Jump to content

Choose your preferred team below. Close
Scotland (Default) Aberdeen Airdrie Utd Albion Rovers Alloa Athletic Annan Athletic Arbroath Ayr Utd Berwick Rangers Brechin City Celtic Clyde Cowdenbeath Dumbarton Dundee Dundee Utd Dunfermline East Fife East Stirlingshire Elgin City Falkirk Forfar Athletic Greenock Morton Hamilton Accies Hearts Hibernian Inverness Caley Kilmarnock Livingston Montrose Motherwell Partick Thistle Peterhead QoS Queens Park Raith Rovers Rangers Ross County St.Johnstone St.Mirren Stenhousemuir Stirling Albion Stranraer
Photo

Teams Coming or Going?


  • Please log in to reply
67 replies to this topic

#1
HibeeJibee

HibeeJibee

    Golden Shoe Winner

  • Gold Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 31,787 posts
Joined: 21-April 07
  • My Team:Berwick Rangers
It's been confirmed that Gordon AFC is going to re-enter the Border Amateur next season. Last time Hawick Royal Albert got an U19s admitted (IIRC), but then elected to withdraw, and while they are intendng to introduce an U19s for next season it'll be playing in EOS U19 League.

Are any other clubs intending or rumoured to be applying to BAFL, or forming Colts?

And are any Border Amateur clubs looking at stepping-up to EOS or joining a different amateur league?
  • 0

and when told Lord Jeffrey burst into tears, and sprang to his feet, and he exclaimed in a tone of triumph

"I am proud of my country. There is no other upon earth where such a deed could have been done"


#2
Eye Valley

Eye Valley

    First Division Sub

  • Gold Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,077 posts
Joined: 23-August 05
  • My Team:Berwick Rangers
Broughton near Biggar could be applying, not heard anything else.
  • 0


#3
Darth Maul

Darth Maul

    Sunday League Starter

  • Gold Members
  • PipPip
  • 27 posts
Joined: 13-November 10
  • Location:The Dark Side
  • My Team:Other
Speaking to a ref and he had herd a rumour of a team from otterburn applying to join the B.A.F.L. That would be some round trips for teams from the lothians
  • 0

#4
Eye Valley

Eye Valley

    First Division Sub

  • Gold Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,077 posts
Joined: 23-August 05
  • My Team:Berwick Rangers

Speaking to a ref and he had herd a rumour of a team from otterburn applying to join the B.A.F.L. That would be some round trips for teams from the lothians

I think there was an email went out to all clubs to get a general opinion if it was worth them applying, think it was bombed out, ie it would be a wasted trip to the AGM.
  • 0


#5
Johnny Foreigner

Johnny Foreigner

    Junior League Sub

  • Gold Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 155 posts
Joined: 29-November 09
  • Location:Pencaitland
  • My Team:Scotland

Speaking to a ref and he had herd a rumour of a team from otterburn applying to join the B.A.F.L. That would be some round trips for teams from the lothians


I completely disagree. Otterburn is far closer for any Lothian team than say, Bowholm or Langholm, about 1hr 15mins compared to at least 1hr 30mins.

FWIW, I would be delighted to see another team (as well as Gordon) come in as it would possibly offer Winton a wee chance of promotion! :P

Edited by Johnny Foreigner, 27 March 2012 - 11:45.

  • 0

Cautious but never afraid.


#6
UptheA7

UptheA7

    Third Division Apprentice

  • Gold Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 687 posts
Joined: 13-September 09
  • My Team:Other

Last time Hawick Royal Albert got an U19s admitted (IIRC), but then elected to withdraw, and while they are intendng to introduce an U19s for next season it'll be playing in EOS U19 League.


