|
Post by mackem on Oct 7, 2012 1:07:34 GMT 10
As this weekend is round 2 you would think by now that BV would have the fixtures worked out for Div 2, 3, etc and up on the website so clubs could organise themselves.
Clubs spent about 4 weeks in July trying to get fixture changes only to have BV change everything. Personally I think this is unacceptable.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 7, 2012 9:31:12 GMT 10
Dont get me started on fixtures makem......I accept that in Div 4 it is terribly hard to do Fixturing with clubs putting in teams, pulling out teams, giving walkovers and saying 'our entered team should be right in a couple of week to play blah blah blah. Bottom line is there are too many players that end up not playing and too many club that have no clue who they are playing (or in the end not playing) and what Division they are actually in etc etc We had a Fixtured Bye this week and I organised us to play a team in another Division that also had a Bye, then we were contacted by another club that got given a walkover this week and we booked our ground, organised umpires etc and aimed to have a Tri-Angular game between the three of us until the first team pulled-out as they had been re-fixtured on Thursday to actually play, then the other team pulled out late Thursday after they got re-fixtured to actually play leaving us without a game at all, then on Friday we got contacted by a 4th club for a Practice Match after they had been given a Walkover. In the end it was just all too bloody ridiculous ! Lets see what this week holds in terms of Fixturing in Div 4 hey !
|
|
|
Post by The Puma on Oct 9, 2012 7:48:04 GMT 10
Rest of the Division 2 fixtures are out, no mid weekers this year. Anyone know why?
|
|
|
Post by The Puma on Oct 9, 2012 8:03:25 GMT 10
Just realised, back to a 22 game season. Makes it a pretty big jump for the teams that go up.
|
|
|
Post by wyatt33 on Oct 9, 2012 9:15:21 GMT 10
Are the league going to drop the affiliation fees too second division clubs with less games? I know our club won't be adjusting the fees....or are we?
|
|
|
Post by wyatt33 on Oct 9, 2012 9:15:46 GMT 10
No were not!!!!
|
|
|
Post by sueridgpipe on Oct 9, 2012 13:38:11 GMT 10
Blessing in disguise wyatt, it just means that Monday is the only day of the week i will get to work and be unable walk!
|
|
|
Post by dickieknee on Oct 9, 2012 22:12:47 GMT 10
Will UFTG in Div 4E forfeit again this week?
|
|
|
Post by wyatt33 on Oct 10, 2012 10:02:59 GMT 10
I'm still struggling from round one wokka! The good life's been a little too good lately....
|
|
|
Post by mackem on Oct 10, 2012 12:14:19 GMT 10
While it's good that they have Div 2 firsts up for the rest of the season but all the other fixtures haven't been up dated and are only up to this weekend.
|
|
|
Post by oldmanriver on Oct 10, 2012 14:11:14 GMT 10
What are you people complaining about, atleast you know who you are playing next week, the masters don't even know who we are playing in the first round. in a couple of weeks time.
|
|
|
Post by wako on Oct 10, 2012 16:18:19 GMT 10
Back in my day, we didn't even have fixtures! We used to just drive around the state until we found another baseball team!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 10, 2012 16:30:27 GMT 10
Yep its frustrating alright, my understanding is that Senoirs and Masters Fixtures will be out today or t/row (presumably t/row now ). Hopefully they will not need MORE adjusting thereafter. Frustration aside, the main issue here is that BV expect (probably rightly so) clubs to nominate teams "6 weeks prior to the season" BUT (and this is the problem) players rock up to clubs usually in the 2-3 weeks prior to the season and they pay their subs (read 'commit') sometime thereafter (with some as we know buggering-off once subs are demanded in say Round 3 > 12-ish !) Clearly there is a massive timeline conundrum here that needs to be looked at. And clubs that nominate teams and then give walkovers and later pull our should lose thier $500 (or whatever it is) given the inconvenince that causes all BUT then do clubs become conservative in nominating teams and choose to add them later so as to avoid losing the fine money - which then creates more problems with adjusted fixtures later - particularly in the lower grades ?
|
|
Camov
Junior Member
Posts: 90
|
Post by Camov on Oct 10, 2012 20:35:03 GMT 10
Great points Authentic
Going through this process first hand this year there are some clear issues with the time frames that all the events occur.
