New Division 1 structure

[Nobby]

Well is it working? Most teams have now played a couple of games - what do you think. For my money the difference between top and bottom of leagues is as wide as ever,with some big thumpings being handed out. The top three teams playing each other 4 timres should give some 'sparky' games though.

[Ice]

It was a terrible decision. Less games - less competitive - less variety and only benefited a couple of clubs in terms of travelling issues. This is not good for development of the women's game.

If common sense has it's way the it will revert to the old structure next season.

[dude]

Look at the league the Lady Bison are in. They are trouncing everyone (is it about 40+ goals from 3 games and non conceeded) so how is that developing them further? They're having challenge matches again Prem teams.

And how is it developing the other teams in the league? Can't be much fun some of the more development teams facing them numerous times a season.

[Nobby]

Look at the league the Lady Bison are in. They are trouncing everyone (is it about 40+ goals from 3 games and non conceeded) so how is that developing them further? They're having challenge matches again Prem teams.

And how is it developing the other teams in the league? Can't be much fun some of the more development teams facing them numerous times a season.

Fair enough, but they do have to play Cobras 4 times. They might be able to put up some opposition thou Bisons will take some stopping this year I think

[Goalie96]

Im playing in the southern section of wd1, think the structure at the moment isnt very good, no one i have spoken to thinks it is any good either. How is the league table at the end of the season going to be a fair representation of how good the teams are when teams arent playing each other the same amount of times? can only hope that it goes back to the way it was.

[dave]

So this new structure only benefits a couple of teams....get off the fence, who do you think that might be??? Maybe the South has had it too easy just rolling along for an hours journey between pads, try 5 hours on a sunday with work the next day.......great development hey?
It was broken and needed fixing....is it fixed yet, maybe not quite but please don't think the old way is best. And just who is missing from the South that means Basingstoke will just romp home......can't think of anyone currently, and its also a little disrespectful to count all the others out don't you think?
If women's hockey wants to really change and develop maybe those in it need to come up with a plan and then they would be stakeholders rather than stone throwers.....

[dude]

Look at the league the Lady Bison are in. They are trouncing everyone (is it about 40+ goals from 3 games and non conceeded) so how is that developing them further? They're having challenge matches again Prem teams.

And how is it developing the other teams in the league? Can't be much fun some of the more development teams facing them numerous times a season.

Fair enough, but they do have to play Cobras 4 times. They might be able to put up some opposition thou Bisons will take some stopping this year I think

I agree if anyone could stop them/beat them it is Chelsmford but a whole season cannot be built on 4 games for either of those teams. I was just using B'Stoke as an example because I know their results so far this season.

[Goalie96]

i understand why they did it, so there is less traveling, but there was never as much traveling as the premier league have to do. the main thing i have the problem with is what i said before, the league table at the end of the season can be a fair representation if the teams havent played each other the same amount of times. what happens if next season a southern team gets promoted and no southern team comes down? it would mean the south wd1 would be left with 5 teams. most people ive spoken to arent knocking why they did it, just dont think the set up is that great

[Michelle #7]

So this new structure only benefits a couple of teams....get off the fence, who do you think that might be??? Maybe the South has had it too easy just rolling along for an hours journey between pads, try 5 hours on a sunday with work the next day.......great development hey?
It was broken and needed fixing....is it fixed yet, maybe not quite but please don't think the old way is best. And just who is missing from the South that means Basingstoke will just romp home......can't think of anyone currently, and its also a little disrespectful to count all the others out don't you think?
If women's hockey wants to really change and develop maybe those in it need to come up with a plan and then they would be stakeholders rather than stone throwers.....

Sorry Dave but I'm from a northern team and think the new system is rubbish (actually I'm from the midlands team that got shoved north), not enough variety of teams to play against and as for whinging about travel, get over it we all have to do it and if you don't wanna do it - don't play, find a local sport.

They say its just a trial but I'm not convinced, seems to me whoever cries the loudest gets what they want

[Ice]

They say its just a trial but I'm not convinced, seems to me whoever cries the loudest gets what they want

The problem was that the decision was not debated fully. It was rail-roaded through on the day of the AGM without any real thought of the overall consequences.

This should have been presented way before the AGM and debated and thought through.

The overall impact of this decision was detrimental to the development and variety within women's ice hockey. What also concerns me is that many teams will have lost game ice time for this and even if the decision was to be reversed some would have problems regaining that ice time.

There is no doubt that there was a travel costs issue for a minority of teams but, as it is in the premier league, travel is part and parcel of a minority sport.

Imagine if the Premier league adopted the same stance?

[dave]

Michelle sorry if my opinion upsets you but I can't legislate for that can I, however just to put the record straight you didn't get shoved North you were there already. Why is it whinging to state the obvious regarding travel, I don't complain about it I merely state that this is an issue for many clubs and should be considered. I didn't shout for it I merely, in the 2007/08 season backed a motion by another team to look at some alternative ways of setting up the leagues. This was never really discussed at that AGM because of the U16 rule, but it appeared at this years, not my doing I'm afraid.
Was it discussed properly and was it the right thing to do, everyone will have different views, however my point is still valid, was it broke, probably, can it be fixed, probably, will the clubs get together and discuss a proposal to put to the EIHA in order to ensure the game and its growth.....not very probable!

