U19 U19s - 2014

[Over The Post]

19s is always pretty much impossible to predict. You get a team of top age champions, next year they have moved on and been replaced by kids who are just too old to play U16s. Its how it goes.

 

[demonstrate]

19s is always pretty much impossible to predict. You get a team of top age champions, next year they have moved on and been replaced by kids who are just too old to play U16s. Its how it goes.

Ummmm-And the comments?

 

[Bagman99]

CURRENT LADDER
POS TEAM P W L D B FF FOR AGST % PTS
1 St Bernards 9 8 1 0 0 0 1104 485 227.63 32
2 St Kevins 8 6 2 0 0 1 871 508 171.46 28
3 Old Xaverians 9 6 2 1 0 0 1028 529 194.33 26
4 Beaumaris 9 6 2 1 0 0 888 683 130.01 26
5 Old Scotch 9 4 5 0 0 0 696 747 93.17 16
6 De La Salle 9 2 7 0 0 0 627 821 76.37 8
7 St Bedes / Mentone Tigers 9 1 8 0 0 0 474 966 49.07 4
8 Old Melburnians 8 1 7 0 0 0 269 1270 21.18 4


U19 Premier ladder after 9 rounds…….St Bernard's the clear pacesetter, having demolished St Kevs in the final quarter on Saturday and after having easily accounted for the other 2 contenders, Xavs and Beaumaris.

So, this dominant St Bernard's U19 Prem side - how many of their boys would you think might make the U19 VAFA State team??

ZERO……….what a joke. 49 players, and our strongest U19 Prem team has NIL members selected……..VAFA, you are kidding yourself

 

[Rooster 24]

CURRENT LADDER
POS TEAM P W L D B FF FOR AGST % PTS
1 St Bernards 9 8 1 0 0 0 1104 485 227.63 32
2 St Kevins 8 6 2 0 0 1 871 508 171.46 28
3 Old Xaverians 9 6 2 1 0 0 1028 529 194.33 26
4 Beaumaris 9 6 2 1 0 0 888 683 130.01 26
5 Old Scotch 9 4 5 0 0 0 696 747 93.17 16
6 De La Salle 9 2 7 0 0 0 627 821 76.37 8
7 St Bedes / Mentone Tigers 9 1 8 0 0 0 474 966 49.07 4
8 Old Melburnians 8 1 7 0 0 0 269 1270 21.18 4


U19 Premier ladder after 9 rounds…….St Bernard's the clear pacesetter, having demolished St Kevs in the final quarter on Saturday and after having easily accounted for the other 2 contenders, Xavs and Beaumaris.

So, this dominant St Bernard's U19 Prem side - how many of their boys would you think might make the U19 VAFA State team??

ZERO……….what a joke. 49 players, and our strongest U19 Prem team has NIL members selected……..VAFA, you are kidding yourself

Sorry Bagman but I’m with the VAFA on this one. You will find that the U19 team will be made up entirely of kids who are playing senior football. In fact the selectors generally don’t even bother attending U19 games. They also rely on input from the clubs so it would seem that StB’s have not bothered to nominate any of your current U19 group. And to be fair this is the right call on their part.

The best U19 team I have seen by a fair margin was the De La 2010 version – unbeaten all year and won the GF by a huge margin. No one got near them. However none of them made the rep team and only those playing seniors were selected. Putting aside the last couple of seasons our club had a long period of dominance at U19 Premier level. I can’t recall one kid being selected for the rep team taken straight from the 19s. All were playing senior football.

On the other hand this if your group have been overlooked in preference for other kids drawn straight from U19 teams then I agree this would seem very harsh. Doubt any without senior experience will be there on game day though.

 

[Bagman99]

Sorry Bagman but I’m with the VAFA on this one. You will find that the U19 team will be made up entirely of kids who are playing senior football. In fact the selectors generally don’t even bother attending U19 games. They also rely on input from the clubs so it would seem that StB’s have not bothered to nominate any of your current U19 group. And to be fair this is the right call on their part.

The best U19 team I have seen by a fair margin was the De La 2010 version – unbeaten all year and won the GF by a huge margin. No one got near them. However none of them made the rep team and only those playing seniors were selected. Putting aside the last couple of seasons our club had a long period of dominance at U19 Premier level. I can’t recall one kid being selected for the rep team taken straight from the 19s. All were playing senior football.

