[Slipmat]

A comment on another thread about QOS fielding their under 16s against Mids in the Challenge Cup the other night after they had put their first team out against Fleet Star in the previous round has got me thinking that the SOSL would be better off if Annan, Dalbeattie and Stranraer were excluded from the league. I see a number of advantages:

1 This would reduce the number of teams to twelve meaning less fixtures over the season so less chance of the three-games-a-week scenario at the end of the season, especially since the powers-that-be refuse to reduce the number of cups. And less chance of Dick Shaw carping on every year about the number of postponed games he has to reschedule.

2 A twelve team league means nobody has to have a blank Saturday

3 There is currently an unfairness when Annan/Dalbeattie/Stranraer beef up their South teams with East/Scottish League players on days when their "big" teams don't have a game. This could mean that in a tight championship one challenging team might play say Annan's East team twice while the other team play their South team twice over the season, or this year if Stranraer are serious about the league they might stick a few first team players in to their last few games. Plus less chance of 13-0 mismatches like Stranraer v Fleet this season.

4 Annan and Dalbeattie could put their South teams into the amateur league instead (as they have done in the past) which would reverse the decline in membership of that league. (Stranraer could play in the Reserve League).

These clubs could still enter the cups if they wanted to.

Anyone agree?

[Blue1870]

Slipmat, on Apr 11 2008, 17:11, said:

(Stranraer could play in the Reserve League).

There isn't a Reserve League.
There is an east and west reserve league cup. Which Stranraer play in. 7 games I think and if you finish in the top two in each section it's semi-final and then final.

This isn't a new thing. My Dad played for Tarff Rovers and Stranraer Reserves in the sixties and he said the same thing happened with different team line-ups then. To be honest if you are a player of another team and you want to test yourself against better players then you shouldn't worry about it. Just get on with it in my opinion. It may be harsh but hey that's tough.

The anti Stranraer and Queens stuff is pretty petty in my opinion. Even in Stranraer some parents tell their kids not to get involved with the senior side. Just because of their small town attitude and chip on the shoulder thing the kids are the one getting punished.

[P.A.F.C]

Slipmat, on Apr 11 2008, 17:11, said:

A comment on another thread about QOS fielding their under 16s against Mids in the Challenge Cup the other night after they had put their first team out against Fleet Star in the previous round has got me thinking that the SOSL would be better off if Annan, Dalbeattie and Stranraer were excluded from the league. I see a number of advantages:

1 This would reduce the number of teams to twelve meaning less fixtures over the season so less chance of the three-games-a-week scenario at the end of the season, especially since the powers-that-be refuse to reduce the number of cups. And less chance of Dick Shaw carping on every year about the number of postponed games he has to reschedule.

2 A twelve team league means nobody has to have a blank Saturday

3 There is currently an unfairness when Annan/Dalbeattie/Stranraer beef up their South teams with East/Scottish League players on days when their "big" teams don't have a game. This could mean that in a tight championship one challenging team might play say Annan's East team twice while the other team play their South team twice over the season, or this year if Stranraer are serious about the league they might stick a few first team players in to their last few games. Plus less chance of 13-0 mismatches like Stranraer v Fleet this season.

4 Annan and Dalbeattie could put their South teams into the amateur league instead (as they have done in the past) which would reverse the decline in membership of that league. (Stranraer could play in the Reserve League).

These clubs could still enter the cups if they wanted to.

Anyone agree?

Why not have an S.O.S RESERVE LEAGUE. Their are 3 teams already as you have mentioned ,the Dumfries teams could pick up from their amateur league and boys clubs whose players become too old for youth league,Saints and Threave have youths and i think summer league teams in town,loads of youths and the Stanraer winter league for Athletic,Ferrytoon for Creetown and Newton and Wigtown has youth and plenty players in amateur (covers majority).I know a town in Cumbria a good bit smaller than for eg Newton Stewart who play in a four division set up and their 1 st team is in div 1 and reserves in div2 so it is possible they have though recently spent on new drainage and resurfacing park something most south clubs would have to do if they had 2 teams going by recent weather or it could be a summer league.

