|
Post by Grace on Jan 7, 2016 23:05:09 GMT 10
Looking at the information on the Hockey Victoria site regarding making a state team, has it just become a money making venture. Looks like you have to pay to attend all the extra things and then pay another $40 on top of that and that doesn't even get you a trial.
Where or who is all this money going to? How much are parents paying to get there daughters a trial. Is it working? Do you know need to be rich just to make a trial? Shouldn't we be encouraging girls to trial, not make it hard or price them out of it. Happy my daughters are no longer Juniors, all seems very confusing and expensive.
|
|
|
Post by Hurt on Jan 7, 2016 23:19:42 GMT 10
Does seem a bit of a scare tactic. Selectors will be at all these extra days so yo give your kids the best chance they better come to everything.
So we have a problem getting good selectors, so to fix it we make the job of selecting more of a commitment, great idea. You are always better off asking people to select than grabbing those who volunteer; less likely to get people with agendas that way.
|
|
|
Post by Guest on Jan 8, 2016 10:47:30 GMT 10
Happy to have a invited trial list , not so happy to have to pay to be seen , guess its a tough thing to see players elsewhere when not during a season . Who knows what the answer is , will never make everyone happy
|
|
|
Post by sure on Jan 8, 2016 11:12:18 GMT 10
JSC and then trials meant all kids had the same opportunity to impress. Sure kids got selected or not selected on reputation as it is a human system but the idea was everyone has been judged on the same days for the same period of time. Now we have deliberately created a system where people who are selected in state teams are not being judged on the same days and do not necessarily have the same opportunity to impress. In this system you will still have players selected or not selected based on reputation.
We have created more potential inequity then we had initially.
|
|
|
Post by Going backwards on Jan 8, 2016 21:40:51 GMT 10
Sadly the system for selection is now more flawed than ever, and the more you pay the more chance you have. It's just wrong.
|
|
|
Post by Speeaking nonsense on Jan 10, 2016 17:20:23 GMT 10
So lets use the JSC from mid 2015 to pick some the 2016 team. I don't think so. JSC costs more to participate in than any of the other Academies, country champs or specialist days. If you can afford to pay $2500 to be in a state team as well as the annual rego fees to just play hockey then surely a couple of hundred extra to participate in one or two of HV specialist days or academies is not going to break the bank. You can miss the more expensive JSC and get seen at any one of the other training days or tournaments. What if you are unavailable to play in the JSC, how do you make a State team then. Don't forget also that these Academies, upskilling, and elite development days offer exceptional skill training from respected, well trained coaches, so that in itself should justify the cost. People are also forgetting that seeing potential players in differing environments allows the AIO's and selectors to get a better understanding of a players abilities outside of just what you see on the field. A major part of HV improved National performances in 2015 was surely due to picking High performance teams rather than just individual players who often look good in a weak team. Don't be fooled by the assumptions from a few years back where selectors where known to be biased and picked their favorites, or picked those with a reputation gained at U/12 that undeservedly stuck with them for years, that today's Selectors are acting the same Today's AIO's, Athlete Development coordinators, and Selectors are running a far more professional system than was previously provided Lets not go back to the old days where certain clubs dominated selections and the state team was picked straight after the JSC with no trials at all. As a current state team parent I am delighted with the changes that have been made cause my kids two teams no longer have selfish players who think of themselves over the team. The only ones I have seen complain are those who got overlooked when they thought they had a god given right to be in every State team the trialed for. Long live professionalism and fairness.
|
|
|
Post by guet on Jan 11, 2016 12:36:18 GMT 10
It’s not really fair to assume what amount of money will or won’t break the bank for people. It’s more the perception that people might have that you are at a disadvantage if you don’t put your kids in everything possible. Having $2500 doesn’t mean you definitely have $2700.
