[bribiaLaubysdggf]

The continued unevenness of the competition has been brought up again by Peel in this article in today's West.

http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/spo...-new-pointers/

Peel are asking the commission for concessions to the points system to allow it to recruit more mature aged players and this would apply to any WAFL club that has been struggling for a while, such as Perth.

I have been saying for years that there needs to be some sort of concession system such as the draft that exists in the AFL that allows struggling clubs to build and become stronger while successful clubs will in effect not have the same ability to add to their list which should have the effect of evening up the WAFL competition and creating a more natural cycle of success and leaner years across the competition.

Don't we all want to see that? Of course I can hear supporters of Subiaco, SF , CL and maybe SD saying nah, we are alright, why should we this and why should we that? If your club can't get it's sh*t together that's your bad luck etc..... But that makes for a boring competition year in year out where leading into pre season each and every year we all pretty well know who are going to be the top 3 and the only argument left is who will finish 4th.

There was some glaring statistics put up by Billy Squire on the Peel thread under the topic "Another great investment" the other day which I have quoted here to highlight the argument.

Hello WAFL Online, I have decided to make the move to this forum and bring my long, meandering (though relatively infrequent) posts to this site. And what better way to start than with a long, meandering run through some stats apropos 30 Plus' post. I agree with what he says; this comp is not even and hasn't been for a long time. SD have only been a power club recently - they made the finals just twice between 1994-2007 - but SF, S and C have dominated and, it seems, will continue to do so.

Taking 1987, the year the AFL changed the face of WAFL footy, here are some stats over the last 23 year period:

At least one of S, SF and C have been in the top 4 every year for the last 23 years;
20 of 23 grand finals have featured at least one of those teams. Two of the three years they didn't were 2000 and 2002. But for the aligned club arrangement, it's likely that one of the big 3 would have played in those years as well - C finished on top in 2000 with S in the four as well, and S finished 2nd in 2002;
9 grand finals have been played between 2 of the big 3 against one another - that's better than 1 in 3 grand finals - and together they have won 13 grand finals;
Since 1987 S have spent 5 seasons out of the top 4 (the last being 1997), C and SF 8. With the other teams, EF have missed out 10 times (including the last 7), WP 11, SD 14, EP 15 and P 21. SF and S have never spent more than 2 consecutive years out of the 4, C had 3 from 97-99. WP's worst drought has also only been 3 years, but EF have gone 7, EP 9 (87-95), SD 10 (94-03) and P 12 (98-?) That shows that C, SF and S spend a couple of years at worst rebuilding before getting a finals team together, most of the rest are susceptible to spending long years in the doldrums;
C have not won the wooden spoon since 87, S and SF have one each.

I'm not going to get into the vexed issue of why this disparity exists as that has been done to death on FG and elsewhere, particularly with reference to the financial advantages enjoyed by some teams. The fact is it does exist and it will continue to do so to the detriment of the credibility and integrity of the WAFL. This year is of course no different - less than halfway through the season and it seems clear that C, S and SD will be top 3, WP, EF and SF will fight for the privilege of being knocked out in the first semi, EP are playing only for respect and PT and P are once again battling for the wooden spoon. It's all well and good if you are a fan of the big 3, but on any objective view this kind of entrenched imbalance can't be good for the comp as a whole.

I have put forward the same argument Peel are now that allowing a greater points cap for struggling clubs should have a similar effect to the AFL draft for the clubs that will benefit. I think it's exciting for the AFL competition to see clubs like Richmond and Melbourne starting to emerge with some exciting new talent and barring bad luck with injuries or high draft picks not living up to expectation they should be where clubs like St Kilda and Geelong are right now in a few years time. It wasn't long ago these clubs were down the bottom. You can throw the Western Bulldogs in there as well.

Of course we can't have a draft of the best talent in the WAFL because clubs spend a lot of resources developing their area's and it is not practical for young kids to travel to a club the other side of the metro area and be split up from their mates they played juniors and colts with.

In the article Subiaco president said he would prefer to see more Fremantle and WC players allocated to clubs like Peel and Perth. That is not practical but I can see where Neil is coming from, he doesn't want to see his club not being able to recruit as much as other WAFL clubs and also this would only result in those clubs not developing their own players and this would result in clubs like Subiaco stealing the best young talent from Peel who can't crack a league game due to number of AFL listed players at the club.

