[Junrlaeh]

Why did the WAFC decide to increase the points value of an AFL listed player who has played just a handful of AFL games from 10 points to 12 points? Case in point Llane Spaanderman who was a 10 point player at Swans but became a 12 point player at Perth. He hasn't added to his 4 games he played for Brisbane 7 or 8 years ago so why should his points value increase?

Also, in the wake of the story on the weekend in the Sunday Times about Casey Sibosado and the generous points concession that was granted to Peel just prior to the start of the season, seemingly without consultation of the other 8 clubs, is the WAFC going to review the points value handed to Casey Sibosado? It is a blight on the system in place that has left him in the football wilderness when he should be playing WAFL for Perth and trying to improve his football so he can maybe one day get drafted again. Common sense needs to prevail, the rules have been bent for Peel, why has no one shown some common sense here when there are clearly extraordinary circumstances in play that warrant re-evaluation?

Casey Sibosado has been valued the same points value as Paul Bevan who is a 140 game AFL premiership player. How can that be?

[jhfkgkfdvjk]

This is the breakdown of the points allocations as per the WAFL Rules & Regs Section 2

AFL listed player/ Rookie or allocated player – 0 points
Local District (Non League) top up players – 0 points
Local District Player – 1 point
AFL delisted Local returnee – 1 point
Non District – no WAFL League games – 2 points
Non District – 1 to 25 WAFL League games – 3 points
Non District – 26 to 50 WAFL League games – 5 points
Non District – 51 to 100 WAFL League games – 7 points
Non District – 101+ WAFL League games – 10 points
Interstate Non Category 1 comp – 5 points
Interstate Category 1 comp – 10 points (League)
Interstate Category 1 comp – 5 points (Non League)
Non District AFL delisted – no AFL games – 8 points
Interstate AFL delisted – 1 to 50 AFL games – 10 points
Non District AFL delisted – 1 to 50 AFL games – 12 points
Interstate AFL delisted – 51 to 100 AFL games – 10 points
Non District AFL delisted – 51 to 100 AFL games – 13 points
Interstate AFL delisted – 100+ AFL games – 12 points
Non District AFL delisted – 100+ AFL games – 14 points

Ammendments to the points allocations were made at the end of the 2011 season in regard to players that were previously on an AFL list. These ammendments were based on if the player was a local AFL delist or an interstate AFL delist. A local AFL delisted player returning to the WAFL is now allocated and extra 2 points above the nominated AFL delist value for a player to go to a club that is not their originally zoned club. The purpose of this change was to make it less attractive for a club to recruit a non zoned player that is returning home and therefore allow the club of origin more chance of retaining their service.

This is the case with Llane Spaanderman as he has risen from 10 points at Swan Districts in 2011 to 12 points at Perth in 2012. He is regarded under the points allocations a Non District 1-25 game AFL player resulting in a 12 point allocation.

This is also the case with Casey Sibosado as he is regarded under the points allocations a Non District 1-25 game AFL player resulting in a 12 point allocation.

The changes to the points allocations are made as a result of consulation with the 9 WAFL clubs who vote on the changes to be implemented.

[Krruqgwt]

This is a Media Release from the WAFC regarding the WAFL Salary Cap and Points System

WAFL Salary Cap & Points System

The following recommendations have been accepted by the WAFC Football Affairs Committee leading into the 2012 AAMI WAFL Premiership season.

Amend WAFL rules to allow for:

1. An annual 3% increase in the WAFL Salary Cap, commencing in 2012 to $217,000
2. A $10k maximum for 1 veteran player (100 games plus with the same WAFL Club)to be paid outside of the salary cap for 2012 on a trial basis as there is widespread support for loyal players to be retained
3. A fixed fine for late lodgement of salary cap documents plus a daily non compliance fine of $50 per day
4. Weekly League match prizes of up to $750 to be introduced in 2012.
5. The WAFL to access player contracts and player payment values at the time of signing to be introduced in 2012.

Recommendations for later implementation include:

1. Increasing the theoretical payments for AFL players by 60%. This will be implemented in 2013 but the increased figures will be calculated in the 2012 season in order to assess the impact on every Club and to allow Clubs to prepare for 2013.
2. That this theoretical payment be paid by Clubs into a WAFC Pool for later redistribution across all clubs. The shadow payment will be calculated in 2012 and a decision made for 2013 implementation.

The WAFC Football Affairs Committee also reviewed the WAFL League competitiveness paper developed at the end of the 2010 season to determine what measures could be undertaken to promote further an even WAFL League competition.

