The Mens and Womens Premier League competitions are underway.
In the Womens PL its Belconnen United, Woden Valley FC and Western Creek that have jumped out to an early lead. Woden Valley has made a particularly impressive start with wins across all grades in the last two rounds, including undefeated records after five rounds for the PL Reserves and PL18s. They are very closely followed by Belconnen United. The two powerhouses in Womens PL football at this time.
The Mens Premier League has completed two rounds and already there are alarm bells ringing. CFC are dominant, although Canberra City came as close as anyone has in 2011 with a 4-2 scoreline against them. Woden Valley FC has been triumphant in all four grades in the first two rounds, a remarkable achievement so early in the season. Cooma has had a very disappointing start by their high standards. Olympic's very impressive young roster is playing fine football and are a serious problme for every club.
But the alarm bells that are ringing loud and long, signal trouble for two PL clubs. Goulburn Strikers are doing it tough and we covered that story last week. Nevertheless, they are contesting every grade, just as they said they would and got their first win in PL18 over Monaro.
Monaro Panthers are in real trouble and it's difficult to know how they got themselves into this position – their PL18 side is simply not to PL standard – by a considerable margin. What preparation did the club do in the off season to construct their team? I understand that they had to start the game against the Strikers with less than a full team. Advertisements now appear on the Capital Football website for players. This is in sharp contrast to the Monaro PL16 team which is very competitive.
It seems to me that the Panthers are more strife than the Strikers. Will Monaro be able to continue to field a PL18 team for the season, because if it unable to do so, will this bring the Clubs involvement in the PL to a premature end? I sincerely hope not – but it is a requirement of the licence to field teams in all grades.
The Strikers and the Panthers have serious deficiencies in their playing strengths. It is most unlikely that either club will be able to resolve these deficiencies for the remainder of 2011 season. The worst case scenario is that one or both find it impossible to continue to field a team in one of the required PL grades. The next worst case is that the losses become more pronounced, which in turn brings other in-season problems for a struggling club.
Each club poses different problems for Capital Football. If Capital Football intends to do something – best its done now and not later. The question is – how flexible will CF be in these matters – because we certainly don’t want to loose either club to the PL, but the weekly destruction of a team is of no value to the PL at any level.
Just how well informed is the Mens League Advisory Committee, what did they glean from any club debriefs they held at the end of the 2010 season, how much homework did they do in the off season and is this committee sufficiently able to manage the Premier League on a continuing basis?
The CF committee appointed to review and recommend PL licences, concluded its work in 2009, so there is not much point in looking back to their work for answers. Things have moved on, and things have changed as they do, which brings us back to the usefulness of the Mens League Advisory committee. And to whom is this advisory committee really accountable? All the other PL clubs? These early but serious stumbles by two of the new Clubs to the PL, together with other important football related club matters, that demonstrate just how important it now is to have the Mens and Womens Premier Leagues managed as a separate entity.
For now, the Strikers and Monaro seem to require some flexible and practical assistance. Looking for new players of the appropriate standard in the ACT is the least likely solution.
All this fits nicely into the continuing discussion the NPL had with the CEO CF.
We continue with Part 2 of this discussion. Remember it’s a discussion, not question and answer. We continue with what seems to be the Womens PL, ACTAS players availability and so on. But its more than that. This discussion goes in its way to the heart of football problems between clubs and CF – consultation or lack of it, competition rules that may or may not be helpful going forward, the rights of players to determine which PL club they wish to play for, how much should CF involve itself in the regulation of players participation in club football, the differing philosophies of the PL clubs, does the CF structure for communication (Club Pres / Regional reps / Standing Committees and so) really work and what is a reasonable level of consultation, how effective and acocuntable are the advisory committees and to whom, how often do these committees meet and with whom do they confer and report, why are Junior clubs limited to one Div 1 team ar age if they have more than one team at the appropriate standard at a time when we are trying to build capacity among talented players not restrict it, what is CF prepared to do to prevent the wholesale poaching of young teams by clubs, if clubs have responsibilities to ACTAS what responsibility does ACTAS have to Clubs (and in particular PL coaches), what happens to players post ACTAS, the impact of the national curriculum and development plan and the increasing roles that junior and PL clubs must play in this process and so on and so on.
