Season 2016 - early days

[saviour01]

Final Score? What about the Under 19's?

14.20 to 1.0 someone said tonight at training.

[water boy]

I heard it was 32.28 to 0.1

[Pekay]

60 scoring shots on Kelso??? Long legged bastards.

[Coastal Boy]

Parra have 4 games against Prem Div reserves teams when their seniors are on a bye.
Others have less or none.
The bye in PD is untidy and compromises the lower grades.

The by-laws surrounding this can be a little unfair.

Yes only 2 players can drop down but if your reserve grade is 2 divisions down its a big drop in standard for PD players.
Most PD clubs would have on average 5 players miss any given week due to work, holidays or injury. So it is normal for say 3 PD players to be eligible because they didn't play at all the week before.

So yeah I feel sorry for Parra here. They will come up against teams with approx. 5 extra players from a higher division.

But I've seen examples where a team has been decimated with "outs" so 7 or 8 reserves step up and play 2 games that weekend only to find themselves ineligible the following week.

So IMO the by-laws need an overhaul in this regard.

[Pmcc2911]

Who was the big score and who was the small score? (re the Kelso game)

[ShortHalfHead]

The by-laws surrounding this can be a little unfair.

Yes only 2 players can drop down but if your reserve grade is 2 divisions down its a big drop in standard for PD players.
Most PD clubs would have on average 5 players miss any given week due to work, holidays or injury. So it is normal for say 3 PD players to be eligible because they didn't play at all the week before.

So yeah I feel sorry for Parra here. They will come up against teams with approx. 5 extra players from a higher division.

But I've seen examples where a team has been decimated with "outs" so 7 or 8 reserves step up and play 2 games that weekend only to find themselves ineligible the following week.

So IMO the by-laws need an overhaul in this regard.

Yes, I understand it's a tough one. Penrith play North Shore in D2 in round 1, with the Bombers having a bye in both Prem Div and 19's D1.
Last year was a bit of anomaly. We played their Div 2 side after the scheduled game was washed out, so it was played later on a wet weather weekend . The earlier round for North Shore PD was also on their bye week, so they didn't need to play in the wet weather round. We had clarification that the 2 player drop down (in a bye) didn't apply and they could play as many higher Div players as they liked, as it was not regarded as a "bye" round but a wet weather weekend.
11 of their players that played the Div 2 ground must have impressed the selectors, as they played Premier Div the following week.
I think Moorebank had an issue with a much higher number than allowed PD higher Div playing in a match against them but they were told post match that the league had given the Bombers an "exemption", without communicating or talking to Moorebank.

Yes, the rules do need clarification.

[ShortHalfHead]

Who was the big score and who was the small score? (re the Kelso game)

Those figures don't add up if you believe a post on the Camden page. "Very low scoring game, they just got on top of us but we put up a fight till the very end"

[Mug Punter]

The idea is for guys at the top of the Sydney AFL level to be able to test themselves and give the NEAFL a crack if they want to, then when they're available they can go back and play with their club. I think given the environment we expose players to with respect to the standards, coaching, conditioning, rehab etc the players will hopefully go back as better footballers and in turn their club benefits.

I can understand why people from other clubs couldn't give a flying about the NEAFL but our aim is to showcase Sydney talent and give kids another pathway into the AFL. There would be no bigger reward for us as a club to be able to get someone like Lloyd Perris back onto an AFL list in 2017 or 2018. If we win a flag, great, but having a sustainable model and contributing to getting kids drafted like Redland do is what we really want to achieve at the NE level.

And in breaking news Veale, Hebron, Behagg, Wilson and Gowers are all lining up for the Swans tomorrow in the NEAFL tomorrow so it would probably suggest that the good academy kids would gravitate to the Swans anyway for the first year or maybe two after graduating so as to get a rookie slot. If they are not successful I guess they would then either gravitate back to their home SFL club or maybe the Sydney Uni NEAFL program.

Baron-Hay will be lining up with Sydney Uni given the by-law that all players with a hyphenated name in Sydney are required to play for the blazer wearers....

