Legend
2.1K
·
16K
·
about 17 years

well said.

I’d say the national champs stage will have some solid teams in it too.

GM
Trialist
0
·
2
·
about 3 years

It will NOT give “the regions a more level playing field than before” as only 2 teams will be selected for the South Island. They will always most likely be Chch clubs, so if you play for a Southland/ Central Otago/ Dunedin/ Timaru/ Blenheim/ Nelson club - and are a good individual player – then play another sport or move to Auckland. Under current arrangements those individuals would play for Tasman/ Southern or the Dragons, as they take their rep teams from any club. That’s how football will be destroyed Andrew.

No Andrew, those region clubs are NOT on the same footing - as only 4 up north, 3 in central & 2 in South Island can go through. The others are discarded.

New Plymouth, Palmerston North & Tauranga will never be able to step up. Any decent player will now be well gone from those towns.

“Fewer, better-resourced clubs” is not a good thing. You might as well have NZFC and be done with it. With regional franchises, players can stay loyal to their local clubs.

Your naivety and ignorance perhaps stem from a UK club mentality where no Chelsea resident plays for Chelsea and I doubt theres a Liverpudlian in Liverpool. In NZ we are provincially parochial. We want to see Auckland play Canterbury not Riccarton v Mt Albert.

The best players will be lost in clubs that didn’t get selected for the national comp.

Your only realistic statement Andrew is the funding issue. That’s could have been addressed better but your new format is going to destroy football in NZ.

Can you speak to the youngsters in Mosgiel, Selwyn, Masterton etc and give them confidence they will play in the national comp OR will you sponsor their move to where they can. 

Getting paid to be here
700
·
970
·
over 6 years

GM wrote:

It will NOT give “the regions a more level playing field than before” as only 2 teams will be selected for the South Island. They will always most likely be Chch clubs, so if you play for a Southland/ Central Otago/ Dunedin/ Timaru/ Blenheim/ Nelson club - and are a good individual player – then play another sport or move to Auckland. Under current arrangements those individuals would play for Tasman/ Southern or the Dragons, as they take their rep teams from any club. That’s how football will be destroyed Andrew.

No Andrew, those region clubs are NOT on the same footing - as only 4 up north, 3 in central & 2 in South Island can go through. The others are discarded.

New Plymouth, Palmerston North & Tauranga will never be able to step up. Any decent player will now be well gone from those towns.

“Fewer, better-resourced clubs” is not a good thing. You might as well have NZFC and be done with it. With regional franchises, players can stay loyal to their local clubs.

Your naivety and ignorance perhaps stem from a UK club mentality where no Chelsea resident plays for Chelsea and I doubt theres a Liverpudlian in Liverpool. In NZ we are provincially parochial. We want to see Auckland play Canterbury not Riccarton v Mt Albert.

The best players will be lost in clubs that didn’t get selected for the national comp.

Your only realistic statement Andrew is the funding issue. That’s could have been addressed better but your new format is going to destroy football in NZ.

Can you speak to the youngsters in Mosgiel, Selwyn, Masterton etc and give them confidence they will play in the national comp OR will you sponsor their move to where they can. 

You have skipped past the very first point that I made – that you should not fixate on taking the national championship phase as being 'the national comp,' as you put it. 

The national league starts in March. What happens from March to September is just as important as what happens from October to December. Plans are afoot in Auckland for the eight non-qualifiers to play another round of matches (maybe not in 2021). My money's on more change along those lines to come as this evolves.

There's no reason why a well-run New Plymouth or a Palmerston North club (or regional entity a la Team Taranaki or Northland) couldn't make it into the Central League. Same for Tauranga City and the Northern Region Football League's Premier Division. 

Better-resourced clubs is definitely a good thing. The fewer bit comes from the fact that it generally takes getting a bigger membership base (via a merger) to help make that happen.

The masses aren't exactly flocking to Canterbury United v Auckland City, so I doubt Cashmere Technical v Eastern Suburbs taking its place will be a major problem. Recent history in the NZFC has been that the regional entities (Canterbury, Hamilton, Hawke's Bay, Southern) have had to bring in imports and lose their regional identity in order to compete.

I can't see how anyone will be lost when they're all part of the same pyramid from March to December. If anything, without the confusing winter/summer crossover around any more, they should be more visible.

Youngsters in Mosgiel, Selwyn, Masterton etc will play for Mosgiel (or other Dunedin clubs, it's not that far a commute, right?), Selwyn (or, likewise, other Christchurch clubs), Wairarapa United and if those clubs advance to the national championship phase they will play nine/10 more games against teams from around the country, rather than just around their region. 

No club (except the Wellington Phoenix, which is a whole other debate in itself) is guaranteed a place in that national championship phase, so you'd be a fool moving with that as your primary incentive (unless you go to the Phoenix, but again).

Legend
11K
·
21K
·
almost 9 years

The motto of the Handy Prem is/was 'where All Whites are made". And to a reasonable extent it was doing that. The Eastern Suburbs title winning side of a few years back being one strong example.

And if not producing AWs then a steady stream of guys, getting scouted and being signed by overseas clubs. Joel Stevens went to Sweden from Southern. Yipe he'd already been to Sweden once before, and prior to that with Weenix/TW.

But fact is he was playing National League for a franchise based in Dunedin, and from there got picked up by a pro club in Scandinavia. So he's an example for Otago/Southland footballers that if they stayed local for their national league football (Southern United), they could end up overseas. Erik Panzer is another guy that from Southern, has got a few overseas 'pro' gigs.

As GM says the chances of a Southern League side progressing to the end of season playoffs, past all the Mainland League sides looks slim at the moment. Will a young player be noticed playing in the obscure, lower quality Southern League. Unlikely. Sure is a high chance he would have gone to ChCh, Wellington or Auckland anyway (if just for his winter football) - but now that's 100% given, I reckon.

Of course Southern United, ain't in this year's Handy Prem. Would they have managed to survive if not for Covid, I don't know. Without a forensic look over their financials no one can 100% say for sure. For awhile there, their model of having a few overseas players (Irish) in as regional football development officers, plus playing for Southern in the Handy Prem looked reasonable. From what I'd read they really lifted the amount & quality of kids coaching, in the Southern region. Maybe I missed something (likely) but I'd never heard reports of financial problems down there until Covid.

And yes you can agrue until you are blue in the face, that technically the National League starts in March. But apart from a few NZF officials is anyone else, really going to think like that. When you are just playing other Northern, Central, Mainland or Southern clubs through the colder months as per every other winter season.

Anyway NZF have made their decision, let see what happens.

One in a million
4K
·
9.5K
·
almost 17 years

I am looking forward to the new format. I think the club based format will allow players and fans to align much more with the teams than the franchise teams did. Player will be able to sign with those clubs and try to fight their way into the top teams, or be able to sign for competing clubs and try to knock off the name club. 
The glory days of the Gisborne Cities should not be forgotten, where a whole provincial area can be behind their team.
I look forward to a southern resurgence too, with the back of the likes of the Invercargill Licencing Trust.
Tauranga, in the BOP area where I currently live, has huge potential for a national league team, as it did back in the days of Mt Maunganui.

