Hope BC Soccer makes this happen ASAP .
Changes afoot south of the Fraser
- Thread starter Admin
- Start date
Hope BC Soccer makes this happen ASAP .
Will give oversight to SMSA. I am not involved in that district so I don't know if good or bad thing for SMSA. But, it creates a HUGE district, and I'd like to know if this creates any ramifications for the other nearby districts that only have 3-5 clubs.
SMSA will prob not favour this option as they lose their power which they have used unfairly at times [ Example -suspension on CCB] . Going under the the new District set-up will make things very fair & transparent
4_the_kids
Active Member
- Oct 20, 2015
- 312
The problem is SMSA is largely controlled by the Newton Clubs ( 3 Newton clubs to 2 non Newton Clubs) that in its self is arguably corrupt and the only way to solve this it dissolve it and form a new district that helps balance the table so that there is balance in the decision making and not just favoring one select group. The chair at SMSA is the same guy very much involved in the other garbage, disgruntle former CCB executive, BC Tiger Executive etc...
So yes I agree it should makes things more transparent and fair.
itsinthegame
Member
- Nov 10, 2015
- 7
I like that idea of having a change at the district level regarding clubs involved.
Take Coastal/Delta/Ladner for example - They are a very small group and can quite easily make it into Coastal cup due to their limited amount of high level teams.
I'm sure someone else with more knowledge of this can add better detail but Surrey is by far the largest with the amount of clubs and teams who are all vying for cup play but get bypassed due to the sheer volume of #'s.
Totally unfair IMO.
Take Coastal/Delta/Ladner for example - They are a very small group and can quite easily make it into Coastal cup due to their limited amount of high level teams.
I'm sure someone else with more knowledge of this can add better detail but Surrey is by far the largest with the amount of clubs and teams who are all vying for cup play but get bypassed due to the sheer volume of #'s.
Totally unfair IMO.
rich
Active Member
- Aug 20, 2015
- 291
Alternatively, Ladner /TSW etc etc have a harder time competing because they have a smaller base of players to choose from, therefore cannot stack teams like some bigger clubs can.
"Stack" may not be the right word, but it's early, and our coffee machine is broken.
That issue alone is not anywhere strong enough to merge districts. No one in Delta District wants any part of this merger, and have to deal with the politicking and bad blood between the Surrey clubs. I believe South District had their vote, and only one club voted in favor of the move.
All that said, I'm sure there is some loophole that will allow BC Soccer to force this move if they truly want to.
socceroo
Member
- Sep 21, 2015
- 68
What Surrey and Delta group must see is the powerhouse they can create by joining forces and not having to duplicate tasks. Also it will ease up little politics of alliances and favors at the table.at same time 12,000 plus player pool.
However, I am sure technical team are freaking how this is going to affect their pocket books and clubs gurus thinking about how it does not benefit me.
tsk! tsk!
However, I am sure technical team are freaking how this is going to affect their pocket books and clubs gurus thinking about how it does not benefit me.
tsk! tsk!
rich
Active Member
- Aug 20, 2015
- 291
Not sure why Technical teams would be freaking? There is no reduction in the number of clubs, therefore still the same number of technical staff needed...unless I am not understanding your point?
Doesn't the possibility also exist that politics get worse with a larger player pool competing for potentially more limited spots on Select teams, etc?
I think you'd find the number of select teams would remain exactly the same. The "benefit" (meaning I don't know if it actually would be one because I am not involved) to adding Delta is essentially oversight at the board level.
Technical staff, number of teams etc would all remain the same.
4_the_kids
Active Member
- Oct 20, 2015
- 312
First let me say i have lived the garbage of Newton first hand, both as a coach and as a parent.
Anything that helps neutralize the current groups trying to get control of SMSA , and is puts accountability on the clubs to adhere by the rules is a positive. It would in theory also allow for more options for players as assuming the boundaries would be the district there would be more clubs one could choose to play for.Example some one in Newton would be able to play for North Delta or Coastal if they so chose to... this would also put more pressure on clubs to be offering quality programming as there would be more options to choose to from.
