The issue raises questions for me as to - Do the State selectors want the best in their state representing their state or do they want to alienate kids by imposing these rules, or perhaps excluding players who may not have the $$ to participate in Reps (is there a cost? what is the cost?)? It sounds like it is a very exclusive way to select your state team disadvantaging other players who may in fact be better served to represent NSW.

I would be certain that there are very select rules that most State Coaches abide by. Eg player not in the State Intensive Programme not played state before generally doesnt get you a look in no matter how good a player you may be. As that would be a smack in the face of the people running basketball in your specific state, now wouldnt it, and seeing as most State Intensive Programmes are run by or overseen by the Head of State Basketball programmes or vice versa it all makes sense, to me anyway...

Happy for feedback to the contrary!

Its an interesting issue.

I think one of the problems is the quantity and quantity of quality schools doing this.

Newington have Rex Nottage as their HC AFAIK, and he would certainly build a good program. But how many other schools can or will do this? I do not know of any other Sydney schools that have really consistent programs - I know a few have programs but really inconsistent in quality.

An indicator perhaps is the National Schools event, which seems to have been dominated by Private schools but I think you see pretty similar schools each year which indicates that maybe there is not great competition within the states.

The danger is that a school coach with a beef with either the state hierarchy or the state program and uses these types of rules to state his/her case.

I perfectly understand the NSW position btw. Their interests are best served by having strong association based programs and this rule helps that.

Perhaps with the exception of rowing, the struture of junior sport in this country remains club/association based, not school based. If there is a paradigm shift then perhaps there is more reason to review.

I would disagree with the poster above saying schools have access to better resources - perhaps that is true in SA, but not in Melbourne - especially with assocs like Dandy, Sandringham etc...

It's about territory and $$$.

I think BA is happy to embrace schools. A few years back I remember some outcomes of an ITC review that would have involved schools potentially being accreditated as ITC centres.

What you cannot have is immoral behaviour by schools in regard to players and their own junior pathway.

I heard of a scholarship program a couple of years back in melbourne where the school took the kids, and as part of the deal the kid then had to play with a certain largish association rather continue to play with his own smaller but nonetheless good assoc.

This is poaching by default.

I agree states and BA should embrace the schools and their programs if they have both depth and quality - at the moment that is just not the case - the private catholic system in Sydney is more attuned to Rugby League for example. But certainly the sport could use the school system to their advantage, provided they can control the types of behaviours above.

I think you've missed the point anon. the point is that i think BA are prepared to embrace the school system - to the extent they have thrown around the idea of accrediting schools as ITC providers....

BTW there are things ITC groups do that schools do not do - US tours being one.... there would be reasons for kids wanting to be involved in both.

Apparently a player that went out to U20 trials was told that since she wasn't a SASI athlete and hadn't been in state teams previously she wouldn't be considered. Looks like a closed shop in SA.

BA need greater regulation over these state agencies, especially nsw...

Anon, grow up, i am not trying to have a stoush with you.

I am pretty neutral on this issue, I am not trying to show anyone up.

The issue of State policy is interesting, and thats where analyze this started with.

"Apparently a player that went out to U20 trials was told that since she wasn't a SASI athlete and hadn't been in state teams previously she wouldn't be considered. Looks like a closed shop in SA."

This goes to what I was saying above, not in Intensive Progamme not in state before, not a look in...

Obviousy they dont want to consider anyone else not in that group of kids, to "save face" and backup the decisions of those in the boys club.

These types of anarchic decision will very rarely win GOLD mendals, and they dont deserve to.

Thank you for enlightening me. Players that have quit SASI mmmmmmm still been at SASI whatever way you look at it, reserve girl is just that reserve girl being used as a training pole she wont ever make the team....but you be sure and get back to me if she does.

My faith in the fair and equitable selection of the best players in the state has been restored.....not

This has gone off topic!!

Well theres a problems with that then isnt there!!

If you register in a local comp, you are covered by BNSW insurance. You can even register with BNSW and not play in any of the comps and you are a registered player covered by the insurance.

I know there are some promising coaches besides Rex Nottage in the private school ranks.

Tim Hudson is at Barker, Jim Arkel- Joeys, Delmas Green- Kings, Stephen Whitehead -Cranbrook, Ben Hayman -High, Ben Morrissey- Trinity, plus more.

The big schools (Scots, Newington, Kings) have facilities to burn. Weights facilities that most commercial gyms don't offer. Specialist strength and conditioning staff, not personal trainers. Recovery facilities similar to any institute. A strong training culture, they compete internally with rowing and rugby, two massive GPS sports. Students receive additional academic support to match their training loads. BNSW CEO son went to Riverview, so he knows whats on offer and the culture.

