New junior football structure

[Sheik Yerbouti]

Why don't you lot stop whining and try to find the info. Not exactly hidden, look here:

http://www.afl.com.au/Development/NextG ... fault.aspx

Has most of what you lot are moaning about covered off nicely.

That's just part of it smac, there's a 76 page epic to go with it.

, this new football structure will be good for the state juniors.

because?

[Bulls forever]

Why don't you lot stop whining and try to find the info. Not exactly hidden, look here:

http://www.afl.com.au/Development/NextG ... fault.aspx

Has most of what you lot are moaning about covered off nicely.

That's just part of it smac, there's a 76 page epic to go with it.

, this new football structure will be good for the state juniors.

because?

smac, u have obviously not been provided with a copy of the Halbert report otherwise you would not make the comment. If somehow u can get a copy I suggest you read that. Let me just pose u this question. If you were involved at Fitzroy and had worked your but off for some time to put competitive teams in NEMJFA. Then big brother comes along and says you cant play for NEMJFA, you must play in Metro West because we must have more junior competitions, do you really think that is fair or democratic. The big issue is not about the rules you point out to us that we have all read, but the fact that the junior clubs will basically loose any say in their football competition - perhaps you think that his fair. Most NEMJFA clubs are happy with their competition, could it be better, probably.

[smac]

At some point, clubs will work out that what is best for FOOTBALL is usually best decided by people who are not involved in one particular club. I have read the Halbert report and if you have great issue with that then you are looking at it from the club perspective only.

Football is best served being run as independently as possible so a fair outcome is reached.

If NEMJFA believe they are doing what is best for football they wouldn't have accepted Eastern Park into the comp some years back.

[FOURTH ESTATE]

At some point, clubs will work out that what is best for FOOTBALL is usually best decided by people who are not involved in one particular club. I have read the Halbert report and if you have great issue with that then you are looking at it from the club perspective only.

Football is best served being run as independently as possible so a fair outcome is reached.

If NEMJFA believe they are doing what is best for football they wouldn't have accepted Eastern Park into the comp some years back.

By your comments then you believe that everything that the SANFL & SAAFL Executive say and do is the correct thing

Heaven helps us if you think that way.

Do you always go by what people tell you in authority and never question what they tell you when it is glaringly wrong??????

The last little Austrian Corporal to try this was in 1932 and things didn't work out to well for him either.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[smac]

No, I didn't say that. By all means question things but don't ignore what may be best for the game just because of who raises the idea.

[aceman]

At some point, clubs will work out that what is best for FOOTBALL is usually best decided by people who are not involved in one particular club. I have read the Halbert report and if you have great issue with that then you are looking at it from the club perspective only.

Football is best served being run as independently as possible so a fair outcome is reached.

If NEMJFA believe they are doing what is best for football they wouldn't have accepted Eastern Park into the comp some years back.

Nor any other club from CDJFL to NEMJFA, just let the kids who happened to be in a certain age group where clubs couldn't field teams in that age groups not play footy, that's what you are implying as this was what happened with several teams from CDJFL to NAJFA & NEMJFA.

Can you please find any truly Independent people on the current Community Football Board for me??? That's your first challenge and I've made it easy by naming them below and their affiliation source.

The Board comprises David Shipway (Affiliated with West Adelaide)as chairman, with other members David Benson(Blackwood), Gino Capogreco(Salisbury/SAAFL), Jeff Burchell.(SAAFL) Scott Duncan(SANFL Reg Director SE), Rob Kerin(Jamestown), Peter Lindner(Olympic Dam), Kym Russell(Westies). Glen Rosser (SANFL/Norwood)holds the position of General Manager of Community Football.

[Executive Member]

At some point, clubs will work out that what is best for FOOTBALL is usually best decided by people who are not involved in one particular club. I have read the Halbert report and if you have great issue with that then you are looking at it from the club perspective only.

