Seca - Sth East Ca 17/18

Does anyone agree on the SECA's decision to create a ten team comp in Longmuir shield. Also, opinions on the points system.

 

Just longmuir?
still 11 games?

 

No Troy, I believe its down to possibly the top 4 grades with 9 games ????? not sure how they do the draw, but the season seams to be shorter ??

 

No Troy, I think its down to the top 4 grades, not sure how they will do the draw.

 

agree with smaller divisions to tighten the gap between top and bottom but 9 games isnt much of a season..

 

I think the idea of 10 team grades has merit Troy, however, its the process of the way the SECA cronies have adapted it. Its been mooted around for a while and gained legs last season, however, there was no confirmation that they would be implementing it until after Xmas, this decision then gave teams in Longmuir only 5 games to plan and avoid the relegation zone. I'm hearing around the streets that they will not be promoting the premiers of Woolnough either, this is an absolute joke if true.

 

I heard there was a meeting last week where various clubs were invited to present to the SECA committee. Apparently Union decided not to go along as they think they are entitled to go up irrespective of how many are coming down. Royals did present and put forward a compelling argument as to why they should stay in Longy. Not sure when SECA will announce the decision. IMO the committee stuffed up in not announcing the proposed change BEFORE the start of the season. Maybe they should defer it until the end of 17/18.

 

I had heard that, but Union did attend so I've just been told, and presented a very good case. Royals depth as a club would seem to be a general concern, however, 4 wins in Longy is their main argument I would suspect. Their structure now would even be worse as their 2's will certainly be in D grade. SECA seem to be losing any real direction by making ad hoc decisions.

 

My source is very reliable in that Union did not attend but happy to take your word, they may have had a separate meeting. Either way, Union certainly have a straight forward case to go up. Royals argument runs a bit deeper than just win/loss. Strongest argument is to shelve the reduction for this season and give all clubs notice that the change will take place in 18/19. After all, what is the rush?

 

Leader are reporting that the Royals keep their spot in Longy, Union are filthy which is quite understandable

 

Union definitely attended, they are a professional outfit and wouldn't be as stupid as that to not attend. Information coming out is that there were really only 3 SECA senior exec members who were actually involved in the final decision, this is TBC. Still cant work out the reasoning with the Criteria, as ANA's depth will be tested with their 2's in D grade, how does that work against a team with their 2's in Quiney who have been performing well enough. Interestingly it seems that the SECA are more involved in trying to run the turf comp as well in the Bayside SBCA. Clubs still haven't received any information on how the 10 team draw is going to work as well.

 

[ as they think they are entitled to go up irrespective of how many are coming down ] I agree with most of your comments, except for the one in brackets, I certainly wouldn't believe that they think they are entitled, I'm sure no club would think that, maybe one exception perhaps down towards Sandringham way.

 

Correct, the gap in standard is quite big so SECA probably valued the 10th placegetter's 4 wins in a much higher standard than Union's 10 wins in a lower grade against some Seconds teams including the GF. If it was 1 up 1 down fair enough but the gap is too large with 3 down 1 up.

 

An outsider’s comment here – but we’ve done the 8 team comp with 7 two-dayers and 7 one-dayers a few times, and it is a great format. You play everybody home and away, and play everybody with a red ball and a white ball.

Just the initial pain of getting those down the bottom to go down a grade – but the actual competition format is brilliant

 

Sounds OK Rat, but the SECA have botched up the whole 10 team structure as previously noted, they wouldn't have the Gonads to go down to 8 teams. Speaking of Gonads, have you or anyone heard any information regarding the debacle in the Quiney GF, and the Longy GF. Any rulings on the outcome, reported players x 3, and spectator behavioural issues. Had heard that there may be at least 1 umpire possibly 2 not returning due to lack of support during the whole process.

 

All very quiet, what a disgrace.

 

Heard that the SECA executive watched the the second day of play in Quiney and there may have been security guards for the umpire's. Can anyone confirm this? Surely there would be expulsions or big bans if it was bad enough to require security. Rumour said the umpires considered not showing up for the second day of play! Who in their right mind would want to umpire that club again?

Totally agree about an 8 team comp, perhaps seca are taking a slowly slowly approach... on grand final day someone was telling me about a proposed 8 team comp which would have a 7 round red ball and three round one day white ball comp. Not quite sure how it works but sounded decent. Admittedly I don't know enough of the details to have the positives or neg's.

Has anyone heard any rumours or news about player movements?

 

Totally agree with the decision. The standard has really dropped away the past few years, especially in Woolnough.
Can you elaborate further on what occurred at the GF's?

 

3 reported players in Quiney GF. Umpires threatened after the game and stayed in the rooms, crowd from the losing team threatening and abusing umpires etc etc etc. Umpire failed to attend tribunal so charges were not taken into account, offending club fined $$$$$. Both of the quiney umpires not umpiring this season, one going back to play, the other appointed coach of a sub district club.

 

It is pointless fining these idiots.The club should start with -18 points for the season. Honestly why would anyone want to umpire. Where were the SECA officials in all of this?