[UptheA7]

Just been reading the EoS thread about Hawick Royal Albert and the renewed local players policy which is apparently gaining momentum. Will this have such a big impact on the Hawick (and surrounding) amateur sides who I am sure will admit are not enjoying the best of seasons this year. Or is there plenty of youngsters coming through to see the clubs through the dreaded transition period?

[baltic]

UptheA7, on 02 March 2011 - 16:49, said:

Just been reading the EoS thread about Hawick Royal Albert and the renewed local players policy which is apparently gaining momentum. Will this have such a big impact on the Hawick (and surrounding) amateur sides who I am sure will admit are not enjoying the best of seasons this year. Or is there plenty of youngsters coming through to see the clubs through the dreaded transition period?

I am quite sure Mr C will come up with a new rule to stop players making the step up. lol

[danny zucco]

baltic, on 02 March 2011 - 17:53, said:

I am quite sure Mr C will come up with a new rule to stop players making the step up. lol

step up.

[The Jed-i-Master]

I was in the local salad shop this morning and a heard rumours that a (very) old HRA legend has been seen training at Elliot Park, Jedburgh for the last few weeks trying to get a bit sharpness hoping that his old club wil come calling. He's not kicked a ball now for 2 or 3 seasons but he would still walk into the current team even after their recent recruitment drive.

By all accounts the current goings on at Albert Park is adversely affecting the other teams namely the Waverley who have had to call on some elder statesmen in the last 2 weeks to field a team.

Is there enough players coming through in Hawick and currently playing to support 5 well run teams who are able to compete?

This post has been edited by The Jed-i-Master: 02 March 2011 - 18:50

[HEED]

We've seen this many times before with the Albert, there is a lot of promise to start off with then a few bad results later the players end up back at their previous amateur clubs.

A place the size of Hawick should at least have a half decent EOS club and a couple of decent 1st divsion sides and maybe one or two lower level teams to blood the youngsters through.

I suppose only time will tell if the Albert manage to maintain the use of the local amateur players or if the local players can stick it out at EOS level, it will be interesting to see what happens through the summer months.

[UptheA7]

I wondered if they had plans to take on or introduce a feeder club(s)? It hasn't worked too well in other towns as the majority of amateur sides and EoS teams don't exactly work together. The 14 day rule certainly doesn't help.

[geogers]

The Jed-i-Master, on 02 March 2011 - 18:43, said:

I was in the local salad shop this morning and a heard rumours that a (very) old HRA legend has been seen training at Elliot Park, Jedburgh for the last few weeks trying to get a bit sharpness hoping that his old club wil come calling. He's not kicked a ball now for 2 or 3 seasons but he would still walk into the current team even after their recent recruitment drive.

By all accounts the current goings on at Albert Park is adversely affecting the other teams namely the Waverley who have had to call on some elder statesmen in the last 2 weeks to field a team.

Is there enough players coming through in Hawick and currently playing to support 5 well run teams who are able to compete?

good question thats the problem in hawick there is no players coming through well very view anyway a can see at least 1 team if no 2 teams folding at end of season sad like

[The Jed-i-Master]

HEED, on 03 March 2011 - 11:19, said:

We've seen this many times before with the Albert, there is a lot of promise to start off with then a few bad results later the players end up back at their previous amateur clubs.

A place the size of Hawick should at least have a half decent EOS club and a couple of decent 1st divsion sides and maybe one or two lower level teams to blood the youngsters through.

I suppose only time will tell if the Albert manage to maintain the use of the local amateur players or if the local players can stick it out at EOS level, it will be interesting to see what happens through the summer months.

I'm no so sure that Hawick is able to support that many teams Heed, I'm just looking at Gala as an example which is bigger than Hawick and arguably has a bigger catchment area, Tweedbank etc and they are only running the 4 Saturday teams with one looking as if it may fold.

I think the reality is that there's no longer the player base in the Borders for certain towns to support 5 or 6 Saturday teams and Hawick in my opinion may lose one or 2 teams because of the re-emergence of HRA but that may be a good thing in the long run for football in Hawick although no one likes to see teams disappear. I remember when I started there used to be the Albert, Waverley, Legion, United, Legion Rovers, United Colts and Scrumz(can't remember if Scrumz and United Colts were effectively the same club?).

[dawg255]

UptheA7, on 03 March 2011 - 12:04, said:

I wondered if they had plans to take on or introduce a feeder club(s)? It hasn't worked too well in other towns as the majority of amateur sides and EoS teams don't exactly work together. The 14 day rule certainly doesn't help.


