It is a full agenda for the SA Football Commission and league directors as the State league gets another debate on its look

SANFL football has much to consider in the off-season, particularly with the make-up of its competition and how it will react to any rule changes adopted by the AFL Commission.

• What’s cooking in sport? Sign up for the Rucci Roast newsletter
• Power’s heartfelt pitch
• Best gossip in town
• Winners and losers: picture gallery

BIG decisions loom at SANFL headquarters - and again that question of who rules SA football (the independent commission or the clubs?) looms large.

There is the question of compensation to be paid to the Woodville-West Torrens Football Club for being denied a grand final berth while North Adelaide played 19 men for almost four minutes at the start of the preliminary final. This will stay with the commission.

There is debate on the structure of the SANFL competition, in particular the make-up of the AFL B teams at Adelaide and Port Adelaide and the prospect of the reserves competition reverting to eight clubs with the removal of the Magpies reserves. This ultimately falls to a vote of the eight “traditional” league clubs - as it did when the AFL reserves in the SANFL debate was settled five years ago.

And there is the question of how the SANFL will react to any rule changes adopted by the AFL Commission.

North Adelaide coach Josh Carr and the club’s legal team sit in a meeting room at Adelaide Oval, waiting on a decision by the SANFL tribunal on whether his team will play in the grand final after the 19th man fiasco. Picture: Matt Loxton

Compensation is challenging, particularly when the Eagles can argue a grand final appearance - and a premiership - could have delivered as much as $250,000 in sponsorship opportunities. That big crowd - of 40,000 - might just have topped up the SANFL coffers with above-budget returns to cope with the Eagles’claims.

Rule changes adopted by the AFL Commission will spark considerable debate - and the SANFL needs to consider the burden imposed in needing more umpires and officials to cope with change well beyond the league level.

And then there is the structure of the SANFL competition.

Port Adelaide will struggle to win the argument for the Magpies to continue to field a reserves team. But Port Adelaide does have a long-term agreement to participate in the SANFL that opens the door for compromise.

If - as expected - the league directors dismiss the Magpie reserves, Port Adelaide will (with justification) argue for new recruiting rules to allow the Magpies league side to be appropriately stocked.

Port Adelaide’s Jasper Pittard playing for the Magpies in the SANFL against Sturt. Picture: MATT TURNER.

This is where the Adelaide Football Club - that has been forced to scour community football ranks in the Adelaide Hills and Barossa Valley - for “top-up” players for its AFL reserves (SANFL league) side.

Long-serving Crows football chief Phil Harper has argued for some time that the Adelaide and Port Adelaide football clubs should claim their “top-up”players from the SA under-18 squad. This would put these talented youngsters in an AFL environment with strong resources to develop these teenagers’ draft prospects. Harper is prepared to concede that none of these under-18 tyros ever play against their original SANFL teams.

Critically, the eight traditional SANFL clubs need to accept that the strength of its competition is also measured by its weakest club. The fact the SANFL had to take the Crows off the television roster to protect the image of the proud State league tells that there needs to be a major rethink on the recruiting rules for the Crows and Power reserves teams.

The eight traditional SANFL clubs need not fear the Crows and Power reserves when neither has won the league premiership. But they do need to be concerned by the drag effect on the SANFL’s image by having two teams that are vulnerable to AFL injury lists.

Drawing in “top-up” talent from Victoria and even Tasmania - as the Crows did when they needed a ruckman late this year - is not in the best interests of SA football.

It shall be an interesting October in the halls of power at the SANFL. More so if there is a political play towards the commission from any still angry leaders at Woodville-West Torrens.

[e-mail]