TOPIC:

The Rug wrote: How can it be rorted.
I would target low point quality players who haven't played higher than WAAFL but are just as valuable.

This is spot on. Plenty of guys floating around Amatuers/ country who are better than many playing WAFL but have never wanted to. Could easily get 5 or 6 or these guys into your team for low point value if they were to change the rules.

I dont think the clubs will have any say in it to be honest. If the ammos want to fo it they will and if clubs dont like it then it is not like they can go and join another quality comp on a Saturday.

I still cant see how a club can abuse a points system. Clubs should already be looking at recruiting good players in their area.

$$ are always going to be play a part tho, clubs can find these so called good players with low points and offer them money to play for their club!

I agree, FFTF, you cannot rort a points system but you can recruit in such a way that it benefits you.

The Central Midlands Coastal Football League introduced a player points system in 2012, where each club is allocated 38 points for League matches to be spread across 22 players on a match day.

Their points system is
1 for local residents
2 for non-locals
3 for ex-WAFL/State League Reserves players
4 for ex-WAFL/State League players
6 for ex-AFL players.

Teams must list 22 players on their League team sheet and they cannot play short and use their 38 points across say 20 or 21 players. A penalty of $250 per missing player applies for a breach of this by-law.

Playing juniors at the same club (or a Lancelin Primary School pupil in the case of Lancelin-Ledge Point who have been playing competitive football since 2009) allows a player to be considered a local (even if they play elsewhere and then return to their club later on).

Players can also have their points value down-graded as well with loyalty to a club, for example Cervantes’ playing coach Clayton Lasscock has been a Tiger Shark for six seasons, so his value has dropped from four points (ex-WAFL League) to two.

If clubs try and recruit high-point players, they also need to field more 1-point (local) players to remain at 38 points or less. For example, if a club recruited an ex-WAFL League player and five non-locals, it means that they only have 24 points available for the 16 remaining players, making it a juggling exercise to get to 38 points or less if a club already has a number of two-point players.

Based on the player points in the team lists in the CMCFL’s Football Budget, every club except Dandaragan seem to adopt a recruiting model where they avoid higher-point players and instead recruit players from other regional leagues. The Saints elected to strengthen their list by recruiting higher standard players. Their squad list for the match against Jurien Bay in Round 2 (not necessarily including the final 22) had 43 points spread across 24 players. Three players were ex-WAFL Reserves players, nine were non-locals and 10 were locals.

Due to their population, Lancelin-Ledge Point need to be able to bring in non-locals in order to field two competitive sides. Under the points system, the Pirates – like every other side – always need to field a minimum of six locals to keep within the 38 points (i.e. 16 two-point players and six one-pointers). When players with higher points values play in the League side, the number of local players required rises.

Recruiting former WAFL players isn’t as prevalent as outsiders may assume. Looking through the player lists, Cervantes had one four-point player, Dandaragan had four three-point players, Jurien Bay had two three-pointers, Lancelin-Ledge Point had one four-point player and one three-point player and Moora had no player classified higher than two points.

The Preacher. I have spent part of this year on the WAAFL Working Committee on the points system.

All WAAFL Clubs were invited to participate - only 4 took up that invitation. Whether or not your Club was one of those which chose to participate, I do not know.

I will not comment on specifics (a number of differing proposals came up), however those Clubs (which were spread across several Grades) that did participate all supported the introduction of a points system.

There is a meeting at the WAAFL on Wednesday 7 December, with each Club invited to send 3 representatives - this will be one of the main topics. A discussion paper was issued to all Clubs on the matter a few weeks ago.

Ultimately, as FFTF suggested, it will be the WAAFL which makes the final decision.

CasualObserver wrote: I agree, FFTF, you cannot rort a points system but you can recruit in such a way that it benefits you.

The Central Midlands Coastal Football League introduced a player points system in 2012, where each club is allocated 38 points for League matches to be spread across 22 players on a match day.

Their points system is
1 for local residents
2 for non-locals
3 for ex-WAFL/State League Reserves players
4 for ex-WAFL/State League players
6 for ex-AFL players.

An average WAFL reserves player is certainly not guaranteed a walk up start at either A or B Grade League level. However a WAFL Reserves player would probably have a significant impact in any of the lower grades.

Similarly a player who has played less than 10 games of WAFL League is probably not any better than the top 10 players at any A or B Grade club.

