WTF? DVCA change the rules, who knew!!!

[Tongs]

Re: WTF? DVCA change the rules, who knew!!!

This is a complete and utter bullshit way of running the competition. Any comp that is going to create a rule that will allow a club to have 2 teams in a grade, let alone BS is rubbish. Especially if as previously mentioned, you could have a club have a team relegated from BS to MS and a side go up from MS to BS in the same year.

Its just the DVCA's way of killing off smaller clubs. And Although I want a stronger comp, and don't belong to one of these smaller clubs, it would be nothing short of disgraceful to let these teams die, as they would.

I honestly think that the DVCA don't think about rule changes.

 

[absoluteglam]

Re: WTF? DVCA change the rules, who knew!!!

This is a complete and utter bullshit way of running the competition. Any comp that is going to create a rule that will allow a club to have 2 teams in a grade, let alone BS is rubbish. Especially if as previously mentioned, you could have a club have a team relegated from BS to MS and a side go up from MS to BS in the same year.

Its just the DVCA's way of killing off smaller clubs. And Although I want a stronger comp, and don't belong to one of these smaller clubs, it would be nothing short of disgraceful to let these teams die, as they would.

I honestly think that the DVCA don't think about rule changes.

Oh, I think you do Quinlan!!

 

[100% BULL]

Re: WTF? DVCA change the rules, who knew!!!

The best rule change the DVCA has introduced in living memory. Having played a fair bit of seconds and thirds cricket I have to say the grading of the reserve and lower grades has been pretty ordinary. Last season a number of teams (probably 3-4) in BR should have been playing MR, and visa-versa. The standard in C grade last year was also pretty ordinary, the top 4 sides would have been able to match it with the mid-table MR teams, and the bottom 4 sides were of about an F-grade or lower standard.
[/LIST]

Your point about the lower grades is spot on and needs to be fixed, not that the DVCA should structure the entire competition around the lower grades though.

I'm not sure of all the permutations, but I at least like the fact the DVCA is looking at things laterally. Also good to see all the negative, knockers out in force. Just looking forward to round one.

 

[PremiersAgain]

Re: WTF? DVCA change the rules, who knew!!!

Just to clear something up.


No club will have 2 sides in any particular grade.

 

[CowCorner]

Re: WTF? DVCA change the rules, who knew!!!

Just to clear something up.

No club will have 2 sides in any particular grade.

Whilst I acknowledge that PA, does that not make the promotion and relegation rule that they are trying to achieve unachievable? Who goes up, runner up? What if they also have a side in the higher grade? Does 3rd go up? Does no one? Then what happens to the relegated side?

There is a lot of answers that they need to provide I reckon. Or at least clarity.

 

[The Ox]

Re: WTF? DVCA change the rules, who knew!!!

Whilst I acknowledge that PA, does that not make the promotion and relegation rule that they are trying to achieve unachievable? Who goes up, runner up? What if they also have a side in the higher grade? Does 3rd go up? Does no one? Then what happens to the relegated side?

There is a lot of answers that they need to provide I reckon. Or at least clarity.

Clearly if no-one could go up, no-one would be relegated.

Having played against my own club before though, we thought it was awesome. I acknowledge that may well be different in Barclay than it is in H though.

 

[CowCorner]

Re: WTF? DVCA change the rules, who knew!!!

Clearly if no-one could go up, no-one would be relegated.

Having played against my own club before though, we thought it was awesome. I acknowledge that may well be different in Barclay than it is in H though.

And why in **** is it clear?

 

[brutal]

Re: WTF? DVCA change the rules, who knew!!!

Whilst I acknowledge that PA, does that not make the promotion and relegation rule that they are trying to achieve unachievable? Who goes up, runner up? What if they also have a side in the higher grade? Does 3rd go up? Does no one? Then what happens to the relegated side?

There is a lot of answers that they need to provide I reckon. Or at least clarity.

Correct me if I`m wrong, but does the HDCA have a similar structure with promo and rel?

 

[Nawab of Pautadi]

Re: WTF? DVCA change the rules, who knew!!!

Correct me if I`m wrong, but does the HDCA have a similar structure with promo and rel?

and if they do does that make their system right?

hardly a yard stick?

 

[brutal]

Re: WTF? DVCA change the rules, who knew!!!

and if they do does that make their system right?

hardly a yard stick?

I didn`t say it was right, just asking if they have that system!

 

[The Ox]

Re: WTF? DVCA change the rules, who knew!!!

And why in **** is it clear?

Because otherwise the proposed system wouldn't work.

 

[Ex-Prez]

Re: WTF? DVCA change the rules, who knew!!!

Whilst I acknowledge that PA, does that not make the promotion and relegation rule that they are trying to achieve unachievable? Who goes up, runner up? What if they also have a side in the higher grade? Does 3rd go up? Does no one? Then what happens to the relegated side?

There is a lot of answers that they need to provide I reckon. Or at least clarity.

I believe what will happen if the premier of a grade already has a team in grade above, then the runner up will be given the opportunity to "apply" to go up (again assuming no higher team in the grade above).
Assuming all ok, then the DVCA will have the discretion to promote this team and relegate the bottom team. They will judge this on the merits of the runner up team ( ie did they finish on top and lose the granny or did they come from 4th...). Also did the bottom team win 3-4 games or are they a basket case...?
Will be on a case by case scenario.
Is highly unlikely the promoted team will come from outside the granny. So if two GF teams are ineligible to go up, then the bottom teams stays safe.

 

[Ex-Prez]

Re: WTF? DVCA change the rules, who knew!!!

Has anyone considered the 4 piece ball proposals?

