|
Post by russelledwards on Apr 2, 2014 15:42:51 GMT 10
Due to my Grandson's selection in the Victorian Under 14 and Under 16 Teams the last 2 years (I refuse to call these Teams "The Aces" - the kids are representing Victoria, not Melbourne's National League Team) I have had the opportunity to experience first hand just where Victoria now sits in the greater Australian Baseball Community. We have fallen to a distant 5th behind NSW, Queensland, WA and NSW Country. I would even go so far as to say,we are now at risk of falling behind SA as well. In the last 10 years (from 2005 to 2014) there have been 29 Under Age National Championships (one Tournament was lost to rain). Out of those 29 Championships, Victoria has won 3 (just over 10%) with 2 of those being Under 16 Titles Coached by a Baseball Lifer and good friend in Garry Bitmead and the other a Under 14 Championship in 2010. That is, in the last 10 years Victoria has failed to win even one Under 18 Title and in the last 4 years we have not won any Age Group what-so-ever.
In the period 1994 to 2004 there were 33 Championships and Victoria won 11 (33%). Something has gone drastically wrong with Baseball development in this State. Under no circumstances should anyone interpret this rant as being in anyway a criticism of the Coaching Staffs of our Under Age Teams.
The two teams that my Grandson has been involved with were both well Coached by dedicated Baseball People who effectively gave up 3 months of their lives to help our kids be the best they could be. They ran excellent training sessions every Monday night, Wednesday night and Saturday morning for the ten weeks leading up to the Championships and they ensured that the young men selected represented our State well. The problem of Victoria's fall from grace, in no way lies with the Coaching Staff - I have nothing but the utmost respect for anyone willing to give so much of their time to help these boys achieve. Interestingly, in the 60 odd training sessions that my Grandson attended over the the past 2 years, only one member of Baseball Victoria's Full Time Staff attended any of the State Team's Training Sessions.
It is time however, that some hard questions were asked about just what the High Performance, Participation and Development Sections of Baseball Victoria are really achieving. We presently have 3 full time Staff in these areas and I wonder just what Key Performance Indicators these people have to meet to justify their positions.
For instance, you would think a KPI for the High Performance Manager would be the success or otherwise of our Under Age Teams but I doubt that any of the Directors of Baseball Victoria would even be aware that it is now 5 years since we won an Underage Championship. Some people seem to think that a KPI for the High Performance Manager is the number of Victorians that sign Professional Contracts. This totally discounts the countless hours put in by Club Coaches, Parents and the young men themselves in reaching their dreams. Who deserves the accolades for Lewis Thorpe and Daniel McGrath signing lucrative Pro Contracts - Baseball Victoria or the people at Doncaster who took these men from T Ball through to the Minor Leagues? I know where I think the credit is due.
For Participation and Development the obvious KPI is the number of juniors playing our Game today compared to the number playing 5 years ago, 10 years ago and even 20 years ago. Anecdotally I find it hard to believe that our Junior Summer numbers today are anywhere near what they were 20 years ago. The Club that I devoted 35 years of my life to, EBC, is justifiably considered one of Australia's leading Clubs, but even their Domestic Junior Competition has less than 20 percent of the numbers that were playing every Friday night 20 years ago. I would happily ask Baseball Victoria for the Junior Registration Statistics to see if my impressions are actually incorrect but unfortunately I don't have much luck getting calls returned by BV Staff.
During the 35 odd years that I was involved at Essendon I regularly asked Juniors "what prompted them to join our Club". I can't remember one instance where a boy or a girl said they joined because of a Baseball Victoria visit to their school. We were fortunate to have Garry Bitmead regularly dragging kids, and sometimes Teams, along from Strathmore High to boost our numbers.
As a matter of urgency, I would suggest that Baseball Victoria ask all Summer Clubs to poll the parents of all juniors who have joined over the past 2 years to find out if any are joining because of Baseball Victoria School Visits. We presently would be spending well in excess of $250,000 in salaries and on costs in our Participation and Development Dept and if the present program is not getting kids to play then it needs to be looked at. I wouldn't be surprised if less than 20 kids per year join baseball because of School Visits.and if that is shown to be the case then the emphasis needs to change.
