TOPIC:

Hearing the same thing KCEF

The WAFC was looking at reducing the number of clubs in the WAWFL from 9 to 6 in an attempt to compress the talent pool and bring up the standard of matches.

This year East Perth didn't field a Women's League team. South Freo and Perth only won 1 and 2 games respectively for the season. The Reserves comp saw South Freo, Perth and West Perth and win 2 games each. Perth, Subi and West Perth also struggled in the girls Colts competition winning 2 or 3 games each.

Given West Perth's treatment of their women's teams, you'd presume they'd struggle to get too many of their girls to return next year and that East Perth, Perth or South Fremantle would also be unlikely to enter teams next year in the reduced competition.

If they do go to a six team competition, they might fixture the Women's League occasionally in the Colts timeslot if they do fixture multiple colts games at the one venue a few times a season.

I also heard that the WAFL Reserves is safe until 2020/21, but is in real trouble after that. The WAAFL A Grade standard is equal to, if not better than most WAFL Reserves matches now and the drain of players from the WAFL into the WAAFL and WACFL's is seeing the WAFL Reserves standard continually drop away.

The WAFL Reserves comp will become defunct just as the WANFL Thirds and Fourths did.

As much as a few on here will hate the stand alone Eagles team, I'd prefer a 10 team competition that creates an even 18 game H&A season with the traditional 8 WAFL clubs (and Peel) playing 10 home games and 8 away, if the Eagles proposal to play all of their matches away remains in place.

swan42 wrote: I was quoted a figure of around $50,000 - $70,000 it was going to cost Swans next year.

For the record I think the women's matches (youth, reserves and league) should be played after each other on a Sunday and develop the game with that structure.

I agree Swan42, the women's matches should be fixtured together predominantly on Sundays. They could also play a few WAWFL League games after the WAFL League at grounds which have suitable lighting to give the competition more of a profile.

$50-$70k seems relatively inexpensive to run 3 grades of football.

Tiger Tales wrote: ...I also heard that the WAFL Reserves is safe until 2020/21, but is in real trouble after that. The WAAFL A Grade standard is equal to, if not better than most WAFL Reserves matches now and the drain of players from the WAFL into the WAAFL and WACFL's is seeing the WAFL Reserves standard continually drop away.

And the result of all that TT is that the WAFL will do to the Amateur competition what the AFL aligned sides did to East Perth and Peel. They will align with the Ammo clubs and end up telling them who they can play and where. It will be an absolute disaster for WA Footy!

Big difference is that the WAAFL competition and the clubs within the WAAFL are financially viable without WAFL club funding. The WAFL clubs needed the extra money that was on offer to allow the alignment model to get up.

Also there are a number of Ammo clubs within each WAFL district that will be pushing back against one Ammo club being aligned to each WAFL club.

Tiger Tales wrote:

swan42 wrote: I was quoted a figure of around $50,000 - $70,000 it was going to cost Swans next year.

For the record I think the women's matches (youth, reserves and league) should be played after each other on a Sunday and develop the game with that structure.

I agree Swan42, the women's matches should be fixtured together predominantly on Sundays. They could also play a few WAWFL League games after the WAFL League at grounds which have suitable lighting to give the competition more of a profile.

$50-$70k seems relatively inexpensive to run 3 grades of football.

TT let me clarify that was additional expense.

swan42 wrote:

Tiger Tales wrote:

swan42 wrote: I was quoted a figure of around $50,000 - $70,000 it was going to cost Swans next year.

For the record I think the women's matches (youth, reserves and league) should be played after each other on a Sunday and develop the game with that structure.

I agree Swan42, the women's matches should be fixtured together predominantly on Sundays. They could also play a few WAWFL League games after the WAFL League at grounds which have suitable lighting to give the competition more of a profile.

$50-$70k seems relatively inexpensive to run 3 grades of football.

TT let me clarify that was additional expense.

Are you saying that it will cost SD an extra $50k-$70k above the existing costs that the separately run and funded SDWFC already finances to put the 3 women's teams on the park?

Or it will cost $50k-$70k, which will now be reported as part of the SDFC annual expenses?

Just been doing some maths with the 10 team competition now confirmed. It will be interesting to see how the fixtures are configured next year assuming that each team will still be playing 18 games as per last season and that the season starts on the first Saturday in April with the first final on the first Saturday in September.

Working out the logistics, there are 22 weeks between the 6th April and the 31st August, take out 1 weekend for a state game and a resultant general bye you would have 21 weeks to get through 18 rounds or 90 games in total.
Assuming the WAFC want games every week this would mean 15 rounds of 4 games with two teams on byes and 6 rounds of 5 games. This would create 3 byes for every team during the season, 4 including the state bye.
So really not as much change for the competition as initially anticipated as like others I had assumed that there would be no byes apart from the state game with a 10 team competition. However the only way that the WAFC could achieve this is by starting the season in mid April and play the finals in mid August which I assume would not be a viable option.

Maybe so mike you might be right if they want to string the season out over 21 or 22 weeks but at least we will have an even draw in that every club will play each other twice.

There's a horrid logic to Mike's calculations but he might well be right. I was hoping for 5 games every weekend - would rather the odd week where there's nothing - but this could be what they are thinking. Or there could be a couple of split rounds ?

mikeh wrote: Just been doing some maths with the 10 team competition now confirmed. It will be interesting to see how the fixtures are configured next year assuming that each team will still be playing 18 games as per last season and that the season starts on the first Saturday in April with the first final on the first Saturday in September.

Working out the logistics, there are 22 weeks between the 6th April and the 31st August, take out 1 weekend for a state game and a resultant general bye you would have 21 weeks to get through 18 rounds or 90 games in total.
Assuming the WAFC want games every week this would mean 15 rounds of 4 games with two teams on byes and 6 rounds of 5 games. This would create 3 byes for every team during the season, 4 including the state bye.
So really not as much change for the competition as initially anticipated as like others I had assumed that there would be no byes apart from the state game with a 10 team competition. However the only way that the WAFC could achieve this is by starting the season in mid April and play the finals in mid August which I assume would not be a viable option.

yes...you're correct Mike. The WAFC came out and said that even with 10 teams there would still be 3 byes for each club throughout the season which I think is too many...so nothing has changed in that regard.