January 31, 2007
Summer Cup (Div.1)
Division One Summer Cup groups are as follows:
Group A
Beachside
Nelson
DOSA
Kingborough
Group B
Kingston Cannons
Christian United
Hobart United
South Hobart
State U/15 Squad
Some interesting pairings. Who is likely to prevail?
Dosa and Hobart UTD.
Comment by vivailcalcio — January 31, 2007 @ 10:57 pm
DOSA over Beachside and Hobart Utd over the Christians.
Comment by Keeper — February 1, 2007 @ 9:15 am
It appears the State U/15 squad has been included in the Division 1 summer cup competition. Their inclusion will now create a bye in Group B.
By way of discussion:
Most of these kids will still be 14 years of age. Some will look physically small. Now I’m no expert but I question the ability of ’some’ of these kids to stand up to the rigours of Div.1 football. Most have only just completed their first year of representative football in the state U/15 squad. Some of them will have competed in the U/17 youth competition but it is a HUGE step up to senior mens competition.
Let’s not forget, a couple of years ago these boys wouldn’t have qualified to compete due to the fact that they would not meet the age requirements.
What do people think?? Am I just being overprotective, over precautious…??
Comment by Blackjack — February 2, 2007 @ 4:34 pm
absolutely pathetic that Football Fec have put that state team in the competition. All its going to do is give tehse kids big heads and cocky attitudes for teh future. They will get murdered in teh cup and alot will suffer injuries. Bad for Football Fed!
Comment by Player — February 2, 2007 @ 7:27 pm
I have it on good authority that not only are the U15’s playing in the Summer Cup, but they are playing Div1 for the whole season. Apparently in other States the elite kids in this age group are playing senior football and that is why FFT are going down this path. Apart from the obvious physical difference I would question that there is the depth in the squad to cope with the demands of senior football mentally. Even though technically most of these kids are very gifted and I can can understand some of the rational behind the FFT decision, but how will the FFT deal with the players that will inevitably struggle physically and/or mentally at this level. Some of the kids will be strong enough to take on mamoth task that lies ahead and will no doubt improve as the season progresses, but to others it may end up a detrimental and damaging experience. How will FFT deal with these kids during the season?
Comment by DeB8 — February 3, 2007 @ 10:46 am
I hope the above statement is just a joke. Entering a team of 14-15 year olds is just plain STUPID!!!
Last year’s U/15 squad played in the Southern U/19 competition and aquitted themsleves well. The times they did lack was when they came up against the physically bigger and more skillful teams. The squads did well but they didn’t win the competition. So what is to be achieved playing them in a higher, more skilled (in most cases) & physically imposing competition? Are we going to totally humiliate them? Sort the men from the boys? Harden them up?
Mr Abela this way of thinking went out when they dragged the kids out of the coal mines of Wales early last century. Heaven help these kids.
Yeah, some will make it and will probably be better for the experience, but what of the others that don’t make it??
This is just plain silly. It must be a joke.
Comment by Lionheart — February 3, 2007 @ 6:01 pm
Back in 1999, the state under 16 boys played in the Southern Premier League Reserves league and, as it happens, won the league after a slow start. Unfortunately the boy’s success did not carry over to the national chamopionships as injuries to key players took their toll. Having been a member of this team I can attest to the benefits that playing together as a team week in week out against physically stronger and more experienced opposition can have. Having said this, however, in this instance we are talking about an under 15 team and one year can make a big difference in terms of both phsyical growth and maturity around this age.
Oh, and I hope any north west members of the team know what they’re getting themselves into regarding the travelling they’re going to be doing because the 8hr round trips aren’t that fun.
Best of luck to the boys though.
Comment by Northwester — February 4, 2007 @ 11:07 am
i think its good that the state team is playin the div1 comp because in there own age groups there just not getting strecht enough and wen they go 2 the national campionships there not used 2 the intensity and physicallity of the games against other states playin in the div1 comp should get them prepared nicely 4 the campionships
Comment by gifted — February 4, 2007 @ 8:46 pm
I can see referee’s being either:
1. Blasted by parents for not ‘protecting’ their precious kids or;
2. Copping an earfull from ’senior’ players for not applying the rules consistantly to all 22 players.
Comment by K — February 5, 2007 @ 3:37 pm
Well what an interesting site we have here.
Some interesting points to discuss. The state u/15 playing div 1, was that factual (was it confirmed, pretty easy to assume…..remember that, if we assume we make an ass out of u and me), or simply a typo? Who’s to know.
14/15 year old boys playing div 1, would it be a major concern………
Some very very good 16 year olds last season playing premier league, for various clubs across the state, all holding their position within those teams, so would it have been a major issue for those particular young men in the u15 team to play div 1.
