Jump to content

mcruic

Gold Members
  • Content Count

    86
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

59 Excellent

2 Followers

About mcruic

  • Rank
    Sunday League Starter
  • Birthday 27/06/1976

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    theroonba.com
  • ICQ
    0

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Cambridgeshire
  • My Team
    Blairgowrie

Recent Profile Visitors

3,039 profile views
  1. Does anyone know why Auchterarder are named "Primrose"? I note now that their nickname is "The Rose" and they sport a red rose on their club crest. Primroses are traditionally light yellow (primrose yellow) and are not related to roses at all.
  2. When did Hawick Royal Albert become a United?
  3. A minor issue: Coltness United don't exist any more - they became Newmains United - you have both in it.
  4. If it does happen, Montrose should definitely play their home games next year in the sea.
  5. Yes - it's the same old problem with junior clubs (wanting to remain junior - which means absolutely nothing, really) - and floodlights now being part of the licensing requirements. But the way the pyramid is currently being built, the West of Scotland junior teams would have to join the East of Scotland League. If a certain number of WoS junior teams go senior, this would tip the balance in favour of a 3-way split at Tier 5. I am fully aware this is all pie in the sky stuff at the moment because the people involved in making the decisions are not fit for purpose, and there are individual agendas rather than just getting a proper pyramid. Every other country in Europe has one, but here in Scotland everyone acts like it's something alien or complicated. What we have at the moment is a pyramid that is being built on incomplete foundations, and it's going to collapse at some point. Most times I have posted about the pyramid on this forum (in the juniors or East of Scotland section), it's like "not the pyramid again", or "that would never work" or "it will never happen". But most threads on the pyramid are just random and incoherent tit-for-tat, with no real concrete proposals about what it would/should actually look like, because "there are too many clubs" or "Scotland's geography is too complex", etc. etc. Nonsense. The system I have designed below would work, and it would be better than what we have now. It allows teams to "opt out" of promotion (which in effect means they could opt out of the pyramid, while still being in it). There would be no negative consequences for any team, and most of the lower level teams would be playing pretty much the same teams they are playing now. Judging by some people's reactions, it's as if they imagine that joining the pyramid means playing Wick or Newton Stewart away every week.
  6. Given that SPFL clubs don't want regionalisation, I think it would be sensible to divide the clubs into 3 leagues instead of 4 (12-14-16?). Top tier as it is now, 2nd tier play each other 3 times each (as has happened previously - 39 game season), 3rd tier playing a 30-game season. It means only 2 promotions are required to reach the Premier instead of the current 3. It also freshens up the fixtures list a bit with more teams instead of playing the same 9 teams all season... If Tier 3 teams are concerned that 30 matches isn't enough, split the league and play an extra 7 each. Below the SPFL, 3 regional leagues at Tier 5. Stop with this obsession with Highland/Lowland. There are 3 natural regions in Scotland in terms of clusters of clubs - and those are the divisions used by the juniors. Tier 5 East/West/North would all have 16 clubs as well.
  7. There is simply no good reason not to adopt a pyramid system that includes all teams, right down to the amateurs. "The fans don't want it" or "the clubs don't want it" are not valid excuses if the fans or clubs don't have good reasons. I haven't seen any good reasons. Scotland is the only country in Europe without such a system, not because of "tradition", but because of obstinacy and refusal to change - just for the sake of it. Most, if not all, clubs, would be better off, would have to travel the same or less than now, and would know their place within a national system. They'd also be playing a set of teams very close to what they are already playing.
  8. My attempt: Note - this includes all current senior, junior, amateur, welfare teams in existence in Scotland (around 1,060).
  9. Their geographically appropriate Level 7 league (the Northern Premier) would involve much more travelling than they would expect in the Lowland League, as it includes clubs all the way down to North Norfolk. The only "local" league that might involve less travelling than the Lowland League would be the Northern League (its top tier is at Level 9 on the English pyramid, 4 levels below the "Conference").
  10. Not sure this is entirely down to them moving into national leagues - the Tier 2 attendances also went up in this period (from around 15,000 to 17,000) with no change in league structure. But yes, the average attendance of the latter 3 clubs seem to have gone up quite a lot.
  11. The Scottish League system has changed many times over the years, from 2 divisions, to 3, to 4. No wiping away, just continuing the tradition of change. The number of matches played, and the league system has also changed many times. There is no drawing of any lines on a map - the lines are already there and being used. The only one that needs redrawn is the Tier 5 one - for historical reasons, as juniors weren't involved, there was no need for a West region - but with the current evolution, it looks likely that this will be necessary, otherwise the West clubs would have to join the East of Scotland League - which seems bizarre to me. The only problem is the junior/senior divide. The East juniors last year showed how easy it was to overcome that by joining the EoS League.
  12. My point was - If you are selecting the Top 20 best attended clubs from across regional divisions, their attendance figures will be made up of matches against what would now be Tier 3 and Tier 4 clubs, so it's not a fair comparison. The 73 clubs at Tier 3 in the regional leagues, for example, do not equate to the 20 in the national Tier 3. To put it another way - if you regionalised League 1 and 2 in Scotland, the regional leagues would probably have lower attendance than the current League 1 but higher than the current League 2 (because there would be League 2 clubs in there with smaller fan bases). So it wouldn't be fair to compare League 1 pre and post-nationalisation. "National wins" every time, but only because the comparison is not a fair one.
  13. I'm not expecting it to happen overnight. But it has to happen with 3 feeder leagues sooner or later if a fully working pyramid is to happen. There are more than twice as many clubs in the "South" for a start. I laid out a plan above that provides a benefit to all teams, or at least the same as they have now. All teams with the same chance of promotion or better than they have now. All SPFL clubs still in a national structure (no regionalisation), all "non-league" clubs still in a regionalised structure (but a more suitable one). Again - I don't see the problem.
  14. I think you are mistaken. The worst thing is actually holier-than-thou "fans" who think that they know best just because they stand and watch a team every week. Nobody is proclaiming anything as the only way - we are offering suggestions for discussion. The lines are already on the map - otherwise the juniors wouldn't exist, and the senior non-leagues wouldn't exist either. Which anorak drew those lines I wonder? The comparisons are not meaningless - they are countering claims made by those who claim to know because they follow the teams. A bit of factual evidence doesn't hurt anyone. History or sentiment? No idea what you think that means - but some history and tradition is outdated. Those hanging on to the "but we are the juniors, we've always been the juniors" - this is just empty sentiment, as most decent clubs will leave and the juniors will be no better than the amateurs.
  15. When you did this comparison, did you take the Top 20's average against the other teams in the Top 20, or against all teams in their division? Because this would also make a difference.
×
×
  • Create New...