National League structure [Archive]

Meridian

04-06-2003, 10:44 AM

Hi Paddy,
I must admit paddy thats quiet a Gem.
I have attended many of the competions in Div4 this year both in the central and SE Divisons and their would definetly be a benefit from what I have seen of splitting taking one or two extra teams out of these divisions.
I would suggest that if you were to to form this divison from the teams that went to playoffs and didn't get promoted and then look at each of the teams that finished 3rd in their respective divisions and have each of them put their case forward for why they shoul be given 1 of the remaining 4 slots. I would suggest quite strongly that the team that finished 3rd in central Div4 should be considered as both of the div4 central teams that went to play offs got promoted to Div3 and without wishing to sound to confident I will be joing that team this season and I would suggest that would strengthen them further.
I will try and draw the attention of the polo committee to your suggestion and see if we get anywhere.
regards
Mark

ps I am willing to put my money where my mouth is and help this possible iniative by providing from my club the league organiser for this new Division if the polo committee were to support your idea

Paddy W

04-06-2003, 11:05 AM

Mark

I was going to e-mail the Polo committe about this. But I have not had much response (positive or negative) on this forum about it.
You only have to look at Div 4 results too see that the range of ability is diverse with top teams in each Div 4 being at Div 3 ish
standard. I know having played in both leagues. I have also
volunteered to run Div 4 SE next season if we (clapham) are still
in it, which looks likely unless a team in higher league drops out.

Glad you agree anyway!

Anyone think its a bad idea??

Paddy

Meridian

04-06-2003, 11:12 AM

over recent years new div4s have been created so maybe its time a new div3 was created....
just a thought

clyde

04-06-2003, 01:40 PM

Can I suggest you contact the polo committee soon before they all resign at the AGM.

Still, if no one takes on the positions that will be vacant (pretty much all of them), then you wont need to worry about the National Leagues.

Clyde

Paddy W

04-06-2003, 01:56 PM

Paul,

I have just sent out an e-mail to all Div 4 teams that attended the play-offs and also the polo committee outlining the idea.
I realise that they do a hard job , but believe the change
would not be a big one, (i.e. replace Div 4 central with Div 3 central). Both Mark & myself have volunteered to help out in running leagues.

Here is hwat I suggested:-

How could this operate:-

1) at end of next season (2003/04) DIV 4 Central is replaced by Div 3 central.
No change to pool bookings are needed. Top 2 teams from all DIV 4 leagues, (10 in total), are automatically promoted to DIV 3 next season (2003/04). No teams are demoted from Div 3 next season (2003/04). The 30 teams in new Div 3 (2004/05) could ask or be put put in whichever league is closest geographically.

Play offs (2004/05 onwards):- 6 top teams in new Div 3 leagues play off for 2 places going to Div 2. Two Div 2 teams demoted to Div 3 (S,N,Central according to geographical location & space).
8 top Div 4(SE,SW,NA,NB)teams play off for 6 places in Div 3. Bottom 2 from each Div 3 demoted.

2) alternatively this could be implemented for next season (2003/04) rather than waiting for 2004/05 season although I can see this may present problems as this would be fairly short notice.

Paddy

bradmac

05-06-2003, 12:29 PM

Being from one of the teams that came third i have to say i agree with Paddy. The playoffs in our pool on playoff night were close but most of the div 4 league games werent

Brad (Battersea)

Paddy W

05-06-2003, 01:03 PM

Have also had very positive response from Blakedown.

Recieved an e-mail from Shirely Pell (current National leagues organiser), who also thinks the idea is worth putting forward to the committe at next meeting . Hopefully it will get approved!

the more positive responses I get either on this forum or via email the better. I will pass them onto the polo committe before their next meeting.

If you think it's a bad idea then also post your objections on this forum - I am sure some committee members read some of these posts.

Mark H

05-06-2003, 03:00 PM

I think this is the idea of the decade!
I think the standard of div 4 is very varied and the standard between the div 4's throughout the country is also very inbalanced. I think a new div 3 will balance the standards alowing up and coming teams to progress. It will also sort out the issue of travelling as a div 3 central will allow paddlers from the centre of the country an option closer than 100 od miles away!

cheers

Mark (blakedown) :thumbup:

Mark H

05-06-2003, 04:08 PM

All,
I have just re read through the history and looked at what Meridian was saying about the team that finished 3rd in central divison the team played at the national championships with Mark and finished as the highest placed Div4 team. They had a very close game against the Div2 side from Viking loosing by only one goal.
There team is made up of a mixture of two GB U21's players and two players who should be considered amonst the top U18's, As well as Mark Preddy (Meridian) who has played Div1 Recently for many seasons.
Whilst I realise this team is young I think this team would benefit from the higher level of competion and could if they continue to develop at the rate they are be potential contenders for playoffs to div 2 at the end of the season hopefully alongside blakedown of course.
Meridian seems to be developing a strong development programme and I think any help that the league system can give when asked should be given.
I think if this new Division is created it will help strengthen the league structre and help more teams to develop and possible help accelerate more teams to the top of our sport.
Mark H

