SA Footy

in 2017, dump the possible upcoming SFL premier in div 4 or give everyone equally a crack at some rapid promotion...

What about seeding through pre-season trial games - say the 7th / 8th side from D2 and the runner up D3, and Brighton play a series of trial games and have the top 2 ranked sides at the end play D2, the other two play D3.

D2 9th and 10th already being relegated, D3 premier already earned promotion.

So a 2016 D2 side plays a 2016 D5 side in 2017, sounds like it will be a good comp....just like the SFL.

Run a 12 team D1, put brighton in there, only relegate bottom side in each grade, top2 still get promoted, twisties in D4. Bottom 4 in each grade get relegated at end of 2017, top 2 get promoted

Just stick Brighton in D3 along with the D4 premier, relegate the bottom two.

Anyone else, stick them in D7 in a 12 team div and if it means they collect some easy flags on the way up so be it.

Run each comp from div 1> div 6 as an 11 team comp with top 5. Div 7 is only a C grade exclusive comp or clubs who can get either 1 side or who are really struggling. Start round 1 apart from div 1 on the same week end and div 1 a week later. Play each team twice. No one gets screwed over with division placements and maybe a couple will get a better deal in div 4,5 and 6. Play GF's at Thebarton, Kilburn, Salisbury, Kenilworth, PNU ect as you can't play them all at Thebarton in 1 week.

marbles wrote:in 2017, dump the possible upcoming SFL premier in div 4 or give everyone equally a crack at some rapid promotion...

2017.jpg

I know its only hypothetical, but HV are sitting 8th in Div 4 so shouldn't be heading to Div 5. They would have more dibs on a spot in Div 3's than Hectorville and Lockleys

S Demon wrote:

marbles wrote:in 2017, dump the possible upcoming SFL premier in div 4 or give everyone equally a crack at some rapid promotion...

2017.jpg

I know its only hypothetical, but HV are sitting 8th in Div 4 so shouldn't be heading to Div 5.

Don't bank on it... i'd be wanting to finish 7th to ensure any safety in D4 next season.

Clubs finishing top and second must be elevated to the higher grade as they have earn't that right. Sides finishing bottom two need to be relegated. So therefore the only way that sides can be added at the rate of one extra club per grade, is making an 11 team competition played over 20 games.

Then at the end of that season 3 sides are relegated. Ensure the rules are in place before the season starts, so that clubs are not just forced down on a whim. Clubs wouldn't mind being relegated if finishing 8th, if the rules are in place before the season starts. Clubs would quite rightly be infuriated if they were relegated this year when finishing 8th, but no rules were in place before the season starts. Hypothetically if Hope Valley finishes 8th this year, they should never be relegated because this was not a part of rules before the season starts.

11 team competitions x 20 week season. The only way to make it work and be fair on the existing clubs.

oyster wrote:Clubs finishing top and second must be elevated to the higher grade as they have earn't that right. Sides finishing bottom two need to be relegated. So therefore the only way that sides can be added at the rate of one extra club per grade, is making an 11 team competition played over 20 games.

Then at the end of that season 3 sides are relegated. Ensure the rules are in place before the season starts, so that clubs are not just forced down on a whim. Clubs wouldn't mind being relegated if finishing 8th, if the rules are in place before the season starts. Clubs would quite rightly be infuriated if they were relegated this year when finishing 8th, but no rules were in place before the season starts. Hypothetically if Hope Valley finishes 8th this year, they should never be relegated because this was not a part of rules before the season starts.

11 team competitions x 20 week season. The only way to make it work and be fair on the existing clubs.

It will actually be a 22 week season as each team will have 2 byes.

cracka wrote:It will actually be a 22 week season as each team will have 2 byes.

That's a bloody long season - especially if you play finals.

It's hard enough at the moment with barely time off between cricket and footy without adding an extra 4x weeks in there.

S Demon wrote:

marbles wrote:in 2017, dump the possible upcoming SFL premier in div 4 or give everyone equally a crack at some rapid promotion...

2017.jpg

I know its only hypothetical, but HV are sitting 8th in Div 4 so shouldn't be heading to Div 5. They would have more dibs on a spot in Div 3's than Hectorville and Lockleys

Ahhhhhhhh so true man

SDemon actually highlights a very significant point here

There might be 9 teams in div 4 right now but next year 2 will come up and therell be 10

It will actually be division 5 with 9 teams next year at this stage and therefore brightons only entry point at this stage into C9AFL is division 5 haha

The fact remains if a side finishes top 2, then they have earn't the right to be promoted. If a side finishes 9th or 10th then they are relegated. Finishing 8th does not mean relegation either. All well and good to have Brighton, or any other SFL club come back to the SAAFL, but it can't be at the expense of a current loyal club, who has been a part of the SAAFL for years. Imagine if it were you're club being relegated when finishing 7th or 8th, just to accommodate Brighton, who have come and gone more than once from the SAAFL before. The clubs who have not left should be the first priority. Reasonably logical and fair this way.....or maybe I'm too hopeful of a fair outcome for all clubs.

