SA Footy

A really strange decision, that one. Simply because there was a club function on Glenelg Oval, they managed to get it postponed. Surely they should have either moved the club function, postponed it, had the final played at Camden or at Perteringa. The final had been planned for months on a day State players were available. As Airie said, they now won't be. Very strange and poor decision.
Cheers

Aerie wrote:How did Glenelg pull off adjusting the date of their semi and therefore the final at the last minute? Do they run the show?

Now the final won't feature any Redbacks players as a Shield game is on and Glenelg get the added bonus of having Sayers and Carey playing for them against Tea Tree Gully in the Semi-Final, who presumably won't have Head as he's playing T20 for Australia.

Careful Aerie, you will upset the Glenelg Supporters on here like "The Hound" and "back of the room"!!

It is a disgrace, if I was TTG I would be spewing, they now get Sayers and Carey to contend with, swings the game massively in their favour. Don't know why all Clubs got to vote on this, but the other three Clubs still involved in semis (Port, TTG and WT) all voted no, all other teams voted Yes, they did not give a crap. Too much power with Snewin from Bays in charge of Grade Committee.

The date was set, should of played at Park 25 if they could not provide oval. Makes a mockery of comp yet again when they change rules as they go.

Eagles2014 wrote:

Aerie wrote:How did Glenelg pull off adjusting the date of their semi and therefore the final at the last minute? Do they run the show?

Now the final won't feature any Redbacks players as a Shield game is on and Glenelg get the added bonus of having Sayers and Carey playing for them against Tea Tree Gully in the Semi-Final, who presumably won't have Head as he's playing T20 for Australia.

Careful Aerie, you will upset the Glenelg Supporters on here like "The Hound" and "back of the room"!!

It is a disgrace, if I was TTG I would be spewing, they now get Sayers and Carey to contend with, swings the game massively in their favour. Don't know why all Clubs got to vote on this, but the other three Clubs still involved in semis (Port, TTG and WT) all voted no, all other teams voted Yes, they did not give a crap. Too much power with Snewin from Bays in charge of Grade Committee.

The date was set, should of played at Park 25 if they could not provide oval. Makes a mockery of comp yet again when they change rules as they go.

Apparently it was their own social function they had on their Oval and that is why everything needed to be rescheduled? Unbelievable.

Yes, they had their 100 Club function. West Torrens had the same function on Saturday night, so most of the A Grade players did not attend as had to prepare for the Semi today. We could have asked SACA to move our game also, but was not an option as you have to adapt and play when programmed. Unless you are the Bays of course!

Wouldn't it have been awesome for the club function to have a semi final being played on the oval for everyone to watch?

Tony Clifton wrote:Wouldn't it have been awesome for the club function to have a semi final being played on the oval for everyone to watch?

Agree, would have been sensational. They had a marquee on the oval which is one reason, but nothing that could have been moved.

Aerie wrote:How did Glenelg pull off adjusting the date of their semi and therefore the final at the last minute? Do they run the show?

Now the final won't feature any Redbacks players as a Shield game is on and Glenelg get the added bonus of having Sayers and Carey playing for them against Tea Tree Gully in the Semi-Final, who presumably won't have Head as he's playing T20 for Australia.

Who chairs the Grade Cricket committee.....

Clearly Geoff Turley is to blame for this..

The Hound is not upset , went to a vote three against the rest for.
Unfortunately the weather intervened the week before!
250 club not 100 club
Park 25 used for State Under 15 trial yesterday and also Special Olympics games so out of the equation, #3 roped off, Railways unable to be accessed due to redevelopment starting.
Before the WT posters start having a go at the Bays find out which club stepped up to the plate to assist your overseas spinner after his accommodation issues

Another great effort from Daniel Drew. Has had a fantastic season in all forms. Excellent bat, useful bowler and superb fielder. Must be pushing the Redback incumbents. Possible outside chance for the Bradman Medal.

