HFL Division 1 (Central)

Talk on any country footy league or club from the SA Country area

Re: HFL Central Division

Postby Legs Man » Thu Jan 22, 2015 2:20 pm

Elmer J Thudpucker wrote:
Legs Man wrote:
By doing this it also stops a club with a weak A grade from temptation in loading their B grade with A grade players in the latter part of the season.


There's always lots of speculation that someone may do this, but over the past 6 years I'm only aware of one club trying to "stack" their B grade in an effort to gain additional points - and that was Echunga last year against Bridgewater.

In that game you put out possibly the highest paid B grade team in HFL history.


As stated - this temptation must be removed with a revamp of points weighting.
In the Bridgey match Echunga actually didn't have enough players to fill the reserves - even with colts - so 3 A grade players played part of the B grade also.
Echunga lost the B grade so this had no effect on points outcome and was a big risk considering possible injuries to A grade players.
Reckon you will find some other clubs B grade sides have players that would normally play A grade due to not enough points available. ( this wasn't the case with us though)
Bridgey had a couple of pretty handy players in that B grade side also that I would think are worthy of A grade inclusion.

You would know by now my thoughts on any club being able to play Central as long as they can field all sides and allowing natural attrition take its course - without a relegation process at all.
Clubs without all grades will stay in Country and clubs getting beaten week in week out will want to go back and re build - with the opportunity to also win a flag.
Legs Man
Under 16s
 
 
Posts: 497
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2014 12:02 pm
Has liked: 88 times
Been liked: 44 times

Re: HFL Central Division

Postby StickyFingers » Thu Jan 22, 2015 3:40 pm

Wow, it sure was brave of your club to risk injury to Carey and other important A graders just to make up numbers in the B Grade… especially on the eve of a finals series! Nice try but I don’t think anyone’s buying that. You will find that most other B grade sides have some pretty handy players that are worthy of A grade inclusion – its known as DEPTH!

Legs Man, anyone who regularly reads this forum would be familiar with every opinion you have ever had regarding football and the HFL, as you enjoy sharing them and tend to repeat yourself a little bit. As another one-eyed passionate HFL supporter used to say - put a damn cork in it!
StickyFingers
Member
 
Posts: 71
Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 1:06 pm
Has liked: 3 times
Been liked: 1 time

Re: HFL Central Division

Postby jumbo20 » Thu Jan 22, 2015 4:01 pm

Wow legsman I have heard some crap but your post takes the cake if you were short why would you play expensive recruits
jumbo20
Under 16s
 
 
Posts: 474
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 8:29 pm
Has liked: 0 time
Been liked: 9 times
Grassroots Team: Goodwood Saints

Re: HFL Central Division

Postby Legs Man » Thu Jan 22, 2015 4:05 pm

StickyFingers wrote:Wow, it sure was brave of your club to risk injury to Carey and other important A graders just to make up numbers in the B Grade… especially on the eve of a finals series! Nice try but I don’t think anyone’s buying that. You will find that most other B grade sides have some pretty handy players that are worthy of A grade inclusion – its known as DEPTH!

Legs Man, anyone who regularly reads this forum would be familiar with every opinion you have ever had regarding football and the HFL, as you enjoy sharing them and tend to repeat yourself a little bit. As another one-eyed passionate HFL supporter used to say - put a damn cork in it!


I am sure there is quite a bit of pleasure gained by numerous board members by having a crack at my posts and opinion.
We can't deprive them of that !
Personal opinion - public forum - enjoy!

