Season 2016 - early days

[Pekay]

I didn't say they were folding Nuttsy, just a hypothetical in response to suggestions that it's healthy for clubs to compete for the same regional player base.

[Nuttsy]

I didn't say they were folding Nuttsy, just a hypothetical in response to suggestions that it's healthy for clubs to compete for the same regional player base.

Yeah for sure mate. As I said it will be interesting to see how they go in Div 1 and how many they have in 2017 as im pretty sure that the Junior club didn't have a 15's last year and from what I hear are struggling to get a 17's this year

[justabaraker]

...Why should a senior club like Sydney Uni be able to throw the Uni scholarship chequebook at players that North Shore has spent up to 8 years developing?...

MP, I'm sitting here wracking my brain as I try to think of a player that North Shore spent 8 years developing, and has now had a Uni scholarship chequebook thrown at him to headhunt him to play PD.

Nahhh, can't think of one. You'd better name names.

[Mug Punter]

MP, I'm sitting here wracking my brain as I try to think of a player that North Shore spent 8 years developing, and has now had a Uni scholarship chequebook thrown at him to headhunt him to play PD.

Nahhh, can't think of one. You'd better name names.

How about you go through your Under 19 team and list their junior clubs, bet most come from the North Side of the harbour.

Fancy disclosing that? No, didn't think so

[saviour01]

I disagree strongly, clubs should not be in competition for each others juniors in my opinion.

Why should a senior club like Sydney Uni be able to throw the Uni scholarship chequebook at players that North Shore has spent up to 8 years developing?

Clubs may be able to offer juniors choice within reason but I do think the pathway had some merit. Is that still operational?

Clubs being encouraged to engage with junior clubs and create pathways into the seniors is a good thing. If some clubs cant be bothered then the clubs who can should not be punished. Its like having a salary cap, sure it allows a level playing field, but the clubs who offer more (whether that is having trained them for years via a junior academy or throwing some money at them) should be allowed to do so. What stopping the club deciding to pay them 2 years later anyway?

Clubs fighting for juniors means more juniors are likely to end up playing senior football.

- - - Updated - - -

How about you go through your Under 19 team and list their junior clubs, bet most come from the North Side of the harbour.

Fancy disclosing that? No, didn't think so

North shore seniors have been involved in developing them since they were 11?

I genuinely don't know because I didn't watch my first game of AFL till I was 20, but at St George the youngest we have in the Academy is probably about 14. I'm not aware of any of the senior coaching staff being involved that early.

[Mug Punter]

North shore seniors have been involved in developing them since they were 11?

I genuinely don't know because I didn't watch my first game of AFL till I was 20, but at St George the youngest we have in the Academy is probably about 14. I'm not aware of any of the senior coaching staff being involved that early.

Auskick starts earlier than that so yeah these district clubs invest a huge amount of time for Sydney Uni to come along and pinch their players into their under age team

[saviour01]

And what does north shore seniors have to do with auskick?

[Mug Punter]

And what does north shore seniors have to do with auskick?

You are clearly being argumentative but you asked about the time developing players to get them to senior football and that clearly starts at Auskick.

And no the North Shore seniors don't run the Auskick themselves but their affiliated junior clubs do.

Maybe I am being na?ve but I'm just of the opinion that the ideal scenario is that players play for the club that developed them as juniors. This usually happens but when you have one club with the ability to pay huge five figure scholarships and even get discounted entry into Uni then it becomes an un-level playing field. It's a strategy that bloody Uni adopt across the board with all sports (rugby, cricket and netball to name a few). I wouldn't have such a problem with it except that its our taxpayer dollars funding their little empire

I thought the pathway system had resolved this issue - all I am really asking is whether that pathway system is still in place.

I have no involvement with North Shore

[ShortHalfHead]

I thought the pathway system had resolved this issue - all I am really asking is whether that pathway system is still in place.

Unfortunately it was abolished last year. After months of hard work by GB and a couple of years of tweaking it.

