Dvca, Nmca And Hdca To Merge

[WanderingUnity]

Not surprised to hear that, and not disappointed. I think the discussion has been worthwhile, its time now to improve our (already strong) comp by implementing some of the very good ideas / commenst / thoughts that have been thrown around over the past 4 months.

Who is going to take the major strides to implement these 'very good comments / ideas / thoughts'??
From what I heard last night, one of the strongest benefits of the new association, will be the increased and strengthened administrative capacity, allowing for clubs to benefit from better council assistance, as well as drawing on more experience with a greater pool of creative minds to choose from.
A great presentation put forward last night, especially on the junior side of things, with good discussion, and see only benefits for all clubs.

 

[Goliath]

As expected a room full of small and narrow minded people that are not willing to even think about it. Half of the morons that asked questions at the end wouldn't even listen properly to what the executives had to say. It wont go ahead because too many people only consider the negatives and not the positives

It takes years for good ideas to get up in the Diamond Valley so surely you aren't telling us that the executive wasn't listened to.Nooo what a surprise. I'm shocked. Ha Ha

 

[100% BULL]

Who is going to take the major strides to implement these 'very good comments / ideas / thoughts'??
From what I heard last night, one of the strongest benefits of the new association, will be the increased and strengthened administrative capacity, allowing for clubs to benefit from better council assistance, as well as drawing on more experience with a greater pool of creative minds to choose from.
A great presentation put forward last night, especially on the junior side of things, with good discussion, and see only benefits for all clubs.

The clubs elect the association committee members, the clubs should make their thoughts and priorities known to the committee. If that means we need to seek out new people, with skills that do not currenly exist in the committee then thats the first step. The number one objetcive of the DVCA committe should be to increase participation within the DVCA, there are a whole heap of strategies that fall out from this but if the DVCA are soley focused on this objective then we are heading in the right direction.

 

[E.A.H.S]

Some more to be learnt out of last night is that there are 6-10 clubs opposed to it for a number of different reasons. However it is important to remember that there are a combined total of close to 60 clubs.

Having spoken personally to a number of members on each of the executives I can tell you they acknowledge there are at least 30 clubs who are fully behind the proposal and 15 more who are in favour of it in principle.

I think in the long run we'll find that the opposition is a case of the vocal minority rather than a broad representation of views.

 

[YouKnowNothing]

Reading between the lines, it seems that the new entity will be 1 administration covering the 3 existing comps. The top couple of grades will go into the pot but the middle and lower levels will still all stay in there own backyard, so to speak. Would that be a correct summary in simple plain terms????

 

[Snake]

From what I heard last night, one of the strongest benefits of the new association, will be the increased and strengthened administrative capacity, allowing for clubs to benefit from better council assistance, as well as drawing on more experience with a greater pool of creative minds to choose from.

Having played cricket at a club whose ground was governed by the City of Darebin and then moving that club to a ground which was governed by the City of Whittlesea I can tell you now that the City of Darebin do sweet f.a. for cricket clubs.
If this new association is going to help clubs get better assistance from councils then the working committees should get reprensentatives from the councils who run the grounds to articulate what they are going to do for the clubs? Put up or shut up!

 

[Ex-Prez]

Reading between the lines, it seems that the new entity will be 1 administration covering the 3 existing comps. The top couple of grades will go into the pot but the middle and lower levels will still all stay in there own backyard, so to speak. Would that be a correct summary in simple plain terms????

Fairly close to the mark from what i have heard.

What we have heard recently, was that despite saying nothing much has happened on the senior fornt, apparently quite a lot of concept work has been done.

Without knowing all of the facts, what i think is being planned is:

In the interim, plans are afoot to have 3 even divisions of A grade. Again this is only hearsay so anything could happen, but in principal would be 3 divisions of 8 teams - playing the mixed 1 day / 2 day format.
In principal - and not set in stone by any stretch - All current 12 DVCA teams remain in the A grade level, 4 teams from HDCA, and 8 from NMCA. What the mix of this comp will be I assume would be split geographically.

It is understood cricket victoria and premier cricket need younger players coming through the system to play a mixture of 2 day, 1 day and 20/20 cricket. Thsi gives the younger gusy coming thru a better all round grounding in the sport.
The current DVCA seniors for example do not cater this.

A crtieria to join the A grade level might also be introduced. ie clubs might need to have minimum 4 senior teams and must have juniors, etc... details obviously need to be ironed out here.

