|
Arthur
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 5.1K,
Visits: 0
|
Quote:Brendan Schwab @BrendanSchwab 6h
@stevenmcgarry @RobbieGaspar23 In my view, the PPS is clearly an unreasonable restraint of trade and in breach of FIFA player regulations
View conversation Edited by Arthur: 2/9/2013 10:06:46 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Labazetta
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 14,
Visits: 0
|
Too many formulas here! Australia will never produce players of the golden generation for a long time, kids dreamed of playing for Hellas, Olympic, knights etc etc 2nd ties leagues should be best vs best. AND for the a-league to have the youth teams playing before the seniors. Just like in the NSL . Not rocket science
|
|
|
|
|
Benjamin
|
|
Group: Moderators
Posts: 23K,
Visits: 0
|
Scoll wrote:Benjamin wrote:Problem with PPS, as I see it...
Two players: Paddy and Mick.
Paddy is 27, Aussie, has been at Club A since he was 12 - he's an okay player but not up to Club A's top of the table standards.
Mick is 27, Aussie, has been at Club B since he was 12 - he's a poor player, but Club B are at the bottom end of the league so he still gets a game.
At the end of the season Club A release Paddy because he's no longer good enough and they have to make space for the kids coming through to keep their points down.
Paddy would like to sign for Club B because he wants to keep playing, and Club B would like to sign him because he'd improve their squad - however, Paddy would come with transfer penalty points, and they'd lose their positive points for having Mick come through their youth policy.
End result - Club B retain an inferior player to satisfy the points system, whilst a better player drops out of the top division - good player suffers, standard of play in the league suffers. I see your point, but playing Devil's Advocate: In the first decade or so of the 15 years Mick has been at the club, why did Club B not manage to develop a player better than Mick (a poor player) to replace him? Who have they got on their roster to make this transfer not viable? Evidence would suggest they need to re-assess their squad balance anyway if they are floundering in the league. It may harm Paddy, but a team with top league status should not be suffering in that situation. Perhaps the penalty should only apply within the parent club's division- Paddy could go to a second tier team penalty free (however obviously not offer the youth development point bonus) and try and lift that team to promotion. My understanding is the penalty for taking a player from another club is to protect smaller clubs from being muscled out of the playing field. If the tables were turned and Paddy was poor whilst Mick was good and Club A tried to replace Paddy with Mick, it may cost Club B a spot in the top division and have a flow on effect to the development of the rest of their players. There is nothing stopping Club A from copping the points and doing it anyway, but that penalty acts as a balance to ensure the big/powerful don't absorb all the talent and the small don't get relegated to the status of feeder clubs (which may cause long term harm to their development potential.) I think it is one of those problems where there is always going to be a loser and there must be a judgement call made to draw the line that determines how much harm and who it is dealt to. Not saying the current system is right, but it isn't explicitly wrong either. Club B will have had better players, I'm sure, most of whom will have been tempted away over the years by the bigger spending Club A (and Clubs C & D who've come into silly money over the last few years). Club B has always had a bit of a talent drain due to their relatively small sponsorship and supporter base. I understand the theory, brought up at the end of your comment, that the transfer penalty points will, in effect, help balance the league, but in reality what they do is take the power of choice away from the player. To give another example - a player who lives in Altona, gets a job all the way over in Dandenong and moves home rather than have to drive 60 minutes each way (and the rest in rush hour) every day. He wants to switch clubs too, because he doesn't want to drive all the way back for training 3 times a week)... But he's carrying a penalty with him that stops Dandenong, Oakleigh or Bentleigh, etc., giving him a chance. Edited by Benjamin: 2/9/2013 04:35:59 PM
|
|
|
|
|
Scoll
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.6K,
Visits: 0
|
Benjamin wrote:Problem with PPS, as I see it...
Two players: Paddy and Mick.
Paddy is 27, Aussie, has been at Club A since he was 12 - he's an okay player but not up to Club A's top of the table standards.
Mick is 27, Aussie, has been at Club B since he was 12 - he's a poor player, but Club B are at the bottom end of the league so he still gets a game.
At the end of the season Club A release Paddy because he's no longer good enough and they have to make space for the kids coming through to keep their points down.
Paddy would like to sign for Club B because he wants to keep playing, and Club B would like to sign him because he'd improve their squad - however, Paddy would come with transfer penalty points, and they'd lose their positive points for having Mick come through their youth policy.
