HibeeJibee Posted September 30, 2015 Share Posted September 30, 2015 You either follow the path or carve out your own i guess. Hopefully the creation of a east and west league (existing format, just along side the lowland/highland league) will prove sensible with the play off involving winners of all 4 for a shot at the spfl team in a final game. If any winning team doesn't want to go up or have the required ground etc after the final then thats up to them. So in theory everything virtually stays the same, ambition to move up can be addressed, the playoffs would pull good crowds and assistance could be provided to members of the top leagues to meet current licenses/stadium standards. If you're meaning simply placing the existing West and East Superleagues alongside HL / LL, it is clear that would never happen. In the first place it would be very odd to have such substantial geographical overlaps in the south. More importantly however, it would never be acceptable to the SPFL clubs... they will not accept relegation to leagues where there is essentially no minimum ground standards, without fixturelists, where you cannot use your floodlights, 2pm kickoffs, non-variable admission charge, reinstatement, where weeks and weeks of games can get skittled-out by an away Junior Cup tie on a gluepot pitch, and so forth. Obviously all those areas could be resolved - but for example, it could take ages for both Superleagues to get fully licensed. It's a similar situation to why LL had to be established versus simply connecting-up EOSL & SOSL. Perhaps a Superduperleague, though... In practical terms the Superleagues also usually finish at the start of June, sometimes a touch earlier in the East - the playoffs begin in later April. As regards talk of England - remember that when the Conference started it had no promotion at all. I think automatic promotion will come, in time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimbaxters Posted September 30, 2015 Share Posted September 30, 2015 Where did I state that it was unfair? I said it was put in place to preserve the status of the likes of East Stirling A proper pyramid system is 1 where you can start at public park level & work your way up theoretically go all the way to the top league in your country At the moment it is teams who have basically been hand picked I was referring to the fact you said you'd be happy with a "fair and proper" pyramid. Also moving from public park to eventual senior status would need clubs with that ambition. Very very few junior sides have this aspiration. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fan of the juniors Posted September 30, 2015 Share Posted September 30, 2015 I was referring to the fact you said you'd be happy with a "fair and proper" pyramid. Also moving from public park to eventual senior status would need clubs with that ambition. Very very few junior sides have this aspiration. Ah right As has been shown the current pyramid is loaded towards the league sides Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burnie_man Posted September 30, 2015 Share Posted September 30, 2015 The major difference, from what I've seen, is facilities. A couple of Lowland teams aside, facilities at LL level are far in advance of the Juniors and I think that's where a lot (not all obviously) of the Junior teams would struggle to join that proposed setup: meeting the licensing requirements. Cumbernauld Colts, Stirling Uni, Gretna & Edinburgh City effectively hire existing/former league grounds so a wee bit unfair to use them as a comparison, and BSC hire a Junior ground anyway. Spartans, Gala & Preston have well appointed grounds with seated stands comparable with Linlithgow, Sauchie, Auchinleck, Irvine Meadow, Petershill, Banks O’Dee etc. The remainder are comparable to a lot of a lot of Junior grounds. A Licence doesn’t necessarily mean a leap forward in facilities although I do think Junior Superleague clubs should have to conform to some basic ground grading requirements, such as floodlights. The Lowland League is a busted flush in its current set-up as far as Junior clubs are concerned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burnie_man Posted September 30, 2015 Share Posted September 30, 2015 I'd jump to the Lowland League tomorrow given half a chance. Hang on, when BSC were admitted you said you were done with the LL as credibility had gone through the floor (to paraphrase!) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bankies Alive Posted September 30, 2015 Share Posted September 30, 2015 Its all been a total sham.The SFA said over 2 years ago that you need a license to play in the LL to try and frighten off Junior involvement and handed the keys to the new pyramid to their non-league senior pals. It worked and en masse the Juniors haven't been keen to be engaged especially as they were given about 2 weeks to decide whether to be involved in the 1st place! Now down the line despite warnings that the end of last season was to be the line in the sand regarding licensing Vale of Leithen are still playing away in the LL WITHOUT a license. The SPFL senior clubs are even seeing right through the scam because when Regan and his cronies tried to push a vote through that would have meant only licensed clubs could play in the SFA cup they stuck two fingers up at them and have even gone further by allowing the Amateur Cup winners in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burnie_man Posted September 30, 2015 Share Posted September 30, 2015 If you're meaning simply placing the existing West and East Superleagues alongside HL / LL, it is clear that would never happen. It is clear that the Junior clubs would never accept being below the LL, and there you have the problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bankies Alive Posted September 30, 2015 Share Posted September 30, 2015 The SFA are always keen on having independent reviews. Why don't they have one to look into the set up of non-league football in the country to find the best way forward for all? Get someone from the English FA to look into it and provide recommendations for the best way forward after speaking to all the stakeholders. By that I mean all the individual clubs and not just the Association heads. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HibeeJibee Posted September 30, 2015 Share Posted September 30, 2015 That would seem a good idea... albeit would it conclude anything different to the McLeish Report, or Pyramid Working Party? Problem has been getting stakeholders to sign-up to recommendations, not finding the recommendations themselves. However you're rather over-egging the pudding on the licensing thing IMO. When LL was founded, it had 3 licensed clubs - by the end of last season it had 14... and although granted it will be late their local paper reports that Vale expect to get theirs in the next few weeks. Fact remains that they'll have gone from 3 to a full set of 15 in not much over 2yrs. You'd be on stronger grounds criticising HL for not ejecting Cove - who haven't a licence or home ground just now. Even then, imminently 32 of 33 will be licensed, the only exception being Cove who fulfil all other criteria and are playing out of licensed grounds while waiting for their new stadium to be completed. It is clear that the Junior clubs would never accept being below the LL, and there you have the problem. Yep, this is the conundrum. Ironically enough the much-maligned Superduperleague might help - more feasible to apply licensing, and could be 'mixed' with LL into East & West Superlowland leagues. