New Rule...... Thoughts????

[Dudas]

I was having a discussion about youth players the other day and the restrictions around then playing both senior and junior football. I agree with the ruling of only two senior players allowed to play for your reserve team to prevent filling the team with senior players.

I have a suggestion and interested to hear other peoples views on this. I would suggest under 21's are exempt from this rule. 

We currently have a lot of young players who we are losing in the transition between youth and adult football. At the G we have some very good youngsters who I like to bring along with the first team to gain experience and then continue to develop in the reserves. The problem is that once they have played two games they then class as senior players and the reserves can only use two senior players. This has resulted in instances this season where I have not taken youngsters when a first team player has been injured or unavailable because it will make then ineligible for the reserves. With the fixture pile up to come I would really like to continue to include players mid week but can only use each one once or they are then unable to play for 28 days.

The reason I have said 21 is that we have a under 21's development league and thought this would make sense to draw the line. 

I am really interested in what others think on this. 

Hope it makes sense....

[Darin Morse]

Sorry but these rules are way too complicated. Abolish ALL restrictions - if you're registered, you're eligible. 

[Dave Bartlam]

1 hour ago, Darin Morse said:

Sorry but these rules are way too complicated. Abolish ALL restrictions - if you're registered, you're eligible. 

I disagree. Think of it this way... Helston first team have no game tomorrow. Their Reserves/thirds have games... Without this sort of ruling, the first team players could then star for one (or both teams) and make a huge impact on the game. This ruling is all about having players playing their standard as opposed to dropping down and smashing the teams that do not have the luxury of a higher placed side. You will never get rid of this rule.

Note: Helston used as an example (first club that popped into my head).

[WendronOfficial]

Definitely don’t scrap the rule. It would lead to chaos and teams using it to an unfair advantage. 

Interesting thought though @Dudas  - we often have younger players that transition between teams. It would help promote and keep interest of players, even if it was upped to three games it would ease some pressures. Not sure on the answer but one to think about. 

[Tempo]

If you scrapped the rule you’d see even more disgruntled players - when they’re all ousted for the first team to pick up points. And you’d see a distinct disadvantage to smaller clubs who don’t have a first team in a higher league, such as St Erme.

[cornish leg end]

Ash I agree with most of what your suggesting. But I think if you sign for a club you can play for any team with in that club. The whole Idea of having a reserve team is to bring players in for the first team. They don' instantly become a first team player and they will still need to drop down and play reserves following injury or even to get some form back. I agree we need a rule of how many players can be on the field of play at once but I believe if you play for a club you should be able to play for any team to progress and learn. 

This has been said for years though but never changed. Its something that needs to change to help teams and clubs to keep going and progressing and to help cornish football be the best it can be.. 

[Dave Bartlam]

We do have leagues that can be used for developing youth players - the U18 and U21 leagues to highlight just two.

The Flexi League has also been used by St Agnes to bring through their youth players who can’t play on Saturday’s. There are alternative options but if they are good enough to play in first teams at SWPL (in particular), they will have an impact in a game in say, Trelawny 4

[St Darren]

Yeah. Why should you sign and play for a club and not be eligible to play for teams within that club!!! Crazy

[Dave Bartlam]

1 minute ago, St Darren said:

Yeah. Why should you sign and play for a club and not be eligible to play for teams within that club!!! Crazy

There are many players that don’t even play for all the clubs in their team. We have many players who are signed on with Trelawny teams who have signed on for other Combo/SWPL teams, despite their club actually having a team in one (or both) of those respective leagues.

[Dudas]

I get the loading up concerns of senior players and although I don't agree with it I would rather any signed player for the club can represent any team. I understand and appreciate the feelings of teams like St Erme so support it.

What I don't like as mentioned is the restrictions on the youth team players. Agree if they are good enough for SWPL then they are good enough. I am more on about the ones that still need time to develop. 18/21 league is still not against experiences senior players and the flexi league is a good laugh but again not against the type of SWPL on a Saturday.

It was just a discussion as I say with another coach in a way we could prevent the numbers of players who are leaving clubs and football. I am not saying this is he only reason either, just looking at ways to improve and develop the youngsters at clubs.

[Fish]

I was told the rule is “a player is classed as a senior player if they have played 50% or more of the games played by the senior team” so if a combo team have played 20 games and a player has only played 9 of those games they can still play for the Trelawny League team??

if that is the case then if an U21 is an unused sub then they would be under 50%

is this correct? I am sure a rule book warrior will confirm ?

[Bobjfh]

G’ Reserves play Dutch League and I am not 100% sure of their rules - Trelawney League use the standardised FA rules - which are similar to what Fish quoted, it’s a while since I looked but firstly it relates to ‘higher ranked’ players and teams - Senior only relates to SWPL. Combo /ECPL and below is recreational football and not senior football - the CCFA just use the term to bolster numbers in the ‘Senior’ Cup.

The rule is similar to a player playing 2 or more consequetive games or more than 50% of games for the higher ranked team they become a higher ranked player. However, if they play two consequetive games for the lower ranked they become lower ranked again. 

