Interesting inter view with mr Smith on Hfl web site. Link at bottom. My english is not best but I will try to type out relevent parts below for those with out media playr. What are your thoughts on his reform plans?

Q: "You're also speak now about a pyramid system for clubs going up through highland league, through juniors and stepping into Third division. Any further progress on that?"

GS: "No we have no further progress on that. We're putting forward ideas on that. I'm making a paper that is going to be put through out a group who look at it. In order to take it further. We will have to eventually come back to all teams, but at moment there's a long way from establishing any plans. But it is something we are looking at."

GS: "We do know we have to develop an equivalent of the Conference in England. Financially it is a problem because they have a lot of money in that league from television deals and sponsorship and all that type of thing".

GS: "There are a lot of hurdles to get over but we are at least looking at it"


My reaction having spoke to people in EOS football and look at this forum is that a nation wide Conference and having it below Third division of sfl may be not good idea. Smith does not seem confident.


Later on Smith also speak about expanding Scottish cup and say he does not see expanding to include more Juniors and all-in draw as good. Say he think better for current small clubs to play themselves in early rounds. Shame as many good junior and EOS clubs not in cup currently.


http://www.ngrfoundation.co.uk/joomla/inde...40&Itemid=1

I'm fairly sure he's using Conference as a name to describe any system that offers progression to the SFL, not necessarily as a national division. In the papers back in August he talked of a North and South Conference. Personally speaking, I think it should be a three-ways regionalised division as that offers the least amount of change and the best chance of acceptance.



He didn't answer anything about more Junior or EOS sides coming in as he was asked about, bizarrely, an all in draw involving the 1st, 2nd Division (what about 3rd Division?) Highland League and the Juniors i.e. EVERYONE in the pot for round one. At least that's what Gordon answered, and rightly told him that the best systesm is the one we have now where the non-league clubs progress to the bigger sides by winning games. What a daft question. The Junior CUP IMO is spoiled by the all-in approach that sees big names dunted out left right and centre before the last 32 which can mean a very weak and poor last 18/8/4 final. Rank dross like Carnoustie v Renfrew was bad for the Junior Cup Final's reputation.

Has anyone seriously thought an ALL IN Scottish Cup draw a good idea bar the interviewer?

Fixed it for you

Well seeing as we've been in the QFs and beyond 3 out the past 4 seasons I can hardly say I'm speaking for myself.

Would the senior cup be better for having mouthwatering quarter final ties such as Albion Rovers v Preston Athletic, Stenny v Dumbarton, Kilmarnock v Montrose and Dunfermline v Airdrie Utd?

Definitely a school of thought that says the Junior Cup is all the greater for the all-in draw but I feel it totally devalues it as a prize. The best should have to beat the best to win it, and that is not the case with the way the draw can pan out. If Bathgate must draw Meadow it should be in the last 16, last 32 at a push, not the last 128. Anyone who celebrates the loss of a big team that early in such circumstances can applaud themselves for continuing to keep the grade in the stone age.

Out of interest, have you been drawn against biggish teams in the early rounds in the past 4 seasons?



In my opinion, it *would* be mildy refreshing to have different names involved every now and again. QoS in the final being the prime example.


If the 'best should have to beat the best' why is that devalued because they meet in an earlier round. Why is 'dross, dross, dross, good, good, best, best' a better cup run than 'dross, best, dross, good, dross, good, best'


It's hardly 'celebrating' the loss of a big team - unless you're the ones who beat them. I'm not sure that artificially improving the chances of a select number of teams - despite the principle being applied widely in football - won't lead to a staleness which will be harmful to the game.

Yes. Arthurlie R1, 2005-06



Yes, one or two teams among the best but not the majority which was the example I gave. QOS were great for the cup last season. But the Challenge Cup is largely ignored because of the lack of big names.



I wasn't so much as saying it's devalued because they meet in an earlier round, but I do think the best cups are those where the competitors get considerably stronger with every round and losing one big gun to another seems like a situation best avoided. Fair play if a big gun is knocked out by a so called lesser team. But why deliberately force two big guns to take each other out so early? Would UEFA draw Man Utd v Real Madrid in a Champions league qualifier? No, they'd be kept apart.

In the Junior Cup it is not always the case that the field gets stronger as the cup progresses, at least up until the last 8 or so. I want to see as strong a quarter-final line-up as possible so that the teams in the semis have earned the right to be there. In a discussion earlier in the week it was realised that Formartine United were the last North side to get to the quarters (2000-01) yet the only team of any note they beat to get that far was Petershill.



