It sounds very Melbourne Tigers-esque. Apparently one year they qualified for an U14 Club Nationals (so they must have at least been reasonable) then stuck posters all around Melbourne trying to recruit new kids from teams who didn't make Nationals. They took away an almost completely different team to the one that qualified.

In my mind, I'd say it's the wrong thing to do too :-)

Is this for Nationals, or local club recruiting??

If it is local club recruiting, I dont see an issue with it. It's just like what John Rillie did when he left Adelaide. Could not get a start at Adelaide, as he was behind Maher & Mee, yet went on to star for West Sydney.

There are probably players stuck in Div 2/3 at other clubs, because their Div 1 team is full of outstanding talent, or other reasons, and so Bearcats (I assume, being at Port Adelaide) are offering these girls a Div 1 chance.

Unfortunately, as part of sports today, there is no real club loyalty, players such as Brett Maher, Andrew Gaze, Mark Ricciutio are very rare indeed.

If there are players in Div 2 at a Forestville or Sturt (for example) that could be Div 1 for Centrals, wouldn't that even up the teams a bit?

No different than clubs holding external trials, only a bit more pointed. Kids that want to play div 1 that aren't getting a crack at their own club will move no matter what you advertise. Whilst others are happy in their club's environment.

What difference is this to poaching players. Does this means teams like Forestville or Sturt could just say if you are a first year playing div2 and are big and want to play div 1 ring .........

what is the difference, in my mind this is very wrong from a club labelling other coaches as poaches.

As long as no direct approach is made to individual players , I can't see anything wrong with notices like that appearing on club notice boards.

This might be stating the obvious though, but considering the notice was placed at Pt. Adelaide, was anybody able to read it ?

Hoop Addict,

I think you wil find that this is not for teams going to National Championships but rather they are looking to find players from other clubs to fill an age group which they have deemed to be under standard. I would think that most clubs right now have information reguarding trials which pretty much is doing the same thing. Poaching(if you look in the BASA By-Laws) is when a SASI players moves clubs to that of the State Coach in that age group. Good on West for thrying to improve their playing stocks. Plus if a kid is happy with their current situation, I doubt that they wil move to play div 1. And from my perspecftive, if they are moving from div 2 to play div 1, then they are taking the easy option and aren't showing any willing to work for their position, thus telling me that they aren't worth a div 1 spot in the first place.

I come from a aussie rules football background and if you want to change clubs, you have to be officially cleared and released from your existing club. Is that the case here?

So.......how is this different (say for example) than an already strong North girls teams saying "if you are playing div 1, but want the chance to go to Nationals/Classics next year, call xxxxxx"???

I understand Westies are struggling for numbers/quality in their younger girls age groups for next year, but surely the answer is do some hard work, hit the schools and other resources in that area and find/develop that talent, rather than bait players over from other clubs with the promise of a div 1 team??

Ironical, considering West are amongst THE biggest whingers re poaching (as ..... suggested)

Ask any JCD if they recruit from other clubs and they will ALL say NO.

Why? Because it's an unwritten rule that clubs won't do it. They all do, well the strong ones anyway, but none of them will admit it.

West have crossed the line. While I don't agree they should be allowed to, no club should be allowed to recruit the way they currently do either. As no one is going to stop them (and going by the posts above, some people just don't get why they can't) then why wouldn't they?

There is a simply answer, zone areas off to clubs, like they do in junior football and then clubs will have their own schools of responsibility and the problem of recruiting/poaching is gone.

Oh and to 'The Big Aristotle' while that is a rule don't worry that still happens to, and no-one seems to care about that either.

Exodia Of Forbidden,

Please show me the last time a player went to the club of a State Coach. If it occurs then it is an immediate $750 fine.

Oh, and I think you might find that the rule above is actually a restriction of trade. I can't wait until a junior player challenges it due to the fct that the coach for the team that they MUST play for doesn't want them but they still want to play.

If you are so interested in football then by all mean please go and become a member of a football club. Players should be allowed to play for who ever they want. Then it is up to the clubs to make sure that they do a good job of keeping the player happy. I doubt that a happy player has ever moved clubs.

Restriction of Trade. Hmmm didn't realise junior players were working for their clubs, it actually isn't.

I won't mentioned player names or situations because 1) they are junior who in their minds obviously were just trying to do the best thing for their own careers and 2) the coaches involved don't deserve that.

They all did what the did because they can.

It is becasue they are minors that it is a problem. And I think you will find players do transfer in football as well. And infact they are bought and sold by clubs, is this any different or any better. I think not.

You say players change clubs because they can. If that is the case why do all players not change. Obviously because they think that they are getting a good service provided by their own club. Or they are leaving because they feel that they are not.

Oh and by the way I would love to see your proposal to evenly break up the city and country area's so that each club has an equal opportunity for numbers of players, and that over time as the population break up changes, especially area's where junior aged players are residnig, hwo you plan to maintain that balance.

The idea of zoning off areas has been around BASKETBALL for a long time. I still remember a map of Adelaide with marked off zones in the old Forestville Stadium office. I know it won't happen but try seeing the point I was making. A club because of its staff and profile will stay ahead of the others because they can recruit the best coaches/players. If clubs are zoned off areas of responsibility then they have a clearly defined area of people/schools with which they can work with. It's a theory!

Players move for selfish reasons, as is the reason that started this whole thread. Maybe if you're not playing Division One at the moment you're simply not good enough. Would you rather play Division 2 and be competitive and maybe win or play Division One and get wacked every game?

As an aside, the BASA by law re "poaching" players is so specific and uses such outdated terminology, that it is almost meaningless. My interpretation is that it is restricted to situations in which the following are all true:
- the coach is a "core" coach (presumably this means a State head coach)
- the player is a SASI "scholarship" holder (presumably this means U16s/18s, not U15s)
- when the player transfers, they must still be in the age group in which the coach was coaching the state team (or something like that)

See:

http://sa.basketball.net.au/fs_home.asp

(By laws->Junior District, C35)

Vincent you're right it is out dated but what By-Law isn't?

Even under that By-Law breaches have still been made. And I'd suggest that if a current state player moves to the club of a current state coach for season 2004/05 that is still a breach ... "This will apply from the date of appointment of the State Junior Coach and conclude twelve months after the Grand Final of the Australian Junior Championship for that age group."

My understanding of that is that a player that played State one year can't move to the club of the State coach in the following 12 months even if the player has gone up an age group.

Would be good to have a ruling clearly explained on here from a BASA Junior Committee rep. or BASA Staff member.

Also that doesn't include the unwritten rule which everyone knows still applies (and still gets broken by some).

Exodia,

You're right - the 12 month stipulation does seem to conflict with my third assumption (which itself was based on the first sentence of the by-law). Fair point.

I also agree that the unwritten rule of poaching players is broken by some, if not most clubs. This is very difficult to prove though. Good players transfer to a new club all the time, often without having been approached by anyone from that club.

I believe that the most common reason for this happening is because the player and their family believe that they will receive better coaching at the new club.

I agree that it is totally inappropriate for a coach to approach a player from another club, but I also think that clubs get unfairly accused poaching, when all they are guilty of is creating a good program that people want to be a part of.

Exodia of Forbidden,

Just because the idea has been around for years doesn't make it good. And you don't give a explaination of how to make it work. Just stating that it is a cure for all our ill's is not enough. If you have a idea that you think can help the competition then do some research and put it up. I for one would be happy to support it, if it was fair to all clubs, and in the best interest of basketball.

You seem to be arguing both sides. You say that the strong clubs will always be strong, but West was the dominante club of the 80's and that could not be said now. And if you look at North's lower level teams, they will struggle in the future if they don't do some work. Why would a player move from one club to another in U/12's or 14's becasue their U/18 team is good. If clubs do the work in the U/10 and U/12 age groups then they don't need to worry about players leaving.

Any position of dominance is just waiting for complacency to bring it down. Again look at NCT. Dominante in the 90's, but now even with a merger with Adelaide Southern but only finished 6th at State champs. Can your dominant geting bigger idea explain this.

You then go on to say that div 2 players should not get to move clubs to be able to play div 1. This is the idea that the weaker clubs take into why they should have the right to div 1. So that they can use their position to gain players. This is why they want transfers in, but not promotion/relegation. Because they feel that they will mean transfers out.

