Fudpucker wrote:Stevo wrote:All sorted my muscat.
Sure Flinders finished in 3rd in Div 3 and 4 and Gleeson have a right to complain but look at the situation now.
Flinders Div 4 finished 3rd on goal difference to USC Lion. Lion played and destroyed the weakest teams in that comp, Flinders through 'forfeits' didnt get to play those teams and so didnt get a chance to rack up a big goal difference. As such Lion went up and we didnt. Sure maybe we wouldnt have but we would have liked to have that chance. Still we copt it on the chin, our Div 3's finished in 3rd as well and didnt want two clubs in the same div.
No we have a situation where we were put up to div's 2 and 3 as Gleeson were relegated. Now i understand the goings on before the end of the season and although Gleeson finished stone motherless last in their div i also understand their frustration at being relegated when they said they wouldnt be.
STILL we are now in a situation where Torrens Valley and One Tree Hill have been promoted from Div 4 to Div 3, the teams that finished bloody FOUTH and FIFTH!
So not only do we not finish second on goal difference in part due to not getting to play certain teams, a club that finishes TWO places BELLOW us on the table get promoted above us???????
Sorry for the vent and im probably overreacting but ive just heard about this and its a joke, whats the point of playing, training and trying your best all season just to see a team who finised SEVEN POINTS and two places bellow you get rewarded above you.
Whilst I can understand Stevo's frustration it has been mentioned in previous topics that Flinders are able to move players freely between division 3 and 4 to fill gaps where they are short which is apparently within the rules. However if they were to have two teams in the same division I would imagine the teams would have to be set and the only changes would have to be done prior to transfer deadline. I guess there would be nothing stopping them from moving their 5/6 up to their Div 3s.
It's still a little unclear, is it that Flinders don't want two teams in one division? Or is it that the league will not allow it? Or is it both?
I can confim that it was Flinders, that did not want to have two teams in one divison, something the Saasl despite there previous statements on this seemed happy enought to do. Whilst I understand the frustrations of Stevo, what the club did was in the best interest of the club and of the other clubs whom we would have to play as Swansong points out no one would want a situation where the two sides from the same club would have to play each other for a title.
All that has come to light once again is the chaos that occurs when teams fold (not usualy something they can control) or change divisons or days of play (something they can sometimes control). The Saasl really needs to come up with a transparent way they deal with the Susspension/Removal/Realingment of teams and how and league re-structuring will occur. It has been our experience in this that the Saasl make decisions with out consulting the clubs it will impact. I am sure they do this beliving to be in the clubs best interets, but a lot of what has gone on this pre-season could have been avoided had the league spoken to and asked for a meeting of the clubs, proposed changes would affect.
If we all had a clearer understanding of what is going to happen when the inevitable teams disapear from our Divisions, then a thread like this would not be needed.
Again good luck to both One Tree Hill and Torrens Valley, for the season ahed in Div 3, and to Glesson in Div 2.