The points system provided by Casual Observer is an excellent example. It would probably work reasonably well in the lower grades from C2-C4, D1-D2 and E1 but would be hopelessly inappropriate for the most senior grades and would in my view decimate the quality of our elite competition if adopted.

Those advocating a standard points system seem totally oblivious to this fact. It seems to be a case of the blind leading the blind at the moment.

If the aim is to equalise the competition and stunt the impact of under-the-table payments, then the South West Football League is a good example.

The SWFL introduced a Player Points System for the 2012 season, with all ten clubs initially being set a 40-point limit and the aim being to create a more level playing field. A tinkering of the set-up has been made since and currently there is a three-tiered system, with the top three sides from the previous season working with a 36-point limit, the teams placed fourth to seventh have 38 points and the bottom three sides being granted 40 points.

Whilst devising the system, the SWFL noted that if a blanket 40-point maximum had been in place in 2010 (when the plan was being developed), there would have been at least 36 instances where a League team sheet would have breached the cap during the season.

At the time of its introduction, League president Kevin Lynn said that the points system aimed to promote loyalty and that clubs would have to re-think their recruiting strategy so they didn't breach the points cap.

The final ladders over the last four seasons show that the system is assisting in the equalisation of the competition. Between the 2013 and 2016 seasons, only one side had not made the finals - Donnybrook (seventh, last, sixth and sixth) - and in the same time period, nine of the ten clubs have finished in the bottom three (South Bunbury made finals three times, but finished seventh in 2015).

Obviously in a multi-divisional competition like the WAAFL, this is potentially not the best player points format to use (maybe the six/eight sides from the previous season and any relegated sides have a certain points value, with promoted sides getting say two points more than the other eight for their first season only at the higher level - e.g. B Grade has 40 for everyone except the two promoted sides who get 42 for that season only), but the fact is that currently no SWFL has a mortgage on a finals berth or is permanently stuck at the foot of the ladder.

That's where you have it wrong Hawk Eye. You said 'elite competition' nearly all recent top side in A and B grade have directly correlated level of player payments. This is not an elite completion. It is an AMATEUR comp and clubs are rorting it more than ever. A points system won't be perfect but it is very effective in reducing the impact payments have. If your club can't administrate simple points system you shouldn't have a club.

Heads out of the sand, at least 20 players who were on the field during the A grade grand final were not 'playing with their mates'. The names leaving wafl to play at the top B grade sides in recent seasons is evidence is enough to show we need to points system now. For 2017.

At the end of the day if you play in a flag with a club who has one paid player, you are a cheat and no better than the Russian athletics team.

The points system will not work for a multi-division competition like the WAAFL. There is a huge difference between the impact of WAFL players in A&B Grade and that at the lower levels.

The points system will not impact at all on whether some players get paid.

All it will do is dramatically drop the standard of the A&B competition. You may be happy for that to happen but I'm not.

Your analogy TP is just like most Essendon supporters. You are in denial if you think you are playing at a club that hasn't breached the rules.

You can continue on in blissful ignorance of that fact if that makes you happy.

First of all why are we bringing in a points system. It is either to "TRY" and stop player payments as it is an amateur competition or to even up the competition by making clubs not be able to get too many quality players in. Surely these are the only reasons.
Well reason 1 we all agree a points system will not stop player payments in any way, as clubs will still spend what they have.
Reason 2 I come from a club that has never played in A or B grade and doesn't pay players, hence why we haven't gone any higher than C. So all of a sudden blokes are just going to start rocking up to my club and play for free because the club down the road can't fit them in their points system. I think you are living in a dream world if you think blokes who play for cash are suddenly going to walk into your club and even up the competition if they have no reason to be at your club.

I also believe it makes it harder for smaller clubs if they cant recruit as many players if they are doing it the right way. The bigger clubs that have more players in the area, will surely this is favouring them and making the competition more unfair.

I am all for bringing something in if it is going to help the amateur status, but I don't believe this will help clubs that don't pay in anyway. The blokes that want to get paid will go to another competition or another club willing to pay. Just remember its us clubs that are paying, so we should probably look in the mirror before we bring in changes. We have a great competition leave it.

Ok so because everyone is cheating it's ok to jump on the bandwagon?

This is what the problem is with the state of play.

Your comments reflect your club and your sheepish following to cheat.