The following outcomes were reached:

1. All WAFL Clubs will be permitted to pay a maximum $10,000 travel allowance to players, with a maximum of $2000 to any one player, for players who have exceptional travel requirements. Clubs will be asked to justify these payments and indicate which players will be eligible as part of their salary cap submissions. This travel allowance is not compulsory for clubs to pay.

1. Peel Thunder is granted up to 12 points above the 130 limit for the inclusion of an interstate player, plus an extra $12,000 allowance in the salary cap to accommodate this player. An increase in the number of interstate players will also be allowed if required. This allowance will be in place for two seasons, 2012 and 2013, with the expectation that Peel’s points value returns to 130 in 2014.

The ability to recruit an experienced player was seen as the single biggest influence on performance for Peel Thunder Football Club, which formed the basis for allowing an increase in points.

These considerations were not taken lightly as they both have financial implications. In a financially tight football environment, any increase in player payments needs to be carefully implemented by the Club.

It should also be noted that Peel has a debt with the WAFC that must be repaid. The monitoring of Peel’s annual finances and their ongoing repayment of debt will continue to be a focus of the WAFC Finance Department.

[Ruilnasr]

I wonder if Casey had been at Peel under the same circumstances that he was at Perth whether 12 points would have been allocated...somehow i think not!
The WAFC would have bent the rules for that club and not for the first time.

[ceagsoosy]

What the WAFC has not accounted for is Casey Sibosado was given up by Claremont and transferred to Perth. Ok it was probably Fremantle that initiated this but Claremont could have said no we will play him in our league side. They did not so he was switched to Perth. He then established himself as a league footballer at Perth and was happy to continue his football career there. That was made very difficult for Perth by valuing him at 12 points.

If as you say "The WAFC Football Affairs Committee also reviewed the WAFL League competitiveness paper developed at the end of the 2010 season to determine what measures could be undertaken to promote further an even WAFL League competition", why did it take until the eve of the 2012 season to be announced? No one in the football world knew about this. I read a lot of sports papers and football forums and i do not recall this being canvassed in public. It smacks of the WAFC doing everything possible to make Peel successful because that is what certain people at the WAFC want, while it ignores clubs like Perth that have struggled just as much as Peel has in the time Peel has been in the competition and going right back to 1979.

If the WAFC was serious about the competitiveness of the competition it would have granted the same concession to Perth who has been a basket case for the past 33 years and this has not been recognised.

[jdynwa]

the thing is DD there is a lot animosity already against Peel, because of all their WAFL concessions, you Perth boys especially lead from the front when it comes to highlighting how Peel is favoured....yet you want the WAFL to bend over for you boys and grant you concessions too??.....

Perth have had on paper some talented sides, well from a Perth fan perspective any way.....perhaps these guys aren't as good as you boys make them out to be.......something can't be right at Perth, culture,harmony,character etc whatever.....the root of Perth's problems is not the WAFC but the PFC......same as the EFFC has played a big part in the lack of EF success since 1998......wrong choices in coaches etc, poor recruiting etc.....only since Woewodin was picked to coach has the club moved forwards.....and stavros is doing the same.

[kennyguitar]

The bottom line is Freezin you cannot ignore the results and there must be a reason for Perth's lack of success. Can we just blame it on poor management or poor selection of coaches? I cringe when i look at the size of players at other clubs compared to ours sometimes, not just in the league side but also in the reserves and wonder why we don't have these big blokes coming through? We are always struggling for ruckmen and key position players.

There was an article written the other day about statistics showing that kids from wealthier families do better at school. That is no surprise to me but i will take that further and say that kids from wealthier families probably also benefit from a better lifestyle physically and therefore grow bigger and stronger bodies than kids from poorer backgrounds. Hence why Claremont's colts are in the top 2 or 3 every year. You can't ignore the facts, they are there for all to see so if the WAFC is serious about the competitiveness of some teams in the competition then it had better start looking at Perth because the problems are not going to go away.

You proudly boast how many AFL listed players EF has on it's list, Perth doesn't do too badly compared with some other clubs but it can't hold a candle to EF and Claremont. I try to stay positive every year and find an arguement why Perth will be a top four contender but i sometimes wonder if I am just kidding myself?

[Uttephabeta]

DD.....rich kids can also afford the latest couch potato technology too mate.....poorer kids have to make do kicking a footy in the back yard for entertainment, instead of using a x-box,PS3 etc simulating the skill.

Geraldton isn't known for it's affluence mate and they produce consistently good footballers....PFC have consistently had srtong under 16's teams these last 5 -10 years.....also your colts have been more than competitive......than it seems to stop there....the very good kids like Buddy,Glass,Myers,Conca,O'Meara get drafted......yet the other good kids seem to go no further in development.....why is that?...is that the WAFC fault?....