End result - Club B retain an inferior player to satisfy the points system, whilst a better player drops out of the top division - good player suffers, standard of play in the league suffers. I see your point, but playing Devil's Advocate: In the first decade or so of the 15 years Mick has been at the club, why did Club B not manage to develop a player better than Mick (a poor player) to replace him? Who have they got on their roster to make this transfer not viable? Evidence would suggest they need to re-assess their squad balance anyway if they are floundering in the league. It may harm Paddy, but a team with top league status should not be suffering in that situation. Perhaps the penalty should only apply within the parent club's division- Paddy could go to a second tier team penalty free (however obviously not offer the youth development point bonus) and try and lift that team to promotion. My understanding is the penalty for taking a player from another club is to protect smaller clubs from being muscled out of the playing field. If the tables were turned and Paddy was poor whilst Mick was good and Club A tried to replace Paddy with Mick, it may cost Club B a spot in the top division and have a flow on effect to the development of the rest of their players. There is nothing stopping Club A from copping the points and doing it anyway, but that penalty acts as a balance to ensure the big/powerful don't absorb all the talent and the small don't get relegated to the status of feeder clubs (which may cause long term harm to their development potential.) I think it is one of those problems where there is always going to be a loser and there must be a judgement call made to draw the line that determines how much harm and who it is dealt to. Not saying the current system is right, but it isn't explicitly wrong either.
|
|
|
|
|
Benjamin
|
|
Group: Moderators
Posts: 23K,
Visits: 0
|
Problem with PPS, as I see it...
Two players: Paddy and Mick.
Paddy is 27, Aussie, has been at Club A since he was 12 - he's an okay player but not up to Club A's top of the table standards.
Mick is 27, Aussie, has been at Club B since he was 12 - he's a poor player, but Club B are at the bottom end of the league so he still gets a game.
At the end of the season Club A release Paddy because he's no longer good enough and they have to make space for the kids coming through to keep their points down.
Paddy would like to sign for Club B because he wants to keep playing, and Club B would like to sign him because he'd improve their squad - however, Paddy would come with transfer penalty points, and they'd lose their positive points for having Mick come through their youth policy.
End result - Club B retain an inferior player to satisfy the points system, whilst a better player drops out of the top division - good player suffers, standard of play in the league suffers.
|
|
|
|
|
melbourne_terrace
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 11K,
Visits: 0
|
The problem with the points system rather than a normal squad restrictions is that it so highly weighted against senior players like they don't add to senior football which is ridiculous, you can't just have a squad of u22's. The emphasis on clubs developing their own players is good but they should get rid of this overage crap.
Viennese Vuck
|
|
|
|
|
Arthur
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 5.1K,
Visits: 0
|
One key element of the NPL will be how much the compensation training fee will be;
Will it be the $3,000 fee?
The mooted $10,000 fee?
Will it be the worthwile $20,000 for a young talent from the NPL signing up for the A-League? Then we are talking some decent coin.
|
|
|
|
|
Arthur
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 5.1K,
Visits: 0
|
phutbol wrote:Arthur wrote:phutbol wrote:Arthur wrote:thupercoach wrote:The NPL clubs need to focus on youth development, not short term success by signing older players which deplete the coffers and do nothing for the club's long term stability.
With the NPL clubs not paying through the nose for players they can have no excuses in reducing youth fees. Eleven 19yo's playing against eleven 19 yo's in a SENIOR competition will learn nothing and will not develop accordingly. Beleive it or not muscular skeletol, cognitive abilities and just plain experience of a 19yo vis-a-vis a 28yo has no comparison. Sure there is the exception to the rule but even then then exception will develop better playing alongside mature players. To restrict the NPL on an age basis is ridiculous, to make limitations "On the Field" is interference by administrators on coaching and team success that may not deliver the desired outcomes. It may also reflect that the Administrators may have come to realise that not enough coaches with C and B and A Licences are implementing what they are learning in terms of player development with the one year working or tourist Visa. The limitation of VISA players is crucial but it should be focussed on bonuss for quality VISA players and free from restriction of points and salary caps if that player has the experience and exposure of First or Second European or South American Football. By all means restrict the player from the Welsh third division or the player from the Isthmian League Premier Division. Edited by Arthur: 2/9/2013 09:38:40 AM As for the points cap, read the article. Its not that they dont want older players in the comp - absolutely essential for passing on experience to the younger ones. They just dont want a dozen running around on the park. Perfectly sensible. Imagine 6 visa players and 5 over 35's running out for the starting 11. great look for the development of young local talent. And finally if the playing field is more level because of these changes, surely that means a closer competiton with better matches. Even if there is an alleged reduction in the on-field quality due to the loss of an aging star or expensive import squeezing the last few years out of his body. All seems perfectly logical. Yes I did read the article did you? Quote:FAWA argues;
*starve the game of some of its most celebrated players
*lead to a decline in on-field standards.