When HRA U19's applied last year to the BAFA and were accepted it caused problems with Hawick Legion Rovers and possibly other clubs in Hawick, if they are accepted into the EoS U19's will this not have the same impact if not worse(based on the EoS 14 day rule - if it is retained)? Could this result in a Hawick team possibly having to withdraw? Please don't start the HRA v BAFA club thing this is simply a question for the Hawick clubs - Are there enough players to go round or new players coming up from the junior teams to ensure all the clubs can keep going?
Likewise when Gordon come back are there sufficient players to keep the clubs who lose players to them (or back to them) going? There were a few touch and go moments last pre-season hopefully things have improved on the front with more youngsters available to the Amateur leagues.
It won't be long now before the player merry-go-round and rumour mill starts.
  • 0
It's all fun and games until someone loses an eye.


#7
the mask

the mask

    Sunday League Starter

  • Gold Members
  • PipPip
  • 26 posts
Joined: 22-November 09
  • My Team:Hawick Royal Albert

When HRA U19's applied last year to the BAFA and were accepted it caused problems with Hawick Legion Rovers and possibly other clubs in Hawick, if they are accepted into the EoS U19's will this not have the same impact if not worse(based on the EoS 14 day rule - if it is retained)? Could this result in a Hawick team possibly having to withdraw? Please don't start the HRA v BAFA club thing this is simply a question for the Hawick clubs - Are there enough players to go round or new players coming up from the junior teams to ensure all the clubs can keep going?
Likewise when Gordon come back are there sufficient players to keep the clubs who lose players to them (or back to them) going? There were a few touch and go moments last pre-season hopefully things have improved on the front with more youngsters available to the Amateur leagues.
It won't be long now before the player merry-go-round and rumour mill starts.

IM NOT UP TO TOTAL SPEED WITH THE 14 DAY RULE BUT WOULD IT NOT BE WORTH SOMEONE PROPOSING THAT LIKE SAY UNDER 21 OR UNDER 19 ARE ABLE TO MOVE BETWEEN BOTH EOS & AMATEUR ,WE NEED TO TRY & ENCOURAGE MORE YOUNGSTERS NOT DRIVE THEM AWAY BY HAVING THEM SIT WITH NO FOOTBALL FOR 2 WEEKS
  • 0

#8
dawg255

dawg255

    Sunday League Superstar

  • Gold Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 133 posts
Joined: 02-March 10
  • My Team:Scotland
Now there's a good idea I personally think the 14 day rule should be scraped but if not scraping it for the u19s would be great they play on Sundays so games would not clash and it would give youngsters the chance to play more which is wot they need.
  • 0

#9
Siralec

Siralec

    Sunday League Starter

  • Gold Members
  • PipPip
  • 95 posts
Joined: 23-October 09
  • My Team:Scotland

Now there's a good idea I personally think the 14 day rule should be scraped but if not scraping it for the u19s would be great they play on Sundays so games would not clash and it would give youngsters the chance to play more which is wot they need.



Sorry, Dawg - I have to disagree with you there. The 14-day rule is there to tackle a specific problem that Border Amateur clubs were facing, and would face if it was scrapped. As far as I'm aware, the ruling regarding the under 19's came from the SFA/SAFA that they may not sign for an amateur club while signed for an under 19s club. As for the Hawick "situation" that arose last season - they found that the string (of players) went only so far and there was a real danger of HLR collapsing if HRA u19s entered the Border Amateur League. Unless they've had a rapid-growth breeding-boom in Hawick since then, the same situation will apply this season.

I'm aware that Gordon FC re-entering competition next season will create pressure on other clubs who provided a home for some of their players this season, but the reality is that there's only so many players to go around. A creative solution to the problem would perhaps be to have the bairns below under 19s level introduced into the situation, with the clubs involved willing to swallow the results that would inevitably follow ??


