Where is the Hype? 2016 GRAND FINAL

[The Runt]

I beg your pardon?

We forfeit twice last season not this. 11 of our team were under 19's with the majority of those first year under 19's. The other 11 were under 17's with an even mix of first and second year. 3 of those who were under 17's had never played AFL prior to this year, all three are very talented league players who from my conversations will make AFL their focus next season.

I took over coaching our under 19's 2 years ago because work commitments continue to grow and being both President and senior coach was not viable. The other reason was we were always going to struggle to have the numbers to field a team and asking someone to coach a team on a hiding is not something I would do. I also knew it was imperative that we fielded a team for 15 and 16 to ensure the work we have done would pay dividends. We were approached this season by two clubs seeking a merger with Wests being the first. The other club to approached us did so after an agreement with Wests was made in principle. With people like Steamboat and the Lemmes at Wests we were comfortable in our decision. I made it clear at the time it was for one season only - should the agreement continue beyond this year I cannot say as I will have no involvement at a decision making level or coaching level moving forward. One thing I do know is that in 2017 we have a squad of over 30 (as a South West Sydney standalone) with the vast majority first year under 19's and a strong pathway for a number of years beyond that in place.

Finally to say we wont the grand final because we pulled players from our senior grades is absolute rubbish. The only player given an exemption was Michael Lemme (first yr 19) who had injury issues all year and had played less than 3 full games all year across all grades.

North Shore given a forfeit by Manly in the final round were and did to some degree stack their team against us. The simple fact is that a misfit team who trained twice as a full group all season and with the vast majority of the team much younger than their opponents stayed more disciplined, attacked the contest far harder and simply wanted it more than the opposition throughout the finals series won the game.

As a coach I couldnt be prouder of the boys efforts all year especially the fact they had only two wins after the first seven games. If would have been far easier to listen to the parents who said we were wasting our time but they didnt and got a little better each week winning 10 of the last 11 games.

As the outgoing president I am content that as a club we have fostered very strong relationships with the juniors in our region and that next year with will be the tenth season since re-establishing the under 18/19's and one where for the first time our numbers will be very very healthy.

As a member of your club Tara and a coach I know the pain and trouble you and Rick had getting the 19s on the park so thanks mate, as for the uninformed comment above he is having a giggle or has been fed information from either someone who is bitter at worst, delusional at best. It tends to rankle when you see crap like that when you know the work that has gone into just getting the team on the park a great effort from both the Magpies.

[Pmcc2911]

I beg your pardon?

We forfeit twice last season not this. 11 of our team were under 19's with the majority of those first year under 19's. The other 11 were under 17's with an even mix of first and second year. 3 of those who were under 17's had never played AFL prior to this year, all three are very talented league players who from my conversations will make AFL their focus next season.



I took over coaching our under 19's 2 years ago because work commitments continue to grow and being both President and senior coach was not viable. The other reason was we were always going to struggle to have the numbers to field a team and asking someone to coach a team on a hiding is not something I would do. I also knew it was imperative that we fielded a team for 15 and 16 to ensure the work we have done would pay dividends. We were approached this season by two clubs seeking a merger with Wests being the first. The other club to approached us did so after an agreement with Wests was made in principle. With people like Steamboat and the Lemmes at Wests we were comfortable in our decision. I made it clear at the time it was for one season only - should the agreement continue beyond this year I cannot say as I will have no involvement at a decision making level or coaching level moving forward. One thing I do know is that in 2017 we have a squad of over 30 (as a South West Sydney standalone) with the vast majority first year under 19's and a strong pathway for a number of years beyond that in place.

Finally to say we wont the grand final because we pulled players from our senior grades is absolute rubbish. The only player given an exemption was Michael Lemme (first yr 19) who had injury issues all year and had played less than 3 full games all year across all grades.

North Shore given a forfeit by Manly in the final round were and did to some degree stack their team against us. The simple fact is that a misfit team who trained twice as a full group all season and with the vast majority of the team much younger than their opponents stayed more disciplined, attacked the contest far harder and simply wanted it more than the opposition throughout the finals series won the game.

As a coach I couldnt be prouder of the boys efforts all year especially the fact they had only two wins after the first seven games. If would have been far easier to listen to the parents who said we were wasting our time but they didnt and got a little better each week winning 10 of the last 11 games.

As the outgoing president I am content that as a club we have fostered very strong relationships with the juniors in our region and that next year with will be the tenth season since re-establishing the under 18/19's and one where for the first time our numbers will be very very healthy.

I apologise for my error re the two forfeits.

I don't know you but anyone who gives up their time to coach and administer any sport is deserved of praise.

I have chaceked a couple of points that you raised in your response and would just like to respond.

