Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Just longmuir?Does anyone agree on the SECA's decision to create a ten team comp in Longmuir shield. Also, opinions on the points system.
No Troy, I believe its down to possibly the top 4 grades with 9 games ????? not sure how they do the draw, but the season seams to be shorter ??Just longmuir?
still 11 games?
No Troy, I think its down to the top 4 grades, not sure how they will do the draw.Just longmuir?
still 11 games?
agree with smaller divisions to tighten the gap between top and bottom but 9 games isnt much of a season..No Troy, I think its down to the top 4 grades, not sure how they will do the draw.
I think the idea of 10 team grades has merit Troy, however, its the process of the way the SECA cronies have adapted it. Its been mooted around for a while and gained legs last season, however, there was no confirmation that they would be implementing it until after Xmas, this decision then gave teams in Longmuir only 5 games to plan and avoid the relegation zone. I'm hearing around the streets that they will not be promoting the premiers of Woolnough either, this is an absolute joke if true.agree with smaller divisions to tighten the gap between top and bottom but 9 games isnt much of a season..
I think the idea of 10 team grades has merit Troy, however, its the process of the way the SECA cronies have adapted it. Its been mooted around for a while and gained legs last season, however, there was no confirmation that they would be implementing it until after Xmas, this decision then gave teams in Longmuir only 5 games to plan and avoid the relegation zone. I'm hearing around the streets that they will not be promoting the premiers of Woolnough either, this is an absolute joke if true.
I had heard that, but Union did attend so I've just been told, and presented a very good case. Royals depth as a club would seem to be a general concern, however, 4 wins in Longy is their main argument I would suspect. Their structure now would even be worse as their 2's will certainly be in D grade. SECA seem to be losing any real direction by making ad hoc decisions.I heard there was a meeting last week where various clubs were invited to present to the SECA committee. Apparently Union decided not to go along as they think they are entitled to go up irrespective of how many are coming down. Royals did present and put forward a compelling argument as to why they should stay in Longy. Not sure when SECA will announce the decision. IMO the committee stuffed up in not announcing the proposed change BEFORE the start of the season. Maybe they should defer it until the end of 17/18.
I had heard that, but Union did attend so I've just been told, and presented a very good case. Royals depth as a club would seem to be a general concern, however, 4 wins in Longy is their main argument I would suspect. Their structure now would even be worse as their 2's will certainly be in D grade. SECA seem to be losing any real direction by making ad hoc decisions.
Union definitely attended, they are a professional outfit and wouldn't be as stupid as that to not attend. Information coming out is that there were really only 3 SECA senior exec members who were actually involved in the final decision, this is TBC. Still cant work out the reasoning with the Criteria, as ANA's depth will be tested with their 2's in D grade, how does that work against a team with their 2's in Quiney who have been performing well enough. Interestingly it seems that the SECA are more involved in trying to run the turf comp as well in the Bayside SBCA. Clubs still haven't received any information on how the 10 team draw is going to work as well.My source is very reliable in that Union did not attend but happy to take your word, they may have had a separate meeting. Either way, Union certainly have a straight forward case to go up. Royals argument runs a bit deeper than just win/loss. Strongest argument is to shelve the reduction for this season and give all clubs notice that the change will take place in 18/19. After all, what is the rush?
[ as they think they are entitled to go up irrespective of how many are coming down ] I agree with most of your comments, except for the one in brackets, I certainly wouldn't believe that they think they are entitled, I'm sure no club would think that, maybe one exception perhaps down towards Sandringham way.I heard there was a meeting last week where various clubs were invited to present to the SECA committee. Apparently Union decided not to go along as they think they are entitled to go up irrespective of how many are coming down. Royals did present and put forward a compelling argument as to why they should stay in Longy. Not sure when SECA will announce the decision. IMO the committee stuffed up in not announcing the proposed change BEFORE the start of the season. Maybe they should defer it until the end of 17/18.
Sounds OK Rat, but the SECA have botched up the whole 10 team structure as previously noted, they wouldn't have the Gonads to go down to 8 teams. Speaking of Gonads, have you or anyone heard any information regarding the debacle in the Quiney GF, and the Longy GF. Any rulings on the outcome, reported players x 3, and spectator behavioural issues. Had heard that there may be at least 1 umpire possibly 2 not returning due to lack of support during the whole process.An outsider’s comment here – but we’ve done the 8 team comp with 7 two-dayers and 7 one-dayers a few times, and it is a great format. You play everybody home and away, and play everybody with a red ball and a white ball.
Just the initial pain of getting those down the bottom to go down a grade – but the actual competition format is brilliant
All very quiet, what a disgrace.Sounds OK Rat, but the SECA have botched up the whole 10 team structure as previously noted, they wouldn't have the Gonads to go down to 8 teams. Speaking of Gonads, have you or anyone heard any information regarding the debacle in the Quiney GF, and the Longy GF. Any rulings on the outcome, reported players x 3, and spectator behavioural issues. Had heard that there may be at least 1 umpire possibly 2 not returning due to lack of support during the whole process.
3 reported players in Quiney GF. Umpires threatened after the game and stayed in the rooms, crowd from the losing team threatening and abusing umpires etc etc etc. Umpire failed to attend tribunal so charges were not taken into account, offending club fined $$$$$. Both of the quiney umpires not umpiring this season, one going back to play, the other appointed coach of a sub district club.Totally agree with the decision. The standard has really dropped away the past few years, especially in Woolnough.
Can you elaborate further on what occurred at the GF's?