HibeeJibee Posted July 7, 2017 Share Posted July 7, 2017 Contrary to tweet from EOSFA - the PR1 draw is not open with 16 clubs making 4 ties/8 byes... 4 of 12 licensed clubs are randomly drawn to join LTHV, Kelty, Glenafton and Colville. Presumably they put those 12 in the bowl... draw 4... empty the bowl, put those 4 + LTHV/Kelty/Glenafton/Colville back in, draw PR1... empty the bowl, put the remaining 8 back in + 4 numbers representing PR1 ties, draw PR2. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sermani Posted July 7, 2017 Share Posted July 7, 2017 1 hour ago, calmac25 said: That's proof that the SFA read pie and Bovril Cheers for the replies folks. SFA read Pie an Bovril? no chance, they might start to make sensible decisions Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HTG Posted July 7, 2017 Share Posted July 7, 2017 1 hour ago, HibeeJibee said: Contrary to tweet from EOSFA - the PR1 draw is not open with 16 clubs making 4 ties/8 byes... 4 of 12 licensed clubs are randomly drawn to join LTHV, Kelty, Glenafton and Colville. Presumably they put those 12 in the bowl... draw 4... empty the bowl, put those 4 + LTHV/Kelty/Glenafton/Colville back in, draw PR1... empty the bowl, put the remaining 8 back in + 4 numbers representing PR1 ties, draw PR2. Whit? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HibeeJibee Posted July 7, 2017 Share Posted July 7, 2017 Last year SFA dumped all "non-professional clubs" out of the competition proper and into preliminaries. Unlicensed clubs begin in PR1, and licensed clubs (outwith SPFL/HL/LL) join at PR2. However there are only 12 spaces in PR2, and there are now 12 licensed clubs, so they have to randomly draw 4 licensed clubs to also start in PR1. Last season was only 3 clubs (Newton Stewart and St Cuthbert weren't licensed but there was also a West Junior qualifier unlike this season). Thus there won't be 16 clubs in the hat for PR1, with 8 of them drawn and the other 8 byed into PR2... there will be 4 clubs in the hat for PR1, and another 4 randomly drawn from the PR2 bunch to join them. LTHV, Kelty, Glenafton and Colville are bound to play in PR1. Meanwhile the 12 licensed clubs - including Linlithgow - have 1/3 chance of having to play PR1 and 2/3 chance of staying in PR2. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
archieb Posted July 8, 2017 Share Posted July 8, 2017 19 hours ago, HibeeJibee said: Contrary to tweet from EOSFA - the PR1 draw is not open with 16 clubs making 4 ties/8 byes... 4 of 12 licensed clubs are randomly drawn to join LTHV, Kelty, Glenafton and Colville. Presumably they put those 12 in the bowl... draw 4... empty the bowl, put those 4 + LTHV/Kelty/Glenafton/Colville back in, draw PR1... empty the bowl, put the remaining 8 back in + 4 numbers representing PR1 ties, draw PR2. Would it not make more sense to put the 12 licensed clubs' balls in the bowl, draw out 8 byes, then add the 4 qualifiers' balls, skoosh them round and draw the 4 x Q1 ties? Then, to draw Q2, the 8 byes are returned to the bowl along with 4 balls representing the Q1 winners ... Or is that too logical? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HibeeJibee Posted July 8, 2017 Share Posted July 8, 2017 They could do and may well do, I was being demonstrative rather than literal. It effectively amounts to the same thing anyway and your way probably involves 1 fewer emptying of the bowl too. One of the oddities is that both the licensing factor and the random drawing mean that unlike anywhere else in the competition, clubs who finished below others can enter later! LTHV - champions of tier 6 - are bound to start in PR1... Burntisland who finished bottom of tier 6 have a 2/3 chance of starting in PR2, and might do so while the likes of Preston (relegated from tier 5) and Coldstream (mid-table in tier 6) might have to start in PR1. It should really be 4 from Golspie, BoD, Linlithgow, Girvan and Glasgow Uni starting in PR1 as they're outside pyramid... if there were 2 more qualifiers you'd add Burntisland... etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HTG Posted July 8, 2017 Share Posted July 8, 2017 16 minutes ago, HibeeJibee said: They could do and may well do, I was being demonstrative rather than literal. It effectively amounts to the same thing anyway and your way probably involves 1 fewer emptying of the bowl too. One of the oddities is that both the licensing factor and the random drawing mean that unlike anywhere else in the competition, clubs who finished below others can enter later! LTHV - champions of tier 6 - are bound to start in PR1... Burntisland who finished bottom of tier 6 have a 2/3 chance of starting in PR2, and might do so while the likes of Preston (relegated from tier 5) and Coldstream (mid-table in tier 6) might have to start in PR1. It should really be 4 from Golspie, BoD, Linlithgow, Girvan and Glasgow Uni starting in PR1 as they're outside pyramid... if there were 2 more qualifiers you'd add Burntisland... etc. How do you propose that Golspie get into the pyramid to avoid having to play a round earlier? Or anyone else north of Montrose for that matter? They could all come into the EoS league so the self preservationists are not affected. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HibeeJibee Posted July 8, 2017 Share Posted July 8, 2017 It's a fair point but equally applies to Fort William/Strathspey/etc. entering R1 proper. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HTG Posted July 8, 2017 Share Posted July 8, 2017 7 minutes ago, HibeeJibee said: It's a fair point but equally applies to Fort William/Strathspey/etc. entering R1 proper. Of course it does given that they are being retained at an artificial level. The first round proper is a far more winnable affair than the qualifiers on a percentage basis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ranaldo Bairn Posted July 10, 2017 Share Posted July 10, 2017 It contradicts what they published on Friday! http://www.scottishfa.co.uk/resources/documents/ScottishCup/2017-18/2017-18 Scottish Cup Format Composition.pdf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