** What they would like to see ideally only 2 senior A grade comps - say east/west and then the eventual premiers play off. (assume this could be done if we stay with traditional DVCA 2 day game format and 2 x 12 teams??).
Only having 16 teams in A grade initially might be too hard to implement and cause too much agro.

Then senior grades below this would follow similar pattern for 2-3 levels.
After say C grade and down - then the teams will be split into more equal gradings and aligned geographically again. This is designed not only for more even competition, but also less travel for lower grades.

Quite disappointing none of these "ideas" or concepts were outlined last night to allow feedback.

I feel a great deal of the negativity surrounding this change is because of the unknown.
If clubs actually had a concept or a plan they could argue around then we might get somewhere.

Again last night created more confusion than answers on the senior comp. Saying you can choose to join or not to join doesnt say what happens to the left overs. Ok if only 6 teams from DVCA want to move, then 18 will remain in a DVCA run comp. However if 18 teams move, will the DVCA run with only 6 or less teams??

Conversely the junior comp plan was reasonably well outlined and presented. I beleive personally this must go ahead to try to allow as many kids as possible to play. By having all age groups u10, 11,12,13 to u18 and different playing days, gives kids a wider choice to play the sport. Kids do not care if they play against Riverside or Northern Socials, they just want to play and do not really know any different. The parents might.

I cannot see how travel will be restricted here though. If your team wants to play under 13 on a wednesday, and are the only DVCA club who does so, then you might find yourself in a division made up entirely of NMCA clubs.
yes kids get a better choice, but might have to travel more. At the end of the day, how far are we saying here? what is the difference driving west to go to Preston Druids or East to Panton Hill? The outer lying clubs like Whittlesa,Panton Hill etc.. will be hardest hit by this. most centralised clubs, will not affect much at all.
Just play against newer different teams than previous.
I feel the board needs to make some tough decisions and outline their plans for this to move forward. A representative from Cricket victoria on the board might give the project better direction in aligning with the CV ideas moving forward as well.

In today's society where kids are easily bored, we need to think outside the square and work out how to attract kids to play the sport. (ie hence the concept of 20/20)
I have been brought up on traditional cricket and love it. Personally i dont want to see any changes at all to our game or our competition. But that's being selfish and shallow minded.

However looking from a kids point of view - particulalry if you are not great at the sport, then cricket is not an attractive sport to play. It could be seen an boring, too long, and played in the summer where you might like to get out and do other things rather than sit/stand around all day. Unless coaches make a considered effort to involve everyone, kids could easily go 2 weeks (6-8hrs) and not participate at all.
Compared to footy - mostly everyone involved in under 2 hours, basketball -all involved in under an hour, etc...
Can be a long boring game if you dont bowl or bat 11. It gets worse for young seniors - where participation is not a focus.

If cricket is not to die a slow death in this country (let alone the world) we must be proactive now and think of ways to promote the game more. The key is to get more numbers playing the sport for longer.

Will the merger assist this - maybe - but cannot be worse than slowly dying in the current format.

(I would introduce coloured shirts for the junior teams as a start. They look great, allows clubs to advertise sponsors as well.)

 

[Muppet]

Fairly close to the mark from what i have heard.

What we have heard recently, was that despite saying nothing much has happened on the senior fornt, apparently quite a lot of concept work has been done.

Without knowing all of the facts, what i think is being planned is:

In the interim, plans are afoot to have 3 even divisions of A grade. Again this is only hearsay so anything could happen, but in principal would be 3 divisions of 8 teams - playing the mixed 1 day / 2 day format.
In principal - and not set in stone by any stretch - All current 12 DVCA teams remain in the A grade level, 4 teams from HDCA, and 8 from NMCA. What the mix of this comp will be I assume would be split geographically.

It is understood cricket victoria and premier cricket need younger players coming through the system to play a mixture of 2 day, 1 day and 20/20 cricket. Thsi gives the younger gusy coming thru a better all round grounding in the sport.
The current DVCA seniors for example do not cater this.

A crtieria to join the A grade level might also be introduced. ie clubs might need to have minimum 4 senior teams and must have juniors, etc... details obviously need to be ironed out here.

** What they would like to see ideally only 2 senior A grade comps - say east/west and then the eventual premiers play off. (assume this could be done if we stay with traditional DVCA 2 day game format and 2 x 12 teams??).
Only having 16 teams in A grade initially might be too hard to implement and cause too much agro.

