by MoP » Tue Mar 21, 2023 12:13 pm
by The Angry Bull » Tue Mar 21, 2023 4:19 pm
Eagles2014 wrote:Jim05 wrote:Absolutely Redbacks players should be directed to move. The best players need to be playing Div 1Minimum Chips wrote:Wonder how long before the raids from Div 1 clubs start happening on the Div 2 clubs? In particular Sturt - especially given their strong juniors? Interesting if the current Redbacks listed players get directed by SACA to play Div 1 next season?
SACA were pretty clear at start of season they don't want players moving. Said it will not impact their selection for the Redbacks. But in reality, you need to be playing Div 1 - that's the whole point of this decision isn't it? Make them play better standard cricket every week. You don't want the batters facing bowlers from Southerns or Prospect every week!
I know if WT went down, the likes of Bailey Capel, etc were going elsewhere, they have to for the sake of their careers, only have limited years to make it so can't afford to waste any.
Will be interesting how they deal with permits for player transfers, think it will not be as straight forward as previously, but would it be restraint of trade if they get knocked back?
by Eagles2014 » Tue Mar 21, 2023 4:58 pm
by Aerie » Tue Mar 21, 2023 5:23 pm
Eagles2014 wrote:Angry Bull, I totally agree with everything you said above. That was exactly what all the Clubs were told by the SACA board people who came around at the start of the season with their meetings. Players will not be disadvantaged with selection if playing Div 2. The big boss of SACA Charlie Hodgson is from UK and behind this proposal and was adamant they don’t want players moving Clubs. Can’t see Thomas Kelly or Matthias leaving as they are Sturt juniors from way back. Can see any players moving from interstate to try and make it here though going to a club in Div 1.
by Eagles2014 » Tue Mar 21, 2023 8:13 pm
by heater31 » Tue Mar 21, 2023 8:34 pm
Didn't Kensington have all grades still alive in finals? How is this possible?Eagles2014 wrote:Heard rumour Kensington D Grade been disqualified for playing someone in Semi who had not played that grade all season. Port lodged a protest and was upheld. How can such a successful and well run club make such an error
Sturt now play Port, wonder if venues will all be adjusted and they get the Price Memorial Oval and 16 Whites find a new oval?
by Eagles2014 » Tue Mar 21, 2023 8:47 pm
heater31 wrote:Didn't Kensington have all grades still alive in finals? How is this possible?Eagles2014 wrote:Heard rumour Kensington D Grade been disqualified for playing someone in Semi who had not played that grade all season. Port lodged a protest and was upheld. How can such a successful and well run club make such an error
Sturt now play Port, wonder if venues will all be adjusted and they get the Price Memorial Oval and 16 Whites find a new oval?
by heater31 » Tue Mar 21, 2023 8:57 pm
That's a bit different!Eagles2014 wrote:heater31 wrote:Didn't Kensington have all grades still alive in finals? How is this possible?Eagles2014 wrote:Heard rumour Kensington D Grade been disqualified for playing someone in Semi who had not played that grade all season. Port lodged a protest and was upheld. How can such a successful and well run club make such an error
Sturt now play Port, wonder if venues will all be adjusted and they get the Price Memorial Oval and 16 Whites find a new oval?
Looked up the team and they played a Nathan Woods, batted three and made 50. Played all year in their ATCA LO1 team and made a century and a 76 during the season.
Why play him? They would have left out players as such a strong club. Surely they realised that doesn’t pass the Pub test? Sympathy for the players who played all year, but as been mentioned on the other cricket forums where similar things happened, you have to check these dubious decisions out BEFORE the game
by Eagles2014 » Tue Mar 21, 2023 9:04 pm
heater31 wrote:That's a bit different!Eagles2014 wrote:heater31 wrote:Didn't Kensington have all grades still alive in finals? How is this possible?Eagles2014 wrote:Heard rumour Kensington D Grade been disqualified for playing someone in Semi who had not played that grade all season. Port lodged a protest and was upheld. How can such a successful and well run club make such an error
Sturt now play Port, wonder if venues will all be adjusted and they get the Price Memorial Oval and 16 Whites find a new oval?
Looked up the team and they played a Nathan Woods, batted three and made 50. Played all year in their ATCA LO1 team and made a century and a 76 during the season.
Why play him? They would have left out players as such a strong club. Surely they realised that doesn’t pass the Pub test? Sympathy for the players who played all year, but as been mentioned on the other cricket forums where similar things happened, you have to check these dubious decisions out BEFORE the game
by Corona Man » Wed Mar 22, 2023 7:34 am
by Eagles2014 » Wed Mar 22, 2023 7:43 am
Corona Man wrote:I was at the game. Woods had played in lower grades this year. Surely they can bring a player up?
A heap of kids out with school cricket commitments.
Eags. Lad missed most of season with injury. Played 4 or 5 games. Is playing in the D’s assuming they are still in.
Even if they take Woodsy 50 off the Kensy total, the browns still win. Bowled Port out for 60!
I've also just heard they got a permit for him to play in the Semi.
by Corona Man » Wed Mar 22, 2023 7:45 am
Eagles2014 wrote:Corona Man wrote:I was at the game. Woods had played in lower grades this year. Surely they can bring a player up?
A heap of kids out with school cricket commitments.
Eags. Lad missed most of season with injury. Played 4 or 5 games. Is playing in the D’s assuming they are still in.
Even if they take Woodsy 50 off the Kensy total, the browns still win. Bowled Port out for 60!
I've also just heard they got a permit for him to play in the Semi.
Will be interesting what happens then - Port trained last night and believe they are playing in the Grand Final on the weekend
by heater31 » Wed Mar 22, 2023 8:06 am
by Corona Man » Wed Mar 22, 2023 8:09 am
DOC wrote:Actually he beat them. They only made 57.
by Eagles2014 » Wed Mar 22, 2023 8:24 am
heater31 wrote:Still listed as Kensington v Sturt for the GF...
by Insider_Trading » Wed Mar 22, 2023 5:26 pm
by Armchair expert » Wed Mar 22, 2023 6:30 pm
Insider_Trading wrote:Final decision to be made tomorrow afternoon apparently regarding 4th grade gf
Nathan Woods isn't the player in question either from what ihave heard.
Possibly a play named Eckert?
Woods got a permit no worries by all reports.
Kensington apparently applied for a permit for Eckert, and the permit came through. The sticking point is the SACA permit committee didn't agree to the permit, some pen pusher at SACA offices just accepted it without going to committee. Which is apparently not in the SACA BY-Laws.
Farcical scenes if you ask me.
by Tony Clifton » Wed Mar 22, 2023 8:21 pm
heater31 wrote:Still listed as Kensington v Sturt for the GF...
by Corona Man » Thu Mar 23, 2023 12:06 pm
Armchair expert wrote:Insider_Trading wrote:Final decision to be made tomorrow afternoon apparently regarding 4th grade gf
Nathan Woods isn't the player in question either from what ihave heard.
Possibly a play named Eckert?
Woods got a permit no worries by all reports.
Kensington apparently applied for a permit for Eckert, and the permit came through. The sticking point is the SACA permit committee didn't agree to the permit, some pen pusher at SACA offices just accepted it without going to committee. Which is apparently not in the SACA BY-Laws.
Farcical scenes if you ask me.
H.Eckert batted 11 made a duck and didn't bowl.
Competitions SANFL Official Site | Country Footy SA | Southern Football League | VFL Footy
Club Forums Snouts Louts | The Roost | Redlegs Forum |