Challenge Cup 2017-18

[Bring Back Paddy Flannery]

Folk hoping that we'll beat Rangers Colts 8-0 need to remember two things;
A) Dumbarton have possibly the worst Challenge Cup record in Scotland
B) We couldn't score a goal against Bonnyrigg let alone beat them.
We are terrible in cups and I wouldn't be surprised if we were beaten.

Absolutely this.

I wouldn't be surprised to see them pap us out given our cup record.

The result doesn't bother me, I'd happiky field a team of youngsters if we had enough. I'm more concerned about folk actively boycotting the game. Seeing a few folk thinking they are the pinnacle of loyalty claiming they will be attending regardless because they "will always support the team" or some shite.

Thankfully it's a minority but I'm craving a proper sub 100 crowd.

[Ira Gaines]

21 minutes ago, The Moonster said:

Folk hoping that we'll beat Rangers Colts 8-0 in front of nobody need to remember three things;

A) Dumbarton have possibly the worst Challenge Cup record in Scotland

B) We couldn't score a goal against Bonnyrigg let alone beat them.

C) There will be a decent number of local Rangers fans who will go to this game and by the looks of it we have a number of "Superfans" who will be attending in the home end.

We are terrible in cups and I wouldn't be surprised if we were beaten in front of our usual midweek crowd of around 500.

At the same time, do not underestimate just how shite these Colt teams are.

[TheBuckfastTriangle]

22 hours ago, SimonLichtie said:

This competition was initially changing format on the premise it would allow U20 teams (am I f**k using the 'c' word to describe them) to play about proper men's teams, right?

After the first year, where the majority of the U20s got fucked and easily put out the competition, they haven't seeded the teams this year, resulting in several U20s playing each other.

Now, considering that this was pushed through to give them game time against men, what the utter f**k is the justification for not seeding this time and having them in the competition, where quite a few of them will just be playing each other akin to the youth cup every season?

A big reason for the format change was as precursor to having the U20's involved in the senior SPFL setup. If they continue to get pumped and put out in the first round its hard to justify that they'd be competitive. Also, the crowds for senior teams v U20s are gash.

They've noted these issues and, by removing seeding, they can claim the U20s are getting better (as at least St Johnstone or Aberdeen U20s must make the 2nd round, so there's every chance there will be at least 2 in the pot - double last years total) while also claiming crowds are up in the 1st round as more ties between senior sides will be attended in the same way as would always have been the case.

It suits the agenda to have an U20s team play 2 or 3 rounds against other U20s then get pumped by the first senior team they play and claim they "heroically made it to the QF in a competition containing senior teams" than to watch them all actually play against senior sides and be knocked out in the 1st round.

[Skyline Drifter]

15 hours ago, Skyline Drifter said:

No overage players allowed. Werent last year either.

 

14 hours ago, Clyde01 said:

Thanks for confirming, there was some talk of this being allowed this year earlier in the thread.

 

 

5 hours ago, HibeeJibee said:

Brora's chairman writes a piece on his club's website every week or so, and in a piece at the end of the season... along with a number of other things which have happened, including the reorganising of entry points, and shortening of the competition... said there would now be over-age players. Presumably he didn't invent that; perhaps it was planned but changed their minds.

It's possible I'm wrong then. As far as I know there are no new rules published yet for this season's competition. Nothing has been circulated to clubs yet anyway and the rules on the SPFL website are still last year's. I haven't heard or been told of any proposal to change the rule requiring 20's teams to contain only age eligible players. However, neither have I attended any meetings where such would have been discussed so it's possible there is a change afoot and nobody's had any official word yet. They normally circulate the competition rules about the same time the first round is drawn. I presumed since we haven't had any that nothing has changed.

[capt_oats]

1 minute ago, Skyline Drifter said:

It's possible I'm wrong then. As far as I know there are no new rules published yet for this season's competition. Nothing has been circulated to clubs yet anyway and the rules on the SPFL website are still last year's. I haven't heard or been told of any proposal to change the rule requiring 20's teams to contain only age eligible players. However, neither have I attended any meetings where such would have been discussed so it's possible there is a change afoot and nobody's had any official word yet. They normally circulate the competition rules about the same time the first round is drawn. I presumed since we haven't had any that nothing has changed.

Surely the fact they're still identifying the u20 sides as 'Colt' sides means that they won't be eligible to play overage players in their side. Is it not possible that whoever's suggested that is conflating the change in plan for the dev league with this?

Either way, I'm looking forward to it. I genuinely enjoyed the two games our u20s played in the tournament last season vs Edinburgh City and Airdrie.

[Skyline Drifter]

44 minutes ago, TheBuckfastTriangle said:

A big reason for the format change was as precursor to having the U20's involved in the senior SPFL setup. If they continue to get pumped and put out in the first round its hard to justify that they'd be competitive. Also, the crowds for senior teams v U20s are gash.

They've noted these issues and, by removing seeding, they can claim the U20s are getting better (as at least St Johnstone or Aberdeen U20s must make the 2nd round, so there's every chance there will be at least 2 in the pot - double last years total) while also claiming crowds are up in the 1st round as more ties between senior sides will be attended in the same way as would always have been the case.

