March 7, 2007
2008 Southern League Structure
a post by SJ (7.3.07)
2008 possible structure - an extract from Presidents letter to clubs:
…the Board considered some alternative structures and has chosen the following preferred position to present to Members for their comments.
• An eight team Premier League
• A Championship League restricted to non-Premier League teams
• A two-tier system – with Seniors and Under 21’s
• An optional Under 18 league open to all clubs
• Promotion and relegation based on the current system
Please feel free to provide your feedback…
i think we still need to have the seniors and reserves leagues but bringin back the U/21’s might be a good idea and getting televised games good benefit. Getting more matches like Glenorchy Knights Vs Melbourne Knights will help draw more crowds and possibly if we brougth a couple of VPL games down here to be played. Also i think we deffinately need to think of a new competition before we make the jump into the V-League!
Comment by Player — March 7, 2007 @ 3:23 pm
need a state league or it is a waste of time. have a top league and then a div 1 where premier reserves can play along side the current div 1 sides. promotion and relegation based on round robin for the top non premier club team in div 1 against the bottom state league team and northern div 1 winner. goodbye metro, taroona etc and hello to some northern top dogs. would have to be majority south obviously because of the league strength. no player in state league squads would need to pay rego and soccer tas could use some money on developing the sport for once in the way that futsal indoor soccer seems to with their trips away etc being subsidised well. also maybe get some kids development squads together which tour overseas like the futsal does or otherwise watch futsal get bigger and soccer down here get smaller!
Comment by player 2 — March 7, 2007 @ 5:19 pm
I like the 8 team structure, the talent is spread to thin already. Need reserves though as where would a 22 year old not picked in his clubs firsts play if he was loyal and not prepared to play for any other club? It should be 8 clubs u17’s (mostly 15 year olds), reserves (mix of young on the way up and experienced old guys to pass on knowledge), seniors. A State league would be great, but there would have to be a massive influx of cash for the clubs (travel is expensive and time consuming :-P)
Comment by player 3 — March 7, 2007 @ 6:55 pm
as posted elsewhere on the blog, the thought is there will up to a set number (3?) over age players allowed to play in the U21 team. Reserve teams are full of youngsters already, so this is not much of a change. For other club loyal players, hopefully the next division down from the “Championship League” will still be competitive enough (and be allowed to play for their club’s premiership team if required).
FFT have stated that the State league is unlikely to proceed if the V-League is pursued.
If it is decided to proceed with the new structure from 2008, how will they determine the 8 premiership teams? Will it be a playoff between the bottom three 2007 teams and the div 1 winner?
Comment by Ice-5 — March 8, 2007 @ 9:53 am
Why not jump straight into the V-League?
I’ve witnessed some V-League games and they would be not better than the best talent in Tassie. It might take a couple of years to find our feet but look at the Tassie Devils now. After being easily beaten early in their history, they have been in consecutive finals. Programs would come along to help and support up and coming players. Also more money from sponsors.
I think also to strenthen Tassie football we need a format similar to a state-league but maybe an extended version of a cup. Top four from south vs top four from north leagues play off similar to a Champions league style.
Comment by Player 4 — March 8, 2007 @ 10:22 am
an 8 team Premier league with reserves with an 8 team div 1 with reserves with promotion/relegation between the 2 is the way to go. Statewide league becomes too expensive & player 2’s suggestion that all the div 1,2,3,4,womens, junior,etc. players pay for the rego for state league players is not very egalitarian in what is an amatuer sport for EVERYONE after all [even if some Knights players do get 'sponsorship'
]
Comment by fab — March 8, 2007 @ 10:22 am
I would be pleased if SJ could release better and more detailed particulars. What is the rationale behind the restructure ?
Are the current Premier and Division 1 reserves to be replaced by 21 Leagues?
How many rounds is the roster ?
My initial reaction is that an 8 team league is to few in number , a promoted side has little chance of surviving against 7 premier opponents whereas against 9 there is some prospect of survival.
I beleive there is historical data to prove my point .
With regards to the current structure if a Div 1 side is not able to beat all comers in their league then they do not deserve to be promoted .
My perception is that FFT are seeking to disperse the current Premier Div i players amonst the independents with a view to giving them added strength.
In reality would this happen perhaps over 10 years but not imediately.