I don't think the schools care what BNSW does, it's not like they can provide something similar. Most good kids play rep ball so they are considered for state.

A lot of the better state players now are private schools kids, thanks to theninvestment of the schools and rep clubs, not ITC or BNSW.

Why would a school be accredited? For what purpose?

"Case in point, U19 Australian basketball representative, Daniel Hill of Newington College, has not played reps for the last 3 to 4 years and started on the world team."

This is untrue, Hill has played for Sutherland Sharks from U12's all the way through to U18's and is now part of the Senior Program there. Any more mistakes in this ??

I am a teacher in a private school in NSW and have been involved with school basketball in the private system. I have seen the tension between Public, catholic and Independent school and the fighting between systems. I have always been amazed that the school system and NSW rep system clash and dont seem to work very well together. I have also done a working holiday in Vancouver, Canada. I coached the school team over there and in Canada there is NO junior rep system. All junior basketball is through the schools system. There is 3 levels of basketball AAA, AA, A. AAA is the highest level and their state playoffs are huge! I watched these games and there was like 6000-10000 people watching. All basket is played through the schools.

School basketball in NSW is very political, which is to the detriment of the young players in NSW.

I hope that it will get sorted in the future.

This is a great topic, and close to my heart. As a junior rep coach in Vic this attitude of BNSW is exactly what is wrong with basketball development in this country, and why we can get an U17 team to the gold medal match at the world champs, but settle for 8th at the Olympics. It is about territory and money, pure and simple as Libertine says. The State Associations are so driven to prove their relevance, that they miss the point completely. In vic, we have a ridiculously over croweded rep system that plays from November till September, plus tournaments, plus tryouts. If that doesn't break your spirit or your body, then the so-called elite pathways will, especially if you happen to not fit their ridiculous mould, or be a true point guard. If you're a PG, just don't bother. Go play footy. It seems to me that there is not a single open mind in the state associations system. They look after their own. Their philosophy of the game is rank, their focus on developing real fundamentals is poor, and their development of player confidence rubbish. A perfect example is our collective obsession of strangling great individuals in a team system. Tell me where that happens in any other successful development program? Individual stardom is welcomed, embraced, and a team is built around it. Not build the individuals around the team system, create a system to suit the cattle. Surely that is logical. I have come to the conclusion that if you have a kid who is good enough to go further, they have to get out of the rep system, because it will kill them. Not enough room at the top, so good kids who miss out on opportunities simply because they don't fit into a certain type, or don't have the right pedigree, get ignored out of the game. I'm watching it happen to a couple of kids right now, and it is heart breaking.

Not quite on the topic but ...

In Melbourne, it seems that most private school kids play school sports in their own leagues, which public school kids don't.
The more teams any kid plays for, the more confusion and contradiction in what they're told and what they need to know, how they need to play, who they need to be friends with to get noticed or advanced, etc.

Unfortunately, I think kids in Melbourne are able to play too much basketball - I've heard of some playing 5 nights a week, including rep. Yeah, it's great to give them an outlet for their passion, but then we shouldn't be surprised if they burn out and leave the game when they stop school.

I'd be curious to see if there's a clear relationship between the number of nights a week played and how far players got. Did the current Boomers get there by playing 5 nights a week, for example?

@thechief, I hear you and have also seen some of the problems you have mentioned happen before my eyes.

The VJBL is what you are referring to I take it, then the Youth League pathway if a kid does not pursue college or is good enough to go to NBL or Euroleague...?

It is a topic that deserves some serious and common sense discussion, but what options do you see as being better than the current system for say a 15 year old who still has some high school in front of him/her?

If they are good enough, then Youth League, under the right coaching seems the only viable option!

Yes, fundamentals and elite level training to be included does take lots of time, money and effort, but what are the options mate....?

rep coaches are not paid therefore parents end up coaching most teams.They are not made to coach to win. They are not made to pick the best players either. Private school comp is a much higher standard. Teams stay together for longer and 1 year and have a coach that is paid therefore doing a much more profesional job.
My son has been in the system for 8 years now. He has played reps for 8 years and plays at a private college.

NSW

@john, in Vic most representative teams in the VJBL have coaches who apply for their position and they receive some form of incentive based payment varied between covering travel and accommodation costs to including cash incentives depending on team success.

NSW coaches get paid $200- $500 a rep season. This does not cover much.