SA Footy

Trader wrote:Oh, and 'a bit steep' doesn't cover half of it.
$22.50 per player.
Last year our bottom side used 48 players.
$1,080 CA will collect if its the same this season.
In return, they've told the club we don't have to pay the $100 insurance per team. That seems balanced doesn't it!

This is a massive cash grab from CA targeting casual community cricketers.

This is deadright! I was having the same discussion with someone the other week about that - we have gone from paying $100 insurance per team to the cost being $22.50 per player! Juniors from $5 to $16.00.

Their argument is "it's the player paying so not a cost to the club".. BULLSHIT! It impacts your fee structure - $100 per team insurance is easily absorbed across the member base, almost no cost.. the $22.50 is a real cost that the player picks up - and they dont want to pay that + your fees.

So we charge $60 membership + $10 per week played.. that $60 used to cover a lot of our running costs, suddenly we have two options - either make it closer to $90 to include the PlayHQ charge, and risk alienating more of our member base, or keep it at $60 and lose $22.50 to PlayHQ, and only receive $37.50 for membership.

The Bedge wrote:

whitepointers wrote:Yes the Insurance and IT costs are a bit steep, but a person can play as a fill in for one game without having to pay the fee

How? I've looked everywhere and can't find anyway that can setup a "one off" registration form that excludes the $22.50 cost?

Obviously can setup so that that's the only cost you have though.

We have setup a couple of options that include partial payments of fees right up to full payment.. see how it goes.. I must admit, Juniors are the best though - Parents just pay straight out, I love it.

Play HQ might let someone in without being registered for their first game (ie: a fill in), but that doesn't mean the association will.
I think you will find a lot of associations have bylaws that say you can not play an unregistered player.
Given the insurance risks etc, I can't see associations jumping at the opportunity to allow unregistered players all of a sudden.

I'm not sure where WP is getting his information on that from but maybe it's from our association (ASCA) executive? Our president and a fellow committee member said the executive mentioned at the last association meeting that they will allow one week's grace when it's comes to a fill in player paying the registration fee. They apparently won't have to pay the fee apon playing their first game/week and will play on a permit, be a private player and their stats won't be available until they pay the fee.

I'm yet to learn just how that will work and I'm sceptical about it at the moment. The guys also mentioned that it seemed as though the association executive didn't have a great knowledge of Play HQ at that point in time which doesn't fill me with confidence either.

saintal wrote:

The Bedge wrote:

MoP wrote:it will be interesting to see how Clubs go when they're looking for fill ins this season.

It'll be a huge challenge. You can remove the rego costs but at a minimum still need to cover the $22.50 insurance.. and they'll still need to register online themselves before hand.

Yep it's going to be a pain in the butt I feel, a big shift from the norm.

FWIW our subs are $130 (plus $5/week for a umpire, so works out around $210 if you play each week). That's just hard wicket cricket in the hills, so we keep subs pretty low and subsidise them to an extent.

Ours are about the same in Alexandra & Eastern Hills. Plus if you play the lower grades where you don't have umpires you don't even have to pay the $5 a week either.
When I was playing in Perth in a hard wicket comp we were paying $450 a season

Unique situation but what happens when Phil Inn plays one week as an unregistered player, he then decides to play abit more regularly. I'm guessing game 1 doesn't count for him when it comes to finals qualification etc.

The Bedge wrote:

Trader wrote:Oh, and 'a bit steep' doesn't cover half of it.
$22.50 per player.
Last year our bottom side used 48 players.
$1,080 CA will collect if its the same this season.
In return, they've told the club we don't have to pay the $100 insurance per team. That seems balanced doesn't it!

This is a massive cash grab from CA targeting casual community cricketers.

This is deadright! I was having the same discussion with someone the other week about that - we have gone from paying $100 insurance per team to the cost being $22.50 per player! Juniors from $5 to $16.00.

Their argument is "it's the player paying so not a cost to the club".. BULLSHIT! It impacts your fee structure - $100 per team insurance is easily absorbed across the member base, almost no cost.. the $22.50 is a real cost that the player picks up - and they dont want to pay that + your fees.

So we charge $60 membership + $10 per week played.. that $60 used to cover a lot of our running costs, suddenly we have two options - either make it closer to $90 to include the PlayHQ charge, and risk alienating more of our member base, or keep it at $60 and lose $22.50 to PlayHQ, and only receive $37.50 for membership.

I was at a SACA event. It's not all for Insurance.......

Faramir wrote:I was at a SACA event. It's not all for Insurance.......

Nah i'm aware of that - system upkeep etc as well.. but still point remains with insurance, it's costing an additional $22.50 per person per season.

Anyway, it's not impacting me personally, but i'm interested to see how it impacts others.

The Bedge wrote:

Faramir wrote:I was at a SACA event. It's not all for Insurance.......

Nah i'm aware of that - system upkeep etc as well.. but still point remains with insurance, it's costing an additional $22.50 per person per season.

Anyway, it's not impacting me personally, but i'm interested to see how it impacts others.

As I said, our Club has just added it onto our fees. But, I'm not sure how they're planning on operating with regards to fill in players. I know David Heyzer would be all over any dodgy 'Phil Inn' registrations in ATCA.

Second chance saloon for the ROCCC after getting relegated to A3, SHOC's misfortune means ROCCC reinstated into A2. They had a young side last season and suspect it will be much of the same... although I'm hearing murmurings of a few ex-rossi lads coming in to boost their stocks.
Going to be interesting to see how they go.

Rocs super lucky! Simpson needs some help, think they’ll struggle again in a2 - along with modbury and Brighton they’ll be amongst the relegation battle.

Any other player movements around?

when are fixtures due to be released?

Bluedemon wrote:when are fixtures due to be released?

A1-A3 due by cob Wednesday
Lower grades progressively but all expected by this time next week.

Trader wrote:

Bluedemon wrote:when are fixtures due to be released?

A1-A3 due by cob Wednesday
Lower grades progressively but all expected by this time next week.

good to see they kept to this time line. it might be ignorance on my side but every year it seems to get later and later. i have noticed the comps havent got sponsors on yet either just div 1 div 2 and div 3

Huge News,

Michael Renfrey from TTG to Hope Valley CC.

Good bat and nice off spin option for the demons.

Any other news around the grounds?

Cheers,
BA

niCe_gARRy wrote:Huge News,

Michael Renfrey from TTG to Hope Valley CC.

Good bat and nice off spin option for the demons.

Any other news around the grounds?

Cheers,
BA

How do you reckon he'll go in A1?

Senor Moto Gadili wrote:

niCe_gARRy wrote:Huge News,

Michael Renfrey from TTG to Hope Valley CC.

Good bat and nice off spin option for the demons.

Any other news around the grounds?

Cheers,
BA

How do you reckon he'll go in A1?

Judging by his stats from last season, A1 could be a bit of a jump for him, but off-spin tends to have a decent record in this competition so we'll see how he goes.

Do any clubs use TK Turf for their pitch preparations, and if so, what are they charging?

MoP wrote:Do any clubs use TK Turf for their pitch preparations, and if so, what are they charging?

Is that with Trent Kelly?

Bluedemon wrote:

MoP wrote:Do any clubs use TK Turf for their pitch preparations, and if so, what are they charging?

Is that with Trent Kelly?

Yes.

MoP wrote:Do any clubs use TK Turf for their pitch preparations, and if so, what are they charging?

Yes, used his services for 12 years.
Not cheap but the boys do a great job.

We recently used Green Options, as do Ingle Farm, Marion and Walkerville, more affordable than TK but also do a great job.