There are always stories of teams/clubs being advantaged or disadvantaged.

Ultimately however the results will speak for themselves. You'll have your answer in 4 weeks time.

Interesting- where do you see the rankings?

I deduced the rankings from the first grading phase and compared with the results from the 2022 VJBL season. It takes a while, but not hard to do.

To Jichael- everyone involved knows that the VJBL system is a drop-down grading system. The higher you start, the better chance of grading higher. So a 34 ranking jump is significant, and will help with final grading. Eltham probably think that it is pretty significant. (And I have no connection with Eltham being a life member at another club that is a long way from Eltham).

Yup understand completely, wasn't having a crack just making an observation that if there was some favourable rankings it’ll be evident in a few weeks.

Dandenong 2 in the 18 girls is simply taking the spot that Hawthorn had, who don't have a team at all in 18 girls.

People in the know have no issues with their ranking in pool 1. The amount of talent in that 18 girls age group for Dandenong is stacked. They've picked up a lot of imports in the last two seasons (mostly from Nunawading), so I wouldn't be surprised at all if their 2s make VC.

It takes some serious justification to be graded higher, many have tried. But this one is completely fine.

It's the same in the U16 Boys, Hawthorn has dropped out of Pool 1. They still have a team, they are just not as talented now. There are 3 2's teams in Pool 1 that all look to be reasonable selections.

Hi Big D,

I was not complaining as much about the specific team (although I did mention Eltham's Under 18 girls might feel aggrieved) as I was about the trend for one big club.
I did the Under 14s as well, and Dandenong 2 in Under 14s also rose around 30 spots from 70 (pool 4) to 40 (pool 2).

I am aware of the movement of players and coaches from Nunawading to Dandenong. But other clubs have also enjoyed the benefits of movement of players without the upgrades (try Sandringham, Camberwell and Melbourne).

Random changes are understood as luck of the draw- as you said, it is difficult to get an upgrade. Systematic changes are much more difficult to explain. But would it hurt the VJBL to report on the justifications for the changes that their grading committee makes.

Dandenong u18.2 boys also moved from pool 4 to pool 2 somehow

It is an interesting process.

Are the rankings based on where the teams finished in that age group two years ago? Eg. Under 18s 2024 based on Under 18s 2022?

In that case neither top nor bottom agers in the current 2024 teams would have had any influence where teams were placed.

Just trying to grasp the logic.

u18's 2024 are ranked according to how they finished in u16 at the end of 2022. it difficult because of the huge number of player movement. The Dande 18.2's going up is less of an issue compared to Frankston maintaining their position when they have hardly any players left from their u16 team in 2022.

If Eltham 18.1 are good enough they will have a decent chance of making VC still, there will be some decent VC teams still grading after Christmas because of the change in landscape.

There isn't a single player in our child's team that was on the team two years ago... It does seem unfortunate the team are limited in how high they can now grade based on the performance from a couple of years ago. That said, not sure what a better way there would be to organise the grading of so many teams.

Whilst it is an imperfect approach, I'd say that using rankings from 2 years is as good and fair an option that we have. Having watched Dandenong's 16.2s in a pre-season trial, I'd suggest that their regrading is a fair representation as to where they are at as a side.

However, I do have an in-principle issue with power clubs getting their way with exemptions. They already get a rails run in terms of getting their kids into the more elite pathways. This, together with the exemptions, perpetuates them being power clubs. Maybe this suits Basketball Victoria as they can concentrate their "priority" kids in associations where they can be more closely watched.

However, if there were no exemptions to the rules, we'd have less poaching and a more even competition.

My problem with this isn't just the re-ranking- it is the degree of re-ranking. Moving sides up 30-40 spots is excessive.
And if the justification is that Dandenong have picked up a large number of players from Nunawading over the two years, then there would be a consequential drop in Nunawading 2 rankings. But there has (rightly) not been that.
Again, it is not random but systematic (many other clubs have picked up players over that period), and it is excessive. And it does affect many clubs and teams, not just the couple displaced that I have mentioned.

As I said, at the very least, the VJBL grading panel should publish its detailed reasoning.

Dandenong 2 losing by around 50 doesn't help the argument.

Ouch

Ouch

Double ouch.

Mike. You were spot on!

Just to (almost) finish this off:

Under 18 Dandenong 2 Women- Lost to Mornington on Friday night and will be in a playoff for the last 2 VJL1 spots. Meanwhile, Eltham have qualified for VC. From a distance (I have nothing to do with Dandenong), coach and players from the side have done a super job remaining positive.

Under 16.2 Women- made VJL1 on Friday night challenge. Probably the only age group where the upgrade could be justified because of the influx of players from Nunawading over the last two years.

Under 14.2 Women- Lost to Camberwell 2 on Friday night and will play off for VJL3 or 4 next Friday.

Under 18.2 Men- lost to Collingwood on friday night and will be in a playoff for the last two spots in VJL1.

I would hope that the VJBL committee reflects on this when next season's regrading is done.

And just to show that regrading does work if it is strongly justified, Keilor 2 in Under 16 girls have made it from Pool 2A into VC on last Friday night.

Basically had to push for regrading - have imported a lot of good players, and to put at ease the locally developed kids had to say don't worry you will also be in VC. Didn’t quite work out that way. Would be spewing if I was in one of those 2s teams just because the club enticed good players. Culture is so important. And their 16.1s boys didn’t even make VC.
Melbourne is an interesting one as well - 16.1 and 18.1 did not make it ... but if you looked across the league there are heaps of good players that played there but left. Why? Culture is so important.

Several clubs lost a bunch of top end talent at the end of last season. Culture is so important.

Melbourne missed out on VC for 12.1s, 16.1s, 18.1s and 20.1s. What a mess.