On the other hand this if your group have been overlooked in preference for other kids drawn straight from U19 teams then I agree this would seem very harsh. Doubt any without senior experience will be there on game day though.

Thanks Rooster 24. We'll just have to agree to disagree. I don't want to cast aspertions on Div 1 and Div 2 senior footy, but kids selected playing at that level would not be a patch on Bernard's top 3 or 4 at 19 Prem, and I can tell you there are a couple of kids selected in the squad NOT playing senior footy. I do know it's the VAFA policy - I just think it's flawed.

 

[footyack8]

looking in from an outside perspective, very rough treatment there...the VAFA are letting themselves down there with not selecting any from Bernards 19's...by far the standout team in the 19's and it does make selection look like a bit of a joke, taking into consideration it'd be a lot harder for Bernards 19 boys to get a gig in the seniors outfit as well.

 

[Rooster 24]

Thanks Rooster 24. We'll just have to agree to disagree. I don't want to cast aspertions on Div 1 and Div 2 senior footy, but kids selected playing at that level would not be a patch on Bernard's top 3 or 4 at 19 Prem, and I can tell you there are a couple of kids selected in the squad NOT playing senior footy. I do know it's the VAFA policy - I just think it's flawed.

Fair enough and no disrespect to your 19s group intended BM but it is extremely rare for players straight out of the 19s competition to make the final team. And while I don’t agree with everything the VAFA does on this occasions your frustration should be directed at your club as the VAFA call for nominations.
A quick scan of the squad suggests at least 15 – 20 who are Regular ‘A’ & ‘B’ grade senior players. You would expect they would be deserving of selection which does not leave many spots left.

Obviously your 19s are a strong side this year but I’m hearing that the level of competition in 19 Premier this season is not that great and would suggest that it would be harder to get a kick in D1 seniors than 19 Premier this year. However I tend to agree that it might not have hurt to include a few of the better performers from your 19s in the squad at least.

 

[demonstrate]

looking in from an outside perspective, very rough treatment there...the VAFA are letting themselves down there with not selecting any from Bernards 19's...by far the standout team in the 19's and it does make selection look like a bit of a joke, taking into consideration it'd be a lot harder for Bernards 19 boys to get a gig in the seniors outfit as well.

Thanks Rooster 24. We'll just have to agree to disagree. I don't want to cast aspertions on Div 1 and Div 2 senior footy, but kids selected playing at that level would not be a patch on Bernard's top 3 or 4 at 19 Prem, and I can tell you there are a couple of kids selected in the squad NOT playing senior footy. I do know it's the VAFA policy - I just think it's flawed.

Have been sitting on this for a few weeks waiting to see a few of the young blokes play in the lower divisions.Fair dinkum H.R. PuffnStuff could get a kick! To suggest that placement of so called deserved selections and its a harder gig at senior d1 than at 19 prem level seems a bit harsh. The inclusion of players in any comps rep squad is albeit a bit tainted at times, and has been for years,but keen observers agree most are eventually found out .U/Age rep squads literally read a where are they now,its probably not a bad thing that the boys from St Bernards are given the chance to establish themselves at club level before being given a free ride,just to see their name in lights.Before the backlash from others begins YES most existing boys in the squad are worthy of inclusion/consideration,some are NOT and some that havn't even been looked at are also worthy of consideration at least.I could list another 50 odd Kids playing u19"s at the moment who are yet to play a senior game at any level whom potentially are as good if not better chances of being good,and some, really good footballers in the future.No I do not agree with the selection/nomination of the existing V.A.F.A. selection process, but compared to other comps it has a good success ratio of w/L purely I expect based on numbers of kids to choose from.Yes I do agree that in the future enough selectors and credentialed personnel could be assembled to gauge an independent assessment/nomination of rep teams but I suspect that would not fit well with most clubs nor the hierarchy in command at head office.Resources of non affiliated people are hard to find,especially when about a thousand eligible u19 kids participate every weekend across 20 odd venues and 50 odd venues if you have to attend senior matches to validate those playing senior games as well.All this in 10 weeks is a massive task ! but maybe a solution is clubs send 3or 4 players(max) not already playing seniors to suitable geographic zones pre season and for the first 6 or 7 weeks of the year.That way if any have slipped the attention of selectors they at least are considered for inclusion into the traditional squad.

