Nobody, possibly the key factor is that Regency were relegated to divisions 2A and 2B but no longer exist (they have merged with North City to form one club with two teams) and no one team clubs expanded to two teams. That meant that divisions 2A and 2B were down to 9 teams. A 16 game season for A and B grade teams wasn't seen as enough, so other ideas had to be considered.
There were obviously various ways to address that situation. Leaving Scotch and Windsor in 2A, adding another one team club to 2A and pairing all 3 teams up with other teams in 2B was certainly considered. It could have gone either way, but it would be difficult to say who the other team in 2A should be - Blackwood and Woodside existed last year and did well, but were in div 5, whereas St Paul's are a brand new club with no track record to assess.
Other comments have speculated about whether some of the clubs with lots of teams could put teams in 2A and 2B as well as in 1A and 1B. That could be put to a vote in the future perhaps, but it would be a move away from the model the CSL is currently aiming for. We want every team in 2A to be capable of being promoted, so what would happen if a big club with teams in divisions 1A and 1B won division 2A? Or if a team was relegated from 1A but alreday had a team in 2A? It would just compound the issue we've had in recent years with Windsor being very successful but not being promoted.
I agree that the format in the last two season worked reasonably well. If nothing had changed I dare say the format would not have changed either. I know that Pembroke would have been happy to remain in division 2B.
I suspect that the format this year will ultimately work well. Divisions 2A, 2B and 3 could all be really competitive and the 3 newest one team clubs will have a good chance of success in division 5 (and can use interchange to keep players happy if they have more than enough for one team).
I'm sure there will be different circumstances and a different solution next year too.
div 2
Re: div 2
Fair enough, well explained.
Looks like the issue is there are only 22 clubs over 8 divisions and a total of 70 teams. It is a logistical nightmare if you want to have 20 clubs with 2 teams and be competitive.
It is very difficult for small clubs to sustain 2 teams, which is proven over the years, with teams folding or merging due to player availability (PAC, Uni Black, Regency, North City).
What would happen if there was a cap of 3 teams per club? Would this then create more clubs? For example Rostrevor Black & Rostrevor Red. It works with the Uni teams. They can then both compete in div 1&2.
Looks like Windsor isn't the issue. The issue is getting and sustaining 2 team clubs. So turning a 4-5 team club into two sister clubs might be the solution. Remember there are only a limited number of colleges and players available.
What do you big clubs think? Will it work or am I dreaming?
Looks like the issue is there are only 22 clubs over 8 divisions and a total of 70 teams. It is a logistical nightmare if you want to have 20 clubs with 2 teams and be competitive.
It is very difficult for small clubs to sustain 2 teams, which is proven over the years, with teams folding or merging due to player availability (PAC, Uni Black, Regency, North City).
What would happen if there was a cap of 3 teams per club? Would this then create more clubs? For example Rostrevor Black & Rostrevor Red. It works with the Uni teams. They can then both compete in div 1&2.
Looks like Windsor isn't the issue. The issue is getting and sustaining 2 team clubs. So turning a 4-5 team club into two sister clubs might be the solution. Remember there are only a limited number of colleges and players available.
What do you big clubs think? Will it work or am I dreaming?
Re: div 2
Oh God no 
From personal experience, I would never recommend a break up of a club into multiple 'colours' as per AUSC... it's just a big headache. For starters - how would you break up your club? You would be producing 2 poorer quality clubs. How do you allocate new players? Who gets which pitches?
I agree that there should be a cap on teams though - say 5 (less than the number of divisions). Then the players who don't make the grade will seek out the clubs that need them (PAC, Regency, etc). And then the clubs teams fit into the league, not the other way around.
PS. On the original topic - as usual, you can't make everyone happy. Respect to those on the executive board for spending their personal time to sort it all out.
From personal experience, I would never recommend a break up of a club into multiple 'colours' as per AUSC... it's just a big headache. For starters - how would you break up your club? You would be producing 2 poorer quality clubs. How do you allocate new players? Who gets which pitches?I agree that there should be a cap on teams though - say 5 (less than the number of divisions). Then the players who don't make the grade will seek out the clubs that need them (PAC, Regency, etc). And then the clubs teams fit into the league, not the other way around.
