Saturday, January 30, 2010

South Hobart finish Wollongong tour on winning note


Photo: South Hobart squad in Wollongong [Vicki Woods]

South Hobart's youth side beat Wollongong Wolves' under-18s 3-2 in Wollongong this morning.

South Hobart, which led 1-0 at half-time and 3-0 at one stage, produced a solid performance, according to coach Ken Morton.

"It was nice to finish our two-match tour on a good note," said Morton.

"I'm not just happy with the result, but the performance was consistent."

Jim Pennicott netted twice and Will Ross once.

*****

University are reported to be considering dropping out of Division One and competing just in Division Two.

They are canvassing some of the other Division One teams on the issue.

Some other clubs will also have difficulty in fielding under-19 sides and that is believed to be the fly in the ointment as far as competing in Division One is concerned.

Some people are envisaging a situation where just three clubs can meet the requirements of Division One.

That, of course, would make the competition unviable.

36 comments:

Anonymous said...

If only 3 teams can field an U19 side....

FFT could leave Div 1 and Div 1 Reserves as they are, scrap the U19 section of the division, and place those 3 U19s sides in the Premier League division. If that makes any sense.

Or, and 11 team Premier League? One would assume the 3 clubs are Beachside, Metro and Hobart United. All could be competitive. League winner could be decided through a 6-team finals series following the current structure of the A-League. A finals series has the advantage of attracting spectators who otherwise wouldn't attend.

Anonymous said...

Metro Beachside Nelson I would imagine would be the 3.

stuff the 11 team premier league just have a state league :)

adrian said...

well just goes to prove Uni should have been dumped out of the premier league last yr, when it did not have its own Under 19's squad.

If Uni cannot satisfy the leagues requirements that tough but so be it, we should not making any concessions for them. Huon Valley and Kingston Cannons took it on the chin.

So my point; Uni needs to get on the recruitment drive.

jerrie kruijver said...

adrian,recruitment should be a year round continuous effort that every club should be involved in.leagues should be decided on who meets the standard of play to fit into a particular league.compared to countries where football is major sport we are very small potatoes indeed.in most western european countries even the smallest amateurclubs field at least 6 seniorsides an double that amount of youthteams from under 18 to under 10.most clubs here are struggling tofield more then 3 seniorsides.the sheer number of clubs and teams forces administrators to have many leagues and subleagues.we dont have that problem here.we can have very competive leagues here all the same by removing the so called youth requirement and utilizing the best players we have and let them play.if the top premierleague clubs can field 2 premierleaguestandard teams then is it not ludicrous to lock them away in a reserve league and have a substandard div1 supply the next premierleague team.the top div1 teams would be far better of competing against the premierleaguereserves.also make use of the teams in the lower divisions to make div2 and 1 competetive by relegation and promotion.the same should be done with the so called social leagues.it is silly to not use them and make every league competetive.we have the players capable of playing at a good standard all we have to rethink is is how we use them.

Brian Roberts said...

I was saddened to read in today's paper of the passing of Rapid and Christian Utd .

Rapid a club with a proud tradition for whom I played to disappear virtually moves me to tears .


Likewise Christian Utd . As their inaugural coach albeit Divisions 4 the 3 to see them lose their identity grieves me .

Whay is it so should be a major concern to all Football followers , FFT Directors and staff .

With a nondescript name like Southern F C I anticipate an early demise for the new identity .

Better to play in Division 4 and retain your individuality than just vanish.

The most significant factor is the player pool will decrease .

Two senior and reserve sides do not equal 44 players . After amalgamations the player pool ends up at 29 or thereabouts for the first year then decreases with the passing seasons .

Appropos University and others not meeting benchmarks for starters perhaps FFT have priced them selves out the customers reach.

madmcglone said...