Football is best served being run as independently as possible so a fair outcome is reached.

If NEMJFA believe they are doing what is best for football they wouldn't have accepted Eastern Park into the comp some years back.

Nor any other club from CDJFL to NEMJFA, just let the kids who happened to be in a certain age group where clubs couldn't field teams in that age groups not play footy, that's what you are implying as this was what happened with several teams from CDJFL to NAJFA & NEMJFA.

Can you please find any truly Independent people on the current Community Football Board for me??? That's your first challenge and I've made it easy by naming them below and their affiliation source.

The Board comprises David Shipway (Affiliated with West Adelaide)as chairman, with other members David Benson(Blackwood), Gino Capogreco(Salisbury/SAAFL), Jeff Burchell.(SAAFL) Scott Duncan(SANFL Reg Director SE), Rob Kerin(Jamestown), Peter Lindner(Olympic Dam), Kym Russell(Westies). Glen Rosser (SANFL/Norwood)holds the position of General Manager of Community Football.

come on ace you well know that everyone at some stage has had an affiliation with a club
To be independent you cant be serving on any other footy board
The way you are trying to spin it then only a person that has never been involved with footy at any level could serve on an independent board - a long bow that one

[aceman]

At some point, clubs will work out that what is best for FOOTBALL is usually best decided by people who are not involved in one particular club. I have read the Halbert report and if you have great issue with that then you are looking at it from the club perspective only.

Football is best served being run as independently as possible so a fair outcome is reached.

If NEMJFA believe they are doing what is best for football they wouldn't have accepted Eastern Park into the comp some years back.

Nor any other club from CDJFL to NEMJFA, just let the kids who happened to be in a certain age group where clubs couldn't field teams in that age groups not play footy, that's what you are implying as this was what happened with several teams from CDJFL to NAJFA & NEMJFA.

Can you please find any truly Independent people on the current Community Football Board for me??? That's your first challenge and I've made it easy by naming them below and their affiliation source.

The Board comprises David Shipway (Affiliated with West Adelaide)as chairman, with other members David Benson(Blackwood), Gino Capogreco(Salisbury/SAAFL), Jeff Burchell.(SAAFL) Scott Duncan(SANFL Reg Director SE), Rob Kerin(Jamestown), Peter Lindner(Olympic Dam), Kym Russell(Westies). Glen Rosser (SANFL/Norwood)holds the position of General Manager of Community Football.

come on ace you well know that everyone at some stage has had an affiliation with a club
To be independent you cant be serving on any other footy board
The way you are trying to spin it then only a person that has never been involved with footy at any level could serve on an independent board - a long bow that one

Might be long but sometimes they hit the mark!
What qualifications do you need to become a member of an Exec Board???? There have been plenty of "duds" in my time so who picks these blokes or do you have to have strong knees to be able to crawl from Port Wakefield to West Lakes.

[Sheik Yerbouti]

At some point, clubs will work out that what is best for FOOTBALL is usually best decided by people who are not involved in one particular club. I have read the Halbert report and if you have great issue with that then you are looking at it from the club perspective only.

Football is best served being run as independently as possible so a fair outcome is reached.

If NEMJFA believe they are doing what is best for football they wouldn't have accepted Eastern Park into the comp some years back.

Are you looking at these reports from an SANFL junior underage teams perspective smac ? If so fair enough. You have to realize though that your representing the elite players who can actually play in a competition unaffected by a lot of the new rules applicable to your average Joe who can't get a gig in their SANFL club but who still want to play competitive footy.
I witnessed an u18's game yesterday & not one of these boys would qualify for an SANFL game, but still had a comp to play in, thanks to their junior clubs managing & coaching the teams, nary a senior rep to be seen.

You have read the Halbert report you state. You may like to play the Devils Advocate & comment or answer a couple of queries then.