I think the fact that virtually every cup competition in the world has staggered entry would imply that it is seen as a good thing. Were Thornton good for last year's Junior Cup? Were they a breath of fresh air or just cannon fodder for whoever was lucky to get them in the semi? In the end Cumnock huffed and puffed their way to victory but that they themselves were in the semi anyway is staggering as they were absolutely dreadful last season and were very fortunate to dodge the drop.

I suppose that it's a question of balance between the number of 'favoured' teams and how far through the competition they enter. Obviously, the Junior Cup is one extreme with no favoured teams whatsoever, but the Senior competition leaves me a wee bit cold because the most 'favoured' teams can win the competition having played just 4 (I think) matches (and you're almost guaranteed to get at least one 'weak' club). Down South, the balance at the 3rd Round is better due to the number of clubs still left in the competition for the top 2 divisions to join in with

An SPL side has to win 5 matches to lift the Scottish Cup. The FA Cup has an extra round for the big clubs as they join at the last 64 stage as opposed to last 32. I don't really see the point of mirroring that in Scotland as it'd mean 22 non-league sides in the hat with the SFL/SPL clubs and you're only increasing the chances of the big side drawing a weaker one.

It would be good to see a pyramid in Scottish football but if there isn't a sponsorship deal for the possible re shuffle i cant see it happening. I would like to see it happen.

Albion Rovers in the QF sounds good to me!

Staggered entry is merely a tool to ensure the big clubs are in the latter stages and generate money and viewing figures, just look at the Chumps League. The big get bigger whilst the small stay in their place. CFR Cluj and BATE aren't supposed to be in there. Give me the old European Champions Club Cup any day.

Mind you, look at Germany where Bundeliga clubs enter at an early stage, are kept apart, but must play away from home. Spreading income and giving the smaller clubs a chance of an upset. SPL clubs should enter the Scottish Cup at least a round earlier.

As for the Junior Cup, the furthest I would go is that the Superleague clubs and Scottish Cup participants are kept out of Round 1, and then in Round 2 the the Superleague clubs are kept apart. From Round 3 onwards it should remain all-in. Anymore than that and the competition would be ruined.

Staggered entry happens in virtually all cup competitions except those in Junior football. Not just something that happens in the Champions League.

Having read all the posts on this one and nodded in agreement in a few and shaked my head at a couple of them too, I still feel that the Scottish game is not able to handle a pyramid scheme, What could the leagues agree on? HFL EOS SOS SJFA getting these guys round a table for a start would bring arguments for a start! Guarantee 1st disagreement would be where would they meet!!
I would love to see it happen as it would get rid of so many rank rotten teams that have under achieved for so long, The SFA are to scared to do anything with this one, I mean look at the utter holes that some of the Member Clubs play in and what are they getting from the SFA in payments most years they are just surviving while there are heaps of ambitious clubs that could show the SFL clubs a thing or two about progressing yet the standards at this time to gain entry into the SFL are ridiculous. I am sure there could be 3 or 4 teams in each organisation that would benefit the SFL but due to the DEAD wood running our game it will not happen for Many,Many moons. Anyway thats enough of my ranting just pissed off as the weather looks like its going to curtail my Saturday as its pishing down!

This is, they are already around a table (Pyramid Working Group) but you wonder about what the motivation is on some parts.

I'm certain it will happen, but it won't happen quickly. Far too many people in both grades are so stuck in the past that it may take a new generation...

SFA turnover was, I believe, over £25M last season; to which you can add the new Homecoming Cup sponsorship, and an improved TV deal in future years. The SFA could sponsor the pyramid?

I'm aware of that.

The handouts that SFA member clubs receive, at non-league level at least, should be ringfenced for ground improvements, especially for those clubs who are members but who do not have a ground that complies with the regulations

Most of them probaly just pish it away on buying/paying players.

As for the Juniors, some so-called Superleague clubs play in absolute hovels whilst paying players £30/40/50+ a week. There's something seriously wrong somewhere.

"Staggered entry is merely a tool to ensure the big clubs are in the latter stages and generate money and viewing figures"

That only applies at the top level of sport yet staggered entry for cups happens right down to schools level.

