Don't you talk that way about ... dang itQuote:
Originally Posted by Bon
Printable View
Don't you talk that way about ... dang itQuote:
Originally Posted by Bon
what was final scores between kahibah new fm vs azzurri? saw most of reserve grade with azzurri playing a mix of their thirds and rezzies. I bet Moncreif that the blues would get up and i havent heard from him yet so thinking an upset might have occured?
Word on the street is, Morisset are staying in ZL1. Which means no bye for ZL1, which is nice! Not sure how competitive they will be, but at least we don't have a week off!
Where did this word come from?Quote:
Originally Posted by Roundball Enthusiast
We played them yesterday and you couldn’t escape the word that Morisset can’t field a 3rd grade team......
I hope they stay they are a an integral part of the west side of the lake.
Heard there will be a Bye in 3rds ?
Quote:
Originally Posted by ICEBERG10
Surely you jest???? What's the point of having criteria for Zone League...... Plenty of teams in ZL2 could field more competitive sides than Morisset. Surely the onus has to be on the Association after last season to have a quick look at the final standings and before relegating Charlie (who were competitive in lower grades) look at Morisset with both lower teams basically on 0 points and -50 goal difference and make a quick phone call and ask the question 'how are you blokes travelling for numbers?'.Quote:
Originally Posted by oneeye
Now a month out from the season Charlie has jettisoned a team (to comply with said criteria) and Morisset can't field 3 teams. It's a DISGRACE
PS I have no affiliation with Charlie and would much prefer a couple of weekends off then head down the F3 to play 1 competitive match.....
Yeah, I've heard this too..Quote:
Originally Posted by oneeye
This was just confirmed in an email from ZL boss.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bon
so competition rules only apply when they suit? ZL1 requires each club to have 3 teams.
Correct.Quote:
Originally Posted by Charman
3 out of the 4 divisions are becoming a joke now.
Have just read in another thread that Mayfield have pulled out of ZL3, making it a 6 team comp, and looking like Medowie are about to fold out of there too.
There's some kind of drastic changes that need to be made somewhere
Yes, BUT we were told that the experts run it so leave it to them as they know best! Stop flaunting ideas around on how to improve things on social media web sites.Quote:
Originally Posted by MonkeyKplunk
What a shambles NNSWF are. This is a joke and makes a mockery of the whole league system. No matter what happens this year, Morisset has to be relegated if they cannot field all three grades. Totally not fair on the team coming last (most likely Hamilton Azzurri) who has spent a lot of time, money and resources to field 3 full grades and run them for the whole year and end up being relegated. While, Morisset cruised throughout the whole season managing two grades and completely broke the rules of ZL1 but gets to stay up. It's gotta be fair here on the successful run clubs.Quote:
Originally Posted by Charman
Also, having a 5 or 6 team competition in ZL3 is a joke. That's worse than Friday Night All Age F who had 8 teams last year and Saturday All Age O who had 8 teams as well. NNSWF needs to help ZL clubs more and incentivise them more to keep teams out of All Age and in ZL.
Honestly, I think there should be a restriction on how many All Age teams a club can provide. Maybe 2 max? Last year for All Age Saturday clubs they had this many teams; Hamilton Azzurri - 6, Cooks Hill - 5, Shortland - 4, Valentine - 4, Lake Macquarie - 4, South Cardiff - 4, Belmont - 3. Clubs like; Shortland, Valentine, Lake Macquarie, South Cardiff and Belmont has to be pushed to have their best All Age and mediocre All Age team in ZL3. Maybe make it cheaper than playing in the All Age competition for the first year. I dont know? Although, something has to be done or the competitiveness of ZL or the competition itself will crumble in a few years.
Sorry but NNSWF do not run our comps, Russel Henry runs the comp out of Newcastle Football, aided by Macquarie and Hunter Valley.Quote:
Originally Posted by NumeroCuatro
I have for years pushed the barrow on reducing AA and making clubs form Zone teams if they have to many sides.
