December 2, 2006
Should clubs be permitted to have a team in both Premier & Div.1 Competitions?
I’m going to hand this one over to you. I’m not going to offer an opinion (see miracle DO happen!!). But rather than get into a slanging match Premier v Div.1, can we construct our arguements into positive and productive points. Come up with solutions as it were…
Does it really matter.
Each of these Leagues should stand alone?
Perhaps some overlap, in that entry into Premier League should only come from teams/clubs who have ‘earnt’ the right through the ‘feeder’ league.
But we shouldn’t mandate that to belong in one, we should have a team in the other - the contrary should be true?
Comment by Alan Pullen — December 2, 2006 @ 5:05 pm
I always understood it that div1 was the pathway for players into the senior sides. The only drawback is team stacking and are there not rules to avoid this happening?
Comment by corner flag — December 4, 2006 @ 8:20 am
I’ve noticed some Premier League clubs stack their Div 1 teams regularly (especially if there are ladder positions at stake and their Premier League teams cannot win/lose anything important) making their overall performance look better than it actually is. Other Premier League clubs have been excellent in honouring the spirit of the game to both their Div 1 opponents and their own Div 1 players.
The solution to stop team stacking altogether is either to play favourites with clubs who dont do this by not allowing [only the] offending Premier League clubs to also have teams in Div 1 (which is pretty subjective and nigh impossible) OR to NOT have clubs with teams in both leagues at all (which is a bit harsh on those who’ve done the right thing).
Personally I think an 8 team Premier League with promotion relegation from an 8 team Div 1 “Feeder League” would be the best set up.
Note: I’d also like to add, it would be a lot easier to explain the set up to outsiders if we just called our top league Div 1, 2nd league Div 2, etc. - but I’m sure that note will attract much opposition from those who like to set up our leagues similar to overseas professional leagues and, to be honest, I dont care enough to be too concerned - it’s just a comment.
Comment by Fabrizo — December 4, 2006 @ 4:54 pm
The only common sense approach would be to have have NO premier league clubs having a team in Division One. FFT Board for some reason do not seem to be resilient enough to weather a bit of flack from some clubs to implemet something taht would be of overall benfit to the game. Every time this topic has raised its head the premier league clubs have the numbers to prevent a change - they should be able to have a say - but the Board should look long term. They have looked long term at player development pathways but fail to recognise the flaws in the current league setup.
Comment by sj — December 4, 2006 @ 10:59 pm
OK, Premier League clubs don’t belong in Div.1, so let’s take them out. Div.1 now looks like this;
Where do we build strength from this competition? Further to that what happens to the 50-60 players that have now become displaced?
Another aspect to consider is that to have a true promotion/relegation between Premier & Div.1, the Div.1 clubs are going to be required to have full underage (U17-18) competition so that whomever gain promotion to Premier will have the necessary player numbers to fulfil their Premier League compaign.
Cutting out the Premier clubs from Div.1 is just too simplistic, a whole lot more thought needs to go into the planning.
Comment by Blackjack — December 5, 2006 @ 11:49 am
Why are there Premier Clubs in Div 1?
For the reason we have to turn back the clock . Over time the number of Clubs in S Tas has diminished so replacements had to be found to ” prop ” up a viable 2nd Division and also keep the roster in line with the Division 1 ( Premier).
Ad hoc decisions have now become the norm .
I endorse Fabrizio’s remarks especially about the ethics or lack of of by some clubs .
A contributing factor is the rise of the social team . In yesteryear if a Senior player could not hold his place in Div 1 ( Premier). , I as Chairman of SHSC would go out and obtain his services for our 1st team in which at the time was playing in div 2 . ( Division 1)
Honour was satisfied He was still playing in a ” 1st ” team and I acquired a good player .
Nowadays they play in the Club social team.
The way to stop team stacking is to roster all a clubs senior matches on the one day or introduce the ” Northern ” Rule . Once you have played thats it for that round.
Comment by Brian — December 5, 2006 @ 3:21 pm
But surely if a club that has a premier league team and has sufficient and skilled players in their ranks, shouldn’t they be permitted to field a team at the HIGHEST level possible without fielding two teams in the one division.
For example, Kingborough has finished second in Premier, and nearly took the Div.1 title as well. Isn’t it right that they fill a place in Div.1??
If not should they field their Div.1 team in Division 2. because that’s the next available placing for them. The way I see it is that the non Premier League clubs (Div.1) want to have a bit of a whinge because the Premier League clubs have good quality players available for selection. So maybe the Div.1 clubs need to pull their fingers out and start developing their juniors rather than treating Div.1 as a pseudo social league or Dad’s Army. Taroona & Beachside are doing just that.
Comment by Lionheart — December 5, 2006 @ 5:50 pm
beachside Div1 side was not a social league or dads army side in 2006. Each week they played a number of their U19 in order to give them the experience and chance to improve skills so they as players and club can go onto bigger and better things.