*“There’s a club standing committee, a referees' standing committee, a juniors' standing committee – why isn’t there a players' standing committee?
*We think if you’re good enough you play
*boys who have come back from overseas or from playing in the A-League and I think they’ve got a lot to offer.
*Any system that makes it “too easy” for young players will be detrimental to the game
*cap on visa players would decrease the standard of football and reduce the number of people attending games.
*criticised the introduction of a “salary cap” for failing to include trade-offs for players such as access to coaching education or better insurance
*We’re saying to Football West - you’ve got the salary cap in place...where’s the benefit for the players?”
*Whether it be improving the insurance for the players, whether it be free coach education, encouraging them to coach at their clubs, helping them to give back to their club and being more engaged with their club.
The federation maintains;
*stop clubs clogging their rosters with overseas signings
*stop clubs clogging their rosters veterans in the twilight of their playing careers
*Peter Hugg said there was nothing stopping current players nominating for the board
*“self-voted” group of about 20 players – was committed to the interests of elite footballers who accounted for just one per cent of the state’s 37,000 player base
*If you’re a younger player that’s been developed by a club and are Australian, you will benefit and will be rewarded.
*You won’t find a 35-year-old blocking your way or someone who is here as a backpacker or 457 visa from Ireland who is a bit mercenary and just goes around the country
*This is all about looking after good young local up-and-coming players. It’s better for the clubs, cheaper, better for the Socceroos and Young Socceroos.
*$70,400 maximum per season spend on players was also introduced at the urging of clubs to ensure long-term sustainability
* real problem lies with former elite players struggling to adjust to the realities of State league football.
*income is not there, the gate-takings are not there, the sponsorship is not there, there is no TV or broadcasting rights, so you have a very small income
*these other players are ex-A-League players or ex-internationals and they come back into our amateur league – the bright lights and the stars and the fans and all that have gone – and they’re still putting their hand out for similar amounts of money.” While you've ranted on about VISA players you obviously didn't read what I wrote now did you? Me stating that the quality of player recruited is imperative to the development of the developing player. Oh I'm sure I said limitation of VISA players is "CRUCIAL". Mate go back to school and get some comprehension lessons. If "competitive" matches is most important to you and you think that more people will watch it, then why aren't people flocking to U18 competitions? They are usually the most "competitve" games around. Quote:Even if there is an alleged reduction in the on-field quality due to the loss of an aging star or expensive import squeezing the last few years out of his body. You have just argued that Del Piero should not have been brought here, seriously whats your problem? While no State League or NPL Club at the moment could afford him or that 34yo Emerton or Kewell etc.etc. they are important to a youth players development, the games growth and commercial viability of club and code. As Han Berger keeps saying "Best vs Best" not "Younger vs Youngest". Actually, I did read the article, but thanks for regurgitating it again anyway. My response was to 2 posts, one of which you've removed from your quote, perhaps because it didn't suit your response, or maybe you just didnt make the connection. Let me help... No because the way you set them out meant that you quoted me then commented therefore your comments refer to my post simple. Thats all I wanted to get across.The visa references I made were in response to the first post, and the points cap was referencing your post about 19 vs 19 year olds. I then combined the two issues into a single example to highlight why both make sense in tandem. Refer to above red comments.I also agreed that experience is vital but the points cap limits (not eliminates) the number of older players. You may disagree which is fine, but I think that's perfectly ok and in the long-term interest of the game. And no, I'm not arguing that ADP shouldnt be here. As I said in the first part of my orginal post (that's the bit you took out), the A-league and certain clubs can afford the marquee system, and thats a good thing to increase the entertainment value for the many that watch it, on TV in particular. This is a very different argument at the NPL level. Some Clubs can afford "Marquee" players at a State Level too you know! Shock Horror!I dont see how allowing a wealthy state league club to spend up on older, and/or imported players does anything for the long-term good of the game other than skewing the competition in their favour in order to win. Now you going to tell me that winning is wrong????????????The points cap, salary cap, and visa restrictions in combination go some way toward stopping this. I applaud the FFA/NPL for trying to bias these state level competitions toward a more locally sourced youth development system that still allows the blending in of some experience. The system may need tweaking certainly, but its a step in the right direction in my opinion.
|
|
|
|
|
SydneyCroatia
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.3K,
Visits: 0
|
phutbol wrote:The A-league already has salary caps and visa limits if you didnt notice. Its also the flagship competition in the country, and also has this little thing called a television rights deal and some major sponsors which allows it to spend money on international players to boost the entertainment value for the several hundred thousand viewers each week. how many get down to an NPL state league game?