Getting paid to be here
700
·
970
·
over 6 years

coochiee wrote:

The motto of the Handy Prem is/was 'where All Whites are made". And to a reasonable extent it was doing that. The Eastern Suburbs title winning side of a few years back being one strong example.

And if not producing AWs then a steady stream of guys, getting scouted and being signed by overseas clubs. Joel Stevens went to Sweden from Southern. Yipe he'd already been to Sweden once before, and prior to that with Weenix/TW.

But fact is he was playing National League for a franchise based in Dunedin, and from there got picked up by a pro club in Scandinavia. So he's an example for Otago/Southland footballers that if they stayed local for their national league football (Southern United), they could end up overseas. Erik Panzer is another guy that from Southern, has got a few overseas 'pro' gigs.

As GM says the chances of a Southern League side progressing to the end of season playoffs, past all the Mainland League sides looks slim at the moment. Will a young player be noticed playing in the obscure, lower quality Southern League. Unlikely. Sure is a high chance he would have gone to ChCh, Wellington or Auckland anyway (if just for his winter football) - but now that's 100% given, I reckon.

Of course Southern United, ain't in this year's Handy Prem. Would they have managed to survive if not for Covid, I don't know. Without a forensic look over their financials no one can 100% say for sure. For awhile there, their model of having a few overseas players (Irish) in as regional football development officers, plus playing for Southern in the Handy Prem looked reasonable. From what I'd read they really lifted the amount & quality of kids coaching, in the Southern region. Maybe I missed something but I'd never heard reports of financial problems down there until Covid.

And yes you can agrue until you are blue in the face, that technically the National League starts in March. But apart from a few NZF officials is anyone else, really going to think like that. When you are just playing other Northern, Central, Mainland or Southern clubs through the colder months as per every other winter season.

Anyway NZF have made their decision, let see what happens.

The national league starting in March and now consisting of winter clubs – proper clubs with teams right down through the age groups – is a massive systemic change. Not a technicality. 

Yes – the national championship phase will have some more heft behind it (I expect we'll see wall-to-wall live streaming for that part of it, as has been the case this summer) and will be the part aimed at the more casual football fan and playing in it will no doubt help give some exposure, but I can't see not playing in it stopping truly talented players. 

Matt Conroy, Matt Garbett, Oscar Obel-Hall, and Marko Stamenic are four current U-20 players off the top of my head who have managed to get overseas deals while barely playing in the existing national league (ie on the back of what they were doing in winter leagues). If they're talented and can show it, they will be noticed.

It's about the environments clubs create and this new format empowers them all to put their best foot forward, rather than having them do the work from March to September and someone else do it for the other half of the year.

There is no doubt a Northern > Central > Southern (and within Southern, Mainland > South) hierarchy exists and that promising players who are able to will seek to move up it, but what this change does is make it clear where everyone stands (what I've referred to previously here as a level playing field) and opens up more pathways. 

Instead of there being 11 starting places, five bench places, and seven squad places in Canterbury and in Otago – as is the case with the existing setup, Canterbury United, and Southern United, making time for youngsters very hard to come by – there are now 88 and 40 in Canterbury and 88 and 40 in Otago.

If you're in Canterbury or Otago and want to have a football career, you're going to have to move at some point, but this should mean talented high-school age players stay there, playing or being around first-team football, at that age (not that there are a hell of a lot of them moving, but there has been quite a Canterbury > Wellington Phoenix Football Academy pathway evident the past couple of years – an ideal outcome of these changes would be that that kind of thing (going from playing MPL/SL to playing Cap Prem/Cap 1/Cap 3) stops, but it takes two to tango...) 

Legend
11K
·
21K
·
almost 9 years

Do definitely agree that a Northern League team will happen in Tauranga/Mt Maunganui, in the not too distant future.

Continued population and economic growth will just see it happen.

Woof Woof
2.7K
·
19K
·
over 16 years

Instead of there being 11 starting places, five bench places, and seven squad places in Canterbury and in Otago – as is the case with the existing setup, Canterbury United, and Southern United, making time for youngsters very hard to come by – there are now 88 and 40 in Canterbury and 88 and 40 in Otago.

This is precisely why the new system is such a terrible idea. Let's get as much donkey into the National League, and get dumb clubs (we all know who I'm talking about) to pay them sharkloads while they're at it. Sorry, I mean ask them to do a lot of 'coaching'.

The sad reality is that there's probably only 11-12 clubs in the country that can actually make a fist of it, so basically the whole system's been changed just to give Olympic, Birko, or Wests a chance to be in the national league.

Starting XI
3K
·
3K
·
almost 7 years

Very keen to hear more takes on the potential of young players to move overseas in the new format. Will everything be okay if you’re a youngster playing for a middling team in the new South Island league?

Oscar Obel-Hall only played two games for Christchurch United’s first team before being picked up by Esbjerg in Denmark. How much of this is due to overseas leagues keeping an eye on the MPL, and how much is a product of Chch Utd as a club and how they’re run? Ignoring the money pumped in as it’s barely pertinent - their website, public relations, coaching setup, foreign outreach and overall image are clearly much, much more attractive than most teams in the country, so fair to assume many more foreign eyes will be on their setup from first teams all the way down the grades. 

Don’t want to name names but if you’re a youngster for a club that makes no effort to modernise and catch up with the times, and you’re a promising young player wanting to get noticed overseas, what’s the point in staying at that club? 

Starting XI
1.3K
·
2.7K
·
almost 9 years

We're not even going to be the premier competition in Oceania

Fiji Professional League

Trialist
53
·
80
·
about 5 years

coochiee wrote:

The motto of the Handy Prem is/was 'where All Whites are made". And to a reasonable extent it was doing that. The Eastern Suburbs title winning side of a few years back being one strong example.

And if not producing AWs then a steady stream of guys, getting scouted and being signed by overseas clubs. Joel Stevens went to Sweden from Southern. Yipe he'd already been to Sweden once before, and prior to that with Weenix/TW.

But fact is he was playing National League for a franchise based in Dunedin, and from there got picked up by a pro club in Scandinavia. So he's an example for Otago/Southland footballers that if they stayed local for their national league football (Southern United), they could end up overseas. Erik Panzer is another guy that from Southern, has got a few overseas 'pro' gigs.

As GM says the chances of a Southern League side progressing to the end of season playoffs, past all the Mainland League sides looks slim at the moment. Will a young player be noticed playing in the obscure, lower quality Southern League. Unlikely. Sure is a high chance he would have gone to ChCh, Wellington or Auckland anyway (if just for his winter football) - but now that's 100% given, I reckon.

Of course Southern United, ain't in this year's Handy Prem. Would they have managed to survive if not for Covid, I don't know. Without a forensic look over their financials no one can 100% say for sure. For awhile there, their model of having a few overseas players (Irish) in as regional football development officers, plus playing for Southern in the Handy Prem looked reasonable. From what I'd read they really lifted the amount & quality of kids coaching, in the Southern region. Maybe I missed something but I'd never heard reports of financial problems down there until Covid.

