Possible changes to football calendar....

[Tree13]

http://www.scmp.com/sport/soccer/articl ... as-put-ice

A scheduling change away from winter soccer could be coming to Europe, according to Bayern Munich chairman Karl-Heinz Rummenigge.

Rummenigge, who is also chairman of the 207-member European Club Association that lobbies for the rights of European clubs, told France Football magazine that it made no sense that European clubs played in mid-winter.

"Everywhere, be it Germany, France or England, summer is the best period of the year. And that is the season we don't play," Rummenigge said. "In deepest winter, when it is very cold and snowing, we play nearly all the time in conditions that are disagreeable for both players and spectators. It is not logical."

Rummenigge said Fifa and Uefa were "seriously thinking" about an overhaul of the soccer calendar so European leagues would open in January and wrap up at the end of autumn.

"My sense is that we are heading straight in this direction," the former West Germany international was quoted as saying of possible January-autumn European leagues.

Asked whether soccer's traditional summer break could be abandoned, Rummenigge replied: "It's completely possible, even if this idea does not thrill our friends in South America."

How many games are we going to let the weather spoil, every year, before we revisit this issue DISPASSIONATELY? Even the footballing powers that be are starting to see the logic.

[APaddyNotThePaddy]

Happy with the way it is!

Summer is for Holidays and Summer Tournaments.

Plus with study timetables no college teams could play

[Jon_B]

My understanding from Peter Munday is the leagues were agreed to be structured over winter season as many clubs did (and still do) play on cricket grounds.
Making it a summer sport would, amongst many other things, render a number of clubs homeless.

[Ash]

And lax is something to look forward too in the dark winter months that aren't very BBQ & holiday friendly!! Summer you lose to may players to holidays, festivals, weddings that kind of stuff! Much better in winter IMO.

[Chavez66]

Students cant play in summer.

[Moaning Git]

Considering the position dispassionately, summer lacrosse is a runner, summer becoming the home of the league programmes is not.

What we need to do is ensure that that we maximise the playing opportunities available between September and May

[laxwill11]

Students cant play in summer.

Does it get in the way of their 'lying around' time?

[Rotisserie]

Considering the position dispassionately, summer lacrosse is a runner, summer becoming the home of the league programmes is not.

What we need to do is ensure that that we maximise the playing opportunities available between September and May

This.

[Tree13]

Considering the position dispassionately, summer lacrosse is a runner, summer becoming the home of the league programmes is not.

What we need to do is ensure that that we maximise the playing opportunities available between September and May

This.

We don't play September to May. League and Flags run October to early April. The cricket faction (for want of a better phrase) don't want to play lax in September and May because it intrudes on the cricket season. This same faction want to remain associated with cricket clubs despite the fact that playing on grass in an English winter guarantees cancellations due to waterlogging.

If we stay as a winter sport we limit the degree to which our game can expand, in terms of number of clubs and total participants. We can't play games over Christmas / New Year, or Easter, and we cannot make winter weather less inclement. The current six-month period we use provides, at most, 30 weekends. Four of those are taken up by Christmas, New Year and Easter. The weather can easily account for anywhere between two and six more. So essentially we have 24 weeks if we're lucky. Add to that the fact that spectators don't like standing in the wind, rain or snow; add to that the fact that many potential participants of all ages are not going to move away from football or rugby union. It's not hard to see what the single biggest obstacle to growth in lacrosse is.

We should run from the start of April to the end of October. Seven months instead of six. Less clash with football / rugby union. Increased possibility of spectators. Longer daylight hours. Easier road journeys. Yes, it will involve some short-term difficulties for SOME existing clubs, but obstinate refusal to adopt a summer timetable serves no long-term purpose. In fact the clubs who currently associate with cricket clubs, and therefore play on grass pitches that are more vulnerable to bad weather, actually have the most to gain from such a switch. American Football and Rugby League have both shifted to a summer timetable in recent years, and both have seen an increase in participation AND spectator numbers as a result.