Assuming from the amount of talk this will get up this year.

Has anyone considered which ball and the costs associated with? Talk is that this will come in for all 80 over grade cricket and the top under 16's.

From our club's perspective - changing to the Platypus 4 peice for the above teams would add about $1000 costs per year (incl training balls).
A wholesale change across to Kookaburra & its 4 piece would cost over $3000+.

FYI current 2 pc Platypus $25.50, proposed 4 pc Platypus $35.00, Kookabuura 4 pc $49.50, Kooka 2pc $34.00

I think we need to do this in 2 stages. Firstly to Platypus 4pc, then maybe to Kooka in seasons to come.

 

[CowCorner]

Re: WTF? DVCA change the rules, who knew!!!

Has anyone considered the 4 piece ball proposals?

Assuming from the amount of talk this will get up this year.

Has anyone considered which ball and the costs associated with? Talk is that this will come in for all 80 over grade cricket and the top under 16's.

From our club's perspective - changing to the Platypus 4 peice for the above teams would add about $1000 costs per year (incl training balls).
A wholesale change across to Kookaburra & its 4 piece would cost over $3000+.

FYI current 2 pc Platypus $25.50, proposed 4 pc Platypus $35.00, Kookabuura 4 pc $49.50, Kooka 2pc $34.00

I think we need to do this in 2 stages. Firstly to Platypus 4pc, then maybe to Kooka in seasons to come.

That proposal is worded exactly in the RCP that the DVCA just released....

And I agree, however the amount difference seems interesting, $14.50 seems dramatic. Whilst I agree price is a main issue, can anyone say why the price difference? Will the Kooka last a lot longer? Is the ball better standard? What do other comps use? Has Kookaburra been properly been approached and advised we are looking for a more competitive price? Does Bundoora have 'kickbacks' from Platypus? D)

For the record I am all for 4 piece and hope after al these years it gets up.

 

[CowCorner]

Re: WTF? DVCA change the rules, who knew!!!

I believe what will happen if the premier of a grade already has a team in grade above, then the runner up will be given the opportunity to "apply" to go up (again assuming no higher team in the grade above).
Assuming all ok, then the DVCA will have the discretion to promote this team and relegate the bottom team. They will judge this on the merits of the runner up team ( ie did they finish on top and lose the granny or did they come from 4th...). Also did the bottom team win 3-4 games or are they a basket case...?
Will be on a case by case scenario.
Is highly unlikely the promoted team will come from outside the granny. So if two GF teams are ineligible to go up, then the bottom teams stays safe.

All makes sense and probably needs to be spelt out in the rule book to avoid confusion and post season issues.

 

[Ex-Prez]

Re: WTF? DVCA change the rules, who knew!!!

That proposal is worded exactly in the RCP that the DVCA just released....

And I agree, however the amount difference seems interesting, $14.50 seems dramatic. Whilst I agree price is a main issue, can anyone say why the price difference? Will the Kooka last a lot longer? Is the ball better standard? What do other comps use? Has Kookaburra been properly been approached and advised we are looking for a more competitive price? Does Bundoora have 'kickbacks' from Platypus? D)

For the record I am all for 4 piece and hope after al these years it gets up.

Certainly no shares in platypus... Only trying to cut ours (and everyone's) costs.
I have used the kooka ball (2pc) in Jika many years ago and they seem to be a better ball. Tends to hold the shape and hardness longer but i thought the Platypus swung more. This is just my general perception though. Not a lot of research.

 

[Bubble Wrap]

Re: WTF? DVCA change the rules, who knew!!!

I believe what will happen if the premier of a grade already has a team in grade above, then the runner up will be given the opportunity to "apply" to go up (again assuming no higher team in the grade above).
Assuming all ok, then the DVCA will have the discretion to promote this team and relegate the bottom team. They will judge this on the merits of the runner up team ( ie did they finish on top and lose the granny or did they come from 4th...). Also did the bottom team win 3-4 games or are they a basket case...?
Will be on a case by case scenario.
Is highly unlikely the promoted team will come from outside the granny. So if two GF teams are ineligible to go up, then the bottom teams stays safe.

"DVCA" and "discretion" is just asking for a monumental stuff up at some point. Would prefer some hard and fast rules in place.

 

[TGAT]

Re: WTF? DVCA change the rules, who knew!!!

Certainly no shares in platypus... Only trying to cut ours (and everyone's) costs.
I have used the kooka ball (2pc) in Jika many years ago and they seem to be a better ball. Tends to hold the shape and hardness longer but i thought the Platypus swung more. This is just my general perception though. Not a lot of research.

Having used the Kookaburra ball extensively in the past, they are of a superior quality to the Platypus ball. They stay harder for much longer and hold their shape much better. The difference in quality is large. The Kookaburra will still swing, but not as erratically as the Platypus ball does at times, and it performs much more consistently throughout the duration of a match. The Platypus ball is substandard and if we want to be viewed as a premier competition, then we need to be using the best balls available. I understand the cost concerns, however, we should not use an inferior ball just because it is a cheaper option.

 

[five80]

Re: WTF? DVCA change the rules, who knew!!!

Platypus balls are junk. They'll end up being more expensive anyway, they fall apart after 50 overs so we'll end up using 4 balls every match!

 

[CowCorner]

Re: WTF? DVCA change the rules, who knew!!!

Interesting comments about the standard of both balls, I for one agree, if the difference is that great why in has some rocket scientist decided to make a decision, again without consultation of Clubs to use what appears to be a inferior ball. Looks like arguments will appear at the Pre-AGM and it will again get smashed.