2014/2015 Barclay Shield

Top Contributors
Tongs said:
I think you're on the right track here, thought process is right but you'd need to revise the number or add some more to the process. Reasoning for that, for example, we currently have 12 players who have played 6 or more A grade games this
Click to expand...
serg fernandez said:
I actually think that there is a BIG chance that Plenty will win outright on Saturday in Barclay, thus denying Macleod the opportunity to take top spot.
Click to expand...

6 points is enough for Plenty to stay on top, unless you think Macleod can get 10 points against Bundoora United?
 
Like it or not, no rules have been breached. As Prez says, if you don't like it, suggest a change of rules.

Just keep in mind, it takes someone to enforce and review such rules who's probably got a day job too. If you were to have a system where you need to make an application to drop a player in round 10 and 11, you could eaisly end up with 100+ applications all to be reviewed on the Friday before a game. Then with the reasons given, how would you know if they were true or not. You have 40 players being dropped that list the reason as injury, how do you determine which is serious enough to warrant the drop or not? Denying some applications might be as good as calling the club or player a liar. I can see that becoming a farce and if clubs (opposed to such a system) were smart, they'd just flood the exec with applications the first time it's to come into effect and watch the system break down as I bet it would. I also don't think a blanket ban would be fair either.

While some of you may question the morality of such decisions, I'm not convinced any alternate suggested is workable.
 
Tongs said:
I think you're on the right track here, thought process is right but you'd need to revise the number or add some more to the process. Reasoning for that, for example, we currently have 12 players who have played 6 or more A grade games this year.

Based on that rule, one of them is not allowed to play at all for the last 2/3 rounds? I think that's where the application to the DVCA process is a great one, because we would be saying that we aren't dropping him to boost our twos, but because 12 doesn't fit into 11.
Click to expand...

On hold with Foxtel so thought I'd kill some time!!

I've said all I'm gunna say about the weekend and if you can put to one side for a moment your disdain for our actions on the weekend there is a simple ( well, close to it ) solution which negates the need for clubs to be tempted to do anything other than play your strongest team each & every week.

With the comp going 10,10,8 - i would hope that your 2nd 11 grade is dictated by the position of your 1st 11. The same as most local footy comps. The issue in the Dvca is we have 27 clubs who are "all in" so to speak and Plenty valley/yarrambat who's number 1 side is in essence their 5th 11...... That's the only sticking point IMO.
 
Funny game cricket. All it takes is for 1 bloke to tee off a la Malone style and all of a sudden it could become a distinct possibility. ( hence the plenty/bundoora outright scenario being brought up )
 
Last edited:

Fair point, but Daimo haven't been beaten yet so I reckon your boys will be happy with 6 points against a pretty good attack rather than risk getting beaten & possibly losing the chance of a home final chasing quick runs.
 
Bundoora said:
On hold with Foxtel so thought I'd kill some time!!

I've said all I'm gunna say about the weekend and if you can put to one side for a moment your disdain for our actions on the weekend there is a simple ( well, close to it ) solution which negates the need for clubs to be tempted to do anything other than play your strongest team each & every week.

With the comp going 10,10,8 - i would hope that your 2nd 11 grade is dictated by the position of your 1st 11. The same as most local footy comps. The issue in the Dvca is we have 27 clubs who are "all in" so to speak and Plenty valley/yarrambat who's number 1 side is in essence their 5th 11...... That's the only sticking point IMO.
Click to expand...
This is exactly what I think... Go back to having Barclay Reserve, Money Resrerve and Divison 3 Resrerve... There was absolutely no problem with the Barclay Reserve set up. I can't rememeber any club getting smashed week in week out year after year.. DVCA need to go back to this structure and then there is no problem.
 
PremiersAgain said:
This is exactly what I think... Go back to having Barclay Reserve, Money Resrerve and Divison 3 Resrerve... There was absolutely no problem with the Barclay Reserve set up. I can't rememeber any club getting smashed week in week out year after year.. DVCA need to go back to this structure and then there is no problem.
Click to expand...