BTW - certainly not my decision as to who plays where. And I don't agree with it - AND I have suggested a solution to deter clubs from doing it.
Legs Man
Under 16s
 
 
Posts: 497
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2014 12:02 pm
Has liked: 88 times
Been liked: 44 times

Re: HFL Central Division

Postby StickyFingers » Thu Jan 22, 2015 4:37 pm

I doubt that anyone from outside of (and probably within) Echunga gains pleasure by reading your posts.
The problem with your opinions and 'solutions' is that they are so Echunga-focused that they are painful for everyone else to read. Take your latest suggestion for the relegation points weighting system as an example... how surprising that you would insist that they MUST reduce the value of a B grade win, considering your club didn't win a single game last season :roll:
StickyFingers
Member
 
Posts: 71
Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 1:06 pm
Has liked: 3 times
Been liked: 1 time

Re: HFL Central Division

Postby Legs Man » Thu Jan 22, 2015 4:52 pm

StickyFingers wrote:I doubt that anyone from outside of (and probably within) Echunga gains pleasure by reading your posts.
The problem with your opinions and 'solutions' is that they are so Echunga-focused that they are painful for everyone else to read. Take your latest suggestion for the relegation points weighting system as an example... how surprising that you would insist that they MUST reduce the value of a B grade win, considering your club didn't win a single game last season :roll:


Sure I am passionate with respect to Echunga FC and can certainly be biased on occasion as we all can be.
If you read my posts you will see that a major proportion of content is actually regarding the comp overall and I have deliberately been unbiased and taken an approach of trying to provide valid suggestions for improvement.
It's pretty easy to bag someone without even stating your club allegiance and it's obviously pretty hard to provide suggestions as to how the flaws in our league can be fixed.
Would really like to read input from forum members as to how they feel we can improve our comp - and that doesn't mean simply getting rid of me :lol:
Legs Man
Under 16s
 
 
Posts: 497
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2014 12:02 pm
Has liked: 88 times
Been liked: 44 times

Re: HFL Central Division

Postby daysofourlives » Thu Jan 22, 2015 11:39 pm

StickyFingers wrote:I doubt that anyone from outside of (and probably within) Echunga gains pleasure by reading your posts.
The problem with your opinions and 'solutions' is that they are so Echunga-focused that they are painful for everyone else to read. Take your latest suggestion for the relegation points weighting system as an example... how surprising that you would insist that they MUST reduce the value of a B grade win, considering your club didn't win a single game last season :roll:


I gain enormous pleasure from his posts, he's a breath of fresh air to this otherwise dull and boring competition. Between his common snese approach and the ineptitude of the Board and the other clubs and its poster's of the HFL it makes for great reading.
Supercoach Spring Racing Champion 2019
Spargo's Good Friday Cup Champion 2020
daysofourlives
Coach
 
 
Posts: 11507
Joined: Tue Oct 14, 2008 2:35 pm
Has liked: 2423 times
Been liked: 1660 times
Grassroots Team: Angaston

Re: HFL Central Division

Postby running defender » Thu Jan 22, 2015 11:57 pm

Hardly think Carey and Edmonds are expensive recriuts, Carey been here 4 yrs and David Edmonds played all his life at club. Apps points to be talked about at next meeting Feb 2. This is another huge stuff up by the league trying to be to smart by complicating a very simple exercise, give every club 13pts. Read the letters to the editor ? Well thats the facts . Mr sickerdick is quoted as "they never gave us the opportunity to put forward the motion of another idea such as an 11 team central competition" if they were running a company they would have been sacked. Like my mate legs Man any team that can field 4 teams should be allowed to play central its 2015 now get with the times. I can see maybe a super league been formed say 3 team's from SFL , 3 from GS, 3 from RM and 3 from hills wouldn't that be fantastic. I'll leave you with that to ponder.
running defender
Rookie
 
 
Posts: 155
Joined: Mon Jan 27, 2014 10:48 pm
Has liked: 0 time
Been liked: 14 times
Grassroots Team: Echunga

Re: HFL Central Division

Postby always there » Fri Jan 23, 2015 7:03 am

running defender wrote:Hardly think Carey and Edmonds are expensive recriuts, Carey been here 4 yrs and David Edmonds played all his life at club. Apps points to be talked about at next meeting Feb 2. This is another huge stuff up by the league trying to be to smart by complicating a very simple exercise, give every club 13pts. Read the letters to the editor ? Well thats the facts . Mr sickerdick is quoted as "they never gave us the opportunity to put forward the motion of another idea such as an 11 team central competition" if they were running a company they would have been sacked. Like my mate legs Man any team that can field 4 teams should be allowed to play central its 2015 now get with the times. I can see maybe a super league been formed say 3 team's from SFL , 3 from GS, 3 from RM and 3 from hills wouldn't that be fantastic. I'll leave you with that to ponder.

