Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
"Kyle":2r2qo2gh wrote:Non-contact is a meaningless phrase in ice hockey and people shouldn’t use it.
[/quote:2r2qo2gh]Pond hockey is supposedly non-contact.
Welcome to the forum Lumpy.
Pity to hear the team are pulling out of the Gore tournament and potentially the rest of the season. That’s a big change from two teams last season (or maybe that was the season before).
"battered_and_bruised":3l025whl wrote:You still haven’t told me if/when I win how you will get this cat over to me.
[/quote:3l025whl]Well duh! Dry it, flatten it out and laser print the address on it. How the heck else would you send it?
[img:3l025whl]http://www.techcrunch.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/img_6062jpg.jpeg[/img:3l025whl]
http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/05/06/me … crn.ch_1Q7"Kyle":3lvp7ixp wrote:If we don’t have qualified referees, we can’t have a DIHL. You can’t view the two things in isolation, they’re linked.[/quote:3lvp7ixp]Yep, that was my point.
Anyhows, I don’t think we’re getting anywhere here. If you are able to get hold of the latest finance info. that would be darn handy. I can wank on all I want about stuff but I need some numbers to see how it all stacks up.
What he^ said.
"Kyle":3a5k6wwj wrote:We don’t train referees to look good, we train referees so that we can put competent qualified referees out on the ice for the games that we run. If you’re not concerned about that…[/quote:3a5k6wwj]I did not say I wasn’t concerned about that. It just has absolutely nothing to do with this conversation. We’re talking about improving the number of players in DIHA competitions by changing it’s pricing model.
"Kyle":22md4btt wrote:Players pay the referees for turning up on the night and doing the game as part of the DIHL. They don’t pay for their training, development, supervision etc etc as part of the DIHL. If players want decent refereeing, then they’re drawing benefits which aren’t provided by their DIHL registration. That’s why they ‘pay twice’.
[/quote:22md4btt]Who cares who trains the refs? I don’t think this has any bearing on the discussion at all. What the DIHA does for hockey is irrelevant here, we are trying to work out what is best for the players, the sport and the club, not what makes the club look the best. Players do not need to be registered for the DIHA to provide referee training, they can train the refs regardless of whether the players that are competing are registered or not.
Aaron – What did you think of my suggestion of the DIHA absorbing the registration costs themselves? As much as I’d like to see the club just not bother paying NZIHF/SIHL fees for some players (or only registering them as associates) I’m not sure if that will wash with the powers that be. By absorbing the costs the intial upfront fee can be plummeted.
Not requiring DIHL players to be registered with the DIHA and keeping the $100 fee would not work as it would make other DIHA events prohibitively expensive.
There should be no financial risk to the DIHA since the costs would be immediately covered asthey wouldn’t be registered until signing up for a large scale league like the DIHL. The DIHL wouldn’t perhaps make as much of a profit at the beginning of the year, but at the end of the year it would make a whole bunch more than it normally does.
"Kyle":2cz69m7o wrote:As I’ve said many times, DIHL is not the only service we provide. Club nights, practices etc would all be more expensive if the DIHA was a commercial operation.
[/quote:2cz69m7o]Not necessarily. They could end up cheaper depending on how the numbers stack up.
"Defense101":3o37p60x wrote:Tom when you steal other peoples quotes from the internet that is called plagerism. The least you could do when defending your horrible 2nd rate team with quotes and hockey terminology from other people is reference them at the end of your post and give them the credit for the comments they made. This will be a valuable tool for you should you decide to go to University to learn some of the finer skills if your hockey skills don’t take you to the NHL.
[/quote:3o37p60x]I believe when you accuse someone of something which is not true, it is called ‘slander’ (or ‘libel’, I can’t remember which). This will be a valuable tool for you when you fail university because you spent too long accusing others of plagerism instead of studying.
Oh, and GO the Cannucks!
I wasn’t saying the DIHA should not be affiliated to the NZIHF, just that you don’t have to be affiliated to them.
Not being affiliated to the NZIHF would obviously be a dumb move for the DIHA.
Being a member is purely a technicality. I can’t see that it makes any difference to anything really. That’s just a bunch of politics which doesn’t affect he players IMO.
Anyhow, I’ll wait to see what Aaron says.
You are 100% definitely wrong on one count though, and that is saying that you need to be part of the NZIHF to play hockey in NZ. The Aardwolfs Ice Hockey Club is not a member of the NZIHF, nor are they a member of the CIHA, ChCh SNC or any other ice hockey body in NZ. They have never competed in any NZIHF affiliated events or events organised by bodies which are affiliated with the NZIHF. However they do compete in hockey tournaments held in New Zealand, usually organised by themselves. Many of their members are also members of the NZIHF and organisations which are affilitated to the NZIHF, but that is not a requirement to join their club or to compete in any of the events they participate in.
The Aardwolfs aren’t being dishonest, they’re pretty upfront by sending a big central finger to their local hockey organisation by saying they have no interest in being involved with them or any of their activities.
AFAIK the Queenstown Jurassic league runs a similar system to the Aardwolfs. Although I’ve only heard that via third hand information so I may be wrong.
Most other sports have various bodies which operate a similar model. It does limit what that organisation can do, but usually the sports bodies operating that way never intended to make user of whatever services/facilities those other organisations offered anyway.
Good points Kyle.