The point system I believe is a good one but I don't believe it has had the effect the WAFC would like to see and that is evening up the competition. It now needs to tinker with it and turn it into a concession tool for struggling clubs Peel and Perth and of course this would apply permanently so if god forbid, clubs like Subiaco and SF end up down the bottom of the ladder for a period of years then they too will get those concessions.

[Grenader]

It might be a good idea to run a poll on this.

[fenter1]

I too raised the point of an uneven comp.

I would rather see us get there with good management skills which would flow down to good appointments,first class recruiting,top sponsors dollars etc...

This would be my first option opposed to any handouts given to the lower clubs in the comp.
I could fully understand any clubs displeasure that have got there through good old fashioned hard work,not including those that have rorted the system.Perhaps a closer eye on there books could be considered by the wafc.

I do believe however that any club given any sort of handout by the wafc should be afforded to all clubs.

My first question to my club would be,how much of the salary cap do we pay our players?
Is it 100%,90%,80% etc.....Compare this to other clubs eg.if we pay 100% of the cap and are right up there with the 130 points then the question has to be asked why do we finish down the bottom each season?
If the points are closer to 100 and our match payments are closer to 80-85% then its a case of what can we do to get to the maximum on each count.

Its a tough one because if you raise the points to the lower clubs you would then have to raise the salary cap to those clubs,the big question is would they have the money for any increased salaries?
The only way this would work is if the wafc subsidised there wages and thats not going to happen.

[autoloanexpert]

Good points 30+, firstly I think you will find the salary cap might soon be scrapped or maybe instead of there being an overall cap, there needs to be a cap on what a player can be paid so the richer clubs can't recruit high prized recruits while other clubs cannot afford it. Having said that I like the idea of each club being able to have a "marquee player" like the NBL. This could be outside the salary cap and this would be great for the comp where a high profile ex AFL player could be enticed to play in the WAFL once their AFL career has ended. Say for instance if Richmond do not offer Ben Cousins another contract he might not be interested in playing in the WAFL for $20 - $30 000 but he might be interested for $40 or $50 000? I know most WAFL clubs could not afford that but it could be outside the salary cap and his salary could be paid by an outside source.

Secondly, while in an ideal world every club would have the same resources and be professionally run, sadly this isn't the case and never will be. Some have better people and resources behind the club than others and have better income streams due to their location and deals with Ovals and AFL clubs. How many AFL clubs are broke due to bad management or decisions, poor membership, lack of sponsorship? The AFL don't kick 4 clubs out because they aren't as well managed or don't have the same resources otherwise we wouldn't have a comp worth watching. The AFL have given handouts and concessions and this has created a more natural cycle of success for struggling clubs and it has brought power clubs like the WCE and past power clubs like Carlton down to earth so they have their lean period.

Then it comes down to selecting the right players and good coaching and good list management. You might even find good coaches might take a more favourable view to take on a coaching role at a struggling club like Peel or Perth. As it is now and has been for years, a lot of prospective coaches steer clear of clubs like Peel and Perth and try and land plumb jobs at Subiaco, SF or Claremont.

Bottom line is do you want to see a more competitive competition and see some new teams competing for a premiership or do we just keep kidding ourselves and go round and round again every year like it's Groundhog Day?

[FliveGell]

An even comp is a good comp. An even comp gets more supporters to games.
I wish they had a look at this 30 years ago when the bottom 3 teams for years were Claremont,Subi and Swans and the only change each season was the order at the bottom of the table of those 3.
I think you are on the money with these changes but money isn't everything - The Club structure and management is just as important - then the sponsorship and supporters will hopefully come. But for Subi and Claremont there has never been too many supporters as they were both struggling for too many years. Most of their supporters went with the eagles and then dockers. As for Swans they had a larger and more growing zone earlier on (good for players and supporters) Also the John Todd years set them up well before the Eagles came in.They get a great band of loyal supporters - well done to them. Swans do a great job when they host a game at Basso and they get rewarded by a good crowd.They were struggling for brass but have turned it around.Subi and Claremont could have merged years ago when they were stuffed. They didn't and look at them now.Subi got some brass from Western Underwriters and had brilliant managers at the club & Claremont have battled on. East Freo have developed more AFL players than anyone in the last 7 years and it has been to the detrement of their on field WAFL performance and the money they have received hasn't been enough to get them up the ladder till hopefully this season. Over the last few years they have had to recruit players only because they lost so many. Claremont have never realy recruited - They would probably be the most home grown club but then again they are not very financial so probably didn't have that option and they have produced many VFL/AFL players over the last 25yrs and still are. I would like to see the costs/income of each club? Even out the comp - The crowds will double if the likes of Perth and East Perth (as we saw in the alignment yrs) get up. East Freo supporters will come out in big numbers if they make it to September they use to get massive crowds when playing finals but with a few lean years and the Dockers in they have been hit hard.
I think anything that could even the comp should be looked and that's comming from a long time subi supporter who has seen the very worst and best with my team holding up both ends of the ladder over the last 30 years.