Maybe you and legs man could put your hand up to be on the Hills League, you seem to know everything about how to run the league properly. The only thing left to ponder RD is how many more posts we have to read regarding this saga. Please can we talk football.
always there
Rookie
 
 
Posts: 114
Joined: Thu Aug 18, 2011 8:24 pm
Has liked: 17 times
Been liked: 13 times

Re: HFL Central Division

Postby cracka » Fri Jan 23, 2015 10:01 am

daysofourlives wrote:
StickyFingers wrote:I doubt that anyone from outside of (and probably within) Echunga gains pleasure by reading your posts.
The problem with your opinions and 'solutions' is that they are so Echunga-focused that they are painful for everyone else to read. Take your latest suggestion for the relegation points weighting system as an example... how surprising that you would insist that they MUST reduce the value of a B grade win, considering your club didn't win a single game last season :roll:


I gain enormous pleasure from his posts, he's a breath of fresh air to this otherwise dull and boring competition. Between his common snese approach and the ineptitude of the Board and the other clubs and its poster's of the HFL it makes for great reading.

C'mon Daisy the truth is you like his posts coz they're just like yours, bagging others for what happens without putting your hand up to help. :D
It can't be that boring of a competition if everyone is so interested in what happens. Just look at how many views there are compared to other comps with the same amount of posts/pages on this forum & also how many users from other leagues comment on the HFL. Even compare HFL country div to BLG, there are 1.5 times as many views from 30 less pages.
cracka
Veteran
 
 
Posts: 3664
Joined: Tue Mar 12, 2013 9:41 am
Has liked: 460 times
Been liked: 566 times
Grassroots Team: Onkaparinga Valley

Re: HFL Central Division

Postby cracka » Fri Jan 23, 2015 10:01 am

always there wrote:
running defender wrote:Hardly think Carey and Edmonds are expensive recriuts, Carey been here 4 yrs and David Edmonds played all his life at club. Apps points to be talked about at next meeting Feb 2. This is another huge stuff up by the league trying to be to smart by complicating a very simple exercise, give every club 13pts. Read the letters to the editor ? Well thats the facts . Mr sickerdick is quoted as "they never gave us the opportunity to put forward the motion of another idea such as an 11 team central competition" if they were running a company they would have been sacked. Like my mate legs Man any team that can field 4 teams should be allowed to play central its 2015 now get with the times. I can see maybe a super league been formed say 3 team's from SFL , 3 from GS, 3 from RM and 3 from hills wouldn't that be fantastic. I'll leave you with that to ponder.

Maybe you and legs man could put your hand up to be on the Hills League, you seem to know everything about how to run the league properly. The only thing left to ponder RD is how many more posts we have to read regarding this saga. Please can we talk football.

I reckon there would be a mass exodus of clubs if that were to happen, probably even a new comp formed. :D
cracka
Veteran
 
 
Posts: 3664
Joined: Tue Mar 12, 2013 9:41 am
Has liked: 460 times
Been liked: 566 times
Grassroots Team: Onkaparinga Valley

Re: HFL Central Division

Postby Legs Man » Fri Jan 23, 2015 10:59 am

There is no way that a league director would sanction me to even stand for election.

