Born To Run

Of course they will. Just because they disagree with a proposal doesn’t mean they should refuse any resulting funds out of spite.

My understanding is that any proposed rule changes would need to have been submitted by yesterday ahead of the LL AGM. Any club can propose something with the backing of one other. Really, really hope I’m wrong but I don’t think further relegation will be on the table. In my opinion, we should be aiming for three down every year but realistically they’d only vote to add one more spot.

Any name change is unconfirmed at this time. Business as usual as far as I know.

The reason I haven’t said a full yes is that it still appears to be fluid. Will need to wait until confirmation at the AGM to be absolutely sure. The movement of players bit comes directly from the document shared around (slideshow style one). I don’t think a copy of the actual ‘deal’ has leaked out yet. It will, no doubt.

1) I believe so. 2) Squad moves can only be made during normal transfer windows is my understanding from the proposal document. Max age is 2002s (u20s) with allowance for one u21 outfielder, one u21 keeper.

I take it back - got my figures wrong! It was indeed £33k.

This is the big financial difference. While SPFL clubs got the Anderson money and government help, LL sides only got a Government grant of <£10k. Like it or not, that will make them more keen on any proposal with potential financial upside. (Thanks for the red dot in advance, Marsh.)

For the first point, I’d defer to Chris. In fairness, I’d say we all understand the reason for such strong feelings on this. You’re right that both OF sides would be getting preferential treatment. However, I can also see why some Lowland sides will vote for it (financially & otherwise). I strongly suspect that this vote will pass tonight, meaning at least 9 clubs would see value in the proposal.

You know as well as we all do that reserve/B sides cannot play in the Lowland as rules stand. I’m puzzled as to why you are taking aim at our podcast, however - or our clubs for that matter (I’m the only BSC man, Chris works with Spartans & Ben is involved at Kilwinning). We’re not the ones proposing this. Wouldn’t necessarily call myself a cheerleader for it either, given my immediate reaction was discomfort regarding how this looks to the leagues below.

I haven’t posted much in here since this came out - couldn’t be bothered with the personal attacks just because I might have a slightly different approach to this. Appreciated these comments though. Look - we aren’t journalists (and never pretend to be). What I would say, however, is that going all guns blazing might have resulted in