That aside, apart from the marquee exceptions, it seems like the visa limits and salary caps in the NPL are very much in line with the A-league but on an appropriate level of scale for the level of the competition. Why should an NPL team have 11 visa players on its roster when A-league has 4 maximum? Thats insane.
As for the points cap, read the article. Its not that they dont want older players in the comp - absolutely essential for passing on experience to the younger ones. They just dont want a dozen running around on the park. Perfectly sensible.
Imagine 6 visa players and 5 over 35's running out for the starting 11. great look for the development of young local talent.
And finally if the playing field is more level because of these changes, surely that means a closer competiton with better matches. Even if there is an alleged reduction in the on-field quality due to the loss of an aging star or expensive import squeezing the last few years out of his body.
All seems perfectly logical.
Maximum foreigner limit in A-League is 5 foreigners, not 4 (currently 6 for WSW). How many current state league clubs can you name that have more than a couple of foreigners on its books? From what I've heard, there might be a slight issue in WA and Victoria with backpackers getting gigs but NSW certainly doesnt have that problem. I have no issue with restrictions on Visa players anyway. I have an issue with trying to turn the second tier in Australia into a glorified youth league
|
|
|
|
|
Benjamin
|
|
Group: Moderators
Posts: 23K,
Visits: 0
|
My take, as one who has helped foreign players come to play in the VPL, is that no state league club should be entitled to sign a player who is in the country on a temporary visa. It does very little to assist development of the game here.
The balance of young vs old needs to be looked into - I'm all for a points system which encourages the use of younger players, but at the same time I don't like the idea of a good player losing out because he's too old. End of the day the likes of Coyne and Howarth, stepping down from the A-League should always be able to get a game. Looking here in Melbourne - seeing Rody Vargas turning out for Green Gully is still a terrific example of age being no barrier to good play.
The only thing they need to kill completely in the PPS is the transfer points. It's totally unfair to players that switching clubs should carry a point penalty. Especially as that penalty is in place even for a player released by one club and acting as a 'free agent'. Very hard to get another club if you have a point penalty hanging over your head.
|
|
|
|
|
phutbol
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.3K,
Visits: 0
|
Arthur wrote:phutbol wrote:Arthur wrote:thupercoach wrote:The NPL clubs need to focus on youth development, not short term success by signing older players which deplete the coffers and do nothing for the club's long term stability.
With the NPL clubs not paying through the nose for players they can have no excuses in reducing youth fees. Eleven 19yo's playing against eleven 19 yo's in a SENIOR competition will learn nothing and will not develop accordingly. Beleive it or not muscular skeletol, cognitive abilities and just plain experience of a 19yo vis-a-vis a 28yo has no comparison. Sure there is the exception to the rule but even then then exception will develop better playing alongside mature players. To restrict the NPL on an age basis is ridiculous, to make limitations "On the Field" is interference by administrators on coaching and team success that may not deliver the desired outcomes. It may also reflect that the Administrators may have come to realise that not enough coaches with C and B and A Licences are implementing what they are learning in terms of player development with the one year working or tourist Visa. The limitation of VISA players is crucial but it should be focussed on bonuss for quality VISA players and free from restriction of points and salary caps if that player has the experience and exposure of First or Second European or South American Football. By all means restrict the player from the Welsh third division or the player from the Isthmian League Premier Division. Edited by Arthur: 2/9/2013 09:38:40 AM As for the points cap, read the article. Its not that they dont want older players in the comp - absolutely essential for passing on experience to the younger ones. They just dont want a dozen running around on the park. Perfectly sensible. Imagine 6 visa players and 5 over 35's running out for the starting 11. great look for the development of young local talent. And finally if the playing field is more level because of these changes, surely that means a closer competiton with better matches. Even if there is an alleged reduction in the on-field quality due to the loss of an aging star or expensive import squeezing the last few years out of his body. All seems perfectly logical. Yes I did read the article did you? Quote:FAWA argues;
*starve the game of some of its most celebrated players
*lead to a decline in on-field standards.
*“There’s a club standing committee, a referees' standing committee, a juniors' standing committee – why isn’t there a players' standing committee?
*We think if you’re good enough you play
*boys who have come back from overseas or from playing in the A-League and I think they’ve got a lot to offer.
*Any system that makes it “too easy” for young players will be detrimental to the game
*cap on visa players would decrease the standard of football and reduce the number of people attending games.
