Player's wants (original post withdrawn)

[wako]

Some clubs believe that they are entitled to benefit from the efforts invested in developing junior players by having them play in their seniors, rather than effectively act as feeders for other clubs. Some clubs care more about this than others, some clubs are in a position for this to affect them more than others, etc. etc - the usual variance of circumstances and philosophies.

[wako]

I don't know anything about the situation you speak of, my post is based on a generalisation of a lot of observations from a lot of baseball and cricket clubs over the years. I do know that in the Geelong Cricket Association, at one point (probably still applicable), a club could justifiably refuse a clearance if the player had played a certain amount of junior cricket there and had played fewer than 20(?) senior games there.

If a player is really intent on moving and flatly refuses to play for the club they are moving from, I don't see what the club has to gain by refusing a clearance.

[homer29]

having been in Vealey's situation at the same club a decade ago he has three choices.

Try a second appeal at the pennant committee (or its modern name) although that never seems to get far unless the archaic fossils who used to sit on it are gone.

Sit out and be lost to the game for a year, although that does not help get a clearance next year as it leaves bad taste in the clubs mouth.

or if you want to play baseball, suck it up, play your best and then leave the following year when the club has not convinced you its the place where you want to play your baseball.

Not an easy one for all concerned and very disappointing for the player who cannot play where he wants to.

Seems that you are better to leave a club either in last year under 18s or 2nd year seniors as there is a stigma about players leaving as soon as they become a senior player.

[wyatt33]

If it's the kid I'm thinking of, he played at morrabin last year, and was clearly the only good quality player at morrabin, and would be a a very handy addition to any other div 2 rotation(especially down at mully;). I would think he owes nothing to berwick, and he should be allowed to go wherever he wants. There isn't mich point in standing in someone's way who doesn't want to be there. We at the rebel dome, have seen plenty of great young players move away from the club, and although not happy about it at the time, you just can't do anything about it.

[stuartcapel]

Wouldn't that create some sort of inconsistency though?

So you'd allow a first year senior player (his first non-junior eligible year anyway) to simply move clubs for nothing but effectively tie a player to a club for a year because of relegation?

[stockley]

The whole clearance system stinks anyway...

There is way that any player should be tied to any club, unless there are financial reasons.

Having probably said the opposite over the years (I'm the great back-flipper), I believe clubs should never refuse a clearance. Relegation, junior development, etc, no excuse.

As for being a feeder club for others, aka having a strong junior program, then losing lots of juniors to other clubs, if your club has this issue, maybe its time to look at why its happening and develop a plan to stop it. Whether its due to club culture, or anything else, it should affect the choice a player makes to move clubs, as it is generally not the players issue to solve it.

[Deleted]

I agree Stockley. I know nothing about the individual circumstance above but essentially if a player (Junior or Senior) has not drawn a wage (as a Coach or whatever) nor been given significant financial benefits (subsidised trips etc) then anyone should play whereever they like and if a club cant hold onto players then the clubs needs to look at what it is offering the player that has them looking elsewhere.

Players PAY subs to play, so why would the club have any right to hold on to any player that PAYS ?

[sanchez2]

I think you should only have the right to refuse a clearance if the club fully developed them as a junior (3-5 seasons of juniors). It is crazy that in such a small amateur sport we have so much politics. If players are wanting to leave your club then instead of trying to drag them back you should address the issues as to why everyone is leaving.

The player mentioned should be cleared, I know Upwey has cleared many players over the years, with many returning to play at the club later on in their baseball life.

[stockley]

Sept 29, 2011 11:04:15 GMT 10 sanchez2 said:

I think you should only have the right to refuse a clearance if the club fully developed them as a junior (3-5 seasons of juniors). It is crazy that in such a small amateur sport we have so much politics. If players are wanting to leave your club then instead of trying to drag them back you should address the issues as to why everyone is leaving.

The player mentioned should be cleared, I know Upwey has cleared many players over the years, with many returning to play at the club later on in their baseball life.

Whilst I understand you're thinking, I respectfully disagree. I believe no club has the right to claim they've fully developed anybody. With both winter and summer seasons available, who's to say where the player was really developed. Add to that the potential of state players being further developed within that system.

What happens if the player has had parents/coaches at a summer club that are more looking after the players rather than developing them, and the winter club they play at has extremely good coaching? Said player decides he wants to leave the summer club to go and player under the same coaching that he has in winter club, so he can further develop, and the club knocks him back because they have "developed him through their junior program". You simply can't put that up as an excuse IMHO, as it leaves the door too wide open.

If you've got a good junior system, but players are leaving when they hit the senior levels - there is a problem and you need to address it as a club. Holding on to juniors or even seniors based on the fact they have been developed at your club, or any other reason except financial, has no merit, and should be stopped.

If a player doesn't want to play for you, don't force them. If you do the right thing by the player, you never know, they might just come back after a couple of years... If you do the wrong thing - you'll lose them forever.

[rebelwithoutaclue]

This is really a bunch of BS.
Moorabbin are saying to the snitzel "play with us or not at all".

Its an Amatuer sport. We pay to play. And we don't get choice for that?

Great way to encourage a good bloke to give the game up completely.

[sanchez2]

I do actually agree with you for the most part stockley, but I think in some occasions clubs have poured a lot of resources into developing individual kids, most of these cases should get cleared without all the fuss.

[stuartcapel]

Winston Churchill supposedly once said “Capitalism is the worst economic system, except for all the others”. Plug that into a parlance for this situation and you could say “The clearance system is the worst system, except for all the others.” I see nothing wrong with the current scenario as it is there in some respects to protect the integrity of the game.

