Interesting comments about wanting Amatuers to join FFSA

[Right Back]

http://www.foxsports.com.au/football/sa ... 6812463089

[swannsong]

http://www.foxsports.com.au/football/sa ... 6812463089

Bit of a passing comment really....most people want the FFSA ans SAASL to work as a team....but not in a dictatorial fashion.
FFSA should try to bring the SAASL into the fold without trying to 'run' the amateur competition......just having the two bodies 'agreeably' aligned would empower SA football....particularly at the junior level.

[Dissapointment]

http://www.foxsports.com.au/football/sa ... 6812463089

Bit of a passing comment really....most people want the FFSA ans SAASL to work as a team....but not in a dictatorial fashion.
FFSA should try to bring the SAASL into the fold without trying to 'run' the amateur competition......just having the two bodies 'agreeably' aligned would empower SA football....particularly at the junior level.

More or less this. They need to come under one umbrella, but stubberness from both sides is halting progression

[JBJBJB]

swannsong the offer put forward as to do just that , Amateurs run on their own and be aligned purely as an affiliate. Enabling and allowing friendlies, inter comps, FFA cup, any competitions and more importantly a voice to help drive football in SA, certainly would get some media coverage.

Be nice if it happened but seems to be a tough nut to crack.

[The General]

What is wrong with leaving like it is, and let saasl clubs ( those who want to ) enter ffsa cup competitions anyway like they use to, that worked well in the past - why does it have to be all under one "title" ?
Seems like there is always someone who comes along and wants to complicate the simple things.

[Hatchet Squad]

What is wrong with leaving like it is, and let saasl clubs ( those who want to ) enter ffsa cup competitions anyway like they use to, that worked well in the past - why does it have to be all under one "title" ?
Seems like there is always someone who comes along and wants to complicate the simple things.

This

[vertu1]

how is it that the women's teams seem to have no problem combining but mens ... not so much ?

[God is an Englishman]

What is wrong with leaving like it is, and let saasl clubs ( those who want to ) enter ffsa cup competitions anyway like they use to, that worked well in the past - why does it have to be all under one "title" ?
Seems like there is always someone who comes along and wants to complicate the simple things.

completely agree. Don't see why it's such a big deal to have one "umbrella". Makes not one bit of difference to anyone.

[paul merson]

What is wrong with leaving like it is, and let saasl clubs ( those who want to ) enter ffsa cup competitions anyway like they use to, that worked well in the past - why does it have to be all under one "title" ?
Seems like there is always someone who comes along and wants to complicate the simple things.

Its because the amatuers arent under the umbrella of the FFA so arent recognised, regostration or insurance wise, thats the problem.
The only problem with them not being under the FFA is SA has only half the weight in dealling with the FFA as our participation numbers look poor in comparison to all the other states that dont have outside leagues.

[Ashes Whitewash]

More or less this. They need to come under one umbrella, but stubberness from both sides is halting progression

Why? The SAASL has nothing to gain from it.

[The General]

What is wrong with leaving like it is, and let saasl clubs ( those who want to ) enter ffsa cup competitions anyway like they use to, that worked well in the past - why does it have to be all under one "title" ?
Seems like there is always someone who comes along and wants to complicate the simple things.

Its because the amatuers arent under the umbrella of the FFA so arent recognised, regostration or insurance wise, thats the problem.
The only problem with them not being under the FFA is SA has only half the weight in dealling with the FFA as our participation numbers look poor in comparison to all the other states that dont have outside leagues.

not really the answer I am looking for ?
If saasl were to be under the ffsa umbrella, ( hope never happens ) and they are still able to run themselves as a seperate entity, would assume have our own registration / insurance / nomination fees , like they do now. Only difference would be ffsa would add their fees on top of that - and exactly what benefits would saasl get from that ?
Not recognised ? according to this guise from the ffsa - saasl only been around for over 50 years.
Wasnt a problem before when we had sasf - saasl clubs were welcomed to participate / compete against them.
Now, whenever a saasl club wants to play a ffsa club, so much bureaucracy goes on makes it impossible.

[Stitch This]

Only difference would be ffsa would add their fees on top of that - and exactly what benefits would saasl get from that ?

As mentioned elsewhere my understanding is there are no FFSA fees. FFSA acts as collection agent for the FFA for a player development levy which last time I heard was about $10 - though could be more now
.
The main benefit would be that those clubs that have juniors (and there are more and more each year) would have access to the national development pathways.

However it's quite clear from the majority of comments that SAASL clubs are just for those that want a kick around at the weekend with their mates and are not interested in all the namby pamby development stuff.

[paul merson]

What is wrong with leaving like it is, and let saasl clubs ( those who want to ) enter ffsa cup competitions anyway like they use to, that worked well in the past - why does it have to be all under one "title" ?
Seems like there is always someone who comes along and wants to complicate the simple things.