You make up your own mind on these matters.
For myself, I think CF has a lot of hard work to do around the issues of communication and consultation with clubs. They seem to be too reactive and not proactive - the Strikers and Panthers Pl predicaments are cases in point. Then their are the Womens Pl issues and Junior clubs issues. I very much doubt the league standing committees have been as consultative and inclusive, as might have been best for the development of the game, and that’s heavy lead to carry in the saddlebags. It seems to me that the CF organisational structure is now not best placed to handle the increasing needs of a PL competition.
Its against all this that the CEO and the NPL speak. As ever, the NPL is pleased the CEO Heather Reid is prepared to talk of these and other matters.
Download Podcast Here:
This actually makes me sick... Some flexible and practicle assistance to strikers and monaro? are you kidding? what about assistance to state 1 teams capable of challenging the top 4 with closer results than 19-0. These clubs are strong enough for PL but lack the juniors. This is another example of why the pathway system is wrong. The criteria is almost impossible to meet and the PL is suffering. ANU have gone, maybe this year Goulburn and Monaro. 2012 season may have 7 or 8 teams in the top league in Canberra, how embarrasing. The whole mens league has gone stale since the relegation promotion system was outed. Bottom teams beating top teams to avoid relegation is exciting football... You cant expect CF to be flexible now just to keep Goulburn and Monaro after Juventus, Queanbeyan, White Eagles and Oconnor etc have all been axed.
ReplyDeleteany chance you are from White Eagles or O'Connor disaster?
ReplyDeleteFeeling sick again...
ReplyDeleteDisaster is from White Eagles although I cannot speak for everyone in this club I have been around long enough to know what im talking about. I beleive in developing juniors but the current system does nothing more for juniors than was previosly in place before 2007. What it does do is lower the standard of the top flight therfore lowering the standard of the pathway.
How is this pathway system developing juniors if and when they reach PL level the standard is not what it could be as not all the best teams and players are in the top flight.
Having something to lose (relegation) only improves standards and forces clubs to develop a better playing roster therfore improving the standard at the highest level in
You do not need a pathway at the same club. Players move from club to club anyway and playing with different coaches and players only improves players ability and knowledge of the game. Stuck at one club from under 16's to mens can stunt progress.
MOU's are like hiding the elephant in the room behind a lamp.
Just sayin
@disaster fair point about the MOU's, they should be genuine junior teams for each club and not a school pretending to have a link.
ReplyDeleteBUT
what happens in 5 years time for your club? The (majority) of PL clubs will have their current PL16s players coming through to the Premier League, while your players will be 5 years older. Where are the next crop coming from?
Surely its in the best interest of the game to have clubs develop players rather than buying them? Clubs are more likely to put in the effort to develop players if they are going to get a return as opposed to not having a pathway and the players being poached. The standard of players in the premier league is developed through junior player development, not promotion and relegation of the top flight
The point is that if you don't reward Clubs for doing the right thing they won't do it. That's why PL Clubs have to have Juniors. Last time they had optional youth teams the PL 18s competition stopped running, which was a disgrace.
ReplyDeleteEvery other football code forces their top clubs to have a youth team and a reserves, and they all do it without question, and they have a lot less juniors to pick from. Any Club that thinks they can't field Juniors doesn't deserve to be in the top league.
We've forced the PL Clubs to join up with Juniors (even though some of them are giving the idea lip service), maybe it's time to force the Junior clubs to hook up with a Senior club? Why do Belwest, Weston Creek and Gunghalin not have a PL partner? Perhaps to have teams in Div 1 you should have to have a PL partner?
I agree that some of the MOUs are farcical, the Cooma/Marist joke is the one that comes to mind.
Of course there should be genuine junior teams but not every senior club can meet the criteria. CF has to allow MOU’s or else there wouldn’t be a PL competition.
ReplyDeleteIn 5 years time White Eagles may still be in Div 1 beating PL sides in the federation cup and still bringing youth through the 1st team. We currently have 11 players under 23 in the first team squad and 3 teenagers who regularly start. Where do you think they came from? Thin air? They played for a junior side until they thought they were the right age to move to a senior side and they chose us. Why can’t youth players decide what senior club they wish to play for just like them and their parents chose which junior club, high school, college etc. You do not need a pathway at the same club. Of course we should all be interested in development of juniors, its the future, that’s what the junior clubs and coaches are responsible for. Do you think the current system is working? Developing players any more than was the case before 2007?