"Kyle":3v16ekz0 wrote:If the membership fee ended up significantly lower than that then I suspect the DIHA would have to tack costs onto elsewhere to recover the money (so there might be an entry fee for DIHL for example).[/quote:3v16ekz0]I’m wondering if my above argument wasn’t very clear now. My point (and Aarons presumably) was that the costs [b:3v16ekz0]should[/b:3v16ekz0] be tacked on elsewhere. That is the point I (and Aaron presumably) are trying to make here. It’s not the total cost, just the upfront cost which is a problem.
"Kyle":3v16ekz0 wrote:Remember that the membership fee is the only thing that the membership controls, anything after that the committee does (though the committee didn’t set the DIHL fee this year, our only direction was that it make a small profit, which it looks like it will easily do).[/quote:3v16ekz0]We as members (well actually I’m not a member but you know what I mean) can lobby the committee to change their policies. If we can give a logical, reasonable argument as to why change should be made then presumably we’d have a reasonable shot at achieving what we want.
Depending on how the numbers stack up, and assuming what you said about the other clubs lying about their membership is correct, then it may be reasonable to provide some commercially-based leagues. It would depend on the ratio of members needing NZIHF/SIHL registration to the number not requiring it. Then the DIHA registration fee could be slashed down to some meagre amount. It’s hard to know without seeing hard numbers however. That data could presumably be obtained from this years records. The DIHL will have records of everyone who played and the DIHA will have records of who has utilised their SIHL/NZIHF membership and an estimate could be obtained from that.
Your argument about having to pay people to run a commercially based league is bollocks. It would only be commercial in the sense that it is set up as a fund-raiser to benefit the DIHA. It would purely be a technicality, nothing else would need to change, just the cost of ice time that the DIHA would need to process. The DIHL would potentially indirectly become cheaper because of the increase in ice time costs.
My request for treasury information was actually for this year. I figured last years accounts would be diabolical.
And on the ‘we provide services for members, not for non-members’, remember that the the is here to do it’s best to improve the services for it’s own members. If that requires not having a bunch of former members as actual members then that doesn’t really change anything. You are still doing it to benefit your own members. It’s all just numbers an politics. In a practical real world situation none of this should matter to the players and they would not need to know what is going on behind the scenes, just that the cost of playing hockey has become cheaper or at least the upfront cost has reduced for them.
Aaron – Are you out there? I’d like to know what your opinions on all of this are. I have lots of ideas, but no point in my pursuing them if I don’t have someone else reasonably high up in the DIHA to back me on it. I can piss on for hours about how I think things should be done, but if my ideas aren’t running parallel to yours then I’ll stop planning anything now.
As a comparison, here are the fees for the Christchurch SNC:
[quote:12744bxm]SNC Fees :- $25
CIHA Fees :- $45
NZIHA Fees :- $30[/quote:12744bxm]So that’s only $100 for the Christchurch league in comparison to the same price to play here in Dunedin. Which on the face of it may seem reasonble, however when you realise how much more the Christchurch players get for their money it makes the DIHA deal seem pretty awful.
The Christchurch SNC features three grades (A, B and Premier). Plus those players can compete in the CIHA contact league, womens league, junior league etc. with the same registration. Each grade plays around 20 games per season and many players are able to play in multiple SNC grades (ie: the top 50% of B-graders can play in the A-grade and vice versa). The games are more organised, the league is more organised and they get all that for exactly the same price as the DIHA is charging.
Now even based on that you could argue that the DIHA has a better rink. But the killer blow to charging that sort of rate to me, is that the CIHA has an overflow of players. They literally can’t take any more as there is simply no ice time available. I don’t mean no ice time like Dunedin players like to say there is no ice time, but I mean literally, you can’t book ice time for shit unless it’s at some obscure time of night. Their SNC league had no choice but to move all of it’s games to the summer as they simply couldn’t get enough ice time during the winter.
Another factor to consider, is that the DIHA’s ice time and hence league costs are lower than Christchurch. So the price of the registration fee is disproportionately high in comparison to the cost to compete. For a single DIHL season you are paying well over twice the price of the entire league. Even for two DIHL seasons, the DIHA registration amounts to a fairly large proportion of the total league fees. Since the cost to compete is lower, the DIHA can appeal to players with less disposable income, but providing a high registration fee those players are being turned away.
The CIHA can afford to prune out the poor players, the less serious players and those who simply aren’t organised enough to get their $100 in on time. The DIHA however does not have that luxury, we need as many players as we can get and I think some creative accounting behind the scenes to spread the payment load throughout the season is the best approach to be taken.Also remembering here that we don’t need to pay NZIHF or SIHL fees for players who don’t compete in events organised by those bodies. The DIHA has been a bit of an odd-ball in that respect. The CIHA and AIHA needs their players to stump up the cash because their own local leagues are the leagues which they pool their rep. teams from, this is not the case with the DIHA as those players are pooled from the SIHL league, hence most (all?) of the other clubs around the southern region do not bother paying those fees for players who do not make use of them.
An important thing we would need to emphasise in any attempt to convince others of this idea, is that we aren’t trying to decrease the total cost. If anything this could be used to increase the costs as the cost to play in the DIHL and other events could be ramped up quite a bit since the initial cost hit won’t be as high.
Chris, any opinions on how the system should work?
I think all members in the DIHL SHOULD be fully paid members, simply because it adds a larger tally to the DIHA’s official numbers. However it doesn’t mean that it needs to be a ridiculously high number like it is now, or what Kyle is suggesting for 2010.
