SAW
Years ago

Eight Club Competition

In some of the other discussions there has been talk of reducing the current competition to eight clubs. In these talks it was taken for granted that West/Woodville and North/Centrals should merge.

While I have no view on whether an eight team comp is good or bad I am surprised at the nominated teams for merger.

If you look at the regions covered I classify them as:

Centrals - Regional North
North - Inner North
Norwood - East
West - West
Woodville - West
Mavericks - Regional East
Forestville - Inner South
Sturt - Inner South
South - Inner South
Southern - Regional South

From this breakdown of regions covered I agree that West/Woodville would be possibilities but I would suggest that the next best option would be a merger of two of the Inner South clubs; probably Sturt/South due to their proximity to each other and the poorer facilities at South.

Merging clubs based purely on their current performances is short sighted (ie Centrals - compare to Centrals Football Club). The best method is regions covered.

Topic #237 | Report this topic


The Big Aristotle  
Years ago

SAW,

Good point, but currently the three inner south clubs have some of the highest team numbers in juniors. This is partly due to the higher income area they inhibit, but maybe also to the work those clubs do to get players. If you look at Centrals and the Western located clubs, perhaps it is the lower ecomonic area that fotball (with it's lower significantly lower cost) draws a larger number of it's players from restricts the basketball development in these area's.

While I applaud the merger to make the Southern Tigers, I am sure that it hasn't been without it's difficulties. Rather than looking at club merger, my opinion, for what it is worth (probably not much) is that the competition needs to allow clubs to maintian their status, while allowing for an 8 team competition.

Who can predict where the next generation of basketballers will come from. It seems curretly that the Modbury and Golden Grove area's have made North a stronger club after a previous low. (Dean Kinsman probably helped a bit) And it seems that this may be running out. ie The age of families may be ageing. This seems to be the case with Forrestville and Sturt. Their younger teams seem to be very strong, (indicating a larger young family pool living in the area) but as this area ages will that mean that they too suffer a decline.

Looking at the Western suburbs, West was very strong back in the Bowden days. While now it is in the football heartland, it seems that the local concil is looking to improve the area and induce young families into the area. Be careful in looking to force mergers when in 5 - 10 years the wetern suburbs may have a larger number of high economic young families.

Let us instread that this into account in designing a competition structure which helps those players/teams/clubs that are stronger now, but also when the inevitable highs and lows that occur throughuot basketball over time, help those lpayers/cteams/clubs in the future.

Any competiton which has promotion/relegation must start with each club having the same ability at U/10 or U/12 level to have their team in the top division. Thus for example the centrals U/12 girls team from last season needs to have the opportunity to be a div 1 team. Then from their on they would not feel the need to change clubs because of not getting an opportunity to compete in div 1. This means that as long as this team is coached well, rather than losing players to other clubs they might infact gain players.

So SAW in a long winded answer. I applaud the Sothern merger and think that they will benefit from it as will all SA Basketball, (especially considering the number of young families moving to the area) but better still lets have a competition which has the ability to provide for the short term and long term development of the game making the mergers not necessary.

Reply #1711 | Report this post


Yosemite Sam  
Years ago

Spot on it is about regionalism and the proximity of Clubs.

Your South/Sturt theory may work but both Clubs as has Forestville have good junior numbers.

The West/Woodville is based on how may Junior sides they have. This season Woodville now have more Junior sides than West!

Centrals have it all before them and the area to do something about turning it around.

North have good numbers as well.

Eastern has the area, State Country kids and a smaller number of Junior teams.

Most of the bigegr clubs have between 45 - 50 Junior teams, anything less and you are really up against the wall, generating income for your program.

Reply #1716 | Report this post


Yosemite Sam  
Years ago

Big A,

my mail is that the NCT/Soutern merger went better than plan.

Part of the benefit is that the new Club has secured the Southern area for one Club not two.

Apparently no longer do we have two Clubs working against each other, indeed I am led to believe this was the main preoccupation of both former committees.

