Boundaries - Fair or unfair?

When I was a kid, I lived in Hendon.

Apparently, by living on one side of my street, I was in Port Adelaide's zone. The other side of the street was Woodville's zone.

Fortunately, I wasn't being scouted by either club to save the awful quandry of a Norwood fan having to play for Port - would have tried to persuade the parents to move across the street (given I used to ride my bike to watch Woodville a fair bit, for sheer convenience, and to watch Malcolm Blight in his return from the VFL)

Adelaide Hawk wrote:

Chambo Off To Work We Go wrote:Probably not the subject of this zone thread, but the player churn issue is an interesting one and probably needs its own thread.

Chambo, you may know the answer to this. I played school footy with Silvano Cece. Neither of us understood the reason why, but he had a choice as to whether he'd play for Sturt or Norwood. He chose Sturt because he considered the Norwood juniors were too strong, which was ridiculous, Silvano would have made both teams. I've often wondered why he had that choice as I always thought boundaries were clearly defined. I myself was the opposite side of the street to South Adelaide's zone. No grey area there.

Sorry, I have no idea on this one.
If memory serves he didn't have a lengthy career in blue land.
As to why he would have had the choice of clubs, I cannot say.

OK,I've looked at this and here's what I think.

There are two questions: Numbers and areas.

I'm only looking at numbers this time; I'll look at where they are later.

In broad terms only,this is the result.

Glenelg: Have to have their area cut back sharply. No wonder they do well at junior level.

Sturt: Gee, if they'd kept Blackwood, they'd be up with Glenelg. As it is, they're doing very nicely and have the biggest growth area. Further cuts coming?

Norwood: I'll be careful, I don't want Fort Battle-Axe set on me, but they're near the top on numbers and about average for growth. They're country zone is interesting, because it's mainly almost metropolitan and easy to service.

Eagles: About average.

Port: About average, but a country zone that's difficult to service, especially compared to some other clubs who get it easy.

West: Mid to low on average, but with a 'no-growth' zone by a long way compared to all other clubs bar one.

North: Low in numbers, but OK growth zone.

South: Again, I don't want to incur B & W's wrath, so I won't.Growth zone is about average,but numbers definitely need a boost. (Happy, B&W?).

Central: Almost last on any indicator, I'd say. It looks like the strongest club might get a boost here, but their 'country' zone is, shall we say, not difficult to service.

I'll look at areas later.

All this might be worthless when the census figures come out, of course.

Did the creation and admission of Woodville stuff up the Western side of the metro boundaries? IMO it certainly looks like it.

My other issue is that I cannot tie down the greater NE suburbs to either Central or Norwood or North. I would love to see Modbury, TTG or Golden Grove admitted to the SANFL as our 10th team (preferably the Hawks) and force another change to the boundaries.

redandblack wrote:OK,I've looked at this and here's what I think.

There are two questions: Numbers and areas.

I'm only looking at numbers this time; I'll look at where they are later.

In broad terms only,this is the result.

Glenelg: Have to have their area cut back sharply. No wonder they do well at junior level.

Sturt: Gee, if they'd kept Blackwood, they'd be up with Glenelg. As it is, they're doing very nicely and have the biggest growth area. Further cuts coming?

Norwood: I'll be careful, I don't want Fort Battle-Axe set on me, but they're near the top on numbers and about average for growth. They're country zone is interesting, because it's mainly almost metropolitan and easy to service.

Eagles: About average.

Port: About average, but a country zone that's difficult to service, especially compared to some other clubs who get it easy.

West: Mid to low on average, but with a 'no-growth' zone by a long way compared to all other clubs bar one.

North: Low in numbers, but OK growth zone.

South: Again, I don't want to incur B & W's wrath, so I won't.Growth zone is about average,but numbers definitely need a boost. (Happy, B&W?).

Central: Almost last on any indicator, I'd say. It looks like the strongest club might get a boost here, but their 'country' zone is, shall we say, not difficult to service.

I'll look at areas later.

All this might be worthless when the census figures come out, of course.

Surely you're joking???

Given under the courrent boundaries we have the 2nd lowest number of eligible males (after North) on which our zone is based on and you want us cut back more???

Should we be punished for getting off our ar5es and boosting our participation rates, this despite the fact the southern part of our metro zone (Sheidow/Trott park and Hallett Cove) is Little Britain and as a consequence soccer is booming. Hallett Cove schools (Cove, South and East PS) had no footy teams in 2009-10. In 2011 the club worked hard (our DO and Tiger League Coord) and we had a combined team for those schools for the last school year. I know all this because not only do I work at the Bays I am also the footy coordiantor for my kids school in the Tiger League. R&B why despite having the same resources as us (DO, similar number of schools and School Footy league Coord) why did Westies not have a 6-7 comp in 2010?

In 2009-11 there has been a gap in Auscick nos around Seacliff - again over the off season we've worked our ar5es off and a new Auskick clinic we start in that area at Seacliff PS.

10 years ago our club made a conscience decision to work our area and develop kids and yes it has paid dividend at a junior level but it hasn't yet materialised in the success we all crave. By we I mean all clubs, only one level of premiership truly matters.

Having low participation rates and low numbers isn't a barrier if you (as a club) are prepaperd to work on it. Hope like hell we aren't going to be punished for doing the hard yards so the lazy can benefit.

