to just continue to complain and blame the AFL teams?

I've been to far more WAFL games (400 plus) over the last 30 years than AFL games (under 50) so pretty confident that I can comment from an informed position. Not an AFL club member but I am a fully paid WAFL club member and have been since the late 70's. I remember Subi walking around at halftime asking for donations to keep their club afloat and understand the Subi Oval deal.

Are you referring to the WCE sponsorship of the WAAFL Colts and State football programs?

How accountable do the WAFL clubs and their boards need to be for the position the WAFL competition now finds itself in? Run financially sustainable clubs and therefore a sustainable competition and have a greater level of control, possibly even full control or continue to happily accept handouts, be dictated to and allow the integrity of the competition to be compromised.

Of course the WAFL relies on the two AFL clubs to survive. The WAFL clubs agreed to form a West Australian team to join the then VFL which later became the AFL and Fremantle was formed. The WAFL as a result of those two teams and the AFL draft has raped the WAFL of its best talent year in year out. And without a strong WAFL we would not be producing the second highest number of players currently playing in the AFL. And here you go off half cocked about how badly managed WAFL clubs are. It's a tough gig running a WAFL club these days and balancing the books and all clubs work damn hard to raise money through various fund raising events throughout the year.

Kill the WAFL or allow it to die a slow death it will come back to haunt the AFL and the two Perth AFL clubs.

mobile.abc.net.au/news/2012-10-31/eagles...fl-alignment/4343722

No doubt it is a difficult job to run a club but you do have to question the direction the WAFL clubs have taken. When given an opportunity to say no to the alignment, the 7 WAFL clubs said yes, if you give us an extra $100,000 each per annum.

This only further served to weaken any future bargaining power from their previously weak position in 2012. I wonder what the clubs will do in 2018 when the deal gets renegotiated...probably put their hand out for more cash compromising the integrity of the competition further?

The WAFL clubs were forced into a corner, the Eagles and Dockers pitch forked a couple of people with links to their organisations into the WAFC and there were always issues between the AFL clubs and WAFL clubs over selection and where a player would play. Also some WAFL clubs got lucky getting players that struggled to hold down a regular AFL game but would dominate at WAFL level and be the difference eg Hansen at SD so I've got no problem with the alignments except there should be a limit of 12 players in any league WAFL match, not just finals.

But I really do think EP sacrificing themselves as a bona fide WAFL club is hurting the WAFL and a stand alone Eagles team is the way to go. I'm sure Royal supporters would agree.

This alignment never was going to be like 2000 and 2001 where we could build a side with a minimum of eagles playing usually 4-6 and a lot of them were not world beaters just young up and comers who played in a regular east perth structure and did their job well.We also had the ability to recruit a few good players to compliment some handy east perth players. This alignment was always going to be hard to manage as you have a ever changing unsettled side.The upside is whatever happens in the future east perth will be able to walk away financially a lot better off.Whatever happens whether the eagles go stand alone or takeover another struggling club or join a vfl reserves side I can see a independent east perth.I doubt the wafl clubs have the power to force the eagles and dockers to distribute their players back to all nine clubs.Hey if you can do it don't talk about bring it on please bring it on. In the end i want a club that will be a financially independent club then a independent financial basket case that will never be able to compete on the field.

Bazza wrote:

Swandog wrote:

Bazza wrote:

Grassy wrote:

ArkRoyal wrote: yes, I broadlly agree: but keep in mind that the WAFL has made no attempt whatsoever to protect crowd numbers since 1985, unlike in Victoria.

You mean the WAFC,Ark?!

The measuring stick in Victoria is the VFA or VFL,but right now,I ain't too concerned about them.

the wafc didn't even exist in 1985, remember it was the WAFL council of presidents that voted to join the VFL.

I stand corrected but the only club to vote against both WCE in 86 and Freo in 94 entering the VFL was Swans, led by our great President Bill Walker, South the only other to vote against WCE but not Freo

Wrong again SF voted against both

SF and SD being the only two clubs to have voted no in all 3 critical votes

WCE , FD and Peel.

Not too sure about that, I'll have to do some research for a definitive answer

You mean look into you Emu Export Crystal Ball.

RedLegs wrote:

Beasley Hutton wrote: How many times do people on here have to be told the WAFL Presidents DID NOT vote the alignments in FFS
Cooper presented to them at the meeting the alignment was now a fait accompli due to 2 clubs breaking rank and going behind the others to jump into bed with the 2 AFL teams and the only thing offered to the other 7 clubs was to get the best deal for them as it was going to be happening anyway whether they liked it or not!
What were the 7 Presidents to do cop the coming alignment and get no compensation as well sheesh! EOS

End of Story...maybe but only because the clubs chose to give up all of their remaining bargaining chips when they took the cash and agreed to the alignment. More than 2 clubs broke ranks with others happy to accept the extra cash.

But the WAFL clubs lost most of their power when they agreed to an alignment from 1999-2001 before they got together and killed the alignment from 2002 to 2014. Let's not forget WCE and Fremantle proposed stand alone teams to play in the WAFL in 2011, including an option to not play finals. The clubs rejected this but 3 years later did sign off on the alignment.

We've failed to control our own destiny by being complicit to the process that's arrived here, happily recieving the AFL club provided funding but complaining about AFL club involvement. The clubs (and some supporters) need to grab a mirror, then they'll see the problem.

The WAFL gave up its power once they went bust in 1989 and the WAFC was formed, the WAFC was drafted with a clause that gave it ultimate power over the WAFL clubs, that was the price for being bailed out by the tax payer after the incompetent management of WA Football (those clubs that supported WCE entry carry the can here) lead to the Indian Pacific disaster, the accumulation of massive debt with the poorly planned development of Subiaco Oval and the declining interest in WAFL as players moved East and the VFL paid token transfer fees to increasingly unfinancial and desperate WAFL clubs.

Once the WAFC had oversight it lead to far stronger structure and the eventual success and viability of the WCE . this gave WAFL an income stream that has subsidised its existence ever since. That's where the power base lays, and when the WAFC made the decision the WAFL clubs despite all the hot air about protests , boycotts , legal action et al - did nothing, why because they had surrendered that power decades earlier. They copped the $100,000.00 extra cash meaning each WAFL club now gets $525,000.00 cash hand out from the WAFC ( eagles and dockers ) each year.

The Grassys of the world like to think that its all everyones else's fault , but forgets Perth would of folded years ago without over half a mill a year in hand outs each year , he also conveniently forgets that it was the WAFL that gave up its power in 1989 and his very own club that contributed to the failure that resulted in that happening. he then comes up with crack pot ideas like sending two WA teams and maybe two SANFL sides to play in an expanded second tier national comp in Victoria that would me certain death for what ever is left of the WAFL.

Resorting to name calling, you've lost the argument grassy as well as a grip on reality, you live in a parallel universe where the harsh facts of economics and history are placed in suspended animation.

Bazza wrote: Resorting to name calling, you've lost the argument grassy as well as a grip on reality, you live in a parallel universe where the harsh facts of economics and history are placed in suspended animation.

You might fall over Bazza but I agree with everything you've just posted.