[HibeeJibee]

This from HFL website:

Quote

Scottish Cup entry standards raised as club licensing to be crucial

http://www.ngrfounda...=26286&Itemid=1

Non-league teams are set to lose their right to play in the Scottish Cup if they do not adhere to club licensing regulations, Stewart Regan confirmed to http://www.highlandleague.net/ on Tuesday night.

The SFA Chief Executive underlined this stance in an interview with Steven Rattray which will be aired in full on Sunday. The point arose in a discussion about the role of club licensing in the development of the game.

Regan began, "Club licensing operates right he way throughout the world. The football pyramid world wide relies on licensing. Clubs have to achieve a certain standard to play in Europe for example and all we are doing is applying the same principles back at home to say that if clubs want to play in professional competitions, particularly our own Scottish Cup then they need to invest in their facilities and make sure they achieve the appropriate standards when teams come to visit them at their home grounds. It is good for the game, it shows the spectators that the game is professionalising, that the leagues are professionalising and that there are certain standards that are expected when people turn up to watch a game so it is a positive move."

When asked to clarify the point with regards the Scottish Cup entry he added, "We have made decisions at board level that within the next four to five years that entry into the Scottish Cup will require both membership of the Scottish FA and an entry level license. We have set our stall out and we are giving notice to clubs that they have the next few years to start thinking about making progress and putting in place the necessary standards to achieve that."

The club licensing requirements can be found on the SFA website by typing club licensing into the search bar on the site itself and Steven Rattray added his thoughts to this scenario.

"Clearly this is another line that is being drawn in the sand and we are beginning to understand extent of the modernisation of the game in Scotland and the separation of the professional and non-professional game is occurring.

"Realistically the SHFL is ahead of the game in comparison to the majority of the non-league sides in the Scottish Cup and in my opinion a lot of the credit for that goes to Sandy Stables for seeing the way the winds were blowing long before the McLeish report and ensuring that the Highland League were the non-league pilot for the roll out of the licensing scheme at this level.

If you look at Golspie Sutherland, Glasgow University and many teams in the South you can only think that their days in this competitions are numbered.

"I will be surprised if we have any teams who lie outwith the progressive or pyramid system being involved come 2017. That will mean that those who are in the Scottish Cup will gain a greater revenue from being involved and they will also be at least one round closer to being in with the SPL sides. So you have the carrot and the stick!"

Link referred to, setting-out Licensing criteria is here, presumably the relevant documents being those under "Part Two - National Club Licensing".
http://www.scottishf...es.cfm?page=828

Bell tolling for some clubs?

This post has been edited by HibeeJibee: 12 January 2012 - 12:59

[Grant228]

Seems fair enough, is there any clubs who arn't currently licensed who were in this years Scottish cup?

[gogsy]

Grant228, on 12 January 2012 - 13:46, said:

Seems fair enough, is there any clubs who arn't currently licensed who were in this years Scottish cup?

Burntisland Shipyard?

[Grim O'Grady]

Could those clubs who are unable to get licenced in time not use another venue that is licenced for the Scottish Cup?

Grim

[LongTimeLurker]

Clearly isn't what they have in mind. Will be interesting to see if this also applies to the junior regional and EoS, SoS and Highland league and Scottish junior cup winners. The rhetoric in the quotes suggests that all entrants will require full SFA membership and an entry level license in future, which if implemented right now would mean an end to automatic entry in that context. The phrase, "the separation of the professional and non-professional game is occurring" refers to the recent restructure of the SFA that effectively removed the former senior status of the East and South of Scotland leagues while the Highland League in contrast was able to stay within the "professional" portion of the game.

[WaffenThinMint]

If this is what it takes to force clubs to step up their game off the park, so be it. Four years is plenty of time for them to achieve it.

Personally I long for the day when only the likes of Auchinleck Talbot, Irvine Meadow, Gretna, Linlithgow Rose, Sauchie and all those other non-league sides that have bothered to invest in decent facilities for their fans are allowed in. I'm sick of clubs up here pleading poverty whilst managing to find more than enough to splash out on players year in year out and expecting home fans - never mind away fans - to regard playing on a jumped up council tip as a price worth paying for staying in the top non-league every year, then complain about small gates.