Then senior grades below this would follow similar pattern for 2-3 levels.
After say C grade and down - then the teams will be split into more equal gradings and aligned geographically again. This is designed not only for more even competition, but also less travel for lower grades.

Quite disappointing none of these "ideas" or concepts were outlined last night to allow feedback.

I feel a great deal of the negativity surrounding this change is because of the unknown.
If clubs actually had a concept or a plan they could argue around then we might get somewhere.

Again last night created more confusion than answers on the senior comp. Saying you can choose to join or not to join doesnt say what happens to the left overs. Ok if only 6 teams from DVCA want to move, then 18 will remain in a DVCA run comp. However if 18 teams move, will the DVCA run with only 6 or less teams??

Conversely the junior comp plan was reasonably well outlined and presented. I beleive personally this must go ahead to try to allow as many kids as possible to play. By having all age groups u10, 11,12,13 to u18 and different playing days, gives kids a wider choice to play the sport. Kids do not care if they play against Riverside or Northern Socials, they just want to play and do not really know any different. The parents might.

I cannot see how travel will be restricted here though. If your team wants to play under 13 on a wednesday, and are the only DVCA club who does so, then you might find yourself in a division made up entirely of NMCA clubs.
yes kids get a better choice, but might have to travel more. At the end of the day, how far are we saying here? what is the difference driving west to go to Preston Druids or East to Panton Hill? The outer lying clubs like Whittlesa,Panton Hill etc.. will be hardest hit by this. most centralised clubs, will not affect much at all.
Just play against newer different teams than previous.
I feel the board needs to make some tough decisions and outline their plans for this to move forward. A representative from Cricket victoria on the board might give the project better direction in aligning with the CV ideas moving forward as well.

In today's society where kids are easily bored, we need to think outside the square and work out how to attract kids to play the sport. (ie hence the concept of 20/20)
I have been brought up on traditional cricket and love it. Personally i dont want to see any changes at all to our game or our competition. But that's being selfish and shallow minded.

However looking from a kids point of view - particulalry if you are not great at the sport, then cricket is not an attractive sport to play. It could be seen an boring, too long, and played in the summer where you might like to get out and do other things rather than sit/stand around all day. Unless coaches make a considered effort to involve everyone, kids could easily go 2 weeks (6-8hrs) and not participate at all.
Compared to footy - mostly everyone involved in under 2 hours, basketball -all involved in under an hour, etc...
Can be a long boring game if you dont bowl or bat 11. It gets worse for young seniors - where participation is not a focus.

If cricket is not to die a slow death in this country (let alone the world) we must be proactive now and think of ways to promote the game more. The key is to get more numbers playing the sport for longer.

Will the merger assist this - maybe - but cannot be worse than slowly dying in the current format.

(I would introduce coloured shirts for the junior teams as a start. They look great, allows clubs to advertise sponsors as well.)

I agree with a lot of what you have to say here Prez but what i have highlighted in bold got mentioned a few times at the meeting, but in my opinion doesn't make sense. At the moment If you have a side of Under 13 year olds and would like to put them in a grade they have to go into under 14's, (Travel only in dvca) in an NCL set up you would have the option to put them into an under 13 grade..... at that point you would have the look at what other sides are in the respective under 13 grades and make a decision whether the travel is too much in those grade or not, at which point you would have the option to put them in U/13's or keep them in under 14's. The way i see it the NCL here would provide you with an option you currently don't have ... Can't see the negative here.

 

[Centre to Leg]

The clubs elect the association committee members, the clubs should make their thoughts and priorities known to the committee. If that means we need to seek out new people, with skills that do not currenly exist in the committee then thats the first step. The number one objetcive of the DVCA committe should be to increase participation within the DVCA, there are a whole heap of strategies that fall out from this but if the DVCA are soley focused on this objective then we are heading in the right direction.

Agreed.....we have an elected DVCA committee and they were not fully represented at the NCL meeting the other night. Why? Because they were not invited. Why? Because they do not all agree with what is going on here. The DVCA Clubs and executive members have been treated with contempt by the DVCA representatives on the NCL committee.

Much of what was discussed on Wednesday night was flawed....to Say the benefits to the DVCA would be a better standard of competition and then to say to clubs that they would not have to travel if they didnt want to doesnt make sense. To have the best Standard of teams in any comp with relegation & promotion you would have to travel. If Clubs think they will have a choice of where they get to travel too is a nonsesnse.