[Slipmat]

P.A.F.C, on Apr 11 2008, 19:05, said:

Why not have an S.O.S RESERVE LEAGUE. Their are 3 teams already as you have mentioned ,the Dumfries teams could pick up from their amateur league and boys clubs whose players become too old for youth league,Saints and Threave have youths and i think summer league teams in town,loads of youths and the Stanraer winter league for Athletic,Ferrytoon for Creetown and Newton and Wigtown has youth and plenty players in amateur (covers majority).I know a town in Cumbria a good bit smaller than for eg Newton Stewart who play in a four division set up and their 1 st team is in div 1 and reserves in div2 so it is possible they have though recently spent on new drainage and resurfacing park something most south clubs would have to do if they had 2 teams going by recent weather or it could be a summer league.

Good idea in principle PAFC but I have my doubts that many clubs could afford to run two teams.

[man in the know]

The problem would still persist without the reserve teams , Blairmount, Norfolk Park, Creetown, Lockerbie are all problem parks and possibly not suitable for winter football. Queens , Annan, Dalbeattie and Stranraer all give the league a touch of professionalism and good facilities . In my opinion the league without these clubs would be a step in the wrong direction.

The south secretary does a good job getting all the fixtures completed by the second saturday in may even with all the posponements at the problem grounds. In comparison to the East League fixture pile up the South is without doubt more structured.

It would be good if Queens could enter a team in the South next year and who knows Gretna could end up in the South also.

[cmontheloknow]

Slipmat, on Apr 11 2008, 17:11, said:

3 There is currently an unfairness when Annan/Dalbeattie/Stranraer beef up their South teams with East/Scottish League players on days when their "big" teams don't have a game. This could mean that in a tight championship one challenging team might play say Annan's East team twice while the other team play their South team twice over the season, or this year if Stranraer are serious about the league they might stick a few first team players in to their last few games. Plus less chance of 13-0 mismatches like Stranraer v Fleet this season.

I do agree with this point but Threave Rovers beat Abbey Vale 12-2 in July and Crichton put 9 past Fleet Star so it's not as if the others can't gub the minnows. The biggest problem is when a championship challenger has to play either Annan or Dalbeattie and end up facing the top side. Then again, Creetown were 2nd last season and managed to get cuffed 9-0 by Nithsdale just over a year ago so freak results can happen.

[tipitover]

cmontheloknow, on Apr 11 2008, 21:12, said:

I do agree with this point but Threave Rovers beat Abbey Vale 12-2 in July and Crichton put 9 past Fleet Star so it's not as if the others can't gub the minnows. The biggest problem is when a championship challenger has to play either Annan or Dalbeattie and end up facing the top side. Then again, Creetown were 2nd last season and managed to get cuffed 9-0 by Nithsdale just over a year ago so freak results can happen.

get your facts right mr know it all the score was 9- 3 against 8 men freak result right enough

[P.A.F.C]

Slipmat, on Apr 11 2008, 19:32, said:

Good idea in principle PAFC but I have my doubts that many clubs could afford to run two teams.

Yes, after i posted it came to me that cost would be major factor not only ground improvement but expense of running one team is a struggle for most.I believe winter amateur league in Wigtownshire has only about 6 teams and i don,t think Stewartry summer league fares much better(don,t know anything about Dumfries side) so i thought it would be better way of getting a decent league where the "better" players and youngsters leaving youth leagues in DandG could go as a next step before South but nothings ever easy is it.

[cmontheloknow]

tipitover, on Apr 11 2008, 20:22, said:

get your facts right mr know it all the score was 9- 3 against 8 men freak result right enough

Quote

CREETOWN CRUSHED BY NITHSDALE

NITHSDALE WANDERERS raced back into title contention when they thrashed Creetown 9-0 and moved to the top of the South table.

Creetown suffered one of their worst ever defeats after going out to "kill" off Nithsdale's title chances. But they crumbled and in the process had three players - Ross Milligan, Andrew Houston and Alan Johnstone sent off.

