SANFL Junior codes

[gadj1976]

Anyone on here with links to the juniors of Tea Tree Gully, Edwardstown, Glenunga or Lockleys?
Interested in an explanation on the re-grading of the U17.5 Girls competition. TTG were undefeated in 4 games in the Div 3 comp, yet got relegated to Div 4. Edwardstown were 2nd in Div 3, but got promoted to Div 2. Lockleys were bottom of Div 4 but got promoted to Div 3. Glenunga had the same record as Edwardstown in Div 3 but were unchanged.

I'm not involved in those clubs but my daughter is in another 17.5 girls division & team.

Div 4 is/was the hybrid U16 merged with U17.5 comp for those clubs that could only get a 16's or couldn't manage to get a full side in either. There was going to be a standalone U16 comp but with only 9 teams it was decided to put them into a Div 4 comp where they could play each other in U17.5's and allow some of the top end age to fill in for them or top their squads up.

So some of those U16s teams would have been ex Div 1 under 15's.

Therefore, Div3 could be a lower standard than Div4.

Mind you, I can't follow the TTG logic at all. Lockleys almost makes sense, because they've been moved to the 'weakest grade' of U17.5's.

Makes sense huh?

[MoP]

We got this in U12's this season - last year Eliz beat us by 10 goals in U11.. this year they got graded to the bottom U12 div.

This year:
Rd 1 - 90 to 0
Rd 2 - 99 to 0
Rd 3 - 94 to 1
Rd 4 - 123 to 0

Re-graded from D5 to D4

Rd 5 - 83 to 3
Rd 6 - 90 to 0

How they started in the bottom grade to begin with is beyond me.. but they're taking the piss.

It's a farce. A Club should have to prove they've lost players to be dropped down a division in the following year. Who thinks it's good (for either team) with a 90 - 0 score line? Why don't SANFL Juniors at least pretend they have an interest in the integrity of the competition? It's a problem when the parents/Clubs are more interested in winning a low grade Premiership than actually trying to develop/improve their kids' skills.

[gadj1976]

We got this in U12's this season - last year Eliz beat us by 10 goals in U11.. this year they got graded to the bottom U12 div.

This year:
Rd 1 - 90 to 0
Rd 2 - 99 to 0
Rd 3 - 94 to 1
Rd 4 - 123 to 0

Re-graded from D5 to D4

Rd 5 - 83 to 3
Rd 6 - 90 to 0

How they started in the bottom grade to begin with is beyond me.. but they're taking the piss.

It's a farce. A Club should have to prove they've lost players to be dropped down a division in the following year. Who thinks it's good (for either team) with a 90 - 0 score line? Why don't SANFL Juniors at least pretend they have an interest in the integrity of the competition? It's a problem when the parents/Clubs are more interested in winning a low grade Premiership than actually trying to develop/improve their kids' skills.

The ability to re-re-grade isn't palatable for the SANFL. I think it should be considered for exceptional teams but the rules state you can only be upgraded one grade.

[MoP]

Anyone on here with links to the juniors of Tea Tree Gully, Edwardstown, Glenunga or Lockleys?
Interested in an explanation on the re-grading of the U17.5 Girls competition. TTG were undefeated in 4 games in the Div 3 comp, yet got relegated to Div 4. Edwardstown were 2nd in Div 3, but got promoted to Div 2. Lockleys were bottom of Div 4 but got promoted to Div 3. Glenunga had the same record as Edwardstown in Div 3 but were unchanged.

I'm not involved in those clubs but my daughter is in another 17.5 girls division & team.

Div 4 is/was the hybrid U16 merged with U17.5 comp for those clubs that could only get a 16's or couldn't manage to get a full side in either. There was going to be a standalone U16 comp but with only 9 teams it was decided to put them into a Div 4 comp where they could play each other in U17.5's and allow some of the top end age to fill in for them or top their squads up.

So some of those U16s teams would have been ex Div 1 under 15's.

Therefore, Div3 could be a lower standard than Div4.

Mind you, I can't follow the TTG logic at all. Lockleys almost makes sense, because they've been moved to the 'weakest grade' of U17.5's.

Makes sense huh?

I know they were spruiking the age-thing about the Div 4 comp, but I looked at Lockleys' team that played against Glenunga last weekend. 14 of their players were still eligible to play U15's this season, whilst 2 others had never played before. Word is, an SANFL Jr rep attended the game and thought Lockleys were competitive - the score was 15.15 to 0.1!

I'm on the same thinking as you - the Div 3 comp is considered the weakest. But, given the moves of TTG and Edwardstown, they must think that Div 4 is stronger than Div 2, too!

[The Bedge]

We got this in U12's this season - last year Eliz beat us by 10 goals in U11.. this year they got graded to the bottom U12 div.

