|
Post by Goblin on Jul 3, 2008 18:16:17 GMT 10
At the June P & S meeting Rod Steer advised clubs of the promotion and relegations for the upcoming season.
--- Relegated from Division 1 to Division 2 - Melbourne & Cheltenham --- Promoted from Division 2 to Division 1 - Bonbeach & Sandringham --- Relegated from Division 2 to Division 3 - Werribee & Ormond Glenhuntly --- Promoted from Division 3 to Division 2 - Werribee & Ormond Glenhuntly
Rod advised clubs that no Division 3 club from the previous season was eligible to be promoted to Division 2. Therefore, the two clubs that had been relegated to Division 3 had again been reinstated into Division 2.
Rod also advised clubs that there have been discussions over the possible restructure of the competition. He informed the meeting that the competition structure could be changed to further develop clubs. Rod asked the clubs if they would like the Pennant Committee to continue to review the competition structure.
All clubs were in favour of the Pennant Committee to continue to review the competition structure.
|
|
fetom
Junior Member
Posts: 24
|
Post by fetom on Jul 4, 2008 8:54:27 GMT 10
Have there been any rumors of the possible restructure elements? Nothing like a bit of gossip to get a topic moving.
|
|
|
Post by Chardy on Jul 11, 2008 10:52:08 GMT 10
Victorian baseball needs to get in line with every other state in the country (including ACT who has only 6 teams in 1st grade) and have at absolute minimum, a best of three finals series.
This is baseball, not football and it should be played like baseball.
Has anyone heard if the VBL is going to pull their finger out and have this ready to go for 2008/2009?
|
|
|
Post by mastersballer on Jul 11, 2008 22:49:03 GMT 10
Minutes from the BV Presidents and Secretaries Meeting held Mon 7th of July.
Pennant Committee Report – Rod Steer asked clubs if both their President and Club coach could attend a meeting on Wednesday the 16th of July, which would review rules from the previous season as well as look at the competition structure.
Competition Structure – Peter Dihm informed clubs that discussion had taken place on a possible restructure of the competition.
In these discussions eligible criteria would still be a requirement for promotion within the Divisions.
There was also a thought to reward those clubs who are genuinely working towards developing their juniors and increasing participation numbers and to provide them with some form of protection from clubs poaching their juniors.
The structure of Division 2 would possibly change from an 8 team competition to a 10 or 12 team competition. If the competition is a 12 team competition there would be 22 games in a season, and if it was a 10 team competition their would either be a 18 or 27 game season, and Division 3 will be revamped depending on the changes to Division 2.
If the change was to go ahead there would be no promotion and relegation between Division 2 and Division 3, but the promotion and relegation system would remain between Division 1 and Division 2.
Peter Dihm informed clubs that information will be sent out to clubs regarding these possible changes, and asked if clubs could please take this information back their own club and come to the meeting on Wednesday with an answer.
|
|
|
Post by lowdown on Jul 16, 2008 21:15:35 GMT 10
I find it fascinating that they have left the 2 relegated clubs in 2nd div, and yet BV continue to harass clubs about their qualification in that same div. Obviously they have the blinkers on when it comes to up and coming clubs challenging the establishment, yet when confronted with a real problem, they seem to have no answer. 3rd div seems to have dropped away, if no clubs find themselves able( or more to the point wanting ) to be promoted, and yet they have threatened, continually, my club with the threat of relegation to 3rd div, if we cant guarantee we have the required amount of teams to stay in. At this stage we are looking at putting in a 5th senior team, and have found ourselves with more than 3 times the amount of kids we had 4 years ago. They shouldnt be giving it to us, it should be the other clubs that are failing to raise there respective bars!
|
|
|
Post by skinwardo on Jul 17, 2008 11:20:12 GMT 10
I agree with lowdown in some respects. There is always talk around town that certain clubs are failing in Div 2 to comply with there "criteria" yet are still allowed to remain in Div 2. I think it is unfair to not allow a club from Div 3 to be promoted and at least be challenged to build their junior structure that year. If they fail in their attempt, then that club can be relegated back to Div 3 for a minimum of 2 years to rebuild. With some of these clubs, there may of been circumstances beyond their control as to why the didn't have this criteria. What happens if at the start of the year, they have the teams but at the end of the year, for what ever reasons, those teams have dimminished some what. The teams have done their best to have their junior teams in place. It is far easier to attract and retain players being in Div 2 as opposed to Div 3. If you have a young senior list, that have a desire to play at the higher level, they want to go and play at that level.. It seems to me that BV is allowing the strong teams to continue to get sronger while allowing the others to try and build something for the future but continualy lose players because of their place in the lower grades......I like many others believe that a change needs to be made, but not at the detriment of baseball and the players who play the game for the love of it..
