Junior Elite Leagues

Black Hawk · Post by **Black Hawk** » Sun Sep 03, 2006 6:25 pm

For comment, this is circulating around clubs;

At the request of the Junior Standing Committee I have been requested to seek a response from all clubs currently playing in the Super, Premier and State Leagues with regards to the following.

This Committee has been charged with the task of bringing all Junior football into one co-ordinated and structured body.

This body will hopefully operate under the auspices of the FFSA, and be inclusive of all current associations â€“ schools, colleges and country associations covering all girls and boys playing junior football in South Australia.

The Committee have agreed that an Elite competition be formed exclusive only to Junior teams of the Super, Premier and State League clubs.

This competition is to be totally focused on quality and not quantity with a player base of 16 players per age group.

This Elite competition will be inclusive of teams from U11 to U17 years of age and restricted to one team per age group.

The Under 11 age group will be competitive, bringing it into line with other Associations in the State.

All games will be played on a Sunday.

Suggested format of this Elite League is to follow Senior League program
ie Playford vs Salisbury on a Saturday â€“ all Junior teams of these 2 clubs play each other on the Sunday.

Sunday fixtures â€“ Playford host U11, U12 & U13, Salisbury host U14, U15 & U17 (U16 to be ratified)

Advantages of above programming
Brings conformity to: -
Fixtures, number of games played, Season begins and ends at same time for everyone, no catch up games to be arranged etc.
Efficient use of resources, Grounds and Clubrooms.
Volunteers â€“ Job satisfaction guaranteed by having plenty of customers and activity around the canteen and clubrooms.

Referees â€“ will be appointed to a ground for the whole morning and not be expected to drive to different venues as is the current situation.
This will save our Referees money therefore encouraging them to get out of bed on a Sunday morning.

Income â€“ minimum of 3 home games every Sunday + the younger age group teams.

All of the above will provide a platform for our Elite Junior players to achieve their potential in a quality based, well organised program.

Outcome â€“ is there any reason why we cannot start this Competition in 2007?

Perceived negatives â€“ no B or C teams from U11 to U17.

Would the above Competition not realise greater benefits in the near future?

Do we need to have 2 competitions for 2007 to allow us to have an orderly transition into the new Elite Competition?
Therefore 2007 would comprise of the Elite League plus another league probably called Central Metropolitan for clubs with B teams.

The Committee is currently working on a model to provide access to all junior players with a pathway from schools, junior associations and country associations to have positive links to this Elite Competition, ensuring that all junior players have a clear and transparent access to achieve their goals and ambitions.

We believe this is a positive step in the future of Junior Soccer in this State and look forward to your comments and responses.

My thoughts are;
Most importantly I believe there is a need for a Central Metropolitan League for "B" type teams. This is because of the great difference between "club" football and school or college based competitions and coaching.

Given the natural dropout rate during the years 14-19 if all clubs started with 16 under 11 boys and the "rest" had to play school or in many high school instances no football by the time the clubs were looking for 17-19 year olds there will be a great shortage.

The capture point for club football must be like a funnel with a large opening at the start. I am sure there are senior players in the Super and Premier leagues that would not have been there if not for "B" teams or other clubs if they had to "make" the best 16 at their local either as an 11 or 12 year old.

povman_2009 · Post by **povman_2009** » Sun Sep 03, 2006 10:22 pm

The limit on elite clubs player numbers is an interesting issue, this has been an issue of mine for a while where Super Sized clubs are drawing so many players to them that the other clubs were struggling to field teams.
The secondary competition would have to be the backbone of the games development.

I can see this being a contraversial subject and look forward to seeing peoples comments.

English · Post by **English** » Sun Sep 03, 2006 11:20 pm

Its always going to be a contencious (sp?) issue, do we try and make sure our future clubs have very good players right the way through or do we give the ones who really need a hand a chance to try and improve their game?

Because as this sounds we'd be trying to push the lesser players out of the game, and if thats the case then I wouldnt be coaching an U/13s team next year as only a few are upto the standard.

Having said that a co ordinated fixture list/league would be awesome and like it says referees would be retained.

Is this just for Federation clubs? ie would amatuer clubs keep the same format?

mattieg1200 · Post by **mattieg1200** » Mon Sep 04, 2006 8:35 am

yeh i rekon that shud b enforced straight away asap it would b good 4 the game in south australia

BillShankly · Post by **BillShankly** » Mon Sep 04, 2006 8:42 am

meant to be just for federation English.

I dont like the proposal it seems its suited for certain clubs who are struggling for players at the moment and will benefit from their position in the super league etc to get youth players to fill up their junior sides i.e. white city, enfield etc

There is nothing wrong with the juniors set up at the moment, most competitions are fair and pretty close at the top as well and the standard is at a good to high standard.

Drusetta · Post by **Drusetta** » Mon Sep 04, 2006 9:01 am

Black Hawk

Re: Elite Junior League circulation. Is there any more information oin addition to what you posted or was all of it? I'm interested to find out more - if it exists. Thanks

Black Hawk · Post by **Black Hawk** » Mon Sep 04, 2006 2:03 pm

It is the only info I have. It is up to us to influence our club chairman.

