Far be it for me to question the gurus from Sturt and F/ville but in my mind, particulalry at the lower age groups, playing an extra game v training will put increased emphasis on the individual skills rather than the team orientated skills.

To get the message across regarding team plays, both D & O requires substantial repetitive training and I am not sure this message will get across in a game environment. With this happening I believe the players will become more individualistic (if that's a word) in their approach to playing and the skills they learn.

Good points, but some of the best players are those that were not subjected to the repition and fundamentals you talk about in their younger junior careers. Many were late starters or bloomers so did not get the fundamental and repetitive drilling.

Sure, trainings are important but nothing beats playing a competitive game and you can always go and find a coach willing to give you an extra individual practice.

Some players are great because they as individuals have great individual skills. Other players, and I would suggest more than less, are great players because of the way they perform in a team structure. With this approach are we focussing on the first group of players and letting the second group down.

You also mention about getting extra individual training. My point is that this needs to be in a team environment rather than focussing on individual skills if the team skills are going to be taught.

I forgot to also mention. If this approach is better then why does it not extend to the Div 1 & 2s.

The question here is not whether 1 is better than the other. But rather what is best for the players in those area's. For division 1 and 2 players, generally they have been playing for some time and have developed the basic skills required for the game. Especially at U/14 and U/16 level, these players have played for 7 or 8 years. However, in lower division and younger age groups, players have often not been playing for a long period. Or do not have the necessary basketball related motor skills to be in a position that requires the repitition to take them from being average players up to the next level. Remembering that these players, through their games have already gone from being beginners to average players.

If you look at either Skill Aquisition or Sports Psychology yuo can see that it is only those players who have decided to move to the investment stage of their sporting life (which would be considered U/14 div 1 and U/16 Div 1 and 2) that they really gain a major benefit from the extra trainings. Whereas the other athlete's especially those who are in the Sampling years of sport. ie Those playing multiple sports or for fun will actually develop quicker playing a second game rather than a second training.

The idea of a domestic compeitition is one that hope's in the long term to increase participation levels of basketball while also lowering cost for all to play. It also takes into account that kids usually enjoy the games more than trainings and are therefore more likely to contiue in a non-threatening game enviroment for a longer period for fun as the number of players who are able to continue down the development pathway to elite sport is minimal. I believe that both clubs will be providing other opportunities for players to improve their skills with clinics and camps over the coming years, to provide for those players looknig for further development.

If you have any further questions, please continue to post here.

Thanks, TBA - indeed a good explanation. Forestville and Sturt both think that the domestic competition concept will have a positive effect on players and teams in all divisions/age groups.

Just a clarification on ebay's initial post - all Sturt and Forestville's top 3 teams in each age group play district only, and in some age groups, it's the top 4 teams. The cutoff point varies between different age groups and clubs, and these decisions were based on a number of factors, including the number of players in the age group, the clubs' training structures, and the need for a viable domestic competition.

Just a quick question on the domestic set up. You can't start playing district until the season in which you turn 8 (I believe). What is it for the domestic competition?

Thanks

Are you letting teams from outside your clubs join in?

Is there a demand for teams outside your clubs to join in?

Yes, and yes.

Now's probably a good time for us to post some more details about City South. I'll do so in a new thread.

The BASA rules regarding age occur due to sponsorship from the State Government relating to kids not playing before they turn 8.

In the current City South Competition the lowest division is U/12's. Hopefully in the future both clubs will begin to have U/10 and U/8 compeititons.

Anon, are you suggesting that domestic comps should not be setup?

I would have thought church could run a comp, domestic comps could run as well.

If one of them dies out you can hardly blame the other competition its just the market deciding which comp is best isnt it???

Anonymous,

Agreed that Church does provide a compeittion which i myself began playing in. But it is not exactly a high standard and you are correct when you say that it is dying out. If church are looking for some help I hope that they talk to BASA and that the Associaiotn gives them some as it provides a valuable service to basketball.

You could easily say the div 4 or div 5 is a holding pen for Sturt and Forestville or any other club. Where families pay high fee's for not so quality trainings compared to the div 1 and 2 kids. Where a domestic competition will actually be of higher standard and lower cost to these families.

Or that the money from the domestic compeititons will be put back into the reduction of fee's and providing a higher standard of refereeing and coaching. So I guess it is whether you look at the glass as being half empty or half full.