Dvca - Competition Restructure

What should we do with the Competition next season and beyond?

  • Leave it as is

    Votes: 5 41.7%
  • Go through with the proposed change (10, 10, 8)

    Votes: 1 8.3%
  • Change to a 12, 8, 8 Team Structure

    Votes: 6 50.0%
  • Other

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    12
  • Poll closed .

Tongs

BigCricket Moderator
Staff member
Its obviously a hot topic at the moment, and plenty of discussion and thoughts on it. So I thought it best we give the topis its own thread for discussion. I will move all the posts to date in to the thread.

Feel free to post ideas and thoughts or general discussion around what is best for the competition moving forward. I have also created a vote panel for people to show their thoughts.
 

brutal

Active Member
Just going to throw this out for comment. With what has happened and some clubs benefitting more than what normally would have been expected, thus in sense compromising the fixture and results, is it worth the exec putting the re structure back a season? When it comes to the relegation stakes, a couple of sides have got a bit of assistance, probably more so Rosanna, but it has created an issue where other clubs (mine included) have had their seasons compromised. Would it be the fair and equal option to just have the one side (bun Utd) relegated as a result? Just a question folks, so don't hang me.
 

PremiersAgain

Active Member
Just going to throw this out for comment. With what has happened and some clubs benefitting more than what normally would have been expected, thus in sense compromising the fixture and results, is it worth the exec putting the re structure back a season? When it comes to the relegation stakes, a couple of sides have got a bit of assistance, probably more so Rosanna, but it has created an issue where other clubs (mine included) have had their seasons compromised. Would it be the fair and equal option to just have the one side (bun Utd) relegated as a result? Just a question folks, so don't hang me.
I'm all for this.....

In all seriousness having the 3 go down this season has basically put meaning into every match all season. Thoughts on 2 up 2 down for future years especially in the shields?
 

Tongs

BigCricket Moderator
Staff member
Just going to throw this out for comment. With what has happened and some clubs benefitting more than what normally would have been expected, thus in sense compromising the fixture and results, is it worth the exec putting the re structure back a season? When it comes to the relegation stakes, a couple of sides have got a bit of assistance, probably more so Rosanna, but it has created an issue where other clubs (mine included) have had their seasons compromised. Would it be the fair and equal option to just have the one side (bun Utd) relegated as a result? Just a question folks, so don't hang me.
Two thoughts, and please don't get sooky again.

1) I am going to hang you. Stop trying to save your bacon. Research may be going down because they didn't have a good enough season. Too bad. The DVCA haven't made up this rule to suit them, or punish you. They've made the call as per what the rules state. If you're upset, blame Bun United or the player. Changing the restructure just to save your skin is rubbish.

2) In saying that, I absolutely hate the restructure anyway and would love to see it abolished. It was an awful idea, that somehow got off the ground and even more surprising is that its actually going ahead. It will in no way enhance the competition.
 

Tongs

BigCricket Moderator
Staff member
I'm all for this.....

In all seriousness having the 3 go down this season has basically put meaning into every match all season. Thoughts on 2 up 2 down for future years especially in the shields?
Of course you are. Saves your club too. Spell me you two.
 

brutal

Active Member
Two thoughts, and please don't get sooky again.

1) I am going to hang you. Stop trying to save your bacon. Research may be going down because they didn't have a good enough season. Too bad. The DVCA haven't made up this rule to suit them, or punish you. They've made the call as per what the rules state. If you're upset, blame Bun United or the player. Changing the restructure just to save your skin is rubbish.

2) In saying that, I absolutely hate the restructure anyway and would love to see it abolished. It was an awful idea, that somehow got off the ground and even more surprising is that its actually going ahead. It will in no way enhance the competition.
Hey facts a facts. No one could have envisaged this happening, but the facts are it has compromised the season and in a season where we all knew what was required at the start of the season, this has created an unfair playing field. Hey, my side may win this week and beat BU last came, I'll still throw this up as an option of fairness considering the circumstances. I'm disappointed with your harshness towards me Dave;)
 

Ex Prez

Active Member
Just going to throw this out for comment. With what has happened and some clubs benefitting more than what normally would have been expected, thus in sense compromising the fixture and results, is it worth the exec putting the re structure back a season? When it comes to the relegation stakes, a couple of sides have got a bit of assistance, probably more so Rosanna, but it has created an issue where other clubs (mine included) have had their seasons compromised. Would it be the fair and equal option to just have the one side (bun Utd) relegated as a result? Just a question folks, so don't hang me.

Strong rumour.... a couple of clubs in trouble as far as their future in DVCA goes...????
If hypothetically the 2 clubs were to go... how then does the new structure work... 10, 10 & 6...?
Absolute farce...

