SA Footy

the smokey wrote:

Whydontya wrote:Port districts all full of good blokes. Played half an A2 side against a c grade team full of kids. Bullying the lower grades to get paid players some better stat lines it seems

This doesn't sit well with me.... But if your from Ingle farm which I would presume, you blokes did the same last year when your A3 side had the bye due to Pembroke pulling out! Everything swings in round abouts.

And if your not from Ingle Farm, apologies but once again it all comes back one way or another.

Nope, Just scrolling through scores on my cricket and noticed the low score, and checked out the names of wicket takers. Interesting to see a player down there with his rumored pay packet, that was all.

Mustve been a busy Saturday morning changing all of the teams around.

Also just went back and found the game you mentioned, was an A3 side but looks to have still ended up Ingle Farms 2's against GG 2's. A bit of a fairer match up then A2 opening bowlers against a third side.

I presume old ignitions was to wet for a game, so they instead dropped a heap of cricketers who play for fun on the weekend to let the big guns bully lower grades, seems odd to put what looks like 7 or 8 normal 8 graders ahead of the average Joe's playing down low.

Maybe the players big pay packets are paid per game played.

no_remorse28 wrote:I presume old ignitions was to wet for a game, so they instead dropped a heap of cricketers who play for fun on the weekend to let the big guns bully lower grades, seems odd to put what looks like 7 or 8 normal 8 graders ahead of the average Joe's playing down low.

Maybe the players big pay packets are paid per game played.

Is this B2? I can only see like 2x players who are A graders in their B grade. Granted the two had good games, but hardly looks like they loaded up to bully a side.

Edit: Whoops didn't see the C1 game!

Lets look at it glass half full...

PD were struggling for numbers, like most clubs due to covid.
They were looking down the barrel at having to call off their C1 game.
Instead their A-graders, who's own game had been cancelled due to a wet deck, put their hands up, and helped fill the gaps in B2 and C1 to allow those games to go ahead.

Rather than spending a day on the cans, these blokes put the club and the game ahead of their own afternoon off, and ensured 44 blokes got to play cricket.

Heroes the lot of them.

From what I hear at the expense of the club, that is staring down penalties from ATCA for naming an A2 side and then playing them in other grades regardless of the abandonment.

All though I do feel port districts would be within there rights to challenge that and any club would.

The Bedge wrote:

no_remorse28 wrote:I presume old ignitions was to wet for a game, so they instead dropped a heap of cricketers who play for fun on the weekend to let the big guns bully lower grades, seems odd to put what looks like 7 or 8 normal 8 graders ahead of the average Joe's playing down low.

Maybe the players big pay packets are paid per game played.

Is this B2? I can only see like 2x players who are A graders in their B grade. Granted the two had good games, but hardly looks like they loaded up to bully a side.

Edit: Whoops didn't see the C1 game!

C'mon Bedge, there were 4 in the B2 game. I think you missed Grocke and Hillier. I'm intrigued to know what Bylaw they have contravened. Maybe we need another chapter in the bylaws?

Senor Moto Gadili wrote:

The Bedge wrote:

no_remorse28 wrote:I presume old ignitions was to wet for a game, so they instead dropped a heap of cricketers who play for fun on the weekend to let the big guns bully lower grades, seems odd to put what looks like 7 or 8 normal 8 graders ahead of the average Joe's playing down low.

Maybe the players big pay packets are paid per game played.

Is this B2? I can only see like 2x players who are A graders in their B grade. Granted the two had good games, but hardly looks like they loaded up to bully a side.

Edit: Whoops didn't see the C1 game!

C'mon Bedge, there were 4 in the B2 game. I think you missed Grocke and Hillier. I'm intrigued to know what Bylaw they have contravened. Maybe we need another chapter in the bylaws?

Port Districts named these players in the A2 side.
Sure, teams sometimes change after you upload them to mycricket, and before the start of player, however PD have confirmed the A2 result, with these players still named.

So the bylaw (potentially) contravened would be C6, playing in more than one team in the same round of an ATCA fixture without permission of the association.