Comment by Healthy debate — February 6, 2007 @ 2:17 pm
Ok, let’s have a ‘Healthy Debate’ then….rather than being snide and condescending.
To start with, the State U/15 team was listed on the FFT web site as playing in the Div.1 Summer Cup competition. As this is an ‘official’ FFT site then yes, it was confirmed. Unless…FFT are in the habit of putting up non-factual information. I’d prefer to think there is a little bit of reliability & trust in the old FFT office, wouldn’t you?? As for the team being part of the full season roster?? I plead guilty your honour. I assumed…but was I wrong?? Who’s to know??
The physical difference between a 14 year old and a 16 year old can be HUGE. Just as the psychological difference is HUGE. A massive gulf in fact. Have you spent any time around teenagers ‘Healthy Debate’? I suspect you have but you choose to either ignore this fact or conveniently gloss it over.
Can I ask you a question? Have you consulted with the parents of this team? As some posters have already stated, if they were the parents of a member of this team, then they would be forced to seriously considered their continued involvement. Strong words but that’s a parent’s responsibility…to ensure their child’s safety.
Comment by Blackjack — February 6, 2007 @ 8:23 pm
No I have not consulted with any parents of young men in this particular team, as they are not known to me.
My thinking, is that the level of competition in any sporting national carnival held interstate, is of a much higher standard than we could possibly imagine within this state.
To best prepare any team that is travelling, they must be challenged at the highest level available prior to departure, at both mental and physical aspects.
Reviewing all results from representative teams in the local rag it is fair to say that Tassie teams do struggle, and if coaches continue to do the same old, then the results will not change………….the same old.
Comment by Healthy debate — February 6, 2007 @ 9:55 pm
“To best prepare any team that is travelling, they must be challenged at the highest level available prior to departure, at both mental and physical aspects.”
At any cost??
It’s not about Tassie teams winning national titles, it’s about individual players doing the best they can. It’s individual talent identification. Have you ever heard of a state team being selected for the next Joey’s squad or Institute of Sport Programme?? No?? That’s because they select individuals not teams. So it’s not about winning, and especially NOT at all costs.
You don’t place your kid in front of a freight train and get them to play chicken in the hope it makes a better man of him. This type of stupid rationale went out when Jesus was playing full-back for Jeruselam. Do you understand the analogy??
Comment by Blackjack — February 6, 2007 @ 11:32 pm
If you want to be an individual, then go swimming.
Results are measured on teams performance (by those within any team) at that particular level.
Travelling teams can have a successful tournament by results - even if individual players are not recognised.
2 days ago I didn’t care, but now I wish that that team was playing in the summer cup, I even would have pulled the thermos out of the cupboard, got my blanket and gone along to some games to see just at what standard a state team of 2007 could actually compete at.
No I do not wish for young athletes to be injured, but for a team that potententially are the best within the state give them the competition at the level they could compete.
Comment by Healthy debate — February 7, 2007 @ 8:10 am
Your view of the purpose of Nationals is why I question the value of this current stream in player development. All of the scouts that attend this tournament attend for what reason?? To identify individuals NOT teams. When it’s all boiled down, the state results at Nationals are only useful as they give bragging rights for a state’s development manager. ..very little else.
To expect Tasmania to ‘consistently’ produce a winning team at Nationals (and David Abela has said publicly this is his goal) is egotistical to the extreme. We need to build a strong base (wide focus on individual player development) so when the time comes to select a state squad we have a large pool of talent from which to select.
Under the present regime we select the best squad in February, give them all the attention and opportunity (at the expense and virtual disregard of the rest) for what purpose? So 18-20 kids in a specific age group can be the best. Well, that’s great for the 18-20, but what about the rest. Aren’t you reducing your talent ‘gene’ pool by doing things this way??
Good stuff, we now have a convert from the “I don’t care” catagory to something completely different. Now if we can get others as motivated to do ’something’ we might get somewhere. Welcome aboard ‘Healthy Debate’. Maybe you’ll take the next step and get involved at club/region/state level as well.
Comment by Blackjack — February 7, 2007 @ 9:26 am
No I will reject the offer to ride aboard the “blackjack train”.
As with referees there is always 50% of the people that like them, and the other 50% that detest them.
Similar scenario to the current trend of junior development.
I along with many others sat in on FFt’s rollout and plan for club/regional/state juniors for the future, held last year.
Whilst not agreeing with everything that night, I am under the impression that the changes drafted then were for the better of junior development.
My position in the workforce is of a managerial type, and if the accolades come….well I will take them. But so do the kicks in the a##, so I take them also.
If the manager/coach of a club has a succesful year, then he to will bask in the glory; so why shouldn’t state staff of both girls or boys.
Comment by Healthy debate — February 7, 2007 @ 11:43 am
So which side are you on?? Are you in your managerial position for the accolades or to offer the best service standard you can provide??
