Under19, Under18, Under17 ??

[redandblack]

While I'm sure the AFL will kick in more money if this goes ahead, it's driven by the Clubs and the SANFL, not a reaction to any AFL directive.

How about we try to discuss this intelligently, rather than just abusing each argument from an entrenched position.

For a start, how about one supporter from each club analyse their last league team and let us know how many have come from their own club's junior ranks and how many of those might not have done so if there was an under 18 comp. The second part is a difficult judgement call, but let's have a go.

I'll do it for Westies lineup yesterday and I'd suspect there are a lot of West juniors. Then again, we're bottom.

[redandblack]

West juniors in yesterday's league side: (7)

Tyson Slattery
Ben Fisher
Simon Munn
Nathan Brown
Greg Rowe
Matthew Martin
Daniel Caire

Of those, Slattery, Martin and Caire played SA Under 18's, Nathan Brown was drafted by Melbourne, Simon Munn, Greg Rowe and Ben Fisher would have been in any Under 18 squad at Westies.

[whatever]

All those guys had the advantage of playig uder 19's so the jump from colts to senior football was not as great.

Does ayone actually think taking kids away from their clubs to train with the state squad as much as they do is actually a burden on their development rather than an enhancement.

[am Bays]

In Glenelg League team that played Centrals we had the following Glenelg juniors:

Mules
Allan
Duldig
Pannozzo
Holmes
Block
Button
Horan
Willoughby (drafed out of 18s and off to the AFL)
Sugars (back from AFL Crows rookie list)

Players who have played league football this year and have had played the last year of 19s due to lack of opportunity in higher grades are Guilhaus and Liebelt

Only one is eligible for U 19s ATM is Holmes.

Those that may not have made it if there was an U/18s are Mules, Allan, Duldig and Pannozzo as they came up when they finished year 12 so they would have only one year to adapt to living in Adelaide, training with a league club and starting apprenticeships.

Over the last three years we have had to play kids in 19s compared to other years as the players above them have been playing good footy and pushing for league seleection witness our reserves playing finals for the last three years. Those kids have had to bide their time.

Over the years we have had to play blokes like Peter Berbakov in the 19s, to assist his development as reserves players demanded selection over him. The next year he played 2s then the year after league the year after that he played AFL.

My point has always been the good kids are going to get drafted irrespective of if it is going to be 19s or 18s. It is the late developers like the players I have mentioned above that become good SANFL players not AFL players that having a 19s team is crucial for.

I don't care how it is done (allowance for 8 overage players in the 18s or as an U/19s - my preferred option) but there needs to be an inbuilt safety net to keep the late developers int eh SANFL system and out of the Amateur/ club environment.

[spell_check]

League matches with three matches on during the day will be reduced to a slop in the mud with conditions like yesterday - and you know that there will always be two weeks in a row where a League team will play at their home venue. Eagles after the bye play Glenelg and Norwood at Woodville.

[redandblack]

All those guys had the advantage of playig uder 19's so the jump from colts to senior football was not as great.

Does ayone actually think taking kids away from their clubs to train with the state squad as much as they do is actually a burden on their development rather than an enhancement.

Your first statement is just not correct, whatever. Several of those players were still eligible for Under 18's when they started league football.

As far as training with the State U18's for so long, I'd personally agree with you, but part of this change is to improve the standard of coaching at that age.

It's disappointing that most of the arguments against this are coming from a totally entrenched position, refusing to see any good in anything except the status quo, regardless of the facts.

[Wedgie]

for those that went to the football yesterday can you imagine how bad the ovals would have been at the end of the day if an extra game was played on them in the morning.

The other side to that is how much better would the grounds be that had no games yesterday.

Exactly, yet another argument against quashed.

So where do the U16s play then? At the local park?

They'll still be playing at the opposite oval just like now.

Its not going to be like the 17s at the moment, its going to be an abriged comp similar to the Under 15s, I know North's would probably play at Greenacres.

[Macca19]

West juniors in yesterday's league side: (7)

Tyson Slattery
Ben Fisher
Simon Munn
Nathan Brown
Greg Rowe
Matthew Martin
Daniel Caire

Of those, Slattery, Martin and Caire played SA Under 18's, Nathan Brown was drafted by Melbourne, Simon Munn, Greg Rowe and Ben Fisher would have been in any Under 18 squad at Westies.

Port had 10:
Summerton
Eichner
Waterhouse
Clayton
T Carr
C Carr
Mercer
Lokan
Dolling
Hall

Out of those, Mercer, Hall and C Carr have played 19s in the past 12 months. Others who have played this year that have played 19s in the past year or two have been Clinch, Mardling, Taylor, T Wait and Watson, whilst Kirkwood went straight from 17s to league.

[whatever]

All those guys had the advantage of playig uder 19's so the jump from colts to senior football was not as great.

Does ayone actually think taking kids away from their clubs to train with the state squad as much as they do is actually a burden on their development rather than an enhancement.

Your first statement is just not correct, whatever. Several of those players were still eligible for Under 18's when they started league football.

As far as training with the State U18's for so long, I'd personally agree with you, but part of this change is to improve the standard of coaching at that age.

