That would be Mornington Breakers, last season they had over 60 coaches apply, this season they are doing the ring around looking for coaches as they don't have enough, last season they had approx. 10 outside players they let in, that's not including the 20+ they turned away. The reason is one man and he sits atop all the others and has convinced his followers that this is the path forward, he says that Mornington needs to support its own (It's own is the domestic players and not the community) and anyone who hasn't played 6mths domestic at Mornington will NOT be allowed to tryout; it gets better cause next season they have to have played 12mths domestic at Mornington to be allowed to tryout. Some of the reasoning must be for this his son and some of the people he knows kids that are not up to rep standard so he changes the rules to suite them and allow sub-standard players to continue with rep rather than have to earn their spots. Lost 5-6 quality coaches so far, not sure what the fallout will be with players just have to wait and see. Committee is full of people who have never run a basketball club, if they just ran the business all would be sweet but they felt that had to change things that will eventually be its undoing, rankings will slide, good players will leave and coaches of any integrity wouldn't want to be there to coach Friday night domestic teams against rep teams; possibly the worst decision I've seen or heard of in 25+yrs of basketball.

In the interests of this NOT turning into another Mornington bashing thread I want to ask a question for consideration?

What if they are right?
What would be the impact if the VJBL introduced a rule that said in order to play VJBL for a club you had to have played previously in there domestic competition?
What would be the impact of this?

Obviously there would be necessary exemptions for players who had never played anywhere at all or who had moved into an area, but otherwise the notion that you can't play VJBL for a club unless you have previously played in their domestic competition might be an excellent way of the VJBL reinforcing the importance of domestic basketball.

^ - did you read what i wrote?

^Sure. Understand.

But its not what I am asking.

I am suggesting the VJBL could make a rule enforcing this. So you cannot play for Association A unless you have previously and curretly play in that domestic competition. So instead of the association creating a rule the league would.

If everyone had to abide by a rule like this what would be the outcome? What would be the good and bad results?

Exemptions can be requested for people moving to the area, not for non playing rep players who don't play domestically at Mornington. New players to rep would fall under the category of having to play domestically for a period to qualify, I did ask this question.
Firstly the VJBL wouldn't do it, the program has boomed in the past 2-3yrs and to manage would be a nightmare, in 2012 there was about 215000 registered basketballers in victoria, roughly 75000 are aged 6-18; how to you propose they would manage this? The clubs certainly wouldn't as it would be in their best interest to have a player there, how hard is it to falsely fill in a players name and say they play domestically there? The Country program is considered the best run but players don't abide by the boundaries and neither do Metro if it's a player they want; so how would you do it with 10 times more players?
I never look at things in Black and White but on this occasion i see it and so does everyone else except those introducing it. Coaches have left and there are no new quality coaches coming in and this is evident in the lack of coaching applicants; you don't go from 60+ applicants to less than 32 in one year unless people see an issue. But I will eat humble pie if I am proven wrong; but I doubt very much I will be on this occasion as I see rankings dropping, coaches walking and quality players wishing to play in higher divisions leave. Very sad that those who don't know basketball can't take a back seat and employ or higher a perminante DOC or BOM to run it and let the committee run the business side.
You live off what ifs and I will live of facts, too many succeful clubs not operating this way for it to not be a fact.

678 very good point, won't happen; the VJBL are not stupid and know the magnitude of policing such a rule would be insane and clubs wouldn't abide by it. I suppose just like the "poaching" that doesn't happen at this time of year......does it?

Wow, you may be the first person here to say the VJBL are not stupid. You should see the thread on venues!

BTW Peninsula, the league would need to manage for only those players playing VJBL, not 75k juniors.

You manage the rule the same way every sport manages these types of rules (and many sports have exactly these rules). Through declarations.

So the Secretary of Association A confirms that the players being submitted are or have been domestic players and are therefore, as 673 said, "representing" that association.