Poaching players will always be part of the game at all levels. White Eagles offer players a world famous burger and drink after matches. No players get money for playing.
Do Goulburn deserve to be there next season because they meet the criteria but continue to get pumped all season? The PL should be a showcase of the best of the best, currently not the case. Its sad to see the standard of the PL continue to drop and the divide between the top and bottom teams spread. What would this look like to people from interstate or overseas who come to watch a game or scouts looking to see our best of the best in action.
Gordo – Whats the right thing to do? Push clubs to find juniors from anywhere and create MOU’s to keep everyone happy. Kick out previous PL winners Juve, Cooma and other strong teams like Oconnor (Fed Cup winners), Queanbeyan and White Eagles. Cooma deserve to be there and they are doing what they can to stay. Don’t forget they were kicked out of the PL after winning the competition!
Why not meet half way and have a compulsory under 20’s side for each PL team. Surely every club in Canberra could field one of those, hell even White Eagles could manage that.
I think you may be missing the point here disaster.
ReplyDeleteAs a club without junior development you are relying on players at your club to be developed by junior clubs throughout the ACT. Once they run on the field for you, they have been playing since Under 5s and recieving coaching for about 15 years.
Having a specific pathway allows CF (actually FFA through the Curriculum), to legislate the standard of coaches on this pathway. But this needs a stick to be able to enforce (eg to be a PL club you must meet coaching standards from PL right down to U13s). Clubs with this pathway are also willing to spend more on player development if they can see a return on investment. Why would a Belwest or Weston Creek put in that investment? They're role is to provide participation and not players for future teams.
You can't complain about the stardard of the PL if you're not willing to assist with player development, thats simply not how it works. Yes you are right, a percentage of players will always jump to other clubs, but you can't avoid doing things in the best interest of the game because of it
I completely agree with you Disaster...White Eagles burgers are excellent!
ReplyDeleteAnonymous, im not missing the point, actually its pretty obvious. I know exactly what you and CF are selling but im not buying it.
ReplyDeleteRight down to undetr 13's you say, so why stop there? why not go to under 6's? wouldnt you be poaching players from under 12 sides? whats the difference?
Of course I can complain, like ive said there was always a pathway (without a stick) before 2007 and the best teams were in the PL. Youth player development has and always will be there with or without this Criteria
I think you are missing the point... Its simple... Not all the best teams in Canberra are in the PL due to this forced pathway system that hardly anyone can meet...
As for the curriculum, i suppose they are forcing coaches to play the 433 or is it 4231
these days no matter what players they have.
Gordo - sorry mate but you need to get your facts right - Gungahlin DO HAVE a PL partner in Canberra City - where have you been? maybe you've lost touch with the game?
ReplyDeleteDisaster - I think you also need to rethink the Cooma is OK in the PL as well - Cooma (sorry is that Marist) played a PL16 game last week on a cow paddock called Pearce Neigbourhood Oval with no toilets or changerooms with their players wearing Marist shirts and the supporters yelling Marist - sorry if they want to be Cooma then they shodul play in Cooma and wear the Cooma colours - time for the schools to go the whole hog in PL or get out, especially Marist and Radford who don't let their players play for anyone else.
Seriously though we should all ask what is the Mens League department / those responsible at CF doing about all of this noise around the PL competitions ? From the outside it looks like nothing, but let's hear from them some more. That's what they are paid to do, we in clubland are almost all of us volunteers putting our families and work on hold as we try and keep the junior clubs going and hopefully getting better. Unfortunately when we ask CF for help all we get is the attitude "that it's too hard / don't do things that way / we can't do anything about that" sadly there doesn't seem to be any 'can do' attitude !
ReplyDeleteFair enough about Gunghalin, I forgot about them. It's early days for them and City but so far so good from what I see.
ReplyDeleteOur sport has more junior players than all other sports, more than the other football codes put together. Any club that says they can't field two youth grades is not trying very hard. Especially when you see what some of the clubs in PL are getting away with.
Last time I looked Radford was not in PL and does let players palyer for PL teams, so what do you mean
ReplyDelete"time for the schools to go the whole hog in PL or get out, especially Marist and Radford who don't let their players play for anyone else".