And yes you can agrue until you are blue in the face, that technically the National League starts in March. But apart from a few NZF officials is anyone else, really going to think like that. When you are just playing other Northern, Central, Mainland or Southern clubs through the colder months as per every other winter season.

Anyway NZF have made their decision, let see what happens.

The national league starting in March and now consisting of winter clubs – proper clubs with teams right down through the age groups – is a massive systemic change. Not a technicality. 

Yes – the national championship phase will have some more heft behind it (I expect we'll see wall-to-wall live streaming for that part of it, as has been the case this summer) and will be the part aimed at the more casual football fan and playing in it will no doubt help give some exposure, but I can't see not playing in it stopping truly talented players. 

Matt Conroy, Matt Garbett, Oscar Obel-Hall, and Marko Stamenic are four current U-20 players off the top of my head who have managed to get overseas deals while barely playing in the existing national league (ie on the back of what they were doing in winter leagues). If they're talented and can show it, they will be noticed.

It's about the environments clubs create and this new format empowers them all to put their best foot forward, rather than having them do the work from March to September and someone else do it for the other half of the year.

There is no doubt a Northern > Central > Southern (and within Southern, Mainland > South) hierarchy exists and that promising players who are able to will seek to move up it, but what this change does is make it clear where everyone stands (what I've referred to previously here as a level playing field) and opens up more pathways. 

Instead of there being 11 starting places, five bench places, and seven squad places in Canterbury and in Otago – as is the case with the existing setup, Canterbury United, and Southern United, making time for youngsters very hard to come by – there are now 88 and 40 in Canterbury and 88 and 40 in Otago.

If you're in Canterbury or Otago and want to have a football career, you're going to have to move at some point, but this should mean talented high-school age players stay there, playing or being around first-team football, at that age (not that there are a hell of a lot of them moving, but there has been quite a Canterbury > Wellington Phoenix Football Academy pathway evident the past couple of years – an ideal outcome of these changes would be that that kind of thing (going from playing MPL/SL to playing Cap Prem/Cap 1/Cap 3) stops, but it takes two to tango...) 


The national league starts in March, but only on the basis of changing the name of existing competitions. Nothing else has actually changed, there is still the standard Mainland and then Southern competition in the South for example - just has a new name.

Who is going to watch the live streaming? Enough to cover the cost of broadcast?

Previously the best players (well subjectively) were selected into the Canterbury squad, this cannot happen in the new system as players are spread across the clubs in March and stay there. By definition only 2 squads will make the national competition from Canterbury which will not be the best 30 players.

The part that bugs me most is the repetition that it is better for young players - I completely disagree with this statement by NZF. The best young players will be spread across clubs so cannot all have the same chance that they had of making 1 Canterbury squad.

Legend
2.1K
·
16K
·
about 17 years

el grapadura wrote:

Instead of there being 11 starting places, five bench places, and seven squad places in Canterbury and in Otago – as is the case with the existing setup, Canterbury United, and Southern United, making time for youngsters very hard to come by – there are now 88 and 40 in Canterbury and 88 and 40 in Otago.

This is precisely why the new system is such a terrible idea. Let's get as much donkey into the National League, and get dumb clubs (we all know who I'm talking about) to pay them sharkloads whike they're at it. Sorru, I mean ask them to do a lot of 'coaching'.

The sad reality is that there's probably only 11-12 clubs in the country that can actually make a fist of it, so basically the whole system's been changed just to give Olympic, Birko, or Wests a chance to be in the national league.

11>8

Woof Woof
2.7K
·
19K
·
over 16 years

Feverish wrote:

el grapadura wrote:

Instead of there being 11 starting places, five bench places, and seven squad places in Canterbury and in Otago – as is the case with the existing setup, Canterbury United, and Southern United, making time for youngsters very hard to come by – there are now 88 and 40 in Canterbury and 88 and 40 in Otago.

This is precisely why the new system is such a terrible idea. Let's get as much donkey into the National League, and get dumb clubs (we all know who I'm talking about) to pay them sharkloads whike they're at it. Sorru, I mean ask them to do a lot of 'coaching'.

The sad reality is that there's probably only 11-12 clubs in the country that can actually make a fist of it, so basically the whole system's been changed just to give Olympic, Birko, or Wests a chance to be in the national league.

11>8

Or you could just introduce promotion-relegation. Give ambitious clubs on the outside something to aspire to, and if you can't cut it at the national league level, step down for someone else to have a go.

First Team Squad
1K
·
1.7K
·
over 15 years

GM wrote:

The new club based format I give to last only a few years. Utterly dumb and will destroy football in the regions. Clubs merging already. NZ Football should change its name to Northern Football. So if you're in a regional centre and good, then you're going to have to move to Auckland to be noticed. Sadly the boffins in football management are blind & deaf and journos like Andrew Voerman are so naaive and ignorant. Its the death knell. I've already pulled my sponsorship and I know many others have. I'll become a Yellow Fever supporter now - thats all.

Teams aren't necessarily merging because they want to compete in national leagues. They're primarily merging because of things like club licensing which is enforcing standards of coaching, pitches, and facilities which smaller clubs cannot afford on their own.

People here dribble about how our pitches aren't good enough, facilities and presentation is sub-par, or coaches aren't good enough. Club licensing is an attempt to remediate that.

Trialist
53
·
80
·
about 5 years

20 Legend wrote:

GM wrote:

The new club based format I give to last only a few years. Utterly dumb and will destroy football in the regions. Clubs merging already. NZ Football should change its name to Northern Football. So if you're in a regional centre and good, then you're going to have to move to Auckland to be noticed. Sadly the boffins in football management are blind & deaf and journos like Andrew Voerman are so naaive and ignorant. Its the death knell. I've already pulled my sponsorship and I know many others have. I'll become a Yellow Fever supporter now - thats all.

Teams aren't necessarily merging because they want to compete in national leagues. They're primarily merging because of things like club licensing which is enforcing standards of coaching, pitches, and facilities which smaller clubs cannot afford on their own.

People here dribble about how our pitches aren't good enough, facilities and presentation is sub-par, or coaches aren't good enough. Club licensing is an attempt to remediate that.

People here dribble about how our pitches aren't good enough, facilities and presentation is sub-par, or coaches aren't good enough. Club licensing is an attempt to remediate that.

..........for a large cost to a player. Licensing has taken the basic cost to play from ~$150 -200 up to well over $1000

First Team Squad
1K
·
1.7K
·
over 15 years

Lol who the hell is paying $1000 for fees?

Getting paid to be here
700
·
970
·
over 6 years

Feverish wrote:

el grapadura wrote:

Instead of there being 11 starting places, five bench places, and seven squad places in Canterbury and in Otago – as is the case with the existing setup, Canterbury United, and Southern United, making time for youngsters very hard to come by – there are now 88 and 40 in Canterbury and 88 and 40 in Otago.

This is precisely why the new system is such a terrible idea. Let's get as much donkey into the National League, and get dumb clubs (we all know who I'm talking about) to pay them sharkloads whike they're at it. Sorru, I mean ask them to do a lot of 'coaching'.

