gutta
Years ago

Easter Carnival-SA Teams at a Disadvantage

Who else thinks that all players should be under the age of their nominated age group on December 31st 2008, instead of 2007?
Probably the reason why the Vic teams are always so strong, they're a year older.

Topic #15164 | Report this topic


Anon  
Years ago

What are you saying, or what do you think you are saying - in the words of the fish and chip redhead - please expain!

Reply #179186 | Report this post


NEC  
Years ago

gutta - Since when? This has never been the case, but it is a common misconception.

Do you know something the rest of us don't??

Reply #179189 | Report this post


frangipani  
Years ago

I suspect it's true that some victorian players are too old for their age level, but even if not, there can't be anything wrong with ensuring everyone's the right age. We need players registered state or nationally as soon as they start, and then there's no dispute. They do this in soccer and other sports, just a case of basketball being behind the times.

Reply #179192 | Report this post


In the Know  
Years ago

They are the same age. Bigger population will give you a bigger base. Stop whining and making up stuff you know nothing about.

Reply #179194 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Years ago

The SA teams arent at a disadvantage. We play against exactly the same aged girls and guys from VIC, most of them meet up again at nationals. We get flogged in both.

Reply #179224 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Years ago

This argument happens every year FFS!!! GROUNDHOG DAY, or a fresh batch of assuming parents & players.

Reply #179230 | Report this post


Trex  
Years ago

Your a fool gutta...age cutoffs are they same in SA and Vic..how do you think U14 clubs, U16 state etc go...sheeeesh...just plain dumb...

Reply #179234 | Report this post


Victorian  
Years ago

Did a norwood person start this post ? Carlo perhaps ?

Reply #179236 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Years ago

victorian i doubt it very much. it would have been started by someone relatively new to district basketball who believes this rubbish

Reply #179238 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Years ago

Gutta, The only disadvantage I have encountered when paying the vics is that they are well drilled and skilled and bigger.
They are the same age as our teams but they select from a wider population and gene pool and sometimes it can appear that their Under 12's need a shave and thats only the girls!
Seriously, they are just very good juniors and our best equal their best, just they have a lot of the best to our few.
Its great to get to play the best so enjoy it and learn.

Reply #179243 | Report this post


Speed44  
Years ago

Absolutely right ANON above. They are well drilled. Went to watch my nephew play the other night at Pasadena against Collingwood.

Those Vic boys played disciplined D, no jumping around trying to block shots, no lame attempts at steals, just good, solid denying D, whereas my Neph's team, were lazy on D, let them drive in to within 5 feet, and then flailed about wildly and complained when they got called for blocking from behind. And the parents weren't much better either. The Collingwood boys very rarely if ever complained about the refs, even when they got a couple of dodgy calls themselves. It's just a case of being well-drilled and disciplined. That's the difference.

Reply #179255 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Years ago

Collingwood...

Are you serious? Would be the first Collingwood team like that I have ever heard of.

Reply #179270 | Report this post


Speed44,

Was that the same Collingwood all star team that was playing late at Pasadena the other nite that wanted to do more to the opposition than just "play good D" on court 3?

Was it the same Collingwood side that wanted to also continue to play more than "just good D" after the final buzzer had gone when MOST were shaking hands?

Was that the same Collingwood team were a certain Allstar kid got rattled and wanted to play a whole lot more than "just good D" because an opposition player got in his face on D and screamed "Ball, ball, ball" while the Collingwood cherub had possesion?

Was that the same game were the Collingwood Allstars nearly went down to a lowly SA div 4 side?

Speed44; I am hoping it wasnt the game I witnessed because the Collingwood Upstarts were the ones winging and moaning to the reffs and wanting to do a little more to the opposition than to just play "good D"

As for the parents, I think you have maybe got confussed when writing your thread and gotten events alittle back to front.

The Collingwood team you have described has N E V E R existed in the 10 years of tornaments that I have been going too.

Speed44 I presume you must have witnessed an entirly different game than I did on court 3 at Pasadena the other nite otherwise it is plain to see what you were actually on!

Reply #179279 | Report this post


Speed44  
Years ago

No, the game I watched was on court 2 actually against a Div 2 SA team, and not a late game either. And they won quite handsomely.

Didn't see the game you mentioned. And don't get all uppitty until you find out which game I was at, not before. Take your sedatives now, OK?

The Collingwood team I witnessed were well disciplined and controlled. If that is different to what their teams normally are, then these guys were exceptions, and show that you shouldn't tar all with the same brush.

And I definitely didn't get the parents mixed up either, I was sitting right amongst them. So it's obviously a different game.

Reply #179377 | Report this post


Speed44  
Years ago

Oh, and the questions weren't that hard either.

Reply #179378 | Report this post


Seditives taken.

Must have been a different team as I would hate people to think the team I witnessed on court 3 was your same Collingwood Angels

Reply #179402 | Report this post


Speed44  
Years ago

Obviously 2 different teams. Not saying they were Angels at all, but in that one game I saw, they played a good, fair and honest game. Who knows, the other games they played over the weekend they might have been knuckleheads.

Also, the game on court 1 at the same time was between an SA team and the Darebin Giants (is that their name?), and it was the same deal. The Giants were disciplined and well-drilled, maybe a little cocky, but nonetheless fair, and just steamrolled the SA side.

Great to hear about the sedatives. Don't forget to refill the subscription.

Reply #179487 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Years ago

It would be nice to put a big notice up next to the results on age groups and bold it in the tournament programme. I had to laugh at the how stressed some spectators became due to this ignorance, particularly the Woodville parents at the Dome on Monday ... you know who you are!! RULE 4 clearly states "All players must be under the age of the nominated age group on December 31, 2007."

Reply #179527 | Report this post


gutta  
Years ago

Regardless of bigger base thus more players to choose from and that the players are better drilled & don't whinge there is a loophole that can be exploited.
Why can't the eligibility of the team be the same as our district comp.
2.3. Age Eligibility (C32)
a) To be eligible to play in an age group, a player must be under
the age required on 31 December of the year in which the competition is to be completed.

Reply #179671 | Report this post


Minn  
Years ago

Ummmmm, it already is the same!

An u/12 in Vic is also an u/12 in SA - no exceptions.

Try reading the threads you start, ok?

Reply #179687 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Years ago

so Gutta would like the Vics to be a year older? This is plain nonsense e.g. kids playing U16 in the year they turn 16?? Which bit of UNDER don't you understand. Current rules provide that all kids playing U16 turn either 14 or 15 in the year they play U16. So long as the same rules are applied consistently it makes no difference to competition whether it is "16 and under" or "under 16". There is no loophole.

Reply #179701 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Years ago

I can't wait for this thread to be repeated in June...

Reply #179755 | Report this post


Minn  
Years ago

I'm going to add fuel to that fire by claiming that Victorian years are a month longer therefore 12 year olds from Victoria are a full 12 months older than South Australian 12 year olds.

Reply #179833 | Report this post




You need to be a registered user to post from this location. Register here.



Close ads
Serio: Tourism photography and videography
Little Streaks - The fun and interactive good-habits app designed especially for kids.

Advertise on Hoops to a very focused, local and sports-keen audience. Email for rates and options.

Recent Posts



.


An Australian basketball forum covering NBL, WNBL, ABL, Juniors plus NBA, WNBA, NZ, Europe, etc | Forum time is: 6:58 pm, Tue 19 Mar 2024 | Posts: 968,026 | Last 7 days: 754