In regards the young man’s situation, if Moorabbin has knocked him back, then the club is simply doing what they, under the rules are allowed to do. The player has the right of appeal before the Pennant Committee (I believe it is still called that).

(Actually, as an aside, wouldn’t it be interesting if the young man went to the tribunal and the club delegate was his father! That could lead to interesting discussion around the dinner table...or even the drive home.)

I would doubt that the Pennant Committee would refuse the clearance unless there was some mitigating circumstance(s) tying him to the club, such as the club being ‘protected’ following relegation.

[larry42]

I'm from a club that has always struggled to put good junior numbers on the field but i firmly believe that its up to the club to set the right environment to make the kids/seniors want to stay and play the game at the club, whether they are 14 years old or 24 years old. If you can't do that then the player has every right to walk, financial of course, to any club they would want to play at.

As far as owing the club that they have grown up playing at, i don't believe that arguement at all. although there are clubs who look after and develop their juniors better than others, the kids pay fees from as young as tball level all the way through. The 'investment' is in the coaching and the time given to the players, but as a general rule of thumb juniors see a multitude of coaches during their junior careers, and in the end its an amateur sport where players should be able to move around as desired.

When i was 15 my old man was asked if i could play at another club to further my baseball. I wanted to go to work with Charlie Warner but the old man said i need to stay to help the club out in the future and pay the club back. He had been my only coach!! My old man and i still agree to disagree even now and that was 24 years ago.

[oldracer]

well if you've heard the story Larry, you would have had to put gladwarp on your mask anyway......
Having been at a couple of pretty successful clubs both summer and winter and helped put the time into the kids, I feel it's a clubs responsibility to provide the best coaching that they possiibly can, thats what the parents pay the subs for so commitment to the club is covered by the kid playing there and paying fees, no further beholding to the club.
It is then up to the club to provide the right atmosphere for both player and parents to be long term fixtures and hopefully take up committee duties etc as they go on, the onus is on the club.
The issue of funds being distributed to rep players is another story. Should the parents have been part of the fund raising efforts to provide these funds, commitment covered, if they haven't, the player and family then owe some service to the club, IMO.

[flameon99]

Veale should get cleared, he will learn alot more at berwick than morrabin.

[wako]

I understand that posts sometimes need to be deleted, but the thread is now incoherent.

In case anyone fails to read the "started by" field on the index page, please note that I did not start this thread, even though my first post is now the first post that appears.

The original first post was by bcc07 questioning why a club would knock back a clearance to an 18 year old who wanted to leave.

[Deleted]

It seems that the person who initiated this thread has withdrawn his comments, rendering subsequent remarks somewhat confusing, as wako suggests.

The issue of player clearances remains a worthwhile discussion, although we should keep it general rather than referring to specific cases when we may not be in full knowledge of all circumstances.

[bundysundy]

Sept 29, 2011 21:28:49 GMT 10 kc said:

It seems that the person who initiated this thread has withdrawn his comments, rendering subsequent remarks somewhat confusing, as wako suggests.

Thats good to read. I thought for a minute there that the Andrew Bolt ruling had already taken effect on the forum.

[Deleted]

bundy, there would be a few people around who'd like to whack the Forum for all sorts of "misdemeanours" and have us apply the gag on healthy discussion wherever possible.

But no, not our doing. Not this time.

[bcc07]

Just to like to note, that I did in fact start this thread.
Veale HAS now been cleared and he WILL play on Sunday.
My comments were asked to be removed and I did just that.
Sorry for the inconvenience

[Deleted]

Well done for sorting that, bcc07.

[wg1234]

To late to get cleared before Sunday?

[colind]

Good luck Nick and I hope all goes well at your new club. Great young player, who is a asset to the game.

If a player wants to leave, please let them leave. Young people have a lot of choices on what they can do on the weekends, so lets not drive them from the game.

regards
colin

[perfeckt]

Just thinkin' about young players moving clubs. If a club has a truly successful and vibrant juniour program from T-ball onwards as well as a successful 18's and seniors program then I think it makes sense that a bottle neck of very good players will occur. What does a young player with a passion to play at the highest state comp' level do when there are experienced Div' 1, State rep', Oz rep, Ace players and "signed" players coming back into a club team ? I always encouraged my young (once upon a time ) one to stick with his club. Up down, in out, whatever but that is progression and learning and that's where your club needs you at that point in time. My point is that if you (as a club) are doing all the good things then simple mathematics will tell you that you will lose some great talent to other clubs as there is not enough room for them at the level they want to play at, whether they're ready for that stage or not. Is it disapointing to lose them? Absolutely. Is it better for the player ? Who knows. Is it good for the health of the competition and overall club progression ? I think so.

[Buzz]

Unbelievable,that a club that is trying to get players would try this sort of thing.Therefore undermining their own chances of rebuilding.No player in their right minds would consider moving to a club if they have not changed their ways by now.This episode has been going on for a few weeks and all it does it put a sour taste in the mouth's of players that were considering movements.Maybe,just maybe,those involved might learn the lesson,but,alas,i think this has been burnt in & will never be extinguished.Disappointing.

[gtrain2]

Given that Moorabbin acted completely within the rules and that it seems everybody has the opinion that clubs have no grounds to hold players the rules should be changed immediately.

No intents required, no clearances required just a tick off from your old club that you are financial.

[dickieknee]

In a more general tone. (as I have not kept up to date on the original subject of this thread). Say a U18, U16 player WANTS to change clubs, but this would make the team move from a 9 player team to an 8. Do you still let the player go? Do you let the team go one man down for the season?
Again. This is no comment on a specific move. This is just a general question over club need and player want.