  • 0

#10
UptheA7

UptheA7

    Third Division Apprentice

  • Gold Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 687 posts
Joined: 13-September 09
  • My Team:Other
It would appear that moves are afoot to revamp the 14 day rule, I believe Selkirk FC (EoS) are looking to start an U19's team and are hoping that rules can be amended to allow limited movement between the BAFA and EoS based on appearances and age, this will be have to be proposed through Selkirk Vics at the AGM. first thing that springs to mind is the possible admin involved however there may other options proposed anyway.
  • 1
It's all fun and games until someone loses an eye.


#11
stoolpigeonII

stoolpigeonII

    Junior League Sub

  • Gold Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 154 posts
Joined: 20-July 08
  • My Team:Scotland
Teams going I hear are Peebles Amateurs well when I say going its from the umbrella club that is Peebles FC. Not leaving the border league. They are being asked to leave at the end of the season as the senior side within the group. The club Peebles FC has seen its image tarnished as a well run boys club with the way its senior players have conducted themselves and a manager who has caused nothing but unrest for other clubs in the town with his insistence on playing on the park at Whitestone, during the winter months when asked not to. A new u19 side is being setup and are looking to play in the juvenile leagues in Edinburgh. They will head up the boys club as the senior outfit .
  • 0

#12
Beenthere

Beenthere

    Sunday League Sub

  • Gold Members
  • Pip
  • 24 posts
Joined: 23-October 11
  • My Team:Scotland

1333100212[/url]' post='6096745']
It would appear that moves are afoot to revamp the 14 day rule, I believe Selkirk FC (EoS) are looking to start an U19's team and are hoping that rules can be amended to allow limited movement between the BAFA and EoS based on appearances and age, this will be have to be proposed through Selkirk Vics at the AGM. first thing that springs to mind is the possible admin involved however there may other options proposed anyway.


Hi guys,,I for one will be voting for the 14 day rule to stand at the agm,,the rule benefits the players who genuinely want to play Amatuer football and not jump between the EoS and Ams as it suits them or there clubs,,I've seen it for the last 20 years guys playing EoS fotball until February then jumping back to Amatuer football to pick up some silverware and clubs dropping players all together who have played Amatuer football all season,,as I've said before players should pick one or the other at the start of the season,,if you think your good enough at EoS level go ahead and play if you dont think your good enough play Amatuer football,,Selkirk are one of the teams that can't get a settled team at EoS level so now they want to use the vics to help them out,,what about when they were successful and wouldn't use the Amatuer team as back up?? Like most EoS teams they use their 2nd string when it suits them ,,going onto young players the best way to get them to EoS level is bringing them through the Ams for 2-3 years then the step up to EoS if they think they are good enough.The system works fine as it stands,,it just doesn't work fine for the EoS clubs wanting to take the piss out of Amatuer players!!
  • -3

#13
HibeeJibee

HibeeJibee

    Golden Shoe Winner

  • Gold Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 31,787 posts
Joined: 21-April 07
  • My Team:Berwick Rangers
Aren't the players adults and old enough to decide for themselves...? For me the 14-day rule is restrictive - it makes it difficult for clubs which want to run a BAL side as a 2nd-string, it reduces opportunites for young players to step-up, and I'm right that no such rule applies between BAL sides (e.g. 1st teams <> Colts)?

At a time when Scottish football is supposed to be pulling together to improve participation, improve development, and improve performance, it's doing the opposite IMO. Scrapping its application to U19s and players with low appearances would be a positive step.
  • 0

and when told Lord Jeffrey burst into tears, and sprang to his feet, and he exclaimed in a tone of triumph

"I am proud of my country. There is no other upon earth where such a deed could have been done"


#14
UptheA7

UptheA7

    Third Division Apprentice

  • Gold Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 687 posts
Joined: 13-September 09
  • My Team:Other

Aren't the players adults and old enough to decide for themselves...? For me the 14-day rule is restrictive - it makes it difficult for clubs which want to run a BAL side as a 2nd-string, it reduces opportunites for young players to step-up, and I'm right that no such rule applies between BAL sides (e.g. 1st teams <> Colts)?