|
|
|
Post by Moose on Jul 18, 2008 13:21:12 GMT 10
Why not run your relegation and promotion like the Hockey? Have your 'Elite' grades (State league 1-3/4) where every club has one team and they play for relegation and promotion. The club's 2nds teams would then play in a 'Pennant competition: A, B, C (and so on) for promotion and relegation. 3rd's and 4ths can then be grouped into grades (Based on previous years results and team entry initially) and can form part of the 'Metro' league. So you have 3 teirs of competition, each club would have 1 team in State League, 1 (or 2, depending on strength and numbers) in pennant and the rest in Metro. This would mean that you have a competition for all skill levels.
|
|
|
Post by a on Jul 25, 2008 11:52:06 GMT 10
i think that we should just have mainstream divisions of 10 or 12 teams in each to get more games played and more of a real competition instead of what we have now. Don't get m wrong when i say tis i think that division shows great baseball talent and should stay and division 2 isn't bad either but from div 2 down to div 3 is shocking the div 3 a grade baseball s like the thirds in div 1 thats why i am saying cut the slack have a better all rounded comp and get respect as back into the senior competition
|
|
|
Post by flip on Jul 25, 2008 22:12:22 GMT 10
Does anyone know if anything has been said about the womens competition structure? Has some changes last year, lets hope for the competition sake that they just use the relegation and promotion process.
|
|
|
Post by blockout on Jul 28, 2008 8:57:50 GMT 10
I think the coments from a in regards to Division 3 being the equivilent of Div 1 3rds is very narrow minded.. There are a number of players that would walk into a Div 1 side, ( if they wanted to ) but choose not to due to loyalty towards the club they probably started their career at...Also, granted their are a coulple of teams that would struggle with the level of play if they were promoted, but to tar the whole division with the same brush is extremely prejudice and lacks any validity.....looking at the GF from Div 3 last year, I think would have been a great game to watch.. Obviously the two best teams from their Div got to the GF and played off....and judging by the scores, it wasnt a blowout by either team and looked like it went down to wire as it was.....It is negative attitudes by persons like yourself, that put the game on the plattau that it is on at this time....
|
|
|
Post by southpaw22 on Aug 4, 2008 17:18:46 GMT 10
Good call blockout.... as a now Div 3 player who has played Div 1 way back in the 1980's with Geelong , I can say that facing Richards or Hogan from Springvale in last seasons comp is no walk in the park.... there are some talented players in the Div 3 section.... not right through each lineup.... but they are there!
Granted there are some very poor teams skill wise... but if nothing else, it gives players & some clubs the opportunity to play week in week out at a sport they love with a passion and can play till their twilight years... .
|
|
r8
Junior Member
Posts: 11
|
Post by r8 on Aug 4, 2008 17:33:32 GMT 10
you are talking about 2 pitchers in a whole competition. So you may have to face these pitchers once every 7 or 8 weeks.
Div 1 lets say you play Essendon, Blackburn, Doncaster, Waverley, Sunshine and then maybe even Melbourne or Cheltenham in that order - here are the pitchers you will face -
Spear, Hipke, Edwards, Davies Wilson, Hardy, Hogan, Bright Blewjas Hendricks, Flemming Wiltshire Cassidy Ellis, Blackley
every single one has pitched at Claxton Shield, 11 of them are ex-pro or pro.
This is why you would consider Div 3 to be considered Div 1 3rd grade.
|
|
orcy
Junior Member
Posts: 49
|
Post by orcy on Aug 5, 2008 11:02:03 GMT 10
personally, i think there need to be more games in the season. why are div 1 not playing 50 or 60 games? with more and more clubs getting playing lights in the east, surely games on weeknights at local grounds are possible. what about Friday night/Saturday arvo double hearers?