[harry potter]

i think it's guna suck cuz all the same teams will be at the palyoff's each year

and we get the chance to play some teams more than others the whole thing just confuses me
but on the plus side we could see a little more hope to get some new teams started up in the 3 divisions to plump them up a little

[dave]

No ones been on this for a long time but I do have to draw attention to the following:

1/ Bison have not romped home!!
2/ Chelmsford have done well and taken their title, well done
3/ Streatham showed real steel to get in the hunt
4/ The 'credit crunch' has really affected everyone and had it not been for this change would have put some teams out of business financially.
5/ This years fight for the Prem spot will be worth it with three very good teams all of which hopefully want to be up there competing.

Well done to everyone who has given this a good go, played some great hockey and yes I have to say seen some teams step up to the mark and show real signs of improvement.
What comes next season....who knows but my challenge still stands.....if it isn't right what should really be changed??

[Michelle #7]

Sorry Dave but I disagree. I think it's worse, we're playing less games, playing the same teams so no variety and travelling costs have been crippling cos apart from Sheffield all our opponents are miles away.

I hate the new system and don't see how having 3 div 1 winners and 1 premier loser can make for an equal fight for who goes up.

Also under the new system the league standings are distorted, in div 1 north I would've expected Sheffield to finish 3rd this season but as they are in the top group of 3 have to play the better of the 3 teams and will probably now finish 4th putting them in the bottom half of the tables for next season (if this system continues) but they are a better team than whoever ends up in third place who were in the lower 3 group, thus making the system unfair and not a true reflection on a team's ability.

I think it stinks and want it back to the way it was - the new system is definately NOT better.

On a separate note I see there are only 6 under 16's girls teams left at the end of the season across the whole country so do not see how this is benefitting the game either, something else that was better left alone and down to the parents and coaching staff to decide if a junior should play womens hockey.

[Ben]

Solihull will play Chelmsford in the first 'semi' at the playoff weekend, leaving Bilingham to play MK.

I don't like the 3 league set up and think the only way to make it worth doing would be to have cross overs with the other two leagues.

Other than that, North and South was fine.

[Heather9]

I think the new Division 1 structure is awful how can it ever be a fair league when u don't all play the same teams the same amount of times? We lost to Milton Keynes on the weekend fair & square but they are top of the league by 1 point by playing the bottom 4 teams 4 times & only playing the top teams twice, how can that be fair? It will always be the same if this league stays the same as there is vast difference between the top 4 teams & the bottom 2 therefore there will always be a good team that gets an easy ride & probably ends up winning the league! This has to change, this league change was a knee jerk reaction to the fuel prices & now that they have dropped it is no longer relevant. Ok it was worth the experiment but it didn't work lets go back to what did work!

[globaleyes]

Thanks Heather for the fairly played game over the weekend which was a tough one for us too. We both wanted it badly and it could have gone either way. We are very conscious at MK that we've had an easier run of it this season than the top three teams. But having said that, we beat Oxford Midnight Stars twice, tied and beat Coventry once each, and split with you. So hopefully people will see that it wasn't all down to an easier schedule.

Overall, I couldn't agree with you more - the new league structure is not fair. We've been bored out of our skulls, having so few games but also playing the same teams so often. It isn't good, to be honest, for us either because we haven't been pushed to up our game in preparation for meeting your team. Stronger teams benefit from playing stronger teams, and certainly weaker ones don't like be pummelled unnecessarily (that was us last year). While the new structure is supposed to encourage more even matching of top three and bottom three teams, the teams can change so much each year that ranking them according to the previous season's performance can cause imbalances. This is what happened this year in the Midlands - we did poorly the season before because we lost six forwards. We rebuilt last summer and now have a fuller squad again. The rankings thus didn't make any sense - we actually have four strong teams in the Midlands. Oxford University does well considering it must rely on what students are available. Peterborough has a great spirit and encourages new players to develop which is important.

I personally think the fairest way to do this is to have everyone play each other the same amount of games - six teams per division, 3 games each. We could alternative who has the two home games each season. This will give us 18 games again which the womens' teams need (long stretches of no games is terrible for all of us) and, importantly, give a fair result at the end. I very much hope that the League will reconsider because Division 1 hockey has lost a lot of precious ice time as a result of this decision.

Good luck for the rest of the season. Look forward to meeting you all again at the Swindon tournament - looks like the Midlands will be well represented! Thanks again for giving us such a challenge last Saturday - we need more games like that to raise our standard too!

[dave]

Well it would appear that some want to go back to the 'old way', can't think why really but then we are all allowed to have opinions.
How about if it were changed to reflect the real state of Womens Hockey and have 3 National Leagues, Prem, Div1,and Div2. There are currently 28 teams by my reckoning so 10, 9 and 9 should make for some interesting hockey and give teams with equal rankings a chance of making a good showing and fighting to win their respective leagues therefore having the chance to automatically promote. Top 2 from each league going up and bottom two going down.
Playoffs of top 4 in each league fighting it out at the end of the season, it would certainly give teams at all levels the chance to aspire and hopefully develop.
I don't think it would stop teams 'poaching' but then nothing really will, but it does give everyone something to fight for and maybe it would even out the level of play between teams. It would give at least 16 games and these should all be 20mins and not 15mins.
Well more thoughts oh and by the way I do agree with much of what has been said about distortion in the placings coming into the season with the seedings, and with three games to the team are still looking for victorys. We have had the chance to play 'new' teams and to renew old aquaintances. Well done to MK this season and see all those Midlands teams in Swindon, I think everyone is going along so it should be a good weekend....

[Ben]

It would appear it's only you that wants to keep it as it is.

[Michelle #7]

Thats because they have less travelling to do under the new structure. Glad I'm not the only one who thinks its worse Ben. Question is will all the other people shout loud enough to get it changed back to how it was. I much prefer the old system with the variety of teams and no distortion in placings at the end of the season