The sad reality is that there's probably only 11-12 clubs in the country that can actually make a fist of it, so basically the whole system's been changed just to give Olympic, Birko, or Wests a chance to be in the national league.

11>8

I can get up over 20 pretty quickly...

Getting paid to be here
700
·
970
·
over 6 years

Roys town wrote:

coochiee wrote:

The motto of the Handy Prem is/was 'where All Whites are made". And to a reasonable extent it was doing that. The Eastern Suburbs title winning side of a few years back being one strong example.

And if not producing AWs then a steady stream of guys, getting scouted and being signed by overseas clubs. Joel Stevens went to Sweden from Southern. Yipe he'd already been to Sweden once before, and prior to that with Weenix/TW.

But fact is he was playing National League for a franchise based in Dunedin, and from there got picked up by a pro club in Scandinavia. So he's an example for Otago/Southland footballers that if they stayed local for their national league football (Southern United), they could end up overseas. Erik Panzer is another guy that from Southern, has got a few overseas 'pro' gigs.

As GM says the chances of a Southern League side progressing to the end of season playoffs, past all the Mainland League sides looks slim at the moment. Will a young player be noticed playing in the obscure, lower quality Southern League. Unlikely. Sure is a high chance he would have gone to ChCh, Wellington or Auckland anyway (if just for his winter football) - but now that's 100% given, I reckon.

Of course Southern United, ain't in this year's Handy Prem. Would they have managed to survive if not for Covid, I don't know. Without a forensic look over their financials no one can 100% say for sure. For awhile there, their model of having a few overseas players (Irish) in as regional football development officers, plus playing for Southern in the Handy Prem looked reasonable. From what I'd read they really lifted the amount & quality of kids coaching, in the Southern region. Maybe I missed something but I'd never heard reports of financial problems down there until Covid.

And yes you can agrue until you are blue in the face, that technically the National League starts in March. But apart from a few NZF officials is anyone else, really going to think like that. When you are just playing other Northern, Central, Mainland or Southern clubs through the colder months as per every other winter season.

Anyway NZF have made their decision, let see what happens.

The national league starting in March and now consisting of winter clubs – proper clubs with teams right down through the age groups – is a massive systemic change. Not a technicality. 

Yes – the national championship phase will have some more heft behind it (I expect we'll see wall-to-wall live streaming for that part of it, as has been the case this summer) and will be the part aimed at the more casual football fan and playing in it will no doubt help give some exposure, but I can't see not playing in it stopping truly talented players. 

Matt Conroy, Matt Garbett, Oscar Obel-Hall, and Marko Stamenic are four current U-20 players off the top of my head who have managed to get overseas deals while barely playing in the existing national league (ie on the back of what they were doing in winter leagues). If they're talented and can show it, they will be noticed.

It's about the environments clubs create and this new format empowers them all to put their best foot forward, rather than having them do the work from March to September and someone else do it for the other half of the year.

There is no doubt a Northern > Central > Southern (and within Southern, Mainland > South) hierarchy exists and that promising players who are able to will seek to move up it, but what this change does is make it clear where everyone stands (what I've referred to previously here as a level playing field) and opens up more pathways. 

Instead of there being 11 starting places, five bench places, and seven squad places in Canterbury and in Otago – as is the case with the existing setup, Canterbury United, and Southern United, making time for youngsters very hard to come by – there are now 88 and 40 in Canterbury and 88 and 40 in Otago.

If you're in Canterbury or Otago and want to have a football career, you're going to have to move at some point, but this should mean talented high-school age players stay there, playing or being around first-team football, at that age (not that there are a hell of a lot of them moving, but there has been quite a Canterbury > Wellington Phoenix Football Academy pathway evident the past couple of years – an ideal outcome of these changes would be that that kind of thing (going from playing MPL/SL to playing Cap Prem/Cap 1/Cap 3) stops, but it takes two to tango...) 


The national league starts in March, but only on the basis of changing the name of existing competitions. Nothing else has actually changed, there is still the standard Mainland and then Southern competition in the South for example - just has a new name.

Who is going to watch the live streaming? Enough to cover the cost of broadcast?

Previously the best players (well subjectively) were selected into the Canterbury squad, this cannot happen in the new system as players are spread across the clubs in March and stay there. By definition only 2 squads will make the national competition from Canterbury which will not be the best 30 players.

The part that bugs me most is the repetition that it is better for young players - I completely disagree with this statement by NZF. The best young players will be spread across clubs so cannot all have the same chance that they had of making 1 Canterbury squad.

Taking each paragraph in turn...

1. A new name – and new prominence. The regional winer leagues are no longer second fiddle to a summer national league that clashes with them and which many players prioritise in terms of availability and effort. This is a massive shift.

2. I dunno, whoever watches it now.

3. I don't get the issue here. There is no longer any Canterbury squad. Two South Island clubs will get to play nine/10 more matches and the players at those clubs will get a bit more time in the spotlight. NZ Football is encouraging the teams that do not advance to carry on with auxiliary regional competitions at the same time – whether that happens in 2021 is another matter – and most clubs have youth programmes that run until Labour Weekend tournaments. Not being involved in the national championship phase is not going to be the end of the world.

4. You have seven Canterbury clubs all having to give starts to at least two under-20 players throughout the season. Only four of them gave at least two under-20 players half of the playing time available to them in 2020. That's an improvement in my books. Whatever happens with those clubs and making the national championship phase is icing (on the cake).

Getting paid to be here
700
·
970
·
over 6 years

el grapadura wrote:

Feverish wrote:

el grapadura wrote:

Instead of there being 11 starting places, five bench places, and seven squad places in Canterbury and in Otago – as is the case with the existing setup, Canterbury United, and Southern United, making time for youngsters very hard to come by – there are now 88 and 40 in Canterbury and 88 and 40 in Otago.

This is precisely why the new system is such a terrible idea. Let's get as much donkey into the National League, and get dumb clubs (we all know who I'm talking about) to pay them sharkloads whike they're at it. Sorru, I mean ask them to do a lot of 'coaching'.

The sad reality is that there's probably only 11-12 clubs in the country that can actually make a fist of it, so basically the whole system's been changed just to give Olympic, Birko, or Wests a chance to be in the national league.

11>8

Or you could just introduce promotion-relegation. Give ambitious clubs on the outside something to aspire to, and if you can't cut it at the national league level, step down for someone else to have a go.

Would the idea here have been to also move the national league to winter as well? Because that immediately throws up a plethora of conflicts and double-ups... while having pro-rel and a winter/summer split doesn't address any of the issues. It's such a thorny topic because every time you find a reason for doing it one way, there's usually a 'but....' that explains why it's not that simple.

Woof Woof
2.7K
·
19K
·
over 16 years

el grapadura wrote:

Feverish wrote:

el grapadura wrote:

Instead of there being 11 starting places, five bench places, and seven squad places in Canterbury and in Otago – as is the case with the existing setup, Canterbury United, and Southern United, making time for youngsters very hard to come by – there are now 88 and 40 in Canterbury and 88 and 40 in Otago.