It would also give some of the juniors and more of the 3rds/4ths guys some chance to actually watch the firsts play.
|
|
|
Post by johne on Aug 5, 2008 11:36:36 GMT 10
personally, i think there need to be more games in the season. why are div 1 not playing 50 or 60 games? with more and more clubs getting playing lights in the east, surely games on weeknights at local grounds are possible. what about Friday night/Saturday arvo double hearers? It would also give some of the juniors and more of the 3rds/4ths guys some chance to actually watch the firsts play. we should diffently be playing more games. No doubt about it. 50 or 60 might be a bit much but I like your thinking. We play far less games in victoria than the leagues in other states.
|
|
|
Post by Chardy on Aug 13, 2008 10:37:18 GMT 10
I would like to see a spilt take place halfway through the season.
The top 6 of Div 1 play each other after the Xmas break, two games every weekend - Saturday evenings and Sunday arvo's and get rid of mid-weekers at Altona all together (play Saturday instead) each team plays each other 4 times and you have 20 games in the 2nd half.
The bottom 4 will play a similar comp but have mid-weekers at Altona and the top two teams come up from Div 2 to play in this comp. At the end of the comp, the bottom placed teams go back to Div 2. This will allow the two teams coming up from Div 2 to get a bit more confidence without having to play against the top 6 from Div 1. Clearly, most teams that have been coming up having been struggling against the top 6 (except Donny in recent memory)
any thoughts?
|
|
|
Post by Capt Kirk on Aug 13, 2008 14:19:11 GMT 10
Love it Chins, not sure how long it took you to come up with it but great idea.
|
|
|
Post by baseball widow on Aug 13, 2008 16:11:29 GMT 10
my god i would never see my husband... the baseball widow
|
|
|
Post by GUEST on Aug 15, 2008 18:05:13 GMT 10
50 to 60 Games- Give me a break. We are not professionals. Between work and family, you would lose most players over 25 with that structure. Here's an idea- Make Div 1+2 both 12 team comps. They play each other twice (22 games) Thats 18 weekends and 4 mid-weeks and then Finals. SEASON OVER. Start an "elite' Midweek comp of 4 teams that play a doubleheader on rotation at Altona, Geelong, La Trobe and Doncaster. This comp can be used for Claxton and U23 selections as well as allowing Div 3 'guns' to try out against the best without deserting their club. This comp could start in late Oct. All pitchers 1 Inn. maximum so as not to muck up the main club comp. This could be 12 to 18 games long. On top of the 22 club game season this would give the signed guys and the young guns a chance to play more without making everyone play more.
|
|
|
Post by Chardy on Aug 15, 2008 18:45:25 GMT 10
Club coaches have a hard enough time having their pitchers pitch outside of club ball during the season for Claxton Shield "tryouts" - I for one wouldnt be interested in throwing in these games or having any of my team mates throwing in them either.
12 Teams in Div 1 - no way. 10 teams is already too much with the bottom 2 teams struggling enough against the top 6 as it is.
I can't see anything wrong with 50 games, if we want to get baseball off the ground then this is where it should start - with club ball. As it is, most guys are at baseball 3 times a week most weeks with training and games, if you limit trainings to once a week and have 2 games and 1 training then its still 3 times a week.
|
|
|
Post by GUEST on Aug 15, 2008 22:08:31 GMT 10
I cant imagine any coach having a problem with his pitcher throwing one serious inning mid week. It is just like a bull pen which all pitchers need to do, but always find excuses not to. You might even get to throw against your own team mates to see how you would go. Better still after your 1 inning on the mound you can jump in at RF and take your hacks. You must be young and single cos I dont hear any married guys with jobs jumping at more games.
|
|
|
Post by Chardy on Aug 16, 2008 18:10:59 GMT 10
im sorry but even one inning is more work than throwing 40 pitches in a bullpen. bullpens are thrown at 75% at absolute most. There is no way I would throw a pen at 100% or throw an inning at 75% so they are both completely different.
and i'm 30 - I hope that is still considered young....