Meridian

05-06-2003, 05:10 PM

Thanks Mark, It nice to see that other people look outside of their own club once in a while. I will be honest and say that whilst your email was quite flattering. anyway moving on swiftly. Currently the standard of the top of Div1 is rising but the number of teams competing at that top level is falling rapidly and it is becoming increasingly hard for some of the established teams to mantain themselves due to them not having a strong club structure behind them a problem that I believe has resulted in the scotish teams merging and Humbersiders now almost certainly not re entering the league if the grapevine is to be believed. FOA the current league and National champions have for my mind got it right they have an excellent youth development policy and strong organised club coaching session as well as a lot of experience to draw from. Mark once again if the Grapevine is to be believed Your club is copying this format your club has several teams and you have people that are willing to put time into develop your young players. from reading the forum and talking to people I understand that now Andy Davis is also helping to develop players at your club so it sounds like you have a real team effort going there and if you get the grass roots right then there is no reason why in time Blakedown could become one of the top clubs in the country. What I am trying to say is that the league needs to support clubs like Blakedown, Meridian, FOA and possibly Viking too who are trying to develop their young players and move them through the divisions. The league system should work like a pyramid allowing teams to move through it when they are good enough at the moment I feel that whilst the Base (div4) is good the next level Div3 needs to be broader to allow more teams the chance to compete at a suitable level.

cheers
Mark
Meridian

Unregistered

05-06-2003, 06:02 PM

Mark

Along with all the others I fully support Paddy in his idea to create a new Div 3 Central, what I would not do is drop a Div 4 off the back as these are good feeder leagues.

One question based on an observation from the Nationals, how do you get such strong parental support? we, as you know are linked to a Scout Group and yet struggle to get the help we need.

On a more positive note we are moving forward, 4 teams and a permanent training facility with two pitches. what polo needs are more clubs like yours with a strong youth policy, only then will we get a better feed from below.

What can we do to help get this league going?

Nigel

Paddy W

06-06-2003, 10:18 AM

Have received an e-mail from Nicola from Green Star, (who got promoted a the playoffs, also supporting this idea, and another committe memeber (Nic) saying it will get put forward at next meeting on 21st June.

Nigel - the reason I suggest replacing Div 4 central by Div4 central
is that I am assuming that roughly same number of teams enter the league each year. To add a new league would need another 8-10 teams.

another thought for the committee is that there would be no need for a Div 4 play offs next season. (thereby saving on pool booking etc)

The basic idea is a long term adjustment so that teams play in a league with teams of similar standard.

at end of last Div4 SE the winning team had a goal difference of +73 and bottom placed team had a GD of -66!!!

I am sure the same applies to most of the other Div 4 leagues. Not much fun for the new teams trying to get established in the leagues and not very challenging teams at top of the league!

mark19843

06-06-2003, 11:44 AM

Just to give your idea further backing. The organisers had to turn teams away from Div 4 SW last year. We know that at least 1 new team wants to enter and we're faced with no teams going up from Div 4 SW and 2 teams coming down to us from Div 3 south. It looks as if we may have 15-17 teams wanting to play in Div 4 SW next season!

Unregistered

09-06-2003, 09:27 AM

Have received more support for this idea from West Lothian via e-mail:-

'Hi,
Have discussed this with the team and we agree that this sounds like a good
idea

Paul Smith
West Lothian'

Pointy

09-06-2003, 01:00 PM

I'm in total agreement with Paddy's idea.

At the moment Div4 N is certainly not a entry level league - the difference between the top teams and bottoms teams is very apparent - scorelines of 10-0 are possible.

My team (White Rose B) has made it to the playoffs for the last 2 years only to fail at the final hurdle (next time we'll bring our goalie !).

Speaking for us, being in a higher standard league will improve our polo rather than the varied standard of games we get at present.

I think it speaks for itself that many of the teams promoted from Div4N to Div3 have then quickly gone on to either get promoted to Div2 (eg Selkirk, Matlock B) or contest the top positions in Div3
(White Rose A) etc.

The fact that there are now 2 Div4 N's now (A+B) also shows that the league structure perhaps needs some reshaping.

Unregistered

09-06-2003, 07:20 PM

Paddy what you have proposed is a good idea!

I think that the best way forward is laid out lower down in your posts:

1) at end of next season (2003/04) DIV 4 Central is replaced by Div 3 central.
No change to pool bookings are needed. Top 2 teams from all DIV 4 leagues, (10 in total), are automatically promoted to DIV 3 next season (2003/04). No teams are demoted from Div 3 next season (2003/04). The 30 teams in new Div 3 (2004/05) could ask or be put put in whichever league is closest geographically.

Play offs (2004/05 onwards):- 6 top teams in new Div 3 leagues play off for 2 places going to Div 2. Two Div 2 teams demoted to Div 3 (S,N,Central according to geographical location & space).
8 top Div 4(SE,SW,NA,NB)teams play off for 6 places in Div 3. Bottom 2 from each Div 3 demoted.

2) alternatively this could be implemented for next season (2003/04) rather than waiting for 2004/05 season although I can see this may present problems as this would be fairly short notice.

lets not mess about with the political nightmare that will come about with teams putting forward with their case as to why they should be allowed a place in div3 even though they came 3rd in div4. get there on merit, okay it will take another year but it will give you time to gel better as a team.

Dragon are an example of a team who have worked their way to the top on merit lets keep it like that.

I have one point to make, and that is about promotion from div 4 to div 3 there is going to be a lot of movement here 8 teams playing for 6 places. which could make the playoff's a bit of a nightmare. what is going to happen when a lot of the teams are tying? goal shootout, more matches etc.