Student clubs are already dropping out of SEMLA in favour of BUCS participation, so the claim that a shift to summer would stop students playing is somewhat disingenious. It would simply mean students would be unlikely to enter university teams for league and flags competition: a quick look at the SEMLA league tables shows how few university teams are still in SEMLA competitions, and at what level they compete. I would suggest that what would actually happen is that SOME students would play for different teams to those with which they are currently registered.

[Moaning Git]

I am afraid that your description lacks vision, and simply does not make allowances for the facts. You are looking at Semla, and by extension Nemla, but you also talk about growth of the sport. Who says that growth equates to expansion of the leagues? There are other forms of competition.

[Jon_B]

[/quote]We can't play games over Christmas / New Year, or Easter[/quote]

What about EG Christmas Cracker, The Croydon v Purley boxing day game (ran for about 40 years I believe), The Easter 8's, The Centurion sixes.. to name but a few.

[Tree13]

I am afraid that your description lacks vision, and simply does not make allowances for the facts. You are looking at Semla, and by extension Nemla, but you also talk about growth of the sport. Who says that growth equates to expansion of the leagues? There are other forms of competition.

I would suggest that maintaining the status quo is what lacks vision. Suggesting a model that has greater capacity for growth than the current arrangement does is, by definition, a vision.
What facts am I failing to make allowances for?
I made no mention of NEMLA. Is there a reason why NEMLA would have to change just because SEMLA chose to, or vice versa?
I made mention of growth in terms of participation at all age groups, spectator figures (and by extension public profile, leading to greater possibility of sponsorship opportunities), as well as expansion of the leagues.
I am proposing a model that allows us more weekends to play each year, and removes barriers to current non-participants. Why don't you want those things?

[Tree13]

We can't play games over Christmas / New Year, or Easter

What about EG Christmas Cracker, The Croydon v Purley boxing day game (ran for about 40 years I believe), The Easter 8's, The Centurion sixes.. to name but a few.

Would the existence of any of the above serve as a satisfactory reason for league and flag games to be set on any of the following dates for this upcoming year: 21st December? 28th December? 4th January? Easter Saturday?

I apologise for the lack of precision. I should have said "it would be somewhat unreasonable to schedule league or flags fixtures for the weekends immediately before and after Christmas, and at New Year, and on Easter weekend." If you feel otherwise, can you explain why we don't currently schedule league/flag fixtures for these dates?

[Moaning Git]

The status quo is not being maintained though!

The real growth in the Men's game is not in the North or South leagues, it is in the Universities! The key factor will be translating that into growth amongst clubs, and clubs need to respond to that by being more than just vehicles for league competitions.

You are only looking at part of the issue and therefore coming up with an incomplete response.

And if you were not considering the position of NEMLA you are being more divisive than inclusive, which is hardly helpful

[Chilli]

And I thought LaxForums was getting boring, nothing like a good old ding dong to make it interesting again!

The real growth in the Men's game is not in the North or South leagues

and simply does not make allowances for the facts

I suppose it depends on how you define 'real growth' but in the support of existing clubs, the creation of new Clubs and the development of University teams SEMLA has a strong record.
So purely for perspective;

SEMLA League Membership
1996/7
11 Clubs, 3 Universities, total 18 teams

2012/3
25 Clubs, 9 Universities, total 53 teams (fraction under 300% growth!)

2013/4 three to five new club/university teams to be added

University growth, spectacular, long may it continue, new town clubs essential.

[Jim13]

And I thought LaxForums was getting boring, nothing like a good old ding dong to make it interesting again!

Yeah, this is great stuff. I'm sat here with my popcorn.

[Tree13]

The status quo is not being maintained though!

The status quo to which I am referring is the current scheduling model for league and flags competition, which sees fixtures played between October and April. There are no proposals in the pipeline for any change to this, therefore the status quo is firmly being maintained.

The real growth in the Men's game is not in the North or South leagues, it is in the Universities! The key factor will be translating that into growth amongst clubs, and clubs need to respond to that by being more than just vehicles for league competitions.