The 14 day rule should be changed back eos teams with feeder clubs should be able to have the pick of the players from these teams and then they can play them as trialists and they can go back to there am clubs without having to miss two weeks of football also it would allow eos players coming back from injury the chance to get fit/match practice.

This post has been edited by dawg255: 03 March 2011 - 19:53

[geogers]

The Jed-i-Master, on 03 March 2011 - 18:22, said:

I'm no so sure that Hawick is able to support that many teams Heed, I'm just looking at Gala as an example which is bigger than Hawick and arguably has a bigger catchment area, Tweedbank etc and they are only running the 4 Saturday teams with one looking as if it may fold.

I think the reality is that there's no longer the player base in the Borders for certain towns to support 5 or 6 Saturday teams and Hawick in my opinion may lose one or 2 teams because of the re-emergence of HRA but that may be a good thing in the long run for football in Hawick although no one likes to see teams disappear. I remember when I started there used to be the Albert, Waverley, Legion, United, Legion Rovers, United Colts and Scrumz(can't remember if Scrumz and United Colts were effectively the same club?).

there was hra, united. united colts, haw leg, haw leg rov, hawick scrumz, haw thistle it just shows you fitba not good in hawick very few players are coming through now wouldnt be surprized to see more fold at end of season

[The Jed-i-Master]

Changing the 14 day rule is a valid point and there are many arguments for changing it.

However there is also a valid argument against changing it or introducing another rule to stop the movement of players who haven't played BAFA football all season who towards the end of the season are released by their EOS clubs if they have nothing to play for or their season has finished to then play for a BAFA club to help them push for honours or avoid relegation.

We have come up against this sort of thing on numerous occasions at Jed and it tends to obviously benefit clubs where the town has an EOS club more and can work against teams who are in the same promotion push/relegation battle at the end of a long hard season who don't have access to EOS players. I also always wonder what players who have played all season for a BAFA club think when an EOS player is drafted in to play just to help dig them out the shit or help them win a cup or promotion or the league for a couple of games at the end of the season.

It's not every club that does it but it does happen and this is what this rule is there to prevent but I'm not so sure that there is perhaps another solution that would be better but not sure what that is.

This post has been edited by The Jed-i-Master: 03 March 2011 - 22:39

[dawg255]

I know what you mean Jed-i but still think it is an unfair rule at the end of the day none of us are professional and most just want to play the game and test ourcselves at the highest level and I feel the 14 day rule stops some better am players doin this. As for eos players comin back down to am don't think anything could be done for league games but could possibly cup tie them if they have not played in every round and teams just tried to bring them in for finals.

[UptheA7]

The Jed-i-Master, on 03 March 2011 - 22:22, said:

Changing the 14 day rule is a valid point and there are many arguments for changing it.

However there is also a valid argument against changing it or introducing another rule to stop the movement of players who haven't played BAFA football all season who towards the end of the season are released by their EOS clubs if they have nothing to play for or their season has finished to then play for a BAFA club to help them push for honours or avoid relegation.

I can see both sides of the argument here but would say is there really anyone playing EoS that is a cut above BAFA in the Borders? We have brought back EoS players at the end of the season when their season is over but these players were originally "our" players who had stepped up not individuals selected to dig us out of a hole. If an EoS player is that good they would be playing with a club still involved in their own competitions not looking for a game in the BAFA.

The 14 day rule prevents players getting EoS experience and also hinders injured players comebacks. Where is the incentive to an EoS club to run a BAFA club when the players are basically stuck with their respective clubs they simply run an U19's where the players are signed to them. The u19's are not even playing on a weekly basis! A player is being penalised for trying to play at a "higher" level.

[The Jed-i-Master]

dawg255, on 04 March 2011 - 06:58, said:

I know what you mean Jed-i but still think it is an unfair rule at the end of the day none of us are professional and most just want to play the game and test ourcselves at the highest level and I feel the 14 day rule stops some better am players doin this. As for eos players comin back down to am don't think anything could be done for league games but could possibly cup tie them if they have not played in every round and teams just tried to bring them in for finals.

UptheA7, on 04 March 2011 - 08:36, said:

I can see both sides of the argument here but would say is there really anyone playing EoS that is a cut above BAFA in the Borders? We have brought back EoS players at the end of the season when their season is over but these players were originally "our" players who had stepped up not individuals selected to dig us out of a hole. If an EoS player is that good they would be playing with a club still involved in their own competitions not looking for a game in the BAFA.