I say potentially as there is an argument over if a game is washed out, have you played?
Port will obviously argue no.

But to answer your question, bylaw C6 is the one the compliance committee will be considering.

Trader wrote:

Senor Moto Gadili wrote:

The Bedge wrote:

no_remorse28 wrote:I presume old ignitions was to wet for a game, so they instead dropped a heap of cricketers who play for fun on the weekend to let the big guns bully lower grades, seems odd to put what looks like 7 or 8 normal 8 graders ahead of the average Joe's playing down low.

Maybe the players big pay packets are paid per game played.

Is this B2? I can only see like 2x players who are A graders in their B grade. Granted the two had good games, but hardly looks like they loaded up to bully a side.

Edit: Whoops didn't see the C1 game!

C'mon Bedge, there were 4 in the B2 game. I think you missed Grocke and Hillier. I'm intrigued to know what Bylaw they have contravened. Maybe we need another chapter in the bylaws?

Port Districts named these players in the A2 side.
Sure, teams sometimes change after you upload them to mycricket, and before the start of player, however PD have confirmed the A2 result, with these players still named.

So the bylaw (potentially) contravened would be C6, playing in more than one team in the same round of an ATCA fixture without permission of the association.

I say potentially as there is an argument over if a game is washed out, have you played?
Port will obviously argue no.

But to answer your question, bylaw C6 is the one the compliance committee will be considering.

It's a tough one, I can see both sides of the argument. On one hand, is it fair to load up lower grade teams with higher grade players? The other, there's already been a lot of missed cricket this season and maybe these blokes just wanted to get a game in, we play cricket to actually play cricket. For me it comes down to who missed out, if any, for the higher grade players to assimilate into these teams? If I was a B/C/D player and told on the Saturday morning that I'm now playing in a lower grade or not at all so the A graders can get a game in I'd be pretty annoyed.

Bylaw C6 could come into play in, but they didn't actually play in 2 games did they? Can C6 be overcome by simply changing the names in your A2 side to include 11 registered players, other than those who are playing in B2 and C1. Therefore, are Port Districts guilty of poor administration?

Ethically, I don't think it's the right thing to do. There are plenty of experienced people at Port Districts and surely they would have realised what they did was contentious. How hard is it to ring ATCA and get prior approval? Maybe they did and there's nothing to see.

Senor Moto Gadili wrote:Bylaw C6 could come into play in, but they didn't actually play in 2 games did they? Can C6 be overcome by simply changing the names in your A2 side to include 11 registered players, other than those who are playing in B2 and C1. Therefore, are Port Districts guilty of poor administration?

Ethically, I don't think it's the right thing to do. There are plenty of experienced people at Port Districts and surely they would have realised what they did was contentious. How hard is it to ring ATCA and get prior approval? Maybe they did and there's nothing to see.

If they hadn't confirmed the match result already then I agree that's exactly what they should have done (select 11 random players), however having now confirmed the match result, they can't really do that IMO.

FWIW, I agree that although selected in 2 games, they haven't played, and therefore will get away with it, just.

Trader wrote:

Senor Moto Gadili wrote:Bylaw C6 could come into play in, but they didn't actually play in 2 games did they? Can C6 be overcome by simply changing the names in your A2 side to include 11 registered players, other than those who are playing in B2 and C1. Therefore, are Port Districts guilty of poor administration?

Ethically, I don't think it's the right thing to do. There are plenty of experienced people at Port Districts and surely they would have realised what they did was contentious. How hard is it to ring ATCA and get prior approval? Maybe they did and there's nothing to see.

If they hadn't confirmed the match result already then I agree that's exactly what they should have done (select 11 random players), however having now confirmed the match result, they can't really do that IMO.

FWIW, I agree that although selected in 2 games, they haven't played, and therefore will get away with it, just.

Will both games count towards finals qualifications?

They are all qualified for finals already so doesn't really matter.

Hearing one of the Athelstone boys had a bit of fun with the stick in last nights T20. Apparently made 159 out of 230.

Trader wrote:Hearing one of the Athelstone boys had a bit of fun with the stick in last nights T20. Apparently made 159 out of 230.

