Can't see them having a higher playing budget for VTCA than premier and that's what would be required for them to be competitive again at the top levels of the VTCA. Don't think they will ever be highly competitive in the upper echelons of VTCA again. They will find a level further down the pyramid where they will be though.
VTCA Season 2019/20
- Thread starter warrior
- Start date
Can't see them having a higher playing budget for VTCA than premier and that's what would be required for them to be competitive again at the top levels of the VTCA. Don't think they will ever be highly competitive in the upper echelons of VTCA again. They will find a level further down the pyramid where they will be though.
A significant point of difference between the VSDCA and the VTCA is that the former probably does not yet have the critical mass to offer its clubs a promotion and relegation system. It is more likely to be faced with either enticing clubs from other comps to the extent in can provide a promotion and relegation system, or try to have its clubs accept a salary cap. I think the inequality between the "haves" and the "have nots" in the VSDCA, and extreme difficulty in the latter of a battling club again being competitive because they cannot drop down a division, places greater urgency on the VSDCA rather than the VTCA to address the salary cap issue. Whatever, this is such a sensitive issue that a "bull at a gate" tactic by the executive of a cricket competition to introduce a salary cap is likely to result in significant discord. Are such matters in CV's "too hard" drawer, or does it consider salary cap issues are not of its concern? No leadership from it on this very important issue is apparent and concerning imo.
Both RP Broady and Sunshine hung around in the VSDCA long after, rationally, they should have realised the VTCA model was more appropriate for them. Had the VSDCA then had a salary cap in place would it have allowed these clubs to have been competitive? In isolation, I doubt it. Demographics also are a significant issue and is a main reason why I think associations these days should strive to gain the critical mass to allow a promotion and relegation system.
Turf Cricket
Active Member
Maybe it's time to change the name , as it's not really the VTCA anymore
I heard a couple of days ago that the comp in which your club is affiliated, CSB, is in discussions with clubs or an association in the Moorabbin area to expand its footprint. Given CSB was established by CV to cater for the needs of bayside clubs dissatisfied with the VTCA, I should be grateful if you can tell me if there is any truth in what I heard. If so, I just wish CV would show a similar inclination to be involved over here in the west. As the VTCA is a 65 club comp, running it must be a daunting task. I know, from earlier posts on this thread, that the sheer commitment that would be needed by persons who may otherwise be interested in offering their services to its admin is a major disincentive for them.
Turf Cricket
Active Member
Your 18 months late with that news. The VTCA dictatorship do get a renumeration . CV have tried everything to move in the West , but are blocked by the dictatorship , who tend to pass on no info from CV. That is one of the reasons the South clubs got out of the former VTCA. Good hard working decent people on the exec were treated like absolute shit , not just one , but all.
If CV feel as strongly as you, it begs the question as to why it has not offered disaffected VTCA clubs over here that which it offered bayside clubs? Maybe, because the cost would be prohibitive given the megabucks it has spent on creating and running the much smaller CSB. The remuneration earned by the VTCA executive is peanuts compared to the outlay by CV on CSB. The maximum individual VTCA annual payment is $25K to the secretary. Given it is a 65 club competition, that is far from an excessive amount. Just to be clear, I have never had any connection with the administration of the VTCA.
And what is the present situation in respect to an expansion of CSB's footprint (no doubt to be heavily subsidised by CV if it gets off the ground)?
Turf Cricket
Active Member
You have no idea. If you could be messaged you might learn more !
I think Cricket Victoria would be open to running the competition, however they are relying on clubs to advise them that's what they want. I am guessing if a number of clubs got together and raised their concerns with CV then they may look further into it.
Billy Bowden
Member
unless a group of senior div / div 1 clubs all banded together and went to cricket victoria to start a new comp then nothing will happen.
Turf Cricket
Active Member
They need to show some balls and stand up to the dictatorship.
From reading the posts on the question of a salary cap I have the impression the VTCA tried to ram through their proposal and, being such a sensitive issue, I question its tactics. I am sure it did so with the long-term interests of the clubs and it would have been a trail-blazer had it been approved. What troubles me is why it felt the need to do so in isolation -- have relations with CV broken down to the extent that what needs to be a concerted effort across the board on this issue is not on the table? CV should be seriously considering right now that if it wishes to take an active role on the question of a salary cap across the board, it should not be sitting back waiting for clubs to approach it.
Turf Cricket
Active Member
FFS question the McNamara's !
Billy Bowden
Member
Anyone see the rules used for the womens final semi final yesterday. 2nd vs 3rd was unable to go ahead due to ground to wet. Based on this you would think 2nd go through to the final being the higher side. Well no is the answer. Apparently the rules state that a bowl off on the outfield will result in who goes through to the grand final or if that is not possible then a coin toss will result in the winner. What a farce
NorthClubsDontPayPlayers
Active Member
Out of interest how was the ground still wet Sunday? Did we get much rain Saturday night?
Billy Bowden
Member
I believe it was still wet from the friday and saturday rain
No work possible to date this week so my pitch will be under-prepared. Still too wet for the cover to go on tonight, but if the VTCA directs the club to do so it can go ahead and lay it as far as I am concerned. (It wouldn't be the first time it has directed the cover be laid against my better judgement). The municipal council has never prepared cricket pitches, and I am not a member of the club for whom I curate; my relationship with the club is a contractual one and the laying and removal of the cover is not one of my contractual duties. In common with other curators in this region, I do not offer to lay and remove the cover because we work on our own and the cover is far too heavy and unwieldy to be handled by one person. So, the club is totally responsible for the laying and removal of the cover and complying with directions from the VTCA. I understand the default position is the cover must be laid on by sunset on the eve of a match and otherwise as directed by the VTCA (unless it consents to dispensation on application by a club).
Turf Cricket
Active Member
Same rule as it has been since covers were introduced , the only difference now is someone in charge has no curating experience.
I think the more relevant point is that since the VTCA ( and other comps) commenced demanding clubs lay covers as and when directed by them, it has tested the resources of clubs to comply in areas where there is no municipal council involvement in the handling of covers. For example, a few weeks ago clubs were instructed to lay their cover on a Wednesday ahead of the impending rain. Good idea in theory, but unrealistic in practice for many clubs given the persons who must lay the cover are all at work at that time. A number of clubs in this region could not comply, including the one for whom I curate, coupled with the fact the players would have been required to do so in gale-force winds. In fact, the players advised the president that it was too dangerous to lay a full-size cover in such conditions and refused to do so. When the president told me as a courtesy I said I fully supported the position taken by the players.
There were many people watching the U18 semi final yesterday at Selwyn Park because the match coincided with a Sunshine United function where Sam Newman was the guest speaker. Let me tell you it was not a good look when Lambert came out to bat, not that it had any bearing on the result as he was dismissed for 4 . I hope a St Albans under 18 player was not dropped to make way for Lambert. High time M52.11.3 on page 72 was tightened up or, better still, scrapped. Why do players of that age need this on-field support -- half or more of them 12 months hence will have earned the right to vote and obtain a driver's licence!! And rule M52.11.3 needs amendment in any case as "under 17" should read "Under 18".