There was no hint of the drama in the early stages but the game sprang to life in 40 minutes when David Jardine scored from a David Thomson cross and they went straight up the field for a second scored by Thomson. It was then that Milligan was red-carded for swearing at the referee.

Creetown were in free-fall after the interval and lost five goals in 25 minutes along with two players. David Jardine got a third in the 55th minute and then Paul Weir hit a hat-trick including two from the penalty spot. The other goals came from Sean Lopez, David Kennedy and Darren Kilpatrick.

So who got Creetown's three? I can only go by what's reported seeing as the South League is one of the few leagues in Scotland (North Juniors the other) without an official site.

This post has been edited by cmontheloknow: 11 April 2008 - 20:32

[tipitover]

cmontheloknow, on Apr 11 2008, 21:31, said:

So who got Creetown's three? I can only go by what's reported seeing as the South League is one of the few leagues in Scotland (North Juniors the other) without an official site.

my apologies still shellshocked yes it was 9-0

[cmontheloknow]

tipitover, on Apr 11 2008, 20:40, said:

my apologies still shellshocked yes it was 9-0

No problem. I don't want to sound like a know-all - I do have a genuine interest in the South of Scotland scene.

[tipitover]

cmontheloknow, on Apr 11 2008, 21:51, said:

No problem. I don't want to sound like a know-all - I do have a genuine interest in the South of Scotland scene.

good man cmon the south

[cmontheloknow]

Mr Ed, on Apr 11 2008, 21:44, said:

I agree with your comments that the league would be poorer without the teams you mentioned, I also agree that it is really frustrating when these clubs send out their East team or a team beefed up with first team players. Perhaps one way round this would be if these clubs registered a pool of players that would take part in the South league only, with an allowance of 2 players per game from their first team pool, this would allow them to play players that were coming back from injury or not getting a game in the first team. Registered South league players could step up at any time to allow for player developement or to help the first team out to cover injuries. I realise this could only work on a voluntary basis as I am well aware that a player signs for a club not a league. If someone from the clubs mentioned reads this I would like to know your clubs views on this. B)

Is there not some rule or other that states that all teams must play the strongest XI available, therefore it the East side is idle, Annan and Dalbeattie are perfectly within their rights to play their East side?

[P.A.F.C]

Mr Ed, on Apr 11 2008, 21:44, said:

I agree with your comments that the league would be poorer without the teams you mentioned, I also agree that it is really frustrating when these clubs send out their East team or a team beefed up with first team players. Perhaps one way round this would be if these clubs registered a pool of players that would take part in the South league only, with an allowance of 2 players per game from their first team pool, this would allow them to play players that were coming back from injury or not getting a game in the first team. Registered South league players could step up at any time to allow for player developement or to help the first team out to cover injuries. I realise this could only work on a voluntary basis as I am well aware that a player signs for a club not a league. If someone from the clubs mentioned reads this I would like to know your clubs views on this. B)

Seems a few people agree but surely teams are not content on playing second best but want to play against east sides or Stranraer with some first teamers.

[Slipmat]

The ideal situation would obviously be for Annan and Dalbeattie to play in the South League only but they clearly consider the East to have a higher playing standard, and by placing reserve teams in the SOSL it adds to the impression that the SOSL is a much weaker league than the EOSL although I'm sure that the top half dozen or so south teams would give them a good run for their money. You only have to look back to the mid 90s when Dalbeattie struggled to break into the top half of the SOSL ie before they switched to the East.

Having said that if Annan and Dalbeattie first teams played in the South it wouldn't do much in terms of reducing the number of fixtures over the course of a season.

