Yep, my time in the VTCA isn't ridiculously long so I'm happy to bow to your VTCA knowledge, but South Caulfield, Beauy and Bentleigh have all played in Senior Division GF in my time (I think) – and have been there or thereabouts pretty much every year since. They are well administered with great facilities, have good junior set-ups and would be successful (or at the very least competitive) if they continued in the VTCA, or if they joined the top grade of the CV restructure
Subbies Thread
- Thread starter rang1
- Start date
Yep, my time in the VTCA isn't ridiculously long so I'm happy to bow to your VTCA knowledge, but South Caulfield, Beauy and Bentleigh have all played in Senior Division GF in my time (I think) – and have been there or thereabouts pretty much every year since. They are well administered with great facilities, have good junior set-ups and would be successful (or at the very least competitive) if they continued in the VTCA, or if they joined the top grade of the CV restructure
Copy of VTCA newsletter attached - happy for you to all make your own judgements on what the VTCA think of it. Whether that is representative of what VTCA clubs think (particualrly in the south), is another story
Round the grounds
Active Member
I think this paragraph sums up the VTCA position:-
"We believe we are the custodians of an exceptional cricket organisation and for us to hand over the keys we would need to believe and have strong confidence that the proposed model would be the equivalent or better than what we presently have in place. Unfortunately at this point we do not believe on the evidence presented to us, that this proposed model satisfies this requirement."
I don't think you should have to take the time to read it unless you are suitably remunerated.
I will give my services as a curator for nothing when the umpires start giving theirs for nothing. I think I'm on pretty safe ground! I seldom have any connection with the clubs for whom I curate. Also, it makes no difference to a curator in what comp the clubs play. A cricket pitch is a cricket pitch no matter where they play. I am engaged by clubs only on a season-by-season basis and it is not unusual for me to have curated for 2 different clubs in 2 different comps in the same season. Its a summer-season job mate. And you can't take a couple of weeks off here and there as umpires often do. A curator has to make a commitment every week for the entire season, and a month before, attending to the pre-season reno.
I think you're right - but my concern is that was their position regardless of what was actually in the document.
It raises a couple of related issues
Namely, how does this thing get going? Who votes on it? VMCU, Associations, clubs? If the VTCA clubs are for it, isn't it incumbent upon the VTCA executive to take that position?
And then it would follow that if associations are concerned for their own long term survival and aren't going to vote for it, what does it matter? If I was CV I'd be going after getting clubs' support
Round the grounds
Active Member
It's a good point. Within VTCA and VSDCA, I am sure there are clubs for and against. Does the vote go to CV at club level? At Association level? If it goes at association level, does it favour bigger associations with more clubs? You can see from the VTCA newsletter that some of those guys are worried about being merged out of a job, or might seek assurances from CV that they get guaranteed roles in the new regions. Conflict of interest?
shortnwide
Active Member
I'm sure there will be people feathering their own nests.
But this proposal is in the best interests of Turf cricket in Melbourne, and with the backing and resources of CV surely its when not if.
Young Willi Lad
Active Member
Have been eagerly awaiting a comment from you, also imagine that you would have very much of an inside word.
Are you confident that next season will be the last season of the VSDCA?
And that's probably the primary issue I (and others I've spoken to) have with the VTCA opposition to this. It isn't based on what will be best for the clubs or turf cricket or cricket generally. It's based on what is best for the VTCA as an organisation (and administrators in some cases). That makes their analysis flawed. They are still answerable to their clubs. Do your analysis, see where the cards fall and make your decision. If that means you no longer have a competition to administer, then so be it.
shortnwide
Active Member
You've got your ShortnWide's crossed! Would you believe someone liked my name so much they bastardised it!
The impression I have after reading pages 68 & 69 of the Report is that a lot of work will have to be done by CV to get their proposal up and running, particularly in the MCA, VTCA and VSDCA given their summary responses on P68. In the VSDCA's response it says it is ''willing to work on alternative structures''. This suggests to me the VSDCA has already concluded the CV model cannot be modified to the extent it can become compatible with the wishes of its clubs. If this is so, the ''clear direction'' the executive would hope for is that all clubs ask it to enter into negotiations with CV on ''alternative structures''. Obviously, this would deal it a strong hand in dealing with CV. I have no doubt many, if not all the concerns you have posted are already known to the executive. I note the clubs' positions will become clear to the executive mid March. Interesting times!
Round the grounds
Active Member
They should invite a rep from SECA to observe the meeting. If VTCA won't give South clubs the structure they collectively want then SECA might. South clubs shouldn't rely on the CV model going through if they are reliant on change to survive.
Round the grounds
Active Member
So neither VSDCA or VTCA support the proposal. Chances of it proceeding?
So, CV's strategy as stated in my message 180 on p42 is underway--interesting. In answering Round the grounds question, my gut feeling is that, eventually, the subbies clubs will have to face up to continuing in a competition isolated from the mainstream or get on board, because I do not think CV will agree to an ''alternative structure'' given it is likely to be significantly out of line with the Report's model. However, I see no downsides in the subbies now having a go, provided they have the overwhelming support of their clubs to seek an alternative structure. Long term, I suggest when our generation moves on our successors will wonder what all the hoo ha was about.
Young Willi Lad
Active Member
Apologies the man I was thinking of is Short & Wide.
Personally if I was from the SECA I would have been picking over the bones of the VTCA South clubs ages ago
shortnwide
Active Member
I know, he's my doppelganger. I can understand the confusion
You don't see him do you? To see your doppelganger is believed to be an omen of death!!
Young Willi Lad
Active Member
Big weekend of cricket also about to arrive lads.
Melton v Plenty Valley and Werribee vs RPB the standouts in the North/West. Local rivalry for us against Yarraville who have had to wood over us of late but big loss for them with Finch headed home.
Melton v Plenty Valley and Werribee vs RPB the standouts in the North/West. Local rivalry for us against Yarraville who have had to wood over us of late but big loss for them with Finch headed home.