Welcome!

By registering with us, you'll be able to discuss, share and private message with other members of our community.

Sign Up Now!

NPL 2026

SMFC1959 said:
That was truly ridiculous how they carried on about that. It was in the Rules of Competition from the outset. They had no leg to stand on and yet went off playing the victim.

After the FV Community Shield event in May where South fielded a combined U20/23s team given the seniors were in Auckland for the OFC Pro League, they were signing " You're off to Tahiti ... We are off to Asia". Just utter nonsense.
Click to expand...
No one ever replied to my serious concerns if travel insurance or otherwise refunded all those tickets they booked for Asia?? Legit concern bc if they didnt the souva will go to $25 next time we visit and the meat will be measured by the teaspoon with 40kg of letruce......😂😛
 
plfc47fan said:
On a lighter note I have joined the Boomer AI bandwagon LFG!!! Can’t wait for this game but sadly won’t be in attendance to experience it

View attachment 8869
Click to expand...
Its like saop opera.. thats Berger's Alexander evil twin brother from north of the border, Preston Alexander, who was in hidding while bergers Alexander was around and comes out now that they are dead?? Hahahaha
 
Last edited:
Ian Rush said:
I mean is anything going to happen to North Sunshine after the pitch invasion and celebration with flares after their victory against Heidelberg on Wednesday Night?? Probably not because it'll have nothing to do with FV....However..as a neutral supporter of the game..I am frustrated with the inconsistencies when it comes to precedents.

Yes Preston's chants against South and the banners were unacceptable and yes it did bring the game into disrepute blah blah...but I've always said..Being biased is like watching a football game while only looking through one team’s camera.

As a Greek myself and not that I give a shit about politics but our friends north of the border do cop shit from our very own community. If its not Slavs, its Tito's Children...if it not Tito's Children...it Bulgarians..etc.etc..surely this should also be viewed as provocation.
Click to expand...

Football Australia doesnt touch that stuff, if they never did anything to MV in 2022 they wont to anyone else. Pitch invasions are a common part of the Australia cup, as are flares.

You cant do any of that in any Victoria sanctioned games.
 
southmelb said:
Football Australia doesnt touch that stuff, if they never did anything to MV in 2022 they wont to anyone else. Pitch invasions are a common part of the Australia cup, as are flares.

You cant do any of that in any Victoria sanctioned games.
Click to expand...
So we can storm the pitch at BT Conner...... woo hoo its been a while, you might have to give me a boost to get over the fence re. HAHAAHAHAHAAHAAH
 
No Totti No Party said:
Where's the resident Canberra npl guy when u need him
Click to expand...
Beretta said:
@NicCarBel @Dinamo

what's the go in NPL ACT with these rules, where some clubs are exempt, and others aren't?
Click to expand...
We all know Capital Football love their exemptions - technically Queanbeyan, White Eagles and Juventus are competing in this year's NPL with an exemption for the whole team after last year's shambolic review.

The first I had heard about exemptions to this particular rule was when hearing about Croatia's penalty - and I would presume it's part of said shambolic review. I haven't heard fully yet who the teams are that have exemptions, but I would hope that it's only those 3 (although realistically, Queanbeyan shouldn't have one, as they've been in the system for years already)

Interestingly though, the regulations say absolutely nothing about exemptions for PRP
1786676742475.png
 
NicCarBel said:
We all know Capital Football love their exemptions - technically Queanbeyan, White Eagles and Juventus are competing in this year's NPL with an exemption for the whole team after last year's shambolic review.

The first I had heard about exemptions to this particular rule was when hearing about Croatia's penalty - and I would presume it's part of said shambolic review. I haven't heard fully yet who the teams are that have exemptions, but I would hope that it's only those 3 (although realistically, Queanbeyan shouldn't have one, as they've been in the system for years already)

Interestingly though, the regulations say absolutely nothing about exemptions for PRP
View attachment 8896
Click to expand...
probably just npl bullshit heard around the grounds along with how lil marko went in the morning lmao
 
No Totti No Party said:
probably just npl bullshit heard around the grounds along with how lil marko went in the morning lmao
Click to expand...
Possible - the only place I've seen this chatter is FB comments

The other thing that's interesting, is Capital Football have updated the table to have the penalty (including in the social media post that went out this morning), but haven't actually said anything about it publically.
 