Not bad for a bloke playing in the lowest grades of PDCA

The Bedge wrote:

Trader wrote:Hearing one of the Athelstone boys had a bit of fun with the stick in last nights T20. Apparently made 159 out of 230.

Not bad for a bloke playing in the lowest grades of PDCA

Just a lazy 18 sixes.

Trader wrote:They are all qualified for finals already so doesn't really matter.

I’ll explain it from my point of view as coach of port districts cricket club and how it come about.
Our a2 game was abandoned at 9am. No players were required to attend the game. At this stage we referred to rule c5.3 were it goes on to state no forfeit abandoned or byes cannot be used to qualify towards finals. So at this stage we are assuming the a2 game is no contest.

We have been hit hard with covid and injuries with O’Neil Thomas Thomas Davis Davis sheedy foster foster sarbjit Apram Mackay all being unavailable

This left us very short in both b grade and c grade. We named Darren Francis who has never train or played Kyle Baxter who never played cricket before and a under 15s player in the b grade. With apram being named a close contact the morning of the game he was a late out currently our leading wicket taker in our b grade.
In the c grade Brett Mackay was a late out with also being deemed a close contact with covid we named 2 players in there 60 in Stan Caldwell and Darren Grocke the other play to miss was tj Martin who hasn’t trained and moved to port Lincoln and has just returned to Adelaide he’s a single dad with 4 kids and gets his kids looked after to play.
So with these 8 players not being regulars and following what we believed to be the rules we were in our right to offer anyone not playing this round including the A grade players an opportunity to play with 8 players deserving to play rather then the 8 players who were only helping the club out.

I would not have played anyone from the selected A grade side to play lower if it meant a regular b or c grade player missed out as the last thing I want to do is upset anyone who is out to play cricket.

So in saying this at this stage Adelaide turf have deemed our players to have played in 2 games.
A Lennon from woody rec named in there b grade played A grade and was not changed last I checked on Monday night. Therefore he’s played in 2 games also.
There was 5 other games were there team was not uploaded on the Adelaide turf webpage and some off them are still not uploaded these games are declared a draw when in fact why are they not deemed a forfeit ???? What’s to say the players named for the club that haven’t named there team on the website haven’t gone and played in another grade after there game was abandoned.

Were you playing against another club's B Grade team? If so did their A Grade team play on the weekend?

How does the computer system work.

If a player is named in a side that's game has been abandoned and then also played in a team that got away will the system read this as 2 games. As I understand all the players in this circumstance are qualified for finals but if this wasn't the case you could see this as a major issue and 'borderline' unmanageable from an administration point of view.

Can administration manually manipulate the games played from the back end of the system but once again how practical is this and would they prefer introducing a rule/law that stops this from occurring in the first place. Do they really want to be spending their time resources to go back and manually change things, personally the less manual changes the better, the more manual changes available the more open to manipulation.

I would think that if the system cant decipher a game played and an abandoned game then a rule has to come in which says if you are named in two teams on the same day then you are classified as playing two games regardless of whether one game got away or not.

Obviously though if you go down that path you also have to require teams have inputted their sides into the system by XXXX on a Saturday (I would say before start of play is a fair requirement) You cant have teams not playing and still not putting in their teams 2-3 days later.

Obviously this doesn't help the current incident which seems like a dogs breakfast where there really is no clear laws in place so personally I wouldn't be punishing anyone but actually clearing up the rules/by laws so everyone is 100% clear on the next occasion. I think as we forward with the use of technology etc its fair enough that occasionally a new situation will arise that hasn't necessarily been taken into account as long as the lesson is learned and the incident doesn't repeats itself then its been handled well.

But I think we will find more and more a computer systems capabilities will drive the rules in place more and more into the future.

Why don't clubs just go in and edit the sides Saturday so they aren't showing as double ups?

The Bedge wrote:Why don't clubs just go in and edit the sides Saturday so they aren't showing as double ups?

If possible that's the simple solution isn't. No double ups allowed by 7pm Saturday night or else we will deem a player as playing two games.