WGCA Premier Grand Final

Sobers · Status: Offline

RE: WGCA Premier Grand Final

prince mark · Status: Offline

Fark off Sobers, we don't have drink drivers...........

fridge roberts · Status: Offline

synthetic cricket is so gay

deadbat · Status: Offline

Synthetic is good that you dont miss so many games year, although anyone would prefer a good turf deck every week. Same conditions each week helps, meaning clubs that miss finals cos teams lose 18 wickets in a day cant blame the pitch therefore saving a couple of paragraphs from there letters to the league.

Jake the Mus · Status: Offline

Why are you only comparing Beacy to the clubs in the DDCA, surely there would be clubs in WGCA in simiar positions to some in the DDCA that you refer to, would you care to use some of them as examples into how they are planing for their future

Legal Aid · Status: Offline

Jake the Mus wrote:

Why are you only comparing Beacy to the clubs in the DDCA, surely there would be clubs in WGCA in simiar positions to some in the DDCA that you refer to, would you care to use some of them as examples into how they are planing for their future

Use Beacy as an example because I know some of the committee and used to have an involvement with the footy club. Pakenham are giving some considerations to a similar set-up and I heard just recently that at Premier club (Hawthorn) may have approached them about establishing a turf wicket.

Those two clubs have a focus/direction that they are considering due to their position within Australia's 2nd largest growth corridor.

I cant imagine the powerhouse WGCA clubs like Cardinia & Koo Wee Rup would be considering this form of development as there is limited growth in those areas.

sheepy · Status: Offline

Hey deadbat, Not sure you have noticed but did you know test cricket, state cricket, oh **** come too think of it, all top level cricket is played on turf. Could it possibly be the best surface ?? Just a thought.

Legal Aid · Status: Offline

sheepy wrote:

Hey deadbat, Not sure you have noticed but did you know test cricket, state cricket, oh **** come too think of it, all top level cricket is played on turf. Could it possibly be the best surface ?? Just a thought.

Best surface by far sheepy. I wouldn't discount the fact that there would be some decent cricketers out there on the 'hard-wicket' stuff though.

PRINGLES · Status: Offline

sheepy wrote:

Hey deadbat, Not sure you have noticed but did you know test cricket, state cricket, oh **** come too think of it, all top level cricket is played on turf. Could it possibly be the best surface ?? Just a thought.

          Sheepy being a Sydneysider myself and a DDCA person for the last
          10 years Ill tell you that unless you play district cricket in Sydney
          (and im 90% sure in the country as well) everyone in NSW plays
           on synthetic wickets. There is no Turf subbies or Local Turf competitions
          The players of our level in VIC dont know how good they have it
          and it really enhances the competitions status

         However i believe that even though over half the DDCA is played
        on Synthetic wickets there is an attitude by some that they are too
        good for synthetic cricket and that is why the WGCA cop shyte
         even though it is a very good standard at premier level.

         And come to think of it that system hasnt hurt the NSW representation
         in AUST cricket sides over the past years

sheepy · Status: Offline

None of my posts have commented on the standard of cricket in either league and your right that there is a bit of turf snobbery in this comp, I mean playing turf 4 or 5 doesn't make it top level cricket. But early in this thread deadbat was telling us synthetic was better due to less lost days and that beacy was miles ahead of our grounds. At the end of the day they play top flight cricket on turf for a reason.

deadbat · Status: Offline

sheepy wrote:

None of my posts have commented on the standard of cricket in either league and your right that there is a bit of turf snobbery in this comp, I mean playing turf 4 or 5 doesn't make it top level cricket. But early in this thread deadbat was telling us synthetic was better due to less lost days and that beacy was miles ahead of our grounds. At the end of the day they play top flight cricket on turf for a reason.

Have another read sheepy. I never said Beacy was better than any DDCA ground, i just said it was a great cricket great. And i never said synthetic was better, i said it has some advantages but almost every cricketer would prefer to play on turf every week. Just so happens with live in victoria where it rains every sept/oct and we miss a lot of games or play on ordinary pitches.

Playing on turf does not make anyone a better player like many in the DDCA believe. No doubt turf 1 is stronger than WGCA but i reckon top sides in WGCA would go close to winning turf 2.

Jake the Mus · Status: Offline

Legal Aid wrote:

Jake the Mus wrote:

Why are you only comparing Beacy to the clubs in the DDCA, surely there would be clubs in WGCA in simiar positions to some in the DDCA that you refer to, would you care to use some of them as examples into how they are planing for their future

Use Beacy as an example because I know some of the committee and used to have an involvement with the footy club. Pakenham are giving some considerations to a similar set-up and I heard just recently that at Premier club (Hawthorn) may have approached them about establishing a turf wicket.

Those two clubs have a focus/direction that they are considering due to their position within Australia's 2nd largest growth corridor.

I cant imagine the powerhouse WGCA clubs like Cardinia & Koo Wee Rup would be considering this form of development as there is limited growth in those areas.

so would it be fair to say that these 2 clubs may be in a similar situation to some of the DDCA clubs you previousily eluded too in the coming years.

sheepy · Status: Offline

Yeah good post deadbat, I agree with all of it. I actually devalued turf cricket even more myself this season by playing a few games.
I still think the wgca has to decide wether it wants to be a synthetic comp or a turf comp. Can't be mixed, although would excuse it being mixed for a couple of seasons as clubs changed over.

deadbat · Status: Offline

sheepy wrote:

Yeah good post deadbat, I agree with all of it. I actually devalued turf cricket even more myself this season by playing a few games.
I still think the wgca has to decide wether it wants to be a synthetic comp or a turf comp. Can't be mixed, although would excuse it being mixed for a couple of seasons as clubs changed over.