Comment by Brian Roberts — March 8, 2007 @ 11:51 am
premier league is not the problem in tasmanian soccer. development of the juniors and framework for clubs and development programs should be a priority in my opinion. Also clubs focus on retaining players in the sport should be looked at. I believe that at a junior level players should be maybe looking at playing the indoor game of futsal through to the age of 10-11 to develop tight foot skills etc and to stay out of the cold 7am starts in the same mould as kids are forced to in many european and south american countries. clear for all to see the advantages they have technically in places like, portugal, brazil, holland etc list goes on.
Comment by general — March 9, 2007 @ 8:44 am
fabs suggestion seems the most practical by far.
Comment by wiggidyflex — March 9, 2007 @ 11:27 am
Having reserves and U/21 just defeats the purpose of development. At 19-20 years of age, if your not pushing into senior football you’re probably not going to get there. The option of playing 2-3 overage players in the U/21 team could be of benefit for most of the reason mentioned in the FFT discussion document.
Surprisingly enough I would probably opt for the FFT option but I see virtually no need for an U18 league except as a stand alone league.
The League 1 must be a strong and well supported league as it would take up most of the guys from the current reserves squads.
Comment by Lionheart — March 9, 2007 @ 6:04 pm
Brian
I understand your club has it already. Have sent copy to blackjack as not sure how big a file should be posted. Its about 5 pages.
Comment by sj — March 9, 2007 @ 6:12 pm
People are capable of navigating their way to the FFT website and clicking on the ‘Competitiion Review Paper’ in the ‘Latest News’ but just in case….here ya go!! http://www.footballfedtas.com.au/
Comment by Blackjack — March 9, 2007 @ 6:36 pm
How long before a decision will be made?
Surely before 2007 season starts clubs should know what they need to do to qualify for the top league in 2008 - or is it intended that any changes start from 2009??
Comment by sj — March 10, 2007 @ 12:15 am
Why don’t you make a call and ask your mates at FFT , but guess you are on the outer their now , good job you got a job that enables you to get copy of correspondence .SJ you know an ill timed knee jerk reaction will do more harm than good !!
We need a review as suggested by el presidenti , problem is the review needs real input from outside the bubble - a draft discussion paper - to be spoken to at an AGM is the wrong time and place.
Appoint a FFt chairperson - recruit a couple of players - coaches - administrators - a Walter pless if available and maybe even Neil Connell , give them a scope and let them put a real paper together - talk to cricket - netball - football ffv -FFA .Then lets debate and make long term decisions.
Comment by oncesacked coach — March 10, 2007 @ 10:40 am
I dont think the proposal is that complicated and, in my view, is the way forward. We dont need a long-winded review. The difficulty is in what happens as part of the transistion and which teams miss out on Premier League and on what basis - to simply do nothing for yet another season would not be beneficial to our game when it is clear to most that something has to change to improve it.
Comment by sj — March 11, 2007 @ 9:06 am
I have received a copy of the FFT paper . They are to be congratulated on producing an objective and informative paper on a contentious subject . I hope the debate which will follow will be along the same lines and free from emotive issues.
The above should not infer that I agree with some of the standpoints taken .
Comment by Brian Roberts — March 11, 2007 @ 9:37 am
Brian , given your status in Tasmanian Football - Club President - board member and President , most during the time of State League and our competition reviews - restructures ( for want of a better word) as a player and coach in the era , what are your own thoughts on what it would take to go forward with for example a State League……
My time in the game the $ and travel issue from our Northern Neighbours has always been at the forefront .
I think Steve Gasp ’s earlier paper on relocation of club boundries - leading to formation of new clubs or super clubs i believe based on a Tasmanian version of the A.League structure is fraught with danger , would you be willing to give your own thoughts ?
Sj i don’t believe it is complicated either just not thought out from a football perspective, it is a good start ,, it is a paper prepared without football knowledge - a business paper the way the game is now run !!-
Go out into club world the junior version and count the increase this year in rego’s , we have to make sound long term decision’s not short term to meet the flavour of the month - Soccer in Tas has been doing that for the last fifteen years - it is time to change !!
Comment by oncesacked coach — March 11, 2007 @ 9:12 pm
Please note this paper is a response to the FFT discussion paper from an individual, not a club or any other representative body. This is one man’s view on how things should be conducted. The opinions and suggestions contained within this paper may not be shared by the Blackjack Blog authors and we take no responsibilty for those opinions.
Thank you Brian for your considered and timely response.
Blackjack
Southern Competition Review Discussion Paper
Background
This paper is a response to the initial discussion paper circulated by the CEO of Football Federation Tasmania.