The 14 day rule prevents players getting EoS experience and also hinders injured players comebacks. Where is the incentive to an EoS club to run a BAFA club when the players are basically stuck with their respective clubs they simply run an U19's where the players are signed to them. The u19's are not even playing on a weekly basis! A player is being penalised for trying to play at a "higher" level.

Very valid points guys like I say there are many arguments all fair in my opinion for scrapping the 14 day rule. Maybe Im just a bitter old man who is struggling to overcome past experiences .

Getting back to the original point with regards football in Hawick, it appears as if the Waverley may now struggle between now and the end of the season with the players that they have lost but they may have amassed just enough points to keep them in the league but given HRA's position and the fact that they cant get relegated it may have been better for those players to stay with Waverley until they had maybe got another say 6 points which, in my opinion and historically, would pretty much guarantee them safety and then go to HRA (Waverley are currently on 16 points, Jed 14 pts wi a game in hand, Hawick Legion 9 pts and Greenlaw 3 pts). I think United may also be in a similar position although I think I am right in saying that they only lost the one player to HRA recently(georgers?) but they also lost a couple of players at start of season or earlier in Owens,Shepherd, Wallace.

I understand that HRA want to start the ball rolling asap and start to put a squad together but what can they achieve?? In my opinion they may have been better served waiting to the summer to begin their recruitment drive and not upset the other teams in Hawick as much and perhaps bring them onside in a way which could benefit all clubs. However, by signing their players as we approach the business end of the season, this may have caused some unrest between the clubs but I suppose only the guys looking after the teams in Hawick can comment. This would have at least given the BAFA teams a chance to look to do their own recruiting if required. This is perhaps something that in practice could never happen as I understand the football politics is a complex affair. I know that the current management set up in Hawick were snooping around Jed a couple of weeks ago getting phone nos etc which doesnt help when we are trying to stay in the A division.

[UptheA7]

The Jed-i-Master, on 04 March 2011 - 13:37, said:

I know that the current management set up in Hawick were snooping around Jed a couple of weeks ago getting phone nos etc which doesnt help when we are trying to stay in the A division.

EoS clubs (or other senior clubs) must give you 7 days notice in writing that they want to sign your player or they are liable to action from the SFA unless otherwise agreed.

[HibeeJibee]

Personally, I didn't understand the purpose of the 14-day-rule when it came in, and I wonder if it's really fulfilling a purpose now. It certainly hinders/discourages players who are talented, and could be candidates to 'step-up', from having/taking that opportunity (as you have to sit-out for a fortnight after returning). It also makes it difficult for those clubs who have affiliated feeder or reserve sides in the BAFL... and it means BAFL sides with an injury/suspensions crisis, have to bring-in players from other BAFL sides / youths / free agents, instead of being able to go to a parent club or get someone out-of-the-picture at an EOS side. For those clubs that do have affiliated sides, it makes it hard for them to use it to help their players returning from injury.


If the problem really does surround regular EOS players 'dropping down' to BAFL level once their season has finished - this could be covered by a signings cut-off (for example in the SFL + EOSFL, no-one can sign from 1st April on and play). It's not necessary to have a 14-day 'embargo' which applies throughout the whole season, IMO.

In the case of cup tournaments (though I think players being moved from EOS to BAFL to help win cups is rare anyway), a player could be rated ineligible if they were signed 'after the date of the tie before the Semi-Finals' or suchlike.


If it's really about cup finals and end-of-season fairness, then the 14-day rule is (IMO) a sledgehammer to crack a nut - when a compact mallet exists, and could suffice.

[malky1982]

I think the fact that players are wanting to go down to the albert is a start and can only be a good thing for the town, because it they attract the best am players from the town, they will do more than hold there own in the 1st div eos, the timing of getting players at this stage has to be in question as you have 2 teams in the a div fighting a relegation battle, well miby 1 team now after waverlys result today, but as mentioned they could have waited to the end of the season, just my opinion!!! If the players that say they are going down nxt season then i have no doubt a team mite fold in hawick which is sad but mabye in the long run good for the town, beacause me for 1 is sick of hawick senior fitbaw being a laughing stock!!!