It suits the agenda to have an U20s team play 2 or 3 rounds against other U20s then get pumped by the first senior team they play and claim they "heroically made it to the QF in a competition containing senior teams" than to watch them all actually play against senior sides and be knocked out in the 1st round.

Er, SIX u20's teams made the 2nd round last season. Rangers, Aberdeen, Hamilton, Celtic, Motherwell & Partick Thistle. Only Celtic made the 3rd round. Actually if anything the format change with full time Championship sides entering in round 1 made it LESS likely the u20's would advance though the unseeded draw always gave a chance at least a couple would draw one another. The full time sides didn't come in until the 3rd round last time.

I get that the majority don't want the u20's in this but lets not make things up to try to justify some sort of conspiracy.

[HibeeJibee]

It depends how you define it. Last time only 1 'B' team made the Last 32... this time at least 1 will (Aberdeen 'B' v St Johnstone 'B'), probably more, as they've taken a round out. That said I don't think the shortening of the cup was done to help the 'B' teams, but due to other factors. Northern Irish and Welsh sides did so poorly that it would have been inconceivable to add the 2 Eire teams and give 6 places in the Last 16 to invited clubs. Also the competition was terribly drawn-out last time including 2 midweek rounds in August; so it was wise to take the opportunity to remove a round which making the non-Scottish clubs start earlier provided.

However it is interesting that having seeded it to the hilt last season there is no seeding at all this time. This has seen 8 of 12 'B' teams draw each other, non-league or SPFL2 clubs. If it had been seeded they would have drawn Championship or SPFL1 clubs, Peterhead or Stenhousemuir. That certainly will improve their chances of progressing whereas if seeded they'd have faced Championship or SPFL1 clubs.

[NorthernLights]

7 minutes ago, HibeeJibee said:

It depends how you define it. Last time only 1 'B' team made the Last 32... this time at least 1 will (Aberdeen 'B' v St Johnstone 'B'), probably more, as they've taken a round out. That said I don't think the shortening of the cup was done to help the 'B' teams, but due to other factors. Northern Irish and Welsh sides did so poorly that it would have been inconceivable to add the 2 Eire teams and give 6 places in the Last 16 to invited clubs. Also the competition was terribly drawn-out last time including 2 midweek rounds in August; so it was wise to take the opportunity to remove a round which making the non-Scottish clubs start earlier provided.

However it is interesting that having seeded it to the hilt last season there is no seeding at all this time. This has seen 8 of 12 'B' teams draw each other, non-league or SPFL2 clubs. If it had been seeded they would have drawn Championship or SPFL1 clubs, Peterhead or Stenhousemuir. That certainly will improve their chances of progressing whereas if seeded they'd have faced Championship or SPFL1 clubs.

I did think that last season they "seeded" the draw to stop the Colt teams being drawn against each other in the 1st round.  

I can see our game against St Johnstone Colts being played in Brechin.  

[Jan Vojáček]

I'm really looking forward to the outrage when some big, old lower league jobber snaps some Celtic/Rangers U20 'starlet' (the future Darren Coles, Kyle Hutton etc of this world), and is then targeted by the Glasgow press for the rest of his career.

5 hours ago, Bring Back Paddy Flannery said:

Absolutely this.

I wouldn't be surprised to see them pap us out given our cup record.

The result doesn't bother me, I'd happiky field a team of youngsters if we had enough. I'm more concerned about folk actively boycotting the game. Seeing a few folk thinking they are the pinnacle of loyalty claiming they will be attending regardless because they "will always support the team" or some shite.

Thankfully it's a minority but I'm craving a proper sub 100 crowd.
 

 

Aye the "Will never let our team down , ill b there supporting the sons" comment yesterday forced me into a decision. Either I put my fist through my screen, or I went on a big rant as to why this shouldn't be encouraged. The latter seemed like the cheaper option, so I picked it.

[TheBuckfastTriangle]

2 hours ago, Skyline Drifter said:

Er, SIX u20's teams made the 2nd round last season. Rangers, Aberdeen, Hamilton, Celtic, Motherwell & Partick Thistle. Only Celtic made the 3rd round. Actually if anything the format change with full time Championship sides entering in round 1 made it LESS likely the u20's would advance though the unseeded draw always gave a chance at least a couple would draw one another. The full time sides didn't come in until the 3rd round last time.

I get that the majority don't want the u20's in this but lets not make things up to try to justify some sort of conspiracy.

My bad, you're quite right. I'll blame the change to number of rounds - assumed Airdrie entered 1st round both years but it was 2nd round last year. 

Doesn't help that I'm a bit cynical!

[Back Beach]

Home tie against a team we've not played for a while, half a chance of progressing and not a colt team. Not the worst draw at all for Clyde.

Was rather hoping Clyde would have been in North section so we could have had them back at Brora. [emoji2]

[English Wasp]

13 hours ago, HibeeJibee said:

Midweek before term starts is always an issue for them putting out their strongest XI. That said they played Rangers 'B' last time and weren't totally disgraced - lost 4-0.