If the premier league clubs have so many good quality player how is it that they need to drop players from their prem/res sides to fill in div1
Comment by corner flag — December 6, 2006 @ 9:18 am
Reducing the number of teams in premier league to eight would leave eight for division one. The prospect of div1 teams having to field u17 teams has already been mentioned - it isnt a huge jump.
Premier league clubs fielding a team in Div 1 have a distinct recruiting advantage over the other Div 1 clubs in that a borderline premier league player not able to get a match in a premier league team would not consider going to a div 1 club as he can play in that division anyway. In the absence of a premier club team in div 1 he has the option of playing in div 1 for a clubs top team and having a meaningful purpose in chasing promotion. Those who go to victoria and are not successful in getting into Premier league seek a game with another club in the next division. This keeps the playing field level for all clubs.
Comment by sj — December 6, 2006 @ 9:21 am
Lionheart seems to miss the point when asking why should competitive Div 1 sides be dropped just because their clubs also in Premier League - the reason is that they are NOT so competitive without those Premier League players dropping back at crucial games.
I agree with SJ & conrnerflags comments. An 8 team Premier league supported by an 8 team div 1, with no club in both leagues would be a viable setup in terms of equal competition, ground & referee availability. Seems a fair direction.
Comment by Fabrizo — December 6, 2006 @ 11:22 am
In a nutshell sj has hit on the problem - 2 many teams in the top league - should have been reduced some years ago to 8!!
The 2nd tier( current 1st division ) should have a three team structure and play offs for promotion .
All it takes is a few b—s to make a hard decision and get on with it .
Brian the so called premier league clubs do not have a god given right to have a team were they like , if clubs are big enough lets have a a third tier league for the Premier league clubs ( a new Div 2 that can include all the current premier league Div 1 sides ).
Think outside the square not inside !!
Left Back
Comment by Left Back — December 6, 2006 @ 12:03 pm
Having played in recent years in both Premier and Div.1 leagues, and now continuing to slide down the Ladder of Opportunity, I am surprised by what people see as a problem.
I see it as important for all parties to have a strong Div.1, particularly with the re-instatement of promotion and relegation, and this should be open to all. One could argue that Taroona would not have done so well if they had not been pushed over the last several years, leading to the development of players and coaching systems.
We must remember that, even given the quite competitive nature of Div.1, for many it is a fun game played with one’s mates - this would not be the case if people were forced to shop around for clubs as an earlier contributor suggests. I distinctly recall a former President referring to the main objective of his Club’s Premier League side as being a run-around with mates, and yet this Club has since maintained a very high placing in recent years, so maybe there is something in that concept.
There has been very little reference to the existing rules covering how many players may drop down. It seems to me that, if these rules are appropriate, then proper supervision should take care of things. Maybe the rules need to be tougher? Maybe clubs who have a record of abusing the rules can be punished.
To insist that Div.1 Clubs “need to pull their fingers out and start developing their juniors …” is easier said than done however, as always, there is an element of truth in both sides of the debate.
Sport administration is hard in Tasmania, given our small population and particular socio-economics. It means that even successful Clubs struggle to attract players, coaches and administrators, and for the most part, people just want to play and be active with their peer group.
Comment by Mik — December 6, 2006 @ 1:57 pm
Fabrizo…sorry mate, that’s a crock. I can’t speak for other clubs but Kingborough DO NOT drop premier players merely to get a win in Div.1, yet they are more than competative in that league. Tim Dale & Warren Iles (as Premier coaches) just would not let their players be used like that. It places the Premier players in jeopardy of injury, etc. and denies up and coming players of an opportunity, and surprisingly, Premier League IS the priority for these coaches, so they won’t take those kind of risks.
I can’t speak for the Kingborough coaches but I am sure Charlie White will support me when I say KLUSC has Premier League as the first priority, in terms of selection. The second rung is Premier reserves & Div.1 (of equal priority), selection then becomes a case of balance of what the coaches are trying to achieve with players going up & down the ladder of opportunity. The third rung is U/19 and Div.1 reserves.
SJ, I wouldn’t be the least bit surprised to see the entire structure change all over again, why should next year be any different to every other year? A game of ‘move the goal posts’ and keep them off balance. Sad, but true, even if it isn’t the intention.
Comment by Lionheart — December 6, 2006 @ 3:21 pm
Ok, so let’s reduce the Premier League to eight teams.
How?? (Come on SJ, Left Back this is your idea.)
As the way things stand at this moment (and I know it won’t happen for the 2007 season…but let’s play devil’s advocate for a moment), the bottom 3 teams from premier league must go down and Taroona have already won the right to promotion.
The three teams from Premier to be relegated are: Hobart United, Metro & Hobart Olympic. Did I just hear screams of anguish from the Greek community, not to mention the sound of galloping feet running in every direction?
Comment by blackjack — December 6, 2006 @ 4:11 pm
Having played two games of div 1 in my life i am probably not the best person to speak of the standard of the competition, the way that teams “stack” their teams or whether Prem Clubs should be there or not, but everyone else seems to have an opinion.