My point is, this is a market place. We have competitors in other area. Other sports, leasure activitites, etc, let the market decide where players play or we risk losing them altogether. We do not have the funding football have from above to do the necessary work in all area's, but lets stop saying others clubs are holding us back and do the work that is necessary to keep the players we have, and to entice the lpayers fro other clubs. That way, we will have more than enough players in the sport for all clubs because they will feel that they are being properly serviced.

There are many good arguments for and against zoning.

One positive for zoning is that clubs would be given a reasonable opportunity to recruit from a reasonable pool of children, and clubs would be more likely to start on an even footing at U10 level. At the moment, some players get involved in Aussie Hoops at as young as 5, with a club miles away from where they live, simply because they were the first club to approach their school. Had these schools been approached by the local club, the players would probably have ended up playing for them instead.

This situation is encouraging clubs to put extra resources (time and money) into recruiting players as young as possible, from wherever they can find them. In some cases, this effort detracts from the effort the club puts into working with and developing their existing district players and coaches.

An argument against zoning is that some clubs simply don't put enough effort into recruiting players at a young age, and instead just hope that they will come to them. In some cases, they do. In some cases, they don't, and end up playing other sports (or not playing sport at all).

Zoning also discourages clubs from making the effort to develop their players and coaches, because of the believe that good players who live in their area will play for them anyway, regardless of what sort of service they provide, because they have no choice.

As you can see, I don't have a strong opinion one way or the other. I'm also realistic to know that zoning won't happen in my lifetime, because the clubs won't agree on boundaries.

If you zone schools rather than suburbs, would that be more effective?

No, how do you do it fairly. With the density of clubs in the inner south reigon how do you break them up for South, Stutr and Forrestville. Having in mid that they need the samwe amount of students that say Southern would get.

Plus over time as one school grows and another decreases in size, if you were able to make it fair to start with, how do you maintain equality. Plus as said before, this decreases the possiblity of players being in the sport. If the club that services their area does a poor job, then they may choose a different sport altogether.

I think in the end of the day, if someone wants to change clubs be it because of the coach, opportunities, money etc, they will. I think only in professional sports you can control it.

Ok I KNOW I never said zoning will cure everything. I threw it out there as an option, for discussion which I was lead to believe this forum is for.

I do have a problem with the theory that all clubs would HAVE to have the same number of people in a zone. That's like saying North can't win because they only have two courts at their home venue and Forestville have 3, or Southern have 4. If Southern have zoned 1,000 kids 12 - 16 and Forestville 500 what happens if only 100 of those Southern zoned kids want to play basketball but 400 of those Forestville zoned kids want to play the sport? Do we change the boundries depending on interest.

Zoning will NEVER happen for the reason mentioned above, I just threw it out their for discussion.

If a player wants to move clubs simply to play in a higher division then I don't think they are making the right move. If a player is moving because they have problems at their own club or are being treated unfairly or are of the ability to contribute at Division One level but can't get an opportunity (see for example Sturt in U/14 Boys) then I think they should be free to do so.

I DON'T think a club should be opening offering this to players from other clubs, as per the unwritten rule that all clubs share and trust in. Problem is that it does happen, West are just willing to do publicly what other clubs do through different channels.

Kids move all the time & for many different reasons, this just seems to be abit over the top for my liking!!! If a kid wants to leave to further their opportunity that's fine, in my eyes it just shouldn't be done like that

Well I have created a shit storm haven't I. This is not poaching at all it is offering children at other clubs the opportunity to play at the highest level and extend their basketball by playing against the best children in the competition every week. Poaching would be what Sturt do and contact players directly like they have done to a number of players from our club. Imyself would not stoop to this level if a child wants to move clubs I have just given them the opportunity to do this. And by the way we will have two teams in under 14 girls next year so we are not desperate for numbers. Thanks Travis

Re zoning. I have been involved with an organisation that dealt with minors, and had to join their local unit of a nationwide organisation.

Each unit was restricted to a maximum number. Once this number was reached, any new applicants wefre drip fed to their next local unit (a neighbouring unit).

I personally do NOT agree that zoning is an option. As a parent, if my child wanted to play basketball, and Club Freedom offered the best junior program, in my opinion, I would do my best to get my child into that program. If that clubs program then dropped off, or my child was being hampered, by being kept in Div 2, because Div 1 was full of excellent talent, and Club Democracy was offering my child the oppurtunity to play Div 1, why wouldnt my child want to transfer, if all other situations (friends, coach relationship etc) was the same?

Zoning would prevent this, as zoning also discriminates against clubs in different areas. Central, North Southern and Sturt would fair well, as they are local to suburbs with families, who have kids at playing age.

Woodville, West, Forestville, Norwood have more "yuppie" or elderly suburbs, or suburbs with a higher migrant population, where basketball is not a sport of that culture. Why should these clubs be denied the oppurtunity to gain a junior player, just because of where that juniors parents live, whether by choice, or circumstance?

I think this is a great discussion, and I am sure one had by better minds than ours, keep up the thoughts!!

I see above a few people mentioning that you shouldnt move clubs to play in div 1.

Why Not?

Isn't it all about oppurtunity, if you believe that you are a div 1 player and a couple of clubs agree with that also and are willing to give you a spot then why not move. As opposed to staying with your current club and playing div 2, just because their are 10 or 15 or however many players at your particular club that are better than you. You could go to another club, play div 1 and for all we know be the best player on that team.?

Cheers, DJ

Big Aristotle wanted an example?

John Smith moving to Sturt in 2002 (Mesecke state coach).

Mesecke may have been state coach but Flynn was Sturts u/18 coach.

Libertine,

If you actually had looked to find out the situation you might see that North had been willing to put John Smith onto their Senior playing list because they didn't want him. In these scenario's the senior rules prevail over the junior. (check your by-laws)
Plus John Smith had begun his basketball at Sturt and had moved from Dernancourt to Aberfoyle Park. Once again Libertine/James you have show to be somewhat ignorant to the situation thus losing credibility again.

Where in the by-laws does it say that a junior a club chooses NOT to put on the required players list comes under the required players list rule. That's the 3rd explanation for the John Smith situation I've heard all of which mean nothing. Sturt broke the rules and were allowed to get away with it. Where he used to play, where he moved to, not being on the required players list means absolutely nothing. He went to the club of his state coach, clearly considered poaching by BASA and clearly Sturt should have been fined $750.

Sonny,

Clearly you don't know the first thing about the situation and are very misinformed. And what makes it worse is, that your hiding behind a 'nick name' because you dont have the integrity to put yourself or your club's reputation up for scruteny on this matter.

Let's get some facts straight:

- Sturt did not make any approach to John at all. The Smith's contacted us first and asked if he could come over to play.
- They cited their relocation (as mentioned in post 2216) and the fact that he was a member of the State team and not getting significant minutes of playing time in his club team as the reasons for shifting clubs.
- North made it clear that they did not see John in their future plans for that age group, so THEY cleared him to play at Sturt.

I don't know the intracacies of how this was done but I think it occured after a conversation between the two club Presidents. I guess they just wanted the best for a young man, and seeing he didn't have the opportunity at North, they thought it was in his best interests to shift clubs.

There is certainly no bad blood between the two clubs over this matter. In fact I am sure if we had a player at Sturt who had relocated to the Northern Suburbs and was not getting an oportunity, we would have done the same thing.

Sonny if you have any further factual evidenece on this situation, by all means bring it forward. Until that time occurs, around the time that pigs start flying I presume, remain on the sidelines hidden behind your little nick name.

If you read the by-laws it clearly states that junior by-laws do not apply if the player is on the club's senior list. North were happy for John to go so he was put on the senior list and cleared. Everything was done by the rules.

A few years ago we did exactly the same thing for Todd Matthews to go to Norwood when he was in same situation. He moved from CLG to the northern suburbs. Again, done without breaking any rules. We did this in the best interests of the player (as North did with John).

If you don't like the way it was done change the rules.

A few years ago I started coaching a div 1 junior team partway through the summer season. A few weeks before I took over a player that was in a state program the a in the age group below and was a shoe in for that year (he did end up making it) had put in for a clearance to Sturt. The Sturt coach at the time actually encouraged the player to try and sort out the situation with his own club. The player wanting to transfer to Sturt had similar, established players at sturt that would have been ahead of him and it was in everyones interest for the player to stay where he was. This is an example of sturt virtually turning away a state player.