You then impose significant penalties for breaches, including possible exclusion from finals. (if the penalties are serious then people will think twice about abusing it - problem is at the moment the penalties are not strong for much at all)

So now tell me the positives and negatives if the VJBL did do it.

#685

Good question. To be clear, I have only floated this - I am not proposing it. Trying to find out if some of the sharper pens here could actually think it through and consider the impacts if it was introduced. I have tried before on this forum to get people to think about things - its really difficult!

The more quality you have playing in your domestic competitions the more the standard improves across the board. The result of this is the development of more players with the potential to play at rep level.

It also develops future rep coaches and referees if managed right.

Getting your rep kids involved in your domestic programs is a great idea.

Heard that if you tryout or end up playing somewhere else you will not be accepted back to play even if still playing domestic. Definitely a drain on talent if this is correct. More teams for 2015 but the rankings are worse than they have been in years gone by - quantity over quality - thought VJBL was for quality

If you try out at a club and are successful, you should be required to play domestic. That is the point! Rep should be made up of your best dom players. You should have a month or so cut off after team lists are posted to join dom. But not allowing kids to get on the court, provided they are willing to join domestic is crazy.
Clubs represent the whole community and all kids should be given the chance to try out.
Why can't kids change associations at the end of the season? You dont have to pick them for teams?

Chilled the reasons behind it are logical but the implications are going to be monumental. The reasoning is to support those loyal to the program, what they don't understand is those loyal to the program who think they are better than what's on offer will leave showing no loyalty to them. I have no issues with this but stopping people from trying out because you haven't played 6 or 12mths of domestic basketball is insane to not only your rankings but the quality of team you will place on the floor. The King calls those in the Mornington program 'Their Community', you'd think he was running the mafia HAHA
I understand telling people to play domestic if they are selected and fully support this as anyone else should but they believe, you'll love this, they believe some players will leave their current rep programs to play 6-12mths domestically at Mornington so that qualify to tryout next seasons VJBL teams.
The biggest issue here is that players leave, whether it be to another club, another sport or just want to focus on school etc. you are not replacing them which means you'll be short the following season, you may end up with 22 players....do you then cut, allow a rotating roster, select 7, 7 & 8? No the answer I got, "we will have to cut I suppose". They haven't thought this through as they have not run a club before and what the consequences will be to those kids who are decent players, who can't travel further to play, they will be stuck there with below par players of a standard that shouldn't be in rep.

Basketball Geelong Rep. before Supercats Amalgamation was exactly that. Representation Teams made up from the best domestic players in the Association. Coaches were from clubs affiliated with the Association.

But times change and money needs to be made and the newly named Supercats opened the doors to all. Are the results any better, no, but early days .

I will reserve my Judgement, but no matter what each club does they all break their own rules when it suits.

Supercats, Stingrays, Bellarine and Werribee . I do not have an opinion on this topic just adding info. Although like you ^ anon the more kids that get involved in sport the better it is for our communities.

On a domestic front, any of the associations on the peninsula would be fine as they are all much for muchness but, as for spreading the talent in regards to rep ball? Don't think that is correct:

State players:
Sth Pen - 12
Franktson - 1 or 2 current, plenty of past reps
Western Port - 0
Mornigton - 0

Aust players:
Sth Pen - 2
Frankston - no current juniors, but plenty of past reps
Western Port - 0
Mornington - 0

National Junior Classic Titles
Sth Pen - 2
Frankston - no current junior teams, but again had a few in the past
Western Port - 0
Mornington - 0

Senior teams:
Frankston: SEABL
Sth Pen - SCW, D1M, YL2W
Western Port - D1W, D2M, YL1M
Mornington - D2M, D2W, YL2W, YL2M

I think the talent is all at Frankston and Sth Pen, which are the only real two choices when looking for somewhere to play representative ball on the peninsula. And before people get all upset, i am just basing it on the stats above.

Lets just sit back and see how Morningtons new vision plays out, it might just be very successful yet? Time will tell.

