Will Capital Football Run A Men's Summer 20s in 2011?

As we are aware, our Mens Premier League Football season in the ACT is too short.

The season is too short to sustain the development of younger players, or enable teams to develop and improve their position over a competition that holds a small number of teams and schedules them to play each other only twice in a season (Fed Cup and pre season do not count).

Not every Mens PL Clubs is enthused by the prospect of a longer regular season, but the majority seem to be in favour. The argument put by CF is that the Fed Cup covers the gap. That's misleading - the Fed Cup is seen as a pre-season playing opportunity and importantly, does not count toward the Premiership.

The Womens PL competition has fewer teams but does schedule teams to play each other three times in their regular season. It works.

Our regular season is now drawing to a close. The time goes quickly.

Football, like so many other big participation sports (and Football is the biggest) demand more of players across a longer section of the calender year. This is particularly the case, if we are to talk in terms of the development of young talented players. No more so than the Under 17 to Under 20 age group.

If you follow the NPL interviews with Ron Smith,  Alfred Galustian, Jan Versliejen  to name just three the NPL has interviewed on talented player development in the last three years; one point is made by them all - the Australian regular football season is too short to provide the sort of sustained competitive development opportunities that enable young players to be as good as they can be. We marvel at the technical proficiency of the visiting Asian teams youth teams and gasp at the amount of training and games they play. The get there by addressing the game in what amounts to a whole of year basis. Ron Smith in his report to the CF Board on high performance / development of young players, made teh requirement for off season activity plain enough. So why are we faultering?

Simple first remedy for us here in the ACT - lengthen the domestic premiership competition and then provide an additional playing opportunity for Clubs to develop their emerging players in the off season

In 2009 Capital Football did something fantastic - it started the Mens Summer 20s! It was an outstanding first effort. Clearly some one had done thinking and got it right. WHy did we go backwards after sucj a good beginning? Far too many questions!

In 2010, Capital Football forgot about the Summer 20s, left the planning and consultation too late to be effective across all the PL CLubs and as a result only three PL Clubs participated (one of whom provided two teams). It was a useful experience but a shadow of the previous year.  It was damn shame and a good initiative was killed off before it took hold. Some PL CLubs had issues with CF over the Summer 20s, but that's another story and there has been plenty of time since to get them straightended out. Has anyone at CF bothered to enquire? Thos damn questions again!

At the time of writing, the PL CLubs are yet to receive any news of a Summer 20's competition for men in 2011. To this point there has been no consultation or communication with the PL Clubs. What are the Regional Reps and Mens Standing Committee doing about this issue? is this something the CF Board could get interested in? It should be, because it is a strategic planning issue, not a simple operational matter. Do the responsible Capital Football staff have sufficient instructions to engage with the PL Clubs on this matter? Will Mens Football for our best Under 17 to 20 players stop in the ACT at the end of this regular season? Looks like it at the moment. Too many questions where there should mostly be answers already in place.

Perhaps Capital Football have something else planned - but if they do, the PL Clubs have not heard about it yet and the time to have been discussing it in a steady, contemplative fashion is now behind us - Summer 20s or no Summer 20s or anything else for that matter.

This can be fixed, but we need some careful consultation with the PL Clubs. No PL Clubs should pass up an opportunity to play in the Summer 20s - if its good enough for CFC, the most successful Club in the last ten years and best current roster in the ACT, to have supported this concept from the outset, why would other PL hesitate? Perhaps they need some assistance, I don't kow for sure. So get them together and talk - Now!

Perhaps this could be seen as a development opportunity for the CF Technical Director to charge of going forward. That would make sense.

But if its off, its off, and if we can't do it well, don't try and say so now.

If CF has an alternate proposal then put it to the Clubs now and not later and in time to deal with it and participate. Some Clubs are already thinking of solving this off season matter and not relying on CF. Not sure that's a good position for CF.

Capital Football made an excellent start in 2009 - let's hope we can improve on that for 2011!

With that in mind, the NPL has sent the following questions to Capital Football. Let you know when we get a answer:

What plans are afoot for the Summer 20s in 2011:



- Who in Capital Football operational staff responsibility for a Summer 20’s competition in 2011?