In the current scheduling structure, the biggest growth being found in Universities is simply a self-fulfillling prophecy. By keeping the current scheduling structure and thereby denying access to thousands of potential new non-university players (those that play football), you leave university as the ONLY area in which participation can grow. That the growth in that area has been achieved is an accolade nonetheless, but it is of limited value as a counter-argument against moving the senior league to the summer.

Whilst the genesis of BUCS lacrosse is a good thing, and numbers of institutions participating in that league are growing, there are practical limits to this growth and I believe we are closer to those limits than you realise. BUCS lacrosse clashes with BUCS football, BUCS rugby union, and indeed a lot of other BUCS sports, replicating the inclusivity issue by forcing potential players to chose lacrosse over another sport in which they may already be firmly involved; it also places further demands on finite resources on Wednesdays, already the busiest day of the week by far for BUCS institutions; there is a chronic lack of coaches and officials available on Wednesday afternoons and little scope for any change in that regard except in the long term. BUCS lacrosse would actually benefit from moving from Wednesdays to Saturdays for these reasons (provided that SEMLA / NEMLA lacrosse moved to the summer in order to vacate the Saturdays in the November to February period, thereby freeing up coaches, referees and pitches for BUCS teams to access). Furthermore, there is a suggestion that growth in BUCS lacrosse has, in the South at least, led to a reduction in the number of University teams in senior competition (as universities withdraw funding for SEMLA participation in favour of BUCS participation). But that's another discussion.

You are only looking at part of the issue and therefore coming up with an incomplete response.

Half right. I'm looking at one aspect of a bigger strategy, and addressing that aspect. The response is complete with regard to the aspect I'm examining.

And if you were not considering the position of NEMLA you are being more divisive than inclusive, which is hardly helpful

NEMLA and SEMLA have different problems in certain aspects, based on differing geographic spread and differing growth rates. SEMLA would benefit from extra weekends being found for competitive fixtures because SEMLA is growing year on year, and that growth is being targeted in areas where there are geographic "holes" in the provision of lacrosse; SEMLA would benefit from playing at a time of year when there a more hours of daylight, because our geographic spread dictates that more teams have longer journeys to make than is the case in NEMLA.

And if we accept your remark is accurate, then must we not also consider the reverse to be true? IE, when NEMLA does not consider the position of SEMLA on a given issue, then NEMLA is being divisive rather than inclusive. We can open that can of worms in another discussion, but for now can we stick to the topic?

[Moaning Git]

So glad to see the you are keeping your contributions dispassionate!

[Tree13]

So glad to see the you are keeping your contributions dispassionate!

Not quite sure why you're rolling your eyes.

Also not quite sure if you've actually made a single definable point in counter-argument yet. I'd much rather debate the points raised, as I demonstrated by responding to your claims that the status quo has already changed and university lacrosse is currently the biggest area of growth.

The discussion regarding a move to summer lacrosse is not going to go away just because you roll your eyes. It is a serious consideration in the South and I have yet to hear a rational, insurmountable counter-argument in the face of the obvious benefits such a move would bring.

Clashes with worlds / euros? Yes. But that would affect a proportionally small number of players. This does not come close to outweighing the benefit of opening the game up to more participants, at all age groups, and also making domestic matches a more viable and attractive option for spectators.

So once again MoaningGit, why don't you want this to happen?

[Moaning Git]

You are making the mistake of assuming that I am against the proposal. I am not, I am neutral. All I am saying is the issue is not just one for SEMLA to decide as it has potential impacts elsewhere, so have the debate in SEMLA find the favoured option and then widen the debate and consider how it may be implemented.

My comments are simply to counterpoint your own, you requested dispassionate debate, but you are passionate in defence of your position and deflective on any contribution that does not support it. That is not dispassionate debate, and hence the rolling eyes. However you have every right to your opinion and I would not knock you for that.

I am saying the same thing on the other thread and Trevor also does not seem to appreciate my thoughts, which is a pity, but he is going to continue to get them anyway!