The implementation of a business savvy CEO is the best option moving forward which then takes the onus away from the directors and a lot of criticism is deflected.
There could be savings made by simply having a centrally located office for the CEO and 2 other employees with the HFL meetings being held on a rotational basis at HFL clubs.
This would mean that a headquarters as such is not required and the expense that goes with it.
This also gets the board closer to each club and provides a greater alliance and understanding between all parties.
No remuneration is paid to directors as this is a voluntary position e.g no payments for ground inspections, running the footy budget etc etc,

Our competition now generates the income to be run as a business and should be treated this way which would also mean the constitution would become part of the business structure and be formalised in an equitable and legal sense.

My opinion is that 11 apps points should be allocated to all clubs allowing more quality players into hills footy and therefore spreading the remuneration while also diminishing the mercenary footballer's bargaining power.
Each club is then given the same opportunity - with no permits allowed - and there is no argument that anyone is favoured.
Legs Man
Under 16s
 
 
Posts: 497
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2014 12:02 pm
Has liked: 88 times
Been liked: 44 times

Re: HFL Central Division

Postby overthehill » Fri Jan 23, 2015 11:40 am

I think they were looking in this direction but the $100k they were going to pay the new CEO has been invested into watching the EFC play 1 more year in Central division prior to their 2016 return to Country div!!
overthehill
Rookie
 
 
Posts: 236
Joined: Mon Apr 19, 2010 5:08 pm
Has liked: 3 times
Been liked: 21 times
Grassroots Team: Mt Barker

Re: HFL Central Division

Postby RooShootOhh » Fri Jan 23, 2015 11:50 am

Legs Man wrote:There is no way that a league director would sanction me to even stand for election.

The implementation of a business savvy CEO is the best option moving forward which then takes the onus away from the directors and a lot of criticism is deflected.
There could be savings made by simply having a centrally located office for the CEO and 2 other employees with the HFL meetings being held on a rotational basis at HFL clubs.
This would mean that a headquarters as such is not required and the expense that goes with it.
This also gets the board closer to each club and provides a greater alliance and understanding between all parties.
No remuneration is paid to directors as this is a voluntary position e.g no payments for ground inspections, running the footy budget etc etc,

Our competition now generates the income to be run as a business and should be treated this way which would also mean the constitution would become part of the business structure and be formalised in an equitable and legal sense.

My opinion is that 11 apps points should be allocated to all clubs allowing more quality players into hills footy and therefore spreading the remuneration while also diminishing the mercenary footballer's bargaining power.
Each club is then given the same opportunity - with no permits allowed - and there is no argument that anyone is favoured
.


While this appears fair in principle, its not what the APPS is designed for in country footy, there are too many other factors that make it an uneven playing field as it stands, where the points system is in principle designed to even out the competition "make it fair"...

Withouth being too technical about it, the population, demographic, socio-economic factors that play a major part in participation numbers (and therefore by weight of numbers that equates to playing depth) already makes every club different (or uneven for this argument). What the points system is designed to do is try and even out those differences by allowing players from outside the league population to join a particular club to give it a better chance of competing with other clubs.

Given that intention, the only way to apply points to clubs is based on performance. And heres the example:

Club A wins premiership and based on past 3 years performance is allowed 6 point to retain exisitng recruits or replace one that leave. This mark sets the current benchmark for the rest of the competiton.
Club D runs fourth this year and accounting for previous 3 years performance and is allocated 10 points. This indicates (based on performances not opinions) that Club D requires the use of 4 extra points (to be used as they see fit) to take them to a level that should be equal in relative terms to Club A.
Club H finishes eighth and allowing for previous 3 years results is allocated 15 points. This indicates (based on performances not opinions) that Club H requires the use of 9 extra points (to be used as they see fit) to take them to a level that should be equal in relative terms to Club A.

Every club is assessed without prejudice based purely on past performace to indicate what allowance of outside support is required to make them competitive with the competition benchmark.

If every player/import was of the same ability then this would be a pretty accurate formulae to determine points allocation (and is still the best way).
Where clubs get it wrong, is how THEY decide to use their points allocation.


