[GeraldCortis]

Nisbett is on his high horse again & bleeting about improving the rules in regard to their AFL listed players in the WAFL. He states the issue of certain players being denied a game at league level, which generally means they are not currently good enough to displace those above them. But of course being listed as an AFL player and at the same time not be good enough to make the numbers on a WAFL clubs league list, only smacks the AFL clubs in the face in terms of their recruiting. It is a huge dent to their ego's. Nisbett wants to "tighten the system up a bit", whatever that means....

The fact is the Eagles & Dockers have the right to move whatever player they want to any WAFL club. At the end of the day the player is owned and paid by them. The current system is not a complex one, but it is a system that has worked very well for 25 years overall. But in the West today Nisbett says the Eagles want to have more of a say in where their players play (position on the ground) and who he plays with. In other words the team balance of the WAFL clubs is a non-issue. Understandably the AFL clubs require their players to be playing senior football at every opportunity. Players like a Lewis Broome should have been considered moving to another WAFL club before he was lost permanently to the system. His issue sounds more like a personal one, however after a few years hovering outside the Claremont league side should have been acted on faster. No blame directed at Claremont either as they were simply operating inside the guidelines and proving themselves correct by winning the premiership.

West Coast & Fremantle will be highlighting these facts even more through the advantage of the media during the 2012 football season. Almost like a well orchestrated PR plan. They will not let up until they have reserves sides playing competition football in the WAFL. And they will be embarking on a serious plan for that to happen in 2013 you can guarantee that. Already Nisbett and the Eagles are in the papers regarding this subject and its only November.

The Dockers stirred up the pot in 2011 with Zac Clarke at East Perth. Their argument was based on rubbish facts and contadictions. A few months before the Dockers stated in a report how well Clarke was developing at East Perth including his finals series in 2010. Suddenly after the AFL clubs reserves proposition was knocked on the head, Fremantle's tune on the handling of Clarke at WAFL level was raised. If anything Clarke has developed substancially at East Perth. Our supporters would have seen him play more than individuals employed by the Dockers and the level of criticism directed at East Perth was pure back-handed, non substanciated tripe. Clarke was apparently so disillusioned with EP, he went with the players on thier end of season footy trip. And he was seen regularly at EP games even when he wasnt playing.

The time has come for the media to stop playing the puppets to the puppet-masters. Sometimes this whole subject feels like a school yard peer-group situation. Where the kids are still too immature to realise they have their own backbone and dont need to stay popular with the big kids. The media have a real hard time opposing our AFL clubs in much the same way. The WAFL system in place is working.... It has flaws like any system, but to say it is being detrimental to the AFL clubs players is historically incorrect. The power still lies with the AFL clubs and that is not questioned. The system does not overpower the rights of the AFL clubs and they know it. If the Eagles & Dockers want to look back in history, have a look at the average players signed up by them over the last decade that have amounted to nothing. This proves they are not always right. If they want WAFL clubs to adhere to their wishes today, back it up with an iron clad compensation plan for the WAFL clubs. If the AFL clubs demand a certain player be played at WAFL league level, thats fine. But if that player fails to last a certain number of years without reaching a particular number of AFL games, then the WAFL club that has been forced to play this player in their league side against their wishes should be compensated. Now we all know the AFL clubs would never agree to that, but that is only because they know they will be forking out huge amounts of money.

But it would make them accountable when a player is proven to be second rate.

[Domovoy]

Gassy this is the bit that i have a problem with from Nisbett: "but you do need your players playing senior football so you can have another look at them". So what he is saying is regardless of whether the player is worthy of a league spot he must play in the league team, be given plenty of time on the field and play where the Eagles want him to play!! Not asking much??

In other words he doesn't care about the integrity of the WAFL. I reckon they should join the WAAFL and field their own sides. I reckon that would actually add a fair bit of interest to the WAAFL comp whereas it would have the opposite effect to the WAFL. And the other bit that gives me a chuckle is when he says "the move was not related to the push from West Coast and Fremantle to have reserves teams in the WAFL".

[JanetMorris]

Gas; as I wrote on the EPFC unofficial 'board, the galahs (read; poisoned dwarf, Nisbett) moved Ryan Turnbull from Claremont to East Perth because the Tiger's Coach at the time, Gerard Neesham refused to kiss Nisbett's backside and play Turnbull where Nisbett wanted him to play.

After his days at the galahs, when he automatically became a Claremont player again, Turnbull thankfully opted to remain a Royal.