As was shown by how sharp some of the Northern Juniors managed to get their acts together to get into the Highland League, it can be done if the will is there.

As has been shown by the runs (and money) the likes of Auchinleck, Beith, Irvine Meadow, Pollok, etc have managed, the rewards for playing in the Scottish Cup makes becoming a licensed club annually a very attractive one, as well as being the chance to showcase sides so often overlooked even in their localities as 'not proper teams' by an ignorant public.

[WeeDuncs]

Grant228, on 12 January 2012 - 13:46, said:

Seems fair enough, is there any clubs who arn't currently licensed who were in this years Scottish cup?

Spartans, Whitehill Welfare, Vale of Leithen, Civil Service, Bo'ness United, Auchinleck Talbot and many more

This post has been edited by WeeDuncs: 12 January 2012 - 15:14

[HibeeJibee]

There aren't any licensed clubs in the non-league game currently, and only 25 of 30 SFL clubs have them.

However as has been said above, the Highland League was put into the Professional Game Board in the summer as they'd entered club licensing. According to p34 of the latest SFA Review licensing is changing from this season anyway, to a series of banded categories... Gold, Silver, Bronze, Entry... open to clubs regardless of league. SFA put up new Licensing documents onto their website on 28th December, presumably reflecting this.

According to the material I've seen recently in the Scotsman, and the HFL and Solway Press websites, the proposed Lowland and Highland Superleagues will require a license, and alongside SPl + SFL would comprise the Professional Game area going forward.

Anyway, those dynamics don't directly affect this Cup announcement.


Having a scan through the docs on the SFA website, these are the ground criteria for an Entry level license. (Grounds are only part of licensing... much else are qualifications, compliance, procedures, etc. ... but groundworks will probably be the most expensive aspects to fulfil).

Quote

http://www.scottishf...teria%20(2).pdf

* enclosed ground (i.e. 2m boundary wall)
* railed pitch
* PA system
* 'system of recording entry' i.e. turnstiles

* supporter refreshment facilities
* supporters toilets
* car park
(above 3 segregatable if needed)

* pitch 90m x 56m (best practice 105m x 68m)
* protected access (i.e. changing rooms > pitch)
* 'adequate irrigation and drainage system'
* seated technical area

2x dressing rooms, each with
* seating for 22
* lockers/hangers for 22
* 5 showers
* 2 toilets
* 1 massage table

1x officials dressing room, with
* seating for 4
* lockers/hangers for 4
* 1 shower
* 1 toilet

* doping control room with toilet

Spectator areas
* covered terrace (at least 100 spaces)
* 2 male, 2 female, 1 disabled toilet

First Aid room with
* sink + seperate drinking water
* toilet, couch, telephone
* appropriate medical equipment

* disabled access to ground

In terms of EOS clubs only a few of the 11 current SFA members meet all of the above.

Obviously, there are ~4 clubs... Edinburgh Uni; Civil Service; Coldstream; Selkirk?... incompliant in several "major" aspects, and so they'll have to do a lot of work or face an end to their cup entry.

This post has been edited by HibeeJibee: 12 January 2012 - 18:11

[cmontheloknow]

HibeeJibee, on 12 January 2012 - 18:08, said:

There aren't any licensed clubs in the non-league game currently, and only 25 of 30 SFL clubs have them.

However as has been said above, the Highland League was put into the Professional Game Board in the summer as they'd entered club licensing. According to p34 of the latest SFA Review licensing is changing from this season anyway, to a series of banded categories... Gold, Silver, Bronze, Entry... open to clubs regardless of league. SFA put up new Licensing documents onto their website on 28th December, presumably reflecting this.

According to the material I've seen recently in the Scotsman, and the HFL and Solway Press websites, the proposed Lowland and Highland Superleagues will require a license, and alongside SPl + SFL would comprise the Professional Game area going forward.

Anyway, those dynamics don't directly affect this Cup announcement.


Having a scan through the docs on the SFA website, these are the ground criteria for an Entry level license. (Grounds are only part of licensing... much else are qualifications, compliance, procedures, etc. ... but groundworks will probably be the most expensive aspects to fulfil).