Apparently lots of teams (???) didnt like it...too many dead games after Christmas apparently... I dont think I have ever heard from any club complain about the old structure... yet the word from DVCA is too many dead rubbers...
DVCA really should like it too, certainly makes Neal Bowdens job easier... a no brainer really... which means it probably wont happen...
 
Or clubs could not be self indulgent and exploit the rules to the point of ruining games/ladders/seasons of a number of clubs?

That might fix the issue?
 
Tongs said:
Or clubs could not be self indulgent and exploit the rules to the point of ruining games/ladders/seasons of a number of clubs?

That might fix the issue?
Click to expand...

I don't think you can just hope that clubs will not exploit the rules. Especially dodgy clubs like Mill Park, Bundoora and Eltham.
 
Ex Prez said:
Tongs really...? Short memory you have...
As Brad alluded to earlier, was it not Eltham & Lower Plenty who conspired to play 2 x 40 over games in the last home & away match in 2002 to orchestrate and outright result...?
The winner who collected 10 points, ended up knocking us out of the top 4...

So please dont go get all high and mighty against us when your club is guilty of contriving results in the past...
As they say, what goes around, comes around, and i am sure EVERY club would do what they think is in the best interests of their club when they deem it necessary to do so.
Despite your opinions, we have not ruined the season of any clubs. The ONLY club affected might be Lower Eltham who are doing the same thing.
We havent even won the B grade match yet, nor lost the A grade one.
At least we are not breaking any current rules. The contrived outright, certainly does...
Click to expand...

Are you seriously complaining about a game 13 years ago. I'll repeat 13 years ago? Spell me.

Your club is apart of manipulating results, which could/will ultimately effect the whole top 4 in Barclay Shield, and relegation of B grade. You both agree that it is a poor look, but you do whatever is best for your club. So, stuffing the comp is fine, as long as you look after your own side. Then again, its not the first time, so why should anyone be surprised?
 
Tongs said:
Are you seriously complaining about a game 13 years ago. I'll repeat 13 years ago? Spell me.

Your club is apart of manipulating results, which could/will ultimately effect the whole top 4 in Barclay Shield, and relegation of B grade. You both agree that it is a poor look, but you do whatever is best for your club. So, stuffing the comp is fine, as long as you look after your own side. Then again, its not the first time, so why should anyone be surprised?
Click to expand...

We can be here for the next 10 days arguing the same thing over and over again. Why not be proactive and do something to stop this from happening in the future. Maybe a 'rule' or agreement within the constitution that its not within the spirit of the game to stack your lower sides no matter what the circumstances starting from....NOW.
 
ginger_ninja said:
We can be here for the next 10 days arguing the same thing over and over again. Why not be proactive and do something to stop this from happening in the future. Maybe a 'rule' or agreement within the constitution that its not within the spirit of the game to stack your lower sides no matter what the circumstances starting from....NOW.
Click to expand...

agreed, i think 1 of 2 things needs to happen, bring in a new rule/law....or relegate them both in B grade as a deterrent.

surely the 'spirit of cricket' guidelines have been breached somewhere here....anyway time to move on
 
Ex Prez said:
Tongs really...? Short memory you have...
As Brad alluded to earlier, was it not Eltham & Lower Plenty who conspired to play 2 x 40 over games in the last home & away match in 2002 to orchestrate and outright result...?
The winner who collected 10 points, ended up knocking us out of the top 4...

So please dont go get all high and mighty against us when your club is guilty of contriving results in the past...
As they say, what goes around, comes around, and i am sure EVERY club would do what they think is in the best interests of their club when they deem it necessary to do so.
Despite your opinions, we have not ruined the season of any clubs. The ONLY club affected might be Lower Eltham who are doing the same thing.
We havent even won the B grade match yet, nor lost the A grade one.
At least we are not breaking any current rules. The contrived outright, certainly does...
Click to expand...

Within the spirit of the game, yes.

As Harry said though, time to move on, can't change it now.
 