In the West example of offering players div 1 positions and the Sturt example the players interest is paramount. 99% of juniors pay fees so until the players get to a senior level clubs dont have any RIGHT over players in my opinion. DONT zone areas or the like. The only rule preventing "poaching" or transferring of juniors should be you cant offer them financial incentives and you cant use your position in state or sasi to attract the players.

No coach / club is going to poach a player unless it is in the clubs and the players interest.

As I said the ruling on this is very grey. It would be good if the By-Laws were updated to keep up with the game but no doubt even updating by-laws takes a lot of consultation and planning.

I have issue with West telling Div 2 and THREE players from other clubs to come play Div 1 at West then saying they will have 2 U14 Girls teams anyway. (And Travis 2 teams in an age group is hardly something to be proud of.)

What about those girls already there? I hope West have tried to hit the local schools, miniball and junior social competitions before advertising for kids from other clubs.

I for one would be interested to hear what people like Liam Flynn and Scott Butler have to say on the topic.

And guys let the John Smith thing go, it's in the past let's move on already.

Look, I wasn't trying to make an issue, he just wanted an example! I wasn't trying to discredit anybody or credit myself!

It just seemed at the time to alot of people in our division very dodgy that a player had gone to the club of the State Coach, and was playing for another SASI coach.

Thanks for clearing it up however, Liam, I as many people were/are also unaware that John approached Sturt to play, I do appreciate that he was getting a raw deal at North! I don't see how they couldn't see him in their future plans, bit ridiculous if you ask me, don't often get players that size coming through in bottom age.

Big Aristotle why is everything a competition to you? Who cares? You could have just cleared it up like Liam and Scott did without the personal jibe.

I know that having two teams in an age group is not a great thing to be proud of but when you look at the socio-economic influences that we have around the Port Adelaide are causing our club problems. Yes we have low fees but simply a number of Families around the area can't simply afford to play. The area in which west is situated has a number of problems and I am the first to addmit that we have been at fault over the past few years at not getting enough children into the club. We are trying to rectify this and this is one way of doing it. I like to see it as club promotion more then poaching and the fact that most people have gotten their backs up to this shows just how fragile a state that junior basketball is in, in the State. I can say one thing, numbers at our club have decreased across the bord since BASA introduced their development officer program. Thats just food for thought for all of you. We can't afford to employ someone at our club to run things like a Paul Meske..

If we are saying, as Travis is making a point that sturt have approached players from west in the past then what is the difference with having a notice like west has done. I am not sure of any particulars with what Travis is labelling sturt with but are we saying this.


If a coach walks around a stadium with a sign that reads 'UNDER 14 GIRLS WANTED - ARE YOU CURRENTLY PLAYING DIV 2/3 AND WANT TO PLAY DIV 1 CALL. He does not speak to anyone in particular. It is the same as placing a sign up in a stadium.

I agree that this is not poching and just advertising but if any person leaves another club to go to west then poaching has occurred.

Would also love to hear examples from travis where Sturt have apparently poached players from the club.

Your post does not make a lot of sense. Travis is not saying that we have approached West players. Read what he wrote.

As far as specifics, we had an Under 12 Girl approach us last year and Mesecke alerted Travis to that approach (similar to above post by incognito). She ended up coming over. I am fairly sure that she is the only Div 1/2 player to come to us from West in the last 10 years.

,,,,, you are on a fishing expedition with your above post. There are no fish, move on!

Just to open this debate up further...

If poaching is not done:
1. By a state coach
2. Financial incentives. Fees reduction offered and uniform incentives is fine in my opinion (I think this opens up a can of worms for the club offering it, but thats their choice) just so long as we dont start "paying" juniors (not sure if this would be legal).

Can someone with some coaches/administrators/players here please explain what is wrong with it?

Exodia, if there is an unwritten rule that players from other clubs should not be approached, then thats bullshit. If a coach spots a player that they think they can offer a better opportunity then isnt that coach duty bound to offer the player that position?

What gives a club "RIGHTS" over a junior player??

"Poaching would be what Sturt do and contact players directly like they have done to a number of players from our club."

Scott what else does that mean?

Poaching would be if a club approaches a player directly to entice them to play for that club.

If a player approaches a club, after a club places a general advertisement, as long as that advertisement is within it's own "local" area, then, as far as a general, independent and person of reasonable intelligence is concerned (which is what would be judged by in a court of law), it is NOT poaching.

Well I for one would like to know what facts Travis has to offer to support his wild accusation. Seems to me that he is deflecting some of the attention away from this thread, by trying to tarnish the repuation of a club that has no interest in poaching kids from other clubs.

Lets face the facts, we are in a position where we dont need to recruit kids from other clubs. This is a direct result of the excellent work our U10 coaches do in developing the kids that come to our club from a young age, and is carried on by our professional and experienced coaches throughout every age group.

In my time at Sturt, we have knocked back many more kids then we have taken in...probably on a 10:1 ratio.

As for my opinion on the sign up at Port Adelaide. I think it is in a little poor taste, but not a breach of the rules. If that's how West want to recuit kids to their girls program, all the power to them. Just remember that a Div 1 spot may BRING kids to your club, but you've got to develop their skills and make them better players to KEEP them there. Time will tell if they have both bases covered.....

On a different note, is it poaching if you deliberately target a player despite the fact that the player is a SASI player (and thus incurs the transfer fee), which the club duly is willing to pay? Or is it just good business?

Is that like giving a club a 'right' to a player, incognito, they have produced a player worthy of a scholarship and thus have a 'right' to compensation if they lose him?

Just food for thought!

Liam & Scott

So it may be ok for West to get the kids but they still have to develop them? What a croc....you guys have been poaching players for years. Even at under 10 level. 4 kids from Norwood 2 seasons ago is proof. Scott you should no better. Liam you have no cred anyway....Reported at Junior level you should not even be allowed to coach kids

If West need girls then what they are doing is fine. They are not approaching any girls at all. As far as approaching players is concerned, Scott, Liam and Meske have all contacted players directly or indirectly thru the SASI program for years.

If you want to talk about producing players, lets see your championship record at senior level before you sprout off again. I would say West's 19 would be far more respectable than Sturts 4. If its about producing players to Seniors show us the results in championships? Juniors may be one thing but greatness comes from success at senior level as well.

My long-winded two cents.

As a former junior 'district' player, I can think of a few reasons why a player would or would not be enticed to changing clubs.

Reasons FOR changing:
- Possible conflict with the coach of current Div 1 team or team mates.
- Player is good enough to play Div 1 but there aren't enough roster spots.
- Tired of being a bench warmer on current team (perhaps even Div 1).
- An opportunity to really PLAY and show people what you've got.
- Proximity to new club's stadium.

Reasons AGAINST changing:
- In the junior age groups, basketball is often about friendships with team/club mates.
- Club loyalty.
- Sibling or parental history with the club.
- Proximity to current club's stadium.

I can see why the sign would cause a conflict of interests, but I think that since it doesn't specifically target a named club or say which club they'd be joining, then it's hard to say whether it crosses a line. Sure, if it said for example "Bearcats Under 14 girls div 2/3 players blah blah, call Travis at Sturt on ...." , I think that'd be worse.

But it's a public stadium where lots of players go to from different clubs, and seems to be the ideal arena to reach a broad range of clubs and people. It's not demanding that people call him, only those that are interested. If a player or parent doesn't want to change, then they can ignore it. However, there could be that one player who is just waiting for their chance to shine, and why shouldn't they be allowed to?

I aint much into the polotics and by-laws etc, I just think that a person should be able to choose, and that everyone should be kept informed of the other options open to them. Some players may not even consider changing because they think that every other club is like their own. Competitive, dog eat dog, impress at trials or sit on the bench in Div 3. The reality may be that there's a club that is screaming for youth or experience in that age group that just doesn't have the popularity of the big name clubs. That doesn't make them any less of an option. The right mix of players that work well with each other, can make a winning team, regardless of the colour of the uniform or the profile of the club.

As a junior I considered myself to be a fairly good player. I can recall a former coach who had his favourite little player and she got 40 minutes a game every game and was an absolute ball hog. Now that would be the perfect reason to change clubs rather than sit on the bench and put up with that garbage. Meanwhile my self esteem went down, and no matter how well I did at practice, the same thing would happen every week.

Now I'm not making excuses, but at a junior level, probably the most vital at shaping the future of the game, I wonder how many potentially great players are lost due to experiences such as these. Remembering that although people take basketball seriously it is still a game. If for whatever reason it isn't fun anymore, then switching to another team could be just the ticket to bring out the best of a player held back in another situation and reignite their passion for the game.

