Players and Managers

[nicedarts]

Apologises, just seemed a very strange choice for everyone to move to Harold Hill all of a sudden. I guess as previously said if a few teams are paying then it would add up but from what i managed to watch last year i couldn't imagine many players being paid.

 

Agree with hughes as i assume everyone has a different view on the money and player loyalties.

 

Would be keen to know who to look out for next year and if there will be any suprises. Just from an overview of the last few years i would expect Frenford and Kelvedon to be challenging and i enjoyed the team Rayleigh have put together last year but i guess this all depends on if everyone has the same team. Were Hannikans as close as the league made out last year?? Will the new teams coming up be in a position to challange??

[hughes]

cheers Nicedarts , My opinion is it will be frenford league again with raleigh and wood pushing them close, Harold Hill will be a new team and will need time to gel, i hear southminster are a dark horse and will be one to watch, Hannikans are decent but sometimes too predictable ..

[clubman]

Yeah good luck to kelvedon Hope they carry on their recent success without the aid of money and greedy players!!!!

[nicedarts]

Southminster have been mentioned a few times to me in the past although I have never got the chance to watch them, they did seem to have some impressive results last year. I feel the experience of winning the league will bode well for Frenford, Kelvedon and even Harold wood and i'd hope to see the same names challenging again with the likes of Rayleigh pushing them close this year!! It seems a lot of teams will have a say this year (with or without a budget).

 

Ensign, If stambridge really want to pay someone a wage who was previously happy to play reserve division football and has managed to accumulate a £115 fine for who knows what then it show's what is wrong with the game at the amateur level, is there budget to move on and progress as a club or is there budget there to be a success for a few months of the season and win a cup?? I would be interested to know what the opposing players and even team mates thought if they were aware someone was being paid to do what they do most weeks.

 

Also raises my point of earlier, why are these players not pushing on and using their ability to play for some of the better local teams, surely there must be some ambition??

 

What are to be made of Alderborough do they stand a chance, i noticed a few of their players represented the league team at stages last year?? Should that be used as an accurate guide of the league's best players or was it a case of players who were known to the people in charge and willing to play.......it just seemed strange that on a few occasions the team lacked any of the top 2 team's players??

[dagger]

Having played in the league last year,from what I got told Kelvedon wasn't paying as much money as the previous season.Good luck to the players getting a few quid at least they don't have to pay a signing on fee,club membership and subs unlike the team I play for.As for the league team I think its down to who you know than to do with your football ability,this needs addressing.

[Ensign]

Sum players are just happy playing in there local league , or just with pals, people work then go football , playing higher would take ur Saturday work from you , so you earn less and in todays world that aint a great thing. not all clubs are throwing money everywhere , some players are to far up there own arses think they are so good, if they are then go play higher or don't moan about paying subs ,

 

 

[Talk_Is_Cheap]

First session back for RT tonight, so I will let you know how we are looking in the next few days.....

 

Lost a few (Maldon / Southend Manor) but hopefully picked up a couple as well.

 

Be nice to be there or there abouts next season, but consistancy killed us last year with players commitment (Never played the same side in two consecutive games all season) but thats to be expected at this level I suppose....plus the 7 games in 12 days to finish the year didn't help.

 

Be a strong league next year.....my mate smallsy will put a good side together at Southminster although I know he's not putting to much pressure on the lads on their first season....and Aldborough were strong in the cup final as well, so lets hope they have kept their squad.

 

No entertaining this talk about money, its irrelevant, if Harold Hill have money and thats results in them being the strongest side then good on em.....as a player I want to play against the better players, if I get to do that because HH are paying money then thats a bonus, a challenge and good experience for thr youngsters....so fair play..!!

[mostwanted]

_{Finally (talk_is_cheap) someone that speaks a little sense}

_{So let’s get this right wood are paying players and they came 9^th. HH are paying but all there players are crap and there are a few others teams who pay odd players}

_{Frenford are fav to win it and kelvedon are gonna struggle}

_{End of the day the team that wins the league have been the best team that season so money or no money doesn’t mean if you pay your going to clean up on the trophy front}

_{Also noticed a lot of haters on this site some having personal digs and others just jumping on and having there say}

[smallsy]

Well said TIC!

 

If some teams in the division are able to pay players then good for them. There was talk at the league AGM about making it an even playing field for all teams but I couldn't disagree more. Are Man Utd and West Ham on an even playing field? Or Canvey Island and Concord Rangers? Budgets, resources, facilities and level of support are things that make a club individual and ultimately the ability of the manager to attract and keep hold of good players will shine through. Even with good players you have to get them playing as a team to be successful.

 

There are a lot of people posting on here using an alias who seem to have a hidden agenda and looking to make digs at certain clubs such as Kelvedon. I have really enjoyed reading the debate, the rumours and the talk about this season but it would be nice to know who is associated with which clubs.

 

Finally, Most Wanted could you please type in a slightly larger font? I had to zoom in 400% to read that!!