Is it just bad luck?......Is it a mental, cultural, administrative problem?.....financially Perth are better off than a lot of other WAFL clubs......not to sure.... but I can't see why the WAFC needs to bring success to the PFC.......Peel have only 15 years of history behind, placing down junior development structures etc, I can see why the WAFC are lending them a hand.....Perth has been round for much longer than that, they saw success with relatively the same junior zone etc......tonnes of it in the 60's/70's....pure domination from memory, I bet most PFC fans would of been jumping up down if the WAFC were finding ways to help reduce PFC domination back then by making the comp even.....it's life.....part of the lifes success and failure cycle.....

perhaps Perth rested on their laurels and didn't envisage failure back then and are paying the price....who knows?....but it aint the WAFC fault is it?

[pertikuss]

Very sad state of affairs when a young footballers career is basically over, due to some stupid rule.
There seems to be no compassion towards Sibosodo at all.Rules are rules, let him rot before we make a correct decision.
I am not sure who he should go to,but he must be allowed to play football.

[8Uxtkz7F]

anchor that first sentence of yours is drama queen stuff mate.....yes it's a stupid decision to make the kid a 12 pt player....but at CL he would be a 1pt player and if the kid harbours any AFL aspirations then if he thinks he won't play league for CL then how the hell does he think he will play AFL then. If the kid says footy is his life then go to the VFL or SANFL then, he will soon make friends,settle in, he aint some 12 yr old changing footy clubs.....get a grip, the kid has talent, more than the average Joe who would give his right arm to play WAFL,SANFL,VFL or even AFL.....grow a spine Siba and show the WAFL,PFC or CFC what they have missed out on.....no heart bleeding to the papers, show them all on the footy field......too easy of a cop out to blame others for what's happen......it's happen, move on, shed load of folk have worse life issues to deal with every day and they don't go bleedin to the papers......

[grudabor]

Hypothetically... what would be the points allocated to someone like Sam Butler if de-listed by the Eagles and he decided to play WAFL with Perth, considering he is from interstate, has played between 51 to 100 AFL games, but yet, lets say has played between 51 to 100 WAFL games for Perth... just very curious to see how the system applies to such situations, because I think soon enough each club runs the chance of such a situation occuring (not that I am suggesting it will be with Butler, but I use him just as a hypothetical example)... I would also be interested to find out how the points system operates with players swapping clubs etc under the father son rule (if such still exists)?

[BodeOmissemia]

Oyle, Ashley Hansen at SD is in a similar scenario to the one you make. He played 76 games for West Coast and is currently on 84 games for Swans after debuting for them in 2002. When delisted by West Coast, he was rated only as a 5 point player and then recruited by Swans who were able to fend off offers from rival clubs by throwing a bucketload of cash his way.To my way of thinking, blokes like Hansen and Butler should be at least 10 point players if and when they are delisted.Pardon the pun,but I hope this gives you the good oyle (oil )on this subject!

[oranowdenda]

Oyle if you look at the previous page i think Sam would cost us or any other WAFL club 10 points as Interstate AFL delisted 50 - 100 games. We don't get a discount because he was allocated to us. I guess the way the AFL listed players are distributed that could the lower clubs an advantage since most the AFL listed players go to them.

Mudlark how the hell did Hansen cost just 5 points?

[Sotmoigma]

This is the breakdown of the points allocations as per the WAFL Rules & Regs Section 2

AFL listed player/ Rookie or allocated player – 0 points
Local District (Non League) top up players – 0 points
Local District Player – 1 point
AFL delisted Local returnee – 1 point
Non District – no WAFL League games – 2 points
Non District – 1 to 25 WAFL League games – 3 points
Non District – 26 to 50 WAFL League games – 5 points
Non District – 51 to 100 WAFL League games – 7 points
Non District – 101+ WAFL League games – 10 points
Interstate Non Category 1 comp – 5 points
Interstate Category 1 comp – 10 points (League)
Interstate Category 1 comp – 5 points (Non League)
Non District AFL delisted – no AFL games – 8 points
Interstate AFL delisted – 1 to 50 AFL games – 10 points
Non District AFL delisted – 1 to 50 AFL games – 12 points
Interstate AFL delisted – 51 to 100 AFL games – 10 points
Non District AFL delisted – 51 to 100 AFL games – 13 points
Interstate AFL delisted – 100+ AFL games – 12 points
Non District AFL delisted – 100+ AFL games – 14 points

Ammendments to the points allocations were made at the end of the 2011 season in regard to players that were previously on an AFL list. These ammendments were based on if the player was a local AFL delist or an interstate AFL delist. A local AFL delisted player returning to the WAFL is now allocated and extra 2 points above the nominated AFL delist value for a player to go to a club that is not their originally zoned club. The purpose of this change was to make it less attractive for a club to recruit a non zoned player that is returning home and therefore allow the club of origin more chance of retaining their service.