I think WGCA will have turf in top grade in 4-5 years with a ground at beacy, paky and maybe cardi. Clubs arent big enough to do it themselves and the council would rather spend all there money getting hawthorn to play one intra club match a year on paky main oval so will take time. Its a disgrace that the cricket club cant even play its first XI on that ground thich has the best outfield around.

Legal Aid · Status: Offline

Jake the Mus wrote:

Legal Aid wrote:

Jake the Mus wrote:

Why are you only comparing Beacy to the clubs in the DDCA, surely there would be clubs in WGCA in simiar positions to some in the DDCA that you refer to, would you care to use some of them as examples into how they are planing for their future

Use Beacy as an example because I know some of the committee and used to have an involvement with the footy club. Pakenham are giving some considerations to a similar set-up and I heard just recently that at Premier club (Hawthorn) may have approached them about establishing a turf wicket.

Those two clubs have a focus/direction that they are considering due to their position within Australia's 2nd largest growth corridor.

I cant imagine the powerhouse WGCA clubs like Cardinia & Koo Wee Rup would be considering this form of development as there is limited growth in those areas.

so would it be fair to say that these 2 clubs may be in a similar situation to some of the DDCA clubs you previousily eluded too in the coming years.

Cardy and KWR have limited growth as I said but they still have growth. A couple of those DDCA clubs have no growth.

Legal Aid · Status: Offline

deadbat wrote:

sheepy wrote:

None of my posts have commented on the standard of cricket in either league and your right that there is a bit of turf snobbery in this comp, I mean playing turf 4 or 5 doesn't make it top level cricket. But early in this thread deadbat was telling us synthetic was better due to less lost days and that beacy was miles ahead of our grounds. At the end of the day they play top flight cricket on turf for a reason.

Have another read sheepy. I never said Beacy was better than any DDCA ground, i just said it was a great cricket great. And i never said synthetic was better, i said it has some advantages but almost every cricketer would prefer to play on turf every week. Just so happens with live in victoria where it rains every sept/oct and we miss a lot of games or play on ordinary pitches.

Playing on turf does not make anyone a better player like many in the DDCA believe. No doubt turf 1 is stronger than WGCA but i reckon top sides in WGCA would go close to winning turf 2.

I have seen a few WGCA games and I have no doubt that the Premier Grade sides in WGCA would beat all Turf 2 sides. I also think that the top Premier sides (KWR, Cardy & Officer) would smash Narre, Saints, Coomoora, and Keys in Turf 1.

sheepy · Status: Offline

Hey legalaid, it's pretty easy to sit in a high growth area and take potshots at the dandy based clubs. Areas change with the times, 25 years ago the dandenong area was the growth area now it's your turn but that doesn't mean all the dandy clubs should just give up.
I am from keysy and you keep having a crack at us but I take pride that without the growth and without spending truckloads of money that we have managed again to stay in turf 1 while other clubs like cranny etc with all their teams and all their kids are in turf2. We are probably the smallest club in turf 1 yet were competitive most weeks, beat a finals side and managed to stay up.
I'm sure you, and probably others actually will have a crack at me here but that's ok, we are an easy target.
But while judging other clubs why not tell us which club your involved with or is it easier just kicking others?

Legal Aid · Status: Offline

sheepy wrote:

Hey legalaid, it's pretty easy to sit in a high growth area and take potshots at the dandy based clubs. Areas change with the times, 25 years ago the dandenong area was the growth area now it's your turn but that doesn't mean all the dandy clubs should just give up.
I am from keysy and you keep having a crack at us but I take pride that without the growth and without spending truckloads of money that we have managed again to stay in turf 1 while other clubs like cranny etc with all their teams and all their kids are in turf2. We are probably the smallest club in turf 1 yet were competitive most weeks, beat a finals side and managed to stay up.
I'm sure you, and probably others actually will have a crack at me here but that's ok, we are an easy target.
But while judging other clubs why not tell us which club your involved with or is it easier just kicking others?

Thats not taking pot shots, just a reply to questions that you and others have raised about my previous posts. Agree with your comment in relation to previous growth in Dandy. These areas where the growth is will change in time. By then you and I wont be around to see who has survived and who has not. I live in an area with zero growth. Population under 3,000 so I am not sitting in the growth corridor either.

PRINGLES · Status: Offline

sheepy wrote:

None of my posts have commented on the standard of cricket in either league and your right that there is a bit of turf snobbery in this comp, I mean playing turf 4 or 5 doesn't make it top level cricket. But early in this thread deadbat was telling us synthetic was better due to less lost days and that beacy was miles ahead of our grounds. At the end of the day they play top flight cricket on turf for a reason.

          Sheepy I drive past the beacy ground every day and only a faaarkwit
          would think that it is anywhere near the surface of Keysys ground
          or harold rd and im sure a couple ive left out

slocs · Status: Offline

get out from your court room legal aid and stop talking sh1t.