SA Footy

When is the SFL going bring itself into alignment with everyother footy league in the country and change the mini 2/3 - 4/5 -6/7 competion to under age football ie: under 8 - 10 - 12 and adopt the same rules and principals as other leagues. Club football is just that club football not a school based competition.

Also some kids face the very real prospect of going straight from 6/7 football to under 16 football due to this ludicrus policy adopted by the SFL. What better way to loose kids either from football totally or to other leagues.

I note the SFL under 12 team that has been put together drawing on players from both the 4/5 and 6/7 competition training at Glenelg and a large number of kids having to be taught to tackle as the metro teams they are playing are already doing so. Is this not more dangerous to the player than teaching correct methods at club level.

I can hear the righteous out there now saying we shouldn't be teaching kids to tackle. However is it not more dangerous to teach the bumping aspect of the game before tackling and leave them with no option but to bump a head when a player is over the ball. Football is a contact sport lets teach it correctly from an early age.

The rule change by the SFL might be a bit off for some people, but there is no way that a player would go from playing 6/7's straight to under 16's, unless of course they got held back in Primary School for years... Unless youve got a real situation were this will happen? I doubt it very much.

reppoh_eht wrote:The rule change by the SFL might be a bit off for some people, but there is no way that a player would go from playing 6/7's straight to under 16's, unless of course they got held back in Primary School for years... Unless youve got a real situation were this will happen? I doubt it very much.

Well my friend it happened this season at m/vale,and it will happen again in the future.The new ages that were changed this season should have been like it all along,and yes the mini league kids do need to be the same as 14,16 ,18.

cyclops wrote:

reppoh_eht wrote:The rule change by the SFL might be a bit off for some people, but there is no way that a player would go from playing 6/7's straight to under 16's, unless of course they got held back in Primary School for years... Unless youve got a real situation were this will happen? I doubt it very much.

Well my friend it happened this season at m/vale,and it will happen again in the future.The new ages that were changed this season should have been like it all along,and yes the mini league kids do need to be the same as 14,16 ,18.

Are you sure? Cyclops

vics01 wrote:When is the SFL going bring itself into alignment with everyother footy league in the country and change the mini 2/3 - 4/5 -6/7 competion to under age football ie: under 8 - 10 - 12 and adopt the same rules and principals as other leagues. Club football is just that club football not a school based competition.

Also some kids face the very real prospect of going straight from 6/7 football to under 16 football due to this ludicrus policy adopted by the SFL. What better way to loose kids either from football totally or to other leagues.

I note the SFL under 12 team that has been put together drawing on players from both the 4/5 and 6/7 competition training at Glenelg and a large number of kids having to be taught to tackle as the metro teams they are playing are already doing so. Is this not more dangerous to the player than teaching correct methods at club level.

I can hear the righteous out there now saying we shouldn't be teaching kids to tackle. However is it not more dangerous to teach the bumping aspect of the game before tackling and leave them with no option but to bump a head when a player is over the ball. Football is a contact sport lets teach it correctly from an early age.

To a point I agree with what you are saying I was from the old school and did not believe in the no tackle policy that was until I started coaching junior football.
There will always be a lot of for and against in this argument. I did find that with no tackling or bumping at 2/3 allowed the kids to execute disposal skills and in turn they got the opportunity to practice in this area. It also brought all kids into the game. Moving into 4/5 and bumping these skills were extended to disposal under a gradual pressure.
I believe we would lose more kids at 2/3 4/5 who due to size may not get a kick.

You also mention changing club football to 8 – 10 -12. I personally favors this option don’t know about going from 6/7 to 16 but there are kids who are only just capable at playing 14s and will have to go up next year to 16s. That could cause a lot of kids to be discouraged about playing.
Junior football players should have 2 years at each grade.