I dont think anyone is intentionality at fault here, human behaviour being what it is. That said i think it could be more easily constructed if the process was organised to better fit both the organisation and clubs.
firstly: The top mens/womens team within a club should know what division they are playing in at the end of the previous season. BV as the governing body need to give clear direction and demonstrate a commitment to a process that clubs can follow.
if their are issues with junior qualification, competitiveness, outstanding debt or anything else these things need to be addressed at the end of the season.
the stipulations need to be clear and concise and available before the season starts so that any club wishing to advance/maintain its current standing has due notice of the expectations.
at the end of the season the structure for the following season can be organised, any grey areas addressed and all clubs given notice of what the following season will entail for their senior mens/womens team.
This can all happen within a month of the seasons end!
This will allow for a large part of the following season to be cemented months in advance.
As for additional teams the onus needs to be put on the individuals, via the clubs to express some level of intention for the season ahead. this can occur 8-10 weeks out from the season and at least give the clubs an idea of how many teams to expect.
we tried implementing a policy this year in that players were required to pay 1/2 of their fees up front(or work out payment options) 2 weeks out from the season start to be eligible for round 1 selection. it was very helpful in defining just how many seniors we had.(not to mention cash flow)
inevitably some guys will just show up a week before the season starts, these last minute additions/subtractions are going to lead to the friction we have at the moment in finalising draws for some of the other divisions with clubs pulling teams etc
I think clubs can help to reduce that by creating a culture that promotes better communication, encouraging the individual to take responsibility for their participation in the sport with a simple yes or no commitment.
i think there is always going to be some friction, some late movement and as a sport we want as much participation as possible so some lenience will always have to exist.
there is definitely room for all parties to improve their game here and make this a much easier process.
|
|
dRoy
Junior Member
Posts: 73
|
Post by dRoy on Oct 10, 2012 21:03:14 GMT 10
What are you people complaining about, atleast you know who you are playing next week, the masters don't even know who we are playing in the first round. in a couple of weeks time. We don't know who we're playing in a few weeks time! Exactly the same situation.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 10, 2012 23:34:25 GMT 10
Going through this process first hand this year etc ..... pretty much all of the above.
|
|
|
Post by The Puma on Oct 11, 2012 7:04:57 GMT 10
Well it's taken 2 more days just to get the division 2 reserves fixture up, which is an exact copy of the division 2 fixture. Dosen't exactily fill you with hope about the rest being done anytime soon.
|
|
|
Post by aueagle30 on Oct 11, 2012 10:54:17 GMT 10
I understand the frustration many of you are feeling, but I think directing it toward BV is somewhat misplaced... full disclosure, I sit on the Summer League Committee... the number of requests to add, subtract or move teams over the past 3-4 weeks has been staggering (this is my first year so I don't know if its more, less, or normal compared to past years, only that I'm amazed at how many requests come through so close to, and even after, the start of the season).
No matter what process BV puts in place, the fixturing is currently at the mercy of clubs moving teams. BV asks for submissions early so as to allow it the best possible chance to be prepared, but this can be thrown into disarray when this many requests are sent through.
Enforcing penalties is tough and probably not effective... if a club can't field a team, threat of a $500 fine isn't going to have them running to the 'player tree' to pick a couple newbies... it only further punishes a club that is now a team short.
Not permitting teams to enter or move will be met with criticism BV is not flexible enough to accomodate clubs and therefore any loss of players will be BV's fault.
The way I see, the best way to address this is at club level... the behaviour of players is such now that they roll up a week before the season and know they will be accomodated.
Perhaps if clubs stopped making requests after the team submission dates and told the 'Johnny-Come-Lately's' they would be accomodated on existing teams (but may have to sit on a bench at times) or could be permitted to play a lower grade at another club, the behaviour of players might adapt in future.
Less requests, less fixture changes, this problem solved... but I guess the question is, what are clubs prepared to sacrifice to make this happen?