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HTG Posted September 30, 2015 Share Posted September 30, 2015 Hang on, when BSC were admitted you said you were done with the LL as credibility had gone through the floor (to paraphrase!) Aye but I change like the wind. I still object to a structure and process which can see teams who don't actually exist being catapulted to the tier below the SPFL.That sums up the absolute arse that has been made of the whole process. On the other hand, I can't be done at all with the complete lack of ambition within the junior game to take steps to do anything - anything at all - about any of the game's ailments. Junior football is making no effort to improve standards for customers or players. The Super Leagues should long since have had stronger criteria in terms of toilets, medical care for players, decent dressing rooms etc. The sort of stuff that is pretty much needed at LL level. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
surely not! Posted September 30, 2015 Share Posted September 30, 2015 On the other hand, I can't be done at all with the complete lack of ambition within the junior game to take steps to do anything - anything at all - about any of the game's ailments. Junior football is making no effort to improve standards for customers or players. The Super Leagues should long since have had stronger criteria in terms of toilets, medical care for players, decent dressing rooms etc. The sort of stuff that is pretty much needed at LL level. Why is this? Is it due to teams preferring to spend their money elsewhere? Some bang average players picking up good money in the junior game IMO I know that a lot of historical resentment from lower league clubs towards juniors stems from the years where hmrc turned a blind eye and the juniors paid money to players without tax while the senior sides had to abide to the law. Despite the changes in recent years many people still seem to hold the same viewpoint. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bankies Alive Posted September 30, 2015 Share Posted September 30, 2015 That would seem a good idea... albeit would it conclude anything different to the McLeish Report, or Pyramid Working Party? Problem has been getting stakeholders to sign-up to recommendations, not finding the recommendations themselves. However you're rather over-egging the pudding on the licensing thing IMO. When LL was founded, it had 3 licensed clubs - by the end of last season it had 14... and although granted it will be late their local paper reports that Vale expect to get theirs in the next few weeks. Fact remains that they'll have gone from 3 to a full set of 15 in not much over 2yrs. You'd be on stronger grounds criticising HL for not ejecting Cove - who haven't a licence or home ground just now. Even then, imminently 32 of 33 will be licensed, the only exception being Cove who fulfil all other criteria and are playing out of licensed grounds while waiting for their new stadium to be completed. Yep, this is the conundrum. Ironically enough the much-maligned Superduperleague might help - more feasible to apply licensing, and could be 'mixed' with LL into East & West Superlowland leagues. The McLeish report was a broad look at Scottish Football and recommended a Pyramid,that was as far as it went! The Pyramid working group was populated by people with vested interests. I`m talking about an independant review by an outsider. What we have just now is a dogs breakfast of different names for the same thing!! Semi Pro Non-League Football. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glenconner Posted September 30, 2015 Share Posted September 30, 2015 Why is this? Is it due to teams preferring to spend their money elsewhere? Some bang average players picking up good money in the junior game IMO I know that a lot of historical resentment from lower league clubs towards juniors stems from the years where hmrc turned a blind eye and the juniors paid money to players without tax while the senior sides had to abide to the law. Despite the changes in recent years many people still seem to hold the same viewpoint. If HMRC turned up at the bottom end of the Juniors the revenue mob would need to give the Junior teams money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
surely not! Posted September 30, 2015 Share Posted September 30, 2015 If HMRC turned up at the bottom end of the Juniors the revenue mob would need to give the Junior teams money. Eh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glensmad Posted September 30, 2015 Share Posted September 30, 2015 Junior football is making no effort to improve standards for customers or players. I agree with a lot of your points, but I think that bit is a bit unfair on many clubs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glenconner Posted September 30, 2015 Share Posted September 30, 2015 Eh? How much money can there be in a lower league Junior club when only twenty people turn up on a winters day for a league match. Yet somebody posts that Junior clubs are at the fiddle. There was less than a 100 at the recent Vale of Clyde v Wishaw League Cup semi final. What effin money? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GLENAFTON93 Posted September 30, 2015 Share Posted September 30, 2015 HTG, on 30 Sept 2015 - 13:54, said: Junior football is making no effort to improve standards for customers or players. Not true, my own team Glenaftons facilities are unrecognisable to a few years ago, and they are at the moment awaiting funding confirmation to improve them again, Talbot, and Cumnock have also invested heavily in ground improvements, so generalising Junior football in this way is unfair. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HibeeJibee Posted September 30, 2015 Share Posted September 30, 2015 Is he not meaning central criteria, as opposed to what individual clubs might (or might not) choose to do entirely voluntarily? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HTG Posted September 30, 2015 Share Posted September 30, 2015 I concur. Very unfair and harsh statement indeed. Aye, point taken. When you apply a broad brush like I did you skip over the few who are trying. There are some who are making a lot of effort but how far short of licencing criteria would they be - accepting that the sfa has now purposely excluded them from actually getting a licence? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gingerblastie Posted September 30, 2015 Share Posted September 30, 2015 I agree with a lot of your points, but I think that bit is a bit unfair on many clubs. unfair..its just nonsense from him. You see for yourself the improvements at Kilbirnie and his comment is Unjust Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.