This is precisely why the new system is such a terrible idea. Let's get as much donkey into the National League, and get dumb clubs (we all know who I'm talking about) to pay them sharkloads whike they're at it. Sorru, I mean ask them to do a lot of 'coaching'.

The sad reality is that there's probably only 11-12 clubs in the country that can actually make a fist of it, so basically the whole system's been changed just to give Olympic, Birko, or Wests a chance to be in the national league.

11>8

Or you could just introduce promotion-relegation. Give ambitious clubs on the outside something to aspire to, and if you can't cut it at the national league level, step down for someone else to have a go.

Would the idea here have been to also move the national league to winter as well? Because that immediately throws up a plethora of conflicts and double-ups... while having pro-rel and a winter/summer split doesn't address any of the issues. It's such a thorny topic because every time you find a reason for doing it one way, there's usually a 'but....' that explains why it's not that simple.

No. Keep the winter/summer split. The current model needs some fiddling with, but NZF have gone on and thrown the baby out with the bath water. And as a result are going to end up with a worse standard of football with costs that are still very high.

Woof Woof
2.7K
·
19K
·
over 16 years

Feverish wrote:

el grapadura wrote:

Instead of there being 11 starting places, five bench places, and seven squad places in Canterbury and in Otago – as is the case with the existing setup, Canterbury United, and Southern United, making time for youngsters very hard to come by – there are now 88 and 40 in Canterbury and 88 and 40 in Otago.

This is precisely why the new system is such a terrible idea. Let's get as much donkey into the National League, and get dumb clubs (we all know who I'm talking about) to pay them sharkloads whike they're at it. Sorru, I mean ask them to do a lot of 'coaching'.

The sad reality is that there's probably only 11-12 clubs in the country that can actually make a fist of it, so basically the whole system's been changed just to give Olympic, Birko, or Wests a chance to be in the national league.

11>8

I can get up over 20 pretty quickly...

Interested to hear who they are. There's a maximum of 5-6 clubs who can do this across Central and Mainland Leagues (and including the South in that too). So there are 15+ clubs in the Northern region who can do this? I find that extremely difficult to believe. 

Getting paid to be here
700
·
970
·
over 6 years

el grapadura wrote:

el grapadura wrote:

Feverish wrote:

el grapadura wrote:

Instead of there being 11 starting places, five bench places, and seven squad places in Canterbury and in Otago – as is the case with the existing setup, Canterbury United, and Southern United, making time for youngsters very hard to come by – there are now 88 and 40 in Canterbury and 88 and 40 in Otago.

This is precisely why the new system is such a terrible idea. Let's get as much donkey into the National League, and get dumb clubs (we all know who I'm talking about) to pay them sharkloads whike they're at it. Sorru, I mean ask them to do a lot of 'coaching'.

The sad reality is that there's probably only 11-12 clubs in the country that can actually make a fist of it, so basically the whole system's been changed just to give Olympic, Birko, or Wests a chance to be in the national league.

11>8

Or you could just introduce promotion-relegation. Give ambitious clubs on the outside something to aspire to, and if you can't cut it at the national league level, step down for someone else to have a go.

Would the idea here have been to also move the national league to winter as well? Because that immediately throws up a plethora of conflicts and double-ups... while having pro-rel and a winter/summer split doesn't address any of the issues. It's such a thorny topic because every time you find a reason for doing it one way, there's usually a 'but....' that explains why it's not that simple.

No. Keep the winter/summer split. The current model needs some fiddling with, but NZF have gone on and thrown the baby out with the bath water. And as a result are going to end up with a worse standard of football with costs that are still very high.

The thing is though, when you say 'the baby' you're talking about Auckland City and Team Wellington, and specifically the versions of those clubs that are favourites to win the OFC CL annually and more competitive than not at the (soon-to-be-outdated version of the) Club World Cup. This is undeniably not an ideal outcome for those in and around those clubs, but 'the baby' is nearly drowning in 'the bathwater', and there's many sitting around the edges who are fizzing to jump into the clean bath that would be left behind.

Getting paid to be here
700
·
970
·
over 6 years

el grapadura wrote:

Feverish wrote:

el grapadura wrote:

Instead of there being 11 starting places, five bench places, and seven squad places in Canterbury and in Otago – as is the case with the existing setup, Canterbury United, and Southern United, making time for youngsters very hard to come by – there are now 88 and 40 in Canterbury and 88 and 40 in Otago.

This is precisely why the new system is such a terrible idea. Let's get as much donkey into the National League, and get dumb clubs (we all know who I'm talking about) to pay them sharkloads whike they're at it. Sorru, I mean ask them to do a lot of 'coaching'.

The sad reality is that there's probably only 11-12 clubs in the country that can actually make a fist of it, so basically the whole system's been changed just to give Olympic, Birko, or Wests a chance to be in the national league.

11>8

I can get up over 20 pretty quickly...

Interested to hear who they are. There's a maximum of 5-6 clubs who can do this across Central and Mainland Leagues (and including the South in that too). So there are 15+ clubs in the Northern region who can do this? I find that extremely difficult to believe. 

Clarify what you mean by 'do this' first... but I have 20 clubs that I generally would consider to be what NZF is looking for from a club – or of the size that makes them able to become what NZF is looking for rather swiftly.

Woof Woof
2.7K
·
19K
·
over 16 years

el grapadura wrote:

el grapadura wrote:

Feverish wrote:

el grapadura wrote:

Instead of there being 11 starting places, five bench places, and seven squad places in Canterbury and in Otago – as is the case with the existing setup, Canterbury United, and Southern United, making time for youngsters very hard to come by – there are now 88 and 40 in Canterbury and 88 and 40 in Otago.

This is precisely why the new system is such a terrible idea. Let's get as much donkey into the National League, and get dumb clubs (we all know who I'm talking about) to pay them sharkloads whike they're at it. Sorru, I mean ask them to do a lot of 'coaching'.

The sad reality is that there's probably only 11-12 clubs in the country that can actually make a fist of it, so basically the whole system's been changed just to give Olympic, Birko, or Wests a chance to be in the national league.

11>8

Or you could just introduce promotion-relegation. Give ambitious clubs on the outside something to aspire to, and if you can't cut it at the national league level, step down for someone else to have a go.

Would the idea here have been to also move the national league to winter as well? Because that immediately throws up a plethora of conflicts and double-ups... while having pro-rel and a winter/summer split doesn't address any of the issues. It's such a thorny topic because every time you find a reason for doing it one way, there's usually a 'but....' that explains why it's not that simple.

No. Keep the winter/summer split. The current model needs some fiddling with, but NZF have gone on and thrown the baby out with the bath water. And as a result are going to end up with a worse standard of football with costs that are still very high.

The thing is though, when you say 'the baby' you're talking about Auckland City and Team Wellington, and specifically the versions of those clubs that are favourites to win the OFC CL annually and more competitive than not at the (soon-to-be-outdated version of the) Club World Cup. This is undeniably not an ideal outcome for those in and around those clubs, but 'the baby' is nearly drowning in 'the bathwater', and there's many sitting around the edges who are fizzing to jump into the clean bath that would be left behind.

