Changes to junior football?

Changes to junior football?

It seems that Capital Football are thinking of making changes to the junior structure. The idea seems to be at 13th and 14th grade you play for the clubs and then from there above you play for your school.

dairyflat2007-11-14 12:41:06

That's pretty much what happens now.

I attended the Capital football meeting about this in Sept. Seemed from the meeting Hutt/Mana/Kapiti clubs werent to keen on it and the town clubs didnt give a stuff as they most dont put much effort into their juniors (maybe harsh as they they already lose all their players to schools).

Do junior club players and schools players get registered with Capital Football?

Many schools are totally unable to give any quality opportunity in either coaching or playing. My own school Mana College runs a mid week football team in the College Sport League but it is most definitely a social side catering for students who otherwise would not enjoy a sport playing opportunity. Any players with clubs coming up through their systems with proper coaching, and who show any level of talent remain with the clubs (for example Western Suburbs) and play in the weekend competitions. West provide trained coaches with qualifications which we cannot match.

As a Deputy Principal and a football administrator (Porirua City FC) I have to say that he current arrangement suits us and our kids well.

ive just finshed college football.... and i can see both sides of the argument here. on one hand you  have colleges that probably could support players and that have in the past developed talent such as your wellington colleges st pats (s) rongatai onslow newlands etc etc... its these lower developed schools that struggle who have 1 or 2 decent footballers there where as the rest of the team is just there for a laugh and to break someones leg. in the past i have been in college teams where clubs say were having him etc etc hes not avaliable to play for school.. (normally wests) put it this way u can play college 1st x1 football for 3 years at most you can play club football for the next 40 years??? if your college is good enough play for that or else stick to the club. your thoughts.

The problem is that we in effect have two leagues running, of roughly the same size (number of teams) , and both are struggling to get quality.

The Capital Football solution is pass the league on to College Sport Wellington from 15th grade and above.  There will be provision for club teams to be badged with a college name, as long as they have a majority of players from the college.  However this proposal will be detrimental to the players (IMHO) for the following reasons.

• Colleges are only interested in the elite (as are some clubs).  If they continue this focus, will there be a drop off in those kids that currently find a place in a club team?  Will the clubs have the numbers to form effective teams to play in the College league?
• What happens to the players that leave school before 17?  If they�re any good, they can play Senior football, but if not, but just a player who enjoys participating in the game, will there be a space available in club junior teams?
• Girls currently can play in mixed gender teams right up to 16/17th Grade.  Good female players can remain in a challenging team with the better boys.  Under this proposal, they will be moved to a competition of dubious quality, played on a Tuesday.  College Sport do not appear to have any serious interest in girl�s soccer.
• It has always been the Capital Football philosophy that soccer is played in clear age grades and only exceptional players be played up.  College football seems to have an opposing value � the best play with the best.  My son will be 14 in the year he is in 15th Grade � even if he was good enough, I would be horrified to think he could be playing every week against 17 year olds.  The physical gap is just too big.
• This is the model run by cricket and to a lesser extent rugby.  The number of cricket clubs running junior cricket has dropped by one on average each year over the past 6 years, while the number of senior cricket clubs has remained static.  The attitude seems to be �why waste the effort of developing talent at junior levels when they lose any affiliation to a club.  Easier just to pay (good) players when they come out of the colleges at the other end�.  A good example of this is Naenae have a pathetically weak junior cricket structure, but they outperform Hutt Districts at senior level, despite Hutt Districts being the largest junior club in the federation.
• Rugby people tell me that the colleges are paying silly money for elite players, but don�t care about the rest.
• I believe that parents and kids should have a choice where their football is played.  If I send my son to a college that has a great academic record, but is only interested in Rugby, I know I always have an alternative in the clubs, and it is my choice.  To me this proposal is no different to Capital Football telling the clubs that anyone north of Mitchell Street that they have to play for Lower Hutt, because they live closer to Fraser Park than the Raceway.  Players should have the freedom to play with their mates if is physically possible.

However, the proposal has been put on hold for the 2008 season, after realisation that the timeframe was too short for any agreement.  The working parties will continue to develop the idea for 2009.

Currently junior club team are registered, and so players are indirectly affiliated to CF, and NZF.  This includes college teams playing in the Capital Football Saturday leagues, such as St Bernards in the Hutt Valley League.

College Sport Wellington teams are not affiliated to CF or to NZF, however this proposal does include an attempt to bring them into the umbrella in some way.

Club versus College football goes back many years and the bust up in the northern region end in court over player eligability. I will take a lot to bring college football back to the clubs but it is not impossible. As teachers cut back the extra outside school (unpaid) coaching club will be able to edge there way in by supporting the school teams with coaching help.   It is not a quick fix item though.

(edited to get rid of some html garbage in the middle.  Sorry)
Implementation of this proposal has now been delayed for the 2008 season.  The working parties will continue to "work on defining the issues and proposing solutions to them" in 2008.