LeApFrOg ;-D

SORRY! My mistake! Ooopsy daisy, guess I shoulda read ALL the posts hmmm okay. In my example I said "Bearcats Under 14 girls div 2/3 players blah blah, call Travis at Sturt on ...." . I only used those teams as an example as I'm not aware of the people in charge at the various clubs these days.

Perhaps I should have used this example instead ... "Wangaratta Rays Under 14 girls div 2/3 players blah blah, call Joe Bloggs at Wagga Wagga Dogs on ...." . Maybe now that won't step on anyone's toes (gawd I hope I don't get flamed by Wangaz or Waggaz players now lol).

LeApFrOg ;-D

BOB,

Next time you want to bad mouth someone from another club or bad mouth a certain club as you have, atleast have the guts to put your name behind it.

You can have a go at me because I'm using a nickname to login as well but I'm not the one bagging other people. Atleast Liam and Scott have put their reputation on the line by using their real name.

This is a mod warning

This discussion has been good, with many different thoughts, but personal attacks (such as "Bob") will NOT be tolerated on the board, and if they continue, will be removed.

We pride ourselves on having a non-censored board, unlike some other forums about basketball in this state, but we WILL draw the line at personal attacks.

OOOO, I didn't know we could use html? (That was a test).

Yogee and other mods - personal attacks when people post with their own name and/or it is well known who their identity is? Or do aliases not count?

Bob,

Terrific email! I will put it up there with my Mike Myers movie collection and my Rodney Rude tapes as the things I turn to make me laugh.

I would like to make the following retorts:

- Sadly you're lacking any credibility because you don't have the integrity to put your own reputation on the line. 'Bob' is a fantastic name to hide your true identity...I liked how you used both a Norwood and a West reference in your email to hide which club you are from too.
- Your comment 'So it may be ok for West to get the kids but they still have to develop them? What a croc' read to me that you are saying that you don't need to develop players to keep them at your club?? Is that your belief? I never said that West were a club that couldn't develop kids just that time will tell if in that instance they get both the recruiting and the development mix right. This is something that every club is judged by, including Sturt. Nothing wrong in saying that I wouldn't have thought.
- I also enjoyed how you hinted at Scott, Mesecke and I's senior coaching record. Was this to maybe hint to your many adoring fans that you had one?? Why don't you put yours up so we can judge for ourselves?? Of course we are talking about the issue of transfers of JUNIOR players, as opposed to how senior programs should be coached to win championships, so bringing up that point is completely off the point and a thinly veiled attempt to try and discredit three coaches that are firmly and actively against poaching. But look, if you ever do eventually put up your excellent senior coaching wins and losses and the forum topic is regarding Senior coaching 'dynastys', please feel free to post at will.
- What were the reasons for those Norwood players coming to Sturt? Do you actually know or are you just bagging our proud club because you are aware of one case where players from another club transferred within the rules to our club. Were they talked to by anyone from our club? When did these conversations take place and by whom? Have you any hard evidence of poaching? Or is your style to just throw comments out there that sound very controversial but lack any substance. Please enlighten us on the players that Scott, Paul and I have talked to about coming to Sturt from SASI. We are all ears!
- I too agreed that there was nothing wrong with what Travis was doing. I said that it was in poor taste...and judging by the reaction this thread has had I am not the only one. Are you likely to bag any other people on this forum for having the same opinion on this subject? Seems to me that you have maybe a specific beef against Sturt for a reason that doesn't relate to this subject. If you would like some 'closure', by all means get in touch with one of us three and we will be happy to discuss.
- I think our club's record of producing players to senior level is fine thanks. It actually includes three players at this year's Olympics: Brett Maher, Laura Summerton and Angela Marino. But hey, lets not let the facts stand in the way of a good shit bagging!
- As for my credibility in coaching juniors, I am very confident that the hours and effort I have put into the development of basketball both in my previous employment at BASA and my current coaching roles at Sturt more then justify my role as a coach. Of course everyone is allowed an opinion, and I guess after the misinformed, fictional, propaganda you have come out with on this site, we can all judge what that opinion is worth.

Kind Regards

Doesnt matter what sort of user name they are using, personal attacks on people, will not be tolerated, as a) it makes people uncomfortable, and b) there could be litigous issues involved as well.

As I said, we dont want to censor (hence why the open registration and auto-posting), but if people cant follow the 1 simple rule we have - RESPECT FOR OTHERS - we are left with no choice.

Bob (if that is your real name!). I would suggest that you never reveal your true identity, because when you do I go after you for slander.

I have never poached a player, never ever! I have spoken to players AFTER they have approached me (This is happening right now!). As part of discussions I always tell them it is best if they try to sort it our with their own club first (eg above post by incognito). I have turned away players, good players. How many other clubs, do that? Not many.

Isaac, if you have any more information on Bob, I would be glad to have it.

I don't mind being attacked, I can defend myself, but if you are going to do it 1) use facts not fiction, and 2) use your true name.

You may print a retraction and an apology at any time. I would suggest you do.

Now let's continue the discussion.

I have an opinion that is the opposite of Scott, Liam, Bob and everyone else.

If sturt have not "poached" players where it is their clubs/players interest then I dont think they an aspect of their job very well.

In terms of quality clubs results are what matters not the bull rhetoric Bob throws around and sturt are without a doubt the best Junior club in the state whether we like it or not. If Sturt (and I am using "sturt" interchangeably with any other club that should reach their position) saw a player at another club that they could offer a spot to, and the players position, was "available" at their sturt, I would look at it from another perspective and say that Sturt coach would be duty bound to at least inform that player what they are missing out on. I have nothing to do with Sturt but I dont understand why almost everyone (including the Sturt men) are against Sturt "poaching" players.

Maybe sturt believe they dont poach because it is not in their interest. IE they already have enough quality players and dont want to piss off their current players. In this case that is fine but I dont think Sturt should have to defend themselves against poaching because if they do it good luck to them.

I have not heard of any clubs ever paying a junior outside of giving them uniforms and fees discount. I would have a problem with players being paid. If I was at a club offering a player discounts on uniforms or fees I would be very careful as this could cause internal problems but if another club wants to do it then thats their risky business.

I also think if a State Coach was to talk to a player about moving to their club that state coach would have "rocks" in their head because they would open up question marks as to the players that are selected, if the player they were trying to get over made the state team. Putting aside the rules, this is the coaches business as I think they put their own integrity on the line if this was to happen.

Libertine on a coach poaching players from SASI until someone convinces me differently I dont think this is a problem. Also Libertine I dont think clubs "produce" SASI players I think players produce themselves its just that some environments are more conducive to players producing themselves than others.

My opinion, until someone says what is wrong with it, is poaching is good as long as it is in the players interest and should be done relatively openly. The club poaching the player after speaking to the player should put on the table as to what they are offering the player and give the original club the opportunity to speak to the player (or their parents if its a youngster).

Can people please explain what is wrong with "poaching".

"Poaching" is an approaching a player from another club to come and play for your club. It is unethical and happens rarely. 99% of coaches act responsibly.

However if a player approaches a club (which happens at this time of year especially) then of course it is OK to follow it up. In my first discussions I ask the player to try to sort it out with their present club. If they can't then come back and talk further. I (along with fellow club coaches and coaching heirarchy) then make the decision to either accept the player or turn them away.

Poaching juniors is wrong and should not be tolerated in any form. At the senior level there is a procedure for approaching players. Provided this is adhered to then no problem. Not following this procedure with seniors is also poaching and is not only unethical but against BASA rules and clubs can be fined.

OK if its against the rules thats fine. I just dont understand WHY its unethical.

Example: Poaching is a club going to player and saying look I have seen you play and I think you need to work on this and this and you are not going to get the chance to do that playing this position in div 2. Or Maybe a coach of another club sees something in a player that no one else does.

Junior players/parents are often naive. If you had a Torrens Valley U12 kid thats going to maybe 6foot10 shouldnt a North or Norwood be dutybound to let their parent know about how Norwood / North operate and as long as, if the parents wanted to come over advised Torrens Valley of what was going on. I think that is all West seem to be doing with their sign or Sturt seem to be doing with their slogan "to the other clubs its Just district basketball but this is sturt". They are both saying we have a unique opportunity here for different reasons, the only difference is they are not directly targetting a player.