Will the DVCA go seeking new clubs to join or will they re-think the structure...????


I am with Brutal.. (and before you crucify me too I am hopeful of a win to avoid the bottom 3 anyway)

Until all sorted, leave the re-structure until next season (17/18) - but we know that wont happen so....

On the restructure... any word as to how the lower grades are going to be structured...?
Is there to be a reserve grade for all the shield teams ( but with promo / relegation amongst the reserve grades separate to the shields, but also exclusive from B grade and below...
So promo / relegation works only amongst the Shield grades, then only amongst the reserve grades... then the rest B grade (?) and below ....
Shield teams cannot be relegated below the Mash shield level, reserve grades cannot be promoted to a shield grade nor be relegated from Mash reserve.

Keeps all 1's playing 1's and all 2's playing 2's... also prevents the reserve grades from being a dead grade after Chrstimas.

B grade premier does not get promoted to reserve level... full promotion / relegation system works from B grade to H grade...for the rest.

How many teams per grade from B grade down...? 10 or 8...? surely 8 or we have the farce of playing teams twice in the lower grades too...

The current structure does need to change.... but I reckon leave the Barclay Shield alone. Barlcay should stay 12 teams as the premier division, then 8 teams per grade thereafter...

The rest of the grades do need work... eg having Research 1's in Barclay and the 2's in D grade makes it near impossible for them to be competitive... I am all for the reserve grade coming back in but with promo/releg as above..
 
Last edited:

Tongs

BigCricket Moderator
Staff member
Hey facts a facts. No one could have envisaged this happening, but the facts are it has compromised the season and in a season where we all knew what was required at the start of the season, this has created an unfair playing field. Hey, my side may win this week and beat BU last came, I'll still throw this up as an option of fairness considering the circumstances. I'm disappointed with your harshness towards me Dave;)
Hahaha not a personal attack on you, I hate the restructure and want it gone too. But not for the reasoning of it'll save Research and Plenty's bums . I wonder if OPSF, Rosanna, Bundoora (clubs that benefitted from this) will want to change the decision, or change the relegation rules. I doubt it.

If your boys wanted to be staying up so badly, maybe they should've won more games so that they weren't cutting it so fine? Would be ironic if Bun United knocked you off this week, further digging the dagger in deeper.
 

brutal

Active Member
Hahaha not a personal attack on you, I hate the restructure and want it gone too. But not for the reasoning of it'll save Research and Plenty's bums . I wonder if OPSF, Rosanna, Bundoora (clubs that benefitted from this) will want to change the decision, or change the relegation rules. I doubt it.

If your boys wanted to be staying up so badly, maybe they should've won more games so that they weren't cutting it so fine? Would be ironic if Bun United knocked you off this week, further digging the dagger in deeper.
I think you too focussed on RECCC here. To say just win more games is a simplistic. I said on the radio show from the get go that sides wanting to avoid relegation would have to 5 games min this season. With what has happened, 5 may not be enough and you'll almost have to win 6 which knocking on the door of finals. The goal posts have been moved during the game and I just think it's worth considering.
 

Tongs

BigCricket Moderator
Staff member
I think you too focussed on RECCC here. To say just win more games is a simplistic. I said on the radio show from the get go that sides wanting to avoid relegation would have to 5 games min this season. With what has happened, 5 may not be enough and you'll almost have to win 6 which knocking on the door of finals. The goal posts have been moved during the game and I just think it's worth considering.
I just find it interesting that the people that have biggest issue with the decision seem to be those that might now be going down. From an outsider, it appears to be sour grapes.
 

shortnwide

Active Member
Strong rumour.... a couple of clubs in trouble as far as their future in DVCA goes...????
.....
The current structure does need to change.... but I reckon leave the Barclay Shield alone. Barlcay should stay 12 teams as the premier division, then 8 teams per grade thereafter...

The rest of the grades do need work... eg having Research 1's in Barclay and the 2's in D grade makes it near impossible for them to be competitive... I am all for the reserve grade coming back in but with promo/releg as above..
I think they just need to suck it up and go through the restructure (not delay it). The comp should become a two up two down in the future, keeps the grades more alive at both ends.

The problem with the restructure is, as you have said, what's the point of going to 10 sides? They didn't want to bite the bullet and go to 8 teams for fear of upsetting too many clubs, the problem is, they've still upset clubs, and the restructure hasn't really achieved anything! I believe the ECA intends to bite the bullet and go to 8 sides in its top grades next season. NMCA does it, it makes sense from a fixturing point of view.

I played in the Reserve grade and the new system. I understand the merits of the "new" system, but its definitely better having double headers against clubs from that perspective, bring it back.
 