As former player of Rapid I concur with your grievance rian. Great club, very friendly and with an illustrious past.

common sense said...

its not as if theres not enough players but there is too many at some clubs and not enough at others.

if uni got of its collective arse and recruited rather than talking down the criteria it might be a better thing.

also other prem clubs who are struggling to get a 19s should be players at the bigger clubs who would be willing to move to get a game rather than play 18s

jerrie kruijver said...

brian does that not prove the point that clubs should be active and get out to recruit people from anywhere they can?you cant rely year in year out on some people to just come walking thru the gate to come and play.the emphasis is so much today on standard of play and the amount of siverware a club wins.a succesful club is not the one that wins all the prizes but is the one that every year puts more teams on the park from every agegroup and whatever ability.

common sense said...

so jerry do you reckon south could throw a few youngsters uni's way - maybe loan them out?

common sense said...

anyone know how the TIS boys faired attheir challeng tournament not bonus points just reuslts?

jerrie kruijver said...

no reason why south should not help uni out,however it would be more productive to assist uni to recruit new people.we dont want to fight over the existing playerspool but should go flat out to increase the number of players availlable.the gvt gave 400000bucks for youth developement.it was spent on a few slightly above average players. while the main spin off from that investment should have been a huge increase in youth playernumbers.to throw a club relegated from the premierleague that was fairly competive in that league in the latter part of last season to the swamp of mickey mouse divisions that we prefer most of our teams to playin is ridiculous

Brian Roberts said...

Hard to respond to all the comments .

When I was with Christian Utd we were a competitive Division 3 / 4 side then after I left they climbed up the ladder and then accepted an invitation to go into Div 1 . The core that carried them into the higher grade left and we now see the long term repercussion.

Playing in Div 1 and Premier league is not about recruiting players its about moving paper , meeting benchmarks and raising money . If you can not satisfy the above its a waste of time recruiting players.

It is better to be content with your lot rather than be like that myhological Greek chappie who flew to close to the sun .

In respect of the two clubs concerned my guess is one got tired and the other couldn't maintain the pace .

My permmanent beef with Smithy when I was on the board was that Soccer Tas did not go out of its way to encourage the formation of div 4.5.6 clubs .

We lack critical mass.

Anonymous said...

It was neessary to include benchmarks for Div 1 to drive recruitment, but some would say the bench mark was too high too quickly.
U19s don't come along everyday. Clubs need to build up from U13s and 14s where the numbers are and develop their youth teams up the ages to U19.
A more productive move would be to put the bench mark at U15s or 17s perhaps and then step it up an age group each year.

It's important to remember that these benchmarks were agreed upon by all premier and div 1 teams at the time. I think FFTs support for clubs looking to build their youth teams left a little to be desired.

jerrie kruijver said...

anonymus,while i understand the reasoning for those benchmarks to force clubs to go out and recruit it simply has not worked.it has not produced a huge influx of youngsters.all it has done is create a div 1 that is not based on the footballprowess of the teams but instead on who can meet the benchmarks.as the gouverning body of football in tassie fft must take control of primaryschool football and get the clubs involved in it.too many of these kids are lost by the time they are in highschool.that will take a huge teameffort by both fft and the clubs.but the rewards could be enormous.if we could retain 60%of allthose kids in the sport and see them go on to playing seniorfootball the sport will be booming.

Bill said...

Jerrie, I concur. Only 50% of juniors make the change from U12 to U13 on the eastern shore. Most of these kids move onto other sports that they are good at.
Simply missing the mark and trying to make up U19 teams from thin air doesn't work, you need to look further down the age groups. To get an U19 team may take up to 4 years, and a lot of hard work, assuming 17 year olds would play U19 as in some cases they do.

John Parry said...

Jerrie,

All that will occur if FFT get more involved in primary school soccer is that the numbers at that level will reduce.

Central Region has increase 175% (ie almost 3 fold) in the last 10 years.

The youth and senior leagues have hardly increased at all.

FFT require a staff of 3 to run around 150 games each weekend.

Central region ran 178 games each weekend last year with out employing anyone.

The main problem is that it takes too long to get under 12 players to where they can play under 19s.

If instead of having under 19, each club was required to have an under 15 and an under 13 I do not think the problems with filling teams would be an issue.