Its all about looking after the players and doing it ethically. I would think anyone with some intelligence could figure out what is fair and ethical.

There's a difference between promoting your club and poaching. Promotion (say of the upcoming trials) is aimed at new players not players at other clubs. If someone from another club is thinking of moving to us they will judge us on our results and the manner by which we achieve them.

Allowing poaching (ethically speaking) would make junior basketball a meat market. It also would be devastating to both non-member clubs and below average teams in member clubs who would have their best players taken by better teams.

Our proposal for the junior competition has the basic premise that every club (member and non-member) can earn their way to the best competition. Furthermore, it restricts the number of elite level players that may be accepted by a club in any one year. Poaching is counter-productive towards the goal of better junior competition.

Well if that defines 'poaching', then a certain coach who I won't name approached one of the players on my team that I coached (Div 1 at the time) illegally. So it happens, people.

I should clarify, after the game when we were all shaking hands.

Ok well this is getting somewhere now. Question is it considered poaching if a parent from one club approaches a parent from another club to try and get a player to move club?

This happens a lot too, and most often at the request of a coach.

I don't see what all the fuss is about. How easy is it to develop what you have, can find in your local area? Why do clubs need players from other clubs? And incognito I think your logic works fine in Senior ball but not in Juniors.

NO!!!!! THis is not allowed!

My solicitor is in the process of writing up letters to all parents and a class action will be brought forth to all those who are not taking action against the fundamentals of the game of basketball and all associated affilites!

In turn the disassociation of all non-profit orginisations will also allow the cross examination of tactical corporate completion.
This will result in a highly subsidised program.

Thankyou bags you are dismissed!

P.S- Incognito, how much for one of those poachers?

J, I think ur probably funny but I have no idea what youre on about

Your bags are above my head.

Liam and Scott
what part do players have in recruiting (poaching) players. Also some kids are labelled and need a fresh start. I have had two juniors come to my club in the past and one player leave last year who probably needed a change.

Incog, I was in a bit of a nutty mood yesterday. The Poacher I was refering to was the picture that is up further.

Calm bags

doddobird,

You have brung up a good point. I think that players or family activity is the largest form of recruiting that occurs in basketball. But i think that a lot of it not club directed.

I think that we have all seen players move clubs to play with their friends. This is especially so after the SAPSASSA and State teams go away.

But I'm not so sure as too how often the clubs can instruct families to recruit during these trips. I personally think that asking a member of your club to recrui a player that may eventually take their spot would be a bit silly. Or that if abother member of your club heard that you were recruiting over them taking away their spot would mean that you would often loose players without actually gaining somebody.

Speculation is a messy thing. I think that in todays society we are seeing more and more parents looking for opportunities for their children. Be that moving schools for a better education, or changing butchers for a better product, families are looking harder into the market, in order to make sure that they are getting value for money.

I am not saying that recruiting players doesn't happen. Be that state coach poaching or merely offering a better chance for a div 2 player to play in div 1 due to circumstance.

What I think is that we are seeing more and more parents with higher expectations from clubs and are looking at who can provide it. But unfortumately the club are only pointing the finger each other rather than looking in their own backyard at fixing the problems at home.

Hmm!!
Yes please!

Crunchy nut corn bags

doddobird, Instructing a player/parent to recruit is the same as doing it yourself and is not ethical and certainly not condoned. Many of my players have come to me over the years and said so and so wants to come over. My response is the same every time. They need to make first contact before I will talk to them. 95% never actually do, as it is just kids talking. It is the reverse of the rumour that one of your own players is leaving (which happens just as often). Unless they actually say it (or put in a clearance) you take no notice of it.

Scott, Liam or Exodia, I actually value your insights through this forum.

OK, if you want to call this a meat market approach thats OK, but that still does not explain the downside for either the player or the club the player is moving to????

How does it hurt a player by telling them there may be a better opportunity (eg more minutes, play with friends, play a better position, higher level, even some cheaper fees and subsidised uniform if its a less affluent family or under a better coach) for them as long as you give someone from their current club the chance to discuss the other side before the player makes their final decision. Doesnt this just help players and/or parents make informed decisions???

Any coach with half a brain would know if they go after every player they see it will cause more damage to their own team/players than good but if a coach beleives they can genuinely offer a better situation for the player (and this would be very rare), while helping their club, then whats the problem?

I had to think long and hard if I had every approached a player and I certainly approached one player, who was yet to make his mark, in the past and believe I did this for the right reasons at the time. He was a bottom age U18 and I felt he had the opportunity to come to my club and play with a better crop of players coming through, get better senior playing opportunities in the future(silly in hindsight) and had some friends at our club. He was a good kid but strong family ties to his club made this not possible in his view and I respected that. I don't regret at least telling the player "if ever you were interested, we would be and this is what we could offer". That young man is playing NBL for Townsville this year.

As Doddobird said the reverse can be true. If you have a player that you think would be better served by another club then I would have no problem in that player moving on as long as they make an informed decision. Infact in one circumstance I encouraged it.

The no poaching rule (I was not aware there were any) should maybe be replaced by some guidelines on how clubs should conduct it.

I always thought the focus of Junior Basketball was more on developing players not simply winning at all costs.

I'd rather have my child play for a coach who wants to develop him/her then have them play for a coach who'll try and replace them if they can find someone better.

Something you said I find very curious. You're totally against paying juniors to play yet are in favour of free uniforms and/or subsidised fees. What is the difference? In the end all your doing is saying come play for us and financially you'll be better off. Giving a player a free uniform is just the same as paying for a uniform for them and just the same as putting that $75 in that players pocket.

The Tigers situation of giving all juniors a free uniform (I'm curious to know if they keep getting them as they grow older/bigger) makes this topic even more complicated.

Everyone in here wants closer more competitive games at junior level yet I'd be willing to bet 75% of juniors who change clubs (to play Division One) go to a team that was better then the one they were at previously. How does that help make the junior competition more competitive? From what I've seen when juniors move it's the stronger clubs who get stronger and the smaller weaker clubs that get left further behind. That's what I have a problem with.

(I'll keep my eyes and ears open as it's THAT time of year and from what I've heard already the trend will continue.)

"I felt he had the opportunity to come to my club and play with a better crop of players coming through, get better senior playing opportunities in the future(silly in hindsight) and had some friends at our club"

I hope you didn't offer him better coaching. That would insult three pretty decent junior coaches.

Exodia,

I think if you want some clarity, you need to talk to either the president of your club, or to BASA. They have a spreadsheet of the movement of all SASI players over the years of it has been opperational. I think you will find that the stronger clubs have had more players leave than enter. I know this is true for my club.

Most SASI players move between the name clubs which at the moment I'd say are North, Sturt, Forestville and to a lesser extent Tigers and Norwood. I very much doubt that a SASI player would leave one of those clubs to go to one of the lower profile clubs. In fact I can't think of any right now.

I still stand by what I've said. SASI/STATE/Division One players who move go TO the name clubs/better teams more so then the other way. A Division Two player may go the other way to get an opportunity but as I said I can't think of many SASI/STATE/Division One players that went from one of the clubs above to a lower profile club.

World B. Free as you know if this spreadsheet I can only assume you have either seen it, or know someone with access to it. Maybe you could post it here and let everyone aware of the official BASA figures?

Yes I have seen it. I will try and get a copy of it to put up on this thread.

Much appreciated. I'm sure it would be an interesting read.

Ronnie,

From memory the better Junior coaching did not come into the brief conversation. I only knew my counterpart coach by chatting to him and he seemed like a nice enough guy, but would not know if he was a good coach or not-so good coach.

As you would no doubt be aware, Ronnie, the only way you can really asses a coach is if you play for them or are their Coaching Director. Otherwise you are just engaging in heresay, banter and quiclky lose the respect of those around you, with any experience, and look like an idiot in my opinion.

The only person from that club I could claim to have any such knowledge of was their ABL coach. So I guess if you include him in the 3 then I could have mentioned it.

Exodia,

Yes I think poaching players and taking the spot of existing players is why coaches would not be smart if they did it, but thats an internal club issue, this does not explain to me why there would be ruling By BASA to stop it.

In terms of offering a player discount on uniforms and fees. I know of other clubs that have done it. I actually would not have a problem with it been offered to player in my club. If a player was in an underpriveldged family and good enough to be considered for this kind accolade then why shouldnt they take that into their consideration of changing clubs. What would be the downside of this being offered???

