Valo 4 Redbacks 0
Printable View
Valo 4 Redbacks 0
Valo 3 redbacks 0.
Redbacks done really good and if not for some bad referee calls could've been a draw.
Redbacks did OK Elude, it's a stretch to blame the ref, Valo tore them apart and if old mate scored a couple of the 4 one v ones with the keeper in the first half it could have easily been 5-0.
What about the state of this competition. Completely a 2 horse race. Federation should promote both teams as its embarrassing. To be half way through a season and top 2 teams so far ahead is a joke to newcastle football....
What other country or league in the world can you lose 1 game and draw 1 game all season and not be the winner which is a clear possibility for both valentine and Maitland.
Agree with you. Have a look at the fixtures. Maitland do not need anymore help getting promotion to NPL. Northern cut number of teams a few years back now & may have had something to do with the quality of the bottom teams.Quote:
Originally Posted by Newy
Say you promote 2 teams to NBN, then the next year what if Belswans spend money or make a push for the top spot, and go through undefeated. When do we draw the line? Perhaps we should be focussing on relegating the weaker teams from NEWFM and promoting teams from below.
People seem to be under the impression Northern NEVER offer to promote a club to NewFM? It is up to the clubs to make an application to be considered for the competition, as it stands only 2 clubs have anything more than a year by year position in NewFM (the exceptions are Maitland and Valentine who already hold NPL licences).Quote:
Originally Posted by Bremsstrahlung
If your in a club that's in ZPL then get involved on your committee, get involved and read the critieria, get in and help bring the club up to meet the min standards and get them to apply. It is no good sitting on the sideline bemoaning "lack of promotion" if those clubs themselves are not being proactive in getting promoted.
I'm under the impression that only Valo and maitland hold the licenses for the criteria needed for the NPL making it irrelevant even if belswans won the comp. At this stage there are 2 competent teams especially compared to the rest of this league. And both teams qualify off the pitch aswell. Just seems common sense to meQuote:
Originally Posted by Bremsstrahlung
Redbacks 2- wesy 0
I was under the impression every club but Singleton had said licences?Quote:
Originally Posted by Newy
Singleton and Thornton i thoughtQuote:
Originally Posted by pv4
Yeah it's only Singleton and Thornton without NPL licences but only 2 club are qualified to promote being Valo & Maitland.Quote:
Originally Posted by pv4
Thats the word I have been told anyway.
It wasn't long a go that the Scottish premier league was a 2 horse race as was Spain not long a go.Quote:
Originally Posted by Newy
What's with all the id people bagging this comp. go back to ya id thread and get this one back to talking about results and other news.
So the game was off at Singleton at the weekend , does anbody live up in Singleton that can confirm just hpw bad the weather was up there please
Not that I am questioning the decision (perhaps just a little) but not sure I can remember games getting called off up there before.
I know we should not listen to rumours as most are nothing near true but we were told that Singleton had a function that lots of the players attended on Friday evening and shock game of next day.
Also very close game at Belswans I see with them and Maitland . The Newcastle Herald said today late winner for Maitland.
I have no idea about what the field there was like..Quote:
Originally Posted by NewFM 2014
BUT, my job entails that I measure the level/flow of rivers out around there a lot, and their levels had started rising Fri morning and peaking at about 11pm that night..
So I would say we can assume there was a bit of rain..
Alternatively we could just wait for a Singo bloke to confirm it.. :lol:..
I heard a rumour that singleton made it rain on the day of the match:) below is a link to the BOM site for singo 4.6 mm that dayQuote:
Originally Posted by NewFM 2014
http://www.bom.gov.au/jsp/ncc/cdio/w...stn_num=061397
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zico
Have confirmed with person who attended the NewFM CLub meeting prior to the season launch.
Singleton and Thornton did not apply for NPL Licences
West Wallsend received one but handed it back in voluntarily prior to the meeting as they did not field the required youth sides.
Cessnock received theirs but had youth teams in the wrong ages and Northern advised they would take under consideration but likely would not qualify to retain Licence.
Belswans advised they would not field the youth sides due to a potential clash with Swansea Juniors academy and thus forfeited their NPL Licences on that basis.
Maitland and Valetine both retain NPL Licences
Toronto also did not field youth sides and were thus not in a position to retain the NPL Licence.