Dont get confused with the ammo's where they give everyone 15 points and let promotion and relegation create the so called even divisions, they prom/releg is hugley relevant over the number of divisions they have, the relegation / promtion issue here is minimal at best as its not even a given to happen every year.

people use the APPS as an excuse as a limitation, but forget thats exactly what its designed to do in country footy, giving everyone 15 points will only see an EPL like results, where the bigs clubs with big populations, good juniors and plenty of $$$ win it every year and everyone else battle just to make the finals!
RooShootOhh
Under 16s
 
Posts: 439
Joined: Fri Apr 27, 2012 10:35 am
Has liked: 2 times
Been liked: 40 times
Grassroots Team: Waikerie

Re: HFL Central Division

Postby Snaparazzi » Fri Jan 23, 2015 12:09 pm

overthehill wrote:Nice try RD, round 1 is Echunga vs Uraidla and you know it. Should be a fantastic game of football too.
Also heard a bit of chat over the weekend that Scott Sutherland has recruited ex Mt Barker Coach Steve Samuels as his 2015 assistant and 2016 successor. Can anyone confirm this?


Is there a draw out for the Central and Country comp as yet?
User avatar
Snaparazzi
Rookie
 
Posts: 146
Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2009 4:42 pm
Has liked: 0 time
Been liked: 3 times

Re: HFL Central Division

Postby overthehill » Fri Jan 23, 2015 12:14 pm

Not officially. My comments were purely speculation
overthehill
Rookie
 
 
Posts: 236
Joined: Mon Apr 19, 2010 5:08 pm
Has liked: 3 times
Been liked: 21 times
Grassroots Team: Mt Barker

Re: HFL Central Division

Postby Corona Man » Fri Jan 23, 2015 12:21 pm

overthehill wrote:I think they were looking in this direction but the $100k they were going to pay the new CEO has been invested into watching the EFC play 1 more year in Central division prior to their 2016 return to Country div!!


Wow - Harsh criticism from a former EFC Junior!
1961, 1971, 1976, 1978, 1983, 1986, 1988, 1989, 1991, 2008, 2013, 2014, 2015.... And don't you forget it!
User avatar
Corona Man
Coach
 
 
Posts: 12430
Joined: Thu Oct 02, 2014 2:28 pm
Location: Near the Beer Fridge
Has liked: 1277 times
Been liked: 3476 times
Grassroots Team: Echunga

Re: HFL Central Division

Postby Legs Man » Fri Jan 23, 2015 1:58 pm

RooShootOhh wrote:
Legs Man wrote:There is no way that a league director would sanction me to even stand for election.

The implementation of a business savvy CEO is the best option moving forward which then takes the onus away from the directors and a lot of criticism is deflected.
There could be savings made by simply having a centrally located office for the CEO and 2 other employees with the HFL meetings being held on a rotational basis at HFL clubs.
This would mean that a headquarters as such is not required and the expense that goes with it.
This also gets the board closer to each club and provides a greater alliance and understanding between all parties.
No remuneration is paid to directors as this is a voluntary position e.g no payments for ground inspections, running the footy budget etc etc,

Our competition now generates the income to be run as a business and should be treated this way which would also mean the constitution would become part of the business structure and be formalised in an equitable and legal sense.

My opinion is that 11 apps points should be allocated to all clubs allowing more quality players into hills footy and therefore spreading the remuneration while also diminishing the mercenary footballer's bargaining power.
Each club is then given the same opportunity - with no permits allowed - and there is no argument that anyone is favoured
.


While this appears fair in principle, its not what the APPS is designed for in country footy, there are too many other factors that make it an uneven playing field as it stands, where the points system is in principle designed to even out the competition "make it fair"...

Withouth being too technical about it, the population, demographic, socio-economic factors that play a major part in participation numbers (and therefore by weight of numbers that equates to playing depth) already makes every club different (or uneven for this argument). What the points system is designed to do is try and even out those differences by allowing players from outside the league population to join a particular club to give it a better chance of competing with other clubs.