Incognito,

"I could have mentioned it"

You could have mentioned what?

Are you saying that when you tried to recruit this player to your club, you suggested that the senior coach at his club was a good reason to change clubs?

No, this was not mentioned but my point was I was in a position where I could have mentioned it as I had personal experience. I was just trying to make a point to Ronnie from what perspective we can asses coaches when recruiting a player or in any way for that matter. IE in most cases I dont think you could and you would come off looking stupid if you did this in my opinion.

The problem with offering some players reduced fees/free uniforms, is that this in effect means that these players are being subsidised by all other players in the club. If this does happen at some clubs, I would doubt that it is commonly known by all those who are paying higher fees because of it, and in my mind, this is dishonest.

If this offer is made based on ability, this is no different from paying players to play. In my opinion, there's no justification for treating junior players like professionals, or for a financial incentive to be a differentiator between clubs.

If this offer is made in cases of financial hardship, this is a different story, however guaging financial hardship is a very difficult thing to do. If this is done, there would need to be documented criteria for this happening, and it the rest of the club's members would need to be made aware of the fact that they are subsidising these players.

Incognito, as for attempting to recruit a player from another club, considering this player's history since then, I'd hope you'd agree that he made the right decision to stay where he was, and that perhaps approaching him to move wasn't in his best interests.

Vincent,
I personally would not offer a kid/parents a free uniform or fees reduction if I was a coach or on a Committee etc. because I agree with you about it being dishonest, but thats an internal club issue. If other clubs did it, and I know they do, then so be it.

How can giving a kid a free uniform so he does not have to pay for it be treating them like professionals??? Professionals get paid alot of money to play fulltime. Im sorry but there has to be a little bit of perspective applied here.

In terms of the example I provided he was never even close to coming over, and I was basically just letting the player know we would gladly have him. Yes, I do think it would be in any players interest for them to know if their club was not doing the right thing by them there were others interested if you genuinely felt you could offer the player a role. On me agreeing with your statement, who knows, but how could anyone argue with you on what you say in your last paragraph????

Everyone in this dicussion:

The reason I got involved in this discussion was to find out why would people try and knock clubs that poach players. If they do it, are able to, they think it is in the best interest of the player and their club and give the players current club the right of reply then what is wrong with it.

If you all have problems with it and most would say it does happen then lets stop been sneaky, defensive and secretive about it and get some guidelines drawn up and make the poaching, recruiting or meat market process open and transparent.

Incognito,

Your example is a good reason why poaching is unacceptable. A young player approached by another club could be more easily convinced that things are greener on the other side of the fence, particularly if his team is struggling, and regardless of whether the current club has the right of reply. Fortunately, in the situation you mentioned, the player realised that contrary to whatever you told him, he was better off where he was.

If a player thinks that they are better off somewhere else, let them make the first move. Otherwise, coaches are forced to spend more time selling/promoting their club than concentrating on coaching.

Incidentally, you've implied that you told this player that his club "was not doing the right thing by him". His top age U16, bottom age U18 and top age U18 coaches (including his coaching director) all read this forum, and would no doubt be interested to hear what you meant by this.

This is all for Vincent,

I think you miss my point. This was just an example of poaching. If you want to have a go at me for breaking the poaching rules then so be it but I dont think I was unethical. The purpose of me mentioning it was within the context of the discussion in regards to poaching and I was in no means trying to descredit anyone from the club the player was from. Infact based on the clubs performance in recent years they must be doing a GREAT job.

I dont appreciate you (or Ronnie) asking questions and fishing for me to post something that could be misconstrued or trying to take what I said totally out of context. Im just not going get into that game champ.

"was not doing the right thing by him": This was NOT implied in anyway in my posts and I cant see how you could get that impression.

If you want to continue the discussion I am happy to do so (not in this forum). Let me know through this forum, you want to continue the discussion, and I would be happy to pass my details to you through the moderator (if he is happy to assist).

All in all this is further proof of why poaching or recruiting shouldn't happen. Incognito again simply put giving a player a free uniform or reduced fees to come to your club is EXACTLY the same as saying if you come to our club we'll give you money. You've posted you don't believe juniors should get paid yet you have no problem with them getting paid to move clubs. Your logic simply doesn't make sense.

Guys as Bystander posted don't take things in here so seriously. No one's having a go at anyone else most coaches (unfortunately) will simply do or say anything to improve their team. As I've said Junior Basketball is about developing players not winning at all costs. Something some posters seem to only point out if it backs up their arguement at the time.

Another interesting bit of info to think about... Centrals had three state reps of sort in 2004. Unfortunately only 1 of them is there still.

I found the post which I think caused some friction. Post 2372 the following line:

"Yes, I do think it would be in any players interest for them to know if their club was not doing the right thing by them there were others interested if you genuinely felt you could offer the player a role. "

Is obviously not specifically talking about the player. It is obviously referring to my view that if you told a player as I probably told this player : "if ever your club are not doing the right thing by you then we would be interested". I am not saying that I told the player his club was not doing the right thing by him.

I hope I did not cause too much distress but I do think we are been a little bit precious in this case.

Well if that's the case for the Newley example, that's the sort of thing that happened to my boy - "you'd be more than welcome here" or something similar...is that illegal in your mind, guys?

Incognito,

Believe me, I'm not trying to bait you into incriminating yourself. You've already done that.

I just misunderstood the following sentence to mean that you suggested this guy's club wasn't doing the right thing by him.

"Yes, I do think it would be in any players interest for them to know if their club was not doing the right thing by them there were others interested"

Rereading, you're not saying this - but inserting the word "that" between "know" and "if" whould have made this clearer.

This aside, I still don't see how you can think that approaching said player was acceptable.

I think Mr.Butler is on the money. A coach should NEVER make the first move, in any way shape or form.

Telling an opposition player he's welcome at your club is opening the door. It's just not ethical and also a little disrespectful to the player you're planning to replace.

Happy to incrimate myself where I deserve incrimination Vincent just where its not deserved. hahaah Yes, the BASA authorities will no doubt be in touch with me soon for my crimes against basketball for poaching.

Vincent and Exodia I do think it IS acceptable in some cases. If it is in the player's interests and the recruiting club's interest to recruit, directly advertise, meat market or whatever then I cant see why its not acceptable.

You mention coaches having to advertise and sell their club rather than coaching. I would have thought that by coaching well they are advertising / selling their club and that is why poaching is not a bad thing. It keeps everyone honest and player movement at junior level could be more fluent if they knew they had better roles to play.

EG. A talented U14 player playing 5 spot at a club but he /she will be a guards height. That players parents may not know that by going to a team with bigger players in it they would play guard therebye maximising their opportunity in the future. Wouldnt a coach seeing this opportunity be duty bound to both player and their club to offer the player a spot.

Its going to happen always and it should be made transparent and open.

You keep contradicting yourself. You say its fine for a coach to promote themself and tell a player they'd be better off at their club, in their team; then say that "by coaching well they are advertising / selling their club"

That is the point of this whole arguement. Simply coach, simply do your job. If a club as a whole or a coach in a certain age group develops players better then another coach/club then players and parents will see that. That is something everyone understands will happen and that is not a problem. You've simply done your job well and others may want to be a part of it. Poaching is directly approaching certain player/s to come to your team or club, that is unethical and against the current unwritten rule.

I dare say with the number of basketball people that read this forum that something stronger might be enforced sooner rather then later.

Either way approaching a player or players to change clubs is wrong, if those same players want to change clubs because they like your program that is their choice.

Incognito i will give you my thoughts on why poaching is unacceptable. Your posts have always been respectful so I will not "out" your club or you personally. I will however confirm that it is not Sturt as some posters no doubt feel it is.

Vega has made an good point when he talks about the grass being greener on the other side. Everyone wants to feel wanted, many junior players are impressionable and would enjoy fielding offers from other clubs. You have repeatedly made the point that poaching is "ok" if it is going to improve the players development. What happens if the opinion of the recruiter is wrong.