If teams are cut there will be no soccer for some boys aged 13+ because whilst the colleges run games, most high schools do not have teams. This would be a travesty and very damaging to the game long term. We already have issues filling U19 teams, imagine if extra boys are forced out at 13 or cannot get "club" coaching from 11+. I say we need a large funnel feeding the FFSA that eventually tightens up at around the U19 age.

povman_2009 · Post by **povman_2009** » Mon Sep 04, 2006 2:50 pm

Come and join us in the E&D , always welcome, I have actually had a young lad come to my team this year from the Fed setup, quite a handy player in our level, but couldn't command a regular place in a fed team, he is happy to help work with the other kids and our team is happy to have his experience. A good result all round.

Anonymous · Post by **Anonymous** » Mon Sep 04, 2006 3:10 pm

poor idea, firstly your e.g playford v salisbury.salisbury have no junior teams! Just because senior teams have resouces such as money to spend on players and therefore be competitive their juniors may be poor,e.g white city.if we go down those tracks we will get lopsided games in junior games. top division hammerings dont help either team. Clubs who recruit quality and numbers should be applauded not held back.The current system is working fine by having plenty of talent in the Div 1 as well a div 3 in most age grouyps therefore averaging 30 teams per age groups.Get rid of the under 16 comp though there should be 2 years betyween ages . Under 16 = mickey mouse comp.

corona · Post by **corona** » Mon Sep 04, 2006 5:05 pm

wont happen , thats final , this was brought up last year and the year before , just another rumour .

strawney · Post by **strawney** » Mon Sep 04, 2006 8:43 pm

I think the system is working ok as it is. Don`t change it.
Spoke with a FFSA official at the weekend about this & he said that the FFSA standing comittee was voting on the proposal this week. He himself was against it.

robinfriday :Re: also agree about the U/16 League. Should be scraped.
( wouldn`t really call it a Mickey Mouse Comp. Not fair on the players )
Have some very good teams in that league, Some that can put some U/17 teams to shame. But were forced into that position because Clubs were led to believe that it was compulsory to have a 16`s league in 2006.

CdOtzi · Post by **CdOtzi** » Mon Sep 04, 2006 9:05 pm

Don't deny kids who want to play the game the oportunity whether it be in a B or C Division competition. If you want to promote an elite league create 2 new Divisions with an open Junior age limit (15 to Under 17) and (12 to Under 14). Let the best players (eligible in each age group) play in this league.

Just a thought for discussion.

jets · Post by **jets** » Mon Sep 04, 2006 9:32 pm

Can i just ask why so many people are against a 16s league. the soccer is of a high level not matter what any one thinks it also does pull some main clubs into more teams and more kids playin a good thing if you ask me.

Huddo #3 · Post by **Huddo #3** » Mon Sep 04, 2006 10:28 pm

you've got it in one jets, agreed

billy the kid · Post by **billy the kid** » Thu Sep 07, 2006 11:36 am

Read my comments re: Coerver closing in SA they are also relevant to this topic Unfortunately.

South Aussies are no longer renowned for their foresight, generosity and entrepreneurship. Plus we're all tightwads and would not invest (time or money) into our kids playing development.

NSW is the only palce in Oz that has actually forged a way forward and this is shown in the Senior, Junior and Women's playing ranks. Do your math on SA representation in National squads.

Anonymous · Post by **Anonymous** » Mon Sep 11, 2006 10:39 am

reason 4 s.a lack of reps in aussie squads is our size! we go into every state tournament ranked 4th. behind nsw,vic,qld. when they pick a squad of 18 for national sides its always going to be hard.you have to be realistic.just because we should be ranked 4th does;nt mean we can't finish higher or lower. it just depends on that years quality and depth.after just coming back from sapsasa state titles and watching our boys finish 4th just losing to qld with last kick of game but losing 2-0 to vic and nsw i think not to far off but population numbers in aust show some reflection.this doesn't always reflect around the globe.look at england as example.

billy the kid · Post by **billy the kid** » Mon Sep 11, 2006 1:37 pm

Size does not matter. If your summation is correct then we just oughta stop the whole idea of SA developing players and let them either transfer to NSW, or utilise a professionally run academy or follow another sport. Because if you're in SA you've got NO Hope!

From your posting we're not too far off (after watching SAPSASA). Unfortunatley its just far enough to keep us away from being there.

Anonymous · Post by **Anonymous** » Mon Sep 11, 2006 2:00 pm

of course there is hope and of course we will produce players capable of playing for australia,but generalizing we will always be underdogs and will NEVER supply more internationals than NSW.Sport in general is run from the eastern states so not only do players dominate the market so do coaches. Why did farina get the job over david mitchell, because Labozetta had final vote and he was part of soccernsw. Why do Nsw dominate aussie cricket team? Not just talent alone. But with their numbers they should dominate to a degree. It doesnt mean we CANT beat them , just means generally 7 out of ten we probably won't.John Aloisi has proved we can produce them but not to the same degree as eastern states.I am a realist who supports underdogs!