Happy to continue this conversation, but I won't address specific issues from the SLC (not that I don't think we shouldn't be transparent, but I haven't been authorised to speak on their behalf, so it would be inappropriate of me to do).
|
|
|
Post by mackem on Oct 11, 2012 12:29:45 GMT 10
I understand the frustration many of you are feeling, but I think directing it toward BV is somewhat misplaced... full disclosure, I sit on the Summer League Committee... the number of requests to add, subtract or move teams over the past 3-4 weeks has been staggering (this is my first year so I don't know if its more, less, or normal compared to past years, only that I'm amazed at how many requests come through so close to, and even after, the start of the season). No matter what process BV puts in place, the fixturing is currently at the mercy of clubs moving teams. BV asks for submissions early so as to allow it the best possible chance to be prepared, but this can be thrown into disarray when this many requests are sent through. Enforcing penalties is tough and probably not effective... if a club can't field a team, threat of a $500 fine isn't going to have them running to the 'player tree' to pick a couple newbies... it only further punishes a club that is now a team short. Not permitting teams to enter or move will be met with criticism BV is not flexible enough to accomodate clubs and therefore any loss of players will be BV's fault. The way I see, the best way to address this is at club level... the behaviour of players is such now that they roll up a week before the season and know they will be accomodated. Perhaps if clubs stopped making requests after the team submission dates and told the 'Johnny-Come-Lately's' they would be accomodated on existing teams (but may have to sit on a bench at times) or could be permitted to play a lower grade at another club, the behaviour of players might adapt in future. Less requests, less fixture changes, this problem solved... but I guess the question is, what are clubs prepared to sacrifice to make this happen? Happy to continue this conversation, but I won't address specific issues from the SLC (not that I don't think we shouldn't be transparent, but I haven't been authorised to speak on their behalf, so it would be inappropriate of me to do). Half the problems about the fixtures BV has caused when the decided certain clubs were ineligible then kept them in Div 2. Clubs were given about a month in July to organise fixture changes then lo and behold in September BV changed the whole fixture. As I see it the clubs should not be held wholely responsible for late fixture changes.
|
|
|
Post by mackem on Oct 11, 2012 12:31:15 GMT 10
Well it's taken 2 more days just to get the division 2 reserves fixture up, which is an exact copy of the division 2 fixture. Dosen't exactily fill you with hope about the rest being done anytime soon. And Div 2 thirds & fourths are the exact opposite of the 1sts & 2nds
|
|
|
Post by oldmanriver on Oct 11, 2012 12:54:37 GMT 10
It really does amaze me that BV could take a very simple process and manage to stuff it up. If they stopped worrying about bloody stupid junior criterias, they could have D1 & D2 fixtures done 1 week after the Grand Finals. Problem solved. Then it is only a case of allocating the other sides into various divisions. The Women, just take the seasons draw that is completed and treat that as the following season draw. Easier to adjust if teams pull out. Juniors, there is a formula somewhere, just not being used properly at the moment. Masters, just sit back and wait for team entries. Requests for Div 1 & Div 2 then can be handled a lot earlier. But then again, who am I to suggest how it should be done, I just don't have a grey area to get lost in all the fullsh!t. The BV can get on with helping the Clubs with a lacking junior program to reach the so called requirements to be a senior Club. It just ain't that hard.
|
|
|
Post by Marshy on Oct 12, 2012 10:12:19 GMT 10
but I haven't been authorised to speak on their behalf, so it would be inappropriate of me to do so How can we make "appropriate" for you to do so? I have stated for a while, if explanations, like what you have provided above, came out more frequently, then there may not be as much negative talk. People can deal with bad news, it's the lack of news that causes the most grief.
|
|
Camov
Junior Member
Posts: 90
|
Post by Camov on Oct 12, 2012 14:31:32 GMT 10
spot on marshy,
communication is the key, regular and to the point.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 12, 2012 14:42:50 GMT 10
spot on marshy, communication is the key, regular and to the point. I agree...that is why we have an email network going on this year between the Master League Sub-committee and all Masters teams Coordinators. The Masters fixture went up this afternoon and all Masters Cooordinators got an email to check it within the hour (this is on top of the usual practice of sending it out to clubs and for it to eventually find its way to the Managers and clubs). So some processes are working well...eventually.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 12, 2012 15:45:22 GMT 10
And 31 teams entered, authentic. That would be up four on last year.