Div 1 to me is an independent competition from Premier. Clubs as far as I am aware are allowed to drop 3 players down the most 2 divisions on any one week. There is problems with this in that if you played Prem and then received an injury and did not play for a few weeks when you return you are still classified as a Prem player who has dropped, not the very stiff and sore player who needs a run around that you are and who has not played for a few weeks.
At KLUSC we have very different squads, coaches and support staff (not to mention supporters) of our teams. I think Div 1 needs the Prem Clubs to be there to ensure that the standard of the team that wins the competition is as good as it can be. Lets be honest, if you can not beat a teams 3rd or 4th team does the system of promotion prove anything in a small population such as ours. Hobart United won Div 1 against KLUSC and other clubs Div 1 teams and as history showed did not do very well last year.
Comment by charlie white — December 7, 2006 @ 8:33 am
Lionheart. Dont take offence, I certainly wasn’t referring to Kingborough when I said SOME Premier League clubs drop players to Div 1. I could name them for clarity, but don’t think that really furthers my argument to any great extent. KLUSC’s Div1 staff are to be commended for how they run their team. Some other Premier league clubs are just as sporting.
To address Charlie’s comment on the rules, what some Div 1 teams do when well into the season and wooden spoons or premierships beckon is to drop 3 Premier league players each week for consecutive weeks, thus getting around the existing rules. I dont suggest we be like netball or hockey where each team has trials at the start of the year and players are only allowed to play for the one team they’re picked for, but the rules we have simply dont work if someone doesn’t have a sporting outlook.
Blackjacks suggestion is about spot on. For the first year relegate bottom 2 teams from Premier league and have a playoff between Div 1 winner and 8th placed Premier League side to decide on make up of the two 8 team leagues. After that, promotion/relegation as per normal every year. If that means Olympic get relegated, then so be it. Decisions like this shouldnt be based around WHO may be relegated. thats just biased.
Comment by Fabrizo — December 7, 2006 @ 9:45 am
I think we are all getting carried away with the promotion/relegation issue because even though hobart utd had won the right to promotion the previous year, there set up off field did not allow them to be successful on the field. I guess what i am trying to say, is that any club wishing to gain promotion to the premier league should have standards to be met before they enter premier league e.g junior programs, club rooms, home grounds and being financialy safe and sound.
Comment by Not a knight supporter — December 7, 2006 @ 1:38 pm
NAKS (Not a Knight Supporter), a lot of the Premier League clubs don’t even fit that criteria, so you could hardly ask the Div.1 clubs to do it, even if your intentions are 100% correct (and I agree with the sentiment of your idea). Knights, Zebras, Olympic & Uni cannot fill this criteria so they would be dropped to the lower divisions. Very few clubs in Div.1 would be able to achieve promotion without having two teams from one club (not a good idea!!)
Sure, set the stringent criteria for Premier but the best thing that could happen at Div.1 level would be the introduction of a three tiered system.
Comment by Blackjack — December 7, 2006 @ 4:25 pm
blackjack,
There comes a point in time when these clubs will have to meet criterias to be able to stay in the competition and not just get by on acheiving results, all it takes is someone with a few balls to inforce them, this is exactly what they are starting to do in victoria. this is when we can truly say that we have a proper system of promotion relegation that any tteam that goes up goes through being successful on and off the field
Comment by Not a knight supporter — December 8, 2006 @ 12:10 pm
Blackjack , moving goalposts is easy option , why should things change , it has happened ever since Devonport pulled out of State League - didn’t they get a 5 year ban ? but were allowed into Statewide Cup ? and so many other times not worth counting , decisions made by people who do not have “football knowledge or background ” is a recipe for disaster .
Clubs should form own group to set up league structures , thwey are the ones who have to do all the hard work , FFT just try to administer and set charges - 10 teams means more money to the coffers why would they want to reduce .
Three tier League two divisions South both 8 teams as long term aim - one division North - their are the players but not the coaches or the volunteers and or grounds .
A club based committee elected by the clubs sets league criteria all FFT have to do is ratify !!
Comment by Left Back — December 10, 2006 @ 7:39 pm
I have always viewed the reserves as the second tier in the state. Only in the recent year has walter pless started to print more div 1 than reserves in his articles. I think clubs like beachside and taroona are a little bit ahead of other clubs in that they are playing u/19 or u/17 what ever in their div 1 teams, this gives the boys a chance to play against bigger stronger and faster opponents while giving the lads a chance to mix with people older then what they would be used to. And if you look at the results taroona is promoted beachside was close, but they have some good youngsters coming through i think.
Comment by Borat — January 1, 2007 @ 9:50 pm
I think that this ‘problem’ is being over-analysed a tad. The way I see it, you would be hard-pressed to find any premier league player who was willing to risk fatigue and injury to drop down to div 1 for the sake of a few league points (which one player is hardly likely to affect the result of anway).
At most clubs, the only players who drop down to div 1 are those on the fringe of premier reserves who would otherwise not play on that weekend.
Comment by TC — February 16, 2007 @ 9:55 pm