Ah disaster, sit back, have a cuppa and actually read the curriculum. You think its all about the 1-4-3-3? You are very wrong my friend.
ReplyDeleteBut hey, lets not worry about the future development of football players in Australia (and the ACT), as long as White Eagles and O'Connor are in the Premier League it doesn't matter does it?
Its amazing the people on here complaining that CF isnt doing anything about the league, but putting these criteria in place they are building the league into something special in the future. Ok yes there may be some teething problems at the moment, but what is perfect straight away?
You want to be a Premier League Club? Meet the criteria, its pretty simple really.
To Han's love child:
ReplyDeleteAgree its not all about the 1-4-3-3. hat's teh system of play, but the style of play and how it is coached is so much more. The system if pla is simply a vehilce for the rest and a good I reckon. The coach edusation and training, together with the coaching of the rep teams within the curriculum and development guidelinesis having a very positive impact.
CF has not always done well, but there has been progress. They can do so much better - that seems to be the concensus among the clubs. Parents are harder markers, but then I guess that's no surprise and difficult ground to navigate. CLubs need to be listened too and that hasn't been happening, which is not to CF's credit. That can be fixed.
As to the Premier League. We need a robust Pl in the ACT region. We don't have it yet. CF has a lot of organistational work to do on the subject of the PL and they need to go as widely and collaboratively as possible - not something they are good at for the present. The PL clubs are way ahead of the CF Mens standing committee and the other small sub committee (some of the same people) that assessed PL licences. CF has become serious lead in the saddlebags where the PL development (mens and womens) is concerned I regret to say. That can and must be fixed. The diffferences between the structures for each PL club that has been granted a licence, are the very reasons football people like "Disaster" feels agrreived, because what passes for arrangements at the moment are in a number of cases, falling apart. Look at ther esults for some clubs in some grades of the PL. I'll say more on this in due course.
Thanks for your contributions.
Hans love child, can you read? Where does it say that I think its all about the 1433. Or are you a mind reader? Tell me what im thinking and then tell me im wrong, thats pretty funny...
ReplyDeleteWhite Eagles and Oconnors ability to be in PL is completeley seperate from player development and should not be used as part of some poor argument to make yourself feel better. Why would you single out these 2 great clubs anyway? Why dont know identify yourself and tell us what you really think.
Why cant you have the best teams in the Canberra PL and develop players at the same time?
Straight away! This is the fifth season of this criteria and whats come of it? A weaker lopsided PL? How much longer do you want to wait until the "teething" problems go away?
Are juniors being developed any more than previosly? What about all those juniors who dont make the PL sides and are stuck in Div 1? Thats not development.
CF have done some great things but this criteria is not one of them. Its dividing the football community in Canberra and lowering the standard at the highest level.
Some good points in your last paragraph Peter. Agrreived is one word I would use but what is even more frustrating are these people who write things like...
"You want to be a Premier League Club? Meet the criteria, its pretty simple really".
How simple is it Einstein that in 4 and a half years the majority of Canberra Clubs cant meet it!
I think you need to run your post through the old spell checker peter!
ReplyDeleteBut I think you were agreeing with me about the curriculum? Its a pity there are so many people out there who are ignorant to it and really don't understand what it's all about. Dad worked really hard at developing it so I hope everyone out there is using it!
Should teams like Cooma be in the PL? Probably not (unless they enter a genuine Cooma team). But CF should reward clubs like Woden, Tuggies etc etc who do the right thing and follow the structure. Letting in teams like White Eagle and O'Connor is a backwards step, even if it does provide a (very) short term gain.
Yes I'll watch the spelling. In a bit of a hurry and typing is about as good as my first touch!
ReplyDeleteThe composition of the PL in the ACt region is not easy because not all the clubs offer the complete range of PL grades requirement for a licence. To get a licence these clubs either form alliances with junior clubs (and thats always the shortfall I assure you), or, they do as has been done to my club - whole junior teams or substantial numbers of players over time have been poached, lured away with the promise of succes, money or who knows what. Just occassionally, a coach decides to muster a team to leave because they fell they can;t get what they want at the present club. The motives are not pure, often selfish, but let me assure you again, it can gut a cohort in club that takes years to fix. Frankly it disgusts me. There is no "development" involved here, it all about selfish desire. Club loyalty often runs a long last place.
