Good one, so true.... go magic!

Whats with all the complaints about basketball sa, they dont withdraw teams or enter teams a couple of weeks into the season! the clubs do this hence the need for re-doing programs!!

clubs nominated teams last week (this is all as far as i know and may not be 100% correct) competitions committee then decided on teams and divisions, lots of teams dropped due to summer fixtures, good thing as semi allowed for a slight pro/rel system in lower divs. clubs were givin final team placings in divs this week would expect first 3 rounds to be out fri or tues at latest, still week and a half before first game so most teams will have 3 trainings between program being published and first game!

from what i am aware of few teams (minus those playing in eltham) will have more than those 3 trainings before first game so what is the big deal?

keep in miond seniors starts this week coming so those programs had to be done first plus PA does most of this on his own and prob works more hours per week than anyone who posts on here!!

Stop complaining about crap that doesnt matter!!!

Can it get any worse?

Anon,

I presume the answer is better opportunities and coaching - isn't this the reason we are given for people going to Sturt!

Zones have always been the answer but the top four clubs oppose it.
You could introduce it at the start of next season with the proviso that kids playing for the teams they are now in can remain but that all players in future need to come from the zoned area.
Problem is, that would stuff up the comfy arrangements these clubs have with country associations.
Stand by for the 'lazy useless club reponses' from the chosen ones who have the right to rule and believe they are the only ones who can save basketball.

anon I agree plus I love this type of comment.

"If we have association model, clubs will be financially able to have more full time employees and therefore improve their servie."

Because going to an association money will bring in the $$s, some people have no idea, there are just as many costs relating to the currently proposed association model as opportunities to make $$.

And I for one want domestic competitions/associations so that families can play the sport at a lower cost, not so the big clubs can try and make $$ while the small clubs die off and disappear.

060, haha - you know that response is coming because you know it's true!

Jack,

There may be an error in my calculations but I think future competitions will be one on one comps.

1,000,000 people
divide by 10 = 100,000 each zone
Childen Under 18 say 25% = 25,000 per zone
Children 6 and under say 33% leave 16,667 per zone in age group
Kids not wanting to play sport say 40% leaves 10,000 Other sports/activities say 90% leaves 1,000
People unaware that district junior basketball exists - 98% leaves 20
High cost of basketball precluding participation of those remaining - 50% leaves 10
50% girls 50% boys leaves 5 boys and 5 girls
5 age groups from U10 to U18 leaves 1 per team.

Obviously a one on one comp won't work if we allow people to shift clubs so I am all for zoning!!!

Jack,

There may be an error in my calculations but I think future competitions will be one on one comps.

1,000,000 people
divide by 10 = 100,000 each zone
Childen Under 18 say 25% = 25,000 per zone
Children 6 and under say 33% leave 16,667 per zone in age group
Kids not wanting to play sport say 40% leaves 10,000 Other sports/activities say 90% leaves 1,000
People unaware that district junior basketball exists - 98% leaves 20
High cost of basketball precluding participation of those remaining - 50% leaves 10
50% girls 50% boys leaves 5 boys and 5 girls
5 age groups from U10 to U18 leaves 1 per team.

Obviously a one on one comp won't work if we allow people to shift clubs so I am all for zoning!!!

066 so your saying that the SANFL clubs are lazy and only get players because they walk in the door?

The current model encourages clubs to steal the basketballers we already have from another club. Instead of wasting time recruiting from other clubs, by zoning the metropolitan area as well as country areas clubs would be able to work harder at attracting new people to the sport as they have a clearly defined area to work within and no longer have to fight other basketball clubs for the players they have.

Zones won't make clubs lazy, zones will give clubs the ability to recruit footballers, netballers etc rather than fighting over those already playing basketball.

Instead of wasting time recruiting from other clubs, by zoning the metropolitan area as well as country areas clubs would be able to work harder at attracting new people to the sport

There is NOTHING stopping you from doing that now!
Unless you are lazy...

"there's nothing stopping them from doing it now"

except that most clubs don't have unlimited resources and spend so much time and effort trying to keep the players they do have that they don't have the resources to be as active in schools etc as certain other clubs. Also they find a family/child who has talent and shows an interest but is being chased by three clubs, the child goes elsewhere and the time and effort spent is wasted. Resources wasted, something all sporting clubs have little of.

Zoning means theres no fighting between clubs, there won't be 3 clubs approaching the one school trying to promote themselves and run clinics, won't be pressure on new families to make a decision between one club or another and fear won't be the deciding factor for parents when getting their club involved at the very first and most basic level.