As we move into 2014, I have never seen Victorian Baseball in a worse state.
|
|
|
Post by larry42 on Jun 16, 2014 9:21:45 GMT 10
This is maybe an add on to Russell's post above, but i recently returned from the LLNC in Qld in which our 3 vic Little league teams didn't fair to well either. In fact the regional team (Sunrausia) finished higher than the metro teams (Yarra rangers and Nortern Diamondbacks. Sunraysia played off for 9th-16th, while Yarra finished 17th and ND finished 18th out of 20 teams. In contrast, WA sent 5 teams who all finsihed in the top 8 including the winners, 3rd and 4th.
|
|
|
Post by russelledwards on Jun 16, 2014 10:02:24 GMT 10
I wonder, Larry, at just what stage a review will be undertaken to see why Victoria has fallen so far off the pace. I have nothing but complete admiration and respect for the kids, coaches and parents involved in the Rangers and Diamondback Teams, but once again, Victoria is woefully off the pace. The fall from grace of Victoria's Rep Teams over the past 5 years should alarm and concern everyone involved in our Game. Victoria has gone from being THE powerhouse in Australian Baseball to being "just another middle of the road" State. Our performances now are just a shadow of what was achieved during the Matty Sheldon Collins/ Grant Weir era. Something needs to change.
|
|
smf
Junior Member
Posts: 72
|
Post by smf on Jun 16, 2014 10:58:03 GMT 10
According to what I've read in other places, curves and sliders are legal at the LL national championships. However, apparently, these pitches are illegal in our own LL. Maybe if we start allowing them to be thrown, and teach the kids how to throw them (and for catchers to gain some sense of game management which will serve them well when they play higher level juniors and progress into seniors), then our results may improve, as our pitchers can then compete with the interstaters. Can someone please correct me if I am incorrect, as this may explain part of it.
|
|
|
Post by The Puma on Jun 17, 2014 8:30:30 GMT 10
Didn't Sunrasia finish 5th and winless in the qualifying pool games?
|
|
|
Post by larry42 on Jun 17, 2014 9:17:59 GMT 10
Didn't Sunrasia finish 5th and winless in the qualifying pool games? They won a game in the qualifying round and went through to the middle group (9th-16th) per the tie breaker rule. Winless in the 2nd round.
|
|
|
Post by The Puma on Jun 17, 2014 9:58:14 GMT 10
I mean the Victorian qualifying games.
|
|
|
Post by camerondee on Jun 17, 2014 10:53:06 GMT 10
The fish always rots at the head. Time for a shake up.
|
|
|
Post by larry42 on Jun 17, 2014 11:38:14 GMT 10
I mean the Victorian qualifying games. They beat the Diamondbacks early and then beat the Western Mets in one of the two semi finals to finish 3rd. Earned their spot.
|
|
|
Post by Journeyman on Jun 17, 2014 12:07:12 GMT 10
According to the info on www.unpage.org/australia/au-dir2014.htm which I have copied they finished 4th overall winning 1 game against the Northern D'backs. Victoria State Tournament Host - Melbourne Baseball Club At Surrey Park (Box Hill) Tournament Results: Format: Round-robin schedule, with the top three teams qualifying for the Australian Region tournament. Round Robin Results: (Tournament Participants: Northern Diamondbacks, Southern Mariners, Sunraysia, Western Mets, and Yarra Rangers) Day 1 (Friday, April 11): Southern Mariners 7, Northern Diamondbacks 3 Western Mets 6, Yarra Rangers 5 Yarra Rangers 13, Southern Mariners 2 Day 2 (Saturday, April 12): Sunraysia 8, Northern Diamondbacks 7 Yarra Rangers 21, Sunraysia 6 Southern Mariners 10, Western Mets 0 Day 3 (Sunday, April 13): Yarra Rangers 7, Northern Diamondbacks 6 Western Mets 13, Sunraysia 0 Southern Mariners 12, Sunraysia 5 Northern Diamondbacks 15, Western Mets 5 Metro Round Robin Standings W L Yarra Rangers 3 1 Southern Mariners 3 1 Western Mets 2 2 Sunraysia 1 3 Northern D'backs 1 3 Yarra Rangers, Southern Mariners, and Western Mets advance to the Australian region tournament. Southern Mariners and Western Mets will not participate in this tournament, so Sunraysia and Northern Diamondbacks replace them as Victoria representatives
|
|
|
Post by The Puma on Jun 17, 2014 12:39:18 GMT 10
Can anyone explain that last part? Either way we still sent the 4th and 5th ranked teams.