The PD clubs were always dead against it in general, and I do recall an objection from Blacktown as well....for obvious reasons.

[saviour01]

You are clearly being argumentative but you asked about the time developing players to get them to senior football and that clearly starts at Auskick.

And no the North Shore seniors don't run the Auskick themselves but their affiliated junior clubs do.

Well I don't see why they should have to go to a club just because its the closest to where they live. North Shore seniors haven't assisted in their development, Sydney afl has. If Sydney AFL are the ones running juniors (are they?) then shouldn't they be interested in getting the most amount of juniors playing senior footy rather than them being forced to go to their local club even when they don't want to and then stop playing because of it.

If a gun kid who lives in Cronulla wants to play decent level footy after being in the St George Academy for 2 years, he should be able to chose St George over Sutho due to the fact we have 19s div 1 and prems (nothing against sutho, we do get a few kids every year because of it though).

Maybe I am being na?ve but I'm just of the opinion that the ideal scenario is that players play for the club that developed them as juniors. This usually happens but when you have one club with the ability to pay huge five figure scholarships and even get discounted entry into Uni then it becomes an un-level playing field. It's a strategy that bloody Uni adopt across the board with all sports (rugby, cricket and netball to name a few). I wouldn't have such a problem with it except that its our taxpayer dollars funding their little empire

The club hasn't assisted in their development at all if all they did was expect them to come to seniors from juniors. I would agree if they had an academy or had senior players coaching them through the juniors or something, but if the club hasn't done anything bar maybe giving them a phone call in the pre season when they are u18s (does this even happen? I dunno) then why should they go play for them?

I thought the pathway system had resolved this issue - all I am really asking is whether that pathway system is still in place.

I have no involvement with North Shore

I have no idea about the pathway system. I never played junior footy or u19s, but I do remember hearing that one of our kids might not have been able to play at the club when his dad was coaching u19s because he played juniors in the eastern suburbs. That was 3 or 4 years ago and sanity prevailed in this case.

[tara]

Well I don't see why they should have to go to a club just because its the closest to where they live. North Shore seniors haven't assisted in their development, Sydney afl has. If Sydney AFL are the ones running juniors (are they?) then shouldn't they be interested in getting the most amount of juniors playing senior footy rather than them being forced to go to their local club even when they don't want to and then stop playing because of it.

If a gun kid who lives in Cronulla wants to play decent level footy after being in the St George Academy for 2 years, he should be able to chose St George over Sutho due to the fact we have 19s div 1 and prems (nothing against sutho, we do get a few kids every year because of it though).



The club hasn't assisted in their development at all if all they did was expect them to come to seniors from juniors. I would agree if they had an academy or had senior players coaching them through the juniors or something, but if the club hasn't done anything bar maybe giving them a phone call in the pre season when they are u18s (does this even happen? I dunno) then why should they go play for them?



I have no idea about the pathway system. I never played junior footy or u19s, but I do remember hearing that one of our kids might not have been able to play at the club when his dad was coaching u19s because he played juniors in the eastern suburbs. That was 3 or 4 years ago and sanity prevailed in this case.

I think the waters here were a bit muddy but I seriously doubt he would have ever been stopped playing considering his original junior club before playing in the eastern suburbs.

The pathway system was introduced to allow for the game in sydney to grow and to reward those clubs who actively worked with their junior clubs on that list. St George were never denied access to any clubs in their region and has access to the following junior clubs Bankstown, Bangor, Miranda, Heathcote, Cronulla, Ramsgate, Penshurst, Liverpool, Holsworthy as did ourselves and Southern power based on the policy in 2012. When it was abolished two years later the list would have been similar but may not have included Holsworthy or Liverpool. As at 2012 though both Penrith and Campbelltown also has Holsworthy and Liverpool on their pathway.