However, there will be some major changes to junior football at the younger age levels.  Basically the research suggests that we play full sized teams on full sized pitches too early.  As part of a 3 year implementation plan to lower this level, Capital Football junior teams will have their player numbers reduced each year until 2010.

Note:  No team will have less players than they had in the previous year, they just will not increase as quickly as the previous team structure.

For 2008 the team sizes are

    2008    2007
6th      4        6    Note
7th      6        6
8th      6        6
9th      7        8
10th    8       11
11th    11     11



6th Grade is currently only played as a Capital Football league in the Hutt Valley.  This is a hangover from the assimilation of the sub-associations.

Needless to say, Pitch sizes that these games are to be played on will also be adjusted.

By 2010, 13th Grade will be the point that teams actually get to 11 a side on full sized pitches.  However it appears that the entry point for competitive leagues will remain at 10th level Promotion Grade.  Therefore JPL will be played at 11th and 12th Grades with 9 a side by 2010. Crazy-Horse2008-01-17 14:05:40

thats bullocks. play full sized pitches and teams at jpl. the younger you get used to it the better. no wonder obesity is taking over smoking as number 1 for preventable death becuase idiots like capital soccer decide kids cant run an extra 30 metres. bobdylan2008-01-17 14:13:41

Pitch size has little to do with it.  The research suggests that small sided games are better for skills development, more time on the ball, etc etc...

I have no issues with the research, apart from one of the main proponents being Manchester United with their 4 vs 4 Pilot Scheme for Under 9s.  One of the concepts that this scheme brought in was no referees, and the under 9 players controlling the games themselves.

Why kids play soccer/football/any sport has been well researched, but one good summary can be found at http://tinyurl.com/yo36kt

The biggest resistance to these changes will not come from the players, I suspect but from the parents.  So often we see parents  (and coaches) in junior football almost trying to live their dreams of sporting success through their kids lives.

Crazy horse - what research. Its just an unsubstantiated claim unless you quote or cite it with reference/s. Mr Blobby2008-01-17 16:02:41

Sorry, I was aware that this was an academic forum. 

The material I was particularly referring to were:

Fenoglio R.A. 2004. "The Manchester United Pilot Scheme for U9s - Part II" Insight - FA Coach's Association Journal. pp.30-31

Fenoglio R.A. 2004. "The Manchester United Pilot Scheme for U9s - Part I" Insight - FA Coach's Association Journal. pp.13-14

Fenoglio R.A. 2003. "A 4 v 4 Pilot Scheme for U9 Academy Football Players" for Football Association, FA Premier League, Football League and Manchester United Football Club. Manchester Metropolitan University. pp.250

However, there are other references.

Allpress J. 2002. 4v4 - A way Forward for the 7 to 10 year olds.  Insight - FA Coach's Association Journal. pp.22-24

www.nscaa.com/coachingtips/PlayerDevelopment/69744.html  (This link may be members only, but I can scan and email it if anyone is interested.  PM me)

Mr Blobby
I think you misunderstand the postings.

1.  I am vehemently opposed to giving any level of control over Junior Football to the colleges, and have posted several times in this and other forums making that obvious.  (See my post of 22 December).

2.  I earlier today posted that the proposal from the Board of Capital Football to hand over the 15 year olds and above to the colleges had been put on hold for 2008, but is be looked at for the future.

3.  In addition in that post I highlighted other changes to the lower levels of junior football which Capital Football have the agreement of the clubs to bring in.  These mostly range around small sided games up to and including 13th grade by 2010.  (In fact, if Capital Football get their way on both changes, kids will only have one year of 11 a side, before they go off to College Sport.)  It was these changes that I suggested the research seems to justify in producing better skills.

Martin

smithy2462008-01-17 21:45:39

I am aware that one club has got an guiding opinion from the Human Rights Commissioner in the last couple of years, however my understanding is that the particular college pulled their head in, in that case, before it got taken further.

Yep I've heard that same story.  To the best of my limited knowledge though no school has actually ever allowed itself to be sued.  Schools tend to go through phases of enforcement.  Roger Moses was very strident about playing for the school when he first arrived, but has since moderated his approach at Wellington College and a number of players have played club football rather than for the 1st XI.  Below the 1st XI the school doesn't really bother to care.  St Pat's Stream and St Pat's Town are both still quite firm about it I believe and if you're at those schools and any good, because of it being a smaller pond, you tend to be more on the radar.  Scots I think also have a strong rule based on a "if you choose to come here and pay your money you have to live by our rules" sort of logic.