*criticised the introduction of a “salary cap” for failing to include trade-offs for players such as access to coaching education or better insurance
*We’re saying to Football West - you’ve got the salary cap in place...where’s the benefit for the players?”
*Whether it be improving the insurance for the players, whether it be free coach education, encouraging them to coach at their clubs, helping them to give back to their club and being more engaged with their club.
The federation maintains;
*stop clubs clogging their rosters with overseas signings
*stop clubs clogging their rosters veterans in the twilight of their playing careers
*Peter Hugg said there was nothing stopping current players nominating for the board
*“self-voted” group of about 20 players – was committed to the interests of elite footballers who accounted for just one per cent of the state’s 37,000 player base
*If you’re a younger player that’s been developed by a club and are Australian, you will benefit and will be rewarded.
*You won’t find a 35-year-old blocking your way or someone who is here as a backpacker or 457 visa from Ireland who is a bit mercenary and just goes around the country
*This is all about looking after good young local up-and-coming players. It’s better for the clubs, cheaper, better for the Socceroos and Young Socceroos.
*$70,400 maximum per season spend on players was also introduced at the urging of clubs to ensure long-term sustainability
* real problem lies with former elite players struggling to adjust to the realities of State league football.
*income is not there, the gate-takings are not there, the sponsorship is not there, there is no TV or broadcasting rights, so you have a very small income
*these other players are ex-A-League players or ex-internationals and they come back into our amateur league – the bright lights and the stars and the fans and all that have gone – and they’re still putting their hand out for similar amounts of money.” While you've ranted on about VISA players you obviously didn't read what I wrote now did you? Me stating that the quality of player recruited is imperative to the development of the developing player. Oh I'm sure I said limitation of VISA players is "CRUCIAL". Mate go back to school and get some comprehension lessons. If "competitive" matches is most important to you and you think that more people will watch it, then why aren't people flocking to U18 competitions? They are usually the most "competitve" games around. Quote:Even if there is an alleged reduction in the on-field quality due to the loss of an aging star or expensive import squeezing the last few years out of his body. You have just argued that Del Piero should not have been brought here, seriously whats your problem? While no State League or NPL Club at the moment could afford him or that 34yo Emerton or Kewell etc.etc. they are important to a youth players development, the games growth and commercial viability of club and code. As Han Berger keeps saying "Best vs Best" not "Younger vs Youngest". Actually, I did read the article, but thanks for regurgitating it again anyway. My response was to 2 posts, one of which you've removed from your quote, perhaps because it didn't suit your response, or maybe you just didnt make the connection. Let me help... The visa references I made were in response to the first post, and the points cap was referencing your post about 19 vs 19 year olds. I then combined the two issues into a single example to highlight why both make sense in tandem. I also agreed that experience is vital but the points cap limits (not eliminates) the number of older players. You may disagree which is fine, but I think that's perfectly ok and in the long-term interest of the game. And no, I'm not arguing that ADP shouldnt be here. As I said in the first part of my orginal post (that's the bit you took out), the A-league and certain clubs can afford the marquee system, and thats a good thing to increase the entertainment value for the many that watch it, on TV in particular. This is a very different argument at the NPL level. I dont see how allowing a wealthy state league club to spend up on older, and/or imported players does anything for the long-term good of the game other than skewing the competition in their favour in order to win. The points cap, salary cap, and visa restrictions in combination go some way toward stopping this. I applaud the FFA/NPL for trying to bias these state level competitions toward a more locally sourced youth development system that still allows the blending in of some experience. The system may need tweaking certainly, but its a step in the right direction in my opinion.
|
|
|
|
|
anz
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 2,
Visits: 0
|
SIMPLY...
when federations start giving money to the NPL clubs (like they do to the A League)to help fund youth development policies, then they can start instructing clubs on what & how clubs should do things.
Just to clarify, im in favour of the points system, not this over age crap part of it though.
I think players coming and going & visa players are more of an issue then overage players.
|
|
|
|
|
Arthur
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 5.1K,
Visits: 0
|
phutbol wrote:Arthur wrote:thupercoach wrote:The NPL clubs need to focus on youth development, not short term success by signing older players which deplete the coffers and do nothing for the club's long term stability.
