Picola & District NW 2018

[stuyd1]

Congulpna,,,obviously not up to Murray league standard ... Should they apply th drop down to the Picola South East league and Rennie move to the Picola North West league ,,, geographic wise ,, its makes sense ,,, Rennie mmh ,,, is some 30 klms east of Berrigan !!!? Why is it in the south east league ??

 

["The Roar Is Back"]

I suspect every club to improve with those who finished lower this year moreso.

Might just retract that if I can.

 

[Mairjimmy 321]

Might just retract that if I can.

"Please Explain"

 

[dogs1703]

Might just retract that if I can.

Whats changed?

 

[Rascal99]

Whats changed?

maybe the base points used???

 

["The Roar Is Back"]

Whats changed?

hearing a few whispers about a club who appears to be recruiting very nicely. theintimidator might be able to add some more.

 

[Mairjimmy 321]

Roar, are you saying the 2017 season is a one horse race, done & dusted & the rest should keep their powder dry untill 2018.,

 

[theintimidator]

hearing a few whispers about a club who apoears to be recruting very nicely. theintimidator m8ght be able to add some more.

I wouldnt get too excited there Roar. With a number of retirements and Matt Ryan a hopeful to make the bush rangers squad I would think we need to replace those blokes before we can improve on 2016.

 

["The Roar Is Back"]

Roar, are you saying the 2017 season is a one horse race, done & dusted & the rest should keep their powder dry untill 2018.,

Nope , I'm also hearing you lot are getting a few back along with couple of other clubs and think the whole comp will improve significantly.

 

["The Roar Is Back"]

I wouldnt get too excited there Roar. With a number of retirements and Matt Ryan a hopeful to make the bush rangers squad I would think we need to replace those blokes before we can improve on 2016.

if what I have heard is true I reckon you might be on your way.

 

[torpedo85]

Any names roar??

 

[Rascal99]

Any names roar??

I've heard one could be a multiple premiership player from the south east Comp?

 

[ark n go]

Gee

I've heard one could be a multiple premiership player from the south east Comp?

Gee not many of them around

 

[Catinpigeons]

PDFNL not in CCSP 2017 http://websites.sportstg.com/assoc_...D=336594&&news_task=DETAIL&articleID=49361841

 

[theintimidator]

PDFNL not in CCSP 2017 http://websites.sportstg.com/assoc_...D=336594&&news_task=DETAIL&articleID=49361841

The PDFNL advised the Commission on 31 October that they will not be participating in the Community Club Sustainability Program (CCSP) in 2017.

As such, and consistent with Clause 7.6 of the AFL Victoria Player Points System (PPS) Policy, Players recruited from the PDFNL will have a value of one point where recruited to a Community Club that participates in a competition which has adopted the PPS Policy.

I was of the understanding the clubs voted to join the system?

 

["The Roar Is Back"]

The PDFNL advised the Commission on 31 October that they will not be participating in the Community Club Sustainability Program (CCSP) in 2017.

As such, and consistent with Clause 7.6 of the AFL Victoria Player Points System (PPS) Policy, Players recruited from the PDFNL will have a value of one point where recruited to a Community Club that participates in a competition which has adopted the PPS Policy.

I was of the understanding the clubs voted to join the system?

Apparently league wanted to be in points system and not in salary cap at the request of clubs, and given the salary cap policy has not yet been released.
Whilst further under precedented criteria were also requested .
League apparently had to be in both and do as was requested or not be in points system. The league had allegedly continually requested a meeting, been denied and then told the AFL it would not be in the pps, based on the criteria given to them including the need to be in Salary cap.

 

[Catinpigeons]

Apparently league wanted to be in points system and not in salary cap at the request of clubs, and given the salary cap policy has not yet been released.
Whilst further under precedented criteria were also requested .
League apparently had to be in both and do as was requested or not be in points system. The league had allegedly continually requested a meeting, been denied and then told the AFL it would not be in the pps, based on the criteria given to them including the need to be in Salary cap.

According to memo released 24th October PDFNL clubs had until the Wednesday 9th November to contact Martin Gleeson regarding any issues with the salary cap of $100k.(and points 43) After which time this would be formally ratified?? It's not the 9th yet therefore what is the story? Also were or have clubs been advised of the PDFNL boards decision as to why on behalf of the clubs this was rejected? Surely couldn't be the majority of clubs spending $100k plus if they rejected the cap? Otherwise why reject?

 

[theintimidator]

Apparently league wanted to be in points system and not in salary cap at the request of clubs, and given the salary cap policy has not yet been released.
Whilst further under precedented criteria were also requested .
League apparently had to be in both and do as was requested or not be in points system. The league had allegedly continually requested a meeting, been denied and then told the AFL it would not be in the pps, based on the criteria given to them including the need to be in Salary cap.

Well that seems like the only course of action the PDFNL board could have taken. I know my club was dead against the salary cap. its not that we dont support bringing player payments under control its that it would create an enormous mount of admin work for clubs and i still dont see how they could police it effectively.