There were mixed messages sent out to the Southern Community of where a kid should go to play ball.

Look at it now one club, one council area, one focus.

Reply #1717 | Report this post


Yosemite Sam  
Years ago

Jirachi,

you may be right on that Junior Committee theory.

But, I think there will be more mergers, relocation of West to where? and at what cost?

Centrals as before.

North need a bigger place and they are not going to get it at Hillcrest.

Norwood/BASA pay too much for Mars.

South need room.

The numbers dont stack up for the status quo to remain for too much longer.

Reply #1719 | Report this post


Yosemite Sam  
Years ago

That's where the Club themselves need to get active in partnerships with BASA and the Council areas.

BASA can't are unable do it on their own.

BASA pays nothing for stadia at South/North/Southern West and DH Dome I suspect nothing.

Mars/Starplex something much more than nothing.

Eastern I think also costs a bit more than nothing to put on games.

Sturt/forestville - who knows but what good venues.

Congratulations to those Clubs that continue to put teams out on whatever court at whatever cost.

I am not promerger but the financial impediment placed on Clubs in 2004 is something that should be seriously considered.

Reply #1722 | Report this post


The Big Aristotle  
Years ago

West are locked into the Port. Their alternaive is to change their name to Port Adelaide. (doubt that this will happen)

And decisions for merger's should be taken by the clubs themselves, not pushed by BASA. The best way for that to happen is for the compeittion itself to decide it. If those clubs who lack numbers were in a position where they had to merge to keep up with the comeptition then it might happen. (promotion/relegation) Either that or they might start to work harder to get juniors back into the sport from ther area.

I know a lot of clubs think that this will restrict them at Senior level. But the total number of senior players will come through the compeitiotn either way. Then as usually happens, players will move clubs at senior level to those club where they think that they have the best opportunity to improve.

Reply #1723 | Report this post


Yosemite Sam  
Years ago

(Mod: This post is not available.)

Reply #1726 | Report this post


Yosemite Sam  
Years ago

Jirachi,

I didnt say they owned them...I implied that it doesnt cost them to lease them...(standard $1 lease).

It costs them to maintain, upgrade and there hasnt been a lot of that going on for a number of years.

Reply #1728 | Report this post


Yosemite Sam  
Years ago

Ok, maybe you are right but at least 2 are and the bottom line is that the investment within those stadia has been marginal.

Reply #1730 | Report this post


Logan  
Years ago

Why would a council help a local club build a venue when the venue is going to be run by BASA, for BASA with all profits going to BASA?

How would that help the local community?

One club, somewhere, somehow nees to get a council onside and build a venue for a club where the club itself can run it, use it for its needs and make money out of it. That way the local community benifits and only a proposal like that would get approval from a local council.

Reply #1741 | Report this post


Yosemite Sam  
Years ago

logan, do your homework..it has just happened...that's what i am on about

Reply #1742 | Report this post


The Big Aristotle  
Years ago

Sammy

Where did it just happen???

Reply #1743 | Report this post


Logan  
Years ago

well please share as you must know something I don't.

Reply #1744 | Report this post


Yosemite Sam  
Years ago

This will sound lame...

but I can't say other than a particular Club is more than well on the way.

Sorry had to check sources first and it really can't be out on the public domain until it is done and dusted.

It is coming I am advised.

Reply #1745 | Report this post


Logan  
Years ago

Last I heard at least four clubs were trying to work something out for a new facility. My point is that any new venue will need management and I'd assume that would mean private or BASA management.

Reply #1746 | Report this post


Yosemite Sam  
Years ago

Not new...a partnership with all 3

Reply #1747 | Report this post


Yosemite Sam  
Years ago

Jirachi,

Association means?

Some generalisations but it is your opinion only.

You sound elist it can be a lonely preoccupation.

You are going to get a bagging from the Southern Tigers supporters...deservably so.

