Grumpy old bastard alert
I can see the problem if the kids all started at the same club as six year olds and have been with the same club throughout and their development has been as a result of the development work put in by that particular club / coach.
Sounds like a rule to equalise competition in a small area. Will be painful for a couple of seasons until everyone gets it.
Incredible stamina. No shame. Yellow Fever.
Sounds a bit nanny state to me. Certainly a messy response to the issue (they are asking 12 year olds to accept rotation or change clubs). However from recent conversations on similar topic, it wouldn't surprise if Mainland tighten up on playing out of age. Other feds will have similar issues; and there there are schools who play a very wide range of ages in first X1.
Kotahitanga. We are one.
What is often lost here is the governing body providing any commentary on their thinking, and the objective of any rule.
Incredible stamina. No shame. Yellow Fever.
I can sort of see the logic behind it. It does no on any good to have all the rep players in one team when they are smashing opposition week in week out. Not good for the development of the rep players and not good for a league as a whole to be dominated by one team if that is in fact happening
In Gisborne, junior football for years 7-8 and 9-10 is run by Gisborne Junior Football Association and the kids are put into teams for Saturday morning football. Each team has an equal number of reps and the rest is made up randomly. It's interesting because at primary school level there are always two or three schools who are miles ahead of the rest and kids lose interest in the game but in the next age group where the teams are selected randomly the interest/participation is quite good (or used to be anyway). They still play for their schools on Wednesday evenings as well - which also helps kids from year 11 up to play club football on Saturday. I don't know if many other places do it this way but it seems to work for them.
Fuck this stupid game
Kotahitanga. We are one.
You can ascertain what your opponent is afraid of by observing the means by which he attempts to frighten you
I can see the issue if a rep player has to move clubs. If he's just put into another team in the same club then there is no issue at all. Just makes it more even.
However, in Christchurch, if you had a consultation process for any and all changes or directives, it would be bogged down and delayed by the need for everyones input. In SOME situations (not all, and by no stretch is it a large percentage), you just need someone to say "This is whats happening", and do it for the greater good. If it is wrong, and demonstrably so, then you lose your job/lose your cred when the next thing comes along.
The heads of the various regions do not know everything, but neither does anyone else, and this whole countrys sporting culture is beset by nepotism and "who went to which school" or "who played in that NZ team that did this or that or played bullshit 1970s kick and chase football but they won so they must know something" bullshit.
All of our youth lads would give a limb to play in a white shirt with a fern on it, yet the very organisation that claims to run the game in this country restricts the very talent pool that can be used, to those who contribute to its own coffers. Fundamentally flawed and speaks of some serious inadequacies at the top. Someone wants to retain their control of the world cup winnings, and they are doing it at the expense of the kids futures, in my humble opinion, by limiting any chance of NZ rep play to those who pay them and them only, until full international level.
Incredible stamina. No shame. Yellow Fever.
I highly doubt there will be rep players unable to play. Simple solution is fc nelson a you've got six rep players, fc nelson b has two, move one player into the other team. Problem solved/
Wow.
Consultation would bog everyone down. Someone needs to say what's happening...for the greater good.
But the heads of the regions don't know anyone else and it's all nepotism and they are controlling the money and and and and. Jeepers.
You can ascertain what your opponent is afraid of by observing the means by which he attempts to frighten you
How this actually effects you enough to create an account on here to talk about it?
Like is your club losing players, is your child forced to move to another club, or is it a simple case of not liking the idea?
Incredible stamina. No shame. Yellow Fever.
I agree entirely. What right does anyone have to tell you which club you can or can not play for. The clubs need to say NO. Write to Mainland Board as a group and say NO.
Sounds like Bobs in town.
Supporter For Ever - Keep The Faith - Foundation Member - Never Lets FAX Get In The Way Of A Good Yarn
I agree entirely. What right does anyone have to tell you which club you can or can not play for. The clubs need to say NO. Write to Mainland Board as a group and say NO.
Incredible stamina. No shame. Yellow Fever.
Haven't read through the entire thread so apologies if it has come up. But couldn't an unintended consequence be that it discourages some kids from playing rep football?
Seems like one of those rules that is good in theory, but doesn't play out too well practically.
This rule doesn't seem to reward clubs who work really hard on player development.
Doesn't it work against what we are all here for. Aren't all coaches aiming to produce the next level if player?
If a club produces 4 or 6 or more rep players shouldn't they be rewarded.
I can see how problems arise where rep players transfer to one particular club perhaps cos that's where the rep coach is. Seen enough of that in Canterbury. Perhaps there should be a limit on transferring rep players.
I agree entirely. What right does anyone have to tell you which club you can or can not play for. The clubs need to say NO. Write to Mainland Board as a group and say NO.
That's a silly statement.
The governing body is there to tell you who you can or can not play for. They do that in a lot of ways. For example, you can't play for one club this week and a different club the next etc etc.
There is a process for electing people to run the game. That's where you, the member, ultimately get your say.
But I agree with you fundamentally. Get organised and show your opposition. You can also appeal decisions of the governing body to New Zealand Football.
Get together as clubs and say no. You the members pay their wages to organise your football. They are your federation and there to serve you, their member clubs. The associations have suddenly developed themselves into dictatorships. Their job is to listen to their members.
solution is that players refuse to play rep football and then the association misses out…..
i do understand the CHCH issue and players transferring to a club because the coach is the rep coach and players want to please him to be included in his plans.
But he should not be involved in the selection of the rep team then this would help to stop this problem.
but breaking up a club team of good players because a large number get selected for the reps and if they possibly have been together as a team for some time is not good for football or there own development as players.
i hope some sense prevails
good sportsmanship and fair playing field is all we ask for
but all we get is talk and goal posts moving
But he should not be involved in the selection of the rep team then this would help to stop this problem.
You can ascertain what your opponent is afraid of by observing the means by which he attempts to frighten you
What right does anyone have to tell you which club you can or can not play for.
You can ascertain what your opponent is afraid of by observing the means by which he attempts to frighten you