Correct HJ teams simply transfer the players back and forward with no restrictions(other than being cup tied). A player can be transferred on a Friday and then be transferred back to his original club on the Monday. 31st March is the signing deadline apart from goalkeepers which is a bit of a grey area as an existing keeper could potentially play outfield with the new "keeper" between the sticks - not sure what would happen if the new "keeper" then came out of goal 5 minutes into a match to play outfield? I don't think the ref would be able to do anything or even report it - why should he?
  • 0
It's all fun and games until someone loses an eye.


#15
HibeeJibee

HibeeJibee

    Golden Shoe Winner

  • Gold Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 31,787 posts
Joined: 21-April 07
  • My Team:Berwick Rangers
Cheers. So it's seen as a heinous underhandedness, worthy of a 14-day time-bar, to move between, say, Duns and Duns Amateurs... but there's nothing at all wrong in flitting between, say, Chirnside and Chirnside Colts?
  • 1

and when told Lord Jeffrey burst into tears, and sprang to his feet, and he exclaimed in a tone of triumph

"I am proud of my country. There is no other upon earth where such a deed could have been done"


#16
Soutertiladie!

Soutertiladie!

    Sunday League Starter

  • Gold Members
  • PipPip
  • 25 posts
Joined: 17-March 12
  • My Team:Scotland

Hi guys,,I for one will be voting for the 14 day rule to stand at the agm,,the rule benefits the players who genuinely want to play Amatuer football and not jump between the EoS and Ams as it suits them or there clubs,,I've seen it for the last 20 years guys playing EoS fotball until February then jumping back to Amatuer football to pick up some silverware and clubs dropping players all together who have played Amatuer football all season,,as I've said before players should pick one or the other at the start of the season,,if you think your good enough at EoS level go ahead and play if you dont think your good enough play Amatuer football,,Selkirk are one of the teams that can't get a settled team at EoS level so now they want to use the vics to help them out,,what about when they were successful and wouldn't use the Amatuer team as back up?? Like most EoS teams they use their 2nd string when it suits them ,,going onto young players the best way to get them to EoS level is bringing them through the Ams for 2-3 years then the step up to EoS if they think they are good enough.The system works fine as it stands,,it just doesn't work fine for the EoS clubs wanting to take the piss out of Amatuer players!!


  • 0

#17
Ally1988

Ally1988

    Junior League Starter

  • Gold Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 368 posts
Joined: 11-July 08
  • My Team:Ayr United
I assume the rule was introduced as a result of some clubs seeking to gain an advantage by bringing in "superior" players for important league games or cup ties. While some clubs may not use it to do so and will use it purely for emergency purposes (or for legitimate reasons - eg guys trying EoS but not cutting it/enjoying it) it is clear that others will abuse the absence of a 14 day rule. As such I think the rule should be in place so as to make it as fair as possible for all parties. The rule should not affect players transferring between amateur clubs but should take effect when a player transfers from one level to another, between one organisation and another (SFA to SAFA etc) I'm not clued up enough to know if this is the case or not though I imagine it is.


  • 0

#18
muckle punt

muckle punt

    Sunday League Sub

  • Gold Members
  • Pip
  • 11 posts
Joined: 10-February 12
  • My Team:Scotland

I assume the rule was introduced as a result of some clubs seeking to gain an advantage by bringing in "superior" players for important league games or cup ties. While some clubs may not use it to do so and will use it purely for emergency purposes (or for legitimate reasons - eg guys trying EoS but not cutting it/enjoying it) it is clear that others will abuse the absence of a 14 day rule. As such I think the rule should be in place so as to make it as fair as possible for all parties. The rule should not affect players transferring between amateur clubs but should take effect when a player transfers from one level to another, between one organisation and another (SFA to SAFA etc) I'm not clued up enough to know if this is the case or not though I imagine it is.