I spoke to the people at North and they were bemused at your suggestion that they "stacked" their team against you, I am told they had another 4 players who played Div1 and Div2 who were qualified for the Div 2 finals but didn't play them because it would have meant that 4 other kids who played Div 2 all year would have missed out.

Michael Lemme is not a first year 19, he played 13 x 19's Div 1 for Uni/Easts last year (incl the 19/1 Grand Final) as well as a game in Prems and also a couple 19/1 games in 2014. A very handy player to drop into a 19/2 team.
The point I made was that if Wests were playing finals he would probably have not been playing 19/2's.

[tara]

I apologise for my error re the two forfeits.

I don't know you but anyone who gives up their time to coach and administer any sport is deserved of praise.

I have chaceked a couple of points that you raised in your response and would just like to respond.

I spoke to the people at North and they were bemused at your suggestion that they "stacked" their team against you, I am told they had another 4 players who played Div1 and Div2 who were qualified for the Div 2 finals but didn't play them because it would have meant that 4 other kids who played Div 2 all year would have missed out.

Michael Lemme is not a first year 19, he played 13 x 19's Div 1 for Uni/Easts last year (incl the 19/1 Grand Final) as well as a game in Prems and also a couple 19/1 games in 2014. A very handy player to drop into a 19/2 team.
The point I made was that if Wests were playing finals he would probably have not been playing 19/2's.

Its interesting that they didnt play the four who were qualified yet definately played one who wasnt qualified and had they won the final against us would have have had the result reversed. Please note I did clarify this after the game with Lauren.

So essentially I pulled one one player not "players" and this is the reason we won the GF.

Michael as stated was injured all year, and in the first final did his ankle and I was forced play out of a pocket for the majority of the other two finals.

Due to rules in place I left the kid who was runner up in our B&F out for the finals. He injured his ankle in the last round and despite being right for the GF because we were restricted to 11 under 17's. Had we not been restricted he would have played in Michaels place.

My under standing from Michael himself is he still qualifies for under 19's in 2017 hence my referral to him being first year.

[Pmcc2911]

So you knew the opposing team was supposedly playing an ineligible player going into the game but would only raise it if your team lost.
Clever.

[tara]

So you knew the opposing team was supposedly playing an ineligible player going into the game but would only raise it if your team lost.
Clever.

Actually no we didnt. The North shore team sheet changed 5 times from Friday night until the morning of the game. I tend to have spread sheets which detail opposition players, times in best, goals kicked, games at a higher level etc so that I have an understanding of my opponents each week. If you knew me you would know Im a little bit obsessive when it comes to statistics and numbers(just as well I work in finance). The team sheet we were handed about 15 minutes prior to the game hand yet more changes since the last one I saw online at 7am. A parent bought it to our attention after the game. Whilst having a beer about an hour later I asked Lauren is a kid hand played 11 div one games were they ineligible? Earlier in the season we lost to a team who played more than the allowed number of under 17's - we chose not to protest the result - I did speak to their president though afterwards and let him know if they did it again we would the next time.

All anyone expects is a level playing field, teams that have 2 19's are able to manipulate results if they want. The league should be the ones policing their own policys but clubs have a responsibility to be fully conversant of the rules as well. The rules around games this year increased from 9 to 10 and each club was made well aware of this. As it was you had 3 players who would have been ineligible without the late rule change including a kid who was BOG in your Div 1 premiership team.

[Pmcc2911]

Not my Div 1 premiership team, I just know some guys at the club.

[saviour01]

All anyone expects is a level playing field, teams that have 2 19's are able to manipulate results if they want. The league should be the ones policing their own policys but clubs have a responsibility to be fully conversant of the rules as well. The rules around games this year increased from 9 to 10 and each club was made well aware of this. As it was you had 3 players who would have been ineligible without the late rule change including a kid who was BOG in your Div 1 premiership team.

It's a minefield going through the rules. I reckon I looked at them every week for the last 8 rounds or so trying to work out which players I needed to get qualified for finals. Throw in the rules around bye rounds, wet weather catch up games, different rules for u19s and then again with 2 u19s sides.

Would help if they made it clearer. I've never seen any rules so complicated but then again I come from a league background.

[Norris Lurker]

When both teams in the Under 19s Div 1 Grand Final had a result reversed during the year, there's clearly plenty of people who don't know the rules but should. I don't know what the answer is, and I'm not enough of a programmer to know how do-able this is; but possibly the FoxSportsPulse system could be modified so it's impossible to enter ineligible players onto the team sheet. It warns for duplicate numbers, maybe it could warn for inegligibility as well.
Mind you, that can create issues. I've tried entering goals & bests after a game and been unable to find a player who's been manually written on the team sheet in the drop-down menu for team selections - so if that player kicked goals or was one of their best 6, can't be entered.