|
|
|
Post by Journeyman on Jun 17, 2014 12:43:31 GMT 10
I was wondering the same thing, Puma. And Sunraysia finished higher in the Nationals than the other 2 Vic teams. Sunraysia 16th Yarra 17th D'backs 19th
|
|
|
Post by The Puma on Jun 17, 2014 12:46:50 GMT 10
My understanding was that Yarra had a tough draw and played most of the top teams, not sure about the other 2.
|
|
|
Post by izzygunna on Jun 17, 2014 14:03:04 GMT 10
When you consider that these teams consisted of the best of our regions it makes you consider how far away from other states standards the teams that did not make these Nationals are.
When you consider that our Club teams might play a maximum of 14 to 16 games in the Vic Summer State Club competition we need to ask is the level of competition and the number of games played adequate.
|
|
|
Post by farnt on Jun 17, 2014 14:35:43 GMT 10
Does Melbourne Metro have the same ratio’s of players/team representatives as other metropolitan teams they competed against? F’rinstance if there are say 400 registered Under 13 participants in Melbourne for four teams, are the other states running the same ratios? If another area is choosing four teams from 800 participants they should be better!
|
|
|
Post by uglier on Jun 17, 2014 15:59:09 GMT 10
For the record......Yarra Ranges finished on top of the qualifying rounds at the State championships thus gaining automatic qualification to the National championships. BV in their wisdom, decided that for the other two qualifying positions there would be a 2 vs 5 and 3 vs 4 playoff with the winners progressing. As it was both the 4th and 5th placed teams won the tightly contested games and qualified for the Nationals. (Side note - if you look at the results over the weekend, it was a fairly even tournament) Cant explain the quote at the end of the commentary listed above except that it is not accurate. FYI - Other States conduct a similar championship however their qualifying games have the traditional finals format of say 1 vs 2, 3 vs 4 etc with the teams that move through to the Nationals being those that fall into the qualifying number allocated to each State. What that means is for example; WA send 5 Teams (they have 12 teams in their state champs) Qld send 4 (I think they have about 8 teams) NSW send 5 (they have 10 teams in their State champs) Vic send 3 (we have 5 teams in ours) SA send 2 (they have 3) ACT send 1 (sole team) and for the record, Sunraysia finished 16th Yarra Ranges 17th and Dbacks finished 18th. It does however, show us how far this group of players are behind the rest of the Nation. (FYI - Yarra Ranges Team finished 3rd in the Nationals last year)
All teams were of very good standard and the Ranges played no body tougher than any other team did. Every group was tough.
|
|
|
Post by larry42 on Jun 17, 2014 16:32:53 GMT 10
There were/are a number of people who have stated that this years level of baseball is a big jump from last year. Whether that is the case i cant answer as i didnt see last year. Does the now automatic selection for the Australian winner to the LLWS make the level more competitive, probably to most likely. While at the LLNC i spoke to a few parents from WA. Basically they stated that LL in WA had full support from BWA, the HP Manager in WA, plus the kids play an absurd amount of games more than our kids, somewhere near the vicinity of 50. Not sure how many games that equates to in a week and whether they do mid weekers then weekend double headers, but they play a lot of baseball. i coached an U12 team last year and i think we played 14/15 games (cant remember exactly) Of those games i think we played 4 competitive games during the season...4! Add that the the LL state champs of 4 or 5 depending where you finished and then any practise games you can muster up. We are a long way off the amount of baseball that some other states play. I went to Qld to watch my son play for the Rangers in what i thought was an okay LL team that i thought would compete well at the LLNC. Like any team, had its strengths and weaknesses and had to play a certain way to win games. In the qualifying round the team was 0-4 (played 2 other State Champs in WA and QLD) but if they played better defense and had a bit more luck/timely hitting could have been 3-1. They then won the last 3 games of the tourney which included the only real 'weak' team in Canberra. Where do we fall over.... 1. Our arm strength is down in comparison. not by a lot but we didnt have any kids across the 3 teams who really threw the ball with great velocity. There were a lot of big kids there who did. 2. Our inability to hit and recognise curve balls stood out more for me than anything. kids who threw with good velocity off 46 ft (off a mound) only had to have an average breaking ball to get cheap outs. And a lot of other pitchers used the BB excessively. One of our hitters saw 9 straight BB's in one at bat. we dont throw it here in both 12's and 14's and i think its the hitters who are affected more by not seeing them, than our pitchers are by not throwing enough of them. 3. you could see the difference in the WA teams/NSW teams with game knowledge that comes from playing more, and being challenged in quality opposition. Knew the plays most of the time and automatic more often than not. This isn't a slight on the coaches because we had good ones up there - Harman, Skinner, hargreaves, Fisher, O'Connor, Simpson.