Currently clubs need to chart a course from under 13 to under 19.

If something goes wrong, ie coach leaves and takes team with him, everything falls in a heap.

The under 19 has nothing to do with developing players and a lot about attracting coaches who will bring a team with him.

I was on Soccer Tas board when the requirement was put forward by the CEO, I said at the time it would not develop players, I have never changed my view. All it does is put a lot of administrative pressure on clubs.

IT DOES NOT develop players, most good players play premier league at 15 or 16. Most players who are 18 playing in the under 19 league, just quite the following year when they are too old for under 19.

Clubs need to be looking at 12 and 13 year old players not 17 and 18 year old players.

John Parry
President
Central Region JSA

irate1 said...

Each year we seem to face the problem of people asking why isnt there an under 18 or under 17 or under 19 age for our youth and we end up with an age group not being the required one.
Could this be something to be addressed off season by club coachs and fft officials to determine the player base they currently possess and work out the years requirements before hand.
Most clubs roughly know who will and wont be available before seasons start and have numbers of under 17/18/19 year olds that need a roster to suit then.
that may give them an age group that most clubs can field sides in rather than just making a compulory age group no one has players for.
I recall myself feeling that my son had missed chances due to an under 18 side being the trend when he missed out by a year and following year he missed out again due to age group dropping back to different age .
This is just a thought i may be way off base but everything is worthy of consideration.

Anonymous said...

for gods sake jerry get a life apart from this blog .at least a hobby

Anonymous said...

metro without corey smith who is asking lots of cash to play for metro but will get it .brett pullen at beachside worth twice as much but happy just to play.

Anonymous said...

sorry to see some young players leave top clubs looking for better opportunities.why would some good youngsters go to olympia maybe uni would have been as competitive as them .why bother young fellas

Marty Nidorfer said...

I think last year walter, i predicted the new criteria for div 1 would get rid of a lot of clubs. Now Christian are another club to demise, with Huon and Cannons. Also teams like my side Eagles, South,and Kingbrough. Uni cant meet the crieria as well, and I understand the fact that all of these clubs should strive to pursue junior development but it has decimated the "second tier" to the point that we have 3 or 4 teams in it.

From my experience we had 35 senior and reserve players in div 1 and div 1 reserves a couple of years ago at eagles and last year maybe 20 stayed on in lower divisions, and this year less.

That is 15 blokes from my club that wont participate, likewise as a guess at the other clubs mentioned. Maths suggest up to 100 players maybe more have been affected by this "criterea"

I think participation at the lower level is competing with the ambition of clubs wishing to make the "big time" and that is why the second tier now is in the state it is, which is shite.

No disrespect to the underpeformers in the league, but from playing socially over the last 4 years there are sides out there that dont meet the FFt criteria that are deserving of competing in Div 1.

Suggestion to FFT. Make div 2 Senior and reserves so clubs at this level can play on the same day at the same venue. So as we dont lose players. (valuable stakeholders in the business)

Cheers Walter. Look forward to providing team news for the summer cup Div 1.

jerrie kruijver said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Brian Roberts said...

Marty , My understanding is that South , K'boro and Eagles were excluded from D 1.

Anonymous said...

In regards to coments made about clubs focusing on under 13 and above.Think about it world cup 2022.what clubs should be doing is looking at 9s 10s 11s and 12s these are the future, plan ahead these kids would be perfect age 21 22. garentee FFA are looking already at this age. Perfect example Zebra's started with one junior team,went to three the next and this year to six and this is not joining up with school teams or setting up schools and charging a small fortune, This is offering quality coaching and a focus on development and the future of players and parents who want that for their kids are turning up in numbers, ie up to 35 children registered to trial for one under 13 team.And guess what its free.

Anonymous said...