The only issue I have with the two up two down suggestion is the question of "is the team that finishes runner up in the Money Shield competition going to consistently be stronger than the team that finished second bottom and is relegated for them?"

I don't know the current gap in standards between the two shields at the minute but if the answer to that question is no, aren't we just weakening the Barclay Shield?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

_Blackhawk_

Active Member
The only issue I have with the two up two down suggestion is the question of "is the team that finishes runner up in the Money Shield competition going to consistently be stronger than the team that finished second bottom and is relegated for them?"

I don't know the current gap in standards between the two shields at the minute but if the answer to that question is no, aren't we just weakening the Barclay Shield?
What if you kept the 1 up, 1 down for the shields and 2 up, 2 down for the other grades?
 

shortnwide

Active Member
The only issue I have with the two up two down suggestion is the question of "is the team that finishes runner up in the Money Shield competition going to consistently be stronger than the team that finished second bottom and is relegated for them?"

I don't know the current gap in standards between the two shields at the minute but if the answer to that question is no, aren't we just weakening the Barclay Shield?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It's a good question, I'm not sure it has a clear answer. Amongst other things, it depends who wins the semis! If 3rd and 4th wins their semis against 1 & 2 its a different prospect. That said, 3 sides in Barclay this season have each won 2 games, I'd question if the top 4 in Money would be any less competitive. Certainly there's a gap in standard, but recent history has suggested that if you can survive your first year up there, you can be competitive and amongst the mix in future years.

Personally I like it, it really changes the dynamic of the semis in the lower grades. And, if the two sides that win promotion aren't up to it, they go down the following season, to be replaced by the best two sides in Money. I think you'd find at least one of the sides staying up most seasons, it means sides in Barclay really need to have their houses in order because they may have to win 4-5 games to be guaranteed to stay up much like this season.

Ultimately, it depends what other clubs want.
 

brutal

Active Member
I just find it interesting that the people that have biggest issue with the decision seem to be those that might now be going down. From an outsider, it appears to be sour grapes.
I think if a decision is made that adversely affect some more than others, especially during a season, then it's natural and right to feel perhaps unjustly affected. It's not sour grapes, it's another example, like having our 2's relegated to accommodate a club that provides nothing to the comp of having the goal posts moved.
 

Ex Prez

Active Member
I think if a decision is made that adversely affect some more than others, especially during a season, then it's natural and right to feel perhaps unjustly affected. It's not sour grapes, it's another example, like having our 2's relegated to accommodate a club that provides nothing to the comp of having the goal posts moved.

--> PARTICULARLY WHEN SAID CLUB WHOM YOU MADE WAY FOR MAY NOT BE AROUND MUCH LONGER....?????
 

Tongs

BigCricket Moderator
Staff member
Serious question - Other than pillaging our juniors, and being a rubbish E grade team. What do Plenty Valley actually bring to the DVCA?
 
Last edited:

Ex Prez

Active Member
Serious question - Other than pillaging our juniors, and being a rubbish E grade team. What do Plenty Valley actually bring to the DVCA?
Absolutely zero... in the area they are in, they should be a powerhouse DVCA club.... instead they are a rabble as all their 'talent' goes into the turf comp..
Heard they'll be shown the door very soon.
They won 4 games only in D grade last year then being promoted have won only 1 this year in C... and 2 games in F.
They have a ODC and 2 VETS... so from the outside looking in, they appear to be an old club...

They have access to thousands of kids in the Laurimar & Yarrambat estates... the junior club has 2 x 16, 2 x14, 1x12 & 2 x10 yet not many kids in the senior teams as they all go to PV.
They offer nothing to our hard wicket comp... and no way can anyone justify them going into a shield grade next year...

How long before the Laurimar Thunder have their own senior team...?
 

PremiersAgain

Active Member
Couldn't agree anymore on th PV issue... They have a fantastic propaganda manager that's for sure.

A few weeks ago we counted how many of our kids were playing for them and was nearly enough to fill a side. we need to as a comp stop making it easy for them all the time
 

gnippe

Member
Couldn't agree anymore on th PV issue... They have a fantastic propaganda manager that's for sure.

A few weeks ago we counted how many of our kids were playing for them and was nearly enough to fill a side. we need to as a comp stop making it easy for them all the time
Playing devils advocate here isn't good for our players to try their luck on turf? The more important thing is to get them back once they've had their crack. Maybe is says something about the structure of some clubs with regards to juniors progressing into seniors. Doesn't lovey and his son play at PV rather than plenty?
Edit to add: I don't think PV are adding anything to the DVCA senior competition and could easily be discarded. Their place as progression for players in another comp is warranted though.
 
Top