This is great for the players. But then you have other districts that is only 3-5 clubs, and good distances between them. Those players have very little choice of who they can play for (realistically). I suppose that's more down to geography, and not much anyone can do about that though. But still, an important topic to be discussed.
easoccer
Established Member
- Aug 27, 2015
- 862
I dont really think that the current boundaries restrict much movement. You can already have a certain number of out of district players on your roster. What it will do is open up the gates for FULL teams to move.
rich
Active Member
- Aug 20, 2015
- 291
^ agree. Right now only 3 out of district players can join a team. A merge would potentially open up more options for a disgruntled coach to move his / her entire team.
4_the_kids
Active Member
- Oct 20, 2015
- 312
This is what really needs to change to improve soccer around here, the whole idea of my team , my players. We do not have ownership over the kids , its our job the help educate parents on their options but this whole team staying together thing hurts development forces clubs hands etc ...
I,m in favour of allowing players to play wherever they want same as the BCPL . Not sure but i think the out of District
rule is 5 players ???
Word is that TD,s of some of the Newton/Surrey clubs are against merging the Districts but BC Soccer needs to enforce the merger. There can never be a repeat of what happened with SMSA banning innocent young players for 5 weeks prior to the Fall season starting .I reckon only CCB will support a merger but SFC, SU , GAC & BC Tigers/PUFC will most likely be against it .
easoccer
Established Member
- Aug 27, 2015
- 862
There were no innocent parties last fall. Not CCB. Not SFC. Not even BCT OR CE. They were all to blame for the mess.
There were take over attempts every year over the past few in CCB, BCT, CE, SMSA, etc. I attended each of those AGMs and can tell you first hand as I witnessed it.
You complain about the people running SMSA but where were you at the AGM? When asked for further business you could have objected or nominated someone else. No one did and now we have who we have.
We have to deal with it until the next AGM.
There were take over attempts every year over the past few in CCB, BCT, CE, SMSA, etc. I attended each of those AGMs and can tell you first hand as I witnessed it.
You complain about the people running SMSA but where were you at the AGM? When asked for further business you could have objected or nominated someone else. No one did and now we have who we have.
We have to deal with it until the next AGM.
Word is that TD,s of some of the Newton/Surrey clubs are against merging the Districts but BC Soccer needs to enforce the merger. There can never be a repeat of what happened with SMSA banning innocent young players for 5 weeks prior to the Fall season starting .I reckon only CCB will support a merger but SFC, SU , GAC & BC Tigers/PUFC will most likely be against it .
The young players were all innocent , they are too young to even understand what was going on apart from not being allowed to train or play soccer for 5 weeks !
Examples : If a parent is arrested or convicted of any offence and the local Education Board or school banned their innocent young kids from attending school how would everyone feel ?
If a parent works at the local supermarket and does something wrong and the supermarket bans the parents innocent young kids from the supermarket how would everyone feel ?
In the best interests of the young soccer players in Newton/Surrey and to prevent organizations & clubs punishing innocent young players and manipulating the system the SMSA needs to be merged .
easoccer
Established Member
- Aug 27, 2015
- 862
There are deadlines and rules that all teams must meet. Especially at the higher levels.
And what if the players who had paid for their metro spot in march wouldnt have been allowed to play, would you have been so upset?
And what if the players who had paid for their metro spot in march wouldnt have been allowed to play, would you have been so upset?
And what if the players who had paid for their metro spot in march wouldnt have been allowed to play, would you have been so upset?
Yes i would be upset cus they are innocent kids as well . End of the day its the Adults who run the SMSA &Surrey/Newton clubs and kids should never be punished again for any decisions made by these adults.
By merging the SMSA alot of that power would be taken away , decisions would be more transparent and generally Soccer in Newton/Surrey would improve in a positive direction = great result for all young soccer players !