CF does nothing about this situation, but ask yourself - what would you have them do, after all, people should be free to choose.
This is just the ugly side of PL football - even here in the ACT.
All that said, our PL is fracturing at differnt clubs in different grades and most tables are starting to fall into the can dos and the cannots this season.
Some blended clubs are going well other are not.
CF should put a lot of effort into research our PL and consulting with clubs on the way ahead, run public forums etc. One thing is certain, they don;t have the horsepower resident to make all the decisions going forward, but would you expect them too? I don't.
Isn't the PL fairly competitive anyway?
ReplyDeleteGranted Goulburn Strikers are struggling and Canberra FC are by far and away the best team, but from positions two through to eight I'd argue that on their day any of those sides could beat any of the others.
Is that not healthy? Is this just a pick on Goulburn forum?
Last season Tuggeranong United started off abysmally (lost 1-11 and 1-5 in their first two matches and were pointless after four rounds) but recovered to finish well and defeated Belconnen United at McKellar and drew with Canberra FC at home.
Shouldn't Goulburn be given the same chance? Or should we also kick Canberra FC out of the league because they win every weak and are too good for the competition thus not making it competitive for every one else?
The PL licence is predicated on fiedling four(4) competitive teams - not one - the top grade.
ReplyDeleteThats the most demanding problem for every PL club every season(without regard to funding or facilities). It is also the least investigated or monitored by CF. The variety of arrangements across the clubs, demostrates just how difficult it is to comply with a PL licence and how absolutely essential it is that CF have an informed, visible and continiously engaged part of its organisational structure (not what we have now - that is painfully inadequate for the purpose).
The NPL is very supportiive of Goulburn for a couple of important reasons - firstly, they genuinely reecruit from their area across the grade and they field teams each week, inspite of the difficulties; secondly, this region is important to the future of the game in the ACT region and PL which is model for a PL football club that is msot effeicent for the development of the game, leading as it does to the Southern Tablelands region which one day should become part of the wider ACT region (NSW seem to have little interest in them); thirdly, it takes time to establish your precence in the PL and the Strikers appear to have a sound financial base.
Now, if we focus on the performance of the PL grade only, the performance of PL clubs can get very distorted as it masks performcens in other areas that must be valued. This is undermined by clubs that don;t wish to do the work associted with developing players through the PL grade and prey on other clubs that do. This is the way of football I guess, but in our small pond, it's parasitic behaviour, not to be supported or tolerated. There are limits!
You mention Tuggies - good example - good club that raises and develops its own, is well coached - and for a club like this there is always a place in the PL and not just because occassionaly they pull a rabbitt out of the hat.
We need to have a lot mroe discussion of the shape and future of our PL (Mens and womens). What will CF do to facilitate that - wil they hide behind ineffective sub committees? Lets see.
Premier League hmmm...no lines marked and games get abandoned, no referees, playing on cow paddocks with no facilities, ridiculously lopsided results, teams playing short, 4-3-3 what's that some kind of card game...
ReplyDeleteteething problems?
you are kidding aren't you?
I with you on everything up to 4-3-3.
ReplyDeleteThe Premier League is woefully under adminstered and supported by Capital Football.
The clubs for the most part are doing all they can do to get teams on to the field and find the money to continue. Its a struggel, make no mistake about that and Captial Football do not seem to be as alert, informed, able to provide material assitance, nor do they do much to construct the surrounding infrastructure that will enable this level of football - eg suitbal playing surfaces.
Every weekend you are likely to see some significant shortfall somewhere and it something CF should have sorted out well in advance.
Capital Football must simply change its approach to Premier League football - mes and womens. What we have is not working well enough and most of these issues have been evident for some time. We need fresh ideas, club(s) involvement in decision making - maybe new people and certainly a new adminstrative structure that is dedicated to premier league football. Something!And soon!
Perhaps they should appoint a fulltime premier league manager who is dedicated to just the mens and womens premier leagues. As it stands at the moment the mens and womens league managers are currently responsible for 10+ leagues each ranging from the premier leagues to the masters.
ReplyDeleteAbsolutely correct!
ReplyDelete