It is hard to compare with the state players as the SP players are Country Vic as is WP - Frankston & M'ton are Metro clubs and it is a lot harder to get selected for Metro teams - as it has been for many years - Taking nothing away from SP they are are running programs to improve the players and do not stop players from other clubs trying out - hence 1 x State/Aust player came in new this year. #701 if "they are being told to keep going" how can they exclude them if they still play domestic there. They still fit the criteria. My son plays at one club with his friends from his primary school and at another club with his school team - wouldn't he be qualified to at least be able to try out at both clubs? Some things do not make a lot of sense. Thought VJBL was for better level and quality of game not for numbers - seems some clubs have it right.

Isn't Mornington Country?

Curios based on the stats #721 how many of those state players etc. have come through from U12's at that club and how many have moved clubs for a better opportunity? I know of 1 from Frankston who never started there and surely there are others over the past 5yrs or so who never started out at the club but went onto better things?
As I said Mornington's rules have merit but it will fail dismally, happy to be proven wrong.

Mornington Peninsula - I know 4 of them, could be more? Lucky SP didn't place such a rule as Morno, could have really hurt.

At our association we make our rep players play in the domestic comp so it is supported and they are truly representing the association.

So that rep players cannot get together in one team and slaughter everyone else we also incorporate a rule where you can have div 1 and 2 rep players play in a team with 2 of each and we put points on the where div1 is worth 3 and div 2 is worth 2.

That team can only have a max of 10 points so the make up could be 3 div1 and 1 div 2 or two and two or one div1 and 3 div 2 players.

This made our competition so much more competitive and it helped those players who were not rep players to learn from the rep players and in the end we did not lose players because they got sick of getting beaten badly and the rep players team kept winning comps.

Some people did not like it at the start but then once the comps became more even they actually liked the idea.

If players came from outside to play reps for us we ensisted as part of their player agreement that they MUST play local comp.

Player agreements worth nothing, you are talking about juniors who can not sign legal documents and yes I am aware of several clubs that do it.

Morningtons rule is way off centre. You would be hard pushed to find any experienced bball people that agree with this rule and i think that says it all.
It goes against the main aim of junior bball which is to get kids on the court!
Cant understand why you wouldn't want to attract new talent?

Chilled, the reverse of that thinking is ... I can't think why you would not want to be loyal to those who have previously been loyal to you.

I think the move is really interesting. The risk is not that they are doing it, its that no one else is at the same time.

Ho, Morningtons way of thinking was 30+ yrs ago when the Friday night program was run this way through most associations. They soon realised that the areas some of the clubs wouldn't and couldn't grow so taking in players from other local associations helped theirs grow domestically and with rep. Players are not loyal, given an opportunity to play at a higher level or other opportunities they will jump ship. Those that are loyal are players who will be great to have around for juniors to fill up spots of teams that need it but will probably never play senior ball for the club. I agree that the risk is no one else is doing it and no one else will, it is a freedom of choice by the players and parents to go elsewhere. But how do you call yourself a community based club like Mornington does but won't take a local (Mornington based) player if they had played at Frankston to play in for e.g. A VC team, they then decide to leave and wish to play for Breakers. This actually happened with a VC U16 boy from Frankston who enquired into playing this coming VJBL season but due to him not having played the min. 6mths of domestic he was told not to bother turning up; how is that helping your program progress? What if 4-5 players leave like is happening in the U14 girls (2 who were the best in that age), how do you fill their spots? Girls in general are hard to find but this age bracket and on are not easy to find especially with the necessary skills to play rep ball. They took in more than a 14+ girls last year this year will be none, how is that assisting anyone? 3 coaches have walked from the girls side because of this.....not sure I can find any positive except for those that are ordinary rep players who will be guaranteed a spot.

Crazy. I am not going to disagree with much you have said. I also am not saying I agree with anything Mornington have done. I find it interesting. I seek only to put a different point of view - I have tried, unsuccessfully (incredibly unsuccessfully!) in this thread, to get posters to think beyond next week.