The executive summary says that junior football is in ''quite a healthy state'' then goes onto say that there are issues to be addressed, but no issues are outlined in detail.
A referral to various stakeholders not being harmonious as the taskforce would like, words like suspicion, animosity, & based on ignorance were being tossed around, based on no evidence whatsoever. Then expect the same groups to forward goodwill in their recommendations.
The importance of participation to play but roadblocks being put in the way, they intend to remove these roadblocks, but no detail of these so called roadblocks.
The referral of roadblocks between clubs, we, at Fitzroy have had a healthy sharing system with both Broadview & Walkerville when teams have an excess of players. Also have recommended non school playing u18's to Gaza when we folded due to players school commitments.
Refers to players dropping out of the system & blames JDL coaches & management on an unhealthy emphasis on winning, no mention whatsoever on parental interaction.
The mention of a common register is worrying in itself, vague outlines with no mention of the privacy issue.
The use of the word ludicrous for the wide disparity of rules between leagues & school is a tad drama queenish, being able to adapt to to different rules is no different to being able to adapt to different umpire interpretations, good life skill one would think. Self dicipline? No models were put forward.
The suggestion of swapping players at half time if the scores are lop sided at the umpires discretion is a worry. Would any player gain anything if he was selected in the ''weaker players'' to join the better side? Playing with team mates surely is more enjoyable to the kids than playing in a winning side.
Clause 21 means that the JDL's would be giving up any independence to run the game through the executive in accordance with their current constitutions & a distribution of clubs across the metrop area, associations would change considerably. No mention or guidelines of who, how or why.
Will the fee structure change, currently the fee is $10 a head per club, but in Victoria, where this system has occurred the affiliation fee is $1000 a team, will this happen here?
Who will be paying for all the new bodies, new personnel & paid administrators?
Who is the new board answerable too, the SANFL, Community Football Body, The AFL ? Will the new board dictate where clubs/players/parents buy their guernseys, bandages, equipment or whatever from?
What are the consequences if the JDL's decide not to join? If their are threats to whatever benifits are recieved we need to know before making a decision.
Seeing that this report was finalised in late Feb/March, why was it lobbed on the JDL's so late with less than a week to vote on such a monumental change to the junior structure that has existed for over 40 years in it's current state?

There are many, many good points & ideas forwarded to the current JDL's & worthy of consideration. No doubt changes can be made for the better, but firstly, surely we can have the common decency to at least asked to have a say in the changes & proper debate ensures all parties are at least listened too.

[aceman]

At some point, clubs will work out that what is best for FOOTBALL is usually best decided by people who are not involved in one particular club. I have read the Halbert report and if you have great issue with that then you are looking at it from the club perspective only.

Football is best served being run as independently as possible so a fair outcome is reached.

If NEMJFA believe they are doing what is best for football they wouldn't have accepted Eastern Park into the comp some years back.

Are you looking at these reports from an SANFL junior underage teams perspective smac ? If so fair enough. You have to realize though that your representing the elite players who can actually play in a competition unaffected by a lot of the new rules applicable to your average Joe who can't get a gig in their SANFL club but who still want to play competitive footy.
I witnessed an u18's game yesterday & not one of these boys would qualify for an SANFL game, but still had a comp to play in, thanks to their junior clubs managing & coaching the teams, nary a senior rep to be seen.

You have read the Halbert report you state. You may like to play the Devils Advocate & comment or answer a couple of queries then.