With the NPL clubs not paying through the nose for players they can have no excuses in reducing youth fees. Eleven 19yo's playing against eleven 19 yo's in a SENIOR competition will learn nothing and will not develop accordingly. Beleive it or not muscular skeletol, cognitive abilities and just plain experience of a 19yo vis-a-vis a 28yo has no comparison. Sure there is the exception to the rule but even then then exception will develop better playing alongside mature players. To restrict the NPL on an age basis is ridiculous, to make limitations "On the Field" is interference by administrators on coaching and team success that may not deliver the desired outcomes. It may also reflect that the Administrators may have come to realise that not enough coaches with C and B and A Licences are implementing what they are learning in terms of player development with the one year working or tourist Visa. The limitation of VISA players is crucial but it should be focussed on bonuss for quality VISA players and free from restriction of points and salary caps if that player has the experience and exposure of First or Second European or South American Football. By all means restrict the player from the Welsh third division or the player from the Isthmian League Premier Division. Edited by Arthur: 2/9/2013 09:38:40 AM As for the points cap, read the article. Its not that they dont want older players in the comp - absolutely essential for passing on experience to the younger ones. They just dont want a dozen running around on the park. Perfectly sensible. Imagine 6 visa players and 5 over 35's running out for the starting 11. great look for the development of young local talent. And finally if the playing field is more level because of these changes, surely that means a closer competiton with better matches. Even if there is an alleged reduction in the on-field quality due to the loss of an aging star or expensive import squeezing the last few years out of his body. All seems perfectly logical. Yes I did read the article did you? Quote:FAWA argues;
*starve the game of some of its most celebrated players
*lead to a decline in on-field standards.
*“There’s a club standing committee, a referees' standing committee, a juniors' standing committee – why isn’t there a players' standing committee?
*We think if you’re good enough you play
*boys who have come back from overseas or from playing in the A-League and I think they’ve got a lot to offer.
*Any system that makes it “too easy” for young players will be detrimental to the game
*cap on visa players would decrease the standard of football and reduce the number of people attending games.
*criticised the introduction of a “salary cap” for failing to include trade-offs for players such as access to coaching education or better insurance
*We’re saying to Football West - you’ve got the salary cap in place...where’s the benefit for the players?”
*Whether it be improving the insurance for the players, whether it be free coach education, encouraging them to coach at their clubs, helping them to give back to their club and being more engaged with their club.
The federation maintains;
*stop clubs clogging their rosters with overseas signings
*stop clubs clogging their rosters veterans in the twilight of their playing careers
*Peter Hugg said there was nothing stopping current players nominating for the board
*“self-voted” group of about 20 players – was committed to the interests of elite footballers who accounted for just one per cent of the state’s 37,000 player base
*If you’re a younger player that’s been developed by a club and are Australian, you will benefit and will be rewarded.
*You won’t find a 35-year-old blocking your way or someone who is here as a backpacker or 457 visa from Ireland who is a bit mercenary and just goes around the country
*This is all about looking after good young local up-and-coming players. It’s better for the clubs, cheaper, better for the Socceroos and Young Socceroos.
*$70,400 maximum per season spend on players was also introduced at the urging of clubs to ensure long-term sustainability
* real problem lies with former elite players struggling to adjust to the realities of State league football.
*income is not there, the gate-takings are not there, the sponsorship is not there, there is no TV or broadcasting rights, so you have a very small income
*these other players are ex-A-League players or ex-internationals and they come back into our amateur league – the bright lights and the stars and the fans and all that have gone – and they’re still putting their hand out for similar amounts of money.” While you've ranted on about VISA players you obviously didn't read what I wrote now did you? Me stating that the quality of player recruited is imperative to the development of the developing player. Oh I'm sure I said limitation of VISA players is "CRUCIAL". Mate go back to school and get some comprehension lessons. If "competitive" matches is most important to you and you think that more people will watch it, then why aren't people flocking to U18 competitions? They are usually the most "competitve" games around. Quote:Even if there is an alleged reduction in the on-field quality due to the loss of an aging star or expensive import squeezing the last few years out of his body. You have just argued that Del Piero should not have been brought here, seriously whats your problem? While no State League or NPL Club at the moment could afford him or that 34yo Emerton or Kewell etc.etc. they are important to a youth players development, the games growth and commercial viability of club and code. As Han Berger keeps saying "Best vs Best" not "Younger vs Youngest".
|
|
|
|
|
Arthur
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 5.1K,
Visits: 0
|
thupercoach wrote:The NPL clubs need to focus on youth development, not short term success by signing older players which deplete the coffers and do nothing for the club's long term stability.
With the NPL clubs not paying through the nose for players they can have no excuses in reducing youth fees. I agree with these sentiments, it is a philosophy that should apply to all clubs at all levels in this country. But I don't beleive you can legislate for thses outcomes. I beleive it must be a philosophical point of view.
|
|
|
|
|
thupercoach
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 8.3K,
Visits: 0
|
I'm all in favour of a couple of guys in their thirties and a few more in their twenties at the NPL club.
