by vics01 » Thu Mar 30, 2017 6:39 pm
by Yank Man » Thu Mar 30, 2017 7:43 pm
heater31 wrote:Clubs struggling for numbers??? maybe that is a sign that there simply are not enough blokes playing the game any more due to outside inflences such as family balance, work pressures
by The Bedge » Fri Mar 31, 2017 10:03 am
morell wrote:But srs.
It could work. You could have a minimum of 16, but a maximum of 21 still. So that clubs with the numbers can still pick a "full" side but on the field its only 16 v 16.
This could mean those clubs that have only been able to field one side might've been able to field two. Like us in 2014.
Ultimately, it would mean more control over the integrity of the competition and avoid Salisbury West/North Pines and Mitchell Park/Flinders Uni type situations.
Dolphin Treasure wrote:Your an attention seeking embarsement..
by human_torpedo » Fri Mar 31, 2017 10:06 am
by S Demon » Fri Mar 31, 2017 11:06 am
human_torpedo wrote:Given most B grade sides use excess of 50 different players a season I am very concerned about a cap.. I used 67 players last year for instance. We had nearly 100 registered players for 3 teams yet struggled to field a C grade at times
by Lightning McQueen » Fri Mar 31, 2017 12:00 pm
by Jim05 » Fri Mar 31, 2017 12:21 pm
Lightning McQueen wrote:They should have a pool where registered players form one club that miss out on a game can be lent to another to top up, they don't have to be in the same division or anything, it gives those that miss out a chance to still have a kick and eliminates forfeits.
by morell » Fri Mar 31, 2017 3:37 pm
Its a critical mass argument, in essence.Zartan wrote:morell wrote:But srs.
It could work. You could have a minimum of 16, but a maximum of 21 still. So that clubs with the numbers can still pick a "full" side but on the field its only 16 v 16.
This could mean those clubs that have only been able to field one side might've been able to field two. Like us in 2014.
Ultimately, it would mean more control over the integrity of the competition and avoid Salisbury West/North Pines and Mitchell Park/Flinders Uni type situations.
Surely 2x players isn't all that's making a difference/impact in sides fielding two teams? I fail to see how reducing the numbers is going to improve the chances of fielding an additional side - still need depth in the list over the year to begin with?
Maybe if clubs were capped at the number of registered players and the excess went elsewhere it might help, but thats a crap idea and opens up a whole new can of worms.
by locky801 » Fri Mar 31, 2017 4:51 pm
Lightning McQueen wrote:They should have a pool where registered players form one club that miss out on a game can be lent to another to top up, they don't have to be in the same division or anything, it gives those that miss out a chance to still have a kick and eliminates forfeits.
Competitions SANFL Official Site | Country Footy SA | Southern Football League | VFL Footy
Club Forums Snouts Louts | The Roost | Redlegs Forum |