[Pmcc2911]

I think the real point is that juniors should be encouraged (note not forced) to play with their senior club. It is up to the senior club to engage with the juniors and the junior clubs to facilitate that transition.
If they don't engage with the juniors and they choose to play else where then so be it.
I guess MP is up in arms about the uneven playing field where one club (because if its structure) has greater resources than other clubs and uses those resources to encourage players to move.
My view is you cant change the structure of that club (and its resources), so other senior clubs haves to work harder (by using non cash incentives) to keep its juniors.

[Steiger]

I think the real point is that juniors should be encouraged (note not forced) to play with their senior club. It is up to the senior club to engage with the juniors and the junior clubs to facilitate that transition.
If they don't engage with the juniors and they choose to play else where then so be it.
I guess MP is up in arms about the uneven playing field where one club (because if its structure) has greater resources than other clubs and uses those resources to encourage players to move.
My view is you cant change the structure of that club (and its resources), so other senior clubs haves to work harder (by using non cash incentives) to keep its juniors.

What's the solution when the senior club attempts to engage with the junior club but can't get a response or gets knocked back by the junior club?

[The Student]

Auskick starts earlier than that so yeah these district clubs invest a huge amount of time for Sydney Uni to come along and pinch their players into their under age team

This is so stupid - I thought we have been over this a thousand times before. I'm not sure there's even any point in correcting the many falsehoods you've vomited all over the last few pages to be honest because you won't listen.

Anyway, for those interested

1. Not a single Colts player would be on a scholarship. We only get a finite number to distribute and they go to NEAFL players and the odd PD player that is studying at the Uni.

2. Our football club has nothing to do with getting kids into University. That is an allegation you have trotted out before and could not be further from the truth.

3. Uni recruiting players into NEAFL with scholarships is no different to clubs paying players. Besides, we are not in the same market as the Sydney AFL clubs. As you know we are also unable to recruit into PD - any new players either play NEAFL or get drafted out. I think this is a good rule with regard to players from Sydney AFL clubs coming over but if someone from the bush or interstate walks in off the street they can only play Div 1 at best unless they are studying. This to me is ridiculous but that's the rule.

4. We do a lot of work with junior clubs in the area - Glebe, Drummoyne and Newtown - but as I have said in the past the demographics and catchment area of the inner city and say, St.George are markedly different. If clubs were set up in Redfern and Chippendale I'm sure we would be involved with them as well. Yes, players do come from outside our area. But what is to stop a 17 year old who wants to play at the club because he wants to study there one day, or wants to be involved in a club with a NEAFL set up and the professionalism that comes with that?

5. Your tax dollars have nothing to do with Sydney Uni Sport and Fitness. The money they generate comes from student fees as well as gym and sporting club memberships. Of all of your complaints against Uni you've made over the years this one is by far the dumbest. Just as an aside, do you wag your finger at Police officers and school teachers and tell them that you pay their wage?

6. No scholarship is worth five figures. They aren't all the same and I don't know the exact figures but I'd guess that 75% would be less than half of that (assuming you are suggesting they are worth 10k).

I honestly can't be bothered arguing with you on this - you never come up with any salient or even slightly interesting points on the matter other than to trot out the same old untruths. Besides, I'm not really sure how a discussion about juniors in western Sydney degenerated into you putting forth your wild conspiracy theories about Uni.

[justabaraker]

Why should a senior club like Sydney Uni be able to throw the Uni scholarship chequebook at players that North Shore has spent up to 8 years developing?

You're a spoiler, "STUDENT" for saying it all so much better than I did.
Seeing as MP knows so much about our footy, I was waiting for him/her to name names to back up those dopey stabs in the dark.
But, of course, he/she hasn't put up the evidence and now we find that he/she's not even involved with North Shore !!

Remember the great blast from a couple of years ago when he/she told us about the 50-60 top-liners from Sydney footy who get cherrypicked each week into the NEAFL teams ? Turned out he/she didn't get out to the local park on a weekend to watch our footy at all !

The internet has a name for people like MP...trolls.