In terms of EOS clubs only a few of the 11 current SFA members meet all of the above.

Obviously, there are ~4 clubs... Edinburgh Uni; Civil Service; Coldstream; Selkirk?... incompliant in several "major" aspects, and so they'll have to do a lot of work or face an end to their cup entry.

You forgot floodlights, average 200 lux for entry.

[Borys]

I believe the floodlights are optional.

Bronze
Clubs are required to have a floodlight system at the ground.
The following minimum levels apply:

Average – 300 lux
Min/Max – 0.25

Entry
Clubs that have a floodlight system at the ground are recommended to have the following minimum floodlights together with the appropriate lighting levels or lux level.

Average – 200 lux
Min/Max – 0.25


Borys

[WaffenThinMint]

cmontheloknow, on 12 January 2012 - 19:11, said:

You forgot floodlights, average 200 lux for entry.

The floodlighting requirement is the interesting part. As anyone unfortunate to live near a railway line at night will tell you, there's a whole industry out there dedicated towards producing portable floodlighting at night so that railwaymen can carry out track maintenance at midnight in compliance with H&S rules for details work (and the neighbours can get that Close Encounters Of The Third Kind moment) - which is 200 lux. All it will take is some enterprising side to use this as a loophole.

200 Lux is utterly sweet SFA to achieve. You could hire a couple of Quad Pods from HSS for £150 each for the day (or four if you're Linlithgow Rose and want to go posh! Except they've got floodlights anyway so screw that analogy!), have them up and ready in 10 minutes flat and there's f**k all the SFA could moan about it - thus the Juniors would get around the lighting requirement without having to shell out for 'devils incandescence' they'd never be able to use outside it because their backwards rulers still refuse to recognise.

[LongTimeLurker]

Did you miss Borys's post? If the "Clubs that have a floodlight system at the ground are recommended to have..." portion of text is accurate there is no need for floodlights at entry level, only a recommendation of what should be installed if clubs have a set of floodlights. Combine that with the way they have eased up on pitch dimensions and the need for cover (100 can be achieved with a structure not much more substantial than a bus shelter) and I suspect most top junior and many of the better EoS clubs in the central belt are not too far away. The potentially problematic requirements are seating for 22 and 2 toilets in each dressing room because that could require a complete rebuild and the 2 metre boundary wall if chain mesh or wooden fences and hedges don't meet the requirement of having a "wall".

This post has been edited by LongTimeLurker: 13 January 2012 - 08:47

[HibeeJibee]

I suppose you could split the incompliant clubs into 2 categories.

You have some playing on parks or other open facilities who meet barely any of the ground criteria. Not enclosed at all (let alone a 2m wall or something eqvuialent); no cover or even hardstanding; no or very limited facilities for supporter refreshments, or toilets; poor if any car parking; often the changing rooms aren't directly beside the pitch and they near-certainly don't include the space and facilities needed.

They face very significant challenges, in some cases perhaps insurmountable (financially or practically).

You then have other clubs who might already have an enclosed ground, perhaps with a small shelter, for whom the gap to be bridged is less. Probably the clubhouse is the biggest issue... having 3 suitably large changing rooms, with enough showers/toilets, and having space for the first aid and doping control rooms... and perhaps the spectator refreshment and toilet requirements. Still might need a lot of work and a good deal of money - particularly if a new clubhouse/extension is needed, or a car park area needs created - but it's less than the open-parkers.

They face big challenges, but somewhat less daunting ones.


Of course ground criteria is only 1 part of licensing, and clubs will need decent-sized and (for want of a better phrase) committed committees to meet all the compliance and organisational stuff.

[WaffenThinMint]

LongTimeLurker, on 13 January 2012 - 08:47, said:

Did you miss Borys's post? If the "Clubs that have a floodlight system at the ground are recommended to have..." portion of text is accurate there is no need for floodlights at entry level, only a recommendation of what should be installed if clubs have a set of floodlights. Combine that with the way they have eased up on pitch dimensions and the need for cover (100 can be achieved with a structure not much more substantial than a bus shelter) and I suspect most top junior and many of the better EoS clubs in the central belt are not too far away. The potentially problematic requirements are seating for 22 and 2 toilets in each dressing room because that could require a complete rebuild and the 2 metre boundary wall if chain mesh or wooden fences and hedges don't meet the requirement of having a "wall".

