CCF CIRCA 2010

[FFC Mariner]

Just throwing this in but most grounds are council owned arent they?

Dont they make the decision to close grounds or is that the club officials themselves?

 

[starfish]

Just throwing this in but most grounds are council owned arent they?

Dont they make the decision to close grounds or is that the club officials themselves?

The clubs have the responsibility to open or close the grounds - they are the hirers and are liable to pay council for any damage (bit of a joke really considering the state most of them in).

All bar Budgewoi and Pluim Park are Council owned which is why so many wash out games were played on Pluim and why it is in such a crap condition by the end of the season usually - another reason given for not playing washouts except in the top grades.

 

[marcus67]

Ground closures - its true it will be largely up to the clubs to make the call (unless Councils close all grounds which can still happen), and there will be greater implications of closing when the field was merely 'damp' which is what happened on some fields in previous years.

The system as I understand it, will be to make a call in the morning, on Green (open), Amber (possible open later at Referees judgment, I think) and Red (closed for the day). Any club that closes a ground and therein appears to benefit their team/s, would want to have a very solid foundation for doing so. Remember to call 'Red' now wipes the whole round across every grade affected. A disadvantaged club can easily ask the question of the CCF to investigate, because it would be quite obvious (certainly if it happened more than on a once off basis) where this behaviour was occuring late in the season, but not earlier.

Again I can only speak to my own view on ground closures, but as I am involved in the ground decisions re Gavenlock (a very poorly drained and thus weathering ground), by July/August I took the view last season that we were not going to get any kudos from Council to save the grass for the Cricket. There were games where we shovelled sand into the puddles to get it into a state that the refs would say it was safe. By end of August the ground was bare, as it always is every year.  Every club should be applying this approach (including Budgewoi!).

Mick- last year was a good year weather wise, compared to the previous year. I remember playing 1 game in a 6 week span as a result of wash outs, byes, and spare weekends that my team did not have a re-scheduled game on for whatever reason. In the end, I think we got roughly 12 games (including a couple of washouts that were re-scheduled).

Again only my preference, but I'd rather play 16-18 games virtually guaranteed, with some of these recorded as 2-2 draws, than have the risk of another 12 game, interupted season with higher integrity in the scoring system. I'm old, and I need to play not sit on my backside and get fat.

The answer to your question is yes you are more likely to get 16 games under this system in a bad weather year, if your club opens your home ground at all costs (and I know Ourimbah is a similar type of field to Gavo, so it can be a bold call to open sometimes). 

 

[marinermick]

The answer to your question is yes you are more likely to get 16 games under this system in a bad weather year, if your club opens your home ground at all costs (and I know Ourimbah is a similar type of field to Gavo, so it can be a bold call to open sometimes). 

I cannot see how we will play more games under this system.

Last season we had two total washouts and three partial washouts which were made up during the season. If this season's rules were in place there would have only been thirteen games played instead of sixteen.

In every case the ground was unplayable and would have been deemed unplayable by the referee.

I am just counting my lucky stars that I have no games on the second field at Ourimbah. A bit of rain and that field is unplayable and dangerous for weeks.

And that is under, as you say, a season with good weather.

 

[starfish]

I agree marinermick.

Under last years system you eventually played all 16 games with a result and no games classed as a "draw/washout".

Assuming you are not playing PL, Div 1 or junior A grade, then under this system, given the same scenario this year you would play 14 games but only 11 results counting and have 5 classed as "2-2 draw/washout".

Can someone tell us that this is not the case.

 

[FFC Mariner]

Inbuilt excuse for finishing 5th though isnt it

 

[marinermick]

Inbuilt excuse for finishing 5th though isnt it

if i come fifth five seasons in a row there be hell to pay

 

[Part_Timer]

glad i play in nnsw comp..

 

[dibo]

It's spelt "blonde".
Just sayin'.

It's an adjective with masculine and feminine forms. When referring to a female, it has an 'e', no 'e' for a male, same as in French (from which we drew the word). Generally speaking though it can be used intelligibly in either form.

What really grinds my gears, is this 'if one game in your division is canned for the weekend all are' rule. Beyond lame

Not a CCF decision, was put to a vote at a meeting of all clubs in January. Fair enough your club or my club may not have voted for the proposal but that is how it works, majority rules.

That's pretty much the beginning and end of it. Democracy works on the basis that people know what they want and deserve to get it good and hard. If there are issues, the people who are accountable are those that voted for the system.