————————–
Sorry for the rant folks. We will now return to normal transmission.
Comment by Blackjack — February 7, 2007 @ 12:26 pm
A very interesting and important conversation youhave going…! The fact that FFT just (prior to omission) put the state team in the Div 1 comp. clearly demonstrates what many think, FFT have no clear and identified pathway for young kids and it’s current decisions are done on a ad hoc basis. You only have to look at the structure and set up of individual clubs, nothing aligns and targets the same outcome (as a whole). By this I mean, individual club goals/objectives etc do not target what FFT are aiming for a visa versa (do FFT have a clear pathway, is this conveyed to clubs appropriately….?). FFT are so far behind the eight ball it isn’t funny. It is a real shame and until someone with an excellent team around him targets this specific area from the ground roots up this will just keep going round and round and round with continual patched efforts…..!!!!! Real shame as we have great soccer talent in our young kids here in Tassie!! I have been in Tassie for over 16 years now and nothing has ever changed and never will (I say that with disappointment)!
Comment by Observer — February 7, 2007 @ 12:59 pm
You have answered your own question.
A good manager is in the position beacause he/she is very good with personel, achieves results and yes, like all team members (work and sport) likes to recieve recognition when due.
Comment by Healthy debate — February 7, 2007 @ 1:27 pm
Observer, you built me up beautifully in anticipation toward are very positive conclusion only to dash me upon the rocks of despair with your conclusion. You cruel person!!!
Comment by Blackjack — February 7, 2007 @ 1:42 pm
Sorry Blackjack, just read what I wrote and it was a negative conclusion. It is just a shame that youth soccer isn’t one of FTT’s key priorities (if they have any), as if they did we would see some improvement or direction towards improvement.
Comment by Observer — February 7, 2007 @ 1:51 pm
“A good manager is in the position beacause he/she is very good with personel…”
ARE YOU SERIOUS?? I thought we were having a considered, educational discussion?
No, you’re taking the piss….
Stop wasting my time.
Comment by Blackjack — February 7, 2007 @ 3:09 pm
The State U14 team in 2006 competed in Southern U17 comp (such as it was) and played matches aginst Northern u18 squads often bolstered by those then playing Northern Premier or Premier reserves. If the coach of the State U15 team for 2007 and state director of coaching believe that this squad is capable of competing and developing in the Southern Division One competition then surely they are in the best position to judge - shouldnt we accept that , let them do their jobs. A trial run in the summer cup in 60 minute matches would have been the ideal setting to see just how eell it might work and what areas they may need to work on. It seems a pity that such an opportunity is now lost.
Comment by sj — February 7, 2007 @ 9:54 pm
FFT is targeting junior/ youth soccer.
Coaching accreditation is a major focus. And funds have been allocated to junior associations to facilitate this in each region. Encouragement for all junior associations to include more than just one team in regional competitions was apparent during 2006 –exposing a greater number of players to ‘higher level’ competition. In addition to state teams at U14 & U15 there are regional teams – in the south one part-time & one fulltime for U13 & U14 and two part-time for U15’s – again exposing larger numbers to better coaching and in better competitions. (I havent first hand knowledge of North /NorthWest nor have I the time to research but there is at least one team per region in each of these age groups) So it isn’t just 18-20 players that are the sole focus.
I believe 2007 will see an increased focus on the U9-U12 development hoping that the increased quality of coaching will lead to a flow-on through the age groups in future years so that eventually our senior competition will also be of higher quality.
With FFT also requiring ongoing coaching accreditation and development within the club structure the likelihood that CLUBS can provide quality ongoing facilitation of players skill development and game understanding is signifigantly higher than under any previous system.
Comment by sj — February 7, 2007 @ 9:58 pm
SJ, if you thought your son/daughter could be hurt on a ‘risky’ school excersion would you say nothing and ‘let the teacher do his job’ or would you raise your concerns?? Or do you just want open slather to do what you want?
Comment by Blackjack — February 7, 2007 @ 10:41 pm
Let the state U15 playing in the U19 Premier League comp. StateU15 to playing all games away ,give the chance to playing before Reserve and senior games. will suite the premier league clubs
Comment by Coach — February 7, 2007 @ 11:07 pm
Not a good analogy blackjack. A player can get hurt any game at anytime. The coaching staff are the last ones that want to lose a player to injury. Sure express some reservations , listen to the response, and if you are so sure that the risk is unacceptable withdraw your child - I guess we all have different concepts of what is unacceptable. But the coaching staff are in the position to be able to best judge - especially given the guidance they receive from FFT and FFA. Funnily enough children of this age (and their parents) used to fight FFT to be able to play seniors - now they can - and some are still not happy. I am not convinced that the current State u15 players had any objections at all.