Being unavailable for JSC would be the same as being unavailable for the final trials. In most cases you would miss out. In the old system you nominate for the trials even if you didn’t play JSC, if you were unable to play JSC or attend the final selection trials you would need to be a very good player or have a very good reason for being unavailable, my guess would be you would need both.
Academies, up skilling and elite development days offer training mainly from the state players who aren’t working/ are at uni/school who don’t necessarily have any coaching qualifications. You can’t guarantee the state players you want to coach at these programs are available in most instances. It is normally the younger players who still might have a lot to learn.
JSC and trials show players actually playing the game and how they play within a team. You often see players who have great skills and basics but struggle to find the ball in a game and actually have little to no influence in matches. Lots of players look good at training but when there are no cones and they have to make decisions in a real game they are far less impressive. JSC gives you a chance to see kids play against other good players and how they make decisions at different stages of a game depending on the score and the time left.
There is no evidence to support whether selectors previously played favourites or not, just as there is no evidence that today’s selectors won’t play favourites or pick on reputation. I’m not saying they are better or worse but the new system doesn’t do anything to safeguard against it happening.
The system may be more professional (organised) but that is not proof it will be more accurate, it just now has more red tape; process for process sake. Isn’t there the potential for more selection based on positive or negative reputation if the AIOs are the same for teams instead of changing selectors each year? Players may continue to be punished or carried based on their past. With more requirements for selectors (AIOs) we are likely to see a smaller pool as less people have the time to commit to all the requirements of being an AIO.
Clubs have dominated selections previously because their kids were better. We have seen several dominate underage club teams over the past decade and unsurprisingly that resulted in multiple players from those clubs being selected; this doesn’t automatically mean there was bias. Of course it also doesn’t mean there wasn’t bias.
|
|
|
Post by Oria on Jan 11, 2016 23:57:55 GMT 10
It’s not really fair to assume what amount of money will or won’t break the bank for people. It’s more the perception that people might have that you are at a disadvantage if you don’t put your kids in everything possible. Having $2500 doesn’t mean you definitely have $2700. Being unavailable for JSC would be the same as being unavailable for the final trials. In most cases you would miss out. In the old system you nominate for the trials even if you didn’t play JSC, if you were unable to play JSC or attend the final selection trials you would need to be a very good player or have a very good reason for being unavailable, my guess would be you would need both. Academies, up skilling and elite development days offer training mainly from the state players who aren’t working/ are at uni/school who don’t necessarily have any coaching qualifications. You can’t guarantee the state players you want to coach at these programs are available in most instances. It is normally the younger players who still might have a lot to learn. JSC and trials show players actually playing the game and how they play within a team. You often see players who have great skills and basics but struggle to find the ball in a game and actually have little to no influence in matches. Lots of players look good at training but when there are no cones and they have to make decisions in a real game they are far less impressive. JSC gives you a chance to see kids play against other good players and how they make decisions at different stages of a game depending on the score and the time left. There is no evidence to support whether selectors previously played favourites or not, just as there is no evidence that today’s selectors won’t play favourites or pick on reputation. I’m not saying they are better or worse but the new system doesn’t do anything to safeguard against it happening. The system may be more professional (organised) but that is not proof it will be more accurate, it just now has more red tape; process for process sake. Isn’t there the potential for more selection based on positive or negative reputation if the AIOs are the same for teams instead of changing selectors each year? Players may continue to be punished or carried based on their past. With more requirements for selectors (AIOs) we are likely to see a smaller pool as less people have the time to commit to all the requirements of being an AIO. Clubs have dominated selections previously because their kids were better. We have seen several dominate underage club teams over the past decade and unsurprisingly that resulted in multiple players from those clubs being selected; this doesn’t automatically mean there was bias. Of course it also doesn’t mean there wasn’t bias. Glad someone knows what's going on, you need a job in the high performance team.
|
|
|
Post by thanks coaches. on Jan 12, 2016 21:48:57 GMT 10
"Academies, up skilling and elite development days offer training mainly from the state players who aren’t working/ are at uni/school who don’t necessarily have any coaching qualifications. You can’t guarantee the state players you want to coach at these programs are available in most instances. It is normally the younger players who still might have a lot to learn."
who do you want available in most of your instances though? should chris ciriello fly down constantly for these days? how about we just get ric charlesworth on a full time salary.