Hamiltons resurgence is a great example of what can happen, but surely shorty, southy, valo could form sides.
not to sure how to fix the problems, but associations need to limit amount of AA sides and tell clubs once AA to say M grade for example are full, only spots left are zone teams.
or the other way around. you can still treat it like an AA team, don't train, turn up and play, better side plays 1st the other reggies.....simple...
are they still looking for U25 comp or did that get squashed like it should have....
Wow, I didn't know this. And to be a one-man show with his firm talons gripped onto the running of the competition explains everything. What a shame, this could be a really great competition with some really good consistent and competitive clubs. It sucks football in Newcastle is held by a few at the detriment of many :sigh:Quote:
Originally Posted by Jardelsimage
Dont get me wrong, The big Russ has done and will continue to do some good things for the zone comps. Its like all organizations, they sometimes don't listen to the little people, most times because the little people don't band together for the greater good and have selfish thoughts that only benefit there clubs. I stopped going a couple of years back, about the time they brought in unlimited subs in grade football, just one of a few implementations I thought have ruined grade football or was it U23's instead of 3rds(this one was brought in as 3-4 clubs were sick of Eagles, Uni and Cardiff dominating 3rds....and wanted little jonny to win something, didn't change much though......Quote:
Originally Posted by NumeroCuatro
why should clubs like Azzurri or Cooks Hill be limited to fewer All Age teams when they already have zone squads (and New FM)?Quote:
Originally Posted by NumeroCuatro
in what way would it benefit the game if this would move teams to other (arguably poorer run) clubs away from where people live and want to play?
a lot of people, teams and clubs want to play in a less restrictive competition like All Age, or more suited to their lives like your Friday night competitions, rather than going into zone and requiring additional resources, fences, canteens and other stuff that is in the zone rules - not everyone wants to be in a squad of players
easier fix would be to axe the ZL3 competition, move the better teams to ZL2 and the remainders can go to All Age
ZL3 is the entry level for zone league and must be kept. We need to grow the competition and not reduce it. For the last two years the all age competition has taken alot of players out of the lower end of zone leagues. We need to find out why and fix the problem, move more referees into the zone leagues and making less available for all age competitions may help bring back players/clubs.Quote:
Originally Posted by boz-monaut
Shortland and South Cardiff 4 teams each, really?? Come on someone from those clubs. Start a zone league team. Maybe reducing the entry fees in zl3 might help, not sure?? Maybe the clubs need to work together in the lower grades to help get more players into zone leagues. Instead of pushing guys into all age, maybe they could push them towards smaller clubs that need players? A stronger zone league competition is better for all then helping the all age competition grow.
They actually need to make the rules and criteria consistent across all grades. Then there is no issues with depth of squads or moving between grades. It seems crazy to me to have promotion and relegation between grades with different requirements.
Whether that means tweaking third grade, dropping third grade Or just making all levels have a third grade I don’t know. Do you make it more like NL1 and force clubs to have some junior squads for development? Probably wouldn’t work given it seems some NL1 teams are also struggling to fill younger ages.
All Age is All Age. A lot of players have no interest in anything but All Age and it would be a crazy idea to restrict the numbers of All age teams at a club. Nothing wrong with a bunch of mates forming a team and having a kick. The upper All Age convos are actually quiet strong, but I don’t think there is any benefit in forcing them into a ZL set up. If the players wanted that, they would be there already.
Agree on the criteria problems, definitely a problem that needs to be fixed.Quote:
Originally Posted by sammydog
Yes Age is All Age, I think the issues are that there are just to many sides and to many comps across the board, ref issues every week, etc..need to compress it somehow.
A lot of players don't want to organize a grade team, but i bet you if some of the clubs committee's did the organizing they would play,(and yes I know they have a lot on there plate already, over 30 years on such committee's myself) You don't have to change things too much, lower side plays reggies, better side plays 1st's.