 

[Bagman99]

Have been sitting on this for a few weeks waiting to see a few of the young blokes play in the lower divisions.Fair dinkum H.R. PuffnStuff could get a kick! To suggest that placement of so called deserved selections and its a harder gig at senior d1 than at 19 prem level seems a bit harsh. The inclusion of players in any comps rep squad is albeit a bit tainted at times, and has been for years,but keen observers agree most are eventually found out .U/Age rep squads literally read a where are they now,its probably not a bad thing that the boys from St Bernards are given the chance to establish themselves at club level before being given a free ride,just to see their name in lights.Before the backlash from others begins YES most existing boys in the squad are worthy of inclusion/consideration,some are NOT and some that havn't even been looked at are also worthy of consideration at least.I could list another 50 odd Kids playing u19"s at the moment who are yet to play a senior game at any level whom potentially are as good if not better chances of being good,and some, really good footballers in the future.No I do not agree with the selection/nomination of the existing V.A.F.A. selection process, but compared to other comps it has a good success ratio of w/L purely I expect based on numbers of kids to choose from.Yes I do agree that in the future enough selectors and credentialed personnel could be assembled to gauge an independent assessment/nomination of rep teams but I suspect that would not fit well with most clubs nor the hierarchy in command at head office.Resources of non affiliated people are hard to find,especially when about a thousand eligible u19 kids participate every weekend across 20 odd venues and 50 odd venues if you have to attend senior matches to validate those playing senior games as well.All this in 10 weeks is a massive task ! but maybe a solution is clubs send 3or 4 players(max) not already playing seniors to suitable geographic zones pre season and for the first 6 or 7 weeks of the year.That way if any have slipped the attention of selectors they at least are considered for inclusion into the traditional squad.

I think that is a fair and considered response Rooster….and to be fair to the VAFA, they do have a lot of kids/teams to cover and their approach for the game against Vic Country is to pick guys they know regularly stand up to the rigours of playing against bigger bodied opponents - as they will experience against Vic Country…..but I still shake my head at the ladder leading and dominant (thus far at least) team in the U19 Premier competition not having a single representative; that's all.

 

[Rooster 24]

I think that is a fair and considered response Rooster….and to be fair to the VAFA, they do have a lot of kids/teams to cover and their approach for the game against Vic Country is to pick guys they know regularly stand up to the rigours of playing against bigger bodied opponents - as they will experience against Vic Country…..but I still shake my head at the ladder leading and dominant (thus far at least) team in the U19 Premier competition not having a single representative; that's all.

Rarely am I an apologist for the VAFA but again I point out that clubs are asked to nominate players which overcomes the impossible task of watching every senior and U19 game across the weekend. If your club did not see fit to put up anyone from your current U19 Premier team then you should take it up with your club. One of St Bernard’s most respected clubmen is heavily involved in VAFA rep team selection and has been for years. He is astute judge and knows that the gulf between Premier seniors and Premier 19s is vast. I remember in recent seasons Caven, Sullivan Overman and others playing U19s rep footy but they were already established senior players.

We could go round and round and circles here. I respect your opinion but when the final team is announced I’m pretty sure that you will find that it will be made up of regular ‘A’ & ‘B’grade senior players with maybe a handful from the divisional grades. I expect 2 from our club to make the team – both are well performed and entrenched ‘A’ grade senior players. Even when our club was dominating U19 football we did not get players chosen from the 19 grades and nor should we.

 

[Bagman99]

Rarely am I an apologist for the VAFA but again I point out that clubs are asked to nominate players which overcomes the impossible task of watching every senior and U19 game across the weekend. If your club did not see fit to put up anyone from your current U19 Premier team then you should take it up with your club. One of St Bernard’s most respected clubmen is heavily involved in VAFA rep team selection and has been for years. He is astute judge and knows that the gulf between Premier seniors and Premier 19s is vast. I remember in recent seasons Caven, Sullivan Overman and others playing U19s rep footy but they were already established senior players.