The Hound wrote:The Hound is not upset , went to a vote three against the rest for.
Unfortunately the weather intervened the week before!
250 club not 100 club
Park 25 used for State Under 15 trial yesterday and also Special Olympics games so out of the equation, #3 roped off, Railways unable to be accessed due to redevelopment starting.
Before the WT posters start having a go at the Bays find out which club stepped up to the plate to assist your overseas spinner after his accommodation issues

Good to know that your 250 club is more important than maintaining the integrity of the competition
The easy solution was to postpone or change the location of the 250 club event. The draw at the beginning of the year always showed February 12th as a Reserve Day for the One Day Competition. Perhaps Glenelg just didn't believe in their ability to make the semi-final???
Cheers

.

Would of thought the integrity of the competition is in question with some teams getting 1 day byes and some getting 2 day byes. Forfeits at senior level over the past couple of years, and also allowing players from other clubs to play in junior competitions when their club doesn't have juniors. What about some clubs using hard wicket at 16's level, they get a result everyone else gets washed out. Also 6 sides are not playing in the 16 whites this round!, 3 sides forfeiting

The Hound wrote:Would of thought the integrity of the competition is in question with some teams getting 1 day byes and some getting 2 day byes. Forfeits at senior level over the past couple of years, and also allowing players from other clubs to play in junior competitions when their club doesn't have juniors. What about some clubs using hard wicket at 16's level, they get a result everyone else gets washed out. Also 6 sides are not playing in the 16 whites this round!, 3 sides forfeiting

Agree, 16 Whites is doomed, too many Clubs struggling to field teams, and when College players are unavailable becomes worse.

The Hound wrote:Would of thought the integrity of the competition is in question with some teams getting 1 day byes and some getting 2 day byes. Forfeits at senior level over the past couple of years, and also allowing players from other clubs to play in junior competitions when their club doesn't have juniors. What about some clubs using hard wicket at 16's level, they get a result everyone else gets washed out. Also 6 sides are not playing in the 16 whites this round!, 3 sides forfeiting

Not disputing any of that, just saying that putting a 250 Club function ahead of the competition's Semi-Final certainly doesn't help!
Cheers

Wasn't there a game earlier in the season that got postponed due to Sturt's premiership reunion? That may have been the precedent to get Glenelg's game moved with the function already locked in.

Daniel Drew a strong chance at the Bradman, would be absurd if he didn't get a rookie contract next year as well.

Ah well, seeing as though players don't develop in their own age group might as well remove the national underage carnivals as they may hinder the development of players

Interesting article in this week's Messenger re SACA Under 19 team coming into 1st Grade comp.

Of all the Clubs spoken too, only two thought it was a good idea.

Naturally, Adelaide Uni were for it as they have no Juniors and it will not impact on them, surprise, surprise.

Also, Woodville agreed, but they have hardly developed any good juniors over the years, they just go pinching them from other Clubs, so wont affect them much either. (Sam McNally will no doubt be busy on the phone in the off season as per usual - that's if he still has the job).

Some great comments from Weaver and Brown too, pity SACA don't listen to guys like this that have over 10 years experience in the Comp and make a lot of sense with what they say.

Also got a run in the Advertiser. Dumb idea really, think you will find in the English County Premier Leagues the County Club 'academy' side yo-yo between divisions and rarely get to the top division.

Eagles2014 wrote:Interesting article in this week's Messenger re SACA Under 19 team coming into 1st Grade comp.

Of all the Clubs spoken too, only two thought it was a good idea.

Naturally, Adelaide Uni were for it as they have no Juniors and it will not impact on them, surprise, surprise.

Also, Woodville agreed, but they have hardly developed any good juniors over the years, they just go pinching them from other Clubs, so wont affect them much either. (Sam McNally will no doubt be busy on the phone in the off season as per usual - that's if he still has the job).

Some great comments from Weaver and Brown too, pity SACA don't listen to guys like this that have over 10 years experience in the Comp and make a lot of sense with what they say.

Nice feel good idea but I'm sure clubs would rather blood their juniors right through, perhaps the odd trial here or there but they shouldn't lose their young guns for a season or two.
It would cause issues for those who want to represent their state at this level but want to be loyal to the club that has given them the opportunities.