In regards to coments made about clubs focusing on under 13 and above.Think about it world cup 2022.what clubs should be doing is looking at 9s 10s 11s and 12s these are the future, plan ahead these kids would be perfect age 21 22. garentee FFA are looking already at this age. Perfect example Zebra's started with one junior team,went to three the next and this year to six and this is not joining up with school teams or setting up schools and charging a small fortune, This is offering quality coaching and a focus on development and the future of players and parents who want that for their kids are turning up in numbers, ie up to 35 children registered to trial for one under 13 team.And guess what its free.

jerrie kruijver said...

anonymus,zebras have taken a giant step in the right direction.i hope it keeps growing and all clubs follow that example

Metro fan said...

metro has been doing that for years now

Neonman said...

Brian,
I wholeheartedly agree with all your comments, and fondly remember those first couple of seasons at Christians.
Its sad that the administration of the sport feels the need to apply rules that make stepping up to higher levels unsustainable.
The clubs that are built on close player bonds based on communioty location, ethnicity or beliefs should be more likely to succeed due to the clubspeople sharing a common goal.
All too often clubs arent given this opportunity.

I understand that FFT needs to have income streams and should apply some prerequisites to club admininstration to ensure competition quality, however the pendulum seems to be making ever greater swings,and consequently not getting closer to any long term goal. (Just wondering if, or rather when, FFT will take all players names, make up their own clubs, to play in a single tier competition only??)

and Brian, for the record, Im looking forward to having a kick at the highest level I can this year, and still "Get up 'is ginger!!!" in just the way you showed how!

the priest said...

OMG, I never thought I'd see the day but I have to wholeheartedly agree with John Parry! Somebody shoot me! ;)

Pixel 40 said...

I agreed with everyone to some point
but it is only the start, as player think there is a carrier in football in Tasmania. Because ken and other have been filling their minds with amazing opportunities if they play for their club, and well and truly, if this kids have a shot at play pro. They need to pay the real deal, where they can be look at, like soccer academy of NSW but do they have the money to pay for it no they don't except a few. in the mean time they kidding then self, finally, the problem lies in premier clubs.

Anonymous said...

hi folks sorry but uni this is just crap! if u cant get off yr asses and make good players thats not good enough! look at kingborough all there youth playrs stay with them and are at a very high skill level with many of them being in the state squads, if half the coaches sat down and thought about the correct way to treat and teach the kids then they will stay around for life! and they will most likely be very skillful!

Anonymous said...

My son played at the Liverpool Academy as a guest and we didn't have to pay thousands of dollars to a legend in a lunchbox, filling kids with delusions of grandeur. FFT needs to take control of the whole league and not allow certain people to run their own sideshows to the detriment of the sport as a whole.
I have witnessed really talented teenagers who get lost from the sport because they are not physically developed enough, and don't fit this idea that to compete with other states you have to have the biggest athletes you can find. Surely first it is about enjoying the game and the bonus is playing at a good, competitive level.

Anonymous said...

Interesting to see the comments on the benchmark requirements for three teams in Div 1 and Premier League. Maybe it is time to revisit the original proposal that was put forward by FFT (in 2007?) - to have two tiers (Seniors and Under 21's) - and encourage clubs to have Under 18/19 teams, but not be mandatory.

As I remember it, the proposal didn't get much support from the clubs, but if three tiers is killing the smaller clubs then maybe it should be looked at again.

Spelling and grammar button said...

pixel 40..WHAT????????

Anonymous said...

Metro fan says that they have been developing kids of that age for years.Well where are they? obviously not playing with you,and thats why you have so much depth and playing div 1 after spending numerous years hanging around bottom of prem league.So why are so many leaving to play with central region clubs, eg zebras, and south. Also stated that it is about quality coaches not just about having 5 teams of same age and a parent to coach.

Brian Roberts said...

Annoymous said .

An interesting point of view.

When I was on the Board and a proposal of a similar nature was proposed it went over like a lead balloon . Why?

Because 2 of the club sides would be at home but the " Third tier " would be away or hosting a different team to Seniors/ Reserves .

This upsets the Club management program and excludes management doubling up .

Can any one remember when Nelson played in the U/19 Comp . The howls of protest from the self centred where deafening .

I often disagree with FFT but some intestinal fortitude concerning this dilemma may pay dividends in the long run.