Imagine being a club that has finally got a squad together to challenge a flag only for a club several divisions of quality above you come in and romp all over you.

Going on recent history there will more than likely be different "issues" leading into the 2018 season so there makes no sense in considering beyond 2017.

What the league must do is find a balance between upsetting member clubs by grading the new clubs too high in lieu of current clubs who deserve to & want to be there AND grading them too low just for the sake of it and granting them undeserved premierships.

oyster wrote:
Doesn't really mater champ. If it's 1 team, 2 teams or 4 teams the same processes should be in place. Those who have been playing in the SAAFL as loyal clubs for years and years, should not be overlooked for sides coming from outside of the league unless one of the those clubs "entirely of their choice elect not to come up". Brighton have been in the SAAFL and elected to leave before, so they should be given no free ride back at the expense of a loyal club who has elected to remain a part of the SAAFL over the years. That means the top two clubs are promoted (grand finalists) and the bottom two clubs are relegated, as per the rules. A vacancy should only happen if one club elects to not come up or a team such as Para Hills folds (as per this years vacancy). You can't penalise a club who comes second in D3 or D4, and not promote them in place of Brighton, or any other SFL club. WRONG THING TO DO and sending the wrong message to loyal clubs, that you can leave and come back whenever you feel like it, and just drop into whatever grade you wish.

Hey champ. Which bit dont you understand about we (the clubs) told them (the ivory tower) at the start of the year that they could bring teams in as long as at least the premier gets promoted.[/quote]

Why did you float the story here in the first place then legend? If you already knew the answer legend, then why the need to tell us before you implemented your plan? Normally you float a story to read what people say, but you seemingly don't want differing answers to what you want in the first place. Seems pointless to have used this forum for your charade. Next time why go through the charade of floating your ideas, if you really don't want to hear answers you don't like, ol' legend in your own lunch hour [/quote]

Where has knowitall floated any idea or story? it was mentioned in a post as part of the D7 thread and I chose to merge all the posts into a new thread,just happened to be the first one I copied and pasted. the post from knowitall was just one of only three single sentence posts they'd contributed on the whole thread before you came on and sprouted off, as you do all because someone dared question you.

She's obviously just quoted from the minutes of the delegates meetings, which anyone can do. Clubs were warned it would happen, we're now faced with it and i'm sure the league in conjuction with the clubs will try and do best for everyone involved.

I understand everyone will be thinking about number 1 (their club and what it means for them), the league needs to look at the bigger picture - which is making a fair competition league wide. We've coped when clubs have folded and left a void, we're now trying to fill the void so Div 3, 6 and 7 can become solid, fully competitive A grade comps, instead of having whipping boys in these grades every year.

Surely the worst thing you can do to existing member clubs is bring in new clubs who are well above the standard into their division??

Ignoring one clubs promotion may suck for them, but failing to put the new club where it belongs will ruin the division for all clubs that year and potentially then again the following season depending on how misplaced the new club is.

Ideally they are fitted into a bye spot, and the league should err on the side of the lower division rather than higher, but a new club coming in seriously below their capabilities and winning an undefeated premiership and winning by huge margins, who does that help??

Please stop agreeing with me Jetters its making me uncomfortable.

Would Brighton's reserves side beat a Div 6 side though

LMA wrote:Would Brighton's reserves side beat a Div 6 side though

Only if their 'A' grade played in a division that was an even number Div 2,4,6 etc
Then I backed them in for sure.

Just on top of the point we made above -i found the minutes from that meeting:

From the March 22 minutes

New Clubs
Discussion ensued on the entry point of new clubs to The League
J. Kernahan asked clubs for feedback on a preferred model for The League to work with
J. Kernahan identified 7 clubs who may wish to join the league in the next 3 to 5 years – Blackwood, Brighton, Morphettville Park, Flagstaff Hill, Marion, Hackham, Mt Lofty
G. Capogrecco – Gepps Cross suggested the League cannot have a set entry point of Division 5 for new clubs to assure the new team a premiership
J. Kernahan - replied that at the same time there is no point putting a team in a division where the new club cannot compete and referred to Edwardstown entry of Division 4 and their position at the end of 2016 would provide a reference point for new teams in the future.
Clubs indicated the runner-up not be promoted as against the 8th team being relegated to make way for a new team as the preferred however clubs could negotiate with each other re promotion/relegation depending on their own circumstances at the time
G. Capogrecco – Gepps Cross proposed The League to move forward with growth of The League

Motion: League move forward with discussion with new clubs

Discussion then ensued there is no basis for motion and that The League present options to clubs when available but any changes should be made available before the end of the minor round so all clubs affected know in advance of The League’s plans – general agreement/no objections noted.

G. Capogrecco – Gepps Cross withdrew motion