SAAFL Division 8 & D8R (2012)

[Footy Chick]

VERY good point....

[hotpies]

Modbury (C/D) and Flinders Uni finished bottom of Div 7 in 2011. Normally they would be relegated?

Modbury C grade would of finshied a lot higher if they didnt sandbag in there D grade mate.

Good point but

[Roaring Lion!]

C1
 Gaza (A1)
 SPOC (A2)
 Adelaide Uni (5th Side)
 Salisbury North (A1)
 PHOS (A1)
 ROCS (A1)
 Ovingham (1st Side)
 North Haven (A5)
 SHOC (A1)
 Athelstone (A2)

North Haven look out of their depth?

C2
 Adelaide University (6th Side)
 Walkerville (A2)
 Portland (A2)
 Hectorville (A4)
 Plympton (A4)
 Woodville South (A6)
 Adelaide Lutheran (A5)
 Fitzroy (A5)
 Old Ignatians (A2)
 Pooraka (A3)

Maybe Walkerville / Portland / Old Iggies should be playing higher or should Woody Sth / Luthies / Heccies / Fitzroy play lower...

C3
 Eastern Park (A2)
 Pembroke (A3)
 Adelaide University (7th Side)
 Elizabeth (A4)
 Scotch OC (A4)
 Kenilworth (A5)
 Mawson Lakes (A6)
 Salisbury West (new) (A4)
 Port Districts (A2)
 Payneham (A3)

Should Port Districts / Pembroke / Eastern Park / Payneham look to play up???

C4
 Para Hills (A4)
 CBC (A4)
 Pulteney (A4)
 Kilburn (A3)
 Brahma Lodge (A5)
 Trinity (A6)
 Lockleys (A6)
 Ingle Farm (new) (A7)
 Glenunga (new) (A5)
 Rosewater (new) (A5)
 Blackfriars (new) (A5)

All these sides struggled in 2011 so probally a good match.

Looks not too bad on paper but I think the ranking system requires looking at as interesting to see a few Div 1-3 Clubs C Grade Sides have been nominated to be playing in lower Grades than some Div 4-7 Clubs C Grade Sides by the league...

[Roaring Lion!]

If the SAAFL go down this path i think that this will be a fairer draw for clubs to start, with promotion/relagation the key (is just my opinion)

C1
 Gaza
 SPOC
 Adelaide Uni (5th Side)
 Salisbury North
 PHOS
 ROCS
 Ovingham (1st Side)
 SHOC
 Athelstone
 Old Ignatians

C2
 Adelaide University (6th Side)
 Walkerville
 Portland
 Plympton
 Pooraka
 Port Districts
 Payneham
 Pembroke
 Eastern Park
 Scotch OC

C3
 North Haven
 CBC
 Hectorville
 Adelaide Lutheran
 Fitzroy
 Woodville South
 Adelaide University (7th Side)
 Elizabeth
 Kenilworth
 Mawson Lakes
 Salisbury West (new)

C4
 Para Hills
 Pulteney
 Kilburn
 Brahma Lodge
 Trinity
 Lockleys
 Ingle Farm (new)
 Glenunga (new)
 Rosewater (new)
 Blackfriars (new)

[hotpies]

If the SAAFL go down this path i think that this will be a fairer draw for clubs to start, with promotion/relagation the key (is just my opinion)

C1
 Gaza
 SPOC
 Adelaide Uni (5th Side)
 Salisbury North
 PHOS
 ROCS
 Ovingham (1st Side)
 SHOC
 Athelstone
 Old Ignatians

C2
 Adelaide University (6th Side)
 Walkerville
 Portland
 Plympton
 Pooraka
 Port Districts
 Payneham
 Pembroke
 Eastern Park
 Scotch OC

C3
 North Haven
 CBC
 Hectorville
 Adelaide Lutheran
 Fitzroy
 Woodville South
 Adelaide University (7th Side)
 Elizabeth
 Kenilworth
 Mawson Lakes
 Salisbury West (new)

C4
 Para Hills
 Pulteney
 Kilburn
 Brahma Lodge
 Trinity
 Lockleys
 Ingle Farm (new)
 Glenunga (new)
 Rosewater (new)
 Blackfriars (new)

I think Mawson lakes should be in C4 as they have only had a C grade for one season and would be better suited in C4 where there is other teams that there A and B grade will be playing? Easier for triple headers if the league do go down this way.