You would need to check the exact wording, but the rule does allow, with proper management to bring players through as you are looking to do Dudas  

If the Duchy League still has the old 2 games makes seniors and you have to wait 28 days, then I would suggest clubs may want to look at a rule change?

[Dave Bartlam]

50 minutes ago, Fish said:

I was told the rule is “a player is classed as a senior player if they have played 50% or more of the games played by the senior team” so if a combo team have played 20 games and a player has only played 9 of those games they can still play for the Trelawny League team??

if that is the case then if an U21 is an unused sub then they would be under 50%

is this correct? I am sure a rule book warrior will confirm ?

They are also senior if they have played in the higher placed teams last three games. Rule 8 of the Competition Rules explain all  

 

18 minutes ago, Bobjfh said:

G’ Reserves play Dutch League and I am not 100% sure of their rules - Trelawney League use the standardised FA rules - which are similar to what Fish quoted, it’s a while since I looked but firstly it relates to ‘higher ranked’ players and teams - Senior only relates to SWPL. Combo /ECPL and below is recreational football and not senior football - the CCFA just use the term to bolster numbers in the ‘Senior’ Cup.

The rule is similar to a player playing 2 or more consequetive games or more than 50% of games for the higher ranked team they become a higher ranked player. However, if they play two consequetive games for the lower ranked they become lower ranked again. 

You would need to check the exact wording, but the rule does allow, with proper management to bring players through as you are looking to do Dudas  

If the Duchy League still has the old 2 games makes seniors and you have to wait 28 days, then I would suggest clubs may want to look at a rule change?

Correct - that’s also covered in our rules (players becoming junior). It can be difficult to assertain player status sometimes, if ever anyone is unsure, just ask  

[Dudas]

My understanding at the moment from what CCFA said, but i may have misintepreted the information. 2 games in a 28 day period classes as a senior player. You then have to wait 28 days from your last game to lose you senior status. All to complicated in my eyes and that is why i am interested in hearing opinions and working towards a change. 

[Dave Bartlam]

@Dudas just to quote Trelawny League Rules:

 

8c. i. Teams in this competition shall not play more than TWO players in any one game who, in the current season, are adjudged to be commanding a regular place in a team competing in a higher ranked League.

ii. For any club infringing this rule the penalties at Rule 8o shall apply.

iii. Clubs shall identify by notation of the Team Sheet, or entry of a ‘note’ in the box provided in Full-Time when submitting team sheets electronically, those ‘higher ranked players’ taking part on the first occasion that they play. Failing to identify such players as above will result in the player(s) being classified as ineligible for any game in which they play and the penalties at Rule 8o shall apply. Additional penalties, including fines and/or the deduction of points, may be imposed by the Management Committee for repeated breaches of this Rule.

Notes.

1. A player shall be deemed to be commanding a regular place with the higher ranked team if he has played in the teams preceding 3 fixtures, including cup matches, at the higher level or has taken part in more than 50% of the higher placed teams fixtures. A player shall not count towards the 2 allowed once he has played 3 consecutive games for the team in this league.

2. For the purpose of this Competition ‘Higher Ranked’ Leagues are the Cornwall Combination League, the East Cornwall Premier League and Leagues forming the Football Association Pyramid system i.e. the Peninsula League and above.

3. Where any doubt exists over a player’s eligibility in these circumstances the Registration Secretary will provide guidance.

 

This Rule is also in force for clubs that have more than one team in the the Trelawny League. There’s no time period (28 days).

Unfortunately the deadline for rule change proposals for our League was at the end of February so it’s something which can’t be changed now, I should imagine that’s the same for the Duchy League.

[John Mead]

Under the current rules, if a youngster steps up for 3 (or more) consecutive games, he would still be be eligible to play at the lower level as one of the 2 permitted "senior" players. No need to wait for 28 days unless there are more than 2 younsters stepping up and stepping down at the same time! If it is properly planned and managed, there shouldn't be a problem.

[St Newlyn East AFC]

The Duchy Rule is 8(C) A team shall not include more than TWO players who have taken part in TWO or more senior competition matches during the current season unless a period of TWENTY EIGHT days has elapsed since they played.

I agree with Ash and think we should be doing more to encourage younger players to stay involved but at all levels. However I don't see what new ruling could be put in place that would please everyone - especially with concerns rightly raised by Tempo. Whether, as Ash suggests, the eligible games are increased but the age set at under 18/19 could be an option as it could be that some 21 year olds could have already had nearly 5 years of playing adult football if started at 16 (I realise this isn't now the norm).

However it also falls on managers/coaches of adult teams playing in Duchy & Trelawney to give these young players valuable playing experience too to help their development - I've seen games this season in the Duchy League with young players sat on the bench only to have well established senior footballers play ahead of them because a senior side had no game!

Would a re-instatement system (yes reinventing the wheel) but only for players under a certain age be an option?