[Benchwarmer]

The by-laws surrounding this can be a little unfair.

Yes only 2 players can drop down but if your reserve grade is 2 divisions down its a big drop in standard for PD players.
Most PD clubs would have on average 5 players miss any given week due to work, holidays or injury. So it is normal for say 3 PD players to be eligible because they didn't play at all the week before.

So yeah I feel sorry for Parra here. They will come up against teams with approx. 5 extra players from a higher division.

But I've seen examples where a team has been decimated with "outs" so 7 or 8 reserves step up and play 2 games that weekend only to find themselves ineligible the following week.

So IMO the by-laws need an overhaul in this regard.

Yes absolutely correct.
Further, the additional player numbers then cascade down through the grades so the more teams you have, the greater benefit .

Calling for the eligible 2 higher division players from previous week rule to be dropped since the PD reserves team already gets an advantage of say 3 players as you have explained so well.

Anyone in agreement ?

It just seems common sense . Another of those unique to Sydney AFL ByLaw rules that Is not fair to all clubs.

[Mug Punter]

Yes absolutely correct.
Further, the additional player numbers then cascade down through the grades so the more teams you have, the greater benefit .

Calling for the eligible 2 higher division players from previous week rule to be dropped since the PD reserves team already gets an advantage of say 3 players as you have explained so well.

Anyone in agreement ?

It just seems common sense . Another of those unique to Sydney AFL ByLaw rules that Is not fair to all clubs.

Stacking the lower teams with first graders has been around for ever and I really think the finals eligibility is the best way to deal with it. You can actually over-legislate all this.

I'd have no problems with first graders playing a second match over a weekend to help out if a club was short of numbers and at risk of forfeiting but any club that is dumb enough not to field its best first grade side every week, or a club who fields players below their level is really creating problems for itself more than anyone else.

This is not the same as clubs like UTS getting their lower sides in lower divisions so they can win a flag, that is just plain wrong

[Norris Lurker]

What't the by-law? Only 3 blokes selected in Prems the week before can play down? Should be ok.

That's the case. But round 1 can be tricky because there wasn't a week before. I'm not sure how you could frame a rule to prevent a team from stacking their reserves team with senior players in round 1 - but it's a potential loophole.

[Benchwarmer]

That's the case. But round 1 can be tricky because there wasn't a week before. I'm not sure how you could frame a rule to prevent a team from stacking their reserves team with senior players in round 1 - but it's a potential loophole.

Having either 8 or 10 teams in PDiv would be one way of fixing the problem. Introducing a transpaent promotion//relegation system across all competitions would be useful too.

[The Student]

And in breaking news Veale, Hebron, Behagg, Wilson and Gowers are all lining up for the Swans tomorrow in the NEAFL tomorrow so it would probably suggest that the good academy kids would gravitate to the Swans anyway for the first year or maybe two after graduating so as to get a rookie slot. If they are not successful I guess they would then either gravitate back to their home SFL club or maybe the Sydney Uni NEAFL program.

Baron-Hay will be lining up with Sydney Uni given the by-law that all players with a hyphenated name in Sydney are required to play for the blazer wearers....

As far as I know there won't be any top ups coming from Sydney AFL (or NE) clubs for the Swans and Giants this year - all the Academy kids will be used. We have some on our list but realistically we will never see them.

[The Student]

If someone moves to Sydney and hasn't played for a club the previous year there is nothing stopping them playing Prems for Sydney Uni as far as I understand it. Its only for players that have played the previous year for another club.

I'd be 99% sure that's not the case, whether it be for guys trying out unsuccessfully for NEAFL in December and being sent down to PD, or working their way up from Div 1 or 2 during the season. The link below will take you to the document that outlines all the rules. MP this may also be of interest to you - I don't believe any changes have been made for 2016

http://ow.ly/ZnVe0

[saviour01]

Good hit out against UTS today in div 1 and div 4.

Fairly even in div 1, we got the better of them in div 4 imo but we had a heap of decent 19s playing who have a lot more run than us old blokes.