Comment by sj — February 7, 2007 @ 11:13 pm
SJ’s comment reinforce what I have said, no direction or pre determined pathway has been made. Funds have become available and they have been thrown into something without the appropriate consideration!!! Coaches needing ongong accreditation……? Yes that is important but is a micro issue…!!! wake up SJ… because coaches have accreditation we are going to now have fantastic players… CRAP…we will have the same coaches as prior to the accreditation the only difference being that they have a piece of paper. A holistic approach is needed from the ground roots up for youth soccer not continual patched efforts as SJ is refering too.
Comment by Observer — February 8, 2007 @ 8:28 am
Observer - can you give an example of such an holistic approach? What exactly are you suggesting?
Comment by sj — February 8, 2007 @ 2:16 pm
I am not saying I have the answers, what I am saying is that the current path adopted by FFT isn’t going to work. For starters, FFT needs the right people in charge, I am sorry but at the moment FFT couldn’t organise a chook raffle let alone soccer in Tasmania. Don’t get me wrong, the guy that took over is probably a very nice guy but isn’t the guy for the job. By holistic approach I mean ensuring everything from all clubs around Tasmania, big and small clubs are run the same (obvisouly not down to the micro level). I could pick any two clubs, big or small, and I could bet you a million dollars that each of the clubs have different objectives and priorities, runs there club differently. I am not trying to put a negative swing on things but examples of areas that you have mentioned (sj) are not going to improve the overall performance of the game in Tasmania until you get the core components of a ‘business’, which is what FFT is, right. How many new coaches will the accreditation requirements bring into Tasmania this year??? My guess none, will it in the future?? maybe one or two, will they stay long term, NO! Accreditation should be something that is added when everything else is right and FFT have a very short term outlook.
Comment by Observer — February 13, 2007 @ 9:58 am
Coach accreditation means that the coach has attended a current course - those that have attended the recent youth and senior licence courses now have information and ideas that for the majority are signifigantly different from what they knew and practised beforehand. Accordingly the coaching of players WILL improve. Sure some will just do the course to get the piece of paper, but even those will have been exposed to the new way of approaching coaching. THe only way to improve the game is to improve the skills and game knowledge of the players. The players are taught by the coaches. Improve the coaches = improvement in players. Cant be any simpler!!
Comment by sj — February 14, 2007 @ 11:35 pm
SJ I agree will you (improve coaches and players will improve) BUT why have all of a sudden have FFT made it compulsory to have accreditation??? It is a left field decision that is consistent with the rest of the way FFT run their business. It should be implemented so that accreditation becomes a natural event, coaches aren’t forced to obtain it (wont get the desired result if it is…!!). I don’t want to harp on about it but it comes back to how FFT run their business, they don’t make decisions logically and I guarantee with everything else they do this will not be successful, one hasn’t got majority approval of the clubs, two poorly implemented (just thrown out there and made compulsory, of course this is going to anger people) and three FFT have just thrown it out there without follow up action (running a few training courses doesn’t account for ongoing management). Just look at all other areas of FFT, refereeing, youth development, promoting of the game etc is always messed up as FFT DO NOT DO THE CORE COMPONENTS of their business correctly!! I hate to harp on about it but it is true.
Comment by Observer — February 15, 2007 @ 8:23 am
“all of a sudden” ?? - the clubs had more than 12 months notice of this rule coming in to play and a similar period befre that where it was indicated such a rule was likely. left field?
Natural event? - thats what we have had up until now, and look at the percentage of coaches accredited - the worst in the country. If you look you will see that there are courses being run almost every weekend during the year from entry level to senior licence. This wil be supported by the 4 part-time development officers currently being sought.
Comment by sj — February 16, 2007 @ 7:12 pm
Can I ask a really dumb question on this coaching accreditatation, which I will admit up front I am very dubious about the benefits of.
If its such a great thing, and, is going to be the be all to end all to improve football in Tassie (not sure what other states this is compulsory in), why does it cost money to do something that is going to be a great benefit, AND YET, the referee courses are free ?
Stupid question I know, but …..
Comment by Silverstone — February 16, 2007 @ 8:05 pm
From memory the fee for refs courses was $30. It wasnt therefore such a great impost upon FFT when they made it free in an attempt to encourage more people to take up refereeing.
The Junior licence is I think $90 with youth and senior licences more still. The costs to FFT include the resource book, accreditation fee to FFA, facility hire etc , and they are lucky to break even. So i guess the numbers are somehat different. But if it were free then the clubs would pay for it indirectly in greater affiliation/nomination/registration fees - but these days most organistions tend to go for a user pays system rahter than everybody pays. Would be a good question for a club to put directly to FFT.
Comment by sj — February 17, 2007 @ 12:34 pm