I think it should be enforced in the amateurs. Again take Chirnside for example. They have a team in the A division who are safe from relegation and out of all cups and in reality nothing to play for bar pride. The colts are fighting relegation,what is there to stop them transfering 6 or 7 players from both sides to try and keep the colts in the B division. I am in know way insinuating they would do this, just using them as an example.
  • 0

#19
HibeeJibee

HibeeJibee

    Golden Shoe Winner

  • Gold Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 31,787 posts
Joined: 21-April 07
  • My Team:Berwick Rangers
Fear of players parachuting in to secure promotion/beat relegation could be covered by a signings cut-off - say March 31st.

Fears about parachuting in for Finals could be covered by a requirement participants were registered prior to the Semi-Finals.

I'd scrap it, though.

Plus it's nuts it applies between e.g. Duns <> Duns Amateurs but not e.g. Chirnside <> Chirnside Colts.


  • 0

and when told Lord Jeffrey burst into tears, and sprang to his feet, and he exclaimed in a tone of triumph

"I am proud of my country. There is no other upon earth where such a deed could have been done"


#20
UptheA7

UptheA7

    Third Division Apprentice

  • Gold Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 687 posts
Joined: 13-September 09
  • My Team:Other
Players cannot be transferred after 31st March except a keeper. No trialists either in the BAFA so that knocks all that on the head. Apart from that is there that big a difference between 1st Div EoS and BAFA? Any player that good won't come back.
  • 0
It's all fun and games until someone loses an eye.


#21
HibeeJibee

HibeeJibee

    Golden Shoe Winner

  • Gold Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 31,787 posts
Joined: 21-April 07
  • My Team:Berwick Rangers
Suggestion on the Junior sub-forum a Gala club's applied to East Juniors :huh:.

Anyone?
  • 0

and when told Lord Jeffrey burst into tears, and sprang to his feet, and he exclaimed in a tone of triumph

"I am proud of my country. There is no other upon earth where such a deed could have been done"


#22
UptheA7

UptheA7

    Third Division Apprentice

  • Gold Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 687 posts
Joined: 13-September 09
  • My Team:Other
I did hear rumours and I stress rumours! that Gala Rovers had made enquiries re the EoS but ground sharing was a problem. I can only think that they maybe then looked elsewhere. I can't see any of the other Gala teams looking to go. Gala Nobez can maybe clarify.
  • 0
It's all fun and games until someone loses an eye.


#23
tartanbarmy

tartanbarmy

    Sunday League Sub

  • Gold Members
  • Pip
  • 16 posts
Joined: 13-November 11
  • My Team:Scotland

IM NOT UP TO TOTAL SPEED WITH THE 14 DAY RULE BUT WOULD IT NOT BE WORTH SOMEONE PROPOSING THAT LIKE SAY UNDER 21 OR UNDER 19 ARE ABLE TO MOVE BETWEEN BOTH EOS & AMATEUR ,WE NEED TO TRY & ENCOURAGE MORE YOUNGSTERS NOT DRIVE THEM AWAY BY HAVING THEM SIT WITH NO FOOTBALL FOR 2 WEEKS

Scrap the 14 day rule altogether - its a farce!:angry:
  • 2

#24
oapbuspass

oapbuspass

    Sunday League Starter

  • Gold Members
  • PipPip
  • 85 posts
Joined: 13-February 11
  • My Team:Scotland

IM NOT UP TO TOTAL SPEED WITH THE 14 DAY RULE BUT WOULD IT NOT BE WORTH SOMEONE PROPOSING THAT LIKE SAY UNDER 21 OR UNDER 19 ARE ABLE TO MOVE BETWEEN BOTH EOS & AMATEUR ,WE NEED TO TRY & ENCOURAGE MORE YOUNGSTERS NOT DRIVE THEM AWAY BY HAVING THEM SIT WITH NO FOOTBALL FOR 2 WEEKS


I would like to see the rule changed. For obvious reasons I have a vested interest in this. I also understand that some restrictions need to be kept in place so that teams do not abuse it & bring in players for important games to avoid relegation/gain promotion/win cups etc etc. Totally unfair to the other BAFL teams.