- Has a 2011 Summer 20s competition been discussed at the CF Board level and if so what was the outcome?


- Has planning begun at CF (if so when?)


- Has a decision been made on the conduct of a Summer 20s competition in 2011?


- What is the current CF planning timeline from whenever planning started (or will start) to advice to Clubs (advice it will not happen or advice of the draw and supporting details)?


- What is the minimum number of teams required to conduct the Summer 20s?


- What is the proposed format (aims and objectives of a Summer 20s etc)?


- Competition rules (where different from mens PL currently in use)?

- Have the PL clubs been formally contacted about entering a team?


- Playing location / time?


- Canteen responsibilities?


- Player registration costs and basis of calculation of these costs to Clubs?


- Is the Mens Standing Committee involved in the planning of this competition and if so what is their role and who is involved?


- When will Capital Football advise Club of the Summer 20s (go ahead or no competition) and how will the Clubs be advised?


- Will Capital Football hold a meeting of interested Clubs to discuss the Summer 20s competition in 2011?


- What financial assistance will CF give to Clubs to participate in the Summer 20s.

NPL and CEO Capital Football Discuss Some Football Issues - Part 2

This program is broadcast on 2xxfm (98.3mhz), across the Australian Community Radio Network, on Tuesday at 7:00PM.

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:

Goulburn Strikers FC Are Here To Stay!

This program was broadcast on 2xxfm (98.3mhz) across the Australian Community Radio Network, on Tuesday, 3 May 2011 at 7:00PM.

This program is given to the Goulburn Strikers participation in the Capital Football Premier League.

It’s no secret that the Strikers have had a hard start to the 2011 season, with some big losses in the pre-season Federation Cup and the extra-ordinary misfortune of meeting CFC in the opening round of the 2011 competition, loosing all grades and amassing a total of 70 goals against themselves. It must have been a long drive back to Goulburn.

In fact, the Goulburn Strikers have been experiencing difficulties since the middle of the 2010 season, their first season in the Premier League, following a stellar start to the entry to the CF Premier League at the commencement of the 2010 Federation Cup. Who can forget their game against CFC in the Fed Cup final, the very team that handed out a such a hiding last weekend. But my guess is that CFC will hand out double digit defeats to a few PL teams this season and the Strikers are likely to find themselves in good company before the season is over. But that’s another story and doesn’t help the Strikers become more competitive in 2011.

Perhaps the troubling aspect of the Strikers First round in 2011 is that scope / magnitude of the defeats across all four PL grades. That got everyone’s attention among the other Premier League Clubs last Sunday. It wasn’t pretty. The trouble that beset the Strikers in the latter half of 2010, was more than any Club should endure and ravaged their playing rosters.

What will Capital Football do about this situation was the most frequent comment last Sunday on the sidelines and subsequently among many the Premier League Football community. This thought ran in close company with another – this is not good for the other Premier League clubs and surely the Strikers will not be able to sustain repeated severe losses across the grades. Premier League Club officials, supporters and players who had gone through tough times themselves at their Club in past seasons, had no doubt how hard the road would be in front of the Strikers.

There is a lot of goodwill for the Strikers among the Football community. And that brings the discussion and spotlight back on Capital Football.

This is a very sensitive matter and a substantial test for Capital Football going forward. How accommodating and flexible can Capital Football or will Capital Football be in this matter. How much wiggle room do the Strikers feel they have going forward with a season just begun? Its important to understand the Football environment in which the Goulburn Strikers exist and it’s not like any other I have encountered.

Easy to conclude that the Strikers should not be in the PL. And if that is your conclusion, I think you are wrong.

We must persevere with the strikers and by that I don’t mean go easy on them.

As the scores came in from Deakin on Sunday, some wise Club Football people began to think and communicate on the subject of how CF could help the Strikers remain in Premier League. One thought from a former Club President showed just how smart and pragmatic some of our Club people are: perhaps Capital Football could make the necessary adjustments to competition rules and licence provisions, and excuse them from the Premier League level and allow them to reorganise to play PL Pathways, PL18 and PL16 in 2011 and until they are ready to be competitive in the top level in Premier League. So simple and so pragmatic. But of course, this discussion was without the benefit of knowing how the Strikers might feel about things. Those speaking seem to all agreed that Capital Football should take the initiative and create circumstances that can keep the Strikers in the Premier League, without regard to competition rules – rules can be changed.