[Galabankie]

Good debate this one, I can remember a way back when our reserve side played in the Dumfries and District amateur league with our 1st team playing in the SOSL. We ended up with some ridiculous rules such as having to register and de-register to enable players to get games coming back from injury or indeed promoting players from reserves to South side. There was also a 4-week rule where a player couldn't play in the amateur league if he had played in the SOSL, these restrictions don't happen at other 'Senior' clubs, etc.
I do however understand and accept the view that there is an unfairness about how Stranraer, Star and ourselves 'beef-up' the south team from time to time and on some occassions take the south fixture playing our full 'East' squad, this will happen tomorrow and in the midweek games until the end of the season. Last season Abbey Vale sufferred a heavy defeat to our East side, likewise this year Stranraer lost to our East side at Galabank, Keith Knox appreciated the game and didn't mind the sterner test for his youngsters (his words not mine).
The rules are clear, all our players are registered with Annan Athletic FC and we will continue to play them as the manager, Harry, sees fit. If rule proposals were tabled and accepted to restrict players from the '1st teams' playing in the south this would surely find the 'south' at odds with the SFA, flying in the face of SFA and EUFA principles.
Now the controversial bit (maybe), would Annan Athletic FC return to the SOSL with the reserve team in the amateur league - probably no chance of that, the amatuer league league rules would still prevent our players on pro-contracts playing in the reserves. What a more likely and acceptable proposition in my eyes would be to amalgamate the Dumfries and District Amateurs into the SOSL ( apologies to the teams to the west of Dumfries and Galloway as I am not au-fait with the equivalent leagues but teams from these leagues could also be integrated into the system), the SOSL would then be split into two. Above the SOSL would sit a Lowland League or conference or whatever you want to call it, this league would have 'South Association' teams such as Star, Annan, Stranraer, Threave, Saints, etc participating against the best recent EOSL teams with one or two juniors who may well have expressed an interest to be involved in such a set up. If Annan, Star etc finished at the bottom of the conference then they would be relegated to the SOSL, if by chance Annan's reserve side were also playing in the SOSL 1st Division they would then be relegated to SOSL Div 2. This seems very much like a pyramid, this arrangement would be mirrored in the EAst with amalgamation of the Border and District and other Amateur leagues.
By now readers from the Juniors will be getting up in arms, the aforementioned suggestion is probabaly acheivable and could be set up very quickly, if a will next season even. This arrangement however should be the first step to a full pyramid system (please don't start another thread, we have debated that to bits), in my view there are not enough people with football at heart for this to be resolved in the short term, there is too much self interest, self-preservation within their own clubs, management committee blazers and SFA positions - if you fit any of these and are offended tough,look at the bigger picture if you are capable. We are one of only two countries in western europe with this arrangement - N. Ireland is the other I think, we are thirty to forty years behind England and it DOES work.
While I am at it I would also insist ground criterion should play an important part of any progression from lower leagues to SOSL with further criterion at Conference Level with properly audited accounts that reflects the full income and true running costs of clubs (maybe the SFL / SPL should have something similar -Oh I hear you say they do - UGH!).
P.S. All the best to Queens in the Cup Semi.

[cmontheloknow]

Galabankie, on Apr 12 2008, 00:04, said:

By now readers from the Juniors will be getting up in arms, the aforementioned suggestion is probabaly acheivable and could be set up very quickly, if a will next season even. This arrangement however should be the first step to a full pyramid system (please don't start another thread, we have debated that to bits), in my view there are not enough people with football at heart for this to be resolved in the short term, there is too much self interest, self-preservation within their own clubs, management committee blazers and SFA positions - if you fit any of these and are offended tough,look at the bigger picture if you are capable. We are one of only two countries in western europe with this arrangement - N. Ireland is the other I think, we are thirty to forty years behind England and it DOES work.

Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland both have a system of Senior, Intermediate and Junior football. Senior being the top divisions clubs, Intermediate the bigger non-league sides (bottom national division in NI) and Junior is effectively their public park amateur grade, as it once was in Scotland. When the Junior Scotland Representative side plays Junior internationals against these two, it's actually Northern Ireland Intermediates, though the Republic do put forward their Juniors.