[HibeeJibee]

Galashiels has a population of 12300 and it's got Fairydean, Rovers, United + Hotspur = 4 teams. (As well as Stow to the north and St Boswells + Newtown to the East). Hawick has got a population of 14800 and it's got Albert, United, Waverley, Legion + Legion Rovers = 5 teams. (And no villages as near - infact only Ancrum, before you hit the major central Borders towns).

So you'd think that Hawick could sustain 5 teams, if Gala can sustain 4.

(And infact Gala have an U-19s playing in the EOS on Sundays, too).


Do fewer Hawickers take-up football?

[The Jed-i-Master]

I'm not convinced that many EOS clubs have a true affiliation with Border Am sides other than maybe Selkirk even where the BAFA club share the same facilities but maybe I'm wrong? For example I can't see the Kelso Utd management, Coldstream management + others looking at their BAFA clubs as feeder clubs where players move up or down given the fact that these BAFA clubs are currently playing lower division BAFA football. The EOS clubs instead prefer to bring in players from other EOS clubs or look further afield if required ie Lothians and Northumberland. I'm therefore not convinced that for the majority of EOS clubs that the ability to play a player returning from injury or call up players to cover for injuries at/from supposed 'affiliated' clubs is much of a valid argument against the 14 day rule in the Borders as it tends to be a case of them and us.

This post has been edited by The Jed-i-Master: 06 March 2011 - 12:25

[Eye Valley]

HibeeJibee, on 05 March 2011 - 17:54, said:

- this could be covered by a signings cut-off (for example in the SFL + EOSFL, no-one can sign from 1st April on and play)

Same as Border Am.

[HibeeJibee]

aphex twin, on 06 March 2011 - 14:08, said:

Same as Border Am.

Cheers. So therefore the fear about players being parachuted-in to help win leagues, once their EOS season has finished, isn't an issue?

That still leaves the 'parachuted-in to help win a cup' situation, tbf... but I'm not aware of that often happening, and it could be prevented with a 'signed after X round = ineligible' rule.


What was the official explanation for introducing the 14-day rule? I.e. the reason that BAFL clubs felt it should be brought in.

[The Woolshed]

HibeeJibee, on 06 March 2011 - 14:22, said:

Cheers. So therefore the fear about players being parachuted-in to help win leagues, once their EOS season has finished, isn't an issue?

That still leaves the 'parachuted-in to help win a cup' situation, tbf... but I'm not aware of
that often happening, and it could be
prevented with a 'signed after X round =
ineligible' rule.

What was the official explanation for introducing the 14-day rule? I.e. the reason
that BAFL clubs felt it should be brought in.

Clubs such as Gala Rovers were using EOS players near the end of the season to help them win league/cups. There were a few teams who would do this admittedly

[Eye Valley]

HibeeJibee, on 06 March 2011 - 14:22, said:

Cheers. So therefore the fear about players being parachuted-in to help win leagues, once their EOS season has finished, isn't an issue?

That still leaves the 'parachuted-in to help win a cup' situation, tbf... but I'm not aware of that often happening, and it could be prevented with a 'signed after X round = ineligible' rule.


What was the official explanation for introducing the 14-day rule? I.e. the reason that BAFL clubs felt it should be brought in.

Think the jist of it was, some weeks an EOS side didn't have a game, and players would sign for the Am team for the day, then go back to their EOS club the next again week, think it was basically to try and curb that from happening.
There is talk of a new SAFA wide constitution (same for all Am associations) so this could get the boot.

This post has been edited by aphex twin: 06 March 2011 - 14:45

[HibeeJibee]

The Woolshed, on 06 March 2011 - 14:38, said:

Clubs such as Gala Rovers were using EOS players near the end of the season to help them win league/cups. There were a few teams who would do this admittedly

Cheers. Although going by what Aphex said, they'd have needed to be signing these players in March to help them win the league...?

Even if that had been happening, couldn't the cut-off could be moved back (say to 1st March instead of 31st March) and the cup rule I suggested be used?

Instead of a blanket 14-day embargo the whole season.

(+ Which can be useless anyway, if the big league matches or cup finals are more than 14-days ahead).

[HibeeJibee]

aphex twin, on 06 March 2011 - 14:42, said:

Think the jist of it was, some weeks an EOS side didn't have a game, and players would sign for the Am team for the day, then go back to their EOS club the next again week, think it was basically to try and curb that from happening.
There is talk of a new SAFA wide constitution (same for all Am associations) so this could get the boot.

I see, cheers. Makes some sense, although I still think the overall negative impact of the rule outweighs the positive impact of restricting the above.