NicCarBel said:
Possible - the only place I've seen this chatter is FB comments

The other thing that's interesting, is Capital Football have updated the table to have the penalty (including in the social media post that went out this morning), but haven't actually said anything about it publically.
Click to expand...
Actually hang on - these three being the exemption makes sense now from a 'common sense' kind of approach.

The exemptions these clubs have to compete in the NPL this season, are exemptions to operate without a full junior pathway in 2026. The exemption will not be extended beyond 2026, and eligibility for NPL Men in 2027 is contingent on establishing Division 1 junior teams or NPL Boys promotion.

So from a common sense perspective (which a- Canberra doesn't have a lot of, and b- I gather it hasn't stopped other clubs around the country meeting them without full youth programs), as they don't have a full junior pathway, they simply cannot have the players in their youth ranks (without having an extended squad) to adhere fully to the PRP. In terms of progress of setting them up, Juventus has 3 of the 4 youth grades set up this year, White Eagles has 1, and Queanbeyan has 3 as well).

I think it's a case of unintended consequences and interpretation that didn't hit the fan until now.


I'm going to add for comparison purposes as well:
  • Wagga City has a full NPLY contingent competing in Capital Football this season
  • Yoogali SC has 2 of the 4 comparable age grades competing in Griffith (only comparing ages here, not the quality/standard)
  • Hanwood FC (who applied for NPL Capital Football for both 2024 and 2025) have the full age grade set up competing across Wagga and Griffith this season
 
Last edited:
NicCarBel said:
Actually hang on - these three being the exemption makes sense now from a 'common sense' kind of approach.

The exemptions these clubs have to compete in the NPL this season, are exemptions to operate without a full junior pathway in 2026. The exemption will not be extended beyond 2026, and eligibility for NPL Men in 2027 is contingent on establishing Division 1 junior teams or NPL Boys promotion.

So from a common sense perspective (which a- Canberra doesn't have a lot of, and b- I gather it hasn't stopped other clubs around the country meeting them without full youth programs), as they don't have a full junior pathway, they simply cannot have the players in their youth ranks (without having an extended squad) to adhere fully to the PRP. In terms of progress of setting them up, Juventus has 3 of the 4 youth grades set up this year, White Eagles has 1, and Queanbeyan has 3 as well).

I think it's a case of unintended consequences and interpretation that didn't hit the fan until now.


I'm going to add for comparison purposes as well:
  • Wagga City has a full NPLY contingent competing in Capital Football this season
  • Yoogali SC has 2 of the 4 comparable age grades competing in Griffith (only comparing ages here, not the quality/standard)
  • Hanwood FC (who applied for NPL Capital Football for both 2024 and 2025) have the full age grade set up competing across Wagga and Griffith this season
Click to expand...
I think the best idea that Capital Football could come up with would be perhaps they should introduce some of these teams into the NPL senior pyramid (including West Canberra who have a full contingent, but aren't performing very well on the field), and perhaps also ANU (who could theoretically parter up with a High School team on the Youth side of things on paper) until they get to a total of 16 clubs, and then have two divisions of 8 clubs with promotion and relegation between them. They could probably call the second division the Capital Premier League or something like that. That would be quite ground-breaking
 
Beretta said:
@NicCarBel @Dinamo

what's the go in NPL ACT with these rules, where some clubs are exempt, and others aren't?
Click to expand...

My understanding is that NPL teams must have a minimum of 3 U23 players on the team sheet with at least 1 of those being U20. There is also a requirement for squads to have a minimum of 3 homegrown players. The definition of homegrown is at least 3 years of being at their NPL club between 12-21.

Canberra Croatia apparently got done because they counted a substitute goalkeeper as one of those youth players. However, substitute goalkeepers do not count as one of the youth players. As a result, a 4-0 win on the pitch gets overturned to a 3-0 forfeit.

As Nic said above, clubs like Queanbeyan and White Eagles got specific junior pathway exemptions last year from Capital Football. Juventus got denied an exemption but are in the league, I'm not exactly sure what happened there as Capital Football isn't very transparent. I'm assuming it would be hard for all those guys to meet the homegrown criteria considering their lack of youth setups.
 