Far more money than that in the Superleagues Graeme. Certainly at Meadow there are squad players on three figures while looking at the compensation figures I've seen relating to players we've been in for at other clubs, a basic of around £60 seems pretty typical. And with clubs like Meadow and Bathgate raising the bar, the other clubs have to try and compete with them, within their own means or thereabouts.

As I've said before, clubs spend even when they can't afford it because they want to stay successful. Not spending = risk of relegation unless a very talented group of players who will play for peanuts can be found.

It's a deal. See you in March.

Yes, yes it would

Regardless of what level it goes down to, it is there to ensure the big clubs are in the latter stages at the expense of real competition, for the purposes of money.

If schools competitions choose to copy that then it's upto them.

That makes it even worse.

What significant ground improvements has happened to Superleague teams in the last, say, 5 years?

It's catch 22 - spend the money on the ground by not spending on players day for 4 seasons (to save approx £200,000) but who will watch a team that doesn't spend money on players therefore: who is the tarted up ground for?

I agree there's a certain amont of balancing to be done.

However, I would say that having gents and ladies toilets that are more than holes in the ground, some cover to keep the rain off, hard standing areas to keep mud off your trouser/shoes, pitches with half decent drainage that can take a wee bit of rain, and changing facilities where you actually come out cleaner than you went in, are not really tarting the place up but providing the most basic of facilities for people to watch games and players to change in comfort.

Sadly, even at Superleague level, these facilities are beyond some clubs, and some Senior clubs who get the handouts from the SFA are even worse.

I hope they never change the current format of the Scottish Junior Cup. It is without question one of the world's greatest knock-out tournaments and the myriad permutations of who you can be drawn against is part of the appeal. You have to be bloody good to win it, sometimes an unfashionable side gets to the latter stages (or even goes all the way), invariably with massive community support. That's all part of the cup's character. What an incredible tournament - please leave it alone!

It's a total lottery. Neither finalist last year could be described as 'bloody good' - in fact a supporter of one of them described his own team's general performances last season as 'rotten' to me only a few days ago! Both sides were a little fortunate to dodge relegation.

Some of the finals in recent years have also been utterly dire - Renfrew v Carnoustie and Carnoustie v Tayport just to name two. The latter was embarrassing as a collection of past-it has-beens blootered the poor ball about the park in a wilting, searing heat but lucky the Monaco GP overran and STV were forced to omit the first half hour. An absolute blessing. Even the shootout was dire.

I still say it's one of the great football tournaments and every junior club in the land has a buzz about it when it's Scottish Cup time. Getting through 8 or 9 rounds to the final is a gruelling task and there are certainly teams who are assisted by Lady Luck in the draw. But you can't fluke it all the way and have to be bloody good to win it.

A total lottery? To a certain extent that's what cup competitions are all about. Welcome to the party. We already have leagues (and now super leagues) to tell us who the best team in the region is over 38 games or whatever. But Britain has a love affair with knock-out football and our game as a public spectacle is all the stronger for it.

I can't argue against the fact that recent finals have been dire in terms of flowing football. But that happens in the Champions League as well and - in any case - just about every SJ Cup final is a gala occasion with legions of fans supporting their home-town team. For many people, that's a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity and something you treasure.

I take it that the exponents of all that is good in the Junior game had been dumped on their arses in the earlier rounds

I'm probably the least partisan person on this board. Lok's cup record was pretty poor from 98-04. I don't recall suggesting we'd have added anything to the two finals in question, but other clubs would have.

The obvious argument would be if they weren't good enough to get to the final...

Everyone is pumped up for a major cup final, fans, management and players alike. With two teams going hell for leather, you often get a lot of huffing and puffing and not a lot of silky football. The same thing happens in promotion deciders and local derbies at all levels in the game.

But the SJ Cup final is the only time the junior game is given mass nationwide exposure and many people will take what they see and apply it to the junior scene as a whole.

Which is exactly the problem and why STV took it off air, apart from money reasons.

Maybe you're playing devil's advocate but if you seriously think that Cumnock were one of the best sides in Junior football last season I'll have some of what you're having while there have been other examples of weak teams getting to the final in the past decade apart from them.

Mildly. I'm not a huge fan of league position influencing cup competition though (and I know I'm a lone voice in stating that).

Despite the fact that virtually every cup in Britain is 'influenced' by league position? Except in good old Scottish non-league football...

I don't buy it cmontheloknow, if it is true what you say regarding weaker teams, then why do no teams from the North ever get to the latter stages of the Junior Cup?