debian Posted July 10, 2017 Share Posted July 10, 2017 3 minutes ago, Ranaldo Bairn said: It contradicts what they published on Friday! http://www.scottishfa.co.uk/resources/documents/ScottishCup/2017-18/2017-18 Scottish Cup Format Composition.pdf 12 minutes ago, gogsy said: Just noticed this, only eleven licensed clubs? http://www.scottishfa.co.uk/scottish_fa_news.cfm?page=1957&newsID=17065&newsCategoryID=1&utm_source=Direct No Wigtown? Wigtown have folded as far as I am aware. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HTG Posted July 10, 2017 Share Posted July 10, 2017 Burntisland and Newtown Stewart in preliminary 1 with the original 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyrshireTon Posted July 10, 2017 Share Posted July 10, 2017 17 minutes ago, debian said: Wigtown have folded as far as I am aware. Where are you getting this from? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HibeeJibee Posted July 10, 2017 Share Posted July 10, 2017 This is third-hand info but a mutual contact tells me Wigtown's players and management have left and it's a question of the club folding / going into abeyance. If so it's understandable they wouldn't want to be included in the draw only to potentially have to scratch (and so face even heavier sanctions than they may do for withdrawing), or put out a team of ringers or non-footballers and get humiliated by one of the strong outfits like LTHV, Kelty, Glenafton or Linlithgow. Either way it's a heart-wrenching fall from grace for a club who've been SFA members for generations, won the SOSL 2yrs ago and were runners-up in the season just ended (indeed were it not for late season collapse they would have won and been promoted to LL!). They only achieved their SFA licence within the last year or so, and beat Vale of Leithen of LL in 2015-16. Bad draw for EOSL in so far as 5 of their 6 teams drew each other. I'd expect the winner of Kelty v LTHV; Glenafton; Linlithgow; and Threave to make the competition proper while it'll perhaps be close between St Cuthbert/Girvan and Colville/Preston. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
archieb Posted July 10, 2017 Share Posted July 10, 2017 4 hours ago, HibeeJibee said: This is third-hand info but a mutual contact tells me Wigtown's players and management have left and it's a question of the club folding / going into abeyance. If so it's understandable they wouldn't want to be included in the draw only to potentially have to scratch (and so face even heavier sanctions than they may do for withdrawing), or put out a team of ringers or non-footballers and get humiliated by one of the strong outfits like LTHV, Kelty, Glenafton or Linlithgow. Either way it's a heart-wrenching fall from grace for a club who've been SFA members for generations, won the SOSL 2yrs ago and were runners-up in the season just ended (indeed were it not for late season collapse they would have won and been promoted to LL!). They only achieved their SFA licence within the last year or so, and beat Vale of Leithen of LL in 2015-16. Bad draw for EOSL in so far as 5 of their 6 teams drew each other. I'd expect the winner of Kelty v LTHV; Glenafton; Linlithgow; and Threave to make the competition proper while it'll perhaps be close between St Cuthbert/Wigtown and Colville/Preston. Wigtown back in then??? I think you mean St Cuthbert/Girvan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HibeeJibee Posted July 10, 2017 Share Posted July 10, 2017 Indeed, typo on my behalf. Even then I'm not sure St Cuthbert v Girvan necessarily will be "close", possibly "closer" would be better: as for all that St Cuthbert have improved - ending last season not far behind Edusport and Wigtown and I'm guessing they will have or can pick-up some Wigtown players - Girvan are clearly fairly handy with back-to-back promotions behind them. Burntisland seem to have signed almost a new team but whether it'll be enough to see off the Amateur Cup champions I don't know. Colville needed a replay to get past Edusport last season then lost narrowly to Girvan... I imagine they'd be reasonably content to have drawn Burntisland and then Preston - both having big rebuilds after lowly finishes - but away ties are trickier and I don't know if Colville have retained most of their players, which is often a peril the successful amateurs face. It would be a shock if Glenafton, Threave, Linlithgow and the winner of Kelty v LTHV didn't come through the other ties. Perhaps a recovering Linlithgow look the most vulnerable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HibeeJibee Posted August 9, 2017 Share Posted August 9, 2017 Competition gets underway on Saturday with Burntisland-Colville, Glenafton-Newton Stewart and the big one Kelty-LTHV (this latter unusually kicks-off 2:30pm - usual time in EOSL). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GLENAFTON93 Posted August 10, 2017 Share Posted August 10, 2017 On 7/10/2017 at 11:35, gogsy said: I hope they aren't having what is called " a junior moment" And whats a Junior moment? . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HibeeJibee Posted August 10, 2017 Share Posted August 10, 2017 10 minutes ago, GLENAFTON93 said: And whats a Junior moment? . I suspect he was alluding to a few years ago - when SJFA was drawing R1 of the Junior Cup, and drew 4 fewer ties than required, before having to return several hours later (after their lunch IIRC) and finish it properly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GLENAFTON93 Posted August 10, 2017 Share Posted August 10, 2017 That certainly was embarrassing , probably on a parr with mr Stewart at last seasons SFA draw . Well good luck to all the Junior teams in this seasons Senior Cup, our wee village and team are buzzing , not just quite the Junior Cup buzz, but a nice distraction all the same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.