All clubs except Thornton and Singo applied and received their NPL Licence initially, but a condition of the NPL Licence was the youth sides playing under the same entity as the senior side so when a majority of the remaining clubs came to March were to be technical in breach of the Licence and voided it. Those clubs that did not meet that criteria no longer hold NPL Licences.
During initial discussion the reason the youth teams are such a mandatory condition is not so clubs have teams to automatically insert into the NPL Youth comps, clubs can field sides in A D or J grades for all Northern care, but to satisfy the club is able to manage and organise youth sides on top of their senior commitments.
Personally, I think most clubs will forgo bothering about the NPL Licence unless they believe they can challenge for the Premiership that next season (you must hold the NPL Licence prior to Round 1). Aside from that, clubs do not need the headaches of competing with local junior clubs for players/coaches to fulfil a requirement they will likely not use.
Agree..... in the past seasons in the NPL comp there are only two teams with a realistic shot. That being Magic and someone else! I think that the NEWFM comp is becoming way more competitive, with not a lot of difference between 3rd and 8th placed teams. A few quality players in the bottom 6 teams would sure up the closeness of the comp even further.Quote:
Originally Posted by punter
As for promoting 2 teams... it won't happen. It seems every year that there are two teams in battle for promotion and supporters from one team (maybe it's insecurity???) gets on here banging on about promoting 2 teams. Well everyone knew the rules at the start of the season - get over it will ya's!
Yep... great game to watch. Maitland scored winner in the last minute of normal time. Ripped the guts out of the "Regal Swans". At least I won't call that Juddy bloke a prick this week..... he didn't bother the score board.Quote:
Originally Posted by NewFM 2014
True that one!Quote:
Originally Posted by curious_fan
I can see the point they are trying to make though, from the outside looking in it appears that there are only 2 clubs out of the 8 who are honestly fair dinkum about wanting promotion so if the other 6 clubs couldnt be bothered or think it's to difficult then promote the 2 clubs and dissolve NEWFM to ID's.Quote:
Originally Posted by sancho_theswan
It's both a shame and a disgrace that in a promotion/relegation competition, we have 6 out of the 8 clubs in the 2nd best league that are unable to be promoted solely due to lack of ambition.
Either bring ambitious club into the NEWFM and make it true promotion/relegation or be done with the comp, promote both Maitland and Valo and have the same situation as the local league do with applications ever few seasons and clubs will be judged on merit.
Who are the ambitious clubs currently below NEWFM who would meet the requirements, and have the ambition, to get promoted to nbn?
I think cooks hill and Swansea both have junior bases behind them to push there cause but it's up to the clubs to decide where there headingQuote:
Originally Posted by pv4
To be honest, I know very little of the ZPL but if the fed threw it out there they may find a few clubs that are and it may also jog these lazy 6 NEWFM clubs into gear.Quote:
Originally Posted by pv4
Pretty sure Wallsend would want a crack.Quote:
Originally Posted by pv4
Thats a big statement when you would have little information about the plans of most (if any) of those clubs your referring too.Quote:
Originally Posted by Zico
Belswans - I'd suggest you look at the improvements to the facilities over the last five years, the soon to be improvement via a grant to the watering system to come over this off season, the work that's gone into sponsorship and players recently seasons. The fact that the are not willing to enter into a fight over the local juniors with the Swansea Academy I think speaks worlds for the ambition the club does have..... to foster a good relationship with local juniors and provide the best system available to them. And I am sure it is something they will again try to negotiate a solution to with Northern at next months meeting.
West Wallsend - gone from nearly folding in Feb to a situation where they are negotiating with a new experienced first grade coach for 2015, by projections will be entirely debt free by seasons end and have sufficient funds in the bank to commence 2015 in a normal fashion, have increased their sponsors despite the early gloom, have successfully negotiated with Northern to become the new W-League training base, have reestablished a working relationship with the local juniors, are in the process of putting together a ten year capital plan for submission to LMCC for improvements, judging by recent rounds have the current best playing surface in the competition and a dedicated group of players within the club again.
Singleton - have dedicated quite substantial financial resources to improving the on field and coaching performances this season.
Cessnock have already a fantastic relationship with their juniors, have junior sides playing under the senior banner and playing on their field already just in the wrong age groups at this stage. Have a coach with a youth focus in his plans for the coming seasons and are highly competitive in that youth age group. Have probably the best covered seating areas in the competition, have dramatically improved the paying surface over the last 3 years and have a solid volunteer base.