[uncoosesoge]

It's early days for the points system and the limit on interstate recruits. It's only been 2 years. But we've seen Claremont rise, East Fremantle rise and South fall.

The effects will flow however because there is simply no way a club like Subi can buy their way out of trouble anymore.

We are at our points limit. If nobody leaves at the end of this year we can't recruits at all.

In truth, Subi's position on the ladder this year is due to the older players who have stuck around.

But if the 2010, 2011 and 2012 colts teams don't produce good numbers of players we are in big trouble down the track.

[QWNPdpr5]

True Bensti but I do believe some clubs need help and the beauty of having a system where clubs that are down for a while get points concessions is it will help them bridge the gap and make it a more interesting competition and if a Subi, or South or SD end up down the bottom then they too will get those concessions though I think it should not be automatic that if you suddenly slip from the top four to last or second last like Claremont did the last 2 years, that they should get concessions. It should apply to clubs like Peel, Perth and EF who have been down for a long time and basically waxing the wooden spoon for the past 10 years.

[BoBoMasterDesign]

The new AFL teams coming in over the next few seasons could have a huge impact in turning the WAFL on its head in terms of who's strong and who's not. For example, Claremont could lose the likes of Blackwell, Jones, Richardson, Brabazon and one or two others which would make a massive difference to their line-up. I think the WAFL will sit back for a few seasons, see what happens with the new AFL teams, let the point system take full effect and hope that it all happens 'naturally'.

Having said that, any team that has an average losing margin of close to 100 points and a 90 point loss to the bottom team is a major concern

[XGoFivk7]

SR I don't think the WAFC can afford to take a "sit back and wait to see what happens over the next few years" approach. This lopsidedness hasn't just occured in the last 5 years, it's been going on for decades. It is an uneven playing field and if every club is only allowed the same points and salary cap then the financially stronger clubs will still be dominating because they can afford the better recruits and can probably afford to pay better money to second tier players as well and then there is coaching staff, medical staff, training staff....etc

Now I know you are all thinking how can the weaker clubs afford to pay for more recruits if they have a bigger points cap? Well I think if they have the capacity to recruit more mature age and higher quality recruits then they will find the financial backers to do it. Listening to Jon Ditchburn speak on the ABC game on Saturday they had no trouble raising half a million bucks in the last 12 - 18 months to wipe out their $400 000 debt.

Sponsors and wealthy supporters will stick their hand in their pockets if they think it can bring about success and that then means increased membership and attendances and better sponsors willing to get on board.

[Dildos]

If the topic was more directed at Peel and if they need help - Well yes is the logical answer
Yes,Yes,Yes !!! They unfortunately have been poor performers since they entered the comp.
Something must be done and quickly - for the sake of the whole competition and more importantly their players and supporters. Perth have also struggled for a long time but have had sucessful periods,all be it a long time ago and have been having a go - I don't think they are as bad as their performances have shown. Perth are struggling and still thrashed Peel - Doesn't say much for Peel ???

[jdynwa]

Certainly not saying that the WAFC should sit on their hands and wait to see what unfolds but they are very good at doing that and I think there could be some big changes in the next few years depending on who the Gold Coast and GWS target because there's sure to be a number of WAFL players taken from our system. Still won't solve the Peel problem, but again, I reckon the WAFC will be hoping that the new facilities down at the bombsite might attract and help retain some decent recruits

[kaysions]

Fact is the commission dont see any problems. Dorro openly said a few years ago that struggling clubs need to use clubs like Subi as an example of how to run operations. This comment came before the points system was active, and knowing the massive financial advantages Subi gained from AFL seating & functions at Subiaco Oval.... After listening to him say that, I thought we may as well all give up.