Makes it a bit hard when there is higher ranked clubs is C3?

[The Ash Man]

If the SAAFL go down this path i think that this will be a fairer draw for clubs to start, with promotion/relagation the key (is just my opinion)

C1
 Gaza
 SPOC
 Adelaide Uni (5th Side)
 Salisbury North
 PHOS
 ROCS
 Ovingham (1st Side)
 SHOC
 Athelstone
 Old Ignatians

C2
 Adelaide University (6th Side)
 Walkerville
 Portland
 Plympton
 Pooraka
 Port Districts
 Payneham
 Pembroke
 Eastern Park
 Scotch OC

C3
 North Haven
 CBC
 Hectorville
 Adelaide Lutheran
 Fitzroy
 Woodville South
 Adelaide University (7th Side)
 Elizabeth
 Kenilworth
 Mawson Lakes
 Salisbury West (new)

C4
 Para Hills
 Pulteney
 Kilburn
 Brahma Lodge
 Trinity
 Lockleys
 Ingle Farm (new)
 Glenunga (new)
 Rosewater (new)
 Blackfriars (new)

Not sure that these 3 should be in C4 when you have D5 and D6 clubs in C3

[catchisthecry]

Pulteney and Kilburn were terrible in C4 last year. Uncompetitive

[S Demon]

Pulteney and Kilburn were terrible in C4 last year. Uncompetitive

That doesn't mean they will be this year. As i've said before, putting together C grade divisions based on the previous year's form is dangerous. A premiership side could lose 6-10 good players and not be competitive and an ordinary side could gain 6-10 good players and improve out of sight.

The fairest thing to do IMO, is keep the sides in similar divisions as the previous year, align them with their A's and B's as best you can and let the promotion/relegation begin from there. In 2-3 years time the competition would have gone a long way to sorting itself out, especially with only 4 divisions...

[Yank Man]

Pulteney and Kilburn were terrible in C4 last year. Uncompetitive

That doesn't mean they will be this year. As i've said before, putting together C grade divisions based on the previous year's form is dangerous. A premiership side could lose 6-10 good players and not be competitive and an ordinary side could gain 6-10 good players and improve out of sight.

The fairest thing to do IMO, is keep the sides in similar divisions as the previous year, align them with their A's and B's as best you can and let the promotion/relegation begin from there. In 2-3 years time the competition would have gone a long way to sorting itself out, especially with only 4 divisions...

X2

[woodublieve12]

If the SAAFL go down this path i think that this will be a fairer draw for clubs to start, with promotion/relagation the key (is just my opinion)

C1
 Gaza
 SPOC
 Adelaide Uni (5th Side)
 Salisbury North
 PHOS
 ROCS
 Ovingham (1st Side)
 SHOC
 Athelstone
 Old Ignatians

C2
 Adelaide University (6th Side)
 Walkerville
 Portland
 Plympton - you must be joking having plympton in this div...
 Pooraka
 Port Districts
 Payneham
 Pembroke
 Eastern Park
 Scotch OC

C3
 North Haven
 CBC
 Hectorville
 Adelaide Lutheran
 Fitzroy
 Woodville South
 Adelaide University (7th Side)
 Elizabeth
 Kenilworth
 Mawson Lakes
 Salisbury West (new)

C4
 Para Hills
 Pulteney
 Kilburn
 Brahma Lodge
 Trinity
 Lockleys
 Ingle Farm (new)
 Glenunga (new)
 Rosewater (new)
 Blackfriars (new)

[marbles]

Get the impression that players in these C1-C4 are regarded as retards or somethin

[Masha]

Pulteney and Kilburn were terrible in C4 last year. Uncompetitive

That doesn't mean they will be this year. As i've said before, putting together C grade divisions based on the previous year's form is dangerous. A premiership side could lose 6-10 good players and not be competitive and an ordinary side could gain 6-10 good players and improve out of sight.