Despite the rhetoric it has nothing to do with being lazy, that's just the word that certain people at certain clubs are using to ensure the status quo continues and they continue to have the pick of the best basketballers in Adelaide and across all the Country areas. Your just protecting your own dominance, nothing more 'lazy' has nothing to do with zoning.

Jack,

Obviously there are errors in my calculation but my point was to show that the pool of available kids is quite small unless we can attract them away from main stream sports. I know we like to think we are a main stream sport but I do doubt that.

We need to attract more kids to the sport - we need to make it affordable and I think we need to promote that there is a district junior basketball competition and in fact an ABA for seniors. I wonder how many people know that - I never did and it was quite by chance that my son is now playing district basketball at a high level. A mother at a social game asked why he wasn't playing district - I said what is that and we have never looked back. We were lucky; lucky to be able to afford it and lucky to have heard about it - how many others are not so lucky

most clubs don't have unlimited resources

No club has unlimited resources. It's just that SOME clubs put those resources into junior development. Others don't.

spend so much time and effort trying to keep the players they do have

Why would you need to spend ANY effort in this area? If you provide a good service that they are happy with, they will stay. It's only when you provide a substandard service that they would contemplate not staying.


Zoning means theres no fighting between clubs

No, it means there will be no need to provdie a quality service, or to put ANY resources into junior development at all. You will get players because, heck, they HAVE to play for you. No matter how little you put in.

LAZY.

"No club has unlimited resources. It's just that SOME clubs put those resources into junior development. Others don't."

True but some clubs have more people and higher profile people than other clubs have. Clubs can't just manufacture these people.

Name one club that doesn't have their focus on Junior teams. The days of clubs pilaging their juniors to pay for ABA/State League titles are way behind us and yet people like you continue to use that as a way to sprout your superiority. Name a club, show us an example of a club which doesn't put its resources into junior development.

"Why would you need to spend ANY effort in this area? If you provide a good service that they are happy with, they will stay. It's only when you provide a substandard service that they would contemplate not staying."

When other clubs actively recruit juniors from within your club with promises of free uniforms, no fees, national championships a spot in SASI, a promise to encourage state coaches to give them a spot then the smaller, weaker clubs have to spend resources (time and effort) holding onto the talent they have. That time and effort would be better spent recruiting new players to the club and the sport.

"No, it means there will be no need to provdie a quality service, or to put ANY resources into junior development at all. You will get players because, heck, they HAVE to play for you. No matter how little you put in."

If a club doesn't provide a quality service or doesn't put any resources into junior development families will leave. Zone means new families who have no idea what a club provides will not have two or three clubs to choose from and will not be chased by numerous clubs. No new family to the sport would have the information available to them to know if one club has a better junior program than another. They go somewhere because someone at that club convinces them to do so. Zones would mean clubs can exclusively work within an area and recruit new families to the sport without having to constantly defend themselves and fight other clubs for new players. Zones means a club can build long term relationships with schools, miniball programs, recreation centre and without having to fight another basketball club and in term without the opportunity to build long term relationships.

If a club is lazy, families will leave. Zones are about new families not ones in the system. Lazy has nothing to do with zones.

use that as a way to sprout your superiority

I'm not sprouting my superiority at all. It's just that YOU have a "woe is me" inferiority complex.
Some clubs put MORE resources into junior development. Two clubs have people full time in these roles, is it any suprise they seem to do better than other clubs? Some clubs have had imports playing ABA in the last 10 years - others could have but chose to put the money back into their juniors. Now the club that had a junior focus 10 years ago should be penalised because others spent money short-sightedly/poorly? One club, that used to have the best CD, now have no-one in the role at all (as far as I know). Not suprisingly, they have slipped alarmingly from powerhouse to mid-table (at best) since his departure. Their "reputation" as a top-flight powerhouse has not kept them in their position of prominence as you suggest it would!

When other clubs actively recruit juniors from within your club with promises of free uniforms, no fees, national championships a spot in SASI, a promise to encourage state coaches to give them a spot then the smaller, weaker clubs have to spend resources (time and effort) holding onto the talent they have

Any evidence to back up these *cough* "facts"? Or are you just chasing the bogeyman? I particularly like the national championships one....

Zone means new families who have no idea what a club provides will not have two or three clubs to choose from

Why shouldn't they have two or three clubs to choose from? Don't they have a right to choose which service best suits their needs for their cost (which is large). Or should they just have to pay for substandard returns because they have no choice?

No new family to the sport would have the information available to them to know if one club has a better junior program than another.

In which case, they will usually go to the closest club. No need for zones then!

Zones would mean clubs can exclusively work within an area and recruit new families to the sport

You can do that now. If you don't, well.....

