Season 2015/2016

Scratch

Active Member
The new name hasn’t changed you!!!!! Still don't like people expressing an opinion that might differ from you

One question for you - would the Senior GF have been any worse if it was played under the same conditions as every game that was played that season (apart from a couple of one day games)??
Changed what . Just reading all your posts , you seem to be anti everything that's it. Apart from that I don't know what your referring to mate.
 

Scratch

Active Member
4 or 2 day grand final not the issue here.. Just finding a way to keep an 18 team comp relevant for more than just a handful of sides by December. A top 8 would achieve this but we only have 3 weekends to play finals so the 4 day final would have to make way just for the 18 team grade.
I got told by a mate that it will be a final 8, I don't know how as he said its still a four day grand final
 

DStrek15

Active Member
18 team south & north/west seconds is locked in.

Fixture to be weighted so stronger & senior div clubs play each other

Two "Premierships" will be on offer.
1st to 4th on the ladder will play for the SENIOR SOUTH or NORTH/WEST premiership
5th to 8th will play for the SOUTH or NORTH/WEST DIVISION premiership.
 
Last edited:

DStrek15

Active Member
Bit better - A compromise. Still prefer 10 and 8 teams, but this will help.
Assume Middle Park and Parky United 1s will finish top two, from there its probably better to finish 5th/6th
Middle park will be up there but we (McKinnon 2nd XI) beat Parkdale United 1sts when we played South A1 in 2013/14 so not sure how good they will be..
 

rat'n'bat

Active Member
18 team south & north/west seconds is locked in.

Fixture to be weighted so stronger & senior div clubs play each other

Two "Premierships" will be on offer.
1st to 4th on the ladder will play for the SENIOR SOUTH or NORTH/WEST premiership
5th to 8th will play for the SOUTH or NORTH/WEST DIVISION premiership.
Pretty sure this wasn't the idea when a final 8 was mentioned at the AGM.

See also proposed changes to the relegation rules. One team from each division will be relegated from senior division regardless of where they finish. So effectively 6th can be relegated while 11th stays up.
 

ROY G BIV

Member
Pretty sure this wasn't the idea when a final 8 was mentioned at the AGM.

See also proposed changes to the relegation rules. One team from each division will be relegated from senior division regardless of where they finish. So effectively 6th can be relegated while 11th stays up.
That's idiotic! Hope it remains a proposed change and nothing more.
why bother having divisional relegation/promotional system when making such rules.
Makes snr div a joke!
might as well just have Sth & North divisions & stuff Snr div as a top flight VTCA club could be forced out of it in spite of not finishing bottom 2.
understand why the exec would pass such a rule but that defeats the purpose of Snr siv, better off having Nth & Sth premiers paly off at the end of the year for a VTCA crown!
 
That's idiotic! Hope it remains a proposed change and nothing more.
why bother having divisional relegation/promotional system when making such rules.
Makes snr div a joke!
might as well just have Sth & North divisions & stuff Snr div as a top flight VTCA club could be forced out of it in spite of not finishing bottom 2.
understand why the exec would pass such a rule but that defeats the purpose of Snr siv, better off having Nth & Sth premiers paly off at the end of the year for a VTCA crown!
Agree, but I think you will find that the rule is already passed as at its heading is the following;

The following Rule Changes are Administrative Rules and do not require a vote of endorsement by clubs for approval. These only require endorsement by the Board of Management which has approved the suggested changes.
 

rat'n'bat

Active Member
Agree, but I think you will find that the rule is already passed as at its heading is the following;

The following Rule Changes are Administrative Rules and do not require a vote of endorsement by clubs for approval. These only require endorsement by the Board of Management which has approved the suggested changes.
The VTCA tweet I saw said proposed, but if as you say it is already passed, then....... (Actually, I'm not allowed to be negative!!!)
 

ROY G BIV

Member
Agree, but I think you will find that the rule is already passed as at its heading is the following;

The following Rule Changes are Administrative Rules and do not require a vote of endorsement by clubs for approval. These only require endorsement by the Board of Management which has approved the suggested changes.
Just took a deep breath. nothing more we can do but cop it now.
I atleast fail to find one reason which could excuse this as anything but piss weak leadership.

What next If Nth club wins the flag this season next year it must be a Sth club as the premier, even if they don't make the granny. Keeps things consistent huh.

Commiserations to the club outside bottom 2 who go down this season.
"Good luck fellas" new VTCA motto.
 

DStrek15

Active Member
Under the new promotion/relegation rules these would have been the teams (other than the bottom placed team) since 2010

14/15 McKinnon 9th
13/14 Keilor 11th
12/13 McKinnon 11th
11/12 South Caulfield 9th
10/11 McKinnon 9th
09/10 McKinnon 6th*

*only two south teams in division
 

ROY G BIV

Member
Under the new promotion/relegation rules these would have been the teams (other than the bottom placed team) since 2010

14/15 McKinnon 9th
13/14 Keilor 11th
12/13 McKinnon 11th
11/12 South Caulfield 9th
10/11 McKinnon 9th
09/10 McKinnon 6th*

*only two south teams in division
think the new rules were introduced to keep an even number of Sth & NTH clubs moving forward.

look mate u make a very good point & as I said in my post some of us "understand why the exec would pass such a rule" but this is just a band aid on a gaping wound solution. I would've still preferred this new relegation rule not there and Snr Div to be the survival of the fittest in this comp.

exodus of Sth clubs for a long time now has been a very bad look for this comp & we only have to look at how Sth & Sth A grades ve been pieced together for few seasons now. my sympathies with VTCA board trying to address that as there are other alternative comps for clubs in that side of town but the real fix is to get Sth div sorted so it once again becomes attractive for clubs in that area. especially clubs that left the comp. not simply put it all in a too hard basket & come up with changes that dilute our top grade.

enough of negatives, well done VTCA for at least tryn to fix the 2ndX1 in higher grade problem & good on Sth Caulfield and Vtca for introduction of colored limited over clothing in Snr Div and hopefully it becomes a norm for all other grades in the comp in next few years.
 

TheScorer

Member
think the new rules were introduced to keep an even number of Sth & NTH clubs moving forward.
That's why it was introduced, but why was it necessary? It means Sen Division is now not the best 12 clubs in the VTCA, but quota driven. The best 6 each from North and South, regardless of their strength relative to the clubs on the other side.
 
Top