There is an interesting discussion here potentially about core business.

I think those who are worried about damage to the VJBL program under these rules think VJBL is core business. It might damage the VJBL program.

It could be argued that Mornington think domestic is core business, and here are laying the long term foundations for success in core business. This rule might do that - it is likely it will.

In Mornington's case it appears domestic basketball is more important than rep. It would certainly be more important if you want to impress local government.

Where I disagree with you is that you call them out on being community based. Your words are interesting. You call them a club. I call them an association. Providing a domestic game of basketball to their community is a far greater priority than providing a rep game. Accepting a kid because he wants to play rep with you but is not actually representing you could actually be setting a higher standard than others do.

Isn't it up to each club to set there own rules? If this is the way Mornington wants to go good luck to them.

If you don't like it, recruit a few people and stand at an AGM and stop posting about it on here!

Chilled....you are on the money
The King dictatorship at mornington has now removed the last few people with any basketball knowledge or background,from the club they have no idea what they are doing and it shows by the ridiculous decisions they are making, if you had attended the recent coaches meeting as i did it was an embarrasment for the committee as their 2 reps running it new nothing and could not answer questions from the floor,
This new rule on no outside players would have to be bordering on discrimination would it not

Hi let me put this to you, a child of 10yrs old decides they wish to play basketball domestically for the first time and join Mornington in June. They decide in September that they wish to tryout for rep but are told that they are ineligible because they have not played the required 6mths, how is that community based? Now this isn't a scenario I made up this is an actual situation and now the child has left basketball and isn't playing because they are embarrassed because their friends are playing and they can't. Place that on a poster and parade it around and see if the community thinks it's being represented.
787 if you had attended the AGM you would of seen it was a joke, those who stood opposed to the regime were crucified by cronies. No one is making you read these, if you don't like it don't read it.
795 does Kilsyth makes its players coming from other clubs play 6 or 12mths of domestic prior to being allowed to tryout? We are not talking about sheep stations, kids move clubs for multiple reasons, issues with kids or coaches, playing time, opportunities, convenience etc. but should kids be stopped from moving when in fact it's normally the parents who choose where their kids will start out playing rep? This rule was brought in because the president used it for his swim school he owned, this is not a basketball decision or a strategic decision this is a decision based on he used it for his business when he was running it.

Crazy, I presume the first part of your response is for me.

I am not saying your example is community based. But being elite (rep) is not about being community based either.

As an Association, not a club, their obligation to the community extends to providing a strong environment in which to play the domestic game. By any standard they have met their community obligation in providing this - it is not a "community obligation" to provide a rep spot!

Different Associations set have standards by which you play rep with them. This Association has set a standard. I am with you, I don't think a brand new basketballer should be turned back because he hasn't played domestic long enough, but at the same time I can understand a ruling for local kids coming into your Association that says "if you are serious about playing for us at rep level, prove it by playing domestic for us first".

Because they are also saying "you are not just going to walk in here and take the place of a player who has been playing in our local comp for the last year".

Seriously - I don't know the Committee or its motives. But I can see some rationale for it from afar. But as I said earlier, the problems they face are these:

- no one else is setting this stance and that will hurt them short term
- it will take 3-4 years to judge the success of a strategy like this and the naysayers will probably wear them down!

Well crazy, if things are as bad as your diatribe of posts make it out to be it should be easy to recruit enough members to vote out their board.

If you cannot get enough numbers then either they majority at Mornington are ok with the current board or cannot be bothered doing anything about it.