The executive summary says that junior football is in ''quite a healthy state'' then goes onto say that there are issues to be addressed, but no issues are outlined in detail.
A referral to various stakeholders not being harmonious as the taskforce would like, words like suspicion, animosity, & based on ignorance were being tossed around, based on no evidence whatsoever. Then expect the same groups to forward goodwill in their recommendations.
The importance of participation to play but roadblocks being put in the way, they intend to remove these roadblocks, but no detail of these so called roadblocks.
The referral of roadblocks between clubs, we, at Fitzroy have had a healthy sharing system with both Broadview & Walkerville when teams have an excess of players. Also have recommended non school playing u18's to Gaza when we folded due to players school commitments.
Refers to players dropping out of the system & blames JDL coaches & management on an unhealthy emphasis on winning, no mention whatsoever on parental interaction.
The mention of a common register is worrying in itself, vague outlines with no mention of the privacy issue.
The use of the word ludicrous for the wide disparity of rules between leagues & school is a tad drama queenish, being able to adapt to to different rules is no different to being able to adapt to different umpire interpretations, good life skill one would think. Self dicipline? No models were put forward.
The suggestion of swapping players at half time if the scores are lop sided at the umpires discretion is a worry. Would any player gain anything if he was selected in the ''weaker players'' to join the better side? Playing with team mates surely is more enjoyable to the kids than playing in a winning side.
Clause 21 means that the JDL's would be giving up any independence to run the game through the executive in accordance with their current constitutions & a distribution of clubs across the metrop area, associations would change considerably. No mention or guidelines of who, how or why.
Will the fee structure change, currently the fee is $10 a head per club, but in Victoria, where this system has occurred the affiliation fee is $1000 a team, will this happen here?
Who will be paying for all the new bodies, new personnel & paid administrators?
Who is the new board answerable too, the SANFL, Community Football Body, The AFL ? Will the new board dictate where clubs/players/parents buy their guernseys, bandages, equipment or whatever from?
What are the consequences if the JDL's decide not to join? If their are threats to whatever benifits are recieved we need to know before making a decision.
Seeing that this report was finalised in late Feb/March, why was it lobbed on the JDL's so late with less than a week to vote on such a monumental change to the junior structure that has existed for over 40 years in it's current state?

There are many, many good points & ideas forwarded to the current JDL's & worthy of consideration. No doubt changes can be made for the better, but firstly, surely we can have the common decency to at least asked to have a say in the changes & proper debate ensures all parties are at least listened too.

[Bulls forever]

At some point, clubs will work out that what is best for FOOTBALL is usually best decided by people who are not involved in one particular club. I have read the Halbert report and if you have great issue with that then you are looking at it from the club perspective only.

Football is best served being run as independently as possible so a fair outcome is reached.

If NEMJFA believe they are doing what is best for football they wouldn't have accepted Eastern Park into the comp some years back.

smac, the halbert report was so well thought of until NEMJFA got involved and starting asking question. Then you could see david Hutton backpeddling faster than phil gallagher ever could. I suggest you get a copy of the report tabled by NEMJFA Solicitor Tony Kerin if you really want to see what the clubs are asking. the one thing that comes up short in all of this is why are the SANFL doing this and what isn their agenda. The commonn held belief is that this is some how tied to further Afl FUNDING or does Mr Demetriou really want to runn the world.

[smac]

At some point, clubs will work out that what is best for FOOTBALL is usually best decided by people who are not involved in one particular club. I have read the Halbert report and if you have great issue with that then you are looking at it from the club perspective only.

Football is best served being run as independently as possible so a fair outcome is reached.

If NEMJFA believe they are doing what is best for football they wouldn't have accepted Eastern Park into the comp some years back.

Nor any other club from CDJFL to NEMJFA, just let the kids who happened to be in a certain age group where clubs couldn't field teams in that age groups not play footy, that's what you are implying as this was what happened with several teams from CDJFL to NAJFA & NEMJFA.

Can you please find any truly Independent people on the current Community Football Board for me??? That's your first challenge and I've made it easy by naming them below and their affiliation source.

The Board comprises David Shipway (Affiliated with West Adelaide)as chairman, with other members David Benson(Blackwood), Gino Capogreco(Salisbury/SAAFL), Jeff Burchell.(SAAFL) Scott Duncan(SANFL Reg Director SE), Rob Kerin(Jamestown), Peter Lindner(Olympic Dam), Kym Russell(Westies). Glen Rosser (SANFL/Norwood)holds the position of General Manager of Community Football.