[Olyfan]

Does mostwanted work for an opticians as his type face is so small I think I might need to get some new glasses

[Olyfan]

I see Kelvedon Hatch play Harold Hill in the Senior Division Cup. That should be a bit lively

[mostwanted]

_{SORRY LADS!}

[Stop Whinging]

As I said before , a good Kelvedon team is good for the league and the other teams in it. I think the issue the league have been trying to address is the use of senior players at the end of the season. Those players who have played for Ryman clubs all season and turn out for the final few games in the EOFL because they were signed on to do just that . They have had material impact on League titles etc in the past. Personally, I think that is wrong . I think they have tightened the existing rule so it has less chance of happening. As for paying players good luck to the boys; but it certainly did not work last season. I think it says more about the ego of the guy paying and at the end of the day its still 11 v 11. In the opinion of most who have contributed to this debate the players did not look like they were deserving of payment but I disagree, in my opinion, most of the players in Kelvedon's side last season would have got into any other Olympian side.

[smallsy]

Hi SW, completely agree with you there about what has happened at the end of previous seasons and i understand why the league looked to address the matter but I do feel the new law is flawed. We are now only allowed one player in our team who has played 4 games or more at step 6 or above. Come September/October a lot of players will become available because they have only played bit parts in their respective clubs season and they may look to move on and drop down a level but we will not be able to sign them.

 

I think after a certain date we should only be able to pick those players if they have played in 50% of games to date rather than rule them out all together.

 

In addition, players playing at Step 6 and step 5 are not much different in ability to the level of player at step 7. If a club in the premier division were drafting in players from the ESL I certainly would not be worried.

 

Perhaps we would have been better to apply the new rule from step 4 onwards?

 

That is my opinion anyway.

Edited July 13, 2012 by smallsy

[Talk_Is_Cheap]

I agree mate, the new rule does seem to have a few lmitations.

 

But my biggest concern is this. Last season we had a very good youngster, who has been offered the chane to step up and play for Maldon this season.

 

Quiet rightly, he accepted the challenge. Now, if he plays '4 games' but it doesn't work out, his only option is either the ESL (Which he has said he doesn't want to play) or park football.

 

Doesnt really seem fair on a young lad who is trying to make his way in non league football.

 

So like you say, the best solution would have been you can't play anyone who has made more than 4 appearences at the level above after a certain date.

[Stop Whinging]

My view is that if a player had played more than 50% of the games prior to the end of Dec (I mean League and EOFL Cup games) then the limitation should not affect them. It should thou affect players who do not comply with the 50% rule at the end of Dec. I do believe the league have been a little over zealous and may find they are dealing with a lot of breaches. The added risk is that the quality will disappear because guys who take their chance may not come back to the EOFL. I tyhink a good example is this seasons Denny Cup Final . Smallsy highlighted a good player and I looked him up when his name was released and he had played for Romford all season and fitted a few games in for M and B and he played and scored in the final - to me that is not right nor is it in the spirit of the game.

[smallsy]

SW - for him to be available to play in a cup final I am sure there are rules in place stating the player must have played in X amount of games or in previous rounds. I know that is the case for the Essex Premier Cup.

 

I think the new rules will prevent managers from encouraging their young players to give it a chance at a higher level and lower the standard of the league. The problem is the people voting on these rule changes are secretaries rather than managers and perhaps see things from an idealistic point of view rather than a practical one. What's done is done i suppose but I do agree with you SW when you say a lot of teams will no doubt breach the rules unwittingly and it may prove difficult to police.

 

Of course, the difference between step 7 and step 5 is not much. The difference between step 5 and the EOL 2nd/3rd divisions will be far greater and maybe this is how the rule passed.

 

As it was, should these have been the rules last season my squad would not have been affected but it would be nice to have that flexibility.

Edited July 13, 2012 by smallsy

[nicedarts]

Totally agree with the above. I can understand the league implying a rule of the registration of players, especially if it has effected results at the end of previous seasons, although i think there must be a better way around. Stop Whinging's rule seems very fair, if a player has not been involved in over half of his teams game's by December he should be allowed to sign for whoever.....i'm sure the other leagues do not have these rules.

 

It's good to see a youngster from Rayleigh stepping up, they seem to have some good players last year and it will be interesting to see how he gets on. The fact if it does not work out his option is only ESL is a shame!! i do not see any extra quality in the ESL as the teams play more of a physical long ball game in the aim of winning before concentrating on playing a less direct passing game. I'm not saying either is wrong i would just prefer spending my saturdays watching a team try and play the "right way".

 

For him to play in the final means one of the regular players would of missed out he had more then likely been at the club and played the whole season.......what must that do to a player who has given the club his commitment for a season??

[dagger]

For him to play in the final means one of the regular players would of missed out he had more then likely been at the club and played the whole season.......what must that do to a player who has given the club his commitment for a season??

 

Every player who played regularly last season played in the final.The player in mind played a dozen games for romford but played games for m&b before and after his spell there.I think the ruling is a joke, players who try to work there way up the leagues who maybe have a promising start but then get cast aside and find themselves frozen out,now cant go play in eofl JOKE.

[alwayshiding]

All, the change in rules on this topic was brought forward by a Club to the League and voted on by Clubs. You are right that Secretaries attend the AGM rather than Managers.

Perhaps if you have suggestions about ways of improving the League you should get your Secretary on board with your views or get him/her to send these to the League.

They will get listened to - at the end of the day it's the Clubs that vote rules in or out.

There is no room in moaning about things - like anything else if you don't like it get involved.

I agree with your comments made - let's start changing things.