Get rid of the Alignment,Yes.
Peel is here to stay,though better they stay as a Club in their own image.Nobody else’s!
Get rid of the Alignment,Yes.
Peel is here to stay,though better they stay as a Club in their own image.Nobody else’s!
[/quote]
Who are you to say what Peel supporters want, I expect the rest of the club presidents to come out and strongly denounce the alignments if they don’t …
True.Didn’t exactly hear a response or a peep from them,when Peel secured FREMANTLE as a Partner Club.
John Ditchburn got on his Soapbox about Peel being a Club in it’s own right despite the Alliance,which of course was a complete joke.Didn’t a hear a peep from Peel supporters about that.
Much like South in the Summer of '98/99,though.
As for the Presidents and Boards,forget about 2 of them.If the other 7 get it together,…
Let’s see if the one I spoke to can convince them to out their AFL Club Interests aside and serve the Overall Interests if the Competition,which the Host Club clearly does not!
Alignment is always going to have issues, not sure its an alignment though when 17 AFL players represent Peel, thats a take over.
To be fair,including the AFL listed players,how many actual Peel products were in Sundays’s Team?
3 or 4?
Happens every week in the VFL as well.It is not unique.
So what’s 4 more teams to that Competion?
Those Clubs west of Nhill would fit right in with that common occurrence of your’s Anchor.
You’re right RD there is a fair bit of panic from the replys your getting.
Anchorman: With respect mate, if you want to defend the alignment that is your right, but for me at least, you should do it on its own terms; what happens in the the VFL is of no importance in the WAFL.
PN: no panic – I will dip my lid to them if they win the flag.
All 5 of them.
Are that many Peel players in the team? B) :whistle:
Apologies if this has been posted somewhere else but this appeared in the West this morning
[i]West Perth could be penalised over president Brett Raponi’s verbal attack on the alignment model, with the WAFL club issued with a please-explain notice by the WA Football Commission.
The State’s peak football authority contacted the Falcons yesterday to demand a formal response to Raponi’s critical assessment of the league’s alignment rules.
Raponi questioned the competition’s integrity as he urged the WAFC to rethink the partnership model after a Peel Thunder side stacked with 17 Fremantle-listed players demolished West Perth by 60 points at HBF Arena in Sunday’s first semifinal.
“Seventeen is far too many,” Raponi said post-match.
“It is very difficult for 17 AFL-listed players to go up against 22 semi-professional players.
“The WAFC should absolutely be having a look at that situation. We will suggest that to them. Maybe there’s a better way that could even up the competition.”
Raponi has been a long-running critic of the alignment model involving Peel and East Perth.
An AFL-listed footballer who has played at least five WAFL matches at either league or reserves level is deemed eligible for finals under existing rules.
Experienced Dockers Matt de Boer, Nick Suban, Zac Clarke and Tendai Mzungu all played significant roles for Peel in the second finals win in the club’s history.
A WAFC spokesman confirmed the commission would consider whether a fine or other penalty was appropriate after receiving the response from West Perth.
[/i]
I applaud Raponi but it would of been nice if he had the backing of the other six clubs.
I applaud Raponi but it would of been nice if he had the backing of the other six clubs.
[/quote]
I agree PN he is one president that has been forthright in his views on the effects of the Alignment Model. I can only speak from a SF perspective and sadly President Haydyn Raitt and CEO Stuart Kemp have been MIA.
I guess at day’s end whether it’s an alignment like the current Peel arrangement or a stand along ressies team the result will be the same given both AFL clubs want all their players together in one WAFL team. What needs to happen imo, is more thought put into AFL players qualifying for WAFL finals. Whether that’s increasing games played to 10 or having a quota on how many can play each game or whatever works best …but clearly the current criterion is not working where you have 18 running around.
I agree PN he is one president that has been forthright in his views on the effects of the Alignment Model. I can only speak from a SF perspective and sadly President Haydyn Raitt and CEO Stuart Kemp have been MIA.
[/quote]
maybe the others aren’t engaged in megaphone diplomacy like Raponi. It could be they’re making a lot of noise direct to the WAFC in the background rather than talking to the press.
No,he should speak out.Inside and Out of the WAFL Council of Presidents!
Hey WAFC,I’m a Match Day Official!
The Host Club Scam STINKS!
The AFL Clubs’Presence in the WAFL STINKS!
Fine me if you want,but I refuse to Pay.
I refuse to be Silenced!
I guess at day’s end whether it’s an alignment like the current Peel arrangement or a stand along ressies team the result will be the same given both AFL clubs want all their players together in one WAFL team. What needs to happen imo, is more thought put into AFL players qualifying for WAFL finals. Whether that’s increasing games played to 10 or having a quota on how many can play each game or whatever works best …but clearly the current criterion is not working where you have 18 running around.
[/quote]
BC the problem is that there will be the provision that say the WA domiciled AFL club is in the AFL finals and the WAFL aligned club is also in the finals they AFL aligned club will be allowed to lay as many AFL listed players as they like and that could be up to 22 players.
I reckon more presidents should speak out, Raponi like a shag a on a rock at times but at least we know what Garlic stand for. Others are soft *****
I guess at day’s end whether it’s an alignment like the current Peel arrangement or a stand along ressies team the result will be the same given both AFL clubs want all their players together in one WAFL team. What needs to happen imo, is more thought put into AFL players qualifying for WAFL finals.
Whether that’s increasing games played to 10 or having a quota on how many can play each game or whatever works best …but clearly the current criterion is not working where you have 18 running around.
[/quote]
BC the problem is that there will be the provision that say the WA domiciled AFL club is in the AFL finals and the WAFL aligned club is also in the finals they AFL aligned club will be allowed to lay as many AFL listed players as they like and that could be up to 22 players.
[/quote]
Adelaide’s SANFL team had 21 Crows players against South Adelaide. The result was similar to the WAFL with the AFL reserves side winning by 9 goals.