 

[FFC Mariner]

Notes that it is raining...........

 

[hasbeen]

It's spelt "blonde".
Just sayin'.

It's an adjective with masculine and feminine forms. When referring to a female, it has an 'e', no 'e' for a male, same as in French (from which we drew the word). Generally speaking though it can be used intelligibly in either form.

What really grinds my gears, is this 'if one game in your division is canned for the weekend all are' rule. Beyond lame

Not a CCF decision, was put to a vote at a meeting of all clubs in January. Fair enough your club or my club may not have voted for the proposal but that is how it works, majority rules.

That's pretty much the beginning and end of it. Democracy works on the basis that people know what they want and deserve to get it good and hard. If there are issues, the people who are accountable are those that voted for the system.

You, (the players) have an AGM. You vote for people to do the work and make the decisions on your behalf. That's what they did at the meeting concerned, and the majority voted for the current situation. Simple really.

 

[dibo]

I play in Sydney, so am personally unaffected. But otherwise, all true. Carry on.

 

[marinermick]

It's spelt "blonde".
Just sayin'.

It's an adjective with masculine and feminine forms. When referring to a female, it has an 'e', no 'e' for a male, same as in French (from which we drew the word). Generally speaking though it can be used intelligibly in either form.

What really grinds my gears, is this 'if one game in your division is canned for the weekend all are' rule. Beyond lame

Not a CCF decision, was put to a vote at a meeting of all clubs in January. Fair enough your club or my club may not have voted for the proposal but that is how it works, majority rules.

That's pretty much the beginning and end of it. Democracy works on the basis that people know what they want and deserve to get it good and hard. If there are issues, the people who are accountable are those that voted for the system.

You, (the players) have an AGM. You vote for people to do the work and make the decisions on your behalf. That's what they did at the meeting concerned, and the majority voted for the current situation. Simple really.

This is true but future decisions these people make is something we cannot predict. We vote them in good faith that they will look after us.

I will certainly be making enquiries as to how my club voted, who voted and ways to voice my disapproval.

 

[FFC Mariner]

How many clubs were the said meeting? Assume a quorum was reached...................

 

[From the dug out]

How many clubs were the said meeting? Assume a quorum was reached...................

I heard all clubs were in attendance and that the voting towards this was nearly if not 100% approved by all?

 

[marcus67]

There were 2-3 reps (fixtures officers/coaches etc) from every club (not just the delegates), and from memory, the decision was supported by roughly 70-80% of those present.

 

[offtheball]

Excuse my ignorance of the proceedings, but are the said delegates aware of what they will be voting on prior to their arrival at the meeting.

Have they had time to discuss such an important issue at a club level prior to voting.

 

[WELL INFORMED]

Excuse my ignorance of the proceedings, but are the said delegates aware of what they will be voting on prior to their arrival at the meeting.

Have they had time to discuss such an important issue at a club level prior to voting.

Can advise you that no agenda was put forward but there was quite a good roll up with some clubs having 2-3 people in attendance (most people I have ever seen at a CCF meeting). From memory the discussion started on what to do with washouts and there was a lengthy discussion where  various options were put forward by CCF and the fors and againsts were brought up by the clubs. It was then put to a vote but I do not recall the exact count for for and against but can remember that it was a clear cut decision. This might sound a bit selfish but as a fixtures officer that spent a fair percentage of my Friday and saturday nights last season advising teams of new arrangements for the following day ,the end result means that get some of my life back.
What people don't realise that with all the wet weather last year most fixtures officers could not comtemplate a night out on the weekend as sometimes changes were made as late as 9pm.
Again i know it sounds selfish but in reality the people who think a person should do this are maybe a bit selfish themselves.

 

[Paolo]

Sounds to me like clubs n ccf put it in the 'too hard basket'

That said it doesn't affect me

 

[marinermick]

Excuse my ignorance of the proceedings, but are the said delegates aware of what they will be voting on prior to their arrival at the meeting.

Have they had time to discuss such an important issue at a club level prior to voting.

Again i know it sounds selfish but in reality the people who think a person should do this are maybe a bit selfish themselves.

The new competitions manager, when they find an appropriate candidate, should rectify this. This is a job for a paid staff member not a volunteer.

As Paolo said, it was put in the "too hard basket" and the solution was a cop out. Not at all in the best interests of the paying customer and football on the Coast.

Could well become an issue for the Department of Fair Trading.