archieb

So, Armadale and Bathgate voted Yes to the pyramid while Broxburn voted No. Not sure what that proves?

Read the recent post on this thread by the Wishaw Secretary

In short, that stinks of paranoia

They did have a choice. But they have been told that they don't. 47 WSJFA clubs put in an Expression of Interest to the WoSL That means 16 didn't. If most of those 16 also don't apply to the WoSL, that could still leave a league that's bigger than the rump ESJFA (South), but would there be a WSJFA admin left to run it?

Such decisions will firstly depend on how many of the 63 apply (only a week to wait for that, unless there's another extension), then there'll need to be a further delay till we find out when competitive football can resume and therefore how long the next season (or part-season) will last.

Nithsdale are one club that would struggle to meet the ground criteria - particularly the one that refers to the pitch not being viewable from outside the ground, as it's fully visible from the A76!

Mid-Annandale (in Lockerbie) would be faced with a fair old trek to get to any of the Lanarkshire clubs Jamie. UPPER Annandale (in Moffat) are far closer to the likes of Lesmahagow and Lanark, comparable to their distance from Kirkconnel (Kello).

I beg to disagree, and stand by my original comment. The image doesn't say "promotion spot via a playoff", because that is NOT what is on offer and it is NOT guaranteed (as it is in England) because the team in the higher division may win the play-offs. It says "promotion play-off spot" which suggests eligibility for the play-off process, for which there are THREE places. Take another look at the image: At Tier 4, there is 1 relegation play-off spot in SPFL2 and at Tier 5 two promotion play-off spots, 1 each in the HL and the LL. Total 3 taking part in the play-off process. At Tier 5 there is 1 relegation spot in the LL and three promotion play-off spots, 1 each in EoSL, SoSL and WoSL totalling up to 3 teams eligible for the play-off process. For consistency, the SPFL should say 3 promotion play-off spots (OR the HL & LL should say 0.5 each and the EoSL, SoSL and WoSL each say 0.333333333333333333333 which would be silly!)

They've also got the number of playoff spots in the SPFL Championship, League 1 & League 2 incorrect (should be 3, not 1).

They were indeed instrumental, although the Whitletts proposal originally included a regionalised 3rd level. Hopefully you'll understand my preference for having Pollok's contribution recognised also.

IIRC did the proposal not originally come from St. Anthony's, and it did mention the fact that Central clubs could drop 2 levels away from the Super First, while the Ayrshire clubs could only ever drop 1 level from there? Think they were, there were at least 2 proposals from what I remember, with the club's involved being asked to join together and they then came up with the one that was adopted. It's really not helpful when people who weren't even there try to rewrite history! I've given the correct story before on this thread but, for the sake of clarity, here it is again: What in fact happened was that three clubs independently produced proposals for reconfiguring the league structure. Two sets of proposals were submitted to the WRSJFA for comments (one of which was from Pollok, the other from St Anthony's), the third set from Whitletts Victoria was sent out to all clubs for comment and openly discussed on Pie and Bovril. Feedback from the Region was that Pollok should consult with St Anthony's and agree a joint proposal. I attended a WRSJFA General Meeting as Pollok delegate, and used the opportunity to speak with interested people from several other clubs including Whitletts. Following this, Whitletts convened two meetings of a working group representing all interested clubs plus a few additional ones we invited so that all divisions and geographical areas were involved. There, 5 sets of proposals in all were considered which had many similar features. After discussion, it was a version of the Pollok proposal that met with most approval (with the Premiership, Championship, Leagues 1&2 nomenclature adopted from St Anthony's) and which was taken forward to the next WRSJFA GM, formulated into an AGM motion, (along with 2 other motions, originated by Whitletts and agreed by the group - for advance release of fixtures and changes to the Sectional Cup).

The principal reason for the restructuring was to create larger divisions so that clubs had a greater number of guaranteed home fixtures. Most worryingly, the Ayrshire division had been reduced to 11 clubs , giving only 10 home fixtures, which was not providing enough income to survive on.

It's a whole new set up, teams all start on an equal footing and there is no guarantee who will end up where after the first season of conferences. Even beyond that teams will drop down the way, of course they should have a say in what the overall set up is. The LL have made it clear that all decisions will be democratic, and it's one club one vote. I agree one member one vote should be the guiding principle, although it would be hoped that all clubs would listen to the concerns of those most directly affected. Interestingly, in the case of the WRSJFA restructuring, it was the lower-division clubs involved in the preliminary discussions who argued most strongly for 4 all-in divisions!

As I've already pointed out, it's only 2 years since the West region abandoned regionalisation below the Championship following a decisive vote so suggesting it should be reinstated in the new WoSL makes no sense.

By the time of the meeting on 12th March there had been 52 EOIs in total. 47 were from WRSJFA members, ONE amateur. I have no information about who the other 4 clubs were.