you are nearly right just go to sporting pulse and then junior news then go to competition structure announcement and its all there

Thanks for that AL. What do people think of this and the impact on non member clubs and those who consistently have two teams in Div 2's

I think its ok but i dont think a lot of poeple will like it. its good that you can only one team in div 2 to give other clubs ago in not playing some clubs every few weeks. and if they dont make div 1 or div 2 they might move clubs and make other clubs stronger.

Reckon BSA moving in the right direction.
The North/South competition is an excellent idea in the lower comp as it helps to get more kids into basketball, but would like to see the Top team in each comp play off (like Superbowl)

If Div 1/2 is limited with teams, then that will mean that Div 3/4/5 will be much stronger.

Big unresolved issue is zoning, but this is probably a good thing for some of the "weaker" or smaller clubs as kids who can't fit into the "stronger" clubs may consider moving to get a good position. Reckon without zoning, some of the "stronger" clubs risk losing some players to other teams with positions available. Should see a lot more Mavs and Lions teams in Div 1 and 2 which will only be good for the sport as we desperately need all clubs to be of a good strength across the board.

The other big unresolved issue is the management of country players. I don't like how some clubs are currently actively promoted over others. Need to have a zoning policy IMO, just like footy.

I was going to say the same thing. Players at strong clubs with 2 div 2s may end up leaving that club to pursue div 2 and div 1 teams at other clubs as they will be force to play div 3 now for the strong club. I do like the fact that they are trying pro/rel but in just those divisions means its a trial, would like to see this for d1 and d2 as well.

Don't know too many isoloated clubs that would have two div 2 teams now. Most seem to be centrally located

For 25 years, clubs have had a guarenteed div 1 spot.

The so called 2nd div 2 team will actually be a div 3 team. And why would those players move out of a regionalised lower cost competition, to play for a club they have no affiliation with and incur a large travel burdon. When they are involved in a higher standard, domestic/reigonal competition where they can play the Div 1 and 2 players from their own elite district club in a Saturday afternoon competition, which therefore will be a higher standard than playing the weakened div 2 competition.

How many players have left stronger clubs, to take up div 1 spots in weaker club? Hardly any!

How many good players have left struggling clubs and moved to the stronger clubs? A lot more.

Until clubs understand that poeple move clubs due to being unhappy(not to play div 1/2) and seek out higher quality of service, they will not understand why the changes will in no way even out the competition. It will in fact decrease the overall standard of competition. If you think a Forestville or Sturt div 3 kid is going to go and play for Centrals or Eastern, then you have rocks in your head.

There will still be blowouts, there will still be byes effecting the competition, and there will still be the have's and the have nots.

All that has happened, is the domestic comeptitions will increase quicker, the regionalised compeittions will die of to be replaced by domestic comeptition and the stronger lubs will boom, taking the div 3 and below teams from close clubs and convert them into lower cost domestic teams.

Some best practice junior development models here and overseas , for clubs that compete in an age group div 1 and div 2 structure, is to

1) allow the head coach to , if not actually coach both teams, to at least be able to observe both grades play.

2) allow the 8th-10th ranked div 1 players to compete in div 2


If the Div 2 are at different venues or at the same time as the div 1 then both oportunities go out immediately.


not a fan

What pressure can a club put on a div 2 or 3 family? People don't move clubs if they are HAPPY.

Where are all these Sturt and Forestville kids moving to Mavs?

If that philosophy holds true, we already would have seen numerous div 3 Sturt and Forestville kids lining up for Mavs div 2 teams. And just as many Sturt and Forestville Div 2 kids lining up in their div 1 team.

I can't think of 1. Nobody coming from a div 3 competition in town is going to drive to Mt Barker 2 times each week to play div 2. Nor are they going to Starplex, or Port Adelaide.

Other than into 1 team where they were all high end elite players recruited into the U16 girls team.

The argument holds for all markets and involves economic rational such as moral hazzards and economic choice.

Wouldn't that be like New Zealand joining Australia?

Thanks for that useless input Anon, Mavs are a club on the up, rather than bag kids that move maybe you should question why they leave...

I think the bottom line is that for a heathly competition, the competition should have clubs all of a similar strength. Not the same, but around the mark. You will always get a couple of clubs stronger, couple weaker.

It's the job of the governing body to raise the standard of the competition by providing resources to weaker clubs to aid in development.

How about the weaker clubs do that themselves? If they actually put resources into juniors like Forestville and Sturt do they would have a better chance of improving.

Having them wait for the governing body help clubs that aren't willing to help themselves is a waste of time, effort and resources.

Any guess how many forfeits in U20's in start of summer season with exams the following day!?!?

Zoning is the only way to go, especially in the south western areas where Sturt, Forestville and South are demographically so close together.

How exactly will it help South provide better coaching? Or a better service? Or increase numbers in basketball?

Saw there were a few forfeits this season already in u/20 have a look!

6033, precisely!

I am not into bringing clubs DOWN to a level, let's bring them UP to a level.

What I am saying is that I would like to see BSA provide some better resources to those who are seen as not being at par at the moment. This might mean coaching, training...who knows! Ask the clubs what they need to achieve a standard, not cut others off at the knees.

I reckon that having clubs of a similar strength, but over a minimum standard is good as it keeps things interesting. Seeing the same of clubs on the trophies makes it pretty boring

Well they would have all paid their $55.

Good luck to them.