Is it better for maybe just the bottom team from each Div 3 to be relegated then the 8 Div 4's play for 3 places. which then makes it more of a competition to get promotion.

Unregistered

09-06-2003, 07:26 PM

I guess i should have added this to the previous post!

It is the question that no-one will be able to answer but are the 10 top div 4 teams good enough to play in Div 3?

We should be careful not to create the same situation between Div 1 and 2 where the bottom team from Div 1 comes down into Div 2 only to go up to Div 1 again the following year.

Unregistered

09-06-2003, 08:07 PM

Good question, Pointy mentioned that teams have done we in div 3 north after promotion but I think I'm right in saying that In Div3 south this session both celtic dragon and bristol have struggled and been religated, despite managing to beat 6 div4 teams to earn their place the session before.

Having 3 div3 would just move the problem up to the div2 playoff, with 6 teams fighting for 2 places.

Not sure what the solution is, div 5?

Paddy W

10-06-2003, 10:01 AM

A couple of points

1) Only 1 team demoted from each Div 3 and 8 teams play off for 3 places rather than 6 as I suggested. Yes maybe better

2) Do I think the top teams in Div 4 are good enough to play in Div 3 - Yes. Why ? Look at the results. The top teams in Div 4 get
scorelines like 10-0. The bottom end of Div 3 teams only lose by
narrow margins (e.g. one or two goals) .

THe whole point of this idea is to even up the spread of ability in the leagues. OK it might slightly dilute DIV 3, (but not by much), & it would improve Div 4 greatly.

For example Clapham have competed successfully for 5 years in Div 3 south. In our last season we went to two competions with only 4 players - hence demotion.Last two years we have easily won DIV 4 SE but very narrowly missed out at the play-offs. So I know what the standard is like in both leagues. I would rather play in Div 3 and lose every game narrowly than compete in Div 4 again expecting to win allmost every game by a large margin.

For a team like Tandridge who have competed in Div 4 SE for last 2 seasons and lost the majority of their games by high scorelines
it must be putting off and they may be discouraged from re-entering the league.

3) Another idea re: Play Offs. Instead of automatic demotion why
not have bottom teams in a league attending the play-offs along with the top teams from the lower league. That way you won't get teams getting promoted one season then demoted again the following season??

PS : who are you 'unregistrered' ? and what club are you in?

claire

10-06-2003, 10:27 AM

What a top quality thought! Have just scrolled thru all the replies and there are some really good ideas here.

It'll mean that the committee has to bite the bullet and take this on board...and it'll mean a quick turn around with communicating with the teams involved..however I think it'll be much better for the sport

I've played in Div 4 for a number of seasons and watched teams yo-yo back and forth...and subsequently give new/inexperienced teams a good kicking (v. demoralising)

Can you think of a way to sort the ladies too???

Have you thought about becoming a committee member??

Claire

Paddy W

10-06-2003, 10:58 AM

Claire

Have no desire to be a committe member.
I think the existing committee do a good job.
Don't know much about the Ladies league so can't really suggest anything. Have you any ideas?

Paddy

Meridian

10-06-2003, 02:23 PM

Guest and all Thanks for your thoughts Guest shame you didn't take the time to register and then this wouldn't seem quite so impersonal. In the past the BCU polo committee has allowed new teams (teams that have become much stronger between seasons) to enter at a higher level (Wimps former national champions) would be one example of this. If Woodmill were to re enter the league would you really want them to have to start from Div4 and work there way up. I understand from talking to players who had to play against Dragon when they were making there way through the divisions that teams effectively regarded that they were destined to loose their two games against Dragon at the start of the season. When Dragon gained Clyde and Lee from Meridian there were no places available higher up in the league system. So if the team had wished to request a higher entry in the league system it would have not been possible, this is not the case now. In Addition as mentioned in the previous posts many of the leagues was oversubscribed last year and with our sport still expanding this is bound to be the case again this year. I am actually pushing for the creation of two new divisions a new Div4 SE (B) and a new Div3 Central. What’s more I am willing to put my resources time where my mouth is. I will provide the time to run both of these new divisions the result being that Div4 teams will not be forced to travel from south London to Derby and possibly further in some cases regards Mark

Unregistered

10-06-2003, 03:47 PM

Sorry about posting as unregistered but i just can't quite bring myself to click on the agree button!

by the way the two posts titled 'good idea' and 'oops' are mine.

I am Steve who is currently organising National Div 4 South west. I play for Avon at Div 3 level.

I am not trying to stand in the way of what you are suggesting, just trying to look at it from a different perspective and maybe get all of the issue's ironed out before it's taken to Polo committee. If everything is sorted in advance we will be able to get it through a lot easier.

=============================================

In response to Mark from meridian, where are these extra spaces in the higher league for the 3rd placed Div 4 team? the way I look at it if next year we take the top two teams from all the Div 4's and create another Div 3 that's 10 teams and a full league, the other two Div 3's have already got 10 teams in each, Div 2 is full so is Div 1 - Also in every other sport teams have to work their way through leagues, why do we have to be different?

Also in the south west Div 4 any of the top placed teams Aberfan,Bath,Blakedown and Pembrokeshire would all be capable of holding their own at Div 3. I think you will pretty much find a 3rd placed team in every Div 4 who are cabable of playing at a higher level.

Good on you for putting yourself forward to be a league organiser it's a lot of work for sometimes little credit. I don't even play in the league that I organise yet still make an attempt to attend all of the tournament dates. Oh and I am still waiting for the £50 towards running the league!

