interestingly most of the clubs wanting to keep thirds usually end up playing finals more consistently in firsts over the last 10 years or so and have been long term ZL1 teamsOriginally Posted by Zonal Marking
olympic only small window of measurement
croatia nothing to go off
azzurri used to be all about thirds
swansea were for thirds in the meeting i was told
heard a lot from people that want to keep thirds
would like to hear from more people as to why they dont want it?
🤦*♂️🤷*♂️
I am genuinely curious as well. Would love to hear the reasons why people do not want 3rds in the comp anymore. A proper serious question to those here
Also, All Age has enough teams in the comp as it is. Removing 3rds to force them into All Age just compounds that problem imo.
Jaliens gives me the horn
Giving clubs an option was a mistake. There will be a third grade, but it's going to be a mess. And I think that it will be that much of a nuisance that the following year clubs will get the shits with it and not do it and then players will be lost.
Clubs needed to be helped out and those with numbers low could have assistance in getting players across. There should be a minimum requirement of registered players. I can't see how clubs can get through a season with anything less than 45 at the start as an absolute minimum.
The sweet spot is a 10-team comp across the board. I'm sure if you told clubs they'd need to drop down to ZL3 that they would ensure they get the required numbers signed. sand maybe dropping to ZL3 is the reset some clubs might need to build a bit of club morale with getting more wins on the board.
It's no secret that the clubs who focus on a stronger third grade team that they tend to have better results across the board. It's difficult to build a strong squad over time with only two grades and this will be proven now if this new third grade can stick around. Clubs with a third grade will be stronger and the divide in clubs will be bigger.
One of the reasons club presidents and other committee members told me was the difficulty in getting enough players to make a viable thirds team that didn't rely on needed reserves players to be able to field enough players to put on thirds which then impacted their reserves and 1st grade teams.
With that in mind it is no wonder that nearly 2/3rds of the zone teams (and 1/2 of ZL1) voted to either abolish it entirely or make it an optional grade.
Yeah should've just abolished it rather than doing what 1/3 of the clubs want.
And what assistance would help them get more players in to play thirds?Clubs needed to be helped out and those with numbers low could have assistance in getting players across.
Would certainly help teams get players if you get rid of a couple of clubs.The sweet spot is a 10-team comp across the board.
May find you have a 16 team ZL2 compI'm sure if you told clubs they'd need to drop down to ZL3
Considering they are going to then bring in U18s for all zone teams too from 2026 that will alleviate any issue with building strong teamsIt's difficult to build a strong squad over time with only two grades and this will be proven now if this new third grade can stick around. Clubs with a third grade will be stronger and the divide in clubs will be bigger.
I think you will find even clubs who want thirds will pull out next season.
There is no way it can work 100% in having the separate thirds comp play before Reserves and Firsts each weekend.
Basically will be an all age Saturday comp that won?t align with zone squads as clubs would need.
I think it is a risky move eliminating any teams from playing football. If the average zone league squad consists of 45 players well that has now been cut down to roughly 30 playing members
Just going off Zone league One and its 12 teams that has now left approx 180 players shafted and looking for a new club or competition to play in for next season.
I think it would be naive to assume that majority of these players would stick around for all age or move clubs and if I had to bet I would assume a large number of these will be lost to the game completely.
Totally agree they will be lost and if the federation takes for instance $200 per player (I?m not sure the figure) that means they loss $36k in revenue. I?m not sure many businesses that would think that?s a smart idea
Newcastle Football gets about $80/player so significantly less, though if it means they get to start a ZL3 comp then we will see a much higher increase in revenue.
But the point we are making is that those players might not be around to start a ZL3 comp
When it comes to $$ the association probably doesn't care if it is those players or new players, their $ is worth the same
But where are these new players coming from?
In the end old mate worded his poll well, 4 choices for a simple question, that's how the pollies do it, give him that, confuse and divide.
He spoke about having less AA and 35's on the night as we can't get enough refs etc and if you want refs play ZL he said, in the end he has or will push more players back to AA or even out of the game, taking away 3rds does not guarantee they stay and make another ZL side.
Bottom line is his/there (being NNSWFA) push to have younger players (ex NPL/NPL1) playing ZL football, after the NPL clubs dump them after realizing they are not good enough and the cash cow of youth football runs out, most clubs in ZL if not all clubs already, have some younger ones coming through the system from the NPL, some might be playing 1st's but majority are playing 3rds and reggies.
Thought process of dropping older players to make way for these younger players (sunset clause??) is another idea destined to fail, i can see the suns telling their players to go back and play where???? AA as you are too old for ZL and you can't play reggies either...
For those who have been around this comp as long as me, we all know that over the years especially the last 15, we have had the discussion to drop or change 3rds to fit in the younger players, the best one being U23's with 4 senior players only, lasted 1 year i think, then back to a normal 3rd grade.
Last one, we all could throw this around all day, some will agree, some will disagree, but in the end, people get remembered for certain things they do, let's all hope for the future of ZL football someone gets remembered for making the right choice....
Sorry one more, i hear Dudley want to put a team in ZL3 and have been told they have to go on a list?? and wait their turn...any truth to this?
May find it is some older young ones rather than young ones. From 2026 an NPL 1st grade team sheet will need 3 players under 23 and 2 players under 20. So there will be a need to move out some players in their mid to late 20s from NPL.
End of the day the main reason they are wanting to remove thirds is to allow for easy promotion/relegation between all tiers, ZL2 no longer have to now find a thirds when going up, NL1 don't have to find one when going down, ZL1 don't have to get rid of one when going up and ZL2 don't have to get rid of one when going down.
I also suspect long term plan is to bring in U18s for Zone League as well to also help teams be promoted and relegated.
Look in the long run it may work and might be the way forward. However in the short term it is going to cause a lot of damage and unrest and the successful clubs in particular are going to be punished for these changes.
I will use Suns third grade this year as an example. Quite a young team who had a very successful season and were probably good enough to have finished mid table in the reserve grade competition.
So what happens to those 15 players now? You send them back to an all age competition? That to me seems like a big step back and does not sit right at all.
Maybe they try and move to another club in the league however spots are now at a premium. I just feel a lot of players are being left out to dry.
This applies for probably half a dozen clubs as well. Im just using Suns as an example.
For transparency NF should have detailed each club and their vote on thirds.
What is there to hide ?
I don?t believe the numbers they posted.
I'm not advocating for or against getting rid of or retaining thirds, do I do think some of the discourse as to why they must stay has been exaggerated. No doubt some of those young thirds players are good enough to be in reserves and potentially looking to take those spots, perhaps some reserves are ready to go into 1sts as well and hopefully be able to score more than 1 goal in open play against 8 players for 40 mins. Shouldn't be a case of going you were in thirds this year so you later.
Well some of those young players might hang around but you can only have roughly a squad of 30 so either way 15 current players are being politely told their services are no longer required
Surely NPL isn't going towards an age restrictions for First Grade match days? That would be ridiculous and a disaster.
In any other walk of life discrimination rules prevent alot of decisions based on factors that include age. Why prevent players older then 23 from playing first grade. I know it's the wrong forum but that post made me concerned and frustrated. Nothing wrong with the post, but the topic is concerning.
Posting Permissions
