The SANFL/AFL reserves debate for the Adelaide Crows and Port Adelaide Power can be easily solved

THERE'S a simple solution to the SANFL/AFL reserves debate. It just requires the removal of self-interest - and a bit of good old-fashioned common sense ...

The Common Sense Crusade

MISSION STATEMENT: To cut through the clutter to identify the real issues and solutions in the sporting world.

I love sport - but I get frustrated at times.

Too often politics, egos, emotion, spin and money get in the way of making all sports, and the way we enjoy them, the best they can possibly be.

Agree? Disagree? Have a better idea? Comment in the box at the bottom or tweet me!

Issues will always crop up and whenever there are two opposing sides, the truth (and the best way forward) is normally somewhere in the middle.

It goes from one extreme to another and, really, there's just no need for the diatribe.

There's a distinct lack of common sense employed across the sporting world and I'm making it my weekly crusade to ensure it comes back and is used in the best possible fashion.

Magpies goodbye hard to swallow

There's been one particularly emotive issue circling around recently and it leaves me shaking my head - the SANFL/AFL reserves debate.

So I figured what better way for this column to debut than to annoy the traditionalists by making a heap of sense.

Let's start by laying out the ugly truth.

The glory days of the 60s, 70s and 80s are gone and it's time to accept the SANFL is a second-tier/development competition where all clubs, players, fixtures and the administration are compromised.

As it stands, the nine-team setup just doesn't work. The byes are farcical. The availability of AFL-listed players, which can wildly affect a team's ability, changes week-to-week. Crowds are falling and, really, only the diehards remain.

Port Adelaide's clearance conundrum

The quality of play has been affected by the introduction of Gold Coast and GWS with more talent required at the top level, not to mention other AFL clubs picking the eyes out of the mature-age players.

Decisions at all levels of administration are made on club or personal interest and are affected by historical events irrelevant with the current situation.

I could go on but bottom line - it's not making the competition the best it can possibly be.

So if that's the reality, what's the solution?

Agree? Disagree? Have a better idea? Comment in the box at the bottom or tweet me!

As an old boss drummed into me, we need to ask the wonderful question, 'what are we trying to achieve?'.

Without doubt the SANFL can (and should aim to) be the second-strongest league in the country, featuring players on the fringe of AFL selection, good quality senior footballers and the best young talent coming through.

There should be 10 teams that can stand on their own two feet, putting a competitive product on the park week-in, week-out, which in turn drives interest and fan support.

Sound fair enough so far?

The two SA-based AFL clubs need their own reserves sides. This isn't up for debate. It's essential for the development of their players and puts them on an even keel with the other clubs in the league.

By entering a Crows affiliate (let's call them the Ravens) and then allowing the Port Adelaide Magpies to be the Power's reserves outfit, we've got a 10-team structure in the SANFL, which is proven as the best and fairest number for running any competition.

You play each team home and away. Very straight forward.

I think most people understand these things but there seems to be a lot of hyperbole about the best way to implement it.

Try this out.

Outside of their AFL-listed players, both the Ravens and the Magpies, assemble squads of enthusiastic footballers who want the opportunity to train and play in an elite environment.

The catch? There's no money for them (maybe a small fixed match-fee if that works better) and no guarantee of a regular game.

Agree? Disagree? Have a better idea? Comment in the box at the bottom or tweet me!

The carrot for these players, aside from wanting to improve themselves, is that each AFL club has to offer one of them a spot on the rookie list for the following season.

Hawthorn did this very successfully with the Box Hill Hawks for years. It's not a big price to pay for the AFL clubs.

This works twofold. It actually creates a competitive team environment but also ensures the best players (who obviously command some bigger dollars) go to other clubs and spreads the talent across the league.

It means we don't have the ridiculous situation of players potentially playing for different teams in the same competition a week apart.

Neither has an SANFL reserves team, so players from the squads who don't get a game can play for an affiliated amateur team if they feel the need.

I guarantee neither squad would ever be short of players.

Each AFL club pays a $400,000 license fee (or some other arbitrary number), which is evenly split between the other eight clubs, allowing them to invest an extra $100,000 in good structures and/or quality players.

Agree? Disagree? Have a better idea? Comment in the box at the bottom or tweet me!

The removal of AFL-listed players from the other SANFL clubs forces them to look in their own backyard and get their structures and development right. How can this be a bad thing?

There's no more 'luck' at the mini-draft.

The responsibility of being a competitive outfit now rests squarely on the shoulders of each SANFL club.

Now, to address the specific issues with the Magpies and Ravens.

If Adelaide doesn't want the headache of organising a home ground for the Ravens, that's A-OK - they play away every week and the other teams all benefit.

I'm sure if the Crows were playing away on a Saturday night and the Ravens were playing on a Sunday afternoon down at Glenelg, a better crowd would turn up than anything else they're getting now.

The Magpies want to continue playing at Alberton? That's fine, too. Each team has a right to play at home unless they give up that privilege.

They want to keep their junior teams? No problem - the under-16s and under-18s should operate on the same fixture as the seniors and just have a bye when they're scheduled to play the Crows.

I hear people whining about keeping recruiting zones but it's actually pretty irrelevant.

Once players come through the underage system, they've got a decision to make.

Those they don't get drafted to an AFL team can chose to stay a part of the Magpies senior squad (which they don't get paid for) or open themselves up to other offers and change clubs.

Agree? Disagree? Have a better idea? Comment in the box at the bottom or tweet me!

Pretty straight-forward, really.

Does that strike a balance between keeping the Magpie tradition and moving forward into the realities of the 21st century? Call me crazy but, from a completely neutral perspective, I think it does.

Will the Ravens and/or Magpies dominate? I doubt they can on a consistent basis.

Their only commitment to the league is to be competitive and put out a good product.

When it comes down to it, any team's fortunes can fluctuate from year to year as injury, form and circumstance dictate.

Enabling the other eight teams to remain competitive and putting in place structures to ensure they do that (and not run themselves into the ground) is vital.

For them, there won't be any uncertainty about the availability of players and coaches can do their jobs without incurring the wrath of their AFL counterparts.

In terms of quality, senior SANFL footballers will rule the roost.

The extra money and opportunities can go a long way to helping the foundations of these clubs, ensuring they have the ability to get things right on and off the field.

As far as I'm concerned a poorly run club doesn't deserve to succeed. You need to make your own luck, take responsibility and stop being a victim.

If you're a traditionalist and sit there reading this column saying 'it won't work' - you're part of the problem, not the solution. Come up with a better option.

Agree? Disagree? Have a better idea? Comment in the box at the bottom or tweet me!

The current system isn't sustainable and any more compromises will only ensure the SANFL and the SA-based AFL clubs fail to reach their full potential.

This one creates a much better environment for fans, for players, for clubs and for the competition.

Those in positions of power need to put aside their self-interest and get the best result for football in SA.

That's just common sense.

You can follow Tom Biddington on Twitter - @TomBiddington.