Why not take your creating another Div 4 idea and change paddy's idea a bit? IE:

Keep 5 Division 4's and add in another Div 3, promote the top two teams from the existing Div 4's which would then create space for 10 new teams across the country? If everyone's league's are over subscribed this has to be the way forward. plus it would also make the Div4 to Div 3 jump a little harder - 10 teams chasing 6 places.
==============================================

Paddy - With regards to my are they good enough question I just wanted to gauge opinion.

"I would rather play in Div 3 and lose every game narrowly than compete in Div 4 again expecting to win allmost every game by a large margin."

If this was the case then surely you will end up in Div 4 the following year?

With regards to the Tanridge team would it not be better for them to play in a regional league? we have just re-organised the south west league's from Div1 south west and Invitational to Div1,Div2 and Div3 the whole idea being that teams who may not be quite good enough to play in National Div 4 can get a level of game more suited to them then build up to being able to enter at Div 4 level when they are good enough. Thus no need to create a national Div 5 or more Div 4's.

Also it means that these teams don't have to travel stupid distances to play polo.

By the way I am all for a Div 3 central as hopefully it means that I won't have to leave bristol at 12:00 on a saturday lunchtime and get back at 2:00 am in the morning on sunday, all our games are played in Luton which is a real pain in the butt to get to. Coventry or Derby would be a lot better.

Paddy W

10-06-2003, 04:21 PM

This is getting a bit complicated if you add another Div 4.

Most people seem to agree with my original idea of just replacing
Div 4 central with Div 3 central. It's simple and would be easy to implement at end of next season.

If you created an additional Div 4 this coming season 2003/04 then it makes it harder to create the new Div 3 central next year
because you then have 6 Div 4 s this season and 12 top 2 placed
teams to get promoted to the new Div 3. 12 teams play- off for 10 places ?? You also have problem of finding an extra pool and booking it for the 6 new Div 4 league dates.

Could you just go ahead and create a new Div 3 central next season without having told everyone about it at beginning of last season? It might upset a few people.

Tandridge are good enough to play in Div 4 and I assume a lot of the new teams wanting to enter Div 4 would be of similar standard. Thats the whole point of getting the top Div 4 teams into a new Div 3 Central league.

re: my comments about losing games. I obviously want to win any game I play in but just want to play against teams of similar ability.

I am not too keen of teams jumping leagues unless they are all
(Div 1 & 2 standard), even then Dragon and Luton Old Boys worked their way up the leagues.

I am all for more teams entering the league

Unregistered

10-06-2003, 05:10 PM

Steve Again,

Paddy I think I might have confused you :-( sorry.

my outline is just to add another Div 3 at the end of the 2003/4 season (generating Div3 North, South and Central.), promote the top two from the 5 Div 4 leagues which then allows another 10 teams to enter at the lowest level (Div 4), and maintain the current 5 Div 4's.

If you replace a Div 4 with a Div 3 no more new teams will be able to enter the league's as the remaining 8 teams that were in Div 4 Central (for example) will have to be found places in the remaining four Div 4 leagues. (which will have 8 spaces between them because of the promotion of the top two teams.)

Mark from meridian was suggesting another Div 4 (SE +B) thus creating 6 Div 4's which I am not so sure about.

Meridian

10-06-2003, 10:23 PM

Hi Steve and Paddy and Anyone else who is reading this rather popular thread,

Its a lot easier to address you now I know who you are and where you are coming from.

it would be a lot easier if you registered on this site then I could contact you privately but no matter if you would be willing to talk with me Clyde has my contact details and will pass them to you or pass yours to mine. As I feel that we would both like the best for our sport.

Places Available in the league system

Steve I take it you are unaware at the start of this season Woodmill dropped out of the league but at a very late stage forcing Division 1 to play with 9 teams. Further more Humbersiders have not and are currently not planning on re entering the league if rumors are to be believed which frees up at least two slots in the league system
I have also heard rumors that they may not be the only team not re entering the league system this year.
So even if these two slots in the league system are freed up then an element of shuffling is possible.

Comparing our sport to others

Steve our sport is unlike many that you may choose as a comparison. We are an amateur sport but there are some teams that take an almost professional approach to the sport. There are many canoe polo players in this country that train everyday some even twice a day. And due to the Diversity of facilities available to different clubs the rate at which development is possible is dramatic. My team follows the similar training patterns to my previous Division 1 side, we train with the Div1 side twice a week as well as training independent of them a further 5 times.

This year will take part in at least 15 International competitions this summer and as a result of this I feel I will be fully amalgamated with my team and the team, as a whole will be a lot stronger.

No of teams wishing to play in the league system

Steve earlier on this thread mark19843 said that 15-17 teams would be looking to enter Div4 SW. I know in addition to that Div 4 SE always has at least that many teams requesting to play in it. Our own club is looking to double its number of Div4 teams from 2 – 4 due to the number of Div4 level players. Caused by a successful youth development initiative. I know that many of the clubs up and down the country are moving forwarding the same way as ourselves.

Put myself forward to run a league I don’t think that quite what I said

If you ask Shirley Pell or Gerry McCusker who both know me very well as do most of the senior polo committee members, to read what I wrote on my last post. They would tell you that I didn’t actually say I would run the league merely that I would provide the resource required. Which is what I did for Youth Div 2 south so as that would be able to happen.