PS. On the original topic - as usual, you can't make everyone happy. Respect to those on the executive board for spending their personal time to sort it all out.
That's it!
Re: div 2
The issue is there are not enough clubs with 2 teams to fill div 1&2. My solution is to try to create more 2 team clubs from what we have. It most likely isn't perfect or correct but the league needs to find a solution. Don't dismiss possible solutions without looking at all the pros and cons. We need to think outside the square or else we will get nowhere.
Re: div 2
I've seen the pros and cons of a split club for 15 years, so I think I can dismiss the idea for other clubs. It probably only "works" for the AUSC because it's always been that way.
But like I said, the cap idea (albeit higher) should be beneficial to create more 2 team clubs.
But like I said, the cap idea (albeit higher) should be beneficial to create more 2 team clubs.
That's it!
-
Squeezy Cheesey Peas
- Posts: 215
- Joined: Tue Jul 26, 2011 2:19 pm
- Current Club: Adelaide City
Re: div 2
Don't think capping clubs would solve the root cause here.... I know at our club, any players that were 'cut' due to a cap wouldn't go to another CSL club and even if they did they would be players that couldn't make the top 5 teams (in your capped scenario) ...creating new 2 club teams with a weak base in theory.
Caps and split clubs are all ideas and i agree that we should have an open mind but I still think the best answer was to keep the newer one club teams as partners (Blackwood with Woodside, Windsor with St Pauls, Scotch with one from Pembroke, Unley , Rostrevor or Mt Barker....
THEN, when they grow into a second team, move the remainder into Div 3 - 6 as appropriate.
I do agree that having one of the bigger clubs with 2 teams in 2A/B as well as Div 1 is problematic but again, could work with caveats in place if the Div 1 relegation / dIV 2 promotion scenario was to ever eventuate ( unlikely but anythings possible!)
Impossible to please everyone and at the end of the day, we will all get to play football which is the main aim!!
On a positive note, Only one relegation spot will mean the newly promoted teams have the best odds of staying up for many a year!
Caps and split clubs are all ideas and i agree that we should have an open mind but I still think the best answer was to keep the newer one club teams as partners (Blackwood with Woodside, Windsor with St Pauls, Scotch with one from Pembroke, Unley , Rostrevor or Mt Barker....
THEN, when they grow into a second team, move the remainder into Div 3 - 6 as appropriate.
I do agree that having one of the bigger clubs with 2 teams in 2A/B as well as Div 1 is problematic but again, could work with caveats in place if the Div 1 relegation / dIV 2 promotion scenario was to ever eventuate ( unlikely but anythings possible!)
Impossible to please everyone and at the end of the day, we will all get to play football which is the main aim!!
On a positive note, Only one relegation spot will mean the newly promoted teams have the best odds of staying up for many a year!
Re: div 2
From a ROCSC perspective not sure if capping would have the desired result.
Every year we get more players out of school wanting to play with their mates for their former school- If we turned them to another CSL club there wouldn't be any guarantees that these players would actually go. Good chance they would find a SAASL team near their house or even attempt to go back to State League Club. Would the one team CSL Club want the new players? If we did cap we would certainly keep the better players. Its hard to create an atmosphere at club that retains players and gets new ones - things like that take time.
CSL could also help these one team Clubs with promotion..e.g. subsidise costs for a website. Set up Facebook pages (which does work we got a few new players from social media).
Every year we get more players out of school wanting to play with their mates for their former school- If we turned them to another CSL club there wouldn't be any guarantees that these players would actually go. Good chance they would find a SAASL team near their house or even attempt to go back to State League Club. Would the one team CSL Club want the new players? If we did cap we would certainly keep the better players. Its hard to create an atmosphere at club that retains players and gets new ones - things like that take time.
CSL could also help these one team Clubs with promotion..e.g. subsidise costs for a website. Set up Facebook pages (which does work we got a few new players from social media).
-
Cogs-PortAugusta
- Posts: 1
- Joined: Wed Apr 22, 2015 1:30 pm
- Current Club: Unley
Re: div 2
If any Div 2 teams are looking for a game on the weekend they have a bye we are looking at organising a few games up here in Port Augusta...
(it is a lovely drive, trust me I have done it a million times...)
(it is a lovely drive, trust me I have done it a million times...)