The Lowland League starts back around the same time as the SPFL (last year it started the weekend before) so they should have a few games under their belt already by then. Given how focused Stirling is on sport, I would imagine that most of the players in the first team place a fairly high priority on it, and will be back in time for the start of the season. That being said they did struggle at the start of last season, and only won 2 games before the middle of September. It will be interesting to see how they fare against Patrick youths, but I would expect it to be a closer game than last year. 

[GoTeamGaz]

On 2017-6-27 at 23:30, virginton said:

He already admits to not having actually been to a Dumbarton game in years but shrieks about the need for a bizarre boycott in this case. Dumbarton clearly haven't missed his custom.

Good yin.

Again, to be clear, I wasn't demanding anything (or shrieking, if you prefer) simply stating what would have to be done in order to have people sit up & take notice, but you enjoy your fanfic.

[LiviLion]

On 2017-6-27 at 15:39, SimonLichtie said:

This competition was initially changing format on the premise it would allow U20 teams (am I f**k using the 'c' word to describe them) to play about proper men's teams, right?

After the first year, where the majority of the U20s got fucked and easily put out the competition, they haven't seeded the teams this year, resulting in several U20s playing each other.

Now, considering that this was pushed through to give them game time against men, what the utter f**k is the justification for not seeding this time and having them in the competition, where quite a few of them will just be playing each other akin to the youth cup every season?

If they're drawn against each other they'll get further rather than all being fucked out in the first round, showing they can clearly compete in this competition and therefore the SPFL. 

[Hampden Diehard]

On 6/28/2017 at 10:36, Bring Back Paddy Flannery said:

 

. Seeing a few folk thinking they are the pinnacle of loyalty claiming they will be attending regardless because they "will always support the team" or some shite.

Thankfully it's a minority but I'm craving a proper sub 100 crowd.
 

 

I go to all my team's games but I have absolutely no problem with folks who won't want to pay good cash to see us play M'Well's weans at Fir Park.  Colts teams or whatever you want to call them shouldn't be anywhere near a senior competition.   However, to take some sort of moral high ground here, as you and others have, just because you're not going and then giving people stick as they want to go along and support their team is pish.  Going along to watch this shite actually does make them more loyal than the ones who decide to stay away.

[Bring Back Paddy Flannery]

I go to all my team's games but I have absolutely no problem with folks who won't want to pay good cash to see us play M'Well's weans at Fir Park.  Colts teams or whatever you want to call them shouldn't be anywhere near a senior competition.   However, to take some sort of moral high ground here, as you and others have, just because you're not going and then giving people stick as they want to go along and support their team is pish.  Going along to watch this shite actually does make them more loyal than the ones who decide to stay away.

Who am I giving stick for attending the game? My issue is with people thinking not attending makes you less loyal.

This competition to be the greatest fan on earth is utterly cringeworthy, that's what I'm having a go at. It's not a competition. Staying away or attending a colt match doesn't make you more or less of a fan. People are rolling out quotes about "never letting the team down" or "always being loyal to the team" as if it's a badge of honour and those not attending are letting the team down.

I'd rather they seen the bigger picture and didn't attend but if they want to be deluded and think it's a loyalty issue they can wire in.

[Nowhereman]

Who am I giving stick for attending the game? My issue is with people thinking not attending makes you less loyal.

This competition to be the greatest fan on earth is utterly cringeworthy, that's what I'm having a go at. It's not a competition. Staying away or attending a colt match doesn't make you more or less of a fan. People are rolling out quotes about "never letting the team down" or "always being loyal to the team" as if it's a badge of honour and those not attending are letting the team down.

I'd rather they seen the bigger picture and didn't attend but if they want to be deluded and think it's a loyalty issue they can wire in.

It will be a bit difficult to tell if it's a boycott or not. There was less than twenty sons fans at Stranraer last season but it wasn't a boycott AFAIK

[The Naitch]

http://www.independent.ie/sport/soccer/league-of-ireland/bray-wanderers-players-told-wages-will-only-be-covered-until-next-week-and-that-they-can-begin-talking-to-other-clubs-35886528.html

Bray Wanderers in serious trouble unless a magic money tree is found. Guessing they'll be desperate for a home draw in the 2nd round to avoid travel costs etc.

[liam_barnett]

All times, dates & venues now confirmed for round 1, appears to be no live TV game(s)? http://spfl.co.uk/news/article/irn-bru-cup-first-round-ties-confirmed-76/

[Audaces Fortuna Juvat]

On ‎02‎/‎07‎/‎2017 at 14:31, The Naitch said:

http://www.independent.ie/sport/soccer/league-of-ireland/bray-wanderers-players-told-wages-will-only-be-covered-until-next-week-and-that-they-can-begin-talking-to-other-clubs-35886528.html

Bray Wanderers in serious trouble unless a magic money tree is found. Guessing they'll be desperate for a home draw in the 2nd round to avoid travel costs etc.

They might not even make it that far.