Its because the amatuers arent under the umbrella of the FFA so arent recognised, regostration or insurance wise, thats the problem.
The only problem with them not being under the FFA is SA has only half the weight in dealling with the FFA as our participation numbers look poor in comparison to all the other states that dont have outside leagues.

not really the answer I am looking for ?
If saasl were to be under the ffsa umbrella, ( hope never happens ) and they are still able to run themselves as a seperate entity, would assume have our own registration / insurance / nomination fees , like they do now. Only difference would be ffsa would add their fees on top of that - and exactly what benefits would saasl get from that ?
Not recognised ? according to this guise from the ffsa - saasl only been around for over 50 years.
Wasnt a problem before when we had sasf - saasl clubs were welcomed to participate / compete against them.
Now, whenever a saasl club wants to play a ffsa club, so much bureaucracy goes on makes it impossible.

And FIFA has been around even longer than the SAASL, FIFA dont recognise the league there for the flow on effect, FFA dont which means the FFSA dont, its not just the decision that the FFSA made.

If the SAASL are that concerned about playing under the FFSA they need to negotiate to just run as a sub dept of the FFSA and thats all.

[swannsong]

And FIFA has been around even longer than the SAASL, FIFA dont recognise the league there for the flow on effect, FFA dont which means the FFSA dont, its not just the decision that the FFSA made.

If the SAASL are that concerned about playing under the FFSA they need to negotiate to just run as a sub dept of the FFSA and thats all.

Without knowing the full details, I'm not sure that kind of offer (self management model) was on the table for the SAASL when talks were actually happening.
However, I believe the FFSA did offer a more 'self managing' deal to the Collegiate League.
The recognition of the SAASL works in reverse I think...FIFA do not recognise the SAASL because they are not recognised by the FFSA and therefore not recognised by the FFA.

[God is an Englishman]

I'm just off to the garage to fix my son's bike. It's working perfectly well at the moment, it's a great bike but I'm going to fix it anyway.

[bigpond]

[quote="paul merson"]
If the SAASL are that concerned about playing under the FFSA they need to negotiate to just run as a sub dept of the FFSA and thats all.[/quote]

Thats just it - I dont think the SAASL league really care but now the FFA Cup is in and FFSA got only 1 spot because SAASL is not under the 1 umbrella with FFSA I think FFSA clubs might care.

So maybe it is the FFSA who then need to negotiate with the SAASL so they get the best deal for the FFSA clubs in the FFA Cup - buckleys chance of that happening.

[swannsong]

I'm just off to the garage to fix my son's bike. It's working perfectly well at the moment, it's a great bike but I'm going to fix it anyway.

It's great that you son's bike is fine, unfortunately he will not be allowed to ride it on the same pathways, or ride with other boys who have a different bike model, or compete with them to be selected for which ever Country he would like to represent.....unless he changes the model of bike he rides.
Having said that, he is free to ride his bike on his own

[God is an Englishman]

I'm just off to the garage to fix my son's bike. It's working perfectly well at the moment, it's a great bike but I'm going to fix it anyway.

It's great that you son's bike is fine, unfortunately he will not be allowed to ride it on the same pathways, or ride with other boys who have a different bike model, or compete with them to be selected for which ever Country he would like to represent.....unless he changes the model of bike he rides.
Having said that, he is free to ride his bike on his own

I don't think the English Cycling Association will care which model bike he rides and neither should the Australian cycling association. Should be one question only - is he a good bike rider?

[swannsong]

I'm just off to the garage to fix my son's bike. It's working perfectly well at the moment, it's a great bike but I'm going to fix it anyway.

It's great that you son's bike is fine, unfortunately he will not be allowed to ride it on the same pathways, or ride with other boys who have a different bike model, or compete with them to be selected for which ever Country he would like to represent.....unless he changes the model of bike he rides.
Having said that, he is free to ride his bike on his own

I don't think the English Cycling Association will care which model bike he rides and neither should the Australian cycling association. Should be one question only - is he a good bike rider?

That's my philosophy too, unfortunately, selectors from either Association cannot see him if he is not riding on the specified pathway :

[ROCSC1980]

And FIFA has been around even longer than the SAASL, FIFA dont recognise the league there for the flow on effect, FFA dont which means the FFSA dont, its not just the decision that the FFSA made.

If the SAASL are that concerned about playing under the FFSA they need to negotiate to just run as a sub dept of the FFSA and thats all.

Without knowing the full details, I'm not sure that kind of offer (self management model) was on the table for the SAASL when talks were actually happening.
However, I believe the FFSA did offer a more 'self managing' deal to the Collegiate League.
The recognition of the SAASL works in reverse I think...FIFA do not recognise the SAASL because they are not recognised by the FFSA and therefore not recognised by the FFA.