 

[theintimidator]

According to memo released 24th October PDFNL clubs had until the Wednesday 9th November to contact Martin Gleeson regarding any issues with the salary cap of $100k.(and points 43) After which time this would be formally ratified?? It's not the 9th yet therefore what is the story? Also were or have clubs been advised of the PDFNL boards decision as to why on behalf of the clubs this was rejected? Surely couldn't be the majority of clubs spending $100k plus if they rejected the cap? Otherwise why reject?

Too much work for the majority honest clubs who know that there would be a few clubs, who spend up big now, that would find a way around the cap. And if you think that can be effectively policed then your living in a fantasy land.

 

["The Roar Is Back"]

According to memo released 24th October PDFNL clubs had until the Wednesday 9th November to contact Martin Gleeson regarding any issues with the salary cap of $100k.(and points 43) After which time this would be formally ratified?? It's not the 9th yet therefore what is the story? Also were or have clubs been advised of the PDFNL boards decision as to why on behalf of the clubs this was rejected? Surely couldn't be the majority of clubs spending $100k plus if they rejected the cap? Otherwise why reject?

It would appear that was released without approval or agreeance of the PDFNL board, who received the feedback from the clubs and are responsible for such decisions . Whilst the board apparently advised AFL GM that it wouldnt be involved in the points system based on the criteria and heard nothing until being informed of yesterdays press release.

 

["The Roar Is Back"]

Well that seems like the only course of action the PDFNL board could have taken. I know my club was dead against the salary cap. its not that we dont support bringing player payments under control its that it would create an enormous mount of admin work for clubs and i still dont see how they could police it effectively.

Personally think the biggest issue is that volunteer club administrators would be held accountable , when often payments are made outside of the club and without their knowledge.
harder enough to get people to take on roles far less throwing them under a bus.

 

[Catinpigeons]

Too much work for the majority honest clubs who know that there would be a few clubs, who spend up big now, that would find a way around the cap. And if you think that can be effectively policed then your living in a fantasy land.

Too much work for the majority honest clubs who know that there would be a few clubs, who spend up big now, that would find a way around the cap. And if you think that can be effectively policed then your living in a fantasy land.

Ok, how does it create so much more admin work for a club? Keeping records of player payments? Yes of course I agree that clubs could choose to hide player payments. Mind you the consequences need to be and from what I have read do appear very severe if a breach was to be proven. Like a drug cheat in any sport this should be looked at as nothing but highest level of cheating. I guess similar to the taxation system a club thought to be in breach of the salary cap would be thoroughly audited, players, club executives interviewed etc etc. I am sure we will see this happen in the near future with a club in a neighbouring league. This I would imagine would be an unpleasant situation. I would imagine that after a couple of suspect clubs were audited and if found to be in breach of the cap this would soon send a message to other clubs that the risk is not worth it. What club boards and individuals within would be prepared to risk the possibility of being named and shamed if found guilty of deliberate salary cap overpayment?

 

["The Roar Is Back"]

Interestingly I believe vic central , whose GM was also on the state working party and accredited as being a major player in the whole system, is apparently adopting travel concession for the salary cap.
Apparently the PDFNL board asked for similar with no response.

 

["The Roar Is Back"]

Ok, how does it create so much more admin work for a club? Keeping records of player payments? Yes of course I agree that clubs could choose to hide player payments. Mind you the consequences need to be and from what I have read do appear very severe if a breach was to be proven. Like a drug cheat in any sport this should be looked at as nothing but highest level of cheating. I guess similar to the taxation system a club thought to be in breach of the salary cap would be thoroughly audited, players, club executives interviewed etc etc. I am sure we will see this happen in the near future with a club in a neighbouring league. This I would imagine would be an unpleasant situation. I would imagine that after a couple of suspect clubs were audited and if found to be in breach of the cap this would soon send a message to other clubs that the risk is not worth it. What club boards and individuals within would be prepared to risk the possibility of being named and shamed if found guilty of deliberate salary cap overpayment?

They would avoid the risk by not taking on those positions, volunteeers / helpers are the biggest issue in football/netball making those roles less attractive isnt going to improve the shortage.

 

[wouldIlietoyou]

I'm dead against the whole thing for one reason.

This puts total control for the survival of your club in the hands of a committee of people who have nothing to do with your club. How? Once we are in the system nothing stopping them changing points or cap allocated. We have already seen how badly they treat our league with the stitch up over the umpires. Don't be naive to think they won't be out to shut down clubs using this system.

Bear in mind all these decisions take into account impact on neighbouring leagues in that region. Anyone think we will be treated fairly? I haven't seen any evidence of AFLGM acting with integrity where we are concerned yet. so until set rules are in place as to how and whom oversees this then stay out of it.

anyone who thinks we will be treated fairly when it comes to the crunch is living in fantasy land!! Rules will be altered to favour major leagues even more than now.

Stand behind the board on this if you have any self respect as you deserve and earned the right to be heard and treated fairly.