This year:
Rd 1 - 90 to 0
Rd 2 - 99 to 0
Rd 3 - 94 to 1
Rd 4 - 123 to 0

Re-graded from D5 to D4

Rd 5 - 83 to 3
Rd 6 - 90 to 0

How they started in the bottom grade to begin with is beyond me.. but they're taking the piss.

Round 7 - 103 to 7

[Dutchy]

It wouldn't be an easy job to make Divisions even, but from my experience they do a pretty good job overall, with so many teams and grades (along with some clubs focusing on winning - not development) Im sure there are many more good outcomes than poor ones.

From someone who has come from a "country" league, but have now seen my lads go thru 4 seasons of SANFLJ I know playing in this comp has developed my lads significantly quicker knowing you have a competitive game every week, there is no going thru the motions like some games in the regional comps, just have a look at these results from Saturday if you have any doubts - https://www.playhq.com/afl/org/southern ... 966dbaf/R8

[gadj1976]

Anyone on here with links to the juniors of Tea Tree Gully, Edwardstown, Glenunga or Lockleys?
Interested in an explanation on the re-grading of the U17.5 Girls competition. TTG were undefeated in 4 games in the Div 3 comp, yet got relegated to Div 4. Edwardstown were 2nd in Div 3, but got promoted to Div 2. Lockleys were bottom of Div 4 but got promoted to Div 3. Glenunga had the same record as Edwardstown in Div 3 but were unchanged.

I'm not involved in those clubs but my daughter is in another 17.5 girls division & team.

Div 4 is/was the hybrid U16 merged with U17.5 comp for those clubs that could only get a 16's or couldn't manage to get a full side in either. There was going to be a standalone U16 comp but with only 9 teams it was decided to put them into a Div 4 comp where they could play each other in U17.5's and allow some of the top end age to fill in for them or top their squads up.

So some of those U16s teams would have been ex Div 1 under 15's.

Therefore, Div3 could be a lower standard than Div4.

Mind you, I can't follow the TTG logic at all. Lockleys almost makes sense, because they've been moved to the 'weakest grade' of U17.5's.

Makes sense huh?

I know they were spruiking the age-thing about the Div 4 comp, but I looked at Lockleys' team that played against Glenunga last weekend. 14 of their players were still eligible to play U15's this season, whilst 2 others had never played before. Word is, an SANFL Jr rep attended the game and thought Lockleys were competitive - the score was 15.15 to 0.1!

I'm on the same thinking as you - the Div 3 comp is considered the weakest. But, given the moves of TTG and Edwardstown, they must think that Div 4 is stronger than Div 2, too!

Lockleys belted again. Wow. The SANFL should allow a permit for those kids to play 15's so they get a decent game. Otherwise they'll likely be lost to footy forever. No offence to Lockleys who I know will do everything in their power to keep them playing of course, I just understand it can be difficult to retain them at that age.

[MoP]

Anyone on here with links to the juniors of Tea Tree Gully, Edwardstown, Glenunga or Lockleys?
Interested in an explanation on the re-grading of the U17.5 Girls competition. TTG were undefeated in 4 games in the Div 3 comp, yet got relegated to Div 4. Edwardstown were 2nd in Div 3, but got promoted to Div 2. Lockleys were bottom of Div 4 but got promoted to Div 3. Glenunga had the same record as Edwardstown in Div 3 but were unchanged.

I'm not involved in those clubs but my daughter is in another 17.5 girls division & team.

Div 4 is/was the hybrid U16 merged with U17.5 comp for those clubs that could only get a 16's or couldn't manage to get a full side in either. There was going to be a standalone U16 comp but with only 9 teams it was decided to put them into a Div 4 comp where they could play each other in U17.5's and allow some of the top end age to fill in for them or top their squads up.

So some of those U16s teams would have been ex Div 1 under 15's.

Therefore, Div3 could be a lower standard than Div4.

Mind you, I can't follow the TTG logic at all. Lockleys almost makes sense, because they've been moved to the 'weakest grade' of U17.5's.

Makes sense huh?

I know they were spruiking the age-thing about the Div 4 comp, but I looked at Lockleys' team that played against Glenunga last weekend. 14 of their players were still eligible to play U15's this season, whilst 2 others had never played before. Word is, an SANFL Jr rep attended the game and thought Lockleys were competitive - the score was 15.15 to 0.1!

I'm on the same thinking as you - the Div 3 comp is considered the weakest. But, given the moves of TTG and Edwardstown, they must think that Div 4 is stronger than Div 2, too!

Lockleys belted again. Wow. The SANFL should allow a permit for those kids to play 15's so they get a decent game. Otherwise they'll likely be lost to footy forever. No offence to Lockleys who I know will do everything in their power to keep them playing of course, I just understand it can be difficult to retain them at that age.