You mentioned that the reason you approached Newley was

"I had to think long and hard if I had every approached a player and I certainly approached one player, who was yet to make his mark"

Reserve SA Metro state team, SASI scholarship holder, top 5 player in the comp by the end of the season - he had made his mark on the local scene as much as anyone except for perhaps Burdon, Kies, Dubienicki

"in the past and believe I did this for the right reasons at the time. He was a bottom age U18 and I felt he had the opportunity to come to my club and play with a better crop of players coming through"

His bottom-aged team was quite capable ( you guys only just beat them from memory in state champs semi after a tech foul call) two of his teammates made the SA metro team. The next year his team made the finals

"get better senior playing opportunities in the future"

The Forestville means team for the last 7-8 seasons has been very strong. So his opportunity would be to play against strong senior players the ilk of, Breeding, Simons, Grocke, Jennings a pretty good training environment for his development. Given that these players were always going to retire his playing time was not going to be in jeopardy. Plus he would have been playing for a great coach in Shaun Ryan who has a strong history of developing young talent as you know.

"(silly in hindsight) and had some friends at our club"

had mates at F/Ville not a great reason to recruit a kid.

So what was he really going to get out of (club x) that he wasn't going to get out of F/Ville. Zero.

It was probably more what (club x)? was going to get out of it. If Brad wasn't a strong character, loyal to his club, who recognised the hard work of the coaches working with him he may have played for you. Not all 15 years olds are able to weigh up a situation with such clarity.

So why am i against poaching? I dont see why coaches like Paul Arnott, Tony Cassella and David Laurie should work there arses off to help develop players like Brad Newley only to see another club "poach" them. It is a lack of respect towards your fellow coach.

As Scott has mentioned if the player makes the first contact then that is very much a different story.

Just my point of view

Jeremy,

Fair enough on all your points... I could counter some of them with an alternate view but thats not the point.

Thanks for addressing my question.

scotty not saying clubs get players to recruit but the two players that came to our club from yours had friends. I know you are a fan of Coach K, but I enjoyed watching Jim Harrick at UCLA. (private joke)
ps remove the bird

To the anonomous poster,

Why should BASA do something for a club that is more than willing to pay senior players but not employ their own development officer. If all clubs were willing to pay their senior teams $000 then BASA wouldn't need to help. Plus, how exactly could they help.

On clubs approaching players.

There are examples of where directly recruiting players is fine. There should be at least some guideline put in place for how to do this as there is in the senior program. Im not saying the guidelines should be the same as in seniors but there should be some.

An "unwritten" rule is nonsensical, unworkable, open to interpretation.

For directly recruiting:

Offering a player/parent an opportunity they may not have been aware of.

A player may feel they are not being looked after by their club but despite this may be made to feel that it is unethical to approach another club.

Its going to happen anyway (players approaching players and parents approaching parents) so why not admit it happens and make it transparent and open.

As long as the other club has the right of reply so the players and parents make a balanced, informed decision.

Opportunity for a player that is performing, and may be underprivledged or disadvantaged to get incentives such as cheaper uniforms or fees.


Against:

The player is young and impressionable and may just move because they think the grass is greener on the other side.

Recruiting distracts a coach from coaching because their time is taken up in recruiting.

Clubs that offer cheaper uniforms and fees will upset their other members.

Additional points:

Currently coaches believe that if a player/parents makes the first move then that's a different story. Doesn't the impressionable kid argument come into that scenario anyway?

Incognito,

I agree - there should be a guideline regarding recruiting. Can I propose the following:

"Don't approach players from other clubs. Ever."

Poaching is a shortcut taken by coaches who aren't willing to put in the time and effort to develop their own program. It is almost always done for the benefit of the coach, not the player.

How are clubs expected to get players? Just wait for them to come in off the street? There has to be some recruitment drive to better your club surely.

To Incognito,

Clubs do have an ability to change the minds of their players. They have up to 4 weeks befoe the must clear a player to another club. While most do try to clear players quickly, this does give time for clubs to talk to players about not moving.

To Anonymous,

How could BASA change their recruitment model in a way that didn't help the stronger clubs. I think Scott Butler had a proposal in his relegation/promotion model that clubs could only have 5 players transfer into their club form other clubs in the top grade ie div 1, but not sure that this is enough (what if more than 50 div 1 players want to move clubs). In the pro/reg system, players could be deemed ineligible to move clubs to play in a higher division after the pro/rel series, thus stopping them from changing clubs and re-distorting the idea of equal comp in all grade. They could still change clubs because of problems with their current clubs, or because they think club X has better coaching or philosophy, but just not play in a higher grade. Therefore any parent looking to change clubs would need to look more at the possibilities at the begining of a season when clubs are able to find solutions to any problems that the families have before lossing them because there is a bit more time. Under the current system I cannot see any possible solutions like these. Does anybody have some.

In a perfect world it would be nice to think your players would not be recruited. But in the last two years I can say that two of my top players have been recruited by other clubs, one player giving me a specific example by a coach. I suppose it depends what coach you see yourself as - development or recruitment. A coach wanting to make a name for himself in juniors may want try the fast track.

Anonymous,

Agreed with your idea's. Clubs need to review from top to bottem their goals and business operations. Again I think "Bob" said what I fear the most, when he said "lets see you championship record at senior level". This to me says that as a basketball community we have a poor understanding of what our goals are. Two examples would be Ian Laurie and Bev Chapman. Ian Lauire would be by far one of the best coaches this State has ever produced but it took him about 10 years to win a ABA championship. While Bev in her own right did a great job of producing U/10 groups down at NCT. Does "Bob" (Bob being the analogy for our basktball community) not think that the job these people did was better than other coaches who perhaps coached stronger groups. I hope that we are able to distinguish between a good coach and the coach of a good team.

That said, and sorry for rambling, clubs need to reasses their priorities. Considering what has been said here about struggling clubs, why would BASA (and by their business savy who would want them too) help clubs that are willing to drop about $15000 on imports, not to mention the rest of their senior teams anyway, just to win an ABA championship. And that is not a jibe at any one club, but rather at the mentality of our basketball community.

Anonymous,

The solution for at least one of your concerns (the cost of district basketball) as well as other concerns (high training commitment, the need to commit for a year at a time, lots of travel), all of which turn people away from district basketball, is for clubs to start up domestic competitions.

This is even more important in lower socio-economic areas - there could well be a large number of potential basketballers in the Western suburbs, who are unable to commit because of the cost.

West and Woodville could create a combined domestic competition run out of either Port Adelaide or the Dome or both, which would get new kids into the game. They could then use this as a base for selecting players for their district teams down the track.

We demand of our junior players and parents to be loyal to their clubs and at all time to be ethical, but what is so fair about kids that commit a decade of their basketball career to a club only to then be displaced by an external players from the country, interstate or poached from another club because the club emphasis is on winning nationals and classic comps not on development of their existing players and culture. How can this be?

Of all the posts for this topic, I think you have just summed it all up perfectly Achtung

Somewhere in the BASA regs is a section which fines a club $750 if they poach a player and a State coach is involved. Do you know where the fine, if paid by the club concerned, ends up. The regs do not state where it should go so BASA keep it. The other club misses out. And what is more the other club can not find out whether the fines were paid at all. The regs need improving.

A lot of people are concerned as you have just mentioned Achtung. But I think you might find that it comes more from parents than from the players. But are we really trying to develop that. Of all the juniors that our clubs have. How many are going to play at the elite level. ie NBL or ABA. There just aren't that may spots. SO by trying to develop culture are we saying that a div 1 spot is the be all and end all. If so then I think that as clubs we are failing.

My opinion is that we should be trying to develop a culture that as clubs we want our players to feel ownersip for all results. Not just for their own team. Or as you suggest above, for themselves. I think if you look at clubs that have been the dominant club for that era, the main thing that they have had is depth, not just in all div 1 teams but through the divisions. And this means that some players must have sacrificed for the good of the club by playnig for lower division teams than they might necessarily needed too if they have had of moved clubs. ANd this teaches players a noble character trait.

The best scenario for clubs and their members is to have competition for spots. Remember that we are involved in elite basktball (NBL/ABA/DIV1) as well as providing a recreational opportunity for members of the community.

Aren't we trying to do more for our members than offering them opportunity based on first in best dressed. I would rather see them learn things like work ethic, the ability to deal with adversity and the like. Rather than taking for granted that they will keep their div 1 spot just because they were their first.

But this is just one persons opinion.

Worldy

I understand what you are saying and your comments are valid to a point. I however believe you have misinterpreted my point. I did not say that if a junior player plays all of his/her basketball with a club that he/she has a right to a div 1 spot in a team, absolutely not, but if you recruit, poach, whatever into an under 18's div 1 side, three players, then the existing club players (not parents) are bound to feel upset and resentment. If you suggest it is tough titties, builds resilience and it is all in the name of progress - then good on you. I believe loyalty and hard work should be rewarded and this kind of behaviour will overtime change the club culture and if does continue to happen then communication/change management of existing players will need to be better managed to avoid footsteps to other clubs.