Impressive.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 12, 2012 15:57:06 GMT 10
And 31 teams entered, authentic. That would be up four on last year. Impressive. Yes KC and thats with Greensborough unfortunately pulling the pin and a Bundoora team that was nearly over the line but withdrawing a little while back.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 12, 2012 18:55:36 GMT 10
Hmmmmm....i spoke a little too soon - the link to the Masters Fixture is now 'broken' (has been now for a few hours) Ive informed BV who are now aware of the problem.
|
|
dRoy
Junior Member
Posts: 73
|
Post by dRoy on Oct 13, 2012 17:33:11 GMT 10
First 8 rounds are up for div 2 4ths.
|
|
|
Post by aueagle30 on Oct 15, 2012 10:30:08 GMT 10
Half the problems about the fixtures BV has caused when the decided certain clubs were ineligible then kept them in Div 2. Clubs were given about a month in July to organise fixture changes then lo and behold in September BV changed the whole fixture. As I see it the clubs should not be held wholely responsible for late fixture changes. Mackem, not sure if your ratios are correct that "half the problems" with the fixture are a result of the SLC's decision on one club, considering the voluntary withdrawal of another club from D2 shortly thereafter, and ongoing movements/withdrawals of multiple other teams (last I checked there was still some uncertainty over the state of some teams clubs were committed to). However, I agree with your point that the impact on the fixtures is a combination of the effects of all decisions that add/move/withdraw teams, including those of BV/SLC... I didn't mean to infer it was wholely the the fault of the club's, although the current uncertainty is being dragged out by club's still determining their commitments to teams. It's also important to note, no individual addition/movement/withdrawal of a team/club has a major impact on the fixtures... if it was just one, the adjustments to the fixtures could be managed very quickly... it's the combination of movements as a whole, and the uncertainty about whether a team will stay/go/move that lead to these continuing problems. Considering this thread had already made it clear most wanted to hold BV responsible and several had offered recommendations for how BV could address it, I didn't see the need to offer balance in my post... I offered an alternate view on how clubs could possibly manage the process at a level where they actually have the greatest control.
|
|
|
Post by aueagle30 on Oct 15, 2012 10:52:10 GMT 10
Authentic/Mov/Marshy, I'm in full agreement with you. One of my greatest criticisms over the past couple of years with the SLC and BV was the lack of transparency in reasoning and decision-making.
I've tried to express this within the confines of our meetings... Clubland officials can adapt to short notice, can be understanding of difficult news, but feel frustrated and let down when treated like dolts.
As a club administrator I tried to have it acknowledged this conduct severely undermines the relationship between BV/SLC and the clubs, and creates an elitist perception from a committee the club desperately needs to respect and trust.
I still believe part of the problem is the lack of organisation between clubs creates an inconsistent message from clubland to the SLC/BV... clubs lack the capacity to move/speak as one, highlight their most important needs and work together to sell that message... It seems, at times, BV doesn't know where to focus because there is no clarity in the priorities of clubs... and this may be leading to administrators at BV thinking, perhaps, clubs don't know what's best for themselves, resulting to an 'elitist' construct of ideas.
These are only my opinions, mostly formed from my perceptions as a club administrator. Why can't I speak on behalf of the SLC, or specifically about what occurs at the meetings? At this stage, only because I haven't asked for permission.
Rather than become the spokesperson for the SLC, my preference would be to continue to work with the SLC, for us to improve our process for decision-making, to make our findings completely transparent, to become consistent in our interpretations and understanding of the rules/laws... without offering detail, I can assure you, this process has already begun and the SLC are taking steps to improve several of these criteria.
I'm not on here often, but where I can I'll continue to give some insight... Where permitted, I'll try to provide details.
|
|