They also said that having a super comp will address the reduction in participation levels.....How? kids do not play cricket because they get to play in a bigger league with more clubs. They play cricket because they want to be Shane Warne or Adam Gilchrist. We have to stop thinking that the decrease in junior & senior players is because of how the DVCA Competition is set up.

The decrease in junior numbers are all factors that can be addressed by the DVCA and the clubs themselves.
I can understand there may be benefits to clubs in the HDCA and Jika who have seen clubs jump ship for a number of years now. But the DVCA is healthy and if clubs want the DVCA to look at addressing junior numbers than lets do so, together.
I want to see figures of the reduction in team numbers over the last 5 years because these are the facts we should be presented with each season by the DVCA. And I want to see the number of clubs who have defected from the DVCA to other Comps and vise versa.

We all know clubs can address junior numbers, just look at Lower Plenty 7 years ago. They were nearly gone with no juniors but turned it all around with their President and committee getting of their arse and doing something about it. They hit the schools, coached clinics etc etc & within a few seasons were one of the bigger junior clubs in the DVCA.

We are not Football, Cricket Clubs have to work harder than footy clubs to attract players. It is a pity we are not governed by the AFL because they run rings around Cricket Aust & Cricket Vic.

To all DVCA Clubs, Lets not change for change sake. If the DVCA is in such a bad state than give us the facts & figures in comparison to other comps? And let the clubs decide whether they are willing to address this issue with help from the DVCA.

Another example provided on the night was how the ECA (Eastern Cricket Assoc) was an example of a successfull merge from local Competitions a number of years ago and how they were now a more succesful competition. What they neglected to mention is that the ECA is still losing their junior teams. Refer below comarison going by teams fielded in these years.
2009 = 227 teams
2010 = 224 teams
2011 = 214 teams
The ECA maybe a strong comp but they too are losing junior teams, so a Super League will not fix participation levels. We as clubs need to address this ourselves with programs and help from Cricket Victoria. When was the last time a Cricket Victoria Rep came to a DVCA meeting? Has it happened?

Its time for the DVCA elected Committee from season 2010/11 (Minus the now NCL representatives as they are clearly no longer representing the DVCA or the clubs with in it) to hold a meeting.
The meeting held the other night was an NCL meeting, not a DVCA, HDCA or Jika meeting.

Hey, If all DVCA clubs think this merge is a great idea and will provide a far superior Competition for their club, well so be it, I will shut up. But lets see what the DVCA have to say about all this because the last time I looked the DVCA still were the elected body that was voted in to represent all the clubs in the DVCA. (Not HDCA & Jika and certainly not some mob called he NCL).

Its time for the clubs to meet together with the real DVCA to discuss all this & to take back control and address the real facts of the current state of the DVCA. (Remember - If it wasnt for Don Scott The Hawthorn FC would be singing the Melbourne FC Theme song today).

 

[CowCorner]

....deleted for space.....

I was stuck in hospital (another topic, rushed by Ambulance, major surgery, life threatening......but I kick on) and unable to attend the meeting.

If that happens again, YOU are authorised to vote on ANYTHING on my behalf.

You are a sense of reason and substanse in the flawed proposal full of ifs and buts.

Well written, I will support you.

 

[Centre to Leg]

Some more to be learnt out of last night is that there are 6-10 clubs opposed to it for a number of different reasons. However it is important to remember that there are a combined total of close to 60 clubs.

Having spoken personally to a number of members on each of the executives I can tell you they acknowledge there are at least 30 clubs who are fully behind the proposal and 15 more who are in favour of it in principle.

I think in the long run we'll find that the opposition is a case of the vocal minority rather than a broad representation of views.

Not sure which clubs you talked to but the reality is quite the opposite within the DVCA.
The NCL have to pump out this propaganda to scare clubs into thinking they are a minority.
The DVCA is just the carrot to entice the HDCA & JIKA comps to merge. They tried merging these two comps a few seasons back and it failed. But now add the carrot of the DVCA into the mix and all of a sudden the merge proposition becomes more appealing to some clubs in the other comps.
The DVCA is just a pawn in all this mess.
Time for clubs to get together to discuss without the propaganda!

 

[PremiersAgain]

I also attended the meeting the other night and believe some good points relating to the junior competetion were raised.

Firstly the idea of offering cricket in each age group from U10's through to U17's during the week seems a great idea. I am a traditionalist and think cricket should be played U12's Friday night and the rest Sat mornings. However we cannot ignor the stats showing the biggest drop off is from Friday nights U12's to Sat mornings U14's. Leave the U12's Fridays and play the other age groups on a Monday and Wednesday night.