Did you miss the bit where Borys said "I believe" - meaning he was unsure himself? Sorry, but if it comes to a choice between Jamie's frequent expertise and someone's "believe", I'll take Jamie - it comes with experience!



T'was merely thinking ahead anyway as a moot, as it is likely that Scotland will follow England's lead in upping the ante on what minimums are required and floodlighting is likely to be one of those required as with the FA Cup. The English one I believe to be only 120 lux, but I don't see that remaining under current H&S rules and is likely to jump to at least the 200. With English "Second Division" (read 4th!) needing to go up to 500 in the near future, don't be too surprised if the requirement for FA Cup entry jumps to 300 Lux, with our lot following in probably years later.

The language from the Highland Leaguers makes it all sound like a plot to get rid of clubs from the competition, but the reality is they're trying to drag the Scottish non-leaguers kicking and screaming out of the 19th Century and the "take it or leave it" mentality towards the paying punter. No other sports club could hope to survive treating fans the way they do up here, and there's far too much concentration on the "here and now" rather than long term investment. Change is overdue.

This post has been edited by WaffenThinMint: 13 January 2012 - 12:09

[LongTimeLurker]

I respect what Jamie has done with his websites over the years and agree he usually gets things right but the text Borys highlighted appears unambiguous to me. Think you are right that they would tighten up the requirements as the years pass. The way it reads is that they are prioritising the boundary wall and the building with the dressing rooms infrastructure rather than floodlights as the top priorities, which suggests a willingness to live with the junior grade's traditional aversion to introducing requirements where floodlights are concerned in the short to medium term.

[HibeeJibee]

I suppose floodlighting may become mandatory, at some point in future... but if clubs are in essence getting 4 or 5 years to apply the current rules, then it'll be a long way off until they are raised again, i.e. that 4-5 years plus X years more as a minimum.

Clearly, much of the purpose of the exercise is to make clubs improve standards - for players, youths, and spectators (the regulatory and governance aspects impacting mainly on the former 2); but equally it has to progress realistically or else few clubs will be able to do it, and therefore the point of the exercise will have been lost and not much by way of improvements will occur.

There isn't a huge amount of money out there, from business, charities or funders... and enclosing grounds, rebuilding clubhouses, installing toilet blocks and pie-huts, making car-parks, etc. all adds up... so it probably makes sense to exclude floodlights, which are an expensive outlay* and not as fundemental as other aspects.

*somehow I don't imagine a promise to hire trailer lights would meet licensing criteria - it'll be fixed installations

[Burnie_man]

HibeeJibee, on 13 January 2012 - 13:15, said:

There isn't a huge amount of money out there, from business, charities or funders... and enclosing grounds, rebuilding clubhouses, installing toilet blocks and pie-huts, making car-parks, etc. all adds up... so it probably makes sense to exclude floodlights, which are an expensive outlay* and not as fundemental as other aspects.

Bingo, yet the SFA are insisting on major ground improvements for many clubs otherwise you dont get to play in our cup.

Just exactly what incentive is there for clubs to spend £thousands on ground improvements for potentially one or two games a year? I would say very little. It's a different matter for clubs who already comply or are very nearly there, but for many it's going to be a step too far and that's not even taking into account the current financial climate. Doping room? I mean FFS........

Surely a more sensible way forward to "encourage" clubs to upgrade facilities is the gradual introduction of requirements via the proposed pyramid? and how about offering small grants to clubs to help them on their way? the SFA aren't skint and the Scottish Cup has a sponsor.

I smell a deal here with the SFL dead wood. They will agree to some form of pyramid if the SFA get rid of the dead wood in the Scottish Cup.

[HibeeJibee]

Until now a grant of upto £40,000 for upto 60% of project costs has been available specifically for club licensing projects through Scottish Football Partnership, so one hopes that avenue will continue.