This discussion gave rise to an interesting point, one that is a sore point among the personnel of the two clubs in this football discussion – has Capital Football asked the other Premier League Clubs how they feel about the Strikers predicament? Consultation! Not likely was the view. Pity, I thought, because I don’t know of one club that wouldn’t want to help if they could. But how do they get into a discussion that also affects their Football future this season and into the future?

Consider the strategic implications for Capital Football implicit in the Goulburn Strikers continuation in the Capital Football Premier League. As the President, Tim McGrath, says – “Goulburn is the Campbelltown of Canberra.” I wonder why the STFA just doesn’t simply leave NSW and join Capital Football. Perhaps that’s something the CF Board could turn its mind too.

There are numerous strengths to the Strikers organisation and their regional representation (southern tablelands) is something that must be maintained through these early years. They sit across a wide player attachment area and give absolute priority to the development and promotion of the home grown player in a region that is poorly serviced by Football NSW. The Strikers are financially sound, have a robust and experienced committee, strong community support and sponsorship, and teams well coached. Their constitution specifically precludes payments to players, over the ordinary reimbursement of costs. All this and more does nothing to immediately make the 2011 playing roster more robust, but it does provide a precious base for future success. They are exactly the sort of community based club we want in the Premier League.

The Goulburn Strikers have endured the off season from hell. The drama around the departure of their coach and the subsequent departure of a number of senior players, seems to sit at the heart of the problems. It also included the closure of the club website. Very unpleasant stuff.

And then - only today I was told that the Goulburn (STFA) U15 Boys (it has been referred to as a “rep team of players from the region that would have played in the local competition) had moved to what I have been told is a Canberra based Premier League club for 2011. The President of Strikers confirmed that this is so, but thought it might be Queanbeyan, who also play in the CF competitions – but are no longer a PL club). As if it wasn’t hard enough for the Strikers! I hope these young players haven’t been poached and return to Strikers next year. No doubt they would have been an important influence on the Club’s PL16 playing roster for 2011 had they remained. Surely Capital Football (and the relevant Standing committees) understood the implications of this undertaking and if so, why did they agree to it? This is not the first time this sort of thing has happened to CF PL clubs and it’s a real shame that CF does nothing to discourage it from happening. Capital Football seem to be quick enough to make rules and pursue other far less important matters.

If you think you know what happened to the GS in the off season, I’ll bet you don’t, I don’t think the CEO CF did until CF met with the GS last week. If Capital Football (including the League Standing Committee) did comprehend the difficulties that the Goulburn Strikers were encountering in late 2010, why did they not intervene, consult with and provide guidance and/or assistance? Probably because they just didn’t join the dots.

Fortunately, the Goulburn Strikers have moved on, they are not looking for handouts, they are concentrating on retaining their Premier League licence at the end 2012. They are a PL Club that is sticking with the principles which underpin their Clubs foundation. But this is far from over for this Club and there must be something that can be done to assist that gives hope for this season and importantly, 2012.

We begin with an extract from a discussion I had with the CEO CF – just prior to a meeting CF had with the GS. Then it’s on to the Pres of GS, Tim McGrath. You’ll be impressed by this fellow. Take him at his word.

Download Podcast here:

Draft Playing Dates For Mens Season 2011

Capital Football have advised all Senior Clubs that the draft playing dates for season 2011 are as listed below. The reference to 2010 on the top of the table should read 2011 (Ops!)

The following advice was recieved by the club with this table and may be of some assistance:

"As per the Mens League Review it is Capital Football’s intention to have ten team competitions throughout the State League and Masters competitions. A further reminder of the change in kick off times for many of the Saturday State League competitions (available in the Mens League news).Please note that there will be a different format for the Federation Cup in 2011. The Federation Cup will consist of nine Premier League Clubs and three invited clubs from State League One. The competition will consist of two pools of six teams playing five matches. The two pool winners will play in the Cup Final."