Prior to presenting the arguments on the merits of the proposed recommendations I am setting out for general information, not discussion, a brief historical commentary on the circumstances leading to the present day
Since the earliest days of soccer in the South there have been at least 2 leagues. Initially a Premier (today’s nomenclature) with a secondary league for left over clubs and reserves. At times independent clubs were promoted to fill vacancies or on merit. This status lasted until the rapid growth of the game in the 1950s.
During the 1950-60 era structures varied but basically settled to a Premier, Reserves, then divisions with additional Premier teams and other clubs. During the State League periods 78-81 and 88-99 Division 1 South and North became the domain of independent clubs that provided aspirants to the State League above.
In the South a structure of lower leagues down to Div 4 evolved to provide for the growing number of players (in Premier clubs) and new clubs who had the opportunity to move through the leagues (e.g. Howrah (Beachside), DOSA, Christian Utd, Hobart Utd etc). However, during the period 2001-2003 Div 1 saw the entry of Premier teams (lack of teams, many younger players in the U21 set up) and something of a downgrading in the appeal of the league. This season sees 7 clubs plus two Premier sides and the league looks in better shape.
Promotion…Initially promotion was by merit or to fill gaps in the league above. In the 1960s early 70s there was by play-off between the Div 1 winner and the bottom Premier team. Then for a period 1973-77 it was automatic. A Div 1 league evolved to become a strong competitive league during the State League 78-81, and for most of the 1982-99 period. Again promotion has varied from play-off, application, or just not at all.
Background
The Discussion paper clearly sets out the unacceptable situation that has to be faced by either a Promoted or Relegated Club.
The Board is to be commended for recognizing the situation and initiating steps to remedy the position
All would agree that the “ rules “ governing Division 1 Clubs should either mirror or be similar to those in the Premier League.
Comment is also made on the views held by Division 1 Clubs on the current practice of allowing Premier Clubs to make up the numbers in Division 1.
This is not at the making of Premier Clubs but due to but the fading away of Clubs outside Premier level.
In reality the main plank of the non Premier Clubs discontent is that the qualities of the Premier League based sides vary from week to week.
In the case of Premier Clubs Division 1 and Reserves are last on the selectors pecking order. Whilst there may be a hard core of genuine Division One players who turn out on a regular basis they are from time to time topped up with either under 19’s or the occasional social league player.
More often than not on away trips to say Huon Valley players double up. This is also the case when all club sides play on the same day.
On the occasions when the Premier League team plays on Friday night their Division 1 sides are at full strength with up to three Premier players being permitted to drop back with a cascade effect into their Reserves.
Thus Beachside may be defeated by a full strength South Hobart side whilst Huon Valley may trounce an under strength visiting side.
The solution to this problem is for all Premier based sides to play on the one day. This would effectively eliminate team stacking.
Nevertheless the independent clubs should be and are competitive. Christian Utd won Division 1 South in 2004. Hobart United in 2005 and Taroona in 2006.
Mention is also made to the composition of the under 19 competition with reference to the right of Division 1 Clubs right to enter teams. It is well known that such moves have been opposed by Premier Clubs on the grounds of the disruption caused to their schedules. The paper correctly points out that entrants from outside the Premier ranks have been inconsistent in maintaining their membership.
Again all would agree that provision of a structure that allows Club youth teams to compete against each other, is desirable, notwithstanding the grading of the Club senior XI.
Discussion
The above whilst making pleasant reading to while away the time doesn’t really solve anything .The question of what plan to adopt still remains.
Before setting down any strategies the following criteria must be met.
1. The plan must be realistic
2. It must not be set in stone
3. It must be able to be monitored.
4. It must be able to sustain amendment.
The paper seeks answers to three salient points.
a. How many teams in Premier League and Division 1.
b. The number of tiers in the system
c. Premier league Clubs playing in Division 1
Promotion and Relegation Two tiers or Three.
This point has been addressed to some extent earlier in the paper.
My preferred option is Number Three with the third tier being under 18. Whilst I do not support follow the leader there will be some benefit in having parity with other Federations. The records will show that this third tier is already operative in Northern Tasmania thus we would achieve uniformity across the State.
The replacement of current reserve teams by under 21 (with a 3 adult option) will result in an imbalance of under 21 players in the top echelon. Talented players aged over 21 will have fewer opportunities to play at top level. It could be inferred that one is over the hill at 22. Currently many clubs fill a large proportion of their teams with U21 players so that a dedicated U21 league would not be achieving a great deal other than protecting those U21 players who may not make it in open competition.