Reason for having 6 Div4’s and 3 Div3’s but keeping only 1 Div2 and only 1 Div1

At the moment our sport is doing two things as a whole it is growing rapidly. The sad truth however is that at the top level the sport is suffering possibly even in decline. I have spoken with many experienced Div1 players from all the top clubs and they all have concluded that the Div1s just aren’t as competitive or as higher standard as they used to be whilst inDividuals are improving the general standard just isn’t as high as it used to be.
However some clubs have already reacted to this and are working together, via the Joint U18s initiative and U21’s squad, like Meridian, Blakedown, Greenstar, Viking and of course the pack leader FOA to bring on new young players. Who will in the future be potential Div1 players due to the quality and Structured coaching and the training facilities available to them. Following on from this some of the other older clubs are starting to address the lack of young talented players available to their senior teams such as Bereforest.
Currently due to the league requiring more Div4s we have caused a bottleneck to develop between Div 4 and Div 3 and this will hold up the potential development of these players hence the call for an extra Div 3. Further more while teams are at Div 3 and Div 4 standard they don’t all have the commitment of their Div 2 and Div 1 counterparts and hence keeping travelling time down will also be a benefit. Having 6 Div4’s based on geography feeding three geographically based Div3s will mean that playoffs could be held as 6 team tournaments with the teams coming from: two from each of the div4s and the bottom two teams from Div3 thus maintaining the standard of Div 3.
Surely it is better to maintain the level of Div3 rather than just simply make it harder to get promoted.
The league system should be like a pyramid, which allows you to move up and down freely when the time is right. If a team is removed then the system should be able to survive without that team until a suitable team is found to take their place at the end of the season.

regards
Mark

Nigel Elwell

11-06-2003, 12:59 PM

If its not a silly question where do we go from here? We at Blakedown would support any move to create another Div3 and we have two good venues in Dudley and Stratford that are available for polo.

Nigel

Paddy W

23-06-2003, 04:07 PM

Here is response from Shirley Pell as to what happened when this idea was discussed at Polo committee meeting last weekend:-

'Yes your suggestions were discussed at the meeting. It was decided that it is definitely too late to adopt this coming season, but everyone is going back to the next meeting with their suggestions as to yeah or nay. It was also stated that this really needs a separate meeting from the Exec. as there really isn't enough time to discuss it fully.'

Paddy W

09-10-2003, 10:02 AM

You may have noticed in this years polo handbook that this idea is being considered by the BCU polo committee.
I have just received the following e-mail from Jonathon Walder (polo secretary):-

'Dear All,
Over the last season there have been a number of suggestions that thenational leagues, particularly divisions 3 & 4 and the regions, require restructuring/amending. It was decided at a recent committee meeting that an open forum meeting should be held. The results of which will be presented to the new committee at the forthcoming AGM (Dec 7th). A discussion document,
which will be used as the starting point for discussions, will be
circulated near to the time. But in principal the discussions will take two parts:
1.Firstly centre on ‘the reasons for change’ and the aims of the open leagues in particular divisions 3 & 4.
2. Secondly the options available for change and how they may be implemented It is hoped that at least a representative from each league will be able to make the meeting and where possible one member of each club. It is kindly requested that no more than one club representative is present at the meeting.

The meeting is to be held on the 19th October 2003 at the Headquarters of the 73rd Derby Scout Group, Allestree, Derby. Directions attached. Please feel free to pass this on to other interested parties.

Jonathan Walder
BCU Canoepolo Secretary'

As I raised this idea initially I will be going along. (If I get directions!).

This is your chance to have your say about this now.
Don't complain if things change and you do not like it!
If you can't attend the meeting then post your views here so that they can be passed on at the meeting.

Paddy

Nidge

12-10-2003, 01:43 AM

Why the ******* delay telling people?

I was copied in to direct e-mails about the meeting earlier in the week ~ and still without detail of the proposal itself.

Rant over, my Two penn'orth:

Last year there was a greater demand for places in Div 4 than could be offered. I'm not aware whether that's changed or not. But if the demand for Div 4 slots is still greater than can be currently accommodated, then it might be viable to create one or maybe two additional Div 3s without binning one of the Div 4s.

I'm not sure that will entirely solve the problem 'though. I'd expect the remaining best in Div 4 will still be markedly better then the worst as some very inexperienced teams are then drawn in.

But for sure entry to Div 3 has been a bottleneck for years - That's gotta be frustrating for teams who go three or maybe four years in a row before finally getting in to 3 ~ and then drop a team into Div 4 which then pretty well wipes the floor with the rest of their new lower division......... Hint: Simply swapping more teams between the two divisions as go ups & go downs would sort only half the problem.

Nidge

Nidge

12-10-2003, 02:20 PM

Oooop - Re: My posting above - February was when Paddy joined the Forum, not when this thread kicked off :bang:

Still, I only just received the original post direct from Jonathon this afternoon - although it *is* tagged as sent 8 Oct and I know I was on the original mailing list cos I'd already seen that on the copies I was sent ....... odd that.

More usefully, further thoughts on what others (mostly) have said.
I would be infavour of:

(i) One, maybe two more Div 3s.
Most important is to sort out the playing standards and that would help more than any other action.
Secondarily, although not a problem for me & my team, but logistics like Bristol having to go to Luton? Tcha!

