Footy Smart wrote:smac wrote:It's only worrying if you think clubs should have U16 whites. It's junk cricket, belonging at a community club and not a grade club.
These clubs are now spending untold hours on finding cricketers just to fill a team instead of developing the players in the reds sides - what a waste of effort!
far from it Smac, couldnt be any further from the truth. 3 players from my 16s played whites in their last year of 16s and then eventually played A grade. If they didnt play whites they would have been lost to grade cricket. This year already 2 whites players from the first 4 rounds are into the reds due to performance with one of them top scoring on the weekend....... The rate of development of each kid is idifferent, if these kids go to community clubs they dont develop and are lost in the system.
All depends how the club is run
Pretty sure Peter George played 16 whites in his final year as well. He is a classic example of a kid who took longer to develop but look where he ended up.
Perhaps they could consider changing it to U13s, U14s, U15s, U16s with 3-4 overage players allowed in each grade as required - similar to the U23 Futures concept? Could help some of the first year senior players as well if they can't get a D grade game, can drop back to play as an overage player - might make the transition a bit easier and allows the better jnr players to go up to snrs reducing the worry about having enough numbers for jnr teams. This format keeps the slower developers in the mix but makes the pathway a bit clearer. Dare say there are plenty of holes in this concept, but just a thought....
wtf happened there.