Hopefully SFA might also provide a dedicated fund... according to the Solway Press from last week:

Quote

CLUBS SHARE IN £2 MILLION HANDOUT

THE three SFL clubs in the region and five South of Scotland sides are to share part of the £2 million solidarity and incentive payments made by the Scottish Football Association in time for Christmas. Queen of the South will receive a £30,000 handout with Stranraer and Annan Athletic each receiving £20,000. South of Scotland sides Dalbeattie Star, Threave Rovers, St Cuthbert Wanderers, Newton Stewart and Wigtown are each being paid £15,000.

But the SFA, the sports governing body in Scotland has warned that this will be the last such handout. In future payments will be made on performance awards, youth development programmes, national club licensing, performance and initiative criteria performance.

In addition affiliated associations, amateur clubs who qualify and affiliated national associations will also receive payments.

Chief executive Stuart Regan said the payments were being made to mark the strong financial performance of the Scottish FA in 2011. He added: “The board has approved the highest discretionary payment levels ever made by the association.”

But he warns: “In keeping with the Scottish FA strategic plan and objectives, the Board wishes to make it clear that this would be the last occasion on which it would be able to approve non-performance related payments to members. “It is important that members are aware of this decision and make appropriate financial decisions in the light of this information.” Extra payments will be to clubs maintaining their club licensing status, through performance awards schemes, club academies and youth schemes.

so maybe some of that £££ could henceforth go towards a facilities fund.

(Of course, cynics could say clubs should've saved-up their annual payments from the last decade or so, which will be in high 5-figures... but ultimately, they've only now learned that the facilities bar is rocketing up).

It looks an unclimbable mountain for some clubs, granted.

[cmontheloknow]

The changes to requirements have been frequent in recent months and it had passed me by that they had removed floodlights from being essential to enter club licencing.

[Bundesliga Boy]

[quote name='HibeeJibee' timestamp='1326391708' post='5881664']
There aren't any licensed clubs in the non-league game currently, and only 25 of 30 SFL clubs have them.



HJ - do u know which 5 SFL clubs are still without a license? I'm sure I'd read that Brechin dont, possibly Cowdenbeath too.

As licensing it set to be opened up to all leagues I'm wondering if a club like Banks O Dee could also apply in the not too distant future - they had already made a lot of progress facilitieswise, and that was prior to the entrly level criteria being relaxed.

[HibeeJibee]

According to current SFA Handbook (updated 8th November) the 5 are Annan, Ayr, Brechin, Cowdenbeath, and East Stirlingshire... it was 24 the season before, so it's approaching 100%, albeit slowly.

[tamthebam]

Are the toilet facilities for spectators properly defined in the report? I just wonder, otherwise...


I fantasise about a massive pristine convenience.Brilliant gold taps, virginal white marble, a seat carved
from ebony, a cistern full of Chanel No 5 and a flunky handing me pieces of raw
silk toilet roll. But under the circumstances I’ll settle for anywhere…

 cludgie.jpg (10.52K)
Number of downloads: 0

"yes, we have multi spectator facilities here..."

 cludgie2.png (66.73K)
Number of downloads: 0

[Borys]

WaffenThinMint, on 13 January 2012 - 12:08, said:

Did you miss the bit where Borys said "I believe" - meaning he was unsure himself? Sorry, but if it comes to a choice between Jamie's frequent expertise and someone's "believe", I'll take Jamie - it comes with experience!

Actually I was trying to be "British" - i.e. like after an amputation saying - "I believe my leg might be missing" - as the text seems crystal clear to me
But whatever

Borys

This post has been edited by Borys: 14 January 2012 - 07:02

[DELBHOY]

Come down to the meadow san siro Castle Douglas and you will see what facilities non league teams require because they have the best ground in the south and probably 99% of the east when it comes to sfa licensing

[Clayhole Blue]

As HJ alludes to member clubs have been getting payouts from the SFA for years now. No objection to that, but quite a few of them - can think of a number in the South - have not considered using these monies for ground or youth development and there have been signs for a while that things were heading this way in terms of licensing.

This post has been edited by Clayhole Blue: 16 January 2012 - 12:46