One question will be "why is the LL level not seen as the first level of high performance or high level pathway?". when you see those games up there, its not participation and happy joy joy, its play hard and win because the result is a big incentive. i actually think that our league can cater for both, the high level kids that want to play at the best of their abilities, and the kids who just want to play to have fun.
|
|
|
Post by mc15 on Jun 17, 2014 16:52:03 GMT 10
Please excuse my ignorance as I've been out of the loop relating to the evolution of LL. A couple of questions... What is the catchment age of little league? Of the teams from Victoria that have gone away, how many of those kids have been in the Victorian Junior Program (i.e under 1/16 state teams)? What was the objective of LL outlined by the Baseball Australia?
|
|
|
Post by mc15 on Jun 17, 2014 17:25:45 GMT 10
|
|
|
Post by russelledwards on Jun 17, 2014 18:11:17 GMT 10
Larry - I know that our Teams are Representative Teams comprised of players from various Clubs but what is the deal with the other States? Are they all just Club Teams?
|
|
|
Post by mc15 on Jun 17, 2014 18:54:17 GMT 10
Larry - I know that our Teams are Representative Teams comprised of players from various Clubs but what is the deal with the other States? Are they all just Club Teams? Hi Russ. This is kind of where I was going... What's the makeup of teams and what have they been exposed to?
|
|
|
Post by russelledwards on Jun 17, 2014 19:19:22 GMT 10
I have mentioned previously that the number of games our kids play is a major problem with their development. With byes, forfeits and washouts some junior teams can play only 10 games for the season. A significant number of these games will often feature pitchers who can't throw a strike let alone a curve ball. IMO we really need to concentrate on Club centres playing multiple games each week if we want the kids to improve. On a couple of long weekends each summer we could play Round Robin Championships featuring the best kids from each centre in 6 games. If that means we have to fund the individual Clubs to get out to schools in their vicinity instead of using BV Staff then so be it. What we are doing now is by any measure, not working.
|
|
|
Post by Journeyman on Jun 17, 2014 22:04:30 GMT 10
Larry - I know that our Teams are Representative Teams comprised of players from various Clubs but what is the deal with the other States? Are they all just Club Teams? As far as I'm aware the charter areas in other states are the same, representative teams from the respective charter areas within the state. I can give an example for Adelaide, the Adelaide South team comes from the best players from the 7 Southern clubs. Adelaide North are from the 7 Northern clubs. They are within the guidelines laid down by Little League International.
|
|
|
Post by larry42 on Jun 18, 2014 9:22:52 GMT 10
Ive read the Pathway document before. BA talks of 'evidence' to support the pathway model but doesn't name a company or survey to support it. Any idea where the evidence comes from?