Have had this discussion with a lot of people inc SFL and as I said before there are a lot of for and against the best thing is for the club to monitor the players age and keep on top of it and play the kids up and prepare them properly.

spanner wrote:

cyclops wrote:

reppoh_eht wrote:The rule change by the SFL might be a bit off for some people, but there is no way that a player would go from playing 6/7's straight to under 16's, unless of course they got held back in Primary School for years... Unless youve got a real situation were this will happen? I doubt it very much.

Well my friend it happened this season at m/vale,and it will happen again in the future.The new ages that were changed this season should have been like it all along,and yes the mini league kids do need to be the same as 14,16 ,18.

Are you sure? Cyclops

A lad by the name Clint Santos.He did not play mini league at M/Vale just played for his primary school

cyclops wrote:

spanner wrote:

cyclops wrote:

reppoh_eht wrote:The rule change by the SFL might be a bit off for some people, but there is no way that a player would go from playing 6/7's straight to under 16's, unless of course they got held back in Primary School for years... Unless youve got a real situation were this will happen? I doubt it very much.

Well my friend it happened this season at m/vale,and it will happen again in the future.The new ages that were changed this season should have been like it all along,and yes the mini league kids do need to be the same as 14,16 ,18.

Are you sure? Cyclops

A lad by the name Clint Santos.He did not play mini league at M/Vale just played for his primary school

That makes it hard for the club to monitor it as mentioned

cyclops wrote:

spanner wrote:

cyclops wrote:

reppoh_eht wrote:The rule change by the SFL might be a bit off for some people, but there is no way that a player would go from playing 6/7's straight to under 16's, unless of course they got held back in Primary School for years... Unless youve got a real situation were this will happen? I doubt it very much.

Well my friend it happened this season at m/vale,and it will happen again in the future.The new ages that were changed this season should have been like it all along,and yes the mini league kids do need to be the same as 14,16 ,18.

Are you sure? Cyclops

A lad by the name Clint Santos.He did not play mini league at M/Vale just played for his primary school

How old was he when he left Primary School? Surely he either had a year or two off football or was kept back in school, if either of these is the case then how do u expect the SFL to 'bend' the rules for these exceptions? Still unsure how this would happen...

It will happen again at at least 1 sfl club this year. Due to kids being kept down at school and the fact that the change to 1st Jan. was bought in for under 18/16/14 but no allowance was made for 6/7 below. This also means that most kids will only now get 1 yr at under 14 level to develop.

No bumping at 4/5 level also makes some kids look better than what they are, causing unreal expectations of the childs ability for the child and some parents. Others who might look so good in the open running of no tackling football do develop into good in and under footballers when tackiling is introduced if they are not lost prior to this.

When I was at school 95% of kids in Year 7 turned 12 in that year so when they entered high school they had 2 years of Under 14 and so on. These days school entry at reception is virtually based on a June/July cut off so 50% turn 12 and 50% turn 13 during year 7.

One problem with your theory guys. If a 13 year old Year 7 can't play Minis on Sunday (if oldest age is Under 12), he normally has to play for school before club on a Saturday so this would preclude him from playing club footy anyway. Many club juniors are an extension of the local school(s) and at that age level they should be allowed to play in their school year levels with their mates rather than be separated because of age.

Down the Hill, I wonder what is more important school footy or club footy, being that the clubs are the one's who develop the kids in the first instance. I would have thought that school footy is actually a social exercise and extesnion of what the kids are taught by the clubs. I am fascinated by the mindset in this state that school should come before club. The kids where I am involved are all mates from several schools, in fact 'The Cub' is great place for kids to meet new people make mates and play sport in a learning enviroment. "Down the Hill if you are involved with a club you are probably doing your club a disservice by promoting school over club. In fact I know of two clubs at the moment where the fabled college kids want to get on board now that they have realised that the school season is nearly over and the clubs will be playing longer and competing in finals. We need to give the kids 2 years at u14 level in order to develop their full potential in each age group before passing to the next group up. The SFL needs to wake up before we loose more kids to the leagues down the hill.