Jiggy

 

[Martin Eddy]

I think the big issue is that if a manager of say Godolphin gives these players 5minutes at the end of the game for a couple of games which is good for their experience they then cannot go back and play for the second team because say 2 experienced players are coming back from injury or illness, therefore the club is being penalised for bringing on young players and also, not many teams have an u18 or u21s team. Therefore these young players are then not playing any football

 

[John Mead]

5 hours ago, John Mead said:

Under the current rules, if a youngster steps up for 3 (or more) consecutive games, he would still be be eligible to play at the lower level as one of the 2 permitted "senior" players. No need to wait for 28 days unless there are more than 2 younsters stepping up and stepping down at the same time! If it is properly planned and managed, there shouldn't be a problem.

Sorry, I meant to add that this applies to Trelawny League. It would seem to make life easier if there were common rules for such situations across  the County - or even the Country! The Stadard Code gives too many alternative wordings!

[Darin Morse]

Er...is anybody still following this? (there'll be a test in 10 minutes).

I'm not saying my suggestion (to abolish all restrictions on eligibility) is perfect, but surely it must be better than the inevitable uncertainty caused by the current mishmash of regulations? I think it's the fundamental right of a manager to select whoever he likes. Just because he has the option of "strengthening" his side doesn't necessarily mean he'll take it. It's surely up to him to weigh up the pros and cons, including of course having to face a potential backlash from any "regulars" he puts sub. I get the feeling it's hard enough to get eleven players out on the pitch anyway without also having to negotiate complex rules on eligibility. Some people are quick to moan when losing to teams strengthened by the inclusion of so-called "first-teamers", but are strangely quiet when thrashing sides weakened by "first-team" call-ups - it's got to work both ways. 

[Dudas]

That is the problem I have encountered giving some 16/17 year olds 10/15 minutes where I can has resulted in them being classed as senior players as I did it for 2 games when the reserves didn't have games. I then had a players coming back from injury and the reserve manager had a situation of choosing between a regular 1st Team squad member i wanted to get minutes to get fit and a 17 year old who we are trying to develop. It just made me think the can we address this by having an age limit. I suggested 21 as there is the under 21 league and as Jiggy mentioned there are only a handful of players who will have 5 years senior experience. 

[Savo]

Ash, I've never been a fan of this rule as you know, it stifles development, I understand people worried about loading teams with first team players at times, but I feel this would generally not be the case. Sign for one club play for any if its teams. I have mentioned on a few occasions the solution used in Dorset and Hampshire was a highly competitive reserve league (wyvern combination league) 90% of games played mid week with no player restrictions, made development and inclusion very easy, whilst returning players, injury, suspension etc. Get valuable minutes. Again it may not work for  everyone and travelling and extra games on pitches could be come an issue. I like your idea of an exemption for U21 players from the current rule would definitely make giving young players valuable experience of first team, create more inclusion leading to player retention and would in my opinion increase development. 

[Paul Collings]

1 hour ago, Keith B said:

These rules were dreamed up by a by a fruit cake

As part of the Duchy committee that has brought in such restrictions  -   No offence taken Keith.

 

1 hour ago, Keith B said:

and for what reason that holds water

What about that old fashioned notion of fair play?

 

1 hour ago, Keith B said:

Or were they worried about something else ?

Like what ?

 

And, just for clarity, the detail of these restrictions added to the FA Standard Code Rules whether it be Duchy or Trelawny League, will have gone to an AGM and would have been voted for by the majority of member clubs.

[Richard Rundle]

Which teams play in this Under 21 league regularly mentioned above?

[Simon2389]

Imagine Madron, for example playing against Moushole 3rds in trelawney 4 but packed full of peninsula players?? I think their record of most goals conceded would be smashed... no offence at all to Madron you were used as an example only having 1 team

[le boss]

What ever happened to playing against better players and actually trying to beat them - what a scalp that would be? Surely after a couple of seasons of clubs so-called loading would even itself out anyway. Not sure managers of the senior clubs would want their stars playing on some of the cabbage patches anyway. How about just having the rule in cups then? Maybe clubs should be asked to sign a fair play agreement at the start of the season promising not to load sides with harsh sanctions if they break the agreement. Been an age old problem but so has playing players under assumed names. Something needs to be tried 

[dave bunt]

It would simplify matters if players where only permitted to sign for 1 club not the 5 league structures currently operating in Cornwall (SWPL, Combination, East Cornwall, Duchy @ Trelawney) What upsets clubs most is if a player from say SWPL hasn't got a game & then plays for a Duchy 4 side from a different club & has a direct bearing on the result by scoring 4 or 5 goals

[peggy78]

3 hours ago, dave bunt said:

It would simplify matters if players where only permitted to sign for 1 club not the 5 league structures currently operating in Cornwall (SWPL, Combination, East Cornwall, Duchy @ Trelawney) What upsets clubs most is if a player from say SWPL hasn't got a game & then plays for a Duchy 4 side from a different club & has a direct bearing on the result by scoring 4 or 5 goals

Think this is a FA rule rather than County. Also, does the fact that they play for another club have any bearing? There are plenty of clubs with at least 1 junior and 1 senior side and they are able to do the same.

[NIK NAC]

Every year this comes up and nothing ever gets done, it's there to stop cheating and try to make it a level playing field for all!