That's not quite right, is it? I mean, Eastern Suburbs and Hamilton Wanderers seem to be doing fine too, so we're basically faced with the problems that HBU has had (and I don't know enough about internal politics there so I'll stay out of it) and the issue of cost and talent-base for the South Island teams, which isn't going away whichever way you decide to approach the question of National League. Again, as I've said, decent standard of football is being sacrificed for, allegedly, financial sustainability and developmental reasons, when, realistically, neither of those things is actually going to happen. 

Woof Woof
2.7K
·
19K
·
over 16 years

el grapadura wrote:

Feverish wrote:

el grapadura wrote:

Instead of there being 11 starting places, five bench places, and seven squad places in Canterbury and in Otago – as is the case with the existing setup, Canterbury United, and Southern United, making time for youngsters very hard to come by – there are now 88 and 40 in Canterbury and 88 and 40 in Otago.

This is precisely why the new system is such a terrible idea. Let's get as much donkey into the National League, and get dumb clubs (we all know who I'm talking about) to pay them sharkloads whike they're at it. Sorru, I mean ask them to do a lot of 'coaching'.

The sad reality is that there's probably only 11-12 clubs in the country that can actually make a fist of it, so basically the whole system's been changed just to give Olympic, Birko, or Wests a chance to be in the national league.

11>8

I can get up over 20 pretty quickly...

Interested to hear who they are. There's a maximum of 5-6 clubs who can do this across Central and Mainland Leagues (and including the South in that too). So there are 15+ clubs in the Northern region who can do this? I find that extremely difficult to believe. 

Clarify what you mean by 'do this' first... but I have 20 clubs that I generally would consider to be what NZF is looking for from a club – or of the size that makes them able to become what NZF is looking for rather swiftly.

Firstly, I'm amazed that you think that NZF actually knows what they want from the clubs under this system, but nevermind.

What I mean is, clubs that have strategic and financial capability and capacity to sustainably participate in the new National League system long-term.

Getting paid to be here
700
·
970
·
over 6 years

el grapadura wrote:

el grapadura wrote:

Feverish wrote:

el grapadura wrote:

Instead of there being 11 starting places, five bench places, and seven squad places in Canterbury and in Otago – as is the case with the existing setup, Canterbury United, and Southern United, making time for youngsters very hard to come by – there are now 88 and 40 in Canterbury and 88 and 40 in Otago.

This is precisely why the new system is such a terrible idea. Let's get as much donkey into the National League, and get dumb clubs (we all know who I'm talking about) to pay them sharkloads whike they're at it. Sorru, I mean ask them to do a lot of 'coaching'.

The sad reality is that there's probably only 11-12 clubs in the country that can actually make a fist of it, so basically the whole system's been changed just to give Olympic, Birko, or Wests a chance to be in the national league.

11>8

I can get up over 20 pretty quickly...

Interested to hear who they are. There's a maximum of 5-6 clubs who can do this across Central and Mainland Leagues (and including the South in that too). So there are 15+ clubs in the Northern region who can do this? I find that extremely difficult to believe. 

Clarify what you mean by 'do this' first... but I have 20 clubs that I generally would consider to be what NZF is looking for from a club – or of the size that makes them able to become what NZF is looking for rather swiftly.

Firstly, I'm amazed that you think that NZF actually knows what they want from the clubs under this system, but nevermind.

What I mean is, clubs that have strategic and financial capability and capacity to sustainably participate in the new National League system long-term.

On the pitch, I think NZF wants clubs that have teams right down through all the 11-a-side grades and that bring players through into their first team from within their own ranks.

I'll offer this list (which also takes into account off-the-pitch factors) of 22 clubs as a starting point

Auckland City/Central United

Auckland United

Birkenhead United

Eastern Suburbs

Manukau United

Northern Rovers

West Coast Rangers

Western Springs

Hamilton Wanderers

Melville United

Napier City Rovers

Wairarapa United

Lower Hutt City

Miramar Rangers

North Wellington

Wellington Olympic

Western Suburbs

Nelson Suburbs

Cashmere Technical

Christchurch United

Nomads United

South City Royals

while admitting I don't know much about the ins and outs of Otago clubs, so may have done some an injustice by leaving them off (and that I may be being too cautious in Canterbury – I'd expect Coastal Spirit and Ferrymead Bays to contest the qualification spots down there and I'd say Selwyn United has solid structures in place).

Edit: Will add that not all of these clubs are necessary there as things stand, some are, some aren't that far away, some need a mindset shift.

Legend
11K
·
21K
·
almost 9 years

One of the better debates on this forum. Hats off to you both.

Wairarapa United fields 5 teams (mens & womens) down to U17s. Is that really enough?

Though yes is affiliated to the Paul Ifill Academy.

Getting paid to be here
700
·
970
·
over 6 years

coochiee wrote:

One of the better debates on this forum. Hats off to you both.

Wairarapa United fields 5 teams (mens & womens) down to U17s. Is that really enough?

Though yes is affiliated to the Paul Ifill Academy.

Well, a men's first team, reserve team, and under-17 team is probably the absolute bare minimum. Strikes me that this is probably a quirk – someone with better local knowledge might know what the go with Masterton's 13-15yos is, do they all play for Douglas Villa or their schools?

Starting XI
880
·
2.5K
·
about 12 years

20 Legend wrote:

Lol who the hell is paying $1000 for fees?

several clubs in Auckland charge over $1,000 for a season - Auckland United is double that and Suburbs fees are simular. 

Woof Woof
2.7K
·
19K
·
over 16 years

el grapadura wrote:

el grapadura wrote:

Feverish wrote:

el grapadura wrote:

Instead of there being 11 starting places, five bench places, and seven squad places in Canterbury and in Otago – as is the case with the existing setup, Canterbury United, and Southern United, making time for youngsters very hard to come by – there are now 88 and 40 in Canterbury and 88 and 40 in Otago.

This is precisely why the new system is such a terrible idea. Let's get as much donkey into the National League, and get dumb clubs (we all know who I'm talking about) to pay them sharkloads whike they're at it. Sorru, I mean ask them to do a lot of 'coaching'.

The sad reality is that there's probably only 11-12 clubs in the country that can actually make a fist of it, so basically the whole system's been changed just to give Olympic, Birko, or Wests a chance to be in the national league.

11>8

I can get up over 20 pretty quickly...

Interested to hear who they are. There's a maximum of 5-6 clubs who can do this across Central and Mainland Leagues (and including the South in that too). So there are 15+ clubs in the Northern region who can do this? I find that extremely difficult to believe. 

Clarify what you mean by 'do this' first... but I have 20 clubs that I generally would consider to be what NZF is looking for from a club – or of the size that makes them able to become what NZF is looking for rather swiftly.

Firstly, I'm amazed that you think that NZF actually knows what they want from the clubs under this system, but nevermind.

What I mean is, clubs that have strategic and financial capability and capacity to sustainably participate in the new National League system long-term.

On the pitch, I think NZF wants clubs that have teams right down through all the 11-a-side grades and that bring players through into their first team from within their own ranks.

