For followers of country football, especially the smaller district leagues, the past few seasons have been very sad to watch.
The instances of inability to field three teams at season’s start, the shocking blow-out scores, the forfeits, the “doubling-up” (players turning out twice on the same day to fill teams), matches played when one team only has 15-16 players, and the absence of signs of change for the better are most disturbing.
Causes will divide opinions, but I am more interested in considering what corrective steps might be taken.
Why are under-18 levels retained?
Why not revert to the third level being for ages 16 and under?
Lads who pass 16 years could take the field in the reserves, and the more talented would be selected in the seniors.
I began competitive footy in the Heathcote League with Rushworth in 1966 when aged 11, in the then Under-15s.
At sixteen, I had five matches with the Tiger’s reserves, then a few seasons in the seniors.
Numbers were tight (when playing away at distant, freezing, wet and windy Tooborac) but the idea of a forfeit never arose.
These days, with lots of junior footy, I suspect there is some burn-out for many boys approaching 18 years, but I am poorly placed to assess.
However, without an ability to retain local lads, I see more district clubs destined to merge or fold, the latter a disaster for local communities, and for the willing and far more numerous and active netballers.
End the under-18s football.
Go back to 16 years and under, start the conversation.
The model worked in the 1960s and 1970s.
A change for next season cannot possibly do any harm, and might just save some clubs.
7°C