Reply #1749 | Report this post


Marlin  
Years ago

Sam - If thats the case then thats the reason why they will never improve. If peoples bias arrogance blinds them from looking at the real problems at their club then they will never live up too their full potential. However, Southern is hardly the only club in the south in this boat.

Reply #1753 | Report this post


Yosemite Sam  
Years ago

Marlin,
i think the bagging will come from Jirachi's ill informed opinions about the merger...lets not cloud emotion about mergers with broad brush statements about how a merger will go.

clubs are natuarlly biased that's what a Club hopes for blind loyality.

I am interest about your views on full potential and your views why Clubs in the South have a problem?

Reply #1758 | Report this post


Blue Collar  
Years ago

Jirachi,

For the most part your posts are clever, intelligent and generally food reading. However on this issue you are none of the above.

I doubt you are in a position to comment on the circumstances of the merger, if you were, your attitude would be different.

I for one applaud the actions of the Tigers management, one of the best ABL Home Game hosts in the league.

My only real question to you is this: Would you have prefered Adelaide Southern to go under? That was the undeniable situation. They were going to fold, Noarlunga threw them a lifeline.

RESULT: Initial indications are that we now have a very strong club anchored in the south.

Morning Raplh... Morning Sam - Blue Collar.

Reply #1759 | Report this post


Marlin  
Years ago

People can still be loyal to their club and be honest with others and themselves in relation to flaws in their clubs. Every club has their flaws. No-ones perfect!Personally I only know of clubs in the south with this problem because thats where I live and played. I'm sure it happens elsewhere. There will always be a level of biasness but when this stops them from seeing areas within their own club that need improvement this is where the problem lies. If people opened up their minds and tried to see it from another persons point of view, e.g perhaps that of people like who do not have a bias in relation to Southern as they are not involved in the club, then perhaps they could perhaps say hey we do have a problem here (remember no-ones perfect and neither are clubs!) lets do what we can to make our club the best we can.

Reply #1760 | Report this post


the striped one  
Years ago

(Mod: This post is not available.)

Reply #1762 | Report this post


Bill Hopkins  
Years ago

(Mod: This post is not available.)

Reply #1769 | Report this post


Bill Hopkins  
Years ago

(Mod: This post is not available.)

Reply #1770 | Report this post


Bill Hopkins  
Years ago

just saw the post... sorry the punctuation didn't paste too well from word!!

Reply #1771 | Report this post


04astatsguru  
Years ago

The thread is 8 club competition but after reading the last few contributions it should be 'Bag Southern Tigers' Why because they are successful. Bag Centrals? Can not do that. They are nothing. Bag Sturt. They are a strong club (after Saturday when Sturt - Williams play Mavericks + Jacob I predict that Sturt will be not as strong. They will have their collective rear-ends spanked by a Hills unit that showed last Saturday night that against the strongest opposition in the league just how good they are). the eight clubs could be North, South, East, West, lower South, Upper North, north-East and South West.





















































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































Reply #1777 | Report this post


04astatsguru  
Years ago

The above post from the Tigers man is worthy of comment. Before the merger Adelaide Southern were more concerned with competing with NCT for players and staff than they were at promoting the game. Here is a for instance. I used to be a member of Adelaide Southern Suns back about eight or nine years ago until I went to one of their AGM's. At this meeting the President was a local dentist. About a third of the meeting had progressed when a lady Vice President got up and started to berate the President, calling him names and moved a vote of no confidence. She had got the senior players to support her and the President got dumped. The rest of the meeting degenerated into a 'I hate the Tigers' "discussion" (for want of a better word to describe the fracas). And to make it worse a son of a member of the Noarlunga Executive played in Adelaides age grades and his dad was there as a parent. At the conclusion of the meeting I managed to speak to the Noarlunga person and his comment to me was "What do you expect from a pack of neanderthalls?". I never renewed my membership and friends used to tell me that club meetings had a 'hate Noarlunga' session on a regular basis. Now it is all different as it should be. The latest decision by City of Onkaparinga probably would not have been made if the clubs had not merged. Council originally offered a five year lease (from a councillor) so to go from 5 to 21 years is significant. If you want to read the material from the Council meeting go to the City of Onkaparinga web site. Councillors are not idiots. My eight clubs requires the merger of West and Woodville to form the Port Adelaide Magpie Basketball Club with black and white colours. Think about the implications of such a development. See you at Pasadena on Saturday.

