Is it written in the contract if you sign for Canty Utd you have to play for Tech?
Ha ha. Check with Mainland. They administer Canterbury Utd.
Is it right that if you sign for Coastal you automatically make the Pride squad?
Now now that's a bit random. You'd have to say the 9 of 16(?) players from Coastal in the Pride all deserve to be there, having also represented either NZ under 17/20, NZ secondary schools or full age NZ. So if your assumption is there is favouritism there I think you're a bit off the mark.
My point, just to reiterate, comes down to money. I hate the fact that teams can buy players, or that players ask for money. I like the idea of cheering on a team that does it for the love of it. And it seems to roll on from Canty Utd (also not supposed to be paid....) that those wanting money go to Tech and Bays. If players come to a club because of expert coaching, facilities, atmosphere then sweet, but to buy a team, and not pay others, or subs and fundraising goes towards this, is it all worth it?
I definitely think there is favouritism there. How many of those players started with Coastal. How many joined because of the opportunity to be involved with then Canterbury coaches. How many joined because they saw Coastal as the way into The Pride. I include one of the coaches in that. You think we are all as naïve as you Vim.
In every country in the world the top level of all sports (particularly male) involve financial reward. One of the reasons we are still a backwater is that we (football) in New Zealand do not recognise that.
Tell me what happened to the Sporting Futures progam, $600 worth of support offered to any young player across the city targeted by Coastal. Was not this how your squads were built? How do you justify that. I do not have to I thought it very professional. I did not like the fact that once again your own club players were ignored. Maybe why Parklands now have a bigger player base than Coastal.
I really think you should look at why you are involved with such double standards you should be in politics.
Ouch.
I think there is a difference to coming to a club for better coaching, prospects and culture than coming for the almighty dollar. I have no problem with Tech as such, so don't take it too personally, however openly breaking rules regarding player payments, and then constantly sidestepping this fact is not only dishonest but cheating.
In response to the accusation of favouritism in the Women's game I think the facts will speak for themselves. From memory of the many in the Pride squad, 2 players started at the Mighty New Brighton, and 2 others have only ever played for Coastal. 2 joined the club after the strange 'School of Football' and before they made the Pride squad. All of these became Pride players under previous coaches (not the Coastal ones) so the assumption of favouritism seems invalid. Only one player has come over (and why wouldn't you!) since making the Pride. I can't think of the other 2 but I'm sure there is nothing dodgy about it.
Sporting Futures dates back many years, and was a carryover from Linfield who were doing things around the 'total athlete' such as nutrition and fitness etc. I don't think it was specifically football either. That wasn't how our squads were built. They have been built through countless ours of extra training by coaches, mainly to the elite however now we also do a participation group as well. Quite a few coming through from our 17s and PDL now too so it seems to be working. Not including our endless flow of Western players....
Do Parklands really have a bigger junior base than Coastal? I don't know the facts. We have had an increase of 150 junior players since our first year, and this year had 58 Canty reps. Next year, all going according to plan we will also have girls teams in 12s, 14s, 16s and two in 18s. (And the Parklands coach did actively do the poaching scandal that has been talked about on here...)
And that strange guilty plea about Western brings me back to my point eventually. If players move club for better coaching, atmosphere, facilities then that is great. If they move for money, what is that showing the others coming through the ranks and the general public. Are juniors/masters/others ok with seeing their sub money, or sponsorship money going into a players bank account or in a brown paper bag? I sure wouldn't be. And if that's the way some clubs want to do it, then put it out there, own up to Mainland, and declare it in your annual financials. I, as the worlds greatest player, fan and male model have a greater sense of (Mainland) Pride knowing that my team do it for the love of it, rather than looking for the highest dollar.
Wow, that was epic.
And for the record, I would make a bloody good politician.