New Dvca Grading Structure

Top Contributors
Tongs

Tongs

Well-Known Member
Yep, you read it right. The DVCA have decided that as of 2016/2017 they will be introducing a 3 tier - A Grade competition. There will be 3 x 1st XI competitions, where relegation/promition works much like the old Barclay and Money Shield competition worked. It is going to be as follows:

Barclay Shield: 10 Teams (Currently 12)
Money Shield: 10 Teams (Currently 12)
B Grade: 8 Teams (Note, it will be renamed to become a Shield)

This means, that only 1st XI sides will play against 1st XI sides, and like wise with the B grade structure. There will be no relegation/promotion between the Division 3 Shield and what is ultimately B grade like we currently have.

Thoughts?


(I will post mine shortly, I didn't want to include it in the original post)
 
Tongs said:
Yep, you read it right. The DVCA have decided that as of 2016/2017 they will be introducing a 3 tier - A Grade competition. There will be 3 x 1st XI competitions, where relegation/promition works much like the old Barclay and Money Shield competition worked. It is going to be as follows:

Barclay Shield: 10 Teams (Currently 12)
Money Shield: 10 Teams (Currently 12)
B Grade: 8 Teams (Note, it will be renamed to become a Shield)

This means, that only 1st XI sides will play against 1st XI sides, and like wise with the B grade structure. There will be no relegation/promotion between the Division 3 Shield and what is ultimately B grade like we currently have.

Thoughts?


(I will post mine shortly, I didn't want to include it in the original post)
Click to expand...

I think it makes sense. There will be sides dissapointed to drop to a lower grade due to the restructure, but it will make for more competitive grades. Also gives the comp an oppotunity to expand should they wish. They would easily absorb another 2-4 teams under this structure.
 
shortnwide said:
I think it makes sense. There will be sides dissapointed to drop to a lower grade due to the restructure, but it will make for more competitive grades. Also gives the comp an oppotunity to expand should they wish. They would easily absorb another 2-4 teams under this structure.
Click to expand...

I also note the comp has 27 and not 28 1st XI clubs?
 
Warwick Todd said:
I'm all for it. However, why wait another year? If it's a good idea, do it straight away.
Click to expand...

Clubs success generally goes in cycles.
At least this way, all clubs have 2 years to get their houses in order.
So if clubs feel they are in a risky period of no success, then they have a chance to recruit etc.. or choose not to...

If they just implemented now, then the 3 clubs who go down will be howling. Probably still will be, but at least they would all have had the opportunity to plan to avoid it.

I support it.

And to fill the extra week, I love the idea of perhaps having the extra preliminary final. Seems to work in the NMCA. Gives sides who might finish clear on top , but have a bad 30 minutes in the semi, a double chance instead of costing them the whole season. This way will see the better teams play in the grand finals moreso than the teams who sneak into 4th and have a good session or 2.
 
What are the thoughts around season 2015-16 playing dates...? With the world cup on, in March 2015, I understand AFL will start later and finish week 1 or week 2 of October...
Do we wait until mid Ocotber to start...?
Maybe a good year to revert to new comp structure above. Then we dont really miss the first 2 weeks...?
 
Tongs said:
Yep, you read it right. The DVCA have decided that as of 2016/2017 they will be introducing a 3 tier - A Grade competition. There will be 3 x 1st XI competitions, where relegation/promition works much like the old Barclay and Money Shield competition worked. It is going to be as follows:

Barclay Shield: 10 Teams (Currently 12)
Money Shield: 10 Teams (Currently 12)
B Grade: 8 Teams (Note, it will be renamed to become a Shield)

This means, that only 1st XI sides will play against 1st XI sides, and like wise with the B grade structure. There will be no relegation/promotion between the Division 3 Shield and what is ultimately B grade like we currently have.

Thoughts?


(I will post mine shortly, I didn't want to include it in the original post)
Click to expand...

Never got your thoughts on it, fire away pal. All I would say is, 2015/2016 would be more appropriate. No need for a two season wait.
 
Warwick Todd said:
I'm all for it. However, why wait another year? If it's a good idea, do it straight away.
Click to expand...

Problem is the Money Shield Club who won the premiership would not be promoted. That would suck.

The bottom 4 teams in Money, who are in the process of recruiting could be severely disadvantaged.

2015/2016 would be the right time.

Any news on the worst pieces of equipment installed by the DVCA. Yes the Cricket Balls from hells.
 
shortnwide said:
Never got your thoughts on it, fire away pal. All I would say is, 2015/2016 would be more appropriate. No need for a two season wait.
Click to expand...

My two cents:

Whilst I like the theory of having 3 “A Grade” comps running, as it could very much strengthen the competition in each of the grades, I don’t like the current proposal at all and believe it will, as a whole, weaken the comp across all grades Not just the top 3 grades.. For the below reasons (And I want to put the disclaimer in that I mean no disrespect to any clubs mentioned, I am only using examples based on the current ladders, if the changes were to happen now):

I think the number of teams within each grade (10, 10 and 8) will be too little. Being in the 3rd division will be crap only playing against 7 other sides and only cheapen the comp. For this to work, we need more clubs in the comp. There would need to be at an absolute minimum 30+ clubs, to have 10, 10, 10. This is probably unlikely. It would also mean that Plenty Valley would be forced to play in the top 3 grades. When their DVCA 1st XI are currently in 9th place in D grade.