Given that intention, the only way to apply points to clubs is based on performance. And heres the example:

Club A wins premiership and based on past 3 years performance is allowed 6 point to retain exisitng recruits or replace one that leave. This mark sets the current benchmark for the rest of the competiton.
Club D runs fourth this year and accounting for previous 3 years performance and is allocated 10 points. This indicates (based on performances not opinions) that Club D requires the use of 4 extra points (to be used as they see fit) to take them to a level that should be equal in relative terms to Club A.
Club H finishes eighth and allowing for previous 3 years results is allocated 15 points. This indicates (based on performances not opinions) that Club H requires the use of 9 extra points (to be used as they see fit) to take them to a level that should be equal in relative terms to Club A.

Every club is assessed without prejudice based purely on past performace to indicate what allowance of outside support is required to make them competitive with the competition benchmark.

If every player/import was of the same ability then this would be a pretty accurate formulae to determine points allocation (and is still the best way).
Where clubs get it wrong, is how THEY decide to use their points allocation.


Dont get confused with the ammo's where they give everyone 15 points and let promotion and relegation create the so called even divisions, they prom/releg is hugley relevant over the number of divisions they have, the relegation / promtion issue here is minimal at best as its not even a given to happen every year.

people use the APPS as an excuse as a limitation, but forget thats exactly what its designed to do in country footy, giving everyone 15 points will only see an EPL like results, where the bigs clubs with big populations, good juniors and plenty of $$$ win it every year and everyone else battle just to make the finals!


Understand what you are saying and agree with most of your reasoning RSO.
I don't agree however with the way this has been managed and implemented due to permits being given mid season without the clubs sanctioning this.
My suggestion is simply a thought on how to deflect the arguments that always arise with our system as it stands.
This includes a team entering Central from Country aka Mt Lofty this year and the Country GF win being valued as highly as a Central GF win when it comes to points allocation.
In my view it should be valued as less being the lower league - no disrespect - which hasn't been the case.
Surely the team coming up must start with maximum points and be assessed from there.
Legs Man
Under 16s
 
 
Posts: 497
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2014 12:02 pm
Has liked: 88 times
Been liked: 44 times

Re: HFL Central Division

Postby RooShootOhh » Fri Jan 23, 2015 2:25 pm

Legs Man wrote:
RooShootOhh wrote:
Legs Man wrote:There is no way that a league director would sanction me to even stand for election.

The implementation of a business savvy CEO is the best option moving forward which then takes the onus away from the directors and a lot of criticism is deflected.
There could be savings made by simply having a centrally located office for the CEO and 2 other employees with the HFL meetings being held on a rotational basis at HFL clubs.
This would mean that a headquarters as such is not required and the expense that goes with it.
This also gets the board closer to each club and provides a greater alliance and understanding between all parties.
No remuneration is paid to directors as this is a voluntary position e.g no payments for ground inspections, running the footy budget etc etc,

Our competition now generates the income to be run as a business and should be treated this way which would also mean the constitution would become part of the business structure and be formalised in an equitable and legal sense.

My opinion is that 11 apps points should be allocated to all clubs allowing more quality players into hills footy and therefore spreading the remuneration while also diminishing the mercenary footballer's bargaining power.
Each club is then given the same opportunity - with no permits allowed - and there is no argument that anyone is favoured
.


While this appears fair in principle, its not what the APPS is designed for in country footy, there are too many other factors that make it an uneven playing field as it stands, where the points system is in principle designed to even out the competition "make it fair"...

Withouth being too technical about it, the population, demographic, socio-economic factors that play a major part in participation numbers (and therefore by weight of numbers that equates to playing depth) already makes every club different (or uneven for this argument). What the points system is designed to do is try and even out those differences by allowing players from outside the league population to join a particular club to give it a better chance of competing with other clubs.