Regardless of the coaching qualifications (most do have qualifications as they double up coaching schools/junior teams) most of these young people are and have been involved with junior and senior national programs. Working with what we have available, wouldn't you want your child to learn and work with this group of coaches who are directly exposed to the programs that the hockey australia high performance groups are under? they may not use the exact same drills, but surely they would be beneficial in teaching your kids the things that they are learning at higher levels to become better hockey players.
although they might be young and still have a lot to learn, they definitely have years and years of experience to share and a lot of time to put into the juniors to improve the standard of hockey right across Victoria for the future.
its a little alarming that people are conning the young people putting back into a system and improving a system that they never had as a junior and would have loved to have had...
|
|
|
Post by Huh on Jan 12, 2016 23:12:55 GMT 10
"Academies, up skilling and elite development days offer training mainly from the state players who aren’t working/ are at uni/school who don’t necessarily have any coaching qualifications. You can’t guarantee the state players you want to coach at these programs are available in most instances. It is normally the younger players who still might have a lot to learn." who do you want available in most of your instances though? should chris ciriello fly down constantly for these days? how about we just get ric charlesworth on a full time salary. Regardless of the coaching qualifications (most do have qualifications as they double up coaching schools/junior teams) most of these young people are and have been involved with junior and senior national programs. Working with what we have available, wouldn't you want your child to learn and work with this group of coaches who are directly exposed to the programs that the hockey australia high performance groups are under? they may not use the exact same drills, but surely they would be beneficial in teaching your kids the things that they are learning at higher levels to become better hockey players. although they might be young and still have a lot to learn, they definitely have years and years of experience to share and a lot of time to put into the juniors to improve the standard of hockey right across Victoria for the future. its a little alarming that people are conning the young people putting back into a system and improving a system that they never had as a junior and would have loved to have had... Giving back? Or getting paid good money?
|
|
|
Post by Are you serious on Jan 13, 2016 7:33:00 GMT 10
"Academies, up skilling and elite development days offer training mainly from the state players who aren’t working/ are at uni/school who don’t necessarily have any coaching qualifications. You can’t guarantee the state players you want to coach at these programs are available in most instances. It is normally the younger players who still might have a lot to learn." who do you want available in most of your instances though? should chris ciriello fly down constantly for these days? how about we just get ric charlesworth on a full time salary. Regardless of the coaching qualifications (most do have qualifications as they double up coaching schools/junior teams) most of these young people are and have been involved with junior and senior national programs. Working with what we have available, wouldn't you want your child to learn and work with this group of coaches who are directly exposed to the programs that the hockey australia high performance groups are under? they may not use the exact same drills, but surely they would be beneficial in teaching your kids the things that they are learning at higher levels to become better hockey players. although they might be young and still have a lot to learn, they definitely have years and years of experience to share and a lot of time to put into the juniors to improve the standard of hockey right across Victoria for the future. its a little alarming that people are conning the young people putting back into a system and improving a system that they never had as a junior and would have loved to have had... Giving back? Or getting paid good money? Are you serious. Up at 5.00 am and off to Academy training, often not close to home, using your own car and all for two hours pay. Off course they should be paid, and paid well. I wouldn't get out of bed for two hours work at 5.00 am and neither would most people. Don't forget they also have to write full detailed player reports in their own unpaid time. If that's not giving a bit back then I don't know what is. I don't recall hearing about hundreds of coaches lining up to take these jobs. All you young coaches working at Academies and Elite skill days etc, A big thank you from all the parents who appreciate what you are giving to our children
|
|
|
Post by guet on Jan 13, 2016 8:22:05 GMT 10
“Thanks coaches”, My comment you quoted was in direct response to the below statement from “Speaking nonsense” which was laying it on a little thick. “Don't forget also that these Academies, upskilling, and elite development days offer exceptional skill training from respected, well trained coaches, so that in itself should justify the cost” I said they don’t necessarily have coaching qualifications and you can’t guarantee you’ll get the guys or girls you want to do it. And that it is normally the younger players. I don’t think these were inaccurate or unreasonable statements. You going straight to sarcasm and facetiously suggesting Cirello or Charlesworth come coach has strongly suggested to me who you are. I’d suggest not writing the same way in which you speak if you are trying to remain anonymous.