We could go round and round and circles here. I respect your opinion but when the final team is announced I’m pretty sure that you will find that it will be made up of regular ‘A’ & ‘B’grade senior players with maybe a handful from the divisional grades. I expect 2 from our club to make the team – both are well performed and entrenched ‘A’ grade senior players. Even when our club was dominating U19 football we did not get players chosen from the 19 grades and nor should we.

Bernards actually not my club…..just an interested observer. I take your point and am sure you are on the money.

 

[Rooster 24]

Bernards actually not my club…..just an interested observer. I take your point and am sure you are on the money.

Thanks Bagman. Assumed from previous posts you followed the Snowdogs. You seem to have a good understanding of how things going at the pit. They are flying at the moment across all teams and would be a good time to be a St Bernards supporter.

 

[Rissoles]

I think its interesting to note that AFL VIC Country cite in their rules that under age players are as the 1st January in the year concerned. This means that all AFL VIC Country U19 players will be a maximum age of 19.
The ridiculous VAFA rules state that U19 players must be born on or after 1 July 1994. That means a player can be 20yo on 1 July and still play U19. Moreover, the VAFA allow a team to play up to 4 players in their team who are born on or after 31 December 1993.
I sincerely hope the VAFA are not going to play 20 year olds against 19 year olds and think that is OK.

 

[Over The Post]

I sincerely hope the VAFA are not going to play 20 year olds against 19 year olds and think that is OK.

Make that 17 year olds and you have the "colts" comp...

 

[Rooster 24]

I think its interesting to note that AFL VIC Country cite in their rules that under age players are as the 1st January in the year concerned. This means that all AFL VIC Country U19 players will be a maximum age of 19.
The ridiculous VAFA rules state that U19 players must be born on or after 1 July 1994. That means a player can be 20yo on 1 July and still play U19. Moreover, the VAFA allow a team to play up to 4 players in their team who are born on or after 31 December 1993.
I sincerely hope the VAFA are not going to play 20 year olds against 19 year olds and think that is OK.

While I agree that allowing 20 years olds to play in an U19 competition is ridiculous it is my understanding that both VAFA and Vic Country teams are allowed to select 19.5s if they wish.

Several other metro comps that I know of also allow unlimited U19.5’s but to the best of my knowledge they do not allow U20s.

 

[Rissoles]

Thanks, Rooster. Has anyone asked this sensible question before? Surely the VAFA doesn't play 20 year old in an interleague competition against 19 year olds?? Be that as it may, VAFA remain the only competition that has a ridiculous and inexplicable age definition for under age competitions. Why hasn't ever been questioned? The VAFA do not have a factual U18 or U19 competition. Why do they call it such?

 

[Rooster 24]

Thanks, Rooster. Has anyone asked this sensible question before? Surely the VAFA doesn't play 20 year old in an interleague competition against 19 year olds?? Be that as it may, VAFA remain the only competition that has a ridiculous and inexplicable age definition for under age competitions. Why hasn't ever been questioned? The VAFA do not have a factual U18 or U19 competition. Why do they call it such?

In regard to the rep games there are same rules /eligibility criteria for both teams and the U20s cannot play.

In regard to the ridiculous U20 rule introduced last year it has been questioned with vigor by many clubs however the VAFA board for some inexplicable reason seem to think it was a good idea.

 

[demonstrate]

Thanks, Rooster. Has anyone asked this sensible question before? Surely the VAFA doesn't play 20 year old in an interleague competition against 19 year olds?? Be that as it may, VAFA remain the only competition that has a ridiculous and inexplicable age definition for under age competitions. Why hasn't ever been questioned? The VAFA do not have a factual U18 or U19 competition. Why do they call it such?

The age rules for both team selections for this game are exactly the same is my understanding.V.C.F.L. have published the final squad already and a quick look sees a number of boys(i suspect) who will turn 20 before the end of this year.Every year this same old chestnut gets thrown up--- call it what you like as long as the qualifying criteria is the same whats it matter? Yep its possible to have a player 20 yrs and 2 wks old play this week end.

 

[Rissoles]

The age rules for both team selections for this game are exactly the same is my understanding.V.C.F.L. have published the final squad already and a quick look sees a number of boys(i suspect) who will turn 20 before the end of this year.Every year this same old chestnut gets thrown up--- call it what you like as long as the qualifying criteria is the same whats it matter? Yep its possible to have a player 20 yrs and 2 wks old play this week end.