Another Word On Player Payments

This subject has caused a lot of discussion.

Some feedback from thse that have spoken to me in the last few days (and there has been plent of it!):

One thing is clear thus far, from those that have approached me to discuss the matter (on this Blog and on the sidelines - futsal and football) - many, many people resent the idea of having to work hard in a voluntary capacity to raise money to pay players for players who train twice a week and play on Sunday. These same people see it as a waste of time and effort, something that does not "develop" the game. Most of the same people, seem to also be of the view that once you get into "serious" football (they use the Canberra United players and a representative  Mens team from Canberra in the NSW or Victorian Premier League as examples), then we should expect to give players some remuneration. Our local Premier League doesn't qualify they say, for that sort of consideration. They have been unanimous in one comment thus far - Capital Football doesn't do enough to "develop" football, they make Clubs and players pay for just about everything to be part of Football and playing Football is an expensive business now for every player at every level of the game and by that they mean parents as well as young adults with full or part time jobs.

However, its worth remebering that when we talk to "Clubs", that is club officials with their "Club" hat one, they are more cautious. Every Club wants the best players they can get and most club officials are hard headed enough to know that players will shop around to get what they can by way of match payments - if they are on offer.

Its importnat in this discussion not to demonize the players - if some one offerred you $150 a match to play what you love doing, in good company, with  a better chance of a premiership, you'd probably take the money too. Players wont change this situation - only Clubs can do that.

Some further observations on player payments by me:

This is a tough subject. I admire Belconnen United and Canberra FC because over many years of effort by many, many people, they have built an incredibly solid structure to support football.  They are where the rest of us want to be. And they do demand good football as an outcome.

I have no interest in any Club that get a big handout from a large sponsor every year and have nothing to show for it and no interest in Junior Football. A Club official in a junior club a few weeks ago told me that he had been approached to allow a PL CLub to store equipment in the off season in their shed. "This Pl CLub didn't even have a shiiping container to their name to store their gear and they are going to help us?" he said in disbelief. They have no place in Premier League Football.

The status of "Premier League Club", should be held in high regard, because with it goes some serious community football responsibilities - not just the winning of a Premiership. Both Belconnen United and Canberra FC have the football power to do great good for Football in the ACT - they are / have been involved in some terrific community / charity works. And so they should. A much better use of funds than sticking dollars in players pockets at our level.

My difference of opinion is over the need to pay players to play at the Captial Football Premier League level. It brings a lot of unpleasant stuff with it. I guess the explanation for its happening is simple enough - if you have the money to spend on player payments, to secure a stronger playing roster and win a Premiership, then its an easy step to take.

But its still a very dumb thing to do in my opinion.

Better to have players who want to play, because they want to play, and want to play for your Club and stay with your club. Money, by way of player paments gets in the way of everything - most importantly - Club loyalty. Once it starts at community level football, you can never be sure that the players are with you because you pay them or because they like football at your Club or both. Players' attitudes change and not for the good.

If you want to pay anyone, pay the Coaches a little something and the person in every PL Club who does what might be called the PL manager / Coordinators job - you can bet this will be a net positive investment, because they never stop working for the Club and players, and nearly always put their hands in their pockets to cover off on little expenses and cost during a season. They are worth every penny you pay! There are equivalents in every football club at every level. They are the real football heroes in my book.

What will the Men's Premier League Football Competition Look Like In 2011?

The Capital Football MSAC (Men's Standing Advisory Committee) has met with Premier League CLubs in recent weeks to discuss concerns arising from the 2010 season and requirements for the 2011 season.

The outcome of the meetings is among others things - to settle the form and structure of the Men's Premier League Competition for 2011.

All good so far. Its always nice to talk, but far more important that we get outcomes that provide good opportunities for our players, ensure that all games (PL to Pl16) are played on first class playing surfaces, that costs are reduced to particpatiing Clubs, Clubs remain in a helathy financial state, ensure that PL Clubs make robust efforts to develop junior pathways to the Premier League, and that we build the game and all the Clubs within the Premier League. These few things come immediately to mind because they are the ones that get talked about most often on the sidelines and at training among Clubs officials, players and supporters.