And I agree that beginning a coaching career at an NPL club is a great way for the ageing pro to wind down his playing career while beginning his coaching career. Ante Milicic did that with great success.
|
|
|
|
|
Arthur
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 5.1K,
Visits: 0
|
c3749c wrote:OMG what a terrible way to go for the future of our national side - "But the chief sticking point is the NPL player point system which is weighted in favour of young, Australian and locally-developed footballers" Maybe it should be weighted to the "best" available players regardless of age, nationality or locality?
|
|
|
|
|
Arthur
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 5.1K,
Visits: 0
|
tjwhalan wrote:Im assuming this will only affect clubs that have no intention of promoting youth, I really cant see the problem. Quote:“We currently have a 39-year-old running around on Saturday – that person brings a lot of experience at international level to the game. We want that person. What we don’t want is six or seven of them in the one club.” Someone explain to me whats wrong with that statement.. Nothing I saw Fausto De Amicis playing for Doncaster Rovers in State 3 this year at the age of 45. He offered great learning oppurtunities for his team mates and opponents. The sad thing is that at 45yo he is still an effective player at this level which is a poor indictement for this level.
|
|
|
|
|
c3749c
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 111,
Visits: 0
|
OMG what a terrible way to go for the future of our national side - "But the chief sticking point is the NPL player point system which is weighted in favour of young, Australian and locally-developed footballers"
|
|
|
|
|
phutbol
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.3K,
Visits: 0
|
SydneyCroatia wrote:thupercoach wrote:The NPL clubs need to focus on youth development, not short term success by signing older players which deplete the coffers and do nothing for the club's long term stability.
With the NPL clubs not paying through the nose for players they can have no excuses in reducing youth fees. So it's ok for A-League clubs to pay hundreds of thousands/millions to washed up has-beens and never-weres but not ok for State clubs to chase success? The A-league already has salary caps and visa limits if you didnt notice. Its also the flagship competition in the country, and also has this little thing called a television rights deal and some major sponsors which allows it to spend money on international players to boost the entertainment value for the several hundred thousand viewers each week. how many get down to an NPL state league game? That aside, apart from the marquee exceptions, it seems like the visa limits and salary caps in the NPL are very much in line with the A-league but on an appropriate level of scale for the level of the competition. Why should an NPL team have 11 visa players on its roster when A-league has 4 maximum? Thats insane. Arthur wrote:thupercoach wrote:The NPL clubs need to focus on youth development, not short term success by signing older players which deplete the coffers and do nothing for the club's long term stability.
With the NPL clubs not paying through the nose for players they can have no excuses in reducing youth fees. Eleven 19yo's playing against eleven 19 yo's in a SENIOR competition will learn nothing and will not develop accordingly. Beleive it or not muscular skeletol, cognitive abilities and just plain experience of a 19yo vis-a-vis a 28yo has no comparison. Sure there is the exception to the rule but even then then exception will develop better playing alongside mature players. To restrict the NPL on an age basis is ridiculous, to make limitations "On the Field" is interference by administrators on coaching and team success that may not deliver the desired outcomes. It may also reflect that the Administrators may have come to realise that not enough coaches with C and B and A Licences are implementing what they are learning in terms of player development with the one year working or tourist Visa. The limitation of VISA players is crucial but it should be focussed on bonuss for quality VISA players and free from restriction of points and salary caps if that player has the experience and exposure of First or Second European or South American Football. By all means restrict the player from the Welsh third division or the player from the Isthmian League Premier Division. Edited by Arthur: 2/9/2013 09:38:40 AM As for the points cap, read the article. Its not that they dont want older players in the comp - absolutely essential for passing on experience to the younger ones. They just dont want a dozen running around on the park. Perfectly sensible. Imagine 6 visa players and 5 over 35's running out for the starting 11. great look for the development of young local talent. And finally if the playing field is more level because of these changes, surely that means a closer competiton with better matches. Even if there is an alleged reduction in the on-field quality due to the loss of an aging star or expensive import squeezing the last few years out of his body. All seems perfectly logical.
|
|
|
|
|
tjwhalan
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.4K,
Visits: 0
|
Im assuming this will only affect clubs that have no intention of promoting youth, I really cant see the problem. Quote:“We currently have a 39-year-old running around on Saturday – that person brings a lot of experience at international level to the game. We want that person. What we don’t want is six or seven of them in the one club.” Someone explain to me whats wrong with that statement..
|
|
|
|
|
mahony
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 314,
Visits: 0
|
"The NPL points system is bullshit. Why shouldn't they sign older players for short term success. They don't owe A-league clubs or future Socceroos anything. I think people need a bit of a reality check".
