thanks for that - it's just IMO

I don't agree with the 5 week long in. Coaches should be developing kids and moving them to the correct level. Not trying to win and run some kids for 90% of the time due to club not getting the mix right at the start of the season due to new coaches.

please note that the team that moved players did it well within current by-laws and did breach them in any way.
They were smart and got the best out of the system.

I stand corrected if I have missed anything.

again IMO - what if the pro / rel games only took place between the teams that were wanting the same spot?

ie if norwood, forestville, north and sturt (usual 2 div 2 team clubs) want that second spot - why not get them to play each other with their correct lists with a 20% adjustment factor to players.

however i feel the pro / rel also helped sort div 3/4/5 teams out - there was nothing more boring than 6 teams in one division for a season on 12 in another - by pooling 18 teams and then pro / rel it kept some challenges to look forward to.

sorry that should have read "...and did NOT breach them in any way...."

In U18 boys last season after summer Sturt, Norwood second teams got relegated to Div 3 - I think 2 teams went down and 2 came up. Forestville got the second team in Div 2 in the winter as they fared better on the ladder in the summer. Now this summer season the only club that got the second team in was Forestville other club teams appeared not to be looked at for Div 2 for this summer season. So again will it mean that the top 2 teams in Div 3 will move up for winter, and the team on the line is the Forrestville team in Div 2 as they are the second team no matter where they sit? Or am I confused?

david - in all fairness the pools have to play each other once as the system is results based.
so if there are 6 teams it has to be be 5 weeks / rounds.
If a player needs to move up or down a team that is when it may happen. if a player is way out of their league - a dispensation can be granted by the comp committee (from what I understand - if they rec something in writing.

if the player is serious about their basketball they should be committed to play through a phase.

anon #030,

If facilities are the major factor in success, can you explain why Sturt were ableto be club champions when they didn't have a stadium for 18 months in 1999/00 and didnt have Pasadena for a year in 2006 due ot the floors being damaged and replaced?

good point anon.

if the teams in a division stayed the same as last season - like ours - most of the teams PLAYERS moved up and the current teams are a shadow of last season.

so really there has been no pro/rel and nominations accepted were based on last years teams - which are not the same.

last season the teams that moved divisions did not play each other - so the results compared were not fair - ie a poorer record in a stronger comp vrs a strong result in a weaker comp.

agree with oberon.

facilities are an infrastructure thing not a results factor.

"Otherwise certain clubs will boom while others die simply because of a difference in resources and facilities, of which BSA provide"

What a cop out. The successful clubs just work hard and don't sook, the act. Centrals and Southern both have the biggest areas to pull from and 4 court stadiums and still struggle to pull quality numbers and put real results on the board.

Yesterday you have blinkers on

So the fact that North only have 1 court at Hillcrest and South have a run down stadium would not impact them attracting players to their club.

anon - incorrect - last season a relegation occurred purely on average result in a higher grade vrs good result in a lower grade. pro / rel performed based on this/ at no stage the teams played each other.
the team that came up finished lower than the relegated team from summer and in state champs the relegated team finished 4-5 places higher. if placement for this summer was based on results in a lower age group 2 seasons ago that team would have been relegated because they did not acheive with the players that have moved in 2 seasons ago. So the nomination acceptance is purely on who was there last season.
now they are stacking the team vunerable for relegation and not worrying about the teams with garunteed placement - hence a flaw in teh system.