[Coastal Boy]

The rules can be a minefield.
Say you have a div4 team who is playing a round3 washed out round between rounds 12 and 13.
On the morning of the game you find out that your div3 team playing a round6 washed out game at a different venue is washed out.
So according to the rules any player who played in div 3 the week before(which is round 11 in div3 not round12) is ineligible. Also any player who played in div3 during the weekend of div4's round3 is ineligible...which is div3s round 2.
But you then discover div3 had a bye that weekend so anyone who played div3 the week before in div3s round1 is ineligible.
But 2 players could drop back div3 round1 then and another 2 from div3 round11....or is it only 2 in total from both rounds? But there might have been a div2 player coming back from injury...so you have to check what div2 has been doing all these weeks as well....they had not was out game this week.
Toss into the mix that players might have played 2 games on these weekends and only the higher game counts for eligibility and maybe a player suspended back in week 3 was available to play this week. Can you play him or not?
So even though you picked your team on Thursday night suddenly now with 4 hours to play you have to ring every man and his dog to check who is not ineligible and eligible and who is available from the div2 game which is now washed out or u/19s that can back up just to get 18 players on the field because a forfeit anyway was on the cards.
Confusing. Ken Oath.
If you think I've dreamt this up....I haven't. I probably have embellished a little but 90% of this did happen.
So I can only imagine the hell and the countless scenarios clubs have to face at times. Honest mistakes can happen very easily. The eligibility rules need an urgent over haul as they have been slowly expanded over years and become complex beyond reason.

[Benchwarmer]

It's a minefield going through the rules. I reckon I looked at them every week for the last 8 rounds or so trying to work out which players I needed to get qualified for finals. Throw in the rules around bye rounds, wet weather catch up games, different rules for u19s and then again with 2 u19s sides.

Would help if they made it clearer. I've never seen any rules so complicated but then again I come from a league background.

The AFL NSW ACT bylaws have it all covered..

If you play more games in a higher grade then you are regarded as a higher grade player and not eligible for lower grade finals.

Nothing else is needed.

Rule no 2
Refer to rule no 1

For some reason previous adminstrators weakened to satisfy a couple of the largest clubs to keep there lower grades happy.

While we are at it, UTS fourth grade has now won three flags in a row
2014. DIv 4
2015. Div 5
2016 Div 4,
Some say all are soft. At two are I think.

They have to be in Div 3 next year surely.
Which means Div 2 would need to be 12 teams as Tom Wills has suggested and UTS third grade remain there.

The structure does need a tweak as does finals eligibility .
The pecking order for higher grades should be

Neafl
PD
D1
U19D1
D2
It seems this changed this year .

[Pekay]

When both teams in the Under 19s Div 1 Grand Final had a result reversed during the year, there's clearly plenty of people who don't know the rules but should. I don't know what the answer is, and I'm not enough of a programmer to know how do-able this is; but possibly the FoxSportsPulse system could be modified so it's impossible to enter ineligible players onto the team sheet. It warns for duplicate numbers, maybe it could warn for inegligibility as well.
Mind you, that can create issues. I've tried entering goals & bests after a game and been unable to find a player who's been manually written on the team sheet in the drop-down menu for team selections - so if that player kicked goals or was one of their best 6, can't be entered.

For memory, it works that way with suspended players, they either get flagged when you add them or are 'greyed out' so you can't select them.

[Norris Lurker]

Maybe the Sydney AFL by-laws are too complex for FoxSportsPulse to work around, I don't know - but something like that would be a good feature for future seasons if that could happen to anyone ineligible for selection. Would be useful at times like Premier Division bye weekends, wet weather catch-up rounds, lower grade finals etc.

[Nuttsy]

The AFL NSW ACT bylaws have it all covered..

If you play more games in a higher grade then you are regarded as a higher grade player and not eligible for lower grade finals.

Nothing else is needed.

Rule no 2
Refer to rule no 1

For some reason previous adminstrators weakened to satisfy a couple of the largest clubs to keep there lower grades happy.

While we are at it, UTS fourth grade has now won three flags in a row
2014. DIv 4
2015. Div 5
2016 Div 4,
Some say all are soft. At two are I think.

They have to be in Div 3 next year surely.
Which means Div 2 would need to be 12 teams as Tom Wills has suggested and UTS third grade remain there.

The structure does need a tweak as does finals eligibility .
The pecking order for higher grades should be

Neafl
PD
D1
U19D1
D2
It seems this changed this year .

Unless both teams play finals the same weekend then you can play in the lower grade if not selected in the higher grade