Why not let any player originally signed by a BAFL club at the start of the season be called up to EOS for say a maximum of 4 games at a time. This could be used as cover for injuries for the EOS team in question/ for a trial/ to see if the player himself enjoys it at EOS level etc, etc. The said player could then get experience at EOS level. The said player would then be allowed to come straight back to his original team without having to serve the 14 day "ban". Almost like a loan deal.

Players originally signed by EOS clubs at the beginning of the season have to be transferred & honour the 14 day rule when dropping down to BAFL.Same rule applies if they have played more than 4 games in any "loan" deal. If a player on the fringes of an EOS squad has not made any appearances for say 5 consecutive games, whether that be due to injury or just not getting a game, he would be allowed to play BAFL without serving the 14 day "ban". (possibly quite difficult to check/control that one & maybe an age limit of U21 so that this rule only benefitted young players).
In my opinion this would stop me being able to sign the likes of Dougie Brydon for an important amateur game but also give my players the chance to progress & gain EOS experience. I would also benefit by getting my players back & able to play & to be able to give young EOS fringe players game time.


As I said before this is maybe a bit of a biased view as a rule change would benefit my own club but there would be nothing to stop other BAFL clubs giving EOS fringe players game time as well.
  • 0

#25
eildonview

eildonview

    Sunday League Starter

  • Gold Members
  • PipPip
  • 62 posts
Joined: 04-June 11
  • My Team:Scotland

Scrap the 14 day rule altogether - its a farce!:angry:



its maybe perceived as a farce for some clubs, but for others, it creates a more level playing field. no doubt it will be debated at the AGM in June
  • 0

#26
UptheA7

UptheA7

    Third Division Apprentice

  • Gold Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 687 posts
Joined: 13-September 09
  • My Team:Other
The biggest problem with any amendment to the EoS (or any other "higher level" league) rule is the administration of it. As soon as age limits and appearances come into it there are problems. What date is used re an age limit? If a player sits on the bench but does not play is that classed as an appearance? The diciplinary issues? It would be a Secretary's nightmare and I doubt if the League Secretary would appreciate the increased workload.
It looks like a decision has to be made to either keep the rule or vote it out. Trying to amend it will just confuse the issue.
  • 0
It's all fun and games until someone loses an eye.


#27
HibeeJibee

HibeeJibee

    Golden Shoe Winner

  • Gold Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 31,787 posts
Joined: 21-April 07
  • My Team:Berwick Rangers
It could get very laborious aye.


For me it's a question of the rules purpose.

If the purpose is to stop BAFL sides getting an advantage through parachuting-in players at the end of the season, cup finals, etc., then it can surely be done with a smarter rule. Make the signing cut-off March 15th or February 28th if desired, and debar cup finalists from using players registered after the SFs (or similar).

If the purpose is to stop, discourage or punish players who consider trying EOS over BAFL, then the rule can stay as it it. But that's surely not the purpose of it, so it's not an issue.


  • 0

and when told Lord Jeffrey burst into tears, and sprang to his feet, and he exclaimed in a tone of triumph

"I am proud of my country. There is no other upon earth where such a deed could have been done"


#28
Ally1988

Ally1988

    Junior League Starter

  • Gold Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 368 posts
Joined: 11-July 08
  • My Team:Ayr United

It could get very laborious aye.


For me it's a question of the rules purpose.

If the purpose is to stop BAFL sides getting an advantage through parachuting-in players at the end of the season, cup finals, etc., then it can surely be done with a smarter rule. Make the signing cut-off March 15th or February 28th if desired, and debar cup finalists from using players registered after the SFs (or similar).

