Gleeson named in Division 3

This forum is for the discussion of amateur league football.

It is back by popular demand

Moderators: BillShankly, John Cena, swannsong, Forum Admins

User avatar
God is an Englishman
Board Member
Board Member
Posts: 51452
Joined: Fri May 08, 2009 5:31 pm
Has thanked: 24 times
Been thanked: 85 times

Re: Gleeson named in Division 3

Post by God is an Englishman »

Fudpucker wrote: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 believe it is both.

League rules do not allow it, also a committee member (I think he was anyway) stated last season that they didn't want 2 teams in the same division again.
Image

User avatar
gooner4life
Apprentice
Apprentice
Posts: 212
Joined: Fri May 29, 2009 12:00 pm

Re: Gleeson named in Division 3

Post by gooner4life »

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.
“We do not buy superstars. We make them.”
Arsene Wenger

Stevo
In Memory of Dylan Tombides
In Memory of Dylan Tombides
Posts: 41
Joined: Mon Apr 12, 2010 9:51 am

Re: Gleeson named in Division 3

Post by Stevo »

We would play it honorably of course! :lol:

Look I was just blowing off steam. I understand the situation it's just frustrating when you play all season and see teams get promoted ahead of you who finished bellow you. I also understand that our div 3's didn't finish in a promotion spot so maybe I should take it up with them :lol:

In all of that I wish the two teams that were bellow us and were promoted the best of luck, particularly OTH who are a great bunch of blokes

User avatar
God is an Englishman
Board Member
Board Member
Posts: 51452
Joined: Fri May 08, 2009 5:31 pm
Has thanked: 24 times
Been thanked: 85 times

Re: Gleeson named in Division 3

Post by God is an Englishman »

you calm down quickly, I'm still pissed off about a ref from 6 days ago.
Image

Stevo
In Memory of Dylan Tombides
In Memory of Dylan Tombides
Posts: 41
Joined: Mon Apr 12, 2010 9:51 am

Re: Gleeson named in Division 3

Post by Stevo »

God is an Englishman wrote:you calm down quickly, I'm still pissed off about a ref from 6 days ago.
Eh what am I going to do? It is what it is.

Like Gooner said though SAASL should do this in a more transparent way, it would be quicker and all parties would be happier.

User avatar
God is an Englishman
Board Member
Board Member
Posts: 51452
Joined: Fri May 08, 2009 5:31 pm
Has thanked: 24 times
Been thanked: 85 times

Re: Gleeson named in Division 3

Post by God is an Englishman »

Stevo wrote:
God is an Englishman wrote:you calm down quickly, I'm still pissed off about a ref from 6 days ago.
Eh what am I going to do? It is what it is.

Like Gooner said though SAASL should do this in a more transparent way, it would be quicker and all parties would be happier.

you could rant and rave on here for days and achieve absolutely nothing. Doesn't that sound like more fun?
Image

Dash Riprock
Apprentice
Apprentice
Posts: 193
Joined: Fri Mar 18, 2011 4:49 pm

Re: Gleeson named in Division 3

Post by Dash Riprock »

Soooo. Did Gleeson look at entering the Collegiate Dark Side league before OR after being told they were relegated :wink:
I heard a whisper they were inches away from jumping leagues at one point in Feb....
Don't know what stopped them , maybe the consistently inconsistent manner that frustrates so many?

User avatar
swannsong
Technical Director
Technical Director
Posts: 30001
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2007 10:15 pm
Been thanked: 3 times

Re: Gleeson named in Division 3

Post by swannsong »

Dash Riprock wrote:Soooo. Did Gleeson look at entering the Collegiate Dark Side league before OR after being told they were relegated :wink:
I heard a whisper they were inches away from jumping leagues at one point in Feb....
Don't know what stopped them , maybe the consistently inconsistent manner that frustrates so many?
That would have been tantamount to relegation anyway :wink:
Image
Southern Knights SC - 2019 - Celebrating 25 Years of SAASL Football
SAASL facebook : Southern Knights SC facebook
swannsong Facebook : Elizabeth Downs SC facebook

Dash Riprock
Apprentice
Apprentice
Posts: 193
Joined: Fri Mar 18, 2011 4:49 pm

Re: Gleeson named in Division 3

Post by Dash Riprock »

:lol: :lol: :lol:
Thats what I call a win-win then (or is it a lose-lose!!)

Post Reply