Subbies Thread

Top Contributors
shortnwide said:
They're on the record as saying that. Bizarre though really. I mean what does HMU actually bring to the table in a merger with Dandenong? Dandenong doesn't need that merger, but Hawthorn do. They sold out moving to Monash Uni and now they're got nothing to bargain with, except their spot in premier, so they've targetted subbie and VTCA clubs who may covet that. But I hope Kingston drive a tough bargain, because Hawthorn need it more than they do.
Kingston Hawks maybe.
Click to expand...

You are correct, Hawthorn need a merger partner desperately or they will be gone for good which wouldn't upset CV. But, if you are a club in the southern suburbs that has a vision of becoming a premier club one day then the opportunity has to be taken now as it quite seriously may never present again. New entrants to premier will only come from places north and west so if Kingston hold the view that they want to be a Premier club, partnering with Hawthorn is a once only opportunity. As for the name, Casey-South Melbourne is a good precedent, can't see why Kingston-Hawthorn wouldn't get a tick from both sides.
 
In respect to the suggested expansion of Premier Cricket to 20 clubs, I am advised a number of the existing clubs are so concerned it will reduce their present allocated recruitment areas that when they are required to vote on it, they will oppose the motion.
 
westland said:
In respect to the suggested expansion of Premier Cricket to 20 clubs, I am advised a number of the existing clubs are so concerned it will reduce their present allocated recruitment areas that when they are required to vote on it, they will oppose the motion.
Click to expand...

According to recent articles, CV already holds the mandate to expand to 20, voted on and passed some time back. I am quoting journos who have quoted Ronchi, not saying I know this myself. What you say is particularly relevent to Kingston as there is no way Frankston, St Kilda, Dandenong, Prahran etc would be in favour of a new team in the City Of Kingston. That would have a negative effect on their recruitment. But, if Kingston (or other) merge with Hawthorn they are automatically in if CV approves, that is why Kingston are pretty much in a now or never situation. Geelong and Footscray might have an issue with Werribee but no club could validly argue against Melton and to a slightly lesser extent PV. Good luck to Geelong or Footscray if they try to stand in the way of Werribee's inclusion.
 
Round the grounds said:
According to recent articles, CV already holds the mandate to expand to 20, voted on and passed some time back. I am quoting journos who have quoted Ronchi, not saying I know this myself. What you say is particularly relevent to Kingston as there is no way Frankston, St Kilda, Dandenong, Prahran etc would be in favour of a new team in the City Of Kingston. That would have a negative effect on their recruitment. But, if Kingston (or other) merge with Hawthorn they are automatically in if CV approves, that is why Kingston are pretty much in a now or never situation. Geelong and Footscray might have an issue with Werribee but no club could validly argue against Melton and to a slightly lesser extent PV. Good luck to Geelong or Footscray if they try to stand in the way of Werribee's inclusion.
Click to expand...

I totally agree with the relevance you have expressed. Perhaps Kingston may need to now seek confirmation the expansion to 20 was voted on and passed some time back or, alternatively, asks for written confirmation from CV it has the power to implement the expansion without seeking Premier clubs' approval.
 
westland said:
I totally agree with the relevance you have expressed. Perhaps Kingston may need to now seek confirmation the expansion to 20 was voted on and passed some time back or, alternatively, asks for written confirmation from CV it has the power to implement the expansion without seeking Premier clubs' approval.
Click to expand...
But how is that relevant for Kingston? They would be merging with Hawthorn, that wouldn't expand the competition. It's like Hawthorn relocating really.
 
shortnwide said:
But how is that relevant for Kingston? They would be merging with Hawthorn, that wouldn't expand the competition. It's like Hawthorn relocating really.
Click to expand...
I think the relevance for us is that, for the forseeable future, this is probably our only way into Premier.
My last comment on this prior to a decision being made. In effect, we hold the keys to this merger. We have excellent facilities, excellent finances and currently a sound committee. I can't comment on the 2nd and 3rd issues, but they don't have a ground. Whilst it is a 'step up' for the club, I can state that unless there is significant upside from our club, there will be significant tension in any vote.
 
On things playing, great get by Ormond in Harrison. I personally thought they were a little light on for batting, this makes them a hell of a lot stronger!
 
Super Saint said:
I think the relevance for us is that, for the forseeable future, this is probably our only way into Premier.
My last comment on this prior to a decision being made. In effect, we hold the keys to this merger. We have excellent facilities, excellent finances and currently a sound committee. I can't comment on the 2nd and 3rd issues, but they don't have a ground. Whilst it is a 'step up' for the club, I can state that unless there is significant upside from our club, there will be significant tension in any vote.
Click to expand...

Agree re: premier, this will probably be your only shot at it. Unless another club wants to merge at some point. But the expansion to 20 clubs has no bearing on it. Because they won't be expanding into your area, They'll go north and west, as they should.

