I read with interest Alex Vella’s two commentary pieces in The Times recently.

While joining him in congratulating the winners in this year’s competitions, I would like to make reference to his comments about the issue of foreign players in the junior leagues.

I do this in the context of the larger picture of the various ­problems that exist in waterpolo in general.

It is a fact that five of the six teams that took part in the U-19 league fielded foreign players. Prima facie one could say that this is not a good idea but a closer look at the situation may suggest otherwise.

I start by posing a question – did the 10 foreign players who featured in this year’s U-19 league take the place of local boys who would have played had they (the foreign players) not been here?

The answer to this is not as unequivocal as one might think. I would argue the opposite in that these 10 players allowed 30 more local boys to take part at U-19 level.

During the winter months I formed part of an ad hoc committee made up of club representatives to discuss youth waterpolo.

Right at the start it was obvious that for season 2010 only three teams were certain of taking part in the U-19 due to lack of players. By engaging foreign players it was possible for three other teams to enter and make up a league of six teams. Not only that, but we ended up with a very balanced competition.

By the time the U-19 KO competition came around, most of the foreigners had left their respective teams. The result? Two teams did not enter the competition while one of the semi-finals ended in a ­16-goal romp for one of the teams.

At this point, I ask what is more beneficial for the development of young players?

To play against the same faces over and over again in a 3-4 team league in unbalanced matches, or to take part in a competition with more teams and players of a higher quality?

I have been taking a keen interest in youth waterpolo for close to 20 years now, rarely missing a game involving my team Sirens and often watching matches between other teams.

In 1994, 10 teams took part in the U-18 league. Now, we do not even have 10 active clubs in the ASA, let alone 10 teams who can field a side in at least one of the junior competitions.

This is a multi-faceted problem. The boys who took part in the 1994 U-18 league would have been born in 1976 or 1977. What other forms of entertainment did these boys have when they were around 12 years old?

They had no computers, no internet, no 24-hour television. They couldn’t watch films on their cell phone and they were much less mobile.

If they lived in one of the coastal towns all they did was go down to their local waterpolo pitch and spend the day there playing around in the sea.

Going back even further to the 70s, in St Paul’s Bay alone, we had no fewer then five teams who took part in an inter league fielding teams at U-14, U-16 and U-18 levels, from where the best products were promoted to the senior side.

These “distractions” are common to all sports.

Waterpolo has an added major problem. Players from all age groups train throughout winter to play a few matches in summer, often 10 or less crammed in two months. So, we expect our boys to train for 8/9 months to play competitively for two months. No wonder so many give up along the way.

Tackling new problems with old solutions is a recipe for disaster. The whole outlook towards building waterpolo teams has to change from top to bottom.

In Italy, U-19 players are allowed to play for their own team at junior level and for another team at senior level in a lower division, giving the boys more playing time.

In an interview I did with the Neptunes coach a few days ago, Sergey Markoch bemoaned the fall in standards in Maltese waterpolo. I concur with his opinion.

Markoch was absent from Maltese waterpolo for 14 years and could make a comparison with the benefit of not having been involved for a good number of years. He asked me where are the Marco Manaras, the Jonathan Vallettas and the Kurt Dowlings of those days and, more importantly, where are they going to come from in the future?

The truth is that we only have one player of that calibre who, having benefited from professional full-time coaching for three years, is now head and shoulders above the rest of his peers.

Can you imagine what players like Manara, Dowling and Valletta and many of their contemporaries would have been like had they enjoyed the same privilege?

Waterpolo is a dying game here in Malta.

While the National Pool has bettered the standards of the few it has diminished the number of participants. Those who have yet to notice this are burying their heads in the sand.

There has to be an action plan drawn up for the long-term survival of the sport, a concerted action between the ASA and the clubs. The expenditure on the national team, which will shortly be embarking on a very expensive participation in the European Championship, has to be rethought.

I estimate that this will cost the association in excess of €60,000 per annum. Who exactly will benefit from this besides the 13 players who make the team? Is it the best way to spend such a sizeable portion of the association’s budget when so many problems exist elsewhere?

The time for talk is over. It has been over for a long time. It should have come to an end when clubs like Valletta and Birżebbuġa practically went out of existence. We all stood by, myself included, doing nothing as they went under.

Others are in line to follow them within a few short years. And yet we busy ourselves arguing over the registration of two U-14 players and spending vast amounts of money to pay for our national team to play three games in far flung places.

Note: The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not reflect in any manner those of any club or association.