Seca - Sth East Ca 17/18

#22
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?
Quite a few rumours going around about the secretive seca exec and their decisions, even their web site is down and out for at least the last month. No information whatsoever. Best we go to the AGM and pose these questions in the general forum.
Speaking of umpires, you would hope that Longmuir and Woolnough would have 2 umpires this season as it seems that the SECA are trying to bridge the gap between the two top grades, then it makes sense to apply 2 umpires to Woolnough.
 

CLOCKER

Active Member
#23
How would you know Clocker ? haven't you been playing in another comp for a few years.
I have managed to catch a few games. The standard across the whole comp has dropped away and I believe in ten years time there will be fewer clubs around as the demographics continue to change.
 
#25
I have managed to catch a few games. The standard across the whole comp has dropped away and I believe in ten years time there will be fewer clubs around as the demographics continue to change.
You may be right Clocker, but watching a few games is clearly not enough to judge the comp as a whole. The reduction to 10 teams in the top 5 to 6 grades will improve the standard, however, the points system prevents some clubs from enticing outsiders or overseas players to their club, therefore better cricketers will go elsewhere.
You want as many top line cricketers playing and they should let the clubs decide their own fortunes without impeding their decisions by the points system.
Also heard that a prominent club could be pursuing a complete change in direction by looking at turf options.
 

CLOCKER

Active Member
#26
You may be right Clocker, but watching a few games is clearly not enough to judge the comp as a whole. The reduction to 10 teams in the top 5 to 6 grades will improve the standard, however, the points system prevents some clubs from enticing outsiders or overseas players to their club, therefore better cricketers will go elsewhere.
You want as many top line cricketers playing and they should let the clubs decide their own fortunes without impeding their decisions by the points system.
Also heard that a prominent club could be pursuing a complete change in direction by looking at turf options.
Unfortunately we have to agree to disagree. The points system like in footy is important to force clubs to keep moving forward.
Good luck to the club with their turf aspirations. First they find a ground that can accommodate them and then they will learn how expensive and time consuming it is to manage the whole process.
 
#27
Unfortunately we have to agree to disagree. The points system like in footy is important to force clubs to keep moving forward.
Good luck to the club with their turf aspirations. First they find a ground that can accommodate them and then they will learn how expensive and time consuming it is to manage the whole process.
There's a pretty nice ground at highett that will most likely be available now seeings they merged with Moorabbin park.
 
#28
Unfortunately we have to agree to disagree. The points system like in footy is important to force clubs to keep moving forward.
Good luck to the club with their turf aspirations. First they find a ground that can accommodate them and then they will learn how expensive and time consuming it is to manage the whole process.
It's not expensive if it's set up properly .
 
#29
Unfortunately we have to agree to disagree. The points system like in footy is important to force clubs to keep moving forward.
Good luck to the club with their turf aspirations. First they find a ground that can accommodate them and then they will learn how expensive and time consuming it is to manage the whole process.
Total points = 21, if you get an overseas = 5, if you pick up a couple from other comps = 4 or 3, if you pick up a couple from existing SECA grades [ even lower grades ] = 3 or 4. Do the maths Clock, hardly leaves too much room and then you have to worry about selection issues when promoting players from your 2's into the 1's which I can vouch for. You can have a scenario whereby a player performs in the 2's but your points are up to 19 but the player is worth 3, this then disrupts the decision on who comes down. Its a total ******** and not conducive to improving the comp what so ever. Let clubs decide for themselves on who they bring in to their system rather than those SECA EXECS trying to control everything. On the turf issue, the club in question already has the ground, facilities and infrastructure in place, just need to pull up the wicket and lay the turf block.
 
#30
Total points = 21, if you get an overseas = 5, if you pick up a couple from other comps = 4 or 3, if you pick up a couple from existing SECA grades [ even lower grades ] = 3 or 4. Do the maths Clock, hardly leaves too much room and then you have to worry about selection issues when promoting players from your 2's into the 1's which I can vouch for. You can have a scenario whereby a player performs in the 2's but your points are up to 19 but the player is worth 3, this then disrupts the decision on who comes down. Its a total ******** and not conducive to improving the comp what so ever. Let clubs decide for themselves on who they bring in to their system rather than those SECA EXECS trying to control everything. On the turf issue, the club in question already has the ground, facilities and infrastructure in place, just need to pull up the wicket and lay the turf block.
Disagree mate. Points system is the better system as it is the only system I've seen put up that is transparent.

It rewards clubs that develop their own talent and when you go and look at a pro, or players from other comps, you want to get quality players that are a genuine upgrade on your local players. This is better for the long term health of the club.
 
#31
Disagree mate. Points system is the better system as it is the only system I've seen put up that is transparent.

It rewards clubs that develop their own talent and when you go and look at a pro, or players from other comps, you want to get quality players that are a genuine upgrade on your local players. This is better for the long term health of the club.
I agree - just need to get a system that rewards those clubs that invest in junior development. The VTCA didnt do this, Cricket Southern Bayside is certainly a lot better. So if your junior players are rated as zeroes, then you can 'afford' to splash your money on whoever you want
 
#32
I agree - just need to get a system that rewards those clubs that invest in junior development. The VTCA didnt do this, Cricket Southern Bayside is certainly a lot better. So if your junior players are rated as zeroes, then you can 'afford' to splash your money on whoever you want
Whilst I can understand your thinking, I'm yet to be convinced about your view on '' rewards those clubs that invest in Junior development '' . Since when do clubs not invest in Juniors, good clubs have been doing it for years upon years, so that's a lame excuse for the points system. The SECA just took the DDCA model with the points system and didn't put enough time into their own comp first and foremost. I'm also not convinced that CSB will prosper with the points as there are some clubs who will be clearly right on the limit with their overseas players.
 
