TOPIC:

Glen Ridge - have sent you a private message.

What like Stirling or Hammersley...?
Fair difference between a request and being forced by the league - also seems like a scenario for Feb/March than September.

Would be nothing worse than being a Bgrade League player not being relegated yet playing a lower grade the next season.


ps. I'm not allowed to have an imagination - i just read whats on the card.

Birdman wrote: Looking back, I underestimated Bull Creek, Thornlie and Melville and overestimated Warnbro.

I think Bassendean will be OK in B Grade - not so sure about Bull Creek, though with a couple of notable exceptions, B Grade appeared pretty weak this year

If rumours be true, on the way down come probably only Willetton. Perhaps a bit of rebuilding for them and a mid-pack finish.

Up come Canning Vale and Quinns and I suspect both will go OK. If rumours be true, perhaps a rapidly developing Kwinana coming up too?

Of those who stay, Thornlie likely to be pre-season flag favourites, but I don't discount Melville (particularly) and Gosnells as contenders also.

The statement was that only Willeton come down. If another club requested to come down instead of Kalamunda, it wouldn't be only Willeton.
The only way I can think that 1 comes down and 2 go up is if someone is pulling their ressies and going to E grade as a single team club, or closing up shop, or a once rumoured merge is back on with a lower grade club.
That would mean that only 1 would drop down and 2 come up from C2 to restore the 10 team balance.
Happy to hear other scenarios if you have them.

If you cant field at least 3 senior sides and 2 colts you should be playing another comp

You've gotta be kidding on the requirement for two colts sides with the dismal numbers coming through junior footy. No doubt its an ambiition for most clubs but its very hard to achieve these days. Its all very well for the uni/school clubs that have easy access to juniors, or clubs with strong & young family districts such as Whitford and Swan Ath. I doubt there are 20 clubs out there with two colts teams on a consistent basis.

I agree that A and B Grade clubs should have League, Reserves and Colts teams to qualify for those grade, but you are setting an extremely high bar if you also require a second colts team. Hell, even a reliable third senior team is a stretch at times for some A&B grade clubs towards the end of the season.

Blunder wrote: You've gotta be kidding on the requirement for two colts sides with the dismal numbers coming through junior footy. No doubt its an ambiition for most clubs but its very hard to achieve these days. Its all very well for the uni/school clubs that have easy access to juniors, or clubs with strong & young family districts such as Whitford and Swan Ath. I doubt there are 20 clubs out there with two colts teams on a consistent basis.

I agree that A and B Grade clubs should have League, Reserves and Colts teams to qualify for those grade, but you are setting an extremely high bar if you also require a second colts team. Hell, even a reliable third senior team is a stretch at times for some A&B grade clubs towards the end of the season.

Be lucky to find 10 clubs with 2 colts teams.

Frankly, I would prefer to see Clubs with excess Colts players to send some to another Club - or even put in a joint team between two Clubs.

If the League can place a minimum of 28 registered players to nominate a Colts team, why couldn't they put in a maximum of 44 (like the AFL do) players for one Colts team Clubs.

They could then require a minimum of (say) 55-60 registered players for Club (and a maximum of 80) to nominate two Colts teams, again with excess players either going to another Club or form a joint team between 2 Clubs.

Methinks too many Clubs have too many players who don't get games, and those potential players disappear.

We need kids actually playing.

been tried with junior clubs, players dont like being peeled off from their club of preference.

I think the key is for senior clubs to really invest with junior clubs to ensure they continue on.

I think you are right tho Birdman, league needs to relax rules on lodging teams, would 15 a side be so bad for colts? would certainly allow more colts teams to be lodged.

Or do away with the year 12 comp in Juniors (most comps are combined year 11/12 now due to numbers) and make the year 12 comp the 1st year of colts. Also drop the age back to 19 so it is in line with the WAFL colts meaning ammo colts is ages 17 - 19. They have to do something otherwise clubs will either have to merge or fold. Also this has been coming for a while. I can remember back as far as 2010 when the Subi/Claremont/West Perth combined competition in year 10 had 10 teams in Division 1 and 10 in Division 2, 2011 (year 11 comp)saw 8 teams in Division 1 and 6 in Division 2 and finally year 12 in 2012 saw 8 teams in 1 comp meaning from 2010 - 2012, 12 teams of 22- 25 players walked away from the game for various reasons - hardly encouraging numbers to head into the Ammo Colts th following year

If the Football Commission wants to keep the Year 11/12 competition viable (as it would appear they do), probably the best way to do it is to increase the Colts age to the calendar in which the player turns 17 (as applies to the female competition).

I have concerns about the many 16 year old's who are not very big physically being expected tp compete against 20 years old's.

The alternative as suggested by Sneaky 101 is changing the age back to 17-19.

Whatever way it's done, we have to find a way of stopping kids leaving football at 16/17 as many do.