Losing the promotion/relegation from B grade to an A grade comp will be a step backwards. For years we had clubs (We all know who) exploiting this where their ones were safe in A grade, so they dropped players to a lower grade to dominate to get into finals/save relegation etc. It also means that if a side dominates B grade, they have nowhere to go. They will be forced to stay in that grade and dominate, rather than go up and try to better themselves. This was a big negative that the DVCA used their brains and got rid of the possibility of that. Now, they are reinventing the wheel, and going back to that idea.

It was also changed to because some of the smaller/weaker (no disrespect) clubs were “forced” to have their seconds in BS/MS reserve. For example, Panton Hill. They were forced to have a side in MS reserve for years, getting pumped week in, week out. This is not good for the club or comp. Now I know there will be people that will say that it is Panton Hills responsibility to make themselves stronger, but its not always that simple geographically. Again, this will happen with a few clubs, and ultimately cheapen those B grade comps again.

Lets for argument sake, say it came in right now. This is some of what it would do to the comp:

NEW, who are in both BS and MS would be kicked out of both comps. Their ones would be relegated, and their twos, would also then be forced out and relegated 2 grades as you cannot have two teams in the top 3 grades.
Lower Eltham, who are in BS, would have their twos playing in a grade 5 grades below their ones (They cannot play MS, or the new shield, they also finished low in B grade, so would be relegated again, probably to the 2nd B grade comp). How is that going to work for clubs who will be picking a player in the ones who has come up from what is ultimately D grade? And these are just two examples. It will happen with a number of clubs.
It also means a side like Panton Hill, who weren’t/aren’t good enough to play finals in B grade, let alone win the flag, will be afforded the luxury of going up a grade.


As I said. I like the theory, I like having 3 divisions, but in my eyes, with this current proposal it’s going to be a major step backwards. I would also of liked for the clubs to of had the abililty to discuss this before a decision was made.
 
You don't like the 8 a grade structure?? Is it because it's the best system or because NMCA use it??
What have the old HDCA clubs have to say about it?? they know it's the best system.( don't give me the HDCA is not around anymore)
it wasn't because of the structure. Try leadership instead.
Don't worry I won't come on again, I'm just bemused at how good you actually think your not.
We won't talk about your decisions on the equipment you use ect, because if this is one of your better
decisions you guys really do your homework. LMAO
 
I am exHDCA, I reckon it is the best system too. It would make for more competitive grades as far as I am concerned. You could argue its easier to make finals, 50% chance instead of 33%, however the standard of games through a season would be higher IMO.

scoreboardend said:
You don't like the 8 a grade structure?? Is it because it's the best system or because NMCA use it?? What have the old HDCA clubs have to say about it?? they know it's the best system
Click to expand...
 
scoreboardend said:
You don't like the 8 a grade structure?? Is it because it's the best system or because NMCA use it??
What have the old HDCA clubs have to say about it?? they know it's the best system.( don't give me the HDCA is not around anymore)
it wasn't because of the structure. Try leadership instead.
Don't worry I won't come on again, I'm just bemused at how good you actually think your not.
We won't talk about your decisions on the equipment you use ect, because if this is one of your better
decisions you guys really do your homework. LMAO
Click to expand...

One of the more ridiculous posts I have seen. My comments, in no way have anything to do with HDCA, JIKA or NMCA. To think that they do only shows how big a fool you actually are. Nor did i mention anything around the DVCA being the better/best comp. Based on your comments, I just think that we clearly have more intelligent members/posters.

If you read my post, i actually said that i would like to see more sides than 10, not just the 8. But yes, I hate that especially. Having half of the sides playing finals is is like junior sport. Why don't we just play 5 in each grade. That way you either play finals or get relegated.
 
Opener2 said:
I am exHDCA, I reckon it is the best system too. It would make for more competitive grades as far as I am concerned. You could argue its easier to make finals, 50% chance instead of 33%, however the standard of games through a season would be higher IMO.
Click to expand...

That comment is purely of a selfish Barclay Shield point of view, as it will vastly weaken the grades below Barclay shield as i highlighted earlier.
 
Tongs you keep talking about clubs 2nds being disadvantaged like your panton hill example, however the proposal is only for the 1st XI sides of each club isn't it? So in essence panton hills 2nd XI could still be relegated down the grades over time if they struggled??
 
PremiersAgain said:
Tongs you keep talking about clubs 2nds being disadvantaged like your panton hill example, however the proposal is only for the 1st XI sides of each club isn't it? So in essence panton hills 2nd XI could still be relegated down the grades over time if they struggled??
Click to expand...

No, its not just a 1st XI proposal. It obviously is the main focus, but there is also consideration going into the 2nd XI sides too.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top