It's disappointing that most of the arguments against this are coming from a totally entrenched position, refusing to see any good in anything except the status quo, regardless of the facts.

yes they were still elligible for under 18's but they had all played under 19s at that stage and thus had experienced bigger bodies than they would have enountered if it was an under 18 competition.

As for an entrenched position, well yes and no. The only argument I can see for the change is that clubs will recieve more money and be able to put that into coaching the kids. Now I would assume that give them the extra money under the current format and they would be able to improve the coaching standard.

The second arguement is that you only need to find one lot of coaching staff rather than two. So we just take the soft option, give people more money to be involved ad that problem would deminish.

Thirdly, I contacted the SANFL last year about what coaching courses are available, I am still waiting for a return call so maybe it wouldn't take much work from the SANFL to increase the standard of coaching.

Fouthly the strength of a team is its depth, I would then argue that the strength of a competition is its reserves of which the SANFL is a mile in front at the moment and this would have to deminish the standard of the reserves thus deminish the standard of the SANFL.

So how is going to an under 18's systems suppose to be better??????

[cd]

Our original position as per the first post of this thread gives our reasons for dealing with the U17 group differently and then retaining the U19.

The current favoured position appears to be similar but changing the age structure to U16 then U18 with spots for some overage included - maybe up to 6 allowed - not sure on this.

My personal view only
If you are having up to 25% of the team overage in the U18 seems to me that our proposal makes the most sense. As do I believe our reasons for suggesting change.

Col D

[redandblack]

cd, your proposal is no longer relevant, surely, or are you still campaigning for it?

[redandblack]

whatever, I'd say that all of those Port players would have stayed in the system if there was only an Under 18's. You keep forgetting my contention that the Reserves comp will become a much younger comp. The better Under 18 players who are no longer eligible for that comp will play in the Reserves and won't be lost to footy.

I'm making progress with the actual figures of the numbers of players transferring from 17's to League over the past few years. The figures are stacking up to be an indictment of the current system.

[cd]

Red and Black
You are right the WWTFC proposal was not supported - we did propose a change as per the first post on this thread - it seems the idea is accepted with different age structure.

I believe our proposed age structure was the best way to go but doesnt seem likely.

Personal comments only

Col D

[Macca19]

I'm making progress with the actual figures of the numbers of players transferring from 17's to League over the past few years. The figures are stacking up to be an indictment of the current system.

Id say its the same of any sport. How many State U18 players end up playing league for their team? How many Olyroos players end up making the Socceroos?

Go to the Premier League in England...how many reserves/youth squad players go on to play for their club?

[redandblack]

I'm making that point because it's one of the arguments against the current system and for the new system.

As for the English Premier League, that's not a competition, it's richest wins and don't apply if you're born in the local area.

[nickname]

I'm making progress with the actual figures of the numbers of players transferring from 17's to League over the past few years. The figures are stacking up to be an indictment of the current system.

Id say its the same of any sport. How many State U18 players end up playing league for their team? How many Olyroos players end up making the Socceroos?

Go to the Premier League in England...how many reserves/youth squad players go on to play for their club?

Isn't that then an argument for streamlining the system?
i.e. do we need to sift through 60-70 kids each year to find the handful who will make it? I'd have thought that handful would be just as apparent in an U18 squad of say 30.

[ca]

From a Norwood point of view from Saturday's game the following came through the junior system is some form or another.

Duigan
Dawes
Bown
Bartamucci
Gallagher
Cockshell
Donahue
Puopollo
Speight (Still eligible for Under 18's)

Others that played were Tyrell (SAAFL), Jericho (West), Walker and Kite (Mini Draft), Vlatko (Glenelg), Davis (Sydney & North), Phillips & Rowe (Sydney), Trotter (North Melbourne), Alwan and Zorzi (Victoria), Weatherald (Sturt).

So we have 8 players that came through our system not still under 18 and while I don't know all their history, all I think played Under 19's but probably some wouldn't have played in their final years of Under 19 football. By that I mean when they turned 18 they moved to reserves. Given that you are still going to have some able to play under 18's ( 4 to 6), I don't see a problem with the proposal and as I said without knowing their full history I don't think we would have lost any of those players to the SANFL system.

[Killa]

What I heard on the weekend by one of the parents at the norwood game is the u/18 players will not be allowed to go up in a higher grade until after half way through the season. If this right the afl is trying to stuff up the sanfl if we have an elite u/18 comp.

[Wedgie]

What I heard on the weekend by one of the parents at the norwood game is the u/18 players will not be allowed to go up in a higher grade until after half way through the season. If this right the afl is trying to stuff up the sanfl if we have an elite u/18 comp.

Approval for the new comp hasn't even got through the commission let alone a set of rules being drawn up for it!
Crikey, the things people hear!

[smac]

What I heard on the weekend by one of the parents at the norwood game is the u/18 players will not be allowed to go up in a higher grade until after half way through the season. If this right the afl is trying to stuff up the sanfl if we have an elite u/18 comp.

Approval for the new comp hasn't even got through the commission let alone a set of rules being drawn up for it!
Crikey, the things people hear!

I would have thought issues such as this would need to be part of the submission to the commission though. Would be good to find out what the details of the submission are before it gets committed to.