This 'old chestnut', Demonstrate? It is not possible but highly probable that 20 year olds are playing against 19 year olds! How is that remotely fair??
I really wonder if the AFL VIC Country have ever questioned it. After all, they are playing another U19 team.
What a great way to represent the VAFA - we'll play 20 year olds against your 19 year olds and beat them!
I know why the VAFA has maintained their ridiculous and appalling stance on under age football - to placate the private school group who have dominated the power of the VAFA.
Why should we be the only under age competition in Australia that calls our under age football an entirely different (and wrong) age to others?

 

[demonstrate]

This 'old chestnut', Demonstrate? It is not possible but highly probable that 20 year olds are playing against 19 year olds! How is that remotely fair??
I really wonder if the AFL VIC Country have ever questioned it. After all, they are playing another U19 team.
What a great way to represent the VAFA - we'll play 20 year olds against your 19 year olds and beat them!
I know why the VAFA has maintained their ridiculous and appalling stance on under age football - to placate the private school group who have dominated the power of the VAFA.
Why should we be the only under age competition in Australia that calls our under age football an entirely different (and wrong) age to others?

I see your point of view,but please check previous posts and the content of fair for both sides.Then take a little nap.

 

[Rissoles]

All I want are the facts, Demonstrate. We shall hopefully see.

 

[demonstrate]

All I want are the facts, Demonstrate. We shall hopefully see.

Good Morning Rssoles,
It is highly probable that after a good nap, the capacity to comprehend any facts may have returned-hopefullly. Or not?

 

[Rooster 24]

All I want are the facts, Demonstrate. We shall hopefully see.

Rissoles essentially we are on the same side here. I thought my responses were adequate but they don’t seem to have hit the mark so I’ll try again.

The VAFA v Vic Country eligibility criteria is exactly the same for both – i.e. players born on or after 1 July 1994 can be selected.

Right or wrong the VAFA is not the only competition with compromised U19 age eligibility criteria. In fact it seems to be a trend adopted across many leagues and now includes several U17 and U18 comps with age cut offs on 1 July instead of 1 January. I’m not saying that is a good thing, just that it exists, even in some country U18 leagues.

And the 4 x U20 players has absolutely nothing to do with old school boys clubs – in fact the contrary is true. The idea was initially proposed by a fairly strong district club who floated the idea to the VAFA board after struggling to field competitive U19 teams in 2011. Despite having little or no support and doing very little by way canvassing VAFA clubs it was introduced anyway. Also the U20 rule does not apply in Premier 19s so it has less bearing on the stronger school based clubs anyway.

 

[demonstrate]

Rissoles essentially we are on the same side here. I thought my responses were adequate but they don’t seem to have hit the mark so I’ll try again.

The VAFA v Vic Country eligibility criteria is exactly the same for both – i.e. players born on or after 1 July 1994 can be selected.

Right or wrong the VAFA is not the only competition with compromised U19 age eligibility criteria. In fact it seems to be a trend adopted across many leagues and now includes several U17 and U18 comps with age cut offs on 1 July instead of 1 January. I’m not saying that is a good thing, just that it exists, even in some country U18 leagues.

And the 4 x U20 players has absolutely nothing to do with old school boys clubs – in fact the contrary is true. The idea was initially proposed by a fairly strong district club who floated the idea to the VAFA board after struggling to field competitive U19 teams in 2011. Despite having little or no support and doing very little by way canvassing VAFA clubs it was introduced anyway. Also the U20 rule does not apply in Premier 19s so it has less bearing on the stronger school based clubs anyway.

Can you elaborate as to why you feel that the integrity of any competition is in your words "compromised" by eligible cut of dates being July as opposed to January.

 

[Rooster 24]

Can you elaborate as to why you feel that the integrity of any competition is in your words "compromised" by eligible cut of dates being July as opposed to January.

Quite simply it is compromised because you allow 20 year olds to play in an U19 competition. If that’s the age eligibility criteria then no drama but don’t call it under U19s. While I can maybe cop 19.5s I cannot understand how you can allow U20s.