#33
Disagree mate. Points system is the better system as it is the only system I've seen put up that is transparent.

It rewards clubs that develop their own talent and when you go and look at a pro, or players from other comps, you want to get quality players that are a genuine upgrade on your local players. This is better for the long term health of the club.
Gee Whiz, there must be allot of poorly run clubs out there, I could name quite allot of clubs that could operate without the points system and easily develop their own talent. Its called club culture and good structure.
 
#34
Whilst I can understand your thinking, I'm yet to be convinced about your view on '' rewards those clubs that invest in Junior development '' . Since when do clubs not invest in Juniors, good clubs have been doing it for years upon years, so that's a lame excuse for the points system. The SECA just took the DDCA model with the points system and didn't put enough time into their own comp first and foremost. I'm also not convinced that CSB will prosper with the points as there are some clubs who will be clearly right on the limit with their overseas players.
The points will drop another 2 next year for CSB
 
#35
Whilst I can understand your thinking, I'm yet to be convinced about your view on '' rewards those clubs that invest in Junior development '' . Since when do clubs not invest in Juniors, good clubs have been doing it for years upon years, so that's a lame excuse for the points system. The SECA just took the DDCA model with the points system and didn't put enough time into their own comp first and foremost. I'm also not convinced that CSB will prosper with the points as there are some clubs who will be clearly right on the limit with their overseas players.
I’m not saying it’s an excuse for having a points system – merely saying that the system has to do it to be worthwhile.
Check out the VTCA model. Junior players were 2 points, (they might have played for 10 years), yet you could buy a player, pay them for 4 years and they would have been 1 point.
Quite a few clubs with coin took advantage of that and bought players – and were actively encouraged to do so by the executive of the VTCA. And these were clubs with minimal junior teams. They had no interest in junior development or club culture - it was all about winning a 1st XI premiership

Other clubs spent their coin on developing players – and were discouraged by the points system in place in that competition
 
#36
Gee Whiz, there must be allot of poorly run clubs out there, I could name quite allot of clubs that could operate without the points system and easily develop their own talent. Its called club culture and good structure.
But what is your point mate? My point is, that this system benefits those that develop talent from within their club as these players cost only a point. Its a system that encourages junior development at ALL clubs. Rather than a system that allows a club to spend money on recruiting mediocre talent from other clubs and supplementing this with maybe one or two very good cricketers to be competitive. This is not a desired outcome for Cricket Victoria as it does little/nothing for the long term benefit of grass roots cricket.
 

Troy

New Member
#37
Interesting fixture structure seca have come up with..
17 weeks of cricket with just 9 rounds?
Most comps are 20 or 21 weeks with 11 to 14 rounds.
Might suit casual cricketers but would suggest any serious cricketers, young or old will be Looking elsewhere.. free kick CSB and Subbies!
 
#39
Interesting fixture structure seca have come up with..
17 weeks of cricket with just 9 rounds?
Most comps are 20 or 21 weeks with 11 to 14 rounds.
Might suit casual cricketers but would suggest any serious cricketers, young or old will be Looking elsewhere.. free kick CSB and Subbies!
Interesting fixture would be an understatement, already know of 3 young blokes leaving their clubs to play CSB. Also, what criteria are SECA using FFS. Is it one set of rules for Longmuir, another set for Woolnough, and then a third for Quiney. They drop only 2 teams from Longy, and don't promote premiers from Woolnough, they then drop 4 teams from Woolnough and promote a team with no juniors and only 3.5 teams, their 4's struggled for numbers. I'd be disappointed if I was East Sandy who won 5 games in Woolnough. Good clubs have tried to get their 2's up to the highest grades possible, East Sandy have done that and all of sudden through this stupidity, they get demoted. Can understand Uniting and Mackie 2's going down as the bottom 2, and yet KH won only 2 games and they stay represented in this grade due to their 1's coming down who only won 1 game in Longy, and really should have been relegated last season. Can't wait to hear the full reasons from someone in the SECA, it will be riveting.
 

CLOCKER

Active Member
#40
There will be no statement from the Executive because they never explain their rationale. They would have explained their logic to the clubs in their own convoluted way. It is up to the clubs and their reps to share the information and use forums like this to enlighten supporters and express their point of view.
The Executive treats Longy as a picnic competition, and is it any wonder that is how it is perceived.

I believe that this is part of a well designed plan to make the Longmuir competition irrelevant and unattractive to local cricketers. For many years Longmuir took the limelight away from the turf competitions. Longmuir controlled junior cricket in the South East, so Turf Clubs were beholden to them which annoyed many of them. Now we have a new master plan from CV from cricket in the Southern region focusing on the Turf Competition. The Longmuir Executive has compliantly followed instructions and the restructure of Longmuir and the is draw is just another example. I know for a fact that a few senior people on the Executive were great believers in getting rid of 2 day games and just play one day matches every week. It made it easier for all concerned was their rationale.

The next step that will occur will be the forced merger of clubs to try and give some of the Turf clubs some breathing room. Who knows the decree may come from CV that some turf clubs takeover CMCA clubs. For example Moorabbin and Bentleigh Uniting and/or Mackie. Sound ludicrous now, agreed, however let's see what happens in 5-10 years.

The problem that CV faces is that local councils do not like or really support turf wickets on their grounds. They want soccer clubs; the more the better.
 
Top