With regards to your CSL point I may be able to shed some insight on how the FFSA would treat SAASL if the two associations did merge.
The CSL affiliation with FFSA is very much a 'self-managing' model with the FFSA having little to no input on the day to day running of the league. All decisions in terms of, registration costs, fixtures, division structure, ref payments and cup competitions are set at CSL level.
Where the FFSA comes into play is with the CSL having to incorporate all FFSA / FFA rulings, e.g. having a coaching area, a clearly identifiable ground steward etc. Also the CSL is required to go through FFSA’s disciplinary hearing process. (We used to have our own).
The major benefit being that ‘most games’ from Div. 1 down to Div. 5 are appointed a ref from the FFSA pool. On occasion our Div. 1 games even get official linesmen. But this is likely to change with the number of fixtures ever increasing. But it’s obvious that the CSL is very low on FFSA list of priorities. For instance letting SAASL teams hire Barratt Reserve over CSL teams by obviously not knowing which clubs play in the CSL.

[God is an Englishman]

So, no difference to the saasl then. I just don't like the "little to no", it shoud be NO say and NO money. Then it could work.

[redfred]

lack of linesman in ffsa u18 and reserve football yet div 5 collegiate get refs? priorities wrong

[God is an Englishman]

lack of linesman in ffsa u18 and reserve football yet div 5 collegiate get refs? priorities wrong

why should juniors get refs over adults? Sorry, even worse. Why should juniors get linesman over adults getting refs?

[Stitch This]

Without knowing the full details, I'm not sure that kind of offer (self management model) was on the table for the SAASL when talks were actually happening.

JBJBJB should be able to confirm, but that's what has been offered to other affiliates.

lack of linesman in ffsa u18 and reserve football yet div 5 collegiate get refs? priorities wrong

Is that every game of just when the linesman fails to show up on the day?

[Knight15]

lack of linesman in ffsa u18 and reserve football yet div 5 collegiate get refs? priorities wrong

why should juniors get refs over adults? Sorry, even worse. Why should juniors get linesman over adults getting refs?

Can't agree more, one is a men's competition and as such an 'official' referee is very important one is a junior or reserve competition and has an 'official referee' and you think they should also get 2 official linesmen before an adult comp gets one referee - sums up the problem with FFSA and the SAASL, some people have got their head so far up their ass and think their competition is so important

[ROCSC1980]

My understanding is that FFSA do prioritise the Premier / State leagues (ie younger fitter officials) then the CSL gets whoever is left. Also the Refs choose which CSL games they want on a first in first serve basis. Which is more than fair enough. Friday night is when we have linesmen as they aren't as many fixtures.

[JBJBJB]

Without knowing the full details, I'm not sure that kind of offer (self management model) was on the table for the SAASL when talks were actually happening.

JBJBJB should be able to confirm, but that's what has been offered to other affiliates.

lack of linesman in ffsa u18 and reserve football yet div 5 collegiate get refs? priorities wrong

Is that every game of just when the linesman fails to show up on the day?

Yes "stitch this", the kind of offer of (self management model) was on the table for the SAASL, CSL it would be the same. alot of positives however, if people don't want to change it does make it impossible to move forward no matter what is given.

[swannsong]

Without knowing the full details, I'm not sure that kind of offer (self management model) was on the table for the SAASL when talks were actually happening.

JBJBJB should be able to confirm, but that's what has been offered to other affiliates.

lack of linesman in ffsa u18 and reserve football yet div 5 collegiate get refs? priorities wrong

Is that every game of just when the linesman fails to show up on the day?

Yes "stitch this", the kind of offer of (self management model) was on the table for the SAASL, CSL it would be the same. alot of positives however, if people don't want to change it does make it impossible to move forward no matter what is given.

For transparency, do you, or anyone, have a copy of the written offer ( or any evidence of the offer) of self management to the SAASL by representatives of the FFSA to prove it was made or, like most on here ( including myself) are we relying on here say ?

[ExtraTime]

JBJBJBJBJB would be the one to ask ......

[Sportsfan]

Some years ago when the attempt to merge happened I had a conversation with the President of the SAASL as to the reasons it failed..... from what I can remember the only two sticking points were the self management and fees! There would be no self management, FFSA wanted total control and they refused to fix the fees for 5 years as proposed by the SAASL! Post proposal the SAASL did fix there fees for 5 years! If there have been any merger attempts since then I wouldn't know. I've have been told that the FFSA have little or struggle for money and the SAASL are relatively well-off, my question therefore would be what happens to the SAASL's oil..... sorry I meant money and assets? From all this I think it's obvious the question all amateur clubs should ask themselves is; do you want SAASL level of fees or FFSA fees..... I think the answer is obvious and the ball is in the FFSA's court to compromise and accept that most amateur clubs are exactly that! Do we really want the mess that is the FFSA? Clubs are struggling big time under their fee structures and points system that drives away the older players with nowhere to go, they create the bond, the history and fabric of a club..... and put revenue over the bar. The FFSA competition is becoming too young and is a sterile competition. Amateur football is real football!