|
|
|
Post by Interested on Aug 17, 2008 17:54:10 GMT 10
Sad to hear that view Chins. I hear the new Claxton coach is all for such a mid week comp to help pick a side and to give a tougher edge to what would normally be practice match trials.
|
|
|
Post by Chardy on Aug 17, 2008 21:23:35 GMT 10
yes, I have just been made aware that a seperate competition of sorts is being arranged.
|
|
|
Post by Goblin on Aug 18, 2008 19:48:11 GMT 10
Goodaye Chin,
Care to enlighten us to what this "separate" competition actually entails
|
|
|
Post by Chardy on Aug 18, 2008 23:15:38 GMT 10
well i'm not sure what i'm allowed to say as yet but I can check Wed night when we play against them and see if they are going to announce it themselves or not.
|
|
|
Post by p26 on Aug 20, 2008 23:35:41 GMT 10
WA league play two games every week. One games each night on a Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday and Friday and two games on a Saturday. All teams then play on a Sunday.
To make it fair, you also play the same team twice each week. This prevents one team from playing Tuesday and then coming up against a different team on the Sunday who had to play on the Saturday night.
Each club gets two x 2 game series (one home, one away) against each other club. As a result you play each team four times. 10 clubs = 36 games.
They also do 3 game series for all playoff games. As each team is used to playing 2 games every week, most can cope with the issue of depth required to win 2 out of 3 games in a week.
|
|
|
Post by Ace on Sept 2, 2008 15:33:52 GMT 10
The Perth system has merit.
2 games a week and 1 training session a week, as opposed to to 1 and 2 can only be good for the sport.
|
|
|
Post by homer29 on Sept 2, 2008 21:51:41 GMT 10
We can not be seen to be promoting clubs from Division 3 who finished out of the top 2. From last year Preston springs to mind. They have been actively pushing many models to try and get their club in Division 2 for this season and have been knocked back many times by the Pennant Committee.
As a player who has been in Division's 1, 2 and 3 in the last 7 years, the step between Division 2 and 3 is significant, but no where near as hard as Division 2 to Division 1. The integrity of the competition is being compromised at times with sides 9 & 10 in Division 1, but placing teams from the bottom spectrum of the lower grade into the higher grade is not going to help the club either.
The main logistical nightmare for additional games is 1) Women's competition, many clubs have womens side and having home games on both days of the weekend becomes a scheduling nightmare.
THe midweek games at the club have been a success though, my club reaps the rewards with financial gains greater than most Sundays 1sts home games and a game is always more enjoyable than training.
2) Umpire numbers - We are struggling as it is and most players will tell you the talent depth is shallow in that department once you get beyond the top 10-12. Playing an additional 9-20 games will severely overtax our current umpires unless we get more ASAP.
More games can surely be good for the sport though, much better than the current system. But we cannot have two super leagues and a beer league for the lack of a better term for it where the rest play or the competition will not improve.
|
|
|
Post by Chardy on Sept 9, 2008 10:21:17 GMT 10
The competition structure was brought up, 12 teams in each of Div 1 & 2. Leaves 2 in Div 3, we can all play the crystal ball game and guess who is left behind. The vote was in favor but it was decided no action to happen this year. That's pretty interesting. So bottom two teams this year would stay up and be joined by top two div 2 clubs and same with div 2/3? Could be interesting to see what kind of impact a club can have if being allowed to do two years in the higher division instead of just one before relegation. I think that structure would be a good initiative. It would deffinitley benefit the fringe dwelling sides. Teams that have the skills but not the juniors. On the other hand it will expose the bottom sides, but who knows perhaps formalising this proposed format would be enough for all clubs to really have a look at where they're at and almost force some sort of development. It may also raise the question as to whether the competition can sustain as many clubs as it does? I suspect that for some clubs who have watched their junior programs dwindle over the last few years, time maybe running out.
|
|
|
Post by p26 on Sept 9, 2008 11:38:57 GMT 10
If this was to get up, perhaps it would be better to relegate every two years? Gives the teams coming up more of a chance to recruit and foster homegrown talent if you get a second bite of the cherry. Ie, how much better could some of the existing players be in their second year of div 1 having gained a year's experience?
It also ensures that the teams coming up are really dominant in the lower grade rather than just having a good year or having a good import get them there and then leave.
Thoughts on this?
|
|