Given that intention, the only way to apply points to clubs is based on performance. And heres the example:

Club A wins premiership and based on past 3 years performance is allowed 6 point to retain exisitng recruits or replace one that leave. This mark sets the current benchmark for the rest of the competiton.
Club D runs fourth this year and accounting for previous 3 years performance and is allocated 10 points. This indicates (based on performances not opinions) that Club D requires the use of 4 extra points (to be used as they see fit) to take them to a level that should be equal in relative terms to Club A.
Club H finishes eighth and allowing for previous 3 years results is allocated 15 points. This indicates (based on performances not opinions) that Club H requires the use of 9 extra points (to be used as they see fit) to take them to a level that should be equal in relative terms to Club A.

Every club is assessed without prejudice based purely on past performace to indicate what allowance of outside support is required to make them competitive with the competition benchmark.

If every player/import was of the same ability then this would be a pretty accurate formulae to determine points allocation (and is still the best way).
Where clubs get it wrong, is how THEY decide to use their points allocation.


Dont get confused with the ammo's where they give everyone 15 points and let promotion and relegation create the so called even divisions, they prom/releg is hugley relevant over the number of divisions they have, the relegation / promtion issue here is minimal at best as its not even a given to happen every year.

people use the APPS as an excuse as a limitation, but forget thats exactly what its designed to do in country footy, giving everyone 15 points will only see an EPL like results, where the bigs clubs with big populations, good juniors and plenty of $$$ win it every year and everyone else battle just to make the finals!


Understand what you are saying and agree with most of your reasoning RSO.
I don't agree however with the way this has been managed and implemented due to permits being given mid season without the clubs sanctioning this.
My suggestion is simply a thought on how to deflect the arguments that always arise with our system as it stands.
This includes a team entering Central from Country aka Mt Lofty this year and the Country GF win being valued as highly as a Central GF win when it comes to points allocation.
In my view it should be valued as less being the lower league - no disrespect - which hasn't been the case.
Surely the team coming up must start with maximum points and be assessed from there.


100% agree, purely the fact the League call it Promotion and relegation clearly indicates the Country division is a lower standard. Hence they should start on the Maximum points allocation (15) to allow them to compete with the benchmark of the higher division.

Permits should ONLY apply to kids potentially 6 months over the senior colts age bracket, where there senior colts team can't regularly field 18 players and that the kid who the permit is used for, does not play seniors on the same day.

ALL country leagues in my eyes should move their senior colts age bracket to 18 in line with higher national competitions (SANFL, TAC Cup etc), if that means they habve to up the junior colts age by 6 months as well so the gap between the younest and oldest senior colt is too big then so be it. 2 reasons for this are simple, its inline with the major national junio competitions and secondly, its surprising the number of kids who are 17 but are a few months too old for senior colts, just disappear from footy, that extra year in the system as they leave school, get a job etc whilst STILL playing footy will keep a few extras in the game.
RooShootOhh
Under 16s
 
Posts: 439
Joined: Fri Apr 27, 2012 10:35 am
Has liked: 2 times
Been liked: 40 times
Grassroots Team: Waikerie

Re: HFL Central Division

Postby Legs Man » Fri Jan 23, 2015 6:39 pm

Spot on RSO!
TAC cup and Maccas Cup are under 18 and we should be too.
Flexibility in junior grades is definitely appropriate and will assist lots of clubs that find numbers hard to get.
Reckon if a club can field multiple junior sides in given grades though they should then be ineligible for permit consideration.
This may be in the form of a permit cap depending on number of juniors actually playing in a given year for a club.
Certainly debatable though.
Legs Man
Under 16s
 
 
Posts: 497
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2014 12:02 pm
Has liked: 88 times
Been liked: 44 times

PreviousNext

Board index   Football  Other Footy Leagues  Country Footy

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests

Around the place

Competitions   SANFL Official Site | Country Footy SA | Southern Football League | VFL Footy
Club Forums   Snouts Louts | The Roost | Redlegs Forum |