Zones means a club can build long term relationships with schools, miniball programs, recreation centre and without having to fight another basketball club and in term without the opportunity to build long term relationships.

You can do that now too. But apparently those that chose to do this 10 years ago (and now HAVE long-term relationships) whilst others were spending money on ABA imports should be penalised for showing such foresight.

Here's a question - one that I'm sure you'll ignore.
How can such a small association, say McKinnon, survive when surrounded by so many massive power clubs? Not only survive, but thrive. Both in increasing numbers, and quality of 1st teams (particularly in boys), where they've made VC finals in some grades? Is it because on zoning, or because they dedicate resources to their junior program, and work hard to increase both numbers and the skill level of their players whilst providing a club atmosphere/comraderie that is close to, if not, the best in Victoria? Why can't YOU do the same?

Laziness?

118,

What do you fear from zoning - if your development program is so sound it should work irrespective of the "cattle" - in fact I don't see why you need to accept any one from another club to yours. Just turn up the wick a little more on the development and you won't need others from other areas. We could debate this ad nauseam - you do have many good points but you are burying your head in the sand if you do not consider the points raised by pro zone advocates.

Personally I am against zones but then I am personally against association resources having close affiliations with clubs such as state coaching directors etc etc. I see this as a major issue and a major influence in many moves. I am not saying poaching but I am suggesting that this is a point people do consider when moving.

118,
You would know as well as anyone that certain clubs have promised parents that should their child move to such and such a club, a SASI spot would be a formality and from that state.
You would also know that certain clubs have a disproportionate number of SASI coaches and that some coaches have used those positions to advance their club by having directly or indirectly influenced kids to move clubs.
You should also know that certain clubs have sown up country networks and those networks supply only one or two district clubs.
You may also know that country state coaches at district clubs are put in uncomfortable positions where they often have to chose between the local or country player for the district team.
Most clubs have abandoned country cups as recruiting sources because of the country/district monopoly that is tacitly in effect.
The crap you spout about resources and junior development is a just that, crap. All clubs put energy and money into junior development but not all clubs enjoy the revenue of clubs with bars and canteens.Strut, Forestville, Norwood, North all seem to field teams with WNBL and NBL players, don't they pay them ?
You preach from on high and have no idea about the here and now and keep harking back to how much some clubs were basket cases until they saw the light of junor development.Not a bit of it is true. Some clubs have better placed connections in BSA and country assocation and with the SASI program. Its almost laughable that so few clubs dominate the SASI program and therefore understandable how the inequity has arisen.
Associations will not answer the issues in south australian basketball because it needs an overhaul from top to bottom and a massive clean out to defeat the jobs for the boys nepotism that is basketball in our state.

"You would also know that certain clubs have a disproportionate number of SASI coaches"

Of the actual official SASI coaches all bar 1 are from one club, the 1 being from Forestville.

Seriously, after reading all this petty in fighting I am glad my eldest son has moved on and is playing football - at least or so it seems his skill will determine where he ends up rather than who he knows!!!

You would know as well as anyone that certain clubs have promised parents that should their child move to such and such a club, a SASI spot would be a formality and from that state.

I know nothing of the sort. Are you going to provide ANY evidence to support this at all?
And how can a CLUB guarantee a SASI spot, let alone a state one?

You would also know that certain clubs have a disproportionate number of SASI coaches and that some coaches have used those positions to advance their club by having directly or indirectly influenced kids to move clubs.

Again, evidence? Or more chasing the bogeyman? How will zoning change this anyway?

country state coaches at district clubs

Ahhh, so at least we can put a name to the big bad club now.

The crap you spout about resources and junior development is a just that, crap. All clubs put energy and money into junior development

Really? Then why do only two clubs have full time development officers? Why does at least one club not have one at all? (and this club has one of those bars that are app a licencse to print money!). How has this clubs previous reputation not kept them at the top of the junior basketball tree?


Why haven't you bothered with the McKinnon scenario? That a small association, armed with a willingness to work hard (despite not having state or Vic ITC coaches) and put resources into its junior development, can close the gap on the big bad power associations and compete with them? (and in some grades beat them). Is that it completely shoots down your argument? Or because you are too lazy?

179,

May I call you Ostrich - you seem to act like one and bury your head in the sand.

Let me guess - you are a fat couch potato sitting back in your arm chair riding on the coat tails of all those who have done the hard work at your club.

I resent immensely, on behalf of all the volunteers at clubs, the assertions that they we are lazy. Maybe our efforts are misguided but I doubt many are lazy.