Another issue i have is why does the Diamond Valley have to merge to offer all these age groups? Im positive with the amount of junior sides playing at the moment the DVCA could already offer under 10's through to under 17's in its own entity.

One other point i was thinking about is if the DVCA does continue in its current form we only need another 3 STRONG clubs to come across and then we could possibly start a 3rd divison of A GRADE cricket. 8 teams in each divison with the 2 day/ 1 day split. I do think we need to think outside the square a little bit in regards to what future generations are wanting. Just a thought

 

[draught]

I also attended the meeting the other night and believe some good points relating to the junior competetion were raised.

Firstly the idea of offering cricket in each age group from U10's through to U17's during the week seems a great idea. I am a traditionalist and think cricket should be played U12's Friday night and the rest Sat mornings. However we cannot ignor the stats showing the biggest drop off is from Friday nights U12's to Sat mornings U14's. Leave the U12's Fridays and play the other age groups on a Monday and Wednesday night.

Another issue i have is why does the Diamond Valley have to merge to offer all these age groups? Im positive with the amount of junior sides playing at the moment the DVCA could already offer under 10's through to under 17's in its own entity.

One other point i was thinking about is if the DVCA does continue in its current form we only need another 3 STRONG clubs to come across and then we could possibly start a 3rd divison of A GRADE cricket. 8 teams in each divison with the 2 day/ 1 day split. I do think we need to think outside the square a little bit in regards to what future generations are wanting. Just a thought

Couldn't agree more with you P.A. and centre to leg, The DVCA can provide all the things thrown up by the NCL( NOT THAT THEY HAVE THROWN UP MANY POSITIVES), and we can make our comp even stronger, go after the clubs we think can add to our all ready successful and strong competiton. We need to make sure our clubs are strong and vibrant and we can do this by leaning and feeding of each other and supporting each other,
An interesting thought for everyone out there, how will teams in the 3rd 4th 5th divisions or what ever grade some teams Agrade will be in attract quality coaches and players? this will make strong clubs stronger on field and increase the gap between the clubs best elevens! not sure if i've ever heard of a district player looking for a coaching gig in a leagues 3rd or 4th best division. they bought up the vets playing against clubs in the hdca and nmca this year, surely the guys playing vets are playing cos they like the comraderie and friendships they have built up over 20-40 years with guys not only from there own clubs but the guys they have played against ! this may put more than a few off playing perhaps!
The dvca needs to look after ourselves at this point and OUR EXECUTIVES that are against the NCL IDEA NEED TO STAND UP FOR THE DVCA AND ASK THE PRESIDENT, ADMINASTRATOR AND EXEC MEMBERS(1 i believe) THAT ARE FOR THE NCL TO STAND DOWN AS THEY A CLEARLY BIASED TO THE IDEA AND WILL MAKE IT AS DIFFICULT AS THEY CAN FOR THE OTHER EXEC MEMBERS TO BE HEARD! Hence why they were not invited to the meeting!

 

[Ex-Prez]

DVCA pre AGM & AGM coming up soon.

If the clubs are not happy with current executive and the direction being taken, then we have the opportunity to elect a new executive at the AGM.

Need someone to step forward and commit the volunteer time required to fulfil the job.
Unfortunately a little more involved than sledging on a keyboard to run the comp.

If July/August is too long to wait, then as an elected body, the members of the body ( the clubs) can always call for an extraordinary general meeting to be held.
Not sure of the numbers required to get this up but would not be hard to get enough i would think.

 

[Tony Mash]

DVCA pre AGM & AGM coming up soon.

If the clubs are not happy with current executive and the direction being taken, then we have the opportunity to elect a new executive at the AGM.

Need someone to step forward and commit the volunteer time required to fulfil the job.
Unfortunately a little more involved than sledging on a keyboard to run the comp.

If July/August is too long to wait, then as an elected body, the members of the body ( the clubs) can always call for an extraordinary general meeting to be held.
Not sure of the numbers required to get this up but would not be hard to get enough i would think.

Agree.... and if enough Clubs are interested this is what they have to do. Lower Plenty will be holding a meeting of financial members on 20th July where we will discuss the proposal presented and see what the membership wants.
10. SPECIAL MEETINGS
(1) All general meetings other than annual and ordinary meetings are special meetings.
(2) The Executive may whenever it thinks fit convene a special meeting and where, but for this Rule, more than 15 months would elapse between annual meetings, will convene a special meeting before that period expires.
(3) The Administrator will, on receiving a requisition signed by the secretaries of 3 or more clubs stating the objects of the meeting, convene a special meeting. If the meeting is not held within 30 days after he receives the requisition, the clubs making the requisition may convene a special meeting (in the same manner as nearly as possible as that prescribed by Rule 11) to be held within 60 days of that date. The DVCA will refund all reasonable expenses of convening the meeting to those incurring the expenses.