But the points system does need time to take any effect. Its only in its second year now and will take about 5 years I think to see the changes.... I remember talk in the late 1980's about the WAFL having an open draft format. I actually thought that would be a good idea, and if it was introduced today in alignment with the points system I think it could really even out this competition..... Clubs would argue the fact that they put time into their allocated zones and other clubs get certain players. But the focus should be on developing footballers as a whole. It is a sensitive subject and clubs are very protective of their zones. I think something like that would be a heavy boulder to shift anyway, but just something to throw up I guess.

Regardless of the points system, sides like Subi & Swans were always going to be clubs who would be pushing around the top end of the table anyway. Claremont have stolen the show, and now East Fremantle are standing up after 7 years in the doldrums. But the concern is Perth & Peel and why they continue to struggle. That is not a great reflection on the WAFL competition. The WAFL is a business and if your business is struggling in certain departments, you work out ways to get production up. The WAFL seem quite content to do very little to fix the problem other than bail out Peel for bucket loads of money which is what they did a few years ago... Throwing money at a problem is just like throwing money straight into an open fire. They are seeing those effects right now, upgraded stadium or not... They are quick to hit Perth with a $20 grand fine for a contract cock-up, yet give Swans a pass when they played an unregistered player a few years ago..... Have WAFC officials sat down with these clubs and tried to work out where things are going wrong ?? I agree clubs and the people who put their hands up to run them cannot be without responsibility when it comes to results, on the feild or off. But the comp is run overall by one body and that is the WAFC... They should be looking into why things have been a one way street for so long.

And before the draft idea is dismissed, ask yourself this.... Before last year the AFL had 9 clubs win premierships in the previous 11 years. I reckon there is no better way to even out a football competition than make club officials pick from an open feild (with a points system in place). There could never be any excuses and a clubs drought would depend which club has the best eye for talent....

[Illisezek]

A draft is exactly what the 2 AFL clubs want. Bad idea.

The moment junior development is taken away from the nine WAFL clubs and given to the WAFC in conjunction with the Eagles and Dockers, that will be the end of the WAFL.

Without zones, there is no incentive for WAFL clubs to develop.

Don't even think about it.

As Perth fans have constantly said on this forum, their club has made bad decisions over a long period of time. No amount of assistance will help Perth until they make good decisions in regard to appointments on and off field.

[Mediconlinee]

By the way. The points system has already come into effect.

Last year's Grand Finalists are currently 4th and 6th and full up on points.

Subi's reserves are 8th and their colts 9th with no recruiting possible unless a current high points player retires - someone like Phil Read for instance - but would Subi want to lose him? No!

South Fremantle are 5th in the reserves and 5th in the colts.

From now on the clubs with the best zones will dominate. I forsee a long period where Claremont and East Fremantle finish in the top 3 at least.

In fairness to the WAFC, the points system was only introduced last year and the zones redistributed this year.

For once the zones are fairly even, although East Perth and Subiaco are probably the least fortunate still but it's better than it was.

[pkopwqzsdcvbn]

I never thought for a second a draft in the WAFL would be a reality... Just a suggestion given the AFL has had a host of different clubs win premierships. Imagine if it was the same in the WAFL ?

If they could come up with a plan which clubs could even be compensated for players drafted out of their zone, then it could work. Like you said Bensti, clubs will have no incentive to develop in their zones otherwise. But it would create overall a "totally" equal playing feild.

Like you said clubs like CL and EF you can forsee having dominating periods due to their powerful zones. Given EF have not made finals for 7 years and CL have been 8th two years running its hard to start labelling them with massive advantages. That would be a little knee jerky. Both of those clubs are doing well this season because of good planning and hard work. They deserve all the accolades given to them at this stage.

But with all the great minds around football circles, surley something can be brought to the table that could be looked at. If a player was drafted outside their zone, then the club effected should be financially compensated and given picks in advance. There is always a solution and with the points system still in place it could really be levelled out for every club. And it wouldnt make development a total waste of time for the clubs themselves, which is the issue I guess.

Good debate though .

[Karensmith]

I'm not complaining about what will happen. Far from it. Good luck to CL and EF. It didn't bother me when EP dominated for three years running either.