I'll offer this list (which also takes into account off-the-pitch factors) of 22 clubs as a starting point

Auckland City/Central United

Auckland United

Birkenhead United

Eastern Suburbs

Manukau United

Northern Rovers

West Coast Rangers

Western Springs

Hamilton Wanderers

Melville United

Napier City Rovers

Wairarapa United

Lower Hutt City

Miramar Rangers

North Wellington

Wellington Olympic

Western Suburbs

Nelson Suburbs

Cashmere Technical

Christchurch United

Nomads United

South City Royals

while admitting I don't know much about the ins and outs of Otago clubs, so may have done some an injustice by leaving them off (and that I may be being too cautious in Canterbury – I'd expect Coastal Spirit and Ferrymead Bays to contest the qualification spots down there and I'd say Selwyn United has solid structures in place).

Edit: Will add that not all of these clubs are necessary there as things stand, some are, some aren't that far away, some need a mindset shift.

I'll stay away from Northern and South Island clubs, there are better placed people than ne to comment on that. Although I certainly have strong doubts about SI clubs outside of Christchurch, the Dunedin merger notwithstanding.

But the Central League is really only 4 clubs, Miramar, Wests, NCR, and Olympic, but Olympic don't have a junior club so will  undoubtedly lean on their supporters to throw lots of cash at players.

Wairarapa, Lower Hutt, North Wellington? Forget about it. Not in our lifetimes.

Starting XI
3K
·
3K
·
almost 7 years

el grapadura wrote:

el grapadura wrote:

el grapadura wrote:

Feverish wrote:

el grapadura wrote:

Instead of there being 11 starting places, five bench places, and seven squad places in Canterbury and in Otago – as is the case with the existing setup, Canterbury United, and Southern United, making time for youngsters very hard to come by – there are now 88 and 40 in Canterbury and 88 and 40 in Otago.

This is precisely why the new system is such a terrible idea. Let's get as much donkey into the National League, and get dumb clubs (we all know who I'm talking about) to pay them sharkloads whike they're at it. Sorru, I mean ask them to do a lot of 'coaching'.

The sad reality is that there's probably only 11-12 clubs in the country that can actually make a fist of it, so basically the whole system's been changed just to give Olympic, Birko, or Wests a chance to be in the national league.

11>8

I can get up over 20 pretty quickly...

Interested to hear who they are. There's a maximum of 5-6 clubs who can do this across Central and Mainland Leagues (and including the South in that too). So there are 15+ clubs in the Northern region who can do this? I find that extremely difficult to believe. 

Clarify what you mean by 'do this' first... but I have 20 clubs that I generally would consider to be what NZF is looking for from a club – or of the size that makes them able to become what NZF is looking for rather swiftly.

Firstly, I'm amazed that you think that NZF actually knows what they want from the clubs under this system, but nevermind.

What I mean is, clubs that have strategic and financial capability and capacity to sustainably participate in the new National League system long-term.

On the pitch, I think NZF wants clubs that have teams right down through all the 11-a-side grades and that bring players through into their first team from within their own ranks.

I'll offer this list (which also takes into account off-the-pitch factors) of 22 clubs as a starting point

Auckland City/Central United

Auckland United

Birkenhead United

Eastern Suburbs

Manukau United

Northern Rovers

West Coast Rangers

Western Springs

Hamilton Wanderers

Melville United

Napier City Rovers

Wairarapa United

Lower Hutt City

Miramar Rangers

North Wellington

Wellington Olympic

Western Suburbs

Nelson Suburbs

Cashmere Technical

Christchurch United

Nomads United

South City Royals

while admitting I don't know much about the ins and outs of Otago clubs, so may have done some an injustice by leaving them off (and that I may be being too cautious in Canterbury – I'd expect Coastal Spirit and Ferrymead Bays to contest the qualification spots down there and I'd say Selwyn United has solid structures in place).

Edit: Will add that not all of these clubs are necessary there as things stand, some are, some aren't that far away, some need a mindset shift.

I'll stay away from Northern and South Island clubs, there are better placed people than ne to comment on that. Although I certainly have strong doubts about SI clubs outside of Christchurch, the Dunedin merger notwithstanding.

But the Central League is really only 4 clubs, Miramar, Wests, NCR, and Olympic, but Olympic don't have a junior club so will  undoubtedly lean on their supporters to throw lots of cash at players.

Wairarapa, Lower Hutt, North Wellington? Forget about it. Not in our lifetimes.

Wairarapa = Paul Ifill Academy, support of an entire region

Lower Hutt = Nix

North Wellington has made major major moves in the past few years, plus Tasman links

Curious what your cutoff is for a league-ready club? NZF’s suggestion is vague at best

Getting paid to be here
700
·
970
·
over 6 years

el grapadura wrote:

el grapadura wrote:

el grapadura wrote:

Feverish wrote:

el grapadura wrote:

Instead of there being 11 starting places, five bench places, and seven squad places in Canterbury and in Otago – as is the case with the existing setup, Canterbury United, and Southern United, making time for youngsters very hard to come by – there are now 88 and 40 in Canterbury and 88 and 40 in Otago.

This is precisely why the new system is such a terrible idea. Let's get as much donkey into the National League, and get dumb clubs (we all know who I'm talking about) to pay them sharkloads whike they're at it. Sorru, I mean ask them to do a lot of 'coaching'.

The sad reality is that there's probably only 11-12 clubs in the country that can actually make a fist of it, so basically the whole system's been changed just to give Olympic, Birko, or Wests a chance to be in the national league.

11>8

I can get up over 20 pretty quickly...

Interested to hear who they are. There's a maximum of 5-6 clubs who can do this across Central and Mainland Leagues (and including the South in that too). So there are 15+ clubs in the Northern region who can do this? I find that extremely difficult to believe. 

Clarify what you mean by 'do this' first... but I have 20 clubs that I generally would consider to be what NZF is looking for from a club – or of the size that makes them able to become what NZF is looking for rather swiftly.

Firstly, I'm amazed that you think that NZF actually knows what they want from the clubs under this system, but nevermind.

What I mean is, clubs that have strategic and financial capability and capacity to sustainably participate in the new National League system long-term.

On the pitch, I think NZF wants clubs that have teams right down through all the 11-a-side grades and that bring players through into their first team from within their own ranks.

I'll offer this list (which also takes into account off-the-pitch factors) of 22 clubs as a starting point

Auckland City/Central United

Auckland United

Birkenhead United

Eastern Suburbs

Manukau United

Northern Rovers

West Coast Rangers

Western Springs

Hamilton Wanderers

Melville United

Napier City Rovers

Wairarapa United

Lower Hutt City

Miramar Rangers

North Wellington

Wellington Olympic

Western Suburbs

Nelson Suburbs

Cashmere Technical

Christchurch United

Nomads United

South City Royals

while admitting I don't know much about the ins and outs of Otago clubs, so may have done some an injustice by leaving them off (and that I may be being too cautious in Canterbury – I'd expect Coastal Spirit and Ferrymead Bays to contest the qualification spots down there and I'd say Selwyn United has solid structures in place).

Edit: Will add that not all of these clubs are necessary there as things stand, some are, some aren't that far away, some need a mindset shift.