In any event we need to sight statistical data showing the number of players aged between 16 and 20, also to what extent certain clubs have cornered the market.
How many teams in Premier League and Division 1.
The theory that the lesser the number of teams the greater the standard has yet to be proved in Tasmanian Soccer. The paper points out that a reduction in club numbers is only effective if the loyalty of players is suspect. The most likely scenario will be that the Standard is unlikely to alter. Most players from teams 9/10 may stay with their club, drop out, or just move away to other interests
One of the weaknesses of this debate is that all contributors assume that they will never be numbered amongst Clubs nine or ten.
A survey of the past ten years shows that the following clubs would have been number 8 and playing off to avoid relegation.
They are Glenorchy Knights, Kingborough Lions (3), Hobart Zebras, Clarence, Metro, Newtown Eagles and Hobart Olympic (2).
Again the paper answers the question by a highlighting the difficulties encountered with the roster. This in itself is sufficient for the status quo to remain. Added to which is that The Premier league as currently structured works well. No matter how many Clubs may enter 10,8,6 there will always be someone at the top and another at the bottom.
A league of 10 gives the promoted club some prospect of survival. With 8 teams you have 14 opportunities to win, with 10 teams you have 18 opportunities.
With 8 team leagues the minimum number of times you may meet your opponents is 3, however add in the Summer Cup, Statewide Cup this could blow out to 6 leading to tedium for players and supporters.
Premier League Clubs participating in Division 1
The answer is simple place an embargo on future involvement by Premier Clubs in Division 1 with the further proviso that as soon as a replacement can be found the lower of the two Premier Clubs departs the scene.
Conclusion
I set out below the above paper summarized in dot points. Some of the items shown are not discussed in the paper as they do not fall within its ambit however are of general interest.
FFT League Minus points
• League of 8 places heavy load on promoted club to avoid play-off in first year, 10-team league/roster provides more opportunities.
• 8-team league presents the same teams meeting possibly in 3 league games, Summer Cup and State Cup, a distinct lack of variety.
• Standard unlikely to alter. Most players from teams 9/10 may stay with their club, drop out, or just move away to other interests.
• With U21 league the Premier/U21 side squads will have an imbalance of U21 players. Over 21 year old players will have fewer opportunities to play at top level.
• Currently many clubs fill a large proportion of their teams with U21 players so that a dedicated U21 league would not be achieving a great deal other than protecting those U21 players who will never make it in open matches?
• The endless changing of set-ups every 3/4 years does not give clubs a picture of stability, especially those affected by the change. (e.g. Taroona finally make it to the Premier League only to find someone wants to move the goalposts).
• A roster of only 14 matches to decide the league is a move back to 1920-30s.
• A roster of 21 matches results in an overcrowded schedule.
FFT League Plus points.
• Proposal to develop a structure for both Premier and Div 1 on the same guidelines
• Opportunity for promotion/relegation with less effect on clubs concerned
• Eventual Div 1 that does not require Premier teams to make up the numbers
• Whatever system is adopted it should remain in place for a minimum number of seasons
• Under age league for Div 1 clubs
Other possibilities
• Encouragement/assistance (with fees) for new clubs, the stronger base provides a taller summit for the pyramid. A viable Div 1 will give the Premier stronger competitors.
• Growth at junior levels will see more who just want to ‘play the game’. Clubs (like DOSA, Hob Utd, Christian Utd) that have started in Div 4 have developed the desire to play at a higher level, however some new clubs may be purely social in character.
• The lead in time for changes should be not next season but maybe the following?
• Marketing/profile of Div 1 to be upgraded.
• If it isn’t broken do not fix it. The Premier League works; Div 1 is the area needing resuscitation.
• Suggest Premier, Reserves, and U18. Then Div 1, Reserves, U18. Moving Div 1 in line with Premier.
Recommendations
1. That FFT continues the current system.
2. That in lieu of the current under 19 league an optional under 18 league be introduced open to all affiliated Clubs.
3. The number of teams in Premier and Premier Reserves remain at ten.
4. That FFT institute steps to increase the number of non Premier Clubs in Division 1.
5. That an immediate embargo be placed on the admission of fresh Premier Club teams into Division 1.
Comment by Brian Roberts — March 15, 2007 @ 10:48 am
Making Under 18 optional lessens the commitment necessary by a club to assist in developing youth players. Without compulsion some clubs wont do it. Its not a three tier system witout compulsion. The two-tier system proposed by FFT could be achieved by requiring a maximum playing squad of , say 30 - with a minimum of Under 21 players having to be named across the two squads each week - that way the clubs promoting youth into the first team are not penalised.