 

[draught]

DVCA pre AGM & AGM coming up soon.

If the clubs are not happy with current executive and the direction being taken, then we have the opportunity to elect a new executive at the AGM.

Need someone to step forward and commit the volunteer time required to fulfil the job.
Unfortunately a little more involved than sledging on a keyboard to run the comp.

If July/August is too long to wait, then as an elected body, the members of the body ( the clubs) can always call for an extraordinary general meeting to be held.
Not sure of the numbers required to get this up but would not be hard to get enough i would think.

PREZ, I wouldnt exactly call my comments a sledge, more like you cant have your cake and eat it to ! you can't as a president of 1 competition represent that comp on behalf of clubs and at the same time push the barrow of a new comp that will take away clubs from the comp he is supposed to represent. Am i the only one who see a huge conflict of interest here? Now he may stand for re-election and thats for the clubs to decided whether there happy with that situation to continue but myself personally i cant see how he can act on behalf of a competition that more than likely will be still in existance and competing against the new NCL that he is so obviously in favour of! interested to get others thoughts on this ?

 

[Bubble Wrap]

PREZ, I wouldnt exactly call my comments a sledge, more like you cant have your cake and eat it to ! you can't as a president of 1 competition represent that comp on behalf of clubs and at the same time push the barrow of a new comp that will take away clubs from the comp he is supposed to represent. Am i the only one who see a huge conflict of interest here? Now he may stand for re-election and thats for the clubs to decided whether there happy with that situation to continue but myself personally i cant see how he can act on behalf of a competition that more than likely will be still in existance and competing against the new NCL that he is so obviously in favour of! interested to get others thoughts on this ?

Agreed.

I think that extends to paid administrators too - they are receiving CLUB MONEY to administer the DVCA. If they are in any way undermining the DVCA, or even if DVCA matters go unattended due to time spent on NCL matters, they should be replaced without question.

I appreciate that it's easier said than done, as I doubt people would be queuing up for the job...

 

[Centre to Leg]

PREZ, I wouldnt exactly call my comments a sledge, more like you cant have your cake and eat it to ! you can't as a president of 1 competition represent that comp on behalf of clubs and at the same time push the barrow of a new comp that will take away clubs from the comp he is supposed to represent. Am i the only one who see a huge conflict of interest here? Now he may stand for re-election and thats for the clubs to decided whether there happy with that situation to continue but myself personally i cant see how he can act on behalf of a competition that more than likely will be still in existance and competing against the new NCL that he is so obviously in favour of! interested to get others thoughts on this ?

I too can not see how any elected DVCA representative can double hat on another competition's executive without a conflict of interest. But the Prez makes a good point, we need passionate people to give up their valuable time to represent the DVCA clubs going forward and to ensure the DVCA still has a voice through all this debate and consideration.

 

[gnippe]

I too can not see how any elected DVCA representative can double hat on another competition's executive without a conflict of interest. But the Prez makes a good point, we need passionate people to give up their valuable time to represent the DVCA clubs going forward and to ensure the DVCA still has a voice through all this debate and consideration.

Agreed, it shouldn't work that way.

 

[Goliath]

PREZ, I wouldnt exactly call my comments a sledge, more like you cant have your cake and eat it to ! you can't as a president of 1 competition represent that comp on behalf of clubs and at the same time push the barrow of a new comp that will take away clubs from the comp he is supposed to represent. Am i the only one who see a huge conflict of interest here? Now he may stand for re-election and thats for the clubs to decided whether there happy with that situation to continue but myself personally i cant see how he can act on behalf of a competition that more than likely will be still in existance and competing against the new NCL that he is so obviously in favour of! interested to get others thoughts on this ?

What you are saying is you cant have anyone from either competitions committees being directly involved with helping formulate ideas to create the NCA. Maybe CV should just take over and create it without anyone from the 3 comps controlling the process. Imagine the uproar if that happened. I understand this is an unusual position the comps find themselves in but surely the people who run the 3 comps know what is needed to develop this idea. If there are any ideas about a better way of doing it lets hear them.