IIRC Woodmill were a long time not happy about the logistics of getting to their venues. I could never see a solution in their (or the other "geographically distant from the centre teams'") case - but I suspect that's at least part of the reason they've stacked?

Seems to me that logistically it ain't that great for Div 1 generally -Distance between Bere Forrest (Southampton) and Leeds? Um.. And what happened to Bere Forrest seniors too?

But that's a digression here. More a matter for Div 1 to have a further think about ~ especially if there are no longer Scottish teams in the Div? (Appologies in advance if there are).

(ii) Someone (Paddy? Steve?) suggested ALL teams affected by promotion OR relegation should play off to sort out who goes where the following season.
Unusual solution.
But very, very logical. It will keep like with like better than the existing system.

Maybe that should be offered the other Divs too - ie, Let the decision be by concensus (Committee comends ~ the players choose).
(Did I mention 'unlike the EC approved hats'?)
(Sorry, still annoyed about the hats thing).

(iii) There's potential to work out all sorts of formulae to work out who 'should' go up to the new div 3(s). But calculations won't compare like with like, especially in this sort of situation.
I'd suggest some sort of bid system to sort out even remotely reasonable claims, follwed by some sort of competition right from the outset. I guess that means a specific tournament.

Before kicking that idea to death remember:

* Some new teams with little track record already show clear signs of being good enough to play in Div 3.
* With the greater than usual opportunity this initiative creates for promotion, some teams &/or players may well decide to restructure to enhance their prospects of going into Div 3. eg, Its feasible some current teams could do a 'melting pot' option with their neighbours, creating two teams from their best and worst groups then put them forward for Divs 3 & 4 respectively.

Nidge

nutterwatts

13-10-2003, 06:29 PM

Nidge/Paddy/Meridian etc.

Hi there, i've finally had to register! seeing as someone has stopped us posting as unregistered, but that's another topic!

It' s Steve (South West Div 4 organiser), seeing as the meeting is this weekend and no one has received any proposals in advance I thought I would put one forward!

Unfortunately unless the meeting is held in the evening I don't think I am going to be able to make it. So I would be grateful if someone could take this forward on my behalf.

There are actually two proposals one is about the structure and the second is about team placement ( where I think most of the arguments will occur!)

I think it's important that we firstly agree and set a League structure in place then discuss which teams are going to be placed where.

=============================================
PROPOSAL 1

League Structure

1. Create a new Division 3 Central, keep the existing two Division 3 leagues (North and South)

2. Keep the existing 5 Division 4 Leagues.

=============================================

Reasons:

1. By adding a new Division to the National structure 10 new teams would be able to enter the National League system.

2. Allow a better flow of new teams through the league system. currently 10 Div 4 teams play off for 4 places. with a new Division 3 and if the play off system is kept the same 10 teams would play for 6 places.

==============================================

PROPOSAL 2

Team Placement

1. for the 2003/2004 season ( One year later if it can't be implemented this year.) take the top 5 teams from the 5 Division 4's give them automatic promotion. Then with the 2nd and 3rd placed teams in the five Div 4's have a tournament to decide who will get the remaining 5 places in Div 3 ( this gives the teams something to play for at the end of the season, and makes it a bit more interesting.) no teams are demoted from Div 3 this season.

Then with the 30 teams in Div 3 divide them up equally between the 3 Leagues based on geographical location. (Avon in Central please it's easier for us to get to!)

2. For subsequent seasons (will need a Vote!) either

a ) Take the top 5 Div 4 teams and the 9th placed teams from the Div 3's have a play off for 3 places in Div 3. then have a play off for the remaining 3 places between the 2nd placed teams in Div 4 and 10th placed teams in Div 3.

b ) Play off between the top two teams from all the Div 4's ( 10 teams.) for six places in Div 3, automatic relegation for the two bottom placed teams in the Div 3's

==============================================

Nidge - with the greatest respect I take all what you are saying on board about :

* Some new teams with little track record already show clear signs of being good enough to play in Div 3.
* With the greater than usual opportunity this initiative creates for promotion, some teams &/or players may well decide to restructure to enhance their prospects of going into Div 3. eg, Its feasible some current teams could do a 'melting pot' option with their neighbours, creating two teams from their best and worst groups then put them forward for Divs 3 & 4 respectively.

But !

a) I think that teams who are placed top of the league have shown they worthy of a shot at Div 3, after all they are better than all the teams in their league.
B ) I don't want or think that a committee should decide who gets to be placed in which league.
C ) with regard to your second point there is nothing stopping you getting together with the first placed team in your league and sorting something out ;) after all under the above proposal they would get automatic promotion.

Nidge

13-10-2003, 09:56 PM

The meetings's already been called for 11am and so many people informed I doubt the organisers could change it to the evening even if it was the popular choice (not, to be honest, that I think it would be).

Probably the best way to ensure your views are represented - if you absolutely can't get there to argue them yourself - would be to post them to Gerry McCusker or Jonathon Walder. If you don't have their e-mail addys mail me direct but they should be in the year book.

The reason I'm arguing for a tournament as the final determiner to sort promotions out is because:
(i) Its transparently fair - there's not much scope for argument about whose best when someone just won.
(ii) I know quite a few good highly placed teams lost star players over the summer. Whilst some fairly good but not the top last year teams have massively improved - And I'd cite Cambridge as proof ~ They are just about capable of winning Div 3 IMHO ........ and No, I play for St Albans not Cambridge : )

No major quarrel with the rest of it.