An there, in one neat sentence is the nub of the matter..... it is not just about the A-League or national representation, but it is about developing players and Australian football – wherever those players end up. Having said that, it is disappointing to think that some people take the view that the player pathway comes second to their individual needs and those of individual clubs.
OK, let’s put it this way. The game belongs to all the fans, players and administrators (including those who administrate clubs). Football people, by electing the FFA Board and those of State federations, have democratically determined that achieving a balance between outright competition and player development at the 2nd tier. Until those critics of achieving such a balance can change policy by democratic means we will see the administrators carry out the current policy.
I am a lifelong union member, but I know a cry of pure self-interest when I see one. The PPS (yet to be legally tested) seeks to achieve a balance and I look forward to seeing younger players get enhanced opportunities to play senior football with the right, experienced player(s) around them to aid their development. The NPL can be characterised as a national 2nd tier for development or remain the top tier of provincial football – it cannot however be a retirement village or an opportunity to subsidise lifestyles of mainly British footballers who wish to have a working holiday.
|
|
|
|
|
Tosser
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 347,
Visits: 0
|
Lester there have been far more succesful imports than just those 3.
There is no need to change the Visa limits at A League level. This article is talking about NPL level which is a different story altogether.
Also who is the young player Slater you want to see?
|
|
|
|
|
Arthur
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 5.1K,
Visits: 0
|
thupercoach wrote:The NPL clubs need to focus on youth development, not short term success by signing older players which deplete the coffers and do nothing for the club's long term stability.
With the NPL clubs not paying through the nose for players they can have no excuses in reducing youth fees. Eleven 19yo's playing against eleven 19 yo's in a SENIOR competition will learn nothing and will not develop accordingly. Beleive it or not muscular skeletol, cognitive abilities and just plain experience of a 19yo vis-a-vis a 28yo has no comparison. Sure there is the exception to the rule but even then then exception will develop better playing alongside mature players. To restrict the NPL on an age basis is ridiculous, to make limitations "On the Field" is interference by administrators on coaching and team success that may not deliver the desired outcomes. It may also reflect that the Administrators may have come to realise that not enough coaches with C and B and A Licences are implementing what they are learning in terms of player development with the one year working or tourist Visa. The limitation of VISA players is crucial but it should be focussed on bonuss for quality VISA players and free from restriction of points and salary caps if that player has the experience and exposure of First or Second European or South American Football. By all means restrict the player from the Welsh third division or the player from the Isthmian League Premier Division. Edited by Arthur: 2/9/2013 09:38:40 AM
|
|
|
|
|
Priest
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 99,
Visits: 0
|
thupercoach wrote:The NPL clubs need to focus on youth development, not short term success by signing older players which deplete the coffers and do nothing for the club's long term stability.
With the NPL clubs not paying through the nose for players they can have no excuses in reducing youth fees. Yeah because there is no way an experienced player could help the development of a young player :-"
|
|
|
|
|
SydneyCroatia
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.3K,
Visits: 0
|
thupercoach wrote:The NPL clubs need to focus on youth development, not short term success by signing older players which deplete the coffers and do nothing for the club's long term stability.
With the NPL clubs not paying through the nose for players they can have no excuses in reducing youth fees. So it's ok for A-League clubs to pay hundreds of thousands/millions to washed up has-beens and never-weres but not ok for State clubs to chase success?
|
|
|
|
|
TheSelectFew
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 30K,
Visits: 0
|
The NPL points system is bullshit. Why shouldn't they sign older players for short term success. They don't owe A-league clubs or future Socceroos anything. I think people need a bit of a reality check.
|
|
|
|
|
thupercoach
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 8.3K,
Visits: 0
|
The NPL clubs need to focus on youth development, not short term success by signing older players which deplete the coffers and do nothing for the club's long term stability.
With the NPL clubs not paying through the nose for players they can have no excuses in reducing youth fees.
|
|
|
|
|
Lester
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 703,
Visits: 0
|
We should reduce the visa spots per team to maximum 1 per squad or even zero. Other than ADP, Ono and Berisha, the rest haven't done anything that I'd pay to see. But I'd pay heaps to see young Aussies like De Silva, Slater, and the young Aussies overseas come back like Zullo and Sarota if they don't get a game. What do you think about the FourFourTwo article Veterans hit out over NPL rules? A BATTLE has erupted between Football West and some of the State’s senior players over the future direction of football.Have your say.
|
|
|
|