Toronto and Thornton I wont comment on because I now very little about their situations aside from general impressions. You may not look at long term planning, sound financial planning or youth development as very ambitious but I will take those as means of ensuring strong solid clubs over the long term than short held glory like each of them have been put through in years gone past at attempts for short term glory.
Why is it wrong for clubs to be looking at NBN and saying, to be competitive we have to improve X,Y and Z over the coming 3, 5,7 years and doing it properly?
Hopefully one of their biggest hurdles might be settled once the new licensee takes control of the venue and that is having a long term lease, it was one of the points that went against them when originally demoted. At that time they had no lease so potentially could have been without a ground at any time.Quote:
Originally Posted by Premy
With the new licensee talking about making the venue more sport and community friendly hopefully longer term plans can begin to be put in place in that regard.
It is "thrown out" as you put it EVERY YEAR, clubs can seek to apply to Northern to be considered at any stage of a current season for the next season. If no clubs are proactive enough to raise the possibility with the current NewFM clubs to discuss at their competition meetings or enter into discussions with Northern about applying why would Northern assume anyone is interested?Quote:
Originally Posted by Zico
Cessnocks playing surface has always been top notch imo.
It's no better now than it was 10 years ago - which is still great.
Are you serious???? This is laughableQuote:
Originally Posted by curious_fan
You must be taking the piss if you feel Belswans and Singleton are up to the level required.Quote:
Originally Posted by curious_fan
Westy and Cessnock could if they had more ambition which is clearly what I posted. :banghead:
I'll just add to the praise of Belswans giving up the NPL license because it clashes with the juniors. I'm not invovled with them, but it is good to see Belswans acting in the best interest of not just themselves, but their junior club as well. It's something Thornton Seniors and Thornton Juniors should follow.
Bel-Swans do have a juniors but there separate from the seniors.Quote:
Originally Posted by Thomas477
the way I read it is they don't want to upset "Swansea" juniors, Bel-Swans and Swansea are completely separate.
****, they do to. Either way, it's good to see a senior club not just act in their own interests.Quote:
Originally Posted by Premy
I'm sure if the Thorntons and Torontos of the world had the same "ambition" as say Lambton we wouldn't be having this conversation.
If these clubs had some more "ambition" and I'm sure more quality players would want to play for these clubs.
Spoke to BelSwans secretary. He clarrified a couple of things. BelSwans juniors didn't have the numbers in the grades required to consider approaching. Secondly Swansea FC were approached and agreed to submit teams. Northern requested that these teams would have to play under BelSwans banner as per NPL criteria which was fair enough. So BelSwans opted to withdraw due to a number of issues. Namely not wanting to cause problems with Swansea FC, both clubs realising that there is a lack of quality juniors left in the area after lots leave to all other clubs and "rep" programs. Lastly not real sure where these extra teams are expected to train or play? So there were a number of issues with gaining an NPL licence... I guess. It's not just about laziness, lack of ambition etc.Quote:
Originally Posted by Premy
Thanks for clearing it up Sancho, I had a fair idea of the situation from what I heard on the grapevine.Quote:
Originally Posted by sancho_theswan
As to if it happened where the juniors would play, due to NPL criteria they would have to play at Blacksmiths Oval same as the seniors.
Without this sounding like a Belswans bashing and again I'll say that I'm on the outside looking in but to me if you can't fill the required criteria or have any plans to fill the required criteria then why are you and these other clubs still in the NEWFM? For me a club with this attitiude (and I'm not bagging you as it's very considerate of the junior club you spoke about) should be playing in the ZPL.Quote:
Originally Posted by sancho_theswan
You have given legs to the argument of bringing ambitious clubs who have the required facilities, junior base and strong commitee to be promoted in the place of clubs like your own to be relegated to ZPL or ID's league.
No, I am completely serious. Any club can approach Alan Nisbett to be considered and apply and from past experience Northern will gladly have resources such as Gary Fisher etc work with clubs to look at where they would sit with any regard to the competition criteria.Quote:
Originally Posted by Zico
The next meeting of NewFM is actually early next month when just such topics would be discussed by the current club Presidents and Northern.
Northern do not run these competitions as dictators, both NBN & NewFm (and I am assuming the Herald Womens League) all have Competition Meetings 2/3 times a year. The next one actually has on the Agenda Season 2015 so ZPL clubs would be perfectly timed to be asking Northern and the clubs consider any expansion.