For State Schools it's ultimately unenforceable I think.
smithy2462008-01-17 22:04:33

It is against the bill of rights to force a pupil to play for school rather than play for club... I remember a case nearly 8 years ago when a stop out player (who was a very good player) was attending st pats silverstream college and they were forcing him to play for school and upper hutt football club rather than his favoured club and stop out took them to court and stop out won.. it made press and the school straight away stoped pressuring students but the sad thing was this student who i will not name was scared for life after the bullying and harrasment he got from teachers and students... Any college who pressures a player to play for them instead of club better watch out because by law they cant do it... unless special conditions apply when enrolling for the school which are very unlikely.... I Think its sad any school would bully its pupils into anything being teachers or pupils but the matter is they dont have the right its against the bill of rights

Any school who bullies a student into playing for the school instead of club i strongly suggest the club takes action because the school has no sh*t show in hell of winning...

However, if parents/students have picked a particular school for other issues, such as academic, or special character, and then get forced to make a choice - college or club for football, it is very easy to say it's only for a couple of years.  Why should we take on the hierarchy of the college?  Particularly when the extra bonus of overseas trips with JV are tantalizingly hinted at.

The school may be legally and morally in  trouble, but finding parents/pupils strong enough to take them on is difficult.  As I understand, the particular case you referred to resulted in the player giving the game away for some time.

The same college was still trying the issue in 2007,  and have the following sentence in their enrolment document...." In the Winter season, all students are required to play for a College team. They are not permitted to play by preference for an outside Club nor will they be exempted from attendance at sports practices which are held after school."

If you have accepted this statement when you enroll, it may be a little difficult to argue differently two years later when they want you to play 1st or 2nd  11, and you want to remain in the club team.

Can they plead the fifth amendment?

Yes, and they have the right to bear arms.

Now THAT is funny

who would wanna play for a club anyway when your at school. youve got 2 or 3 years to play for you 1st x1 maybe 4 if your decent. youve got 30 friggin years after that to play club. play for your school and with your mates while you can i say u can't get better football than that.

At the age of 16 some players are good enough to start playing senior football and i think the sooner you start playing senior football the better you will be as a player... I played through at school in the Colleges Premier competition but i dont know about now but we kicked off at 11 o clock then i went down and played atleast a half for the club who i was with at the time reserves or 1st team whats wrong with playing for your school in the morning and your club in the afternoon?

yea i used to do that 2... sure college football might not be the same standard as club football but id far rather play at national tournament for school than play in sume piece of sh*t vs plamy north marist in the central league. 

That's a point that often gets left out of this discussion too.  Clubs kick up a fuss when their star players start playing for their school, assuming that the player has been 'poached' when in fact most kids will want to play for their school, as bobdylan says, with their mates for a few years.

but what happens to your club team if you get injured during your school game or sent off because you arent allowed to play for your club team until you have served your suspension? dont u think that they wuldnt be happy to get a call an hour before kick off saying that you cant play because you got injured or sent off playing for school.

Depends on the which league you're in.

I got a Red card while playing for Club and coped a 1 week suspension and the following year i did the same.. On both Counts i wasnt allowed to play for my College 1st  XI team in Premier Youth Grade or My Club While Serving the Suspension... I guess It Depends what grade your in aswell.. Im sure you would get away with it if you were playing lower down the grades..

The last few posts have been about schools 1st 1x's. Theres more kids that dont make the 1st x1 than do. Should these kids just drop out, as many currently do?

Strangely enough there is a very simple two part solution to the club versus college issue.

1.  Let kids/Parents choose where the players want to play - be it club or college

2.  Organize a combined league for both clubs and college teams to participate in against each other.


See, a simple solution!  As I'm an ideas person, I'll leave the implementation to the administrators. 

After all, doesn't everyone want the kids to enjoy themselves (point 1) and the best possible competition (point 2).  After all, none of us really get involved in junior football for our own egos, do we?

My experience in the school vs club issue ( 4/5 years back) has really only taught me one thing: context.
A potential problem with 'solution 1' may be that not all schools have the depth that allows for this: kids exercising their right to join the club my deplete school resources to such an extent that a school team fails (do not assume that all the kids could or would want to go to the local club for extraneous reasons).

At St Pats it is said that in the winter a student has to play for A college team when you enrol.

This does not have to include football. Some guys i knew got around it by joining a random sport that didnt really hold practices, then playing football for their clubs in the weekend.

I've been saying the same to Capital Football for some time re the league.  The first part is up to the schools and they have their own motivations for wanting kids to play for them that aren't football related and so difficult to negotiate with in a football context.

Graham Sole tried to get a combined u18 league going for school first XIs and club teams and nobody except the big clubs was interested.  College Sport Wellington were adamant there had to be a schools league so that they could crown a schools champion and the smaller clubs didn't think they would have sufficient players for a team at that age group because they lose them all to the schools.

It's like people who say: it's simple, move College football to Wednesday nights.  Except the schools don't want to play Wednesday nights, so how exactly do you "move" them?

This issue will be with us for a while yet.