The fairest thing to do IMO, is keep the sides in similar divisions as the previous year, align them with their A's and B's as best you can and let the promotion/relegation begin from there. In 2-3 years time the competition would have gone a long way to sorting itself out, especially with only 4 divisions...

What? So clubs like North Haven, Adelaide Lutheran and Hope Valley (if they stay C5 and not go Div 8 ) basically have a straight entrance into the prelim/GF because they'll only play 4-6 competitive games, and belt the rubbish teams by 30 goals every week? You have to make a stance sometime and now is as good as any. Make the change now and let it work itself out. At worst, you have 9 home triple headers for the C grade teams, and 9 away triple headers. So be it. Seems like a good and fair system. A couple teams will get their nose out of joint, but you cant please everyone.

For what it's worth, North Haven do seem a little high, maybe C2 with the other sides from C5 in 2011 (Plympton, Woody South and Lutheran).

[Demon Juke]

Pulteney and Kilburn were terrible in C4 last year. Uncompetitive

That doesn't mean they will be this year. As i've said before, putting together C grade divisions based on the previous year's form is dangerous. A premiership side could lose 6-10 good players and not be competitive and an ordinary side could gain 6-10 good players and improve out of sight.

The fairest thing to do IMO, is keep the sides in similar divisions as the previous year, align them with their A's and B's as best you can and let the promotion/relegation begin from there. In 2-3 years time the competition would have gone a long way to sorting itself out, especially with only 4 divisions...

What? So clubs like North Haven, Adelaide Lutheran and Hope Valley (if they stay C5 and not go Div 8 ) basically have a straight entrance into the prelim/GF because they'll only play 4-6 competitive games, and belt the rubbish teams by 30 goals every week? You have to make a stance sometime and now is as good as any. Make the change now and let it work itself out. At worst, you have 9 home triple headers for the C grade teams, and 9 away triple headers. So be it. Seems like a good and fair system. A couple teams will get their nose out of joint, but you cant please everyone.

For what it's worth, North Haven do seem a little high, maybe C2 with the other sides from C5 in 2011 (Plympton, Woody South and Lutheran).

Heard Brahma might have a good 'c' grade this year with all there new players, might have to put them into c2 / c3.

[Masha]

Pulteney and Kilburn were terrible in C4 last year. Uncompetitive

That doesn't mean they will be this year. As i've said before, putting together C grade divisions based on the previous year's form is dangerous. A premiership side could lose 6-10 good players and not be competitive and an ordinary side could gain 6-10 good players and improve out of sight.

The fairest thing to do IMO, is keep the sides in similar divisions as the previous year, align them with their A's and B's as best you can and let the promotion/relegation begin from there. In 2-3 years time the competition would have gone a long way to sorting itself out, especially with only 4 divisions...

What? So clubs like North Haven, Adelaide Lutheran and Hope Valley (if they stay C5 and not go Div 8 ) basically have a straight entrance into the prelim/GF because they'll only play 4-6 competitive games, and belt the rubbish teams by 30 goals every week? You have to make a stance sometime and now is as good as any. Make the change now and let it work itself out. At worst, you have 9 home triple headers for the C grade teams, and 9 away triple headers. So be it. Seems like a good and fair system. A couple teams will get their nose out of joint, but you cant please everyone.

For what it's worth, North Haven do seem a little high, maybe C2 with the other sides from C5 in 2011 (Plympton, Woody South and Lutheran).

Heard Brahma might have a good 'c' grade this year with all there new players, might have to put them into c2 / c3.