The problem we have in Scotland is that when the Scottish League expanded back in the early 20th Century, the other Senior leagues, which were quite extensive, shrank and we had no defined Intermediate grade then. Yet the Juniors kept expanding. Eventually the Juniors had grown to such an extent that professionalism was legalised in 1907, 15 years or so after the Scottish League. That in turn led to the Scottish Amateur FA forming in 1909, and the Scottish Welfare FA followed in 1918 to boost the morale of workers after the War. Scotland did eventually get an Intermediate grade in 1927 when a number of leading SJFA clubs took the huff over losing players to Senior football for nothing, though the dispute was resolved in 1931 and all clubs returned to the fold.

Whatever the history, if Scotland had the same structure as Northern Ireland and Eire, there'd be no problem. The issue is that Junior football here is bigger in parts of the country than the Senior non-league game. I've said before that it would be possible for us to have a similar system.

SPL/SFL: Senior
Top level non-league regions: Intermediate
District leagues / amateurs: Junior

[Burnie_man]

Galabankie, on Apr 12 2008, 01:04, said:

the SOSL would then be split into two. Above the SOSL would sit a Lowland League or conference or whatever you want to call it, this league would have 'South Association' teams such as Star, Annan, Stranraer, Threave, Saints, etc participating against the best recent EOSL teams with one or two juniors who may well have expressed an interest to be involved in such a set up.

Which particular Junior clubs would be interested in such a set-up?

Quote

By now readers from the Juniors will be getting up in arms

Can't see why, we have our own Pyramid set-up which some Senior clubs appear to be very interested in

Quote

in my view there are not enough people with football at heart for this to be resolved in the short term, there is too much self interest, self-preservation within their own clubs, management committee blazers and SFA positions - if you fit any of these and are offended tough,look at the bigger picture if you are capable.

That we agree on.

[Harry Biggerstaff]

I would agree with Burnie man, can't see the juniors having any interest whatsoever in being involved in that

[tuckersloan]

Blue1870, on Apr 11 2008, 18:47, said:

To be honest if you are a player of another team and you want to test yourself against better players then you shouldn't worry about it. Just get on with it in my opinion. It may be harsh but hey that's tough.

When we played Stranraer at the start of the season I was the first one to mention the fact that Stranraer had been bolstered by the addition of first team players. In all honesty though I would now need to say that when they have played they have not really improved the team that much. Am not too convinced that the likes of Cashmore etc is better than some of the reserve players. I really do believe that this 3rd division and some of the players are pretty mediocre.

In fact I actually think the likes of Dalbeattie and Annan have improved the standard of their South teams more when including East players. This thread is a pretty good one - some real fascinating stuff in it. I agree its good to test yourself against better players but when you head down to say Annan thinking you have a 60% chance of victory, take a glance at the opposition team sheet and suddenly realise its more like 10%. That can have an effect on vital final positions and brings a sense of injustice with it for some involved with South clubs.

That all maybe sounds a bit petty to you Colin but when you are running a team and setting them goals for the season these sort of things can be pivotal. If your direct opposition plays a team of a significantly different quality it can be frustrating. Being honest though there is no real ideal solution and I can see things from the other side of the coin. Why shouldn't the likes of Dalbeattie, Annan and Stranraer protect their own interests?

[cmontheloknow]

tuckersloan, on Apr 12 2008, 22:35, said:

When we played Stranraer at the start of the season I was the first one to mention the fact that Stranraer had been bolstered by the addition of first team players. In all honesty though I would now need to say that when they have played they have not really improved the team that much. Am not too convinced that the likes of Cashmore etc is better than some of the reserve players. I really do believe that this 3rd division and some of the players are pretty mediocre.

Cashmore was real quality in his last year Junior but I haven't seen him recently. He may have put on weight or slowed down, but he was a very good player for the Buffs back in 2003/2004. And he'd consistently scored goals for Troon and Irvine Vics before that. Maybe he peaked early.