Achtung,

I do agree with your points. Loyalty breeds loyalty. But how many clubs can show that at senior level. But I do agree you really need to judge the ability of players in a current team if you plan on adding players into an age group. If you already have sufficient players then their is no nead to recruit players. Please note; recruit does not mean approaching current BASA lpayers as I'm against it. Recruit means getting players who are not currently playing for a district club into your club, or assessing players who approach your club from other clubs.

This should take into account the number of top age/bottom age in your top two teams. The number of players already in the position and other such concerns. But I do think that right now because clubs have a right to div 1 in juniors, and most clubs are willing to buy players to win ABA, they don't expect players to work hard and earn their spot which in turn leads current members to think that this is the right way to act.(that is selfishly)

The last few posts are very true and are the exact reasons why directly recruiting are bad for clubs the clubs doing the recruiting.

Again thats an internal club issue, that each club has to decide. Isnt it???

Perhaps,

But as a community, shouldn't we organise rules to stop the rogue recruiters from looking for the quick fix for the overall benefit of the competition for the entire community.

It only takes a few people to have self centred views trying to make a name for themselves to harm the entire competition. Plus generally the committee's, in the same way as they do in buying ABA championships, are generally parents who may not understand the long term implications, or are more interested in the short term gain for their particular club.

While I agree that regulations are needed and need to be open. It will always be those that circumvent the rules for self promotion who bring down the whole.

The problem as I see it, the only way to stop it from happening in the current system is to look at situation and where clubs have broken the rules, the player is notallow tomove to that club. But i am not suggesting that this is a good idea as we are dealing with kids and yuo aer harming them more than the clubs. And how would you prove it anyway.

Unfortunately this whole process creates a chain reaction.

2.2 A player who is registered and playing with an association in a representative competition may not train with, negotiate a clearance to or register with another association without written approval from their current association.

2.3 An association intending to negotiate with a player for a clearance shall not commence the negotiations until the player has the necessary written permission under by-law 2.2.

2.4 If an association rejects or does not respond to a request under by-law 2.2 within fourteen (14) days of the request being received, the player may make the request again and, unless there are exceptional circumstances, the association shall grant the request.

2.5 An association shall not invite a player to train or seek a clearance from another association without first informing the player's current association of its intention to approach the player.

2.6 An association shall conduct negotiations for a clearance with courtesy to the player and the player's current association, with minimum pressure on the player and in a spirit of openness.

2.7 Where a player is playing in representative competition, a clearance in a form approved by the relevant association or a Basketball Victoria clearance form shall be obtained from the player's club before the player may register with another club in the same association or competition or another association.

2.8 A club receiving a request for a clearance shall reply to the request within fourteen (14) days of its receipt, either by granting or refusing the request.

2.9 If a club fails to reply to the request for clearance within the required fourteen (14) days, the player may immediately notify the relevant association or delegated or governing body and the player shall be registered with the new club without a clearance unless there are exceptional circumstances.

2.10 An association or delegated or governing body may restrict the eligibility of players cleared during a season.

2.11 A club may only refuse a clearance at the completion of a season if the player has not fulfilled their obligations to the club, association or delegated or governing body.

PENALTIES
4.1 A person who breaches these by-laws may be reported to a tribunal constituted under the Tribunal By-laws which may either:
· Take no further action;
· Impose a fine not exceeding five hundred dollars ($500); or
· Suspend the person for up to twenty-five weeks.

4.2 An appeal against a decision under by-law 4.1 shall be an appeal under the Tribunal By-laws.

4.3 An association which breaches these by-laws may be fined a sum not exceeding one thousand dollars ($1,000) by the committee of management.

Where are these from? Are they Victoria's rules? Do they apply to Juniors?

These make more sense to me that the status quo of an unwritten rule:
that not everyone is aware of, that is open to interpretation, leads to situations open for inuendo and rumours been generated and can lead to players/parents not making a balanced judgement.

Vic's "rules of operation" are available here.


Championship is equivalent to division 1 in Adelaide, VMJBL is roughly equivalent to division 2-4.

In the clearances section, those rules of operation refer to some BV guidelines. Which are obviously located somewhere else.

2.5, 2.6 in the rules vic rocs lists are of particular interest to this discussion I beleive.

Seems a bit long winded. Can we break it down into somthing simpler.

1. A club will not contact a player from another club without writing to the club prior, giving 14 days notice.

2. A players will not contact, or train with another club without asking permission from their club.

3. When a player asks for permission to speak with another club, their club has 14 days to grant permission. After this 14 days the permission is auto-matic.

4. A club my deny permission for any player to speak with another club if that player is not fully financial.

5. A player must ask for a clearance from both their club and the BASA before they can be cleared to another club.

6. A clearacne must be granted within 14 days if the player is fully financial.

+ do we want something in there about not being able to transfer during season???

Thats all good world B. BUt I think you miss my point. 2.5, 2.6 are addressing on of the topics of this discussion. IE Poaching. There are already rules regarding clearances in place.

west adelaide should be commended for the initiative they have shown in a very difficult area. Since the demise of mutiple div. 1 sides west have only considered the future of junior basketball and have given an opportunity to those players who didnt make div. 1 at other clubs to play div. 1 at west.
This is not poaching, this is making a legitimate offer for junior basketballers pointedly under 12, under 14 girls to play div. 1.

i have seen the notice at west and it does not say "are you playing div 2/3 for another district club" it could be directed at girls playing social/church/school - and ultimately it will not be the child who will make the decision to move, it will be the parent. i honestly would not be willing to move my child from a club, just because the child might think they are a div one player. if the club my kids are at suits my finances, the area i live in, closeness of training etc, then i will not be looking to move to the other side of town. if i am honest about my childs basketball ability (and i understand that a lot of parents are not) i should know if they are div 1 or div 2 standard (especially if i have been around basketball for a few years). west have simply put up a notice to catch the attention of players AND parents that may not be happy with their current situation and who may be willing to travel to another club. it also does not guarantee anyone a div 1 spot - it simply is offering them the chance to try out - we all know that clubs are running their trials at this time of year. what rule is there that prevents any player going to trials at other clubs. i know of a few players that went to trials at other clubs, but ultimately stayed at their club. it can not hurt to shop around if you are not happy, as long as it is your decision alone.

Must have changed it because the one I saw definately did.

I also hear that there could be some girls in 16/18's moving clubs next year, maybe away from a certain Northern club.

Anyone else know anything?

Is THIS Allowed!?

I've heard a number of different reasons covering basically everything possible.

I've heard it too. I don't know what is allowed to be said but there may in fact be some high profile juniors moving clubs before next season.

I think two of the biggest factors would be the glut of talent at their clubs and the limited opportunities to develop and continue to play that would create.

any player / parents that want to play div 1 and are not getting what they want at their current club would be intelligent enough to look elsewhere.

West are desperate - really desperate - woodville have passed them in junior girls in the western suburbs, and woodville had a poor roster, until they ended up getting the best recruiting bloke and now are 100% better off - and no relief is on the horizon for the bearcats.


There is an understanding between clubs that - NO approaches would be made to known players from other clubs.

The poster should read - "West are desperate for Div 1 junior girls" - more politically correct.

what idf a div 3 player comes and are totally inept at div 1 - what do you do? - it is false promises.

I know kids that would rather play in a good div 2 team than a bad div 1 team.

If west wanted to be politically correct than they should've said

"West are desperate for girls aged between ... and ... to join their club."

This would have meant this post would not have existed. Sorry to bring up this topic again.

This happens before 3 girls are kicked out of the club for saying to a mate, 'come to woodville with us.' West is full of shite.

i think it is definately the wrong thing to do, trying to draft players from bettter teams. I think it is a cop out and they should get better coaches rather than better players

The sign is still there, just moved on to the pole next to the staircase. Saw it on Friday.

WHO CARES.... LET PEOPLE PLAY WEREVA THEY WANA

on the money there ......

Oh maybe it's Spam
----------------------------------------------------

http://www.etoshoes.com

Poaching draws huge coverage for something that never happens, doesn't exist and if it does, is always done by someone else. To catch fish you need to go fishing and Basketball S A doesn't own a rod!

depends what people want and what the club needs

when are trials ?

Awesome bump.