This is what cup football is all about, just look at Cardiff City, Portsmouth and Queen of the South in last season's cups.

What you really mean to say is that the worst of the better teams have been making it to recent finals, if you can understand that

The worst of the best is a good way to put it.

Personally, I think the idea that all cups should be all-in from the start passed away long ago. What exactly does the all-in format give the Junior clubs? Certainly not exposure - as there are so many matches on, the majority of them one-sided non-entities, that the media has nothing to focus on. Prize money? The income from a R1 or R2 game is not IMO a major source of sustainance for the season. Crowds? Not as far as I'm aware - especially when so many matches are uncompetitive.

In turn, having it all-in from the start surely just heaps up the backlogs for the successful teams; denies the opportunity for small/weak clubs to put a run together (as they get put out in the first match or two they play); dilutes the quality teams away into the ether; and sometimes, depending on the weather, generates a nightmare of games all over the place, postponements, replays etc.

Nor do I think you can claim that the Scottish Junior Cup, in its current format, is keeping Junior football in the national limelight. There is no live TV coverage now; the competition couldn't find a sponsor of any kind until the Semi-Finals in 2006-07 (IIRC); and the crowds at the Semi-Finals in particular don't suggest it sets the hills on fire. Which is no surprise when its a lottery of draws, of travel, and scheduling. Are many Junior fans confusing cup equality with cup quality?


The same was true of the old Scottish Qualifying Cup (and before it, the Scottish Cup itself), which is why they were seeded, given byes according to league membership, divided into geographic areas (by regional FA/FL), or divided into local Qualifying Cups. But that was roughly 75 years ago!!


What would be the harm of seeding say the top division SuperLeague clubs into Round Three; the remaining SuperLeague clubs into Round Two; with the rest into Round One and a Preliminary? In the senior game, the Scottish Cup is seeded (over 4 different rounds), and few people complain.

I'm not suggesting big clubs should get 5 or 6 rounds of byes, but surely 2 or 3 would do no harm?

There are 38 super league level clubs so a 1st Round bye would probably be the most sensible suggestion. That would leave a 1st round to be drawn from the remaining 126 clubs.

1st Round: 126 clubs in hat, 36 ties, 54 drawn byes (+ 38 super league sides omitted).
2nd Round: 38 super league clubs + 36 1st round winners + 54 1st round drawn byes
3rd Round: last 64
etc...

I'd go a stage further, or at least I'd be looking at format like this as the ultimate goal one day:

Preliminary: 37 West district leagues, 39 East district leagues, 23 North district leagues (33 get byes)

R1(66): 33 who got byes in Preliminary, 33 winners of Preliminary

R2(66): 12 West Super1st, 12 East Premier, 7(bottom) North Premier, 33 winners of R1

R3(64): 12 West SuperPremier, 12 East Super, 7(top) North Premier, 33 winners of R2

R4(32): and so on

Way to piss off the North Region

OK - base it on rounds reached per region over the past 10 years. They'd probably be worse off!!

League competitions decide who is the best teams across a whole season, cup finals do not.

Dire performances in Finals can be attributed to many things, such as playing the Final too late in the season after having to play umpteen midweek matches to catch up.

It is not neccesarily an indicator that the teams involved are shite, how can it be when they have made it through 5 or 6 rounds to get there?

That would be as far as I would go, and to be honest that's as far as you could expect the clubs themselves to vote for.

Burnie - the point is, one half of the draw could (in theory) include the worst 50% of clubs in the SJFA.

A coefficient system? Hmm, interesting idea.

That's the luck of the draw though isn't it?

I agree with the principle of keeping Superleague sides (plus those involved in the Scottish Senior Cup - if they are not Superleague clubs) out of the first round draw as there are loads of bye's anyway so it doesn't really affect the competition too much.

I could also be persuaded that they should then go on to keep the Superleague clubs apart in the 2nd round, but to honest any more than that and you are beginning to ruin what is good about the Junior Cup, and that's from someone who welcomes modernisation in the Junior game.

I agree with you, the changes don't need to be drastic to be effective.

Yeh - to be fair, I think I was pushing the boat out a little with my ideas... though I still don't see why Pollok or Linlithgow shouldn't enter a few rounds after public park outfits from Moray... I would agree with the point about R1/R2 - if you're giving out 80 byes, then why not give them to the 80 top teams?