Can someone refresh my memory and recall a Barclay Shield captain declaring his teams second innings at 0/0 to protect percentage in his sides battle to avoid relegation? I may be a bit out with the detail here, but remember there being a bit of an uproar at the time. Think it was against Plenty in the mid 2000's. Not against the rules but arguably not in the spirit of the game.
 
brutal said:
Can someone refresh my memory and recall a Barclay Shield captain declaring his teams second innings at 0/0 to protect percentage in his sides battle to avoid relegation? I may be a bit out with the detail here, but remember there being a bit of an uproar at the time. Think it was against Plenty in the mid 2000's. Not against the rules but arguably not in the spirit of the game.
Click to expand...

It may have been Thomastown, agreed to go on with their 2nd innings after losing, then unilaterally decided to call the game off after their percentage started to get damaged. You can guess who their captain was.;)
 
brutal said:
Can someone refresh my memory and recall a Barclay Shield captain declaring his teams second innings at 0/0 to protect percentage in his sides battle to avoid relegation? I may be a bit out with the detail here, but remember there being a bit of an uproar at the time. Think it was against Plenty in the mid 2000's. Not against the rules but arguably not in the spirit of the game.
Click to expand...


I did think about that, but wasn't going to go there. The peace and quiet has been nice.
 
ginger_ninja said:
Ok out of the synthetic comps is there much difference in standards between (nmca, eca) and us?
Click to expand...
Absorbing Heidelberg, Rosanna and Banyule was a good result for the DVCA. The depth across Barclay and Money shield was improved and they're good clubs with good cultures.

If you're talking about the Synthetic comps, you're probably well placed to comment on NMCA vs DVCA, I can't imagine the NMCA has the depth the DVCA does.

As for the ECA vs DVCA, the strong (wealthy?) clubs in the ECA tend to be the turf clubs and good cricketers in that area that want to play on turf needn't go to far to do so. It is different for people in the DVCA, plenty of cricketers don't go to play on turf because it is too much travel and/or hassel and all the local clubs are synthetic. For that reason, I'd postulate that Barclay is stronger than Macgibbon and the comp in general has more depth.

Not to forget other comps like BHRDCA, FTGDCA and the RDCA. All these (VMCU) comps sit underneath Premier 1s and 2s at least. So there can't be too much difference between them. The one common theme I suspect you would find is that none of them are as strong as they were 10/15/20 years ago.
 
shortnwide said:
Absorbing Heidelberg, Rosanna and Banyule was a good result for the DVCA. The depth across Barclay and Money shield was improved and they're good clubs with good cultures.

If you're talking about the Synthetic comps, you're probably well placed to comment on NMCA vs DVCA, I can't imagine the NMCA has the depth the DVCA does.

As for the ECA vs DVCA, the strong (wealthy?) clubs in the ECA tend to be the turf clubs and good cricketers in that area that want to play on turf needn't go to far to do so. It is different for people in the DVCA, plenty of cricketers don't go to play on turf because it is too much travel and/or hassel and all the local clubs are synthetic. For that reason, I'd postulate that Barclay is stronger than Macgibbon and the comp in general has more depth.

Not to forget other comps like BHRDCA, FTGDCA and the RDCA. All these (VMCU) comps sit underneath Premier 1s and 2s at least. So there can't be too much difference between them. The one common theme I suspect you would find is that none of them are as strong as they were 10/15/20 years ago.
Click to expand...

Macgibbon Shield is stronger today than it was 20 years ago only due to the composition now being made up of ex ESCA & ESCCA clubs via the merger, plus ex SDCCCL clubs from their recent disbandment, plus some ex inner North clubs who chose to shift to the ECA. From purely an ESCA point of view, only two clubs remain in the top grade from 20 years back and one of them is a merger of two clubs from that era so overall your point is right, especially from an overall participation point of view. A few synthetic clubs in the area have moved on to Turf or have merged with Turf clubs so they no longer play their 1s in synthetic, others have dropped away or folded.

ECA plays BHRDCA and RDCA in an annual round robin style synthetic rep tournament, DVCA should make enquiries about joining in.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top