[boyfaethetoon]

[quote name='Slipmat' date='Apr 11 2008, 18:11' post='2382954']
A comment on another thread about QOS fielding their under 16s against Mids in the Challenge Cup the other night after they had put their first team out against Fleet Star in the previous round has got me thinking that the SOSL would be better off if Annan, Dalbeattie and Stranraer were excluded from the league. I see a number of advantages:

1 This would reduce the number of teams to twelve meaning less fixtures over the season so less chance of the three-games-a-week scenario at the end of the season, especially since the powers-that-be refuse to reduce the number of cups. And less chance of Dick Shaw carping on every year about the number of postponed games he has to reschedule.

2 A twelve team league means nobody has to have a blank Saturday

3 There is currently an unfairness when Annan/Dalbeattie/Stranraer beef up their South teams with East/Scottish League players on days when their "big" teams don't have a game. This could mean that in a tight championship one challenging team might play say Annan's East team twice while the other team play their South team twice over the season, or this year if Stranraer are serious about the league they might stick a few first team players in to their last few games. Plus less chance of 13-0 mismatches like Stranraer v Fleet this season.

4 Annan and Dalbeattie could put their South teams into the amateur league instead (as they have done in the past) which would reverse the decline in membership of that league. (Stranraer could play in the Reserve League).

These clubs could still enter the cups if they wanted to.

Anyone agree?

The east teams are no better than the south watched a couple lately and they were dier

[HibeeJibee]

Having come late to this thread, I'll throw in my compulsory tuppence worth and more in.



(1) to go with the original post by Slipmat, it does appear from outside that the SOSFL is too big. 28 league games a season plus, what, 6 cups? 7? is too much. The absolute chaos being wreaked by pitches being out of commission for months at a time is only adding to this. It also appears to be imposing unfair implications on Threave, St Cuthberts and others who have to get midweek games from February onwards, simply to get the matches done.

However, you can hardly split the SOSFL into Premier and First divisions (without finding new members) because both would be too small. Expelling the reserve sides would seem to be the solution, as Slipmat suggests - but when you look at it objectively, these sides are bringing some quality to the league, and they'd have nowhere to go if they got chucked.



(2) The obvious solution to all of this would be a pyramid system as hinted at a few times above, and countless times on Pie & Bovril such that people are now fed of up the thing!!

In the entirety of the Western World*, there are (to my knowledge) only 4 nations without pyramid systems. Scotland, Eire, Northern Ireland and the Netherlands. Both the Irish leagues are in the process of adopting pyramids by the start of the next decade. The Dutch have a pyramid, but there is no promotion and relegation between the 2nd and 3rd tiers.

Quite why Scotland should limp on with our football torn into bits horizontally (between say Berwick Rangers, Eyemouth and Chirnside Utd as an example) and vertically (between say Spartans and Edinburgh Utd, or between Easthouses Lily and Newtongrange Star) is nothing to do with the optimum footballing environment. It is because of (1) self-interested clubs, (2) self-interested individuals and often their organisations and (3) the 'aye-been' attitude.

But that said, you can't criticise people for looking out for their clubs. The clubs come first.

*Canada and the USA are in something of a special position



(3) to draw the two above sections together is the suggestion that the EOSFL and SOSFL join together into a Lowland League, with the various amateurs and welfarers (Dumfries & District, Stewartry Association, Border Amateur, Lothian & Edinburgh, etc.) below.

This is the kind of thing that people should be considering. I have personal misgivings about the viability of the Lowland League as a feeder to the SFL, and feel that the SOS 'chunk' of the idea should be merging with West Juniors; while the EOS 'chunk' of the idea should be merging with East Juniors. However, in spirit Galabankie's suggestion is on the right lines.

I was talking with an official from a prominent EOS club last week, and he said the reason he couldn't see a pyramid working was because it would cost his club £32,000 to operate in the higher levels, while they run on about £10,000 currently. You can't argue with that, but the point is that the pyramid is not there to get teams into the SFL. That is one part of it, but the pyramid benefits every club - by allowing them to play the best opposition in their local area, and allowing them to rise / fall to a playing and commercial level suited to them.

Its for that reason that every other developed country on earth has or is getting one.

However, Scotland is content to argue and bicker within ourselves - while nothing changes.