Still having a kick, still playing with mates, bonus is you play at the same time each week, the ideas just have to be sold better to the teams, but most of the problems come at committee/club level I believe not wanting to push the barrow and still look at it with a juniors mentality.
Again don't take it the wrong way, I am not saying all committees/clubs are like this also, some basically just don't know there is a zone comp, ones that do don't really understand how it all works and what it would take to make it work.
The constant comments about having 3rd grade across all Zone grades is complete nonsense IMO
About the only thing I'm 100% on board with in terms of organisation of the competitions is the fact that ZL2 & ZL3 are essentially "starters" to a higher grade of competition, and can be a great stepping stone for smaller clubs to show they can compete with the big name/big money clubs on talent. By the time you work your way to being at the top of ZL2 and pushing for promotion you should have had the opportunity to grow and promote the league within your club and Junior grades so you can gain the numbers to field a 3rd grade team in ZL1. This is how the entire ZL competitions are supposed to be structured and how they are meant to be about growing clubs and Junior ranks to provide more opportunities for juniors to compete at a higher level.
The point where we've lost our way as an entire ZL competition over the past 5 or so years is this "we want to field a 3rd grade side so we'll poach players from other clubs and offer them whatever to come across" bullshite.
It ruins some clubs sides, and really highlights those clubs who aren't running their ZL sides from the committee but letting others take over the organisation.
The combined zone committee (yes it's run by a committee of all 3 zones, not Russell himself), needs to start providing more tools and resources to sides within the lower ZL to help them put the right conditions and pathways in place to grow their clubs from youth up, so that these clubs have the strength and numbers to be able to compete in the higher portion of the competitions, and further up if they ever decide to. As our Associations, this is meant to be their job, but sometimes it seems like there is still too much focus on the "power" clubs and pathways within each area.
but what advantages are there to having the ZL3 structure for teams who are happy with All Age?
all that extra time and effort and volunteers for what when you could just make AA/A a stronger competition?
boz did you play grade at allQuote:
Originally Posted by boz-monaut
Id argue that All Age A is already well stronger than ZL3, and most likely ZL2.Quote:
Originally Posted by boz-monaut
You cant force players or teams into Grade Football. If thats not why people are playing, forcing them to do so will just take people out of the sport.
Reduce the rego fees for ZL players. Make it considerably cheaper than All Age and watch em flock back. Enforce club refs to ref all all-age games and save proper refs for ZL.
It should be seen as an entirely different concept for clubs that want something more than an All Age competition.Quote:
Originally Posted by boz-monaut
ZL should always be seen as a pathway for the club to increase their size and operations with a view towards larger competitions like NEWFM etc.
Obviously we all know no one gets into NEWFM these days, but the more clubs we have who have their organisational structure, coaching, skills development together the better off the whole region will be.
I can only speak for my club but playing A/A is more expensive in rego costs then it ever was for us to play zl when we had the senior club up and running and also got a lot more for your money.
From my experience its generally the players that make a push to go from AA to ZL, not the club.
The club can only go in the direction that the players, who are the major stakeholder, want to go.
This is probably a question for a AA player but given there seems so many AA teams I’d like to know why players are choosing this option as opposed to ZL.
I get the feeling that for a lot of players AA seems more appealing as its less of a commitment and takes less time out of the week.
Less/no training, less time on game day, in some cases less pressure. All important things when you take into consideration most of these players all work and have families.
I could be well off the mark.
This.Quote:
Originally Posted by the_butcher
People will chose AA ($200-300 rego) over ZL ($400+) every day of the week.
Swap it round and watch all the ZL teams form up.
Do AA pay refs each week or there clubs pay itQuote:
Originally Posted by Roundball Enthusiast
Each club would be different.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jardelsimage
We build refs into the AA teams rego (as we do with with ZL1). So the players pay it, but the club collects it during registration. This includes two home trials with refs.
AA refs are significantly cheaper than ZL refs, but you also have a bigger chance of not getting a ref on game day.