Reply #1783 | Report this post


Secret Sabre  
Years ago

I am quite sure that the outcome fo the 2 senior games this Saturday will not effect in any way the number of junior teams that Sturt have next year. Nor will the Forrestville Men's missing the finals effect their junior program.

Can you imagine the teams, both at junior level as well as at senior level if their was a merger here? Probably would not be good for basketball???

An 8 team compeitition at junior level ( with a merger in the inner south area) would only decrease the number of div 1 caliber player playing at the div 1 level.

Reply #1787 | Report this post


SAW  
Years ago

Secret Sabre,

When I started this post I did not advocate for or against an eight team competition. My question was the logic of the choice of merged teams if this went ahead. You can't make decisions on merging clubs based on the current circumstances of the performance strengths of the clubs. There will be cycles over time that sees current dominant performing clubs becoming less dominant and vice - versa. (A good comparison is the SANFL. Late 80's early 90's dominant clubs were probably Port, Glenelg, Norwood while the also rans were Centrals, Woodville, Sturt...I'm guessing from memory. However at one point this year the bottom three clubs were Port, Norwood and Glenelg and the top teams were the others.)

If a merger were to occur one of the major criteria should be regional coverage to ensure that we make it as easy as possible for parents and kids to choose basketball as there sport of choice and not football or soccer simply because there is a club on there doorstep.

Reply #1790 | Report this post


Secret Sabre  
Years ago

In junior basketball, often it is the effort of the members of the club rather than the area itself which leads to the number of players in a specific area.

Sturt over the last 4 years has increased from about 30 teams up to nearly 50 teams. Over the last 2 years Forrestville has not only increased the number of teams, but also the quality of theose teams.

My opinion is that this has occurred from the dedicated efforts of the members of both clubs. And if anything, the competitiveness of close proximity has had an effect here. Currently it could be argued that the inner south area has the best concentration of players playing BECAUSE of the proximity of the clubs.

My club is actually the one which has advicated hardest for the 8 team competition. I am quite confident that the club of which you are a members does not because of the fear that they might not have a top team make division 1.

The merger of Southern and NCT occurred because of the Adelaide southern situation. That they had for years (the last 20) not ever realy had a home base to pull from and decided in conjuction with NCT that one strong club in the south was the wya to go. Good for them, I support the move, as well as their attempt to start a domestic competition.

My opinion is that an 8 team compeition is important for the development of elite basketball in the state. And that it can be also used to regionalise the competitions for lower level lpayers, thus increasing the number of players. But the main factor comes back to club members volunteering their time and effort to make the club better, and yes while this does cycle, it cannot be predicted. Let us instead develop a competition which promotes effort at the junior level and rewards the best players/coach/clubs for their efforts. Rather than looking for fixes which cannot be prediced.

Reply #1793 | Report this post


SAW  
Years ago

Firstly, while I have links to one club it is not a club which will have problems fielding a div 1 team. My comments are based on my personal view of basketball overall and not whether one club will fold/merge/not have div 1 teams etc.

As I said one criteria is to get good coverage in the metropolitan areas to give the best chance of capturing the best young sportsmen. Once this is done we don't bury our heads in the sand and say our job is done. Of course we then need to ensure these kids are properly coached and developed. If this is in place perhaps Centrals or Woodville or whoever, may be the pace setters in 2010 and perhaps the overall standard will improve.

How would you react if this did happen, Sturt had a cyclic downturn and then at that time Centrals etc said: "Let's get rid of Sturt as they are dragging down the state"

You mention Sturt and Forestville. What about South; how are they progressing?