If the purpose is to stop, discourage or punish players who consider trying EOS over BAFL, then the rule can stay as it it. But that's surely not the purpose of it, so it's not an issue.




I think the problem is HJ that there could be fixtures in earlier rounds of cups which may be "grudge" matches where one team seeks an unfair advantage to ensure they don't lose the game. For me the rule protects clubs from smaller towns who don't have the luxury of lots of players or an EoS team to call favours from.

I personally don't understand why there is such hostility to the rule, it seems fair to me. It is applied to all teams. Personally I think there should also be a limit on the number of times a player can sign in one season (2, 3 max which would permit 2 transfers) to stop players bouncing between Ams/Colts teams. This would allow players to be moved in the event of an absolute emergency but would hopefully prevent the seeking of advantages.

I sympathise with teams who are struggling to put teams together but to solve this problem a bigger overhaul is needed than stopping players from a higher level waiting 14 days before they are cleared to play. Closer links to youth teams, helping with the organisational side and encouraging those at youth level to keep teams together and improve the number of young players continuing to play the game would be far more beneficial to teams. That is my opinion anyway.
  • 0

#29
tubbytubthumper

tubbytubthumper

    Sunday League Sub

  • Gold Members
  • Pip
  • 22 posts
Joined: 12-October 10
  • My Team:Celtic

Personally I think there should also be a limit on the number of times a player can sign in one season (2, 3 max which would permit 2 transfers) to stop players bouncing between Ams/Colts teams. This would allow players to be moved in the event of an absolute emergency but would hopefully prevent the seeking of advantages.


With Hawick Legion /Rovers there is a lot of movement between the two teams (mostly up the way) this allows young players the opportunity to move up to the First team in order to continue their development. We recently had 5 players move to the first team in this way and it is what the Rovers side is about. We have also had players move to the first team get some game time from the bench and then return to get more games. If you limit the chances of a player moving up and back this will curb his development and he will lose interest if on the bench for any longer. I definatley like the idea of player under 21 being able to move more freely given that this can only help in their development by getting a taste of playing at a higher level without having to wait 14 days before pulling on the boots again
  • 0

#30
Ally1988

Ally1988

    Junior League Starter

  • Gold Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 368 posts
Joined: 11-July 08
  • My Team:Ayr United

With Hawick Legion /Rovers there is a lot of movement between the two teams (mostly up the way) this allows young players the opportunity to move up to the First team in order to continue their development. We recently had 5 players move to the first team in this way and it is what the Rovers side is about. We have also had players move to the first team get some game time from the bench and then return to get more games. If you limit the chances of a player moving up and back this will curb his development and he will lose interest if on the bench for any longer. I definatley like the idea of player under 21 being able to move more freely given that this can only help in their development by getting a taste of playing at a higher level without having to wait 14 days before pulling on the boots again


Firstly, I dont propose the imposition of a 14 day rule between amateur clubs, not sure if I made that point in my original post there. As soon as the paperwork has been done then good to go for me. Should only apply when someone is transferred in from another organisation than the SAFA.

Second, I certainly don't advocate the total removal of what you have described, and by the sounds of it the clubs mentioned have only good intentions in doing so. That is why I was saying there should be allowed 2 opportunities to transfer. Young guy being tested at the higher level who maybe isn't as ready for the step-up as was anticipated could then return to his original team in the lower league to continue his development. Likewise someone coming back from injury could be eased (if thats possible in the lower regions of the league!!) back into action before returning up the league again to his original starting club. In these circumstances there is a logical reason for doing so, and that is the development of a player. The illogical reason of purely wanting to win 1 game and bringing in 6 EoS players (which the 14 day rule is designed to stop, at least thats how I read it) does nothing to aid the development of players already at the club. How do you become accustomed to winning the big games when you're prevented from playing in them!? Handling pressure is part of a players development and ability.

Edited by Ally1988, 19 April 2012 - 14:12.

  • 0




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users