NicCarBel said:
I think the best idea that Capital Football could come up with would be perhaps they should introduce some of these teams into the NPL senior pyramid (including West Canberra who have a full contingent, but aren't performing very well on the field), and perhaps also ANU (who could theoretically parter up with a High School team on the Youth side of things on paper) until they get to a total of 16 clubs, and then have two divisions of 8 clubs with promotion and relegation between them. They could probably call the second division the Capital Premier League or something like that. That would be quite ground-breaking
Click to expand...

ANU are one of the best run clubs in Canberra and could easily be NPL level but don't meet the youth criteria. I've always wondered why they never partnered with a Radford for example so they have the opportunity to move up.
 
Dinamo said:
My understanding is that NPL teams must have a minimum of 3 U23 players on the team sheet with at least 1 of those being U20. There is also a requirement for squads to have a minimum of 3 homegrown players. The definition of homegrown is at least 3 years of being at their NPL club between 12-21.

Canberra Croatia apparently got done because they counted a substitute goalkeeper as one of those youth players. However, substitute goalkeepers do not count as one of the youth players. As a result, a 4-0 win on the pitch gets overturned to a 3-0 forfeit.

As Nic said above, clubs like Queanbeyan and White Eagles got specific junior pathway exemptions last year from Capital Football. Juventus got denied an exemption but are in the league, I'm not exactly sure what happened there as Capital Football isn't very transparent. I'm assuming it would be hard for all those guys to meet the homegrown criteria considering their lack of youth setups.
Click to expand...
My theory is that - after Gungahlin folded and it threatened the NPL having 10 teams this season, Juventus caught whift (i don't know how you're supposed to spell that in context) that White Eagles were getting the new 10th spot and argued with Capital Football that they had already put in place - or began a big chunk of it - what Capital Football doubted Juventus could do in 12 months in the space of 2-3 months, and essentially forced CF to put them in because they had finished above White Eagles (because White Eagles exemption was given while Juventus' was initially denied - despite neither being in the top 3 'exemption adjusted' spots in the CPL last year. I did note that when CF announced White Eagles and Juventus being added, that White Eagles had a full statement post on social media with graphics, etc ready within 15mins after the announcement was made, but Juventus didn't have anything until the next day.

The exemptions given to these 3 made it clear that they had to have a full set up in the Junior League ready to go for 2027
 
Dinamo said:
ANU are one of the best run clubs in Canberra and could easily be NPL level but don't meet the youth criteria. I've always wondered why they never partnered with a Radford for example so they have the opportunity to move up.
Click to expand...
100%

I have to find the post, I'm sure it's here somewhere. But I found it interesting the way they worded ANU not being included in NPL this year, and then changed it a day later..
 
NicCarBel said:
100%

I have to find the post, I'm sure it's here somewhere. But I found it interesting the way they worded ANU not being included in NPL this year, and then changed it a day later..
Click to expand...
ah was in my Fan View article
📢 CAPITAL FOOTBALL DECLARATION OF LEAGUES 2026 - TRANSPARENCY NOT INCLUDED

Article '📢 CAPITAL FOOTBALL DECLARATION OF LEAGUES 2026 - TRANSPARENCY NOT INCLUDED'

Capital Football have gone and done what many have perceived as the unthinkable, and confirmed a 10 team NPL for the 2026 season. This includes the removal from Capital Football for the club that finished 7th in an eight team competition in 2025 (Yoogali SC) - which would normally save them...
  • NicCarBel
  • 8 min read
  • Reaction score: 6
  • Comments: 8
  • Category: NPL

And, a new one that also seems to be an issue (since wording is always key and important), is that as per the recent declaration of leagues announcement, ANU FC - who finished 3rd on the CPL table in 2025, were noted by Capital Football as "Decided not to participate in NPL Men in 2026" rather than "Relegated from CPL Men to Capital League Opens Division 1" alongside the other rejected CPL clubs, despite not having any youth program at all - seemingly the major requirement to be included in the NPL from 2026. This now makes Brindabella's inclusion in the top-flight, and the review as a whole even more baffling if ANU was seemingly in the mix to be promoted.
Click to expand...
They then changed this 'Decided not to participate' to 'Eligible for promotion based on performance, but did not to apply for a Juniors exemption in order to be able to participate in NPL Men in 2026' on the Declaration of Leagues 2026
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top