Shhhhhh....why do you think we like the proposal???? Nah just kidding, we will be pretty similar to last year, struggle in a majority of games with the guys still learning but may have a win or 2.

[S Demon]

Pulteney and Kilburn were terrible in C4 last year. Uncompetitive

That doesn't mean they will be this year. As i've said before, putting together C grade divisions based on the previous year's form is dangerous. A premiership side could lose 6-10 good players and not be competitive and an ordinary side could gain 6-10 good players and improve out of sight.

The fairest thing to do IMO, is keep the sides in similar divisions as the previous year, align them with their A's and B's as best you can and let the promotion/relegation begin from there. In 2-3 years time the competition would have gone a long way to sorting itself out, especially with only 4 divisions...

What? So clubs like North Haven, Adelaide Lutheran and Hope Valley (if they stay C5 and not go Div 8 ) basically have a straight entrance into the prelim/GF because they'll only play 4-6 competitive games, and belt the rubbish teams by 30 goals every week? You have to make a stance sometime and now is as good as any. Make the change now and let it work itself out. At worst, you have 9 home triple headers for the C grade teams, and 9 away triple headers. So be it. Seems like a good and fair system. A couple teams will get their nose out of joint, but you cant please everyone.

For what it's worth, North Haven do seem a little high, maybe C2 with the other sides from C5 in 2011 (Plympton, Woody South and Lutheran).

I think both our opinions will get to the same result in the end after a couple of years, but you can't say certain teams will be strong or weak just because they were the year before. The fairest way to do it in my opinion is stated in my previous post, at least clubs will know what to expect after this year

[Boosh]

D8/8R

•Broadview
•Gepps Cross
•PAOC
•Flinders Park
•SMOSH
•Mitcham
•Salisbury
•Hope Valley (new)
•Golden Grove
•Unley (new)
•Seaton (new)

What is the likelyhood of all these teams getting 4 sides? As it stands our club need one of these to not have four sides in order for us to have a D Grade

[beef]

D8/8R

•Broadview
•Gepps Cross
•PAOC
•Flinders Park
•SMOSH
•Mitcham
•Salisbury
•Hope Valley (new)
•Golden Grove
•Unley (new)
•Seaton (new)

What is the likelyhood of all these teams getting 4 sides? As it stands our club need one of these to not have four sides
in order for us to have a D Grade

Gepps x struggled at times last year for a 4th team and I thought flinders park were in div7. I can only speak for Salisbury but we def will have 4 teams.

[Masha]

D8/8R

•Broadview
•Gepps Cross
•PAOC
•Flinders Park
•SMOSH
•Mitcham
•Salisbury
•Hope Valley (new)
•Golden Grove
•Unley (new)
•Seaton (new)

What is the likelyhood of all these teams getting 4 sides? As it stands our club need one of these to not have four sides in order for us to have a D Grade

I was led to believe by a member of the executive, that Div 8/8R will have as many sides in it that have 4 teams, so it could end up having 12 sides even though you wont play all sides twice??

[Hefty]

D8/8R

•Broadview
•Gepps Cross
•PAOC
•Flinders Park
•SMOSH
•Mitcham
•Salisbury
•Hope Valley (new)
•Golden Grove
•Unley (new)
•Seaton (new)

What is the likelyhood of all these teams getting 4 sides? As it stands our club need one of these to not have four sides in order for us to have a D Grade

GG will have 4 sides...

[Boosh]

D8/8R

•Broadview
•Gepps Cross
•PAOC
•Flinders Park
•SMOSH
•Mitcham
•Salisbury
•Hope Valley (new)
•Golden Grove
•Unley (new)
•Seaton (new)

What is the likelyhood of all these teams getting 4 sides? As it stands our club need one of these to not have four sides in order for us to have a D Grade

I was led to believe by a member of the executive, that Div 8/8R will have as many sides in it that have 4 teams, so it could end up having 12 sides even though you wont play all sides twice??

I hope that turns out to be true because North Haven have been told that we cannot have a fourth side