Ian HarkinModeratorAugust 13, 2021 at 2:40 pmPost count: 18749
If @SuperNetball wants to maintain its position as the world’s best netball competition, it must increase squad sizes from 10 players to 12. This is a change that must happen for the 2022 season. 2021 has demonstrated that, writes @LizzyLegsEllis fact.https://t.co/WBOe7pJ0dd
— The Age Sport (@theagesport) August 13, 2021WaylayParticipantAugust 13, 2021 at 6:19 pmPost count: 266
Super Netball would if they could. It’s all money. If you add 2 players to each team, that’s 16 more players each round you’ve got to pay for their flights, accomodation, food (not to mention their weekly salary as we’ll) it’s expensive! Especially so if they’re not getting on the court.
One of the major reasons we went to 10 players is cause in the ANZ champs they found teams were RARELY using more than 10 players in a game and even with the rolling subs now I doubt that would change.al_exParticipantAugust 13, 2021 at 8:10 pmPost count: 1111
Something I find interesting is that no one’s really floated the idea of having 11 players. 10 players has been shown to be a tough ask especially when there are injuries involved, but I didn’t like when there were 12 players in ANZ and some players didn’t get an opportunity the entire season. To be honest though I think the bigger issue is the lack of teams, but I doubt SSN will be able to find the money to have 10 teams.JoyjamieParticipantAugust 14, 2021 at 3:18 amPost count: 235
Would 12 really work? How much opportunity would all the players get. getting couple more teams makes more sense. Also if this is about developing the Diamonds will there be restrictions on number of Imports in each teammcleodParticipantAugust 14, 2021 at 7:15 amPost count: 1592
With rolling subs, 12 players are not needed.JenParticipantAugust 14, 2021 at 10:06 amPost count: 61
Is Liz Ellis going to fund this? The league barely makes enough money to keep afloat as it is.MontyandpoppyParticipantAugust 15, 2021 at 9:29 amPost count: 198
I think in hindsight, this season would have flowed better and achieved Liz’s benefits had they introduced the 12 player squads about midway when things started to fall apart. Called upon the training partners like in 2020. I know this was difficult for them to uproot lives etc but the opportunity given is fantastic and look at the stars that have been discovered. I’m not sure 12 will be financially feasible (or if the court time would warrant it) if the season wasn’t disrupted but I do think the call should have been made this year…mcleodParticipantAugust 15, 2021 at 9:43 amPost count: 1592
This is the 2nd year in a row, where teams have had to be a in a hub, for a good part of the season. Fbirds and Lightning had is easier.
So surely the clubs are close to folding, no revenue for 2 years in a row. I’d say 12 players is the least of their concernsal_exParticipantAugust 15, 2021 at 9:55 amPost count: 1111
The legacy clubs will be ok, I mean Fever had enough money to overpay their players a few hundred thousand dollars and teams like the Swifts/Vixens/T’Birds are very popular. I think Magpies and Lightning might be in very difficult positions though, their funding isn’t based on fans it’s based on football teams. Maybe Giants as well but they seem to have done a better job of gaining support.mcleodParticipantAugust 15, 2021 at 10:24 amPost count: 1592
Yes true Fever will be fine, they have endless $$$$$.PICASSO123ParticipantAugust 15, 2021 at 10:42 amPost count: 155
One thing I loved about the 12 squad game was that it gave an opportunity for training partners to stamp their mark. Let’s be honest, if it wasn’t for the 12 squad rule there wouldn’t be players like Sunday Aryang getting the recognition she deserves. The Fever would’ve sticked with Bruce and Bayman-Francis for their defensive end, and who knows, wouldn’t have made finals this year 🤷♂️PICASSO123ParticipantAugust 15, 2021 at 10:44 amPost count: 155
But yes, money needs to be discussed thoroughly if SSN wants to increase the squad size
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.