Nidge

Dubster

14-10-2003, 07:50 AM

I have to agree with Avon in respect that Div 3 should be increased to 3 Divisions and that Div 4 should be kept at 5 divisions. If the number of Div 4 divisions is reduced, what is this saying to potential teams that want to join the league? (which is already over subscribed.)

That would say very clearly, "sorry we don't want to make our sport available to more people as we want to keep this a quiet little sport just to ourselves and not promote it at all!"

To do this would be detrimental to the development of the game and could stave off any potential new teams wanting to join our wonderful game. The more people we get into this sport the better!

We all need to bear in mind that this could all be irrelevant if the Polo commitee is not renewed in December!

As for Cambridge being a team capable of winning Div 3, I have to say Nidge, that you need to get out more and see the other 10 teams that finished above Camridge in Div 4 (ie playoff teams.) To say that Cambridge could win Div 3 (no disrespect to them ) is an insult to those teams already in Div 3!!!

mark19843

14-10-2003, 08:05 AM

Fully support Nutterwatts post, but would like to add one more item to the discussion. The structure of playoffs in subseqeuent years.

I think the playoffs should always include the bottom (relagation) teams from the higher division and the top (promotion) teams from the lower division. This way we ensure that the strongest overall teams stay or make it into the higher division.

the playoffs also need to be better controlled to ensure that no ringers play in the playoffs that haven't played for the team before that season.

Paddy W

14-10-2003, 11:31 AM

Most people seem to agree that an additional Div 3 is a good idea.

Personally I beleive that if there are sufficient numbers to create
an additional league (i.e. 3 Div 3s and 5 Div 4s) then the committee should do so if possible, otherwise if it cannot be accomodated then just move to 3 Div3s and 4 Div 4s from current 2 Div3s and 5 Div4s.

I agree with post by Nutterwatts above except for the play-offs in subsequent years, which could be done as follows:-

3 Div 3s & 5 Div4s
16 teams (9th & 10th placed in the 3 Div 3s plus top two teams in 5 Div 4s) are split into 4 mini leagues in two seperate tournaments (southern and Northern - 2 mini leagues each). top 2 teams in each mini league go onto a futher 2 mini leagues of 4 teams.
The top 3 placed teams in last 2 mini leagues get the 6 places in Div 3.

3 Div 3s & 4 Div4s
14 teams (9th & 10th placed in the 3 Div s plus top two in 4 Div 4s) are split into 4 mini leagues in two seperate tournaments
(southern and Northern - 2 mini leagues each, 1 league of 4 teams and one league of 3 teams). top 2 teams in each mini league go onto a futher 2 mini leagues of 4 teams.
The top 3 placed teams in last 2 mini leagues get the 6 places in Div 3.

Details here:-

Nidge

14-10-2003, 12:56 PM

Paddy:

I can't follow what happens to Div 4 Central on the spreadsheet you attached. (This is possibly me being two short planks as usual).

Dubster:

That was then. This is now - Cambridge were 'not the same team' at the summer tournaments.

WHO should get out more ? (cough) : )

Everyone:

Hate to say it but its better now than when its too late.

We already have a quality control problem with reffing in Div 4 that is not a million miles away and unrelated from the point that Grade 4 refs might have been assessed for understanding the rules but, sadly, the evidence is that there is (let's put this kindly) 'rather a large variation' in their ability to apply them. Some are very capable - And would pass Grade 3 straight off if they were assessed. Others are doing their best but seem badly out of their depth and are ruining games.

Having seen what happens without the safeguard of practical assessment I am sure *nobody* should be reffing in *any* league who has not been assessed as practically competent - I don't care a rat's *** if they could write the definitive thesis on the rules! I wanna know they can apply them properly.

And if - hopefully when - we open up Div 4 to more teams the proportion of capable referees is likely to get much worse quickly. So we need to sort that NOW........ The standard has to go up to be minimally adequate.

The whole thing becomes not worth playing if still more not really competent referees are allowed to spoil the sport by perverse and wrong decisions.

So either we need to revert to "Grade 3 is the minimum - Anywhere" or we go to "The minimum is 6 Refeering Grade points in total", ie, you can use a Grade 4 .... but only when a Grade 2 is opposite.

Or are folk not that bothered about random and wrong reffing decisions anyway?

Nidge

Meridian

14-10-2003, 01:15 PM

Nidge sorry I couldn't help myself, What Paddy has done is to scrap div4 central on the worksheet that talks about if there were 4 div4s and to include them on the worksheet if we were to keep the 5 div 4 s we have at the moment

nidge it was an easy mistake to make

Paddy W

14-10-2003, 02:54 PM

Nigel

As Mark says there are two worksheets:- Click on the tabs '5 Div4s' or ''4 Div 4s' at bottom of the spreadsheet.

Forgot that having the additional Div 3 will also affect the Div 2 play offs.

This can be dealt with in a similar fashion:-

8 teams (bottom two of Div 2 and top 2 of the 3 Div 3s ) form two
mini leagues of 4 teams. Top two from each mini league form a final mini league. Top two in final mini league get promoted.

Dubster

15-10-2003, 06:59 AM

Nidge - No disrespect to you or Cambridge but I was it the all the major UK tournaments this summer and only saw Cambridge play at London in August. So I'm not sure where you saw them play?

