Down the Hill wrote:Courtney Fish wrote:Down the Hill wrote:
Last I checked, Brighton is considered a Southern Suburb and quite entitled to be in a league called the Southern Football League. I know we bag the SFL admin at times but the league can boast the best Junior set up going around, at least for the clubs flush with juniors.
I know you are flushed with juniors and a few others are, but really the best junior set up is a bit rich. Letting some clubs have 3 sides in one grade and others struggle for numbers is a joke. Will the SFL be happy in a few years when the whole junior comp is between 5 or six clubs with multiple sides that whinge about travelling to 2 different grounds to play. I thought a good set up would have been all clubs have one side each and they all play at the one ground although the 18's would be hard when they start working, chase girls etc. There are 3 sides short in Saturdays 16's and 14's and 5 extra in these grades on Sundays. With the bottom team in each Sunday comp having 1 win between them, will these guys stay around being flogged each week while clubmates are winning.There are only so many kids in the southern area. Maybe some kind of cap on numbers would lead to an even comp. I am sure writing the programme for juniors would be a nightmare.
Point taken CF but Vics01 and Shoe Boy are also correct. With SANFL not having the profile these days, you ask some of these kids who they support outsdie the AFL and they will say Brighton, Morphett Vale etc. Whether they get a game or not, they will still follow their club and will not be interested in playing elsewhere. So as a club we have to do our best to give them a game and that is why we strive for the extra teams rather than lose the kid to hanging around the streets and becoming a nuisance to society. Your comments about the Sunday juniors is wrong, Other than MV in the Under 14's and the dominance of Brighton in the Under 16, most of these games have been very competitive. Have a close look at the ladders and percentage to see just how even many of the teams are. I would say 80% of these lads would not play elsewhere in the SFL if these clubs were not allowed the option of extra teams.
The reality is that the demographic of the South has changed alot in the last 15 years and several clubs have lost schools and kids from their areas. Should the people from some of the clubs struggling with attracting players consider joining forces and forming a new club at Woodcroft for example. This is a massive suburb these days with a big school in Woodcroft Coll. with all the kids playing at Reynella or MV. If there was a Woodcroft FC then maybe the next generation may be keen to play for them and even out the distribution of juniors.
Shoe Boy, I'll gladly have a Woodstock with you next time our teams meet.
The main problem for the teams struggling to get there 14s and 16s up and running again, is that they can get 12 to 15 players together who really want to play for them, and while trying to get the extra numbers required to fill the team, these players lose a bit of interest and generally end up at the clubs with a lot more numbers and end up playing for them.
What the solution is i dont know, but im sure that all teams want to play at the same oval with there juniors and seniors on the same day, so surely the league could find a way to step in and make this happen.