My suggestion stop posting on here and go do something about it

Sorry Ho i thought that the thread title was VJBL tryouts without outside players, not are they providing a community service or not. It will fail, it's already failing, the fact is people are afraid to speak out against the hierarchy; anyone who has is being squeezed out, not a rumour or people shooting their mouths off. There are no restrictions on moving associations and your 100% right its an associations call to run it this way and bury themselves. 1 association in the whole of the VJBL is doing it this way; some call it ballsy the others who know basketball are calling it stupid. This will not grow it's domestic program as it's a feeder club not a leader club, they rely on others coming in to replace those better rep players leaving to play at better clubs. How do they replace the 5-6 u14g players leaving their rep and domestic program? Girls especially are hard to replace at this age but by picking up Frankstons, Steelers and Sth Pen players it keeps it all balanced. Fact: they went from 1 x u12, 2 x u14 and 2 x u16 girls teams 2 VJBL seasons ago to 3 x 12, 3 x u14 and 3 x u16 girls teams with an intake of 6 x u12, 5 x u14 and 6 x u16 girls from other associations and all now play domestically there increasing the domestic comp. In last years tryouts they cut 25+ boys from other associations because they didn't need them, they took on over 20+ girls from U12-20. It will fail as they will not be able to replace what they lose to other associations. Seriously and Crazy are right it's going to hurt them big time.

Peninsula. I am going to help you with some things.

Crazy raised the Community Service thing, not me. I just responded to it ok? I think Crazy's views on it are extreme.

I am not emotionally invested in this, you are - I don't know the people involved but you appear to, personally.

I am not endorsing them or what they have done. I have made it clear that the debate is interesting to me.

I can see a rationale but as I acknowledged but I am looking from afar.

You appear to be in the camp of VJBL is the be all and end all of an Association's purpose, good luck to you with that.

HO I can see the rationale here as well and get where you are coming from, but as you also elude too in practical terms there is simply no way it will work unless every other club used the same rules (which they would not). Why would a rep player who is looking to switch clubs ever come to Mornington where they would have to sit out a year of rep just to prove they really want to be at Mornington, simply will not work and I'd be shocked if they kept this up for more than a couple of seasons...

No dog in this fight either btw ;)

Ho ho ho if you insist on continuing to make assumptions about me, I'll advise you only this: assume you will always be wrong.

My son switched from the rep team that is representative of that domestic comp to the rep club he now plays with.

He still plays dom ball with his original domestic club... but now plays rep ball with his current rep club. The new rep club invited him to play domestic there rather than with his original club. Even though he doesn't play dom ball with his new club ( & he's in his 3rd season), he is a welcome addition of this rep club.

Is it just me or are crazy, peninsula and Southern Joe one in the same, with an axe to grind against Mornington.

All becoming a bit boring!

#908 Perfect is very boring and if you happen to have a different look about you, that's a celebration of human nature. If we were all symmetrical and perfect, life would be very dull.
Sorry your not perfect 908, perhaps you have a different look about you? Lol

#919 I agree on so many points placed forward, with your logic programs like Western Port wouldn't exist as most of the domestic is rep players as their domestic program is so small, especially on the girls side where in some cases 4 of the 6 teams are effectively rep players. Perhaps a limit of VJBL teams should placed on a sliding scale based on domestic teams?
Fact is no one will play by these rules; should the Melbourne Tigers be forced to run a domestic program?

Stand alone

#924 They tried to sit down but far to many egos, Western Port, Breakers and Sth Pen. No one wanted to give ground for the greater good of basketball on the Peninsula. Personally think there is 1 too many clubs on the Peninsula, possibly 2 too many. The more I think about it the more it would force clubs like Western Port and Breakers who have fairly weak domestic programs compared to Frankstons to merge or at least join domestic comps if the VJBL set up a sliding scale as to how many teams you could enter based on the size of your domestic comp. This would force clubs to be proactive on the domestic side to get in as many teams as possible and help promote the game. Just an idea.

#945 It would need to be Dandenong size for all 3 but Sth Pen are going OK so I could see some resistance from them; but a Mornington/Western Port one would defiantly work. Both are not great in the VJBL standards which as we all agree is a reflection of the domestic comp, so joining these may not make them a force but it would certainly make the a better community based club, offer a better domestic comp and field better rep teams for this.