As for Zac Clarke, the dorkers argument against East Perth at the time was that we were playing him out of position as a KPP when they wanted him as a ruckman. When Zac was finally promoted (??) to the dorkers after sanity prevailed and he remained aligned to East Perth, where did Harvey play him? At wing/half forward, of course.

And unfortunately I think that the Dorkers and galahs will end up with Reserves sides, but they must NOT play in the WAFL. Let them play in the VFL and get thumped by Port Melbourne or Williamstown or even in the SANFL where they can get flogged by the best over there.

And I would still like to know, that if they do get Reserves teams; with lists of about 45, where are they going to get enough players to make up two teams (allowing for injuries, etc?

[Dpkefsuf]

So Macs what you are saying is that the Dockers and Eagles would be too strong for the WAFL clubs,but not nearly strong enough to beat the VFL or SANFL clubs,is that right!!
Doesn't say much about the quality of the WAFL then does it.

I didn't say that they would be too strong for the WAFL Clubs? But don't forget that the WAFL Clubs wouldn't have the benefit of AFL aligned players, unlike the VFL and SANFL.

Remember the Foster's Cup Final? Claremont put up a good show with just a few AFL aligned players whereas Williamstown were almost a totally Western Bulldogs aligned team. And Port Melbourne thrashed Williamstown in the VFL Grand Final.

The SANFL Clubs will still have their AFL aligned players.

I just don't think the should play WAFL matches for Premiership points.

And I don't presume to be the only person who thinks that way.

[exettybele]

Anchorman, you see it through the eyes of an AFL supporter. Your not that in love with the WAFL to begin with lets be honest.

If this idea had been on the table back in 1986, there would have never been an AFL side out of Perth. The WAFL clubs would not have accepted this. So now they want to "change the goalposts" to suit themselves.

The fact is its just not fair and its not right. We (the WAFL) are still running a competition here, not a novelty act to keep them happy. The AFL is a billion dollar organisation who threw away a reserves competition back in 1993. Now the AFL clubs want a reserves competition again, but would rather hinder serious State league competitions instead of dipping into their own Billions and running their own comp.

They should be hammering the AFL themselves to fund an "AFL" Reserves competition.

[PrettyFifa12]

Anchorman, spoken like a true AFL supporter mate.

I like your argument about if it wasnt for the AFL clubs helping financially, most of the WAFL comp would be guts up. Thats a great argument.... Then where would our AFL clubs be with no WAFL competition ?? Can you answer that one with a straight face.... seriously. You just stated the WAFL is the best competition to nuture talent. And I will reiterate "COMPETITION". We are not a support network for a handful of unwanted's. Lets change a whole competition on its head to suit a few rookies.

It takes two to tango in all of this, and it always appears the AFL clubs are being hard done by. Nisbett and his cronies always get the violins out & all the media and the blinkered AFL supporters cry along with them. The Eagles have absolutely nothing to whinge about given this very system has seen them play in 5 Grand Finals and win 3 flags. As for Fremantle, their mediorcre history is their own fault, not the WAFL's.

Yes your entitled to your opinion, as you clearly state every time you post.

[fhutiussk]

i don't get it anchorman, macs doesn't at all say that eagles dockers reserves teams would be too good for the wafl.. he just says he doesn't want them in the wafl (HEAR HEAR). I actually think the wafl would be too strong for them.. and as macs also mentions, where do they get the numbers to make up sides? This question has never been answered.
Gasman hits all the nails of this argument on the head,...
- if these teams from another competition want reserves sides, they have reserves sides in their own competition, their leagues problem is not our leagues problem.
- if these blokes are good enough to play afl, they will first succeed at wafl level - thats pretty basic football science. the reason lewis broom and a host of others weren't getting a league game at tigerland this season and past seasons is because they weren't performing that well at reserves level. I know, i've watched them. If you are good enough to play wafl league, you will be strongat reserves level. and if your good enough to play afl, you will be strong at wafl league level. again this is basic football science, I can't believe the afl teams want to upset this arrangement that has served them very well. This all smells like a case of big brother wanting control over everything. Its a disgrace.

[bonyclayd]

And anchorman says "there are plenty of kids running around out there who will want to play for eagles/dockers reserves sides, they will get numbers easily."
Anchorman, as you would surely know, every player in this state is zoned to a wafl club. So how are eagles/dockers going to get these kids?
And what happens to support of wafl clubs if this proposal gets through.... who are young kids going to barrack for - eagles in the afl, and eagles in the wafl. Freo in the afl, and freo in the wafl.