I'll stay away from Northern and South Island clubs, there are better placed people than ne to comment on that. Although I certainly have strong doubts about SI clubs outside of Christchurch, the Dunedin merger notwithstanding.

But the Central League is really only 4 clubs, Miramar, Wests, NCR, and Olympic, but Olympic don't have a junior club so will  undoubtedly lean on their supporters to throw lots of cash at players.

Wairarapa, Lower Hutt, North Wellington? Forget about it. Not in our lifetimes.

Not in our lifetimes ... what though? They're seven clubs doing good things either in the competitive space or the development space or both and the change of system allows them all to flourish.

First Team Squad
1K
·
1.7K
·
over 15 years

chopah wrote:

20 Legend wrote:

Lol who the hell is paying $1000 for fees?

several clubs in Auckland charge over $1,000 for a season - Auckland United is double that and Suburbs fees are simular. 

Am I misunderstanding something - you're telling me senior men have to pay two grand to play for Auckland United?

Legend
2.1K
·
16K
·
about 17 years

What’s wrong with Norf Welli boxey?
I think as the realisation that T Dub is goneski is taking hold, you are taking even odder flexes on this. There are more positives than you give it credit for.

Starting XI
880
·
2.5K
·
about 12 years
20 Legend wrote:
chopah wrote:
20 Legend wrote:

Lol who the hell is paying $1000 for fees?

several clubs in Auckland charge over $1,000 for a season - Auckland United is double that and Suburbs fees are simular. 

Am I misunderstanding something - you're telling me senior men have to pay two grand to play for Auckland United?

sorry yeah it's the junior/youth development fees - I don't think anyone in first team football in Auckland is "paying" for that right - the money flow is normally the other way around.  

But it's part of this discussion because the clubs who are charging circa $2k for their Academy's are using that money to fuel their NL campaigns.

Woof Woof
2.7K
·
19K
·
over 16 years

Feverish wrote:

What’s wrong with Norf Welli boxey? 

The fact that they managed to get themselves into huge amounts of debt just to compete in the Central League?

Starting XI
2.5K
·
2.4K
·
over 8 years

Yeah the NW financials on the Incorporated Societies register do not make for pretty reading.

Legend
2.1K
·
16K
·
about 17 years

who's to say they don't have a plan? ie clubrooms sale

They are a club that ticks a lot of boxes. They are already trying to get some (more) NL players on board. No reason to dog without absolute knowledge of their financials (Senior entity is merging with Junior as well I believe)

Woof Woof
2.7K
·
19K
·
over 16 years

mrsmiis wrote:

el grapadura wrote:

el grapadura wrote:

el grapadura wrote:

Feverish wrote:

el grapadura wrote:

Instead of there being 11 starting places, five bench places, and seven squad places in Canterbury and in Otago – as is the case with the existing setup, Canterbury United, and Southern United, making time for youngsters very hard to come by – there are now 88 and 40 in Canterbury and 88 and 40 in Otago.

This is precisely why the new system is such a terrible idea. Let's get as much donkey into the National League, and get dumb clubs (we all know who I'm talking about) to pay them sharkloads whike they're at it. Sorru, I mean ask them to do a lot of 'coaching'.

The sad reality is that there's probably only 11-12 clubs in the country that can actually make a fist of it, so basically the whole system's been changed just to give Olympic, Birko, or Wests a chance to be in the national league.

11>8

I can get up over 20 pretty quickly...

Interested to hear who they are. There's a maximum of 5-6 clubs who can do this across Central and Mainland Leagues (and including the South in that too). So there are 15+ clubs in the Northern region who can do this? I find that extremely difficult to believe. 

Clarify what you mean by 'do this' first... but I have 20 clubs that I generally would consider to be what NZF is looking for from a club – or of the size that makes them able to become what NZF is looking for rather swiftly.

Firstly, I'm amazed that you think that NZF actually knows what they want from the clubs under this system, but nevermind.

What I mean is, clubs that have strategic and financial capability and capacity to sustainably participate in the new National League system long-term.

On the pitch, I think NZF wants clubs that have teams right down through all the 11-a-side grades and that bring players through into their first team from within their own ranks.

I'll offer this list (which also takes into account off-the-pitch factors) of 22 clubs as a starting point

Auckland City/Central United

Auckland United

Birkenhead United

Eastern Suburbs

Manukau United

Northern Rovers

West Coast Rangers

Western Springs

Hamilton Wanderers

Melville United

Napier City Rovers

Wairarapa United

Lower Hutt City

Miramar Rangers

North Wellington

Wellington Olympic

Western Suburbs

Nelson Suburbs

Cashmere Technical

Christchurch United

Nomads United

South City Royals

while admitting I don't know much about the ins and outs of Otago clubs, so may have done some an injustice by leaving them off (and that I may be being too cautious in Canterbury – I'd expect Coastal Spirit and Ferrymead Bays to contest the qualification spots down there and I'd say Selwyn United has solid structures in place).

Edit: Will add that not all of these clubs are necessary there as things stand, some are, some aren't that far away, some need a mindset shift.

I'll stay away from Northern and South Island clubs, there are better placed people than ne to comment on that. Although I certainly have strong doubts about SI clubs outside of Christchurch, the Dunedin merger notwithstanding.

But the Central League is really only 4 clubs, Miramar, Wests, NCR, and Olympic, but Olympic don't have a junior club so will  undoubtedly lean on their supporters to throw lots of cash at players.

Wairarapa, Lower Hutt, North Wellington? Forget about it. Not in our lifetimes.

Wairarapa = Paul Ifill Academy, support of an entire region

Lower Hutt = Nix

North Wellington has made major major moves in the past few years, plus Tasman links

Curious what your cutoff is for a league-ready club? NZF’s suggestion is vague at best

Wairarapa is a tiny region that naturally gravitates to Wellington, best players there will always end up in Wellington, and the only way they could compete for top spots in the Central League was when Keinzley was throwing silly money at Wellington players to get up there for the weekend and play. So unless he's prepared to do that again, they're not a factor at all.

Lower Hutt and the Nix? Having Nix take over a local club has been a bad thing for the local club, not a good thing. Just ask Wellington United, and check out where they are now.

For North Wellington, as I said above, they managed to get themselves into a ridiculous amount of debt just by being in the Central League. That's not exactly confidence-inspiring for their financial sustainability and strategic thinking. 

As for Tasman - so the region that couldn't survive in the current set-up can provide a base for both Nelson Suburbs AND North Wellington? Sure. That's likely.

Trialist
53
·
80
·
about 5 years

20 Legend wrote:

chopah wrote:

20 Legend wrote:

Lol who the hell is paying $1000 for fees?

several clubs in Auckland charge over $1,000 for a season - Auckland United is double that and Suburbs fees are simular. 

Am I misunderstanding something - you're telling me senior men have to pay two grand to play for Auckland United?

Yep, we were discussing licensing clubs and that is only a start for costs for youth ages to play at the top level. One team in CHCH charges almost $3k plus costs for tournaments for their 13-17 year olds. These are going to be the players coming through the system (those that can afford to play), but that is another discussion altogether.

You’ll need an account to join the conversation!

Sign in Sign up