Juniors

[Thiele]

West Adelaide u/17s got thrashed and when i left the West Adelaide 19s were up by 14 points late into the last quater

[scott]

Glenelg beat Sturt by a point in the 17s, despite having about 10 less scoring shots. Central beat South by five in the 17s too.

[Thiele]

I was actually nice to watch some Junior Footy today paid nothing to get which was good

[Grahaml]

I would be interested to know whether some clubs take the policy of leaving kids in their respective age groups as long as they're able to or play them at a higher level if they're good enough. I don't think any clubs let them play under 19s instead of League, but perhaps instead of Reserves, or leave them in under 17s instead of taking them to under 19s.

[am Bays]

I can't speak for other clubs but Glenelg in my time there kids played at the level their ability and selection warranted. In other words if they were under 17s but were the the top 42 players at the club, they played reserves. If they were in the top 21 they played league.

Last minor round of 1990 we had 9 players in our twos side eligible for U/19s.....

[Grahaml]

I get the feeling some clubs go one way, and other clubs go the other way. I think Central do it the same way as Glenelg, in that League team picks first, then reserves, then 19s, then 17s and whichever players the coach thinks are the best they pick.

[am Bays]

Well given Bryce Gibbs was playing league footy at 16, I think the policy is still the same at Glenelg as it was in my time there 1990-1996.

[Grahaml]

I was probably thinking more of the players who aren't good enough for League, but could play reserves. Whether a clu would rather they play 19s or reserves basically.

[Jimmy]

gl, sturt have definately played underage kids at league and ressies level....its all about getting them ready for the league footy and playing against men not boys.

plus, i think we have had to do it out of necessity sometimes.

[scott]

Eagles beat West by four points in the 17s. High scoring.

[Thiele]

West defeated North by 2 points in rhe 19s

[MightyEagles]

Eagles beat West by four points in the 17s. High scoring.

Don't you mean Eagles beat Port by 4 pts in the 17's
17's
Eagles 17.17.119
Port 17.13.115
Huge fight in the 3rd in front of the stands.

19's (Eagles fans look away)
Eagles 6.6.42
Port 29.12.186

[scott]

Yeah, meant Port obviously.


Under 19

Port Magpies 8.4 14.5 19.9 29.12 (186)
Eagles 0.0 3.4 6.5 6.6 (42)

West Adelaide 6.2 10.5 11.11 12.15 (87)
North Adelaide 2.4 4.7 9.9 12.13 (85)

Glenelg 4.3 10.4 11.8 15.9 (99)
Sturt 2.1 5.5 8.9 10.12 (72)

South Adelaide ?
Central District ?


Under 17

Port Magpies 5.1 8.3 14.10 17.13 (115)
Eagles 4.2 10.5 11.9 17.17 (119)

West Adelaide 3.2 4.10 5.12 8.17 (65)
North Adelaide 4.2 7.3 14.9 22.11 (143)

Glenelg 4.2 5.3 10.3 15.5 (95)
Sturt 1.6 2.11 7.13 13.16 (94)

South Adelaide 2.5 4.9 7.11 10.17 (77)
Central District 3.1 6.2 11.4 13.4 (82)

[MightyEagles]

There's been a few close games and a couple where there has been blow outs.

[Wedgie]

Crikey, Norths 17s have won their t games by a total of over 200 points, must have a nice %.

[smac]

Crikey, Norths 17s have won their t games by a total of over 200 points, must have a nice %.

Having watched all of their games in the under 15's championship the last few years (last 2 years players would make up a large % of this team), I would be surprised if anyone gets any closer. A real bumper crop in the zone, coupled with what appears to be (I can only comment as an outsider on this part) some very good coaches.