I don't like to make excuses. If my club is up to it, they will sort something out even without recruits.

[Gasfghj]

The points system might have had the effect of bringing some stronger clubs back a few pegs but there are still 2 basket cases in the WAFL that can't take advantage of that, Peel and Perth so I think the WAFC need to give a little more room for those clubs down the bottom to help them bridge the gap.

I can't see how a draft would work in metro zones because they are just 16 - 17 yr old kids who either don't have a license or a car or a job. It would be a bit tough on kid who has to travel from Fremantle to Lathlain or Midland to Mandurah. Unles we are talking about kids who have turned 19 and can no longer play colts and have missed out on being picked in an AFL draft? Then we are shifting young players who have maybe played 2 or 3 years of colts and under age footy for one WAFL club. I can't see that working either.

But I could see how it could work with country players because WAFL clubs have to help them out to provide them with accommodation near their home ground anyway so it shouldn't make any difference which WAFL club they go to. Just because a country player is in a certain WAFL clubs zone doesn't mean he has a personal affiliation with that WAFL club. I think some WAFL clubs have had a big advantage over other WAFL clubs over the years with their country zones. Clubs like EF (Geraldton), SD (Bunbury) though I think Bunbury might be with Peel now, not sure. Claremont (Albany, Esperance), Subi (Kalgoorlie).

Perth has always had the Wheatbelt towns which were probably a lot stronger back in the 60's and 70's but a lot of these towns are a shadow of what they once were and are sparsely populated towns and districts. But then how do WAFL clubs keep track of the best young talent all over WA?

[Bwvapays]

But I could see how it could work with country players because WAFL clubs have to help them out to provide them with accommodation near their home ground anyway so it shouldn't make any difference which WAFL club they go to. Just because a country player is in a certain WAFL clubs zone doesn't mean he has a personal affiliation with that WAFL club. I think some WAFL clubs have had a big advantage over other WAFL clubs over the years with their country zones. Clubs like EF (Geraldton), SD (Bunbury) though I think Bunbury might be with Peel now, not sure. Claremont (Albany, Esperance), Subi (Kalgoorlie).
Perth has always had the Wheatbelt towns which were probably a lot stronger back in the 60's and 70's but a lot of these towns are a shadow of what they once were and are sparsely populated towns and districts. But then how do WAFL clubs keep track of the best young talent all over WA?

I am pretty sure(don't quote me because i am not absolutely certain) that the way it works now is... that if a player is overlooked by the club they are zoned to then its open slather for the other wafl clubs to sign them without any transfer fees involved.

To be honest i have little or no faith in our scouts looking for players.

[sleepergun]

Scouting is a very time consuming job. A few weeks ago I was watching a game between Williams and Wagin in the country and I could not find a player who would be capable of even playing reserves in the WAFL. The standard between the two are like chalk & cheese. Clubs would need to scout far and wide and we are in a state bigger than some countries. So much ground to cover.... No doubt there are players in the bush who need to be tapped into, but from what I saw it would be a time consuming job for any reward. I am sure it was only a few years ago the country league played Peel and Peel thrashed them. Finding that diamond through all that rough is bloody difficult.

I get to many Wheatbelt towns and some struggle to make up numbers and many have merged with nearby towns like Kulin/Kondinin and Brookton/Pingelly. Coastal towns have a far healthier chance given it is more likely they will attract a population. Kalgoorlie is an exception because of their mining potential. Wheatbelt towns are dwindling slowly and it would be a damning statistic to look at from 20 or 30 years ago compared to today. Farms once survived on generation changes, and now many of the young cannot get away from these towns quick enough. It is a tough lifestyle for those trying to keep things going and the football clubs are surviving barely in these inland regions. Its an area that should be looked at by officials to strengthen them. Its vital in keeping the game strong in WA. But recruiting is hard enough. Trying to find players in this region who are capable of playing at the highest level in the city is fast becoming impossible.

This is no disrespect to country football. The best players have come from these area's. But with dwindling opportunities out there now its becoming a tough nut to crack. They are only victims of circumstances and that is a shame for them, and the WAFL clubs who are aligned to them.

[DoctorTOneery]

they should start paying the reserves players a bit of $$$
it would keep them going to play country football
most wafl reserves players could go off and play country football for $150+ a game