Comment by sj — March 15, 2007 @ 1:47 pm
I gave this point some consideration. FFT are in a cleft stick on the one hand they wish to see a vibrant competitive Premier league to rival those of yesteryear and on the other hand they wish to ease the passage of talented players to greatness.
Eventually I came down on the side of the Premier League. By divesting a Club of “ junior” responsibility it can devote its energies to presenting the best Premier team week in week out. The proposed Summer State League has this vision in mind.
Elsewhere Clubs are not compelled to have “ junior” arms however they do so for their own protection or to prevent other Clubs encroaching on their patch. Any Hobart Club that ignored this area would be a fool unto itself.
My personal belief is not to ease the path of “ juniors”. If a boy or girl has the talent and dedication they will make it. Furthermore they will hitch their star to the Club that provides the best Coaching ,facilities and support.
edited at author’s request. Additional material included
Comment by Brian Roberts — March 15, 2007 @ 7:54 pm
Idea !!!!
* Bring back State Premier League competion ,
*State league U18 Competion with 3 over age players in place the reserve comp.
Comment by Coach — March 19, 2007 @ 11:20 pm
*FFT please Bring back State Premier League Competition
*an U18 State League Competion with 3 over age players in place the reserve comp.
This will improve Football in Tasmania.
Comment by Coach — March 19, 2007 @ 11:24 pm
How are you going to pay for that coach?? What organisation is going to offer financial assistance to a league involving six teams, no media coverage (the mercury will give you stuff all), no ability to pay players, no clear league structure or long term plan to retain players in this state. let’s face it, most players worth their salt won’t be in the state long enough to populate this state league beause their opportunities lay elsewhere (interstate).
The State team had two players from the Northern League, so do you think there might be a difference in the standard between North & South? Metro will play off for 1st place in the northern preseason tournament (and good luck to them), yet they have failed to score a solitary point and only one goal in the Southern preseason tournament. Does anything concern you with these statistics?? (Greg, this is not to denigrate Metro in any way, shape or form but purely to demonstate an example)
There is no viable reason to reintroduce a State League other than to recreate a pipedream. It’s just not economically viable.
Comment by Blackjack — March 19, 2007 @ 11:54 pm
Blackjack,
no offence taken. I think all at Metro know that the to reach the same spot in the regular competition is going to be a lot harder.
I notice overall that the sides we played against in the Hudson Cup have a hell of a lot of young blokes playing for them, as we have had in that competition.
I suspect that will change on Sunday when we play Launceston City.
Comment by Greg Saunders — March 20, 2007 @ 6:01 am
If you want an Article on a State League I’ll do you one .
May take some time as I’ll eant to research the Domino Effect.
Muust have 6 potential readers
Comment by Brian Roberts — March 20, 2007 @ 1:14 pm
Brian, I think a comparison needs to be done between any proposed reintroduction of a State League (as laid down in the Chairman’s document) and a bid for a licence in the new V-League, rather than just a paper on the State League.
I think it’s also about time we had some input from FFT to ascertain what their current thinking may be because there is no point doing an article on a State League if this is no longer on the agenda.
We have heard from SJ to say FFT are looking favourably toward a V-League application.
So what is the ‘official’ position?
Comment by Blackjack — March 20, 2007 @ 4:51 pm
Brian - i read with interest your thesis on Southern Competitions ,plus others who have commented on the issue , including Blackjack himself a self confessed non supporter of a state league format - i in principle support his reasoning in the present climate .
However i am in favour of a restructured Southern Comp - even if it means the changeing of the guard in Clubs - numbers on a league -teams mandatory for participation and a strong youth infrastucture ( competition - similar to one identified by blackjack in an earlier post.
V league i believe can only work with a new club ( self sufficent )being formed in Hobart similar to an A League set up , FFT cannot be the owners of such a licence , they would have to have the mandate of it’s members to use the members funds for a team . , by all means have the working relationship ie similar to FFV and Victory , please remember no club in Australian A.League and or National League ever made a profit .The Devils need a 1 mil grant a year from AFL!!
Comment by Billy Jones — March 21, 2007 @ 1:01 pm