Now you may recall that there is also a "Mens League Review" also underway, which is due to report soon.

You would expect the MSAC's advice on the 2011 season and the Review outcomes / recommendations to be consistent, at least in so far as the 2011 season is concerned. But does the MSAC advice for 2011 indicate the "Review" recomendations? I guess we wait and see.

In the meantime, how did the lads on the MSAC do at this years exam?

The advice from the MSAC does little to fill the hearts of some Premier League Clubs with joy. Not sure how they all feel about it. The competition remains at two rounds (Womens PL is at three), so we have less PL competition football than last season, The Federation Cup continues in its tired old form and is offerred as the substitute for a lack f a third round in the PL Competition (there were workable alternatives to include the awarding of the Fed Cup in the PL competition). There is the dubious priviledge of increased entry fes for the Fed Cup (amount not known, just that its going up), which is news Clubs did not need. Start and finish dates and that's it. Wow, the lads had to really work hard for that outcome! I guess the rest is in the review.

What really annoys is that we could have had a longer Premier League competition and that is something we really did need.

These were the options put to the Clubs:

Further to the PL cubs meetings held over the last two nights and the brief overview (details below) of the 2011 competition options discussed, I am seeking your clubs position on the proposals by Wednesday 6 October 2010.
Both options are made on the assumption that there will be nine teams in the Premier League in 2011 and there will be no football over the Easter weekend. The options are only aimed at assisting the short fall in fixtures for 1st Grade.

Option 1:
1st Grade will play three rounds of Home and Away 27 rounds-24 matches and 3 byes
1st round will begin on 12 March and will be completed the Wednesday after Easter. (This round will include 3 mid-week double headers).
The round would utilise the grounds normally available for the Federation Cup and will therefore not be strictly Home/Away
Lower grades will then join in on the first Saturday after Easter and play two rounds on normal club competition.
There will be no weekends off for the remainder of the year apart from the two byes.
Federation Cup may be taken up as a midweek FA cup knock out style competition.


Option 2:
Federation Cup will begin 12 March and will consist of twelve teams (PL clubs plus ANU. Queanbeyan City & White Eagles). It will be split into two pools guaranteeing each club five matches and will be completed prior to Easter. The two pool winners will play off for the Cup Final.
Competition will begin after Easter with two Home and Away rounds 18 rounds (16 matches and 2 byes). There will be no weekends off.
One club may have three weekends off if they do not play in the Cup Final and draw a bye in the 1st round of the competition.
This option will guarantee 1st grade teams with 21 matches over the season.

This is what the MSAC advised yesterday to all PL Clubs:

Thank you to all for your feedback in regards to season 2010 through the recent Premier Clubs meeting.Capital Football Board met on Monday 25 October and the MSAC met on 1 November and I can now confirm the following:
· All existing clubs have had their Premier League licences confirmed until the end of season 2012.
· The Board has accepted the withdrawal of ANU FC and the Premier League competitions will continue with the remaining nine clubs until season 2012 has been completed. Every effort will be made by Capital Football to alleviate any issues in regards to the bye which has been created by the withdrawal of ANU FC.
· The MSAC can now confirm the following in regards to competition structure and dates for season 2011:
Federation Cup will kick off on the weekend of 12 March 2011 and will continue for five weeks for all teams. The final will be on 17 March 2011. The Federation Cup will consist of 12 teams (9 PL plus 3 from SL1). Please note that currently the Federation Cup is not sponsored and there will be no prize money, but the winner will receive a rebate on their entry fee. Capital Football is also reviewing the costs for the Federation Cup and there will be an increase in the entry fee (details will be made available soon).
The Premier League competition will kick off on weekend 30 April 2011 after the Easter weekend. There will be no free weekends unless one of your teams has a bye. PL competition will finish on 21 August 2011 with the Grand Finals on 17 September 2011.

There will be further news covering off on the results from the Mens League Review in the next week.

Well now, what can be said of this situation?