Yes, their score was 75-1. Probably another 'competitive' game, though.

Apparently Glenunga asked to be moved to Div 2 or Div 4, but that request was declined.

[gadj1976]

Yes, their score was 75-1. Probably another 'competitive' game, though.

Apparently Glenunga asked to be moved to Div 2 or Div 4, but that request was declined.

Time to think outside the square especially with the girls competitions.

[The Bedge]

We got this in U12's this season - last year Eliz beat us by 10 goals in U11.. this year they got graded to the bottom U12 div.

This year:
Rd 1 - 90 to 0
Rd 2 - 99 to 0
Rd 3 - 94 to 1
Rd 4 - 123 to 0

Re-graded from D5 to D4

Rd 5 - 83 to 3
Rd 6 - 90 to 0

How they started in the bottom grade to begin with is beyond me.. but they're taking the piss.

Round 7 - 103 to 7

Round 8 - 85 to 0

[MoP]

We got this in U12's this season - last year Eliz beat us by 10 goals in U11.. this year they got graded to the bottom U12 div.

This year:
Rd 1 - 90 to 0
Rd 2 - 99 to 0
Rd 3 - 94 to 1
Rd 4 - 123 to 0

Re-graded from D5 to D4

Rd 5 - 83 to 3
Rd 6 - 90 to 0

How they started in the bottom grade to begin with is beyond me.. but they're taking the piss.

Round 7 - 103 to 7

Round 8 - 85 to 0

U17.5 Girls Div 3
Glenunga 166 def PHOS 6

Do SANFL Juniors look at, or care, about these scores?

[The Bedge]

Holy crap! How is that even possible!?

[MoP]

Holy crap! How is that even possible!?

Good question. Be good to get some clarity from Danielle Robran, or someone else from SANFL Juniors.

Can't imagine that game was much fun for the Glenunga or PHOS girls.

[Bluedemon]

Holy crap! How is that even possible!?

Good question. Be good to get some clarity from Danielle Robran, or someone else from SANFL Juniors.

Can't imagine that game was much fun for the Glenunga or PHOS girls.

not good for both teams

[gadj1976]

U17.5 Girls Div 3
Glenunga 166 def PHOS 6

Do SANFL Juniors look at, or care, about these scores?

I can confirm they do, but are hamstrung by the rules and regs which state that teams can't be regraded more than 1 division. Also, a team that has been regraded, can't be re-regraded after playing a game in that competition. A team that hasn't been regraded wont generally be regraded after Rd4.

I don't agree with it, because I've said numerous times to them that its ridiculous.

[The Bedge]

I can confirm they do, but are hamstrung by the rules and regs which state that teams can't be regraded more than 1 division. Also, a team that has been regraded, can't be re-regraded after playing a game in that competition.

I don't agree with it, because I've said numerous times to them that its ridiculous.

That's honestly stupid.

[gadj1976]

I can confirm they do, but are hamstrung by the rules and regs which state that teams can't be regraded more than 1 division. Also, a team that has been regraded, can't be re-regraded after playing a game in that competition. A team that hasn't been regraded wont generally be regraded after Rd4.

I don't agree with it, because I've said numerous times to them that its ridiculous.

That's honestly stupid.

I don't "know" but I do believe Glenunga got a few girls back into their D1 side from SANFLW clubs, hence strengthening their D3 side. This makes it even more difficult to manage.

I'll be happy to be corrected by someone at Glenunga though.

[The Bedge]

I understand that "re-grading" can become a logistical nightmare sorting fixtures and grounds, but surely it's better to have flexibility and an even competition rather than some clubs being way out of their depth, or clubs belting sides each week.

I am absolutely astounded over the past two years how many sides seem to find a way to magically come good after re-grading is completed, or find themselves in a grade that is well beneath their capabilities.

[gadj1976]

I understand that "re-grading" can become a logistical nightmare sorting fixtures and grounds, but surely it's better to have flexibility and an even competition rather than some clubs being way out of their depth, or clubs belting sides each week.

I am absolutely astounded over the past two years how many sides seem to find a way to magically come good after re-grading is completed, or find themselves in a grade that is well beneath their capabilities.

How far do you go though? Do you keep regrading all season? It would be a nightmare for competition organisers to do fixtures post say Rd7 or 8.

Regrading compromises the competition anyway, so efforts to get it right up front would be better. I hope most clubs wouldn't 'come good' after Rd4 but I do also know players do have other commitments during those first 4 weeks which makes grading and regrading even more difficult.

[The Bedge]

I think I'd prefer to not have a set round when they re-grade - don't say after Rd 4 we will do it and it's locked in. Seems like too many clubs/teams are aware of this and find ways to manipulate.

If a division looks even, leave it.. if there is a clear gap, fix it.. whether it be Rd 4, Rd 7 or whatever.