Their coach has played over 100 1st grade games for Edgeworth, and has coached their youth teams for many years, including last year's 15s.Originally Posted by Izzy
Their coach has played over 100 1st grade games for Edgeworth, and has coached their youth teams for many years, including last year's 15s.
Other than the biological maturation rule what loopholes are you talking about?
Good to know, thanks. He certainly has them playing well and would have to be one of the favourites at this early stage.
Biological my ass, the kids don?t struggle in own age don?t worry about that. One is the captain of the above age and only just came back from the Jets system and more then holds his own in 16s. Plays full games vs the top sides in that age.
So his he playing his age?
You can play keepers down an age group if your keeper is injured. Gets used all the time, one team is playing their 16s keeper in the 15s because their 15s keeper is out long term. Should just be the 14s keeper they play but Northern have approved it.
No he’s playing both ages. Normally gets dropped back to play the stronger teams. More than holds his own in own age group and played at Jets. Yes exactly give the younger keeper some experience. This older keeper garbage is a joke. And I know several clubs do it. Shouldn’t be allowed. It’s plain old cheating.
Playing down an age on the "maturation rule" & own age. His old man is the arrogant fool who holds a club position & is making the descisions.
I know of one outfield player playing down due to the Biological Maturation rule.Not one person I know has ever had an issue with it.Hes a good player and from what I understand wont be eligible for it next year.In his case I know for a fact hes not doing it to win trophies.As for keepers,I agree for the most part but think its an issue with 13s.Asking a JDL kid to play up is a huge change.I would be ok with the 14s keeper playing down but other ages would prefer to see the younger keeper play up.
This seems like an abuse of the rule.If hes using the Biological Maturation rule then he should be ineligible to play up.The rule is clearly designed to help players who cannot physically play their age.If he plays his own age then how is he deemed unable to play his own age?Thats a weird one.
You must be with valo if you?re defending it. Ok if it?s not about winning then why would a kid that?s one of the better players in his OWN age be dropping back down? And why would valo make him a captain of a team he?s biologically not string enough to play in? You?re joking right? Plus he was at the elite system in jets. They are cheating the system because he?s smaller and so are some of the best players in the world mind you.
And I know lots of people that have an issue with it. I?ve seen 2 or 3 ppl comment about it in here and I?m the 4th plus what the chatter is around the grounds.
You seem to know him, tell me you don?t think he?s more than a standout in his own age. Poor form by valentine, just like the code they share a field with who got suspended for a year for stacking footy teams.
I have no idea how you got this reply from my post but let me clear it up.The example I was using was from another club using the rule.I know that kid involved and seen him play.In his case it looks like a fair use of the rule.I have no idea about the kid at Valentine and far from defending it,I said it seemed like an abuse of the rule if hes playing both grades consistently.I asked how he can be deemed too small for 16s if hes clearly getting picked in 16s.Thats why I said it seemed like and abuse.But I dont know any more about the Valentine situation.I was just asking questions to help me understand.If lots of people have an issue with the Valentine situation and its influencing results then you need to contact the governing body to get some sort of clarification on how this is allowed to occur.A simple fix would be that if a club/player is invoking the rule then that player is banned from playing up for the season.
Apologies I must have misunderstood your post.
All good mate.
With only a few weeks let the club championship and division split is almost sorted.Olympic clearly at the top of Div 1 with the same 4 teams as last season dropping down.Div 2 looks down to 5 teams competing for 4 spots in the middle group.NNSW has it updated on squaddie if anyone wants to keep check.Does anyone know how many weeks off the kids have before the 2nd half of the season starts?Our club has been told its only one but theres still a few catch up games to be had.
https://www.northernnswfootball.com....r-youth-league
It?s interesting that it?s the same 4 teams heading down
I am only basing my thoughts on seeing clubs play as you cant argue with results but I think New Lambton and Cooks Hill are much better than they were at this stage last year.Weston look to be in a bad situation (i havent seen them much).There is still a gap between the top 8 and the rest but I think its closing.Maybe its not the same 4 clubs coming back up at the end of year though.Azzurri and South Cardiff seem to have all ages near the top of the table so they might steal quite a few results off the other clubs.Toronto,Westy also look to have improved but Adamstown looks like theres a lot of work still to be done.Im still a fan of the promotion relegation system and would like to see it kept in place.Does anyone know if 18s are staying with youth next year?
Same 4 clubs going down, same Div 2 clubs winning
Result will likely be the same with Charlestown missing out because their is still a gap between Div 2 and the bottom of Div 1
You know what I'd suggest...but I am glad we get the extra games through phase 1 (keeps us up near the number of games Sydney has)
Big winners out of the club championship model will be Edgeworth 13s and 18s who I think still don't have a point between them
Latest PPR.
Div 1.
DIV 1 PPR 06052025.jpg
Div 2.
DIV 2 PPR 06052025.jpg
Belswans & Northern Inland have a lot of football to make up
Posting Permissions