|
|
|
Post by mc15 on Jun 18, 2014 15:11:33 GMT 10
To start with, I'll tip my cap to the time and effort Peter Gahan put into the efforts of trying to gain an understanding, then provide a framework in which to improve the pathway across the country. It is an incredibly difficult task, and one which is both confrontational in terms of what it discovers and controversial in the restructures that result from it. Interesting point in relation to 'evidence'. Under the Winning Edge funding strategies, there is a clear mandate for all sports to get their house in order in relation to how they propose in ensure that there is a steady stream of talented you athletes to enable high level, sustainable results for senior national teams. And I must stress senior teams. In order to assist sports with this, there is a team of approximately four full time staff who's sole responsibility is to assist sports in understanding their own sport better, while assisting with the development resources that lead to success. This support comes in two fronts. The first is through collating, advising and assisting in the application of existing research. The second is through working with the sports to produce their own research data in order to understand local issues. The majority of this research can be found via this link www.ausport.gov.au/ais/pathwaysI do know that Peter did consult with the AIS in putting the pathway review together, but to what depth they were involved, I don't know. Keeping in mind that what they have published on the website is an executive summery. There are three major tools that sports can use to understand themselves better. The first is what's called the Pathway Health Check. This is an internal review interpreted by an independent group in order to understand efficiencies/inefficiencies of an individual sport across a huge spectrum which includes financial management, development, high performance programs, doping policy, inclusion etc... The resulting report clearly outlines the stress points within the system. The second tool is the development framework. In baseball's case, Peter has chosen to use the FTEM framework which is the advised mode for Australian sport. This is supposed to summarise development/progression windows and is based on very clear, high quality research (Gulbin et al., 2012). This is the area which should clearly be promoted across the network to clubs and coaches. A detailed development/implementation plan should (and could be?) sitting behind this. The last tool, which has only come on line this year is a reflective questionnaire for athletes who have played the sport across the entire development pathway which identifies the strengths and barriers within the system from an athlete's perspective. If all these forms of research can be merged, you can produce a very powerful, evidence based strategic approach to your development. The pooled data from across all of sports is identifies that as a general rule, sports to and adequate to good job with their senior national programs. They do a reasonable job within their talent development pathway (15ish-25ish), they to a good job at entry level (Aussie T-ball or similar), but the area of deficiency clearly points towards the transition from the development mode of the game, into the mainstream. In baseballs case, this is round the 10-12 year old age bracket. The data suggests that this is a local club environment where both the coaching depth, and skill acquisition knowledge is tested. Forming a solution to this problem is exceeding complex!
|
|
|
Post by behindthedish on Jun 18, 2014 21:23:05 GMT 10
Interesting topic Russell and there are probably many underlying factors that have created the situation that we are now in, including senior men's baseball. Back in the mid 90s and early 2000, when I was involved with the State junior pgms, the teams to beat were the same ones today - WA/NSW. Victoria always has produced a number of excellent pitchers and defensive players, but we fall behind in hitting and teaching baseball "strategy". The hitting power of both these states was and still is superior to ours and the "baseball smarts" of most of their kids is far advanced than our players. They play more games than what we do and it shows in the National Tournament results. We also do not do ourselves any favours, by creating lopsided junior competitions, where we may have 1 or 2 very strong junior clubs/teams that attract excellent coaching and organisitaional skills, where parents from fifferent parts of the state take their sons (and daughters) and the other teams in the competition only make up the numbers - this has been aproblem for over 40 years in this state. These strong teams will play "dead rubber" games of baseball, where you will have dominant pitchers too strong for the opposition hitters and the outfielders would be lucky to have a handful plays all season, let alone the infield turning over defensive plays in pressure situations. Then we select a State team (or representative teams) and participate at teh National Championships, competing against better and "smarter" teams, where suddenly the outfielders need to make plays, the pitchers need to "think" and not try to blow away the hitters and the infield has to come up with pressure plays, not to mention the "mental approach" of our hitters. I was lucky enough to coach many years of junior/senior baseball and have fond memories of the two State League Championship Titles, one of them undefeated at U/16 Level, where we played against a Waverley team of all Victorian State players and beat them 4 times in that season. The team I formed back then (from t-ball level), were justy knockabout kids who could run, throw and hit and the most important thing was that all the players were taught about strategy and the mental approach towards all facets of our game, including base running, something that is even lacking in Division 1 baseball today. If we want to be extremely competitive again, we need to play more games - at all levels, have passionate personnel (coaches/administrators) and most important of all teach the kids about strategies, game situations, mental approach towards hitting/pitching and not drum into our kids to stick the ball over the fence or blow away the hitters, but to be contact hitters and execute in situations, to be able to locate a pitch for strike, even when you are behind in the count....I have only seen a handful of pitchers at Division 1 level who can throw a breaking or off speed pitch for a strike when behind in the count, rather than a thingyeye fastball as a big as a watermelon.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 18, 2014 21:55:27 GMT 10
BTD, yours is one of several insightful and challenging responses to what has become a vexed issue for Victorian baseball - evidenced by the number and the depth of comments in this thread.