I can understand the tension, premier clubs function differently to local clubs imo. The playing list becomes more transient in nature. So it would be a big change.
 
shortnwide said:
But how is that relevant for Kingston? They would be merging with Hawthorn, that wouldn't expand the competition. It's like Hawthorn relocating really.
Click to expand...

I had in mind what environment the ''Kingston Hawks'' would find themselves in, given the resentment of other Premier clubs as posted by RTG, and they should be in possession of all the relevant facts before voting on the merger. I accept it is by no means a major issue. Given this may be a once only opportunity, and that Kingston's hard work over many years has got it to this position, I favour the merger in principle.
 
Super Saint said:
I think the relevance for us is that, for the forseeable future, this is probably our only way into Premier.
My last comment on this prior to a decision being made. In effect, we hold the keys to this merger. We have excellent facilities, excellent finances and currently a sound committee. I can't comment on the 2nd and 3rd issues, but they don't have a ground. Whilst it is a 'step up' for the club, I can state that unless there is significant upside from our club, there will be significant tension in any vote.
Click to expand...
SS without giving too much away, what would constitute a yes from a vote? 80%? Or would the full committee have to be 100% on the decision?
 
Apparently the majority of VTCA clubs have also rejected the CV model, the format presented by CV is clearly dead in the water. VTCA remains in ongoing discussions with CV about possible new models, presume VSDCA is also having such chats. Also some speculation about VTCA south clubs interested in any vacancy that comes up in subbies...
 
Round the grounds said:
Apparently the majority of VTCA clubs have also rejected the CV model, the format presented by CV is clearly dead in the water. VTCA remains in ongoing discussions with CV about possible new models, presume VSDCA is also having such chats. Also some speculation about VTCA south clubs interested in any vacancy that comes up in subbies...
Click to expand...

My guess is you will have read the comments by Steve McNamara on p3 of the latest Leading Edge in respect to the rejection of the CV Model. A sentence in his article that has me thinking as to the future direction of the VTCA is; ''Whilst the VTCA are proud of our ACROSS TOWN HISTORY (my emphasis), we will not forgo all and sundry to continue to maintain it if it becomes untenable and/or unviable.'' Do you read any significance into the above?
 
westland said:
My guess is you will have read the comments by Steve McNamara on p3 of the latest Leading Edge in respect to the rejection of the CV Model. A sentence in his article that has me thinking as to the future direction of the VTCA is; ''Whilst the VTCA are proud of our ACROSS TOWN HISTORY (my emphasis), we will not forgo all and sundry to continue to maintain it if it becomes untenable and/or unviable.'' Do you read any significance into the above?
Click to expand...

Yes, I have read the latest Leading Edge (VTCA should be commended for the comprehensive wrap up of the season and tributes).

And, yes, I do read much significance into his statement. I think it covers off both potential outcomes for the VTCA being (a) a CV model gets adopted in the future and therefore cross town competition is discontinued, and (b) that they will listen to clubs, Hampton, McKinnon etc, who have spoken out against aligned 2 XI's. I think as early as 15/16, Senior Division will be for First XI's only, all other XI's will fall back into their zones at levels suiting their capabilities.

It is most likely the latter that he is referring to as the CV model Version 2 hasn't even seen daylight. There is no doubt that the VTCA is concerned that in particular South clubs are heading to the DDCA, Mercantile etc and they have to address that before South Division fades away or leaves the VTCA as a block.
 
Round the grounds said:
Yes, I have read the latest Leading Edge (VTCA should be commended for the comprehensive wrap up of the season and tributes).

And, yes, I do read much significance into his statement. I think it covers off both potential outcomes for the VTCA being (a) a CV model gets adopted in the future and therefore cross town competition is discontinued, and (b) that they will listen to clubs, Hampton, McKinnon etc, who have spoken out against aligned 2 XI's. I think as early as 15/16, Senior Division will be for First XI's only, all other XI's will fall back into their zones at levels suiting their capabilities.

It is most likely the latter that he is referring to as the CV model Version 2 hasn't even seen daylight. There is no doubt that the VTCA is concerned that in particular South clubs are heading to the DDCA, Mercantile etc and they have to address that before South Division fades away or leaves the VTCA as a block.
Click to expand...

We share similar views and, I suggest, of particular relevance to this forum is that southern division clubs thinking of looking to the subbies as an alternative would be well advised to wait and see what transpires over the next few months. As to your presumption the subbies are also continuing to have chats with CV, I think they should but wonder whether, instead, CV in concert with the VTCA, will conspire to offer more attractive alternatives to disaffected southern division clubs having the effect of drying up a source for the subbies to top-up its numbers. I cannot help thinking the subbies have burned their bridges with CV. I understand CV will soon meet with clubs in the southern region. The concerns posted by Scratch, Rat'n'bat etc appear to have been heeded. I look forward to posts from them. I recall reading posts a few months ago stating that Hoppers and Y/club players were then tweeting they considered the Senior Division superior to the subbies, so I suppose McNamara's comment is in line with the VTCA's thinking. A combination of the best from both would undoubtedly be the best standard outside Premier, but that will not eventuate.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top