I notice you didn’t address anything else from my post; I will address yours . “most of these young people are and have been involved with junior and senior national programs” Come on, MOST have been involved with SENIOR national programs?? Happy the coaches are good and have plenty to offer younger players, and no doubt are the best of what HV could get (given the requirements they place on AIOs). HV have attempted to get the best coaches, no argument. They have just made the job too onerous and therefor knocked out some of the better candidates.
“and improving a system that they never had as a junior and would have loved to have had... “ The first part remains to be seen and I guess we just take your word for the second part that you have spoken to them all about the new system and they all said they wish they had it. Which is fair enough as they wouldn’t be working as part of it if they didn’t think it was worthwhile.
I think the rest of your post is reasonable but you need to be more balanced in your arguments if you want to convince people. I’m not going to assume you are conceding all the points in my post that you didn’t address, but that’s how it could be perceived when you only address two of them. But it is a free country and I’m sure you don’t have the same amount of free time that I do.
“Are you serious”. Couldn’t agree more, they are definitely giving back and I’m sure doing a great job.
|
|
|
Post by Guest on Jan 21, 2016 21:30:44 GMT 10
Best thing HV ever did was employee Emily Hurtz and Ben Seccul to run the high performance, academies etc. Well done HV
|
|
|
Post by Guest on Jan 26, 2016 19:20:59 GMT 10
Hurtz was a very good pick up.
|
|
|
Post by Guest on Jan 26, 2016 19:59:37 GMT 10
When do they announce the players who are invited to the trials for the u18 and u21 state teams?
|
|
|
Post by Top spotted shark on Jan 26, 2016 22:22:37 GMT 10
Best thing HV ever did was employee Emily Hurtz and Ben Seccul to run the high performance, academies etc. Well done HV Yes Emily is fantastic.
|
|
|
Post by Guest on Jan 26, 2016 23:30:50 GMT 10
Ben has been brilliant. Both he and Emily work so hard and are so passionate about hockey. It's been amazing to watch the work put into the Junior Academies and Skill Sessions.
|
|
|
Post by What do you know on Jan 27, 2016 9:07:38 GMT 10
Ben has been brilliant. Both he and Emily work so hard and are so passionate about hockey. It's been amazing to watch the work put into the Junior Academies and Skill Sessions. Looks like the HV High performance department actually does have an ongoing, long term, well thought out development plan in place despite all the they have copped over the last 18 months on this forum. It takes time to plan out, develop, instigate, and fine tune these programs. From nothing in place 18 months ago to what we have now, looks like someone at HV is on the ball. Overheard a conversation a few months back where it was said that other states and HA are looking at copying HV High Performance programs Good Work Skillern and HV department,
|
|
|
Post by Strong team on Jan 27, 2016 20:15:41 GMT 10
the changes over the past 18months have been tremendous , I truly believe that Rochelle has made a massive impact , yes many have bagged her in the past , I was one of them , but the truth is she is a very strong and determined women whom has been an integral part of the ground work , recruitment and implementation . the addition of Ben and Emily has been amazing , they are both extremely dedicated and should be applauded . HV on the up . great work .
|
|
|
Post by Guest on Jan 27, 2016 21:37:49 GMT 10
Great to see Rochelle and the HV team back posting on here, we missed them.
|
|