Reply #1796 | Report this post


Secret Sabre  
Years ago

I am not advocating for mergers, but an 8 team competition which invoves the best 8 teams regardless of club. And we at sturt were pushing this when we had teams that may not have made the top 8.

I may not have made it clear that my opinion is that for seniors, a 10 club div 1 and 2 is the best. But that in juniors from U/20 down, a promotion/relegation top 8 comp reguardless of club. This would produce enough talent for the 10 clubs as no club is able to give senior opportunities for as many players as they can produce.

And almost every club has a junior div 1 team which would not be in the top 8, if you let me know what club you are from I can let you know which teams from your club may struggle.

As a sturt member I would have no problem with a junior age group not making div 1 as this would show us that we are not working hard enough with our program and that we need to change the way we do things. In fact I would love to see all clubs putting us under pressure to win each and every game, as this would help us reach our goals of producing international/national/and state players.

Reply #1798 | Report this post


SAW  
Years ago

OK, an eight team competition is a different issue to an eight club association. In the previous forum this was widely debated and I for one can see the pros and cons and am not do not have a strong opinion one way or the other.

Most people on this forum have the best interests at basketball overall at heart and not necessarily their own specific club. And notwithstanding this there are so many different views as to what is right, what is wrong what changes, if any, need to occur. To me this simply means there is no obvious correct course of action and therefore we need to consider wider ramifications of any change.

Reply #1801 | Report this post


Libertine  
Years ago

8 association clubs - won't happen in the near future, all the clubs are healthy and have enough members. Plus, people don't like giving up power too easily.

8 team comp for promotion/relegation - won't happen whilst the current delegates sit on the President's board.

Sturt producing state/national/international players - likely, as they pinch the best from everybody else!

Reply #1805 | Report this post


SAW  
Years ago

Libertine,

If your last comment is correct does this mean that Sturt are their own worst enemy in ensuring close competition week in week out?

Reply #1807 | Report this post


Secret Sabre  
Years ago

Yeh,

Who did we pinch Laura, Jacob, Oscar, Monz, Marino, Williams from. I think you will find that we have knocked back more players than we have taken in the last 5 years. And I think your club has had more people up on their hall of fame who started at other clubs than anybody.

And the players who have approached the club to come and play for us, have made that decision because of the effort and knowledge that we put into developing juniors rather than buying senior teams.

Reply #1808 | Report this post


incognito  
Years ago

Sorry Libertine. Yea I have to agree with SecretSabre. Libertines club were renowned for poaching players in the past.

Very few recent additions to the hall of fame = maybe because of very few poachings.

The Hall of Fame in the bar is more advertisement of player poachings in years gone by.

Reply #1814 | Report this post


Libertine  
Years ago

Hey, I was only mucking around!

Sheesh, some people take things slightly too personally on this forum....

Reply #1816 | Report this post


incognito  
Years ago

No problems from my point of view Libertine. Luv ya work!

I just couldnt miss the opportunity to have common ground with someone called "secretsabre".

And I was just making the point that flames tend to jump.

Reply #1818 | Report this post


Libertine  
Years ago

Heh :)

All goes in cycles I guess, Tall Poppy Syndrome and wanting to have a go at the dominant club blahdiblahblah. We all know that North does it! :D

Reply #1821 | Report this post


Liam Flynn  
Years ago

Yes agreed that some of the Hall of Fame pictures in the Norwood bar are a little stretched. Any truth to the rumour that Willy Farley stopped into MARS the other week for directions to the Powerhouse for 36ers training and that the Flames tried to put his photo on the Hall of Fame wall...hehe

Just kidding James...oh I mean libertine. You do have some very fine Norwood products on the wall.

Reply #1824 | Report this post


SAW  
Years ago

So I'm confused here. So far we have assertions that Sturt, Norwood and North prop up their club performance by pinching the best players from others. I am presuming you are referring to Juniors.