Please keep the thoughts coming.
Even if there is a head in the sand approach taken at organisational level - and probably even a denial mentality - these are quite clearly matters (among others) that need to be addressed by those concerned for the future of baseball in this state.
|
|
|
Post by bigbluball on Jun 19, 2014 9:51:32 GMT 10
I overheard a conversation recently regarding "scouts" coaching teams. If someone is aligned with a MLB club and involved with junior baseball at either coaching or the selection process their opinions will be conflicted by who to do their best for. I asked around and was told generally scouts do not coach teams in the USA but in Australia they seem to be coaching and selecting teams. I was also told of scouts approaching teams during tournaments and asking other coaches to play players in different positions to determine their potential! Surely if this has happened it affects game plans and even other players and parents of these tournaments and then games and even final results of tournaments. The more I think about it scouts coaching teams will forever have a level of conflict about "who they are working for"!
|
|
|
Post by mc15 on Jun 19, 2014 10:15:17 GMT 10
I've come full circle on the debate surrounding more games, in particular for the younger developers. The argument that is made, and I have historically supported is that more game at bats, more game innings, and more game ground balls/flyballs will lead to an accelerated development.
However, this is not supported by any skill acquisition model, and even within baseball, the result of more games is counterintuitive.
If we were to consider the construct of a 'normal' Sunday morning junior game... The kids arrive an hour before the game... play catch for about 50 throws, take about 15 swings, maybe take a maximum of five ground balls or flyballs during infield/outfield. In the game, the infielders might get 2-3 ground balls each between innings, and the outfielders get no flyballs. The variance of ground balls hit to infielders in the game may range from 0-8, with the range of flyballs from 0-5. Hitters might get 3-4 at bats, where they might see on average about 5 pitches, with 2-3 swings. Totalling the swing up, the hitters might get 25 swing across the day. I acknowledge that pitchers have the advantage of getting significant amounts of 'work' in.
Now if we consider that the depth of teams is limited, and the natural variance between teams highlights that half the teams you play will be good, and half will be bad, a conclusion you can draw is that half of the at bats a hitter has, and half the hitters a pitcher faces are 'junk' a bats. i.e of minimal developmental significance.
Lets compare that to a well constructed training session where there can be a T station with clear performance outcomes, a soft toss station with clear performance outcomes, hitting tunnel station with clear performance outcomes, and a live on field station with clear performance outcomes. As players rotate through these stations, they can expect to have around 100+ (25+ at each station) high quality, objectively assessed swings where, if there is a quality BP thrower, relative simulation of a game scenario can be established.
Similar with the bull pens, where counts and scenarios can be layered over defined technical outcomes where appropriate.
If we look at things from a defence perspective, literally 100's of ground balls/flyballs can be taken.
I'm sure the thinking leads us to what goes on within the US systems. But when you consider even MLB, there is more 'training' than playing. Yes there are 162 games, but there is live BP, cage BP, early work, sides between starts etc that are layered into the daily preparation for the day. As such, on any given day, a big league hitter is still practicing more than he is playing in the ranges of 50-100 swings, ground balls etc before the game workload.
So what's my point? Yes games are important, and where possible, yes we would love to play more of them. However the majority of player development is elicited through highly structured, high quality training sessions in all environments (club teams, state teams, development programs etc). i.e More total time at the field training AND playing.
My question going forward revolves around our coaching capacity (number of coaches) and quality (understanding of teaching) available to the local club environment where young players spend the majority of their time? This is where I believe there could be some real focus.
|
|
|
Post by johne on Jun 19, 2014 10:48:38 GMT 10
Nothing, and I mean NOTHING accelerates development like game play. There is no substitute for playing the game end of story.
|
|