What are ZL teams giving these players when charging 400 plus for real?Quote:
Originally Posted by Roundball Enthusiast
How do AA teams keep there's so low, it has been a while since I did it but from memory isn't it the same for a club to register a player in either. The extra cost of ZL comes in with registering the club to play and the refs.
I believe at Barnsley we charge the same for both. $350.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jardelsimage
Correct procedure if you want to make life easy for yourself as a club Administrator.Quote:
Originally Posted by sammydog
The daze of players chucking in a 5'er or a 10'er for refs after the game is well and truly over.
Clubs are billed by their Association for refs. Not sure what happens with AA trials though.
We've been paying cash at home and away trials with NewFM...and NPL rates when we've played
Magic, CCB & Olympic last few months. Paying the higher rate of refs fees according to who's playing who.
Killer....
You're actually less likely to get a ref for ZL these days as not enough of them want to deal with the nonsense that comes from Senior players at this levelQuote:
Originally Posted by sammydog
Correct.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bulldogs 1962
The price for an over 18 for Insurance and Assoc fees is the same regardless of where your team registers.
After that it's other inclusions the club puts on
At Muswellbrook, we put on kit fees and Council fees and come out at an even $300.
We dropped it from last season where we were paying an extra $50 for refs, but we've only got refs twice last year and one of those was FFA Cup where we don't pay for them.
I would imagine the $400 + from clubs is to include dress shirts/training shirts/etc...
That has caught us out this season as well.Quote:
Originally Posted by Retro Jet
I guess thats why ours is 350 as we supply dress shirt, training\warm up kit.Quote:
Originally Posted by MonkeyKplunk
And that's how I don't understand the 400+ for ZL and 200-300 for AA. I would think playing kit and the alike is not supplied in those AA ones.
Can anyone here see a justification for the rise in costs of Referees for this year.Quote:
Originally Posted by sammydog
We are in ZL1 and if we got a full set of referees for a weekend last year we would have to pay $256. This year that cost has risen to $450 per weekend.
Means this year we are paying $4050 for referees for 9 home games. The additional cost for this year alone is $1764.
You wanna start doing the maths , theres 10 teams in a comp so for the year in ZL1 they are collecting $40k. With a extra $17k increase for this year alone.
Start adding up all the Zone leagues ( ZPL pay higher fees again) and the sum becomes mind boggling for cash thats spose to be used to “Paying Referees
With regards to the increase, I have no idea - that seems pretty steep.Quote:
Originally Posted by C-Mac
But scaling up the numbers to total for the season to see a big number doesn't really mean much, all that needs to be looked at is each set of games. $450 for three refs, 3x 90 min = 4.5 hours game time (although realistically lets say 5.5 hours, allowing two 15 minute breaks between games and 15 minutes before the first and after last match) and not including any travel.
The match fees may not be split evenly, but for simplicity's sake lets say they are - each ref takes home $150 for their 5.5 hours, a little over $27 an hour. Fairly decent but not unreasonable, especially given the amount of abuse they have to put up with to do their job.
Again I have no info on the increase and do think that's a massive increase. I am just pointing out that saying stuff like "Wow they're collecting $40k in ref fees for one comp! Where's the money going?" is a bit disingenuous when you clearly have the arithmetic to see that there's no real issue there.
To offer some perspective for everyone.
Between the 3 federations and insurance you are looking at roughly $200 per player, I'm to lazy to find the actual brakedown. Say you register 45 players you have to account $2500 for entry and $4900 for refs(we budget for 11 games).
$2500 ÷ 45 =$55
$4900 ÷ 45 =$108
55 +
108
200
=$363
That's before you account for concil fees and what ever a club adds on as well.
If you as a Club can register a ZL1 player for $350 then congratulations to you but sustainability is paramount and I can not see how that would happen without significant financial backing from a Sponsor.
$330 for the blues. But we have Crypto/Azzurricoin remember, that and prize money from last year lollllllllllllllllllllQuote:
Originally Posted by Premy