No, I am referring to Eastern Park, lock stock and barrell. Not individual sides from clubs to allow a full comp.

Whole clubs leaving associations will just cause associations to suffer and die, leaving multiple clubs in a bad position.

I thought the problem was the AFL or the SANFL? Now it's the CFB?

As far as independence goes, the higher up the decision comes from, the more independent it gets. People work in the industry and actually spend all day every day pondering the issues with considerable data to base their recommendations upon and don't just do it part time for the love of the game (which is a great motivation, I am not knocking it at all, it just doesn't always lead to the best decisions for theh whole sport).

[aceman]

They(EP) must have been unhappy with the structure in place at CDJFL then, to move the whole club and it wouldn't have been a fait accompli, NEMJFA clubs would have voted to accept them
If this new CFB idea gets off the ground, clubs will not get that choice, they will be told which league they will play in and that IMO is not how it should be. That is dictating to clubs and of course the CDJFL is in favour of the idea, this will prop them up and bolster their numbers because they look like getting the cream, TTG, GG, Modbury & some others.

[aceman]

I reckon I can say with some certainty 2 of the Junior Leagues will have nothing to do with the "new regime" in it's current format and 2 will even though one junior league president is totally against it.

[locky801]

I reckon I can say with some certainty 2 of the Junior Leagues will have nothing to do with the "new regime" in it's current format and 2 will even though one junior league president is totally against it.

Thats where the problem may well occur for those Associations that go for it. If they play under these so called "New Rules" i can see alot of kids walking, speaking to a number of our parents, quite simply if we go down the new track they are quite content to let their kids play school footy under those rules for nothing on a Saturday and then have Sundays free. (Why pay 80 bucks for your kid to play footy Sunday when he plays under the same rules Saturday and for the same result) You can see their reasoning. It is my personal belief and has nothing to do with the club I am involved in, that a number of kids from these other Associations that go with the changes will move to the NEMJFA to play good competitive footy and of course play finals etc etc. I can really see the NEMJFA blossoming if the new structure comes into other areas and they maintain their stance

[Bluedemon]

I reckon I can say with some certainty 2 of the Junior Leagues will have nothing to do with the "new regime" in it's current format and 2 will even though one junior league president is totally against it.

who are they aceman?

[aceman]

I reckon I can say with some certainty 2 of the Junior Leagues will have nothing to do with the "new regime" in it's current format and 2 will even though one junior league president is totally against it.

who are they aceman?

Unfair for me to name them on this forum, believe me with this bit, I reckon I'm on the money.
The makeup of the new board will be interesting too, if they reckon that will be a smooth transition they've got another think coming. They've already stated NO to an SAAFL rep being on it.

[Sheik Yerbouti]

I reckon I can say with some certainty 2 of the Junior Leagues will have nothing to do with the "new regime" in it's current format and 2 will even though one junior league president is totally against it.

Leagues or clubs Ace?

[aceman]

I reckon I can say with some certainty 2 of the Junior Leagues will have nothing to do with the "new regime" in it's current format and 2 will even though one junior league president is totally against it.

Leagues or clubs Ace?

see in bold above

[Bulls forever]

I reckon I can say with some certainty 2 of the Junior Leagues will have nothing to do with the "new regime" in it's current format and 2 will even though one junior league president is totally against it.

Leagues or clubs Ace?

see in bold above

A bit early to make that call Ace, no secret that NEMJFA and Metro West would vote no if required to vote now, but I think there is a lot of water to pass under the bridge and a lot of questions to be asked and answered before there would be movement from those leagues. The worrying thing is that SANFL want immediate response and these two leagues won't give it until there questions are asked and answered. What will be the response from big brother, will they in effect bring into play the implied threats that Mr Rosser mentioned to a meeting of the JDL's. This in effect will have a considerable impact on the two leagues. Probably insurance being the major issue involved.