I know many clubs are doing many things to improve their lot - the starting point though has to be coach development. I know many have been frustrated by the lack of accredited courses being run - I personally am awaure that level one courses are few and far between. I waited a year before one came available.

You may deny it but there is a perception out there that certain clubs have an advantage because of their links with state, SASI and other BSA paid for staff - the same staff which draws their pay from each and every club.

Don't keep going on about funds being dragged out of the junior system to fund a senior system. It may happen but do not tar each club with the same brush.

If you truly are a basketball person work with us to improve the total situation, and understand that there may be more than one way to skin a cat

The monopoly is actually in many areas. Why are Sturt allowed to run 2 Div11 teams? It actually gives an unfair advantage.

I resent immensely, on behalf of all the volunteers at clubs, the assertions that they we are lazy

Resent it all you want. You said this yourself: "Most clubs have abandoned country cups as recruiting sources" Not putting in ANY effort? Lazy. But then whinge about the clubs that DO put in the effort to attend these events and then get players from them. Well, I guess that's just easier.

I know many clubs are doing many things to improve their lot - the starting point though has to be coach development. I know many have been frustrated by the lack of accredited courses being run - I personally am awaure that level one courses are few and far between. I waited a year before one came available.

Tangent much? What has this got to do with zoning?

You may deny it but there is a perception out there that certain clubs have an advantage because of their links with state, SASI and other BSA paid for staff - the same staff which draws their pay from each and every club.

Ahhh so it's PERCEPTION. So you admit that you have NO evidence of it actually happening. So you waste resources jumping at shadows.

I know many clubs are doing many things to improve their lot

Agreed. Some have shown improvements in results. Woodville (girls in particular) have shown MASSIVE improvements, from not having div 1 teams in some grades say about 8 years ago to nearly every (girls) team making finals last year. How could they possibly have done this with such an unfair system in place? So it CAN be done with some hard work and smartly allocated resources.

Don't keep going on about funds being dragged out of the junior system to fund a senior system

Why not? It happens.

Still no comment about McKinnon? Or other similar programs that are in various staging of building their associations (Hawthorn, Blackburn)?

The unfair advantage is that it allows sturt to keep more players in this level that will play div 1 the following year etc. If there werent so many opportunites they would leave and go to other clubs for opportunity.

Anon 205,

You have mistaken me for another anon. In fact I have said I am not a supporter of zoning.

Yes it is perceptions by most because they are not privy to understanding people's thinking process in determining why they move - I am privy to this in a couple of cases and the more regular access to coaches associated with SASI ans State WAS a key reason for their movement even though their current coaches were highly competent and experienced.

Personally I would rather spend our limited resources on developing our local area rather than look outside our back door hoping to find the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow.

You can't do everything all the time well. I would rather focus on doing some things very well, built a bit of momentum and see where that leads.

What is most annoying about your approach is that most of the people I know at your club (I am guessing) are reasonable people and willing to discuss issues and be helpful. Then we have people like you who just wish to ridicule others efforts - basking of the hard work of the modest people at the club.

If you are so good I invite you to get off the gravy train, put your nose to the grindstone and improve the general lot of basketball in this state. I know all clubs would gladly welcome competent volunteers. Surely this can't be that hard and would be a great service to your club as they contend, and I agree, a stronger general competition will only benefit all of us.

I do not ridicule effort but LACK of effort, esp. when they then want the clubs that DO put in the effort penalised.

This discussion is pointless.

People will only back up the thoughts and impressions they see from their position within their own club or will only be able to discuss this from their own background and experience.

It will always turn into an us vs them arguement.

The one thing that most people can agree on is the current system isn't working.

Constructive change is required but change for the sake of change won't work. Change because something works in another sport or in another state won't work either.

Basketball in SA is specific to basketball in SA and needs to find it's own way forward not copy a system or parts of a system another sport or state uses and say here this is the answer. It isn't and it won't work.

Zones, Promotion/Relegation, Association models, ABA, State teams, SASI, whatever the answer (and I don't profess to having 'the' answer) IMO the whole basketball system in SA is flawed, and falling apart and needs a major overhaul.

Unless being good at PC games like Civilization qualifies as doing your job as a JDO I'm sorry but one of those full time people doesn't work as hard as you may think, just because he's a full time employee

I believed the hype and stories I was told and moved my kids to one of the name clubs because I was convinced I had to do it for them to succeed.

But as soon as they could find a player from another club willing to move who was deemed better then mine, we were pushed to the background and the current development we get is nothing more than we got at our previous club.

#335 Always wanted to now what that game is. Just a quick question that when you came to Sturt did you worry that your child was taking someone elses spot?