Therefore as a parent of kids interested in basketball whom may all develop at different rates at different ages which clubs do you suggest I take them to as it would appear to me, if the above assertions are correct, that none of these clubs would be prepared to put in the develop time if you don't develop quickly.

Reply #1827 | Report this post


Liam Flynn  
Years ago

SAW,

You are taking this thread way to seriously. All these clubs have excellent track records for developing kids along with other clubs eg Forrestville.

If you still need something to lighten your mood, check out Coach Dodson's bum part hairdo on his picture in the MARS bar...hehe

Reply #1830 | Report this post


incognito  
Years ago

Btw Saw Dodson played most of junior basketball for West. Maybe West is the way to go.

Reply #1831 | Report this post


SAW  
Years ago

Liam,

Perhaps my droll writing style makes it difficult to determine if I am serious or not. There was certainly a tongue in my cheek when I made the last post. And I know first hand what the development capabilities are of one of these clubs and I am more than happy, and may I add, I would be happy at any of the other clubs mentioned.

What is most frustrating is we keep sliding back into small, unimportant club based preferences or inter club bickering. I can understand why this would happen but it doesn't mean its right.

Reply #1834 | Report this post


Libertine  
Years ago

*What is most frustrating is we keep sliding back into small, unimportant club based preferences or inter club bickering. I can understand why this would happen but it doesn't mean its right.*

Here Here!

Reply #1871 | Report this post


Secret Sabre  
Years ago

Libertine,

What are you agreeing with? You were the one who started the inter club bickering in this series of posts in the first place by accusing another club of "pinching players from every body else."

And your club is dead against it anyway, and infact voted against their own players in U/16 of being able to stay up in div 1 when thet were quite capable of doing so, thus decreasing the compeition level in both div 1 and 2. So if you want to do something for basketball get on 1 of your committee's and loby the club to change their stance.

Reply #1888 | Report this post


Vincent Vega  
Years ago

Secret Sabre, as I'm sure you're aware, Libertine's club was just one of the 8 clubs that voted against allowing double division 1 teams. It's also not true that the competition level in the U16B1 comp has decreased since Winter. If anything, it has increased - unlike many other age groups, the gap between top and bottom is relatively small.

Not saying that I agree or disagree with the double division 1 concept, just making the point that in this case, it hasn't hurt the competition at all.

The double div 1 concept should be considered separately from the 8 team promotion/relegation concept. My gut feel is that clubs would be more accepting of the promotion/relegation proposal if clubs weren't allowed to have double div 1 teams.

Regardless, competition restructuring is not as important as the formation of club-based domestic competitions. Clubs should be devoting their energy towards setting up a domestic competition in priority to changing the existing competition structure.

Reply #1892 | Report this post


Libertine  
Years ago

Secret Sabre, who gives a shit who started what? My intial response was tongue-in-cheek, designed to get the reaction it did, like I already clarified. Don't take things too personally on this forum, well don't take anything I say personally, or seriously for that matter (waits for smart-arsed comeback from incognito...)

And I find it extremely ironic that you used that example of my club voting for the 'single-team division 1 rule'!! If it decreased the level of competition in division 1, then how come the same team can lose games in division 2? Should those teams that beat it be angry at their clubs for not nominating them in division 1?

Anyway, VV is right. Domestic programs run by clubs, involving schools (my thought as it takes out the issue of organising 'clubs' from scratch) or whatever, shoudl be the main priority. The 89/90 group that my club has is a once in 5 years kind of thing, that kind of strength doesn't happen often.

Reply #1940 | Report this post


Secret Sabre  
Years ago

Libertine/James

I can tell from the "fact" that you have accused yourself of causing the inter club bickering in this stream show's a total lack of credibility of your posts.

PS Were exactly did you clarify your response was tounge in cheek. I had a look back and you haven't stated that before in this series of posts.

Reply #1947 | Report this post




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



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

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: 12:04 pm, Fri 29 Mar 2024 | Posts: 968,026 | Last 7 days: 754