They did nothing there to suggest that were any different to the team that played Div 4 SE. My team beat them with 3 15yr olds, so I'm a little perplexed by your faith in their ability???

Nidge

15-10-2003, 12:47 PM

Dubster - Um, that's possibly because they had core team players playing with other teams (eg Varks) at other tournaments and I realised what sort of capability they'll have once they formed up as their 'this season's' team.

They're playing central this year. We'll have to wait and see what the results are :)

Nidge

Meridian

15-10-2003, 02:51 PM

I would suggest that Cambridge's chances of being promoted out of div4 Central nothing out of the ordinary given that that divison contains the Soak team that includes Andy Davies and has already featured Paul Brain. There is also the Blakedown team who are looking very well organised. I have also heard rumours on the grapevine that the Cherwell team have been reinforced with stronger players from their higher placed teams.
No direspect to cambridge but div4 central will be a hard division for teams to be sure of promotion from.
I would suggest we wait until the end of the season or at least the the end of tournament 5 before we start to consider which teams will be promoted from div 4 central/who will go to playoffs.

Ajdavis5

16-10-2003, 08:45 AM

Do you feel that all this is going round in circles and we should see who runs the national league next year as there will be nobody to do it unless you lot stop arguing and actually stand up and take shirley's job so she can retire after all her hard work and top job she has done up until now.

POLO IS FUN

Remeber that!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

And Just cause i am in a team doesn't mean we will get promoted but on another front my full team is back and we will be in div 3 next season the rest of you can fight it out behind us.

TARA :thumbup:

Phil M

16-10-2003, 12:56 PM

I'm a bit dubious about your confidence in us Nidge, but we'll just have to wait and see. Div4 Central looks a lot harder division than Div4 SE, which is the reason why we asked to be transfered. (You can only improve if you play with teams better than you afterall).

Also, you have to remember we're a uni team, and therefore our members change every year, so its hard to maintain consistency and improvement.

As for the league structure, I'd generally agree that an additional Div3 league would be good. But with Div4 SE almost shutting down because no one was prepared to run it, it seems like it might be a long way off. As Andy says, more action, less chatter!

:cheers:

Nidge

16-10-2003, 01:57 PM

.......... as for your *other* request, I'm sending the Trophy you and Duncan have a share in for winning Div 3 at Merseyside (despite my best efforts :eek: ) to the Div 4 Central tournament at Derby via Karim who plays for Luton ;)

Nidge

great turnout

23-10-2003, 10:19 AM

So after so much talk a grand total of 5 people turned up to the meeting mentioned above.

Paddy W

23-10-2003, 11:02 AM

well I was told it would take up to 5 hours of discussion and it would have taken 6 hours driving at a cost of £35 in petrol. I decided not to go and e-mailed Gerry Mcusker with my reasons and asked him to read this post as it seemed to cover most things.

From what I understand from Mark Preddy there was a lot of talk and nothing decided for certain. If you attened the meeting please let us all know what happened.

Paddy

PoloAlex

23-10-2003, 01:04 PM

As I expect was the same for many people, I only found out about the meeting 4 days beforehand after chatting to someone from Blakedown who mentioned the thread on the forum. I therefore gave my apologies to Gerry on behalf of Cambridge Uni. A representative from us would have made the meeting given a bit more notice.

Anyway, cheers to everyone who have contributed to the issue, especially those who did make the meeting. Hopefully National League will improve because of the changes.

Alex

Nidge

25-10-2003, 11:59 AM

:rolleyes:
Duh, why didn't we all do this?
It would have saved the pair from Avon trailing the fair bit longer way from Bristol, Mark dragging up from London too, Gerry hauling it all the way from the Republic of Scouseland.......... Meanwhile as I barely get into treble figures travelling to North Derby in a car obviously designed to run on psychic emanations rather than diesel I could have sat round with the other on-the-doorstep locals ....... from Leicestershire, Yorkshire and wherever - and pondered the profundities arriving by e-mail. :bang:

Yeah there was "a lot of talk". That's because there were a lot of ideas which mostly offered a range of relative advantages and disadvantages and those needed to be weighed up. If there was 'one right answer' we wouldn't need to discuss anything would we?

And, No, there was no 'decision'. But that's because the meeting was always supposed to be tasked to review the options, maybe develop further ideas from them, and finally put forward recommendations to the Polo committee.
('Leastways that's what I thought both before and after).

My guess is most of the 'core' ideas affecting the mid-band divisions will be pretty widely welcomed. Proposals for Div 4 were left a bit more open ended. How well they are going to work depends, I guess, on which of several options are taken-up.

Personally I favour the view that the existing number of 5 Div 4s should be maintained and that the number of teams in each might vary - Maybe dropping from the current mostly 10 to perhaps 8 - assuming there is an expansion in the number of places in the higher divisions which lifts existing teams out of Div 4. This because (i) journey time is already a deterrent for teams in some areas (small beer by comparison to what Div 1s travel I know, but the whole ethos is different innit?) and (ii) there's then an infrastructure in place and able to expand as the sport continues to grow.

I guess if anyone has useful views to contribute the window's still open until the AGM (mind you, that's not my province) but how you communicate them now I'm less sure.

Nidge

PS: Alex - I think the original notice went out from Johnathan on 8 Oct, but there were evidently problems as I picked up on what was happenning from other threads before 'my' copy - still the 8 Oct original - arrived about 9 days later.