This is the case with Llane Spaanderman as he has risen from 10 points at Swan Districts in 2011 to 12 points at Perth in 2012. He is regarded under the points allocations a Non District 1-25 game AFL player resulting in a 12 point allocation.

This is also the case with Casey Sibosado as he is regarded under the points allocations a Non District 1-25 game AFL player resulting in a 12 point allocation.

The changes to the points allocations are made as a result of consulation with the 9 WAFL clubs who vote on the changes to be implemented.

WAFL HQ, Perth recruited Spaanderman from SD, not away from his original club so why should he be priced higher than 10 points to switch from Swans to Perth? Also I don't believe these changes should apply to players already well out of the AFL system like Spaanderman, it should only apply to delisted players from the date of the changes. Can you please explain how Ashley Hansen is only valued at 5 points when he is originally from interstate and played 78 games for West Coast?

[DrJonson]

Players points drop/reduce the longer they stay with a club and/or the more games they play at that WAFL club, henceforth why JKT is now only a 1 point player at Perth and why Ross Young is now lower poinrt value than his brother.... it is this fact that gave rise to my hypothetical question about someone such as Sam Butler who has now been with Perth for about eight years and has played close to 50 games with the club... so therefore the question is how does the point reduction system work and how does it apply to delisted afl players such as those that initially come from overeast to the WA AFL clubs, just like my hypothetical question about Sam Butler... the answer to this may also answer your question about Hansen and Spanderman

[klubneras]

I see what you are saying Oyle, i wasn't aware of that. I also see that Byron Schammer is a 5 point player at Claremont. But is it based on games played or years of service? Casey Sibosado notched up 30 games for Perth over two seasons but that obviously didn't reduce his points but maybe if Perth took him as a 12 point player in a year or two his points might reduce to 7 or 5 etc.....?

Interestingly i see Casey Sibosado is on Claremonts list as a 1 point player. I didn't see him on their list when i looked during pre season, i wonder if they just added him recently?

[Chooriwrocaey]

As Per Rule 2.3.4
Interstate AFL listed players who are allocated to a WAFL Club for 5 seasons AND who play a minimum of 20 games (League or reserves grade)may, upon AFL delisting, remain at that club as a 5 point player. His value to any other club remains as prescribed in 2.1.4 above.

Sam Butler would therefore be regarded as a 5 point player to Perth. This rule has been implemented recently for players such as Ashley Hansen at Swan Districts and Byron Schammer at Claremont

[wasssallx]

As Per Rule 2.3.4
Interstate AFL listed players who are allocated to a WAFL Club for 5 seasons AND who play a minimum of 20 games (League or reserves grade)may, upon AFL delisting, remain at that club as a 5 point player. His value to any other club remains as prescribed in 2.1.4 above.

Sam Butler would therefore be regarded as a 5 point player to Perth. This rule has been implemented recently for players such as Ashley Hansen at Swan Districts and Byron Schammer at Claremont

So lets say if Perth took Siboasado as a 12 point player who has already played 30 games over 2 seasons at Perth, when would his points value start reducing? Would we have to wait another 3 years or would his points reduce gradually?

And by the way, is Casey Sibosado a recent addition to Claremonts playing list? I haven't seen his name appear in any of the football budgets to date but he is now listed on here as a 1 point player for Claremont.

[lopezsokero]

Sibosado points could not be reduced under the above rule 2.3.4 as he did not complete 5 years service at Perth.

Players points do get reduced for service as per rule 2.3.1

Players who transfer into a WAFL Club do so with a point value prescribed in 2.1.4 above. However in the season after the player plays his 100th League game at the club his point value to that WAFL Club will be halved. His point value to the WAFL Club will reduce by one point for each successive season to a minimum of 2 points.

Sibosado is listed as a claremont as a Claremont player as per rule 1.6.2

a) A player who is registered with a WAFL Club and moves interstate or overseas either for personal reasons or through interstate football transfer, or to a WA based or Interstate AFL Club, shall remain tied to that WAFL Club as if he were at all times included in the Club's list, whether or not he is so included.

[Tumarimmicdak]

Ross Young has only played 72 WAFL league games and this is his 5th year this year. How was his points reduced to 5 then?