Further to my previous post It is intersting to not that in the last three zone re-aligments we have lost geo-graphical areas to South. If there is a club that has suffered with South being pushed in to the deep South of Adelaide (cue banjos playing) it is Glenelg. Yes South got shafted in the 20th century with the loss of its traditional areas to the new club Sturt, but tey have been getting their own back this century (to a minimal degree) with us. And save for a neville nobody nuffy bleating on the internet the club has basically shuts it mouth and kept on working with what it got waiting for the next shafting in metro zone re-alligment.

Just out of interest, I would be keen to know what are some of the clubs are doing to try and boost there participation rates and junior development programs.

Thanks for that, Mods, some really good points there. I think you make a good point about the work different clubs do in their zones and that must be taken into account.

I was working on the number of clubs in each zone and Glenelg have a lot more than any other club. I take your point, but I don't think that explains why Glenelg have vastly more than some clubs.

As I said, though, the census figures might make all of the above irrelevant, but it will give an indication of which clubs work their zone best (would you agree?).

Another point in your favour is that Glenelg's country zone is harder to service than South's zone.

Glenelg, however, have a hugely larger number of teams in their zones than most clubs and have consistently been near the top of the table over many,many ytears in terms of numbers, until the last distribution.

West, on the other hand, have been consistently last or nearly last for a long, long, time. They've never been near the top. Even now, their country zone is the Riverland, harder hit by economic conditions than most. They've had Roxby Downs added, but that's really difficult to service and has a very transient population.

It's a great subject for debate, though, isn't it.

We may have clubs in our zone but some of those clubs draw on players from outside our zone which we can't touch so whilst the club/school may geographically be in our zone (with all it's associate teams) a significant number of that clubs players are not. For example PHOS Camden is in our zone (I think they are based at Camden oval) but a 7 iron with 3/4 swing from the Eastern wing of their oval and you are in westies zone. The same with Westminster School and all its associated teams. I'm sure a fair few of the Westminster footy kids come from East of Marion rd.

The reverse occurs for South with Reynella Footy club just in there zone but a nine iron from crickets nets at Reynella Oval and you are in our zone. So basing it on clubs and subsequent teams associated with that club in each League club's zone can be a little misleading.

Agreed.

So really it comes down to the Census figures?

A mate of mine had a choice of playing for Colonel Light Gardens (West zone) or Unley Jets (Sturt zone) in the hope of being picked for an SANFL club. Both club being less than 5min from his place. IMO he did not pick wisely as he is now a Double Blue.

howthewestwaswon wrote:A mate of mine had a choice of playing for Colonel Light Gardens (West zone) or Unley Jets (Sturt zone) in the hope of being picked for an SANFL club. Both club being less than 5min from his place. IMO he did not pick wisely as he is now a Double Blue.

How does that work htwww? If you're zoned to one SANFL club you can't represent another without a clearance can you?

I'm not sure on the clearance fee issue.

All I know is he did move from one side of the Belair railway line to the other just before committing to the Unley Jets.

Yep, so presumably he moved into Sturt's zone.

Just looking at the map, how many player do West have from Goodwood Saints compared to Sturt? I noticed while the club & oval is in the Bloods zone, I would presume many players come from the Eastern side of the railway line?

It'd be a similar situation with PHOS Camden IMO.

howthewestwaswon wrote:A mate of mine had a choice of playing for Colonel Light Gardens (West zone) or Unley Jets (Sturt zone) in the hope of being picked for an SANFL cl
ub. Both club being less than 5min from his place. IMO he did not pick wisely as he is now a Double Blue.

right choice the Unley Jets are an awesome club!!!

redandblack wrote:Agreed.

So really it comes down to the Census figures?

Well census figure are the most reliable. Was speaking with a SANFL official last week about this topic and he says there are errors with their participation figures. It is possible for some particpants to be counted twice if they play for their school and a club. So it is possible that glenelgs metro zones figures are highly inflated. They are hoping to get this sorted with the new MyFooty website (similar to the MyCricket website that cricket clubs can use to manage player registrations) which will enable them to better track players from a registration/participation point of view.

Yes, I've heard the same, Mods.

In West's country zone, too, kids play in two different leagues on the same weekend.

We have lots in the Eagles that play school footy Saturday morning and clu b footy on Sundays and I am sure we are not alone in that.

@Howthe west waswon "A mate of mine had a choice of playing for Colonel Light Gardens (West zone) or Unley Jets (Sturt zone) in the hope of being picked for an SANFL club. Both club being less than 5min from his place. IMO he did not pick wisely as he is now a Double Blue.

i assume he was older than 18 as it comes down to where your mother lives as to what zone you play in not what local club.

@Mods"For example PHOS Camden is in our zone (I think they are based at Camden oval)

yes PHOS play at Camden Oval which is in Novar Gardens (GFC Zone) not Camden Park (WA Zone)..The split of players at PHOS would be roughly 70% GFC... 25% WA...5% other. I personally think Camden Park should be added to Glenelg Zone and Plympton given back to westies..

I lived in Richmond Played football at Gumeracha. Norwood were interested in me but couldn't touch me as I lived in West Adelaide's Zone. I know Norwood asked could I train at Norwood and A certain West Adelaide person said I was required by West Adelaide. I ended up just sticking to Gums and training up there.

@strawbs..yeah it sucks when that happens..i've heard that alot..Norwood could pay the $5k or what ever, but thats alot of coin

Problem was back then an SANFL club could refuse the clearance and cash was not needed. I would have preferred to play at West Adelaide but in the end not good enough yet I was better at the country club. I know one guy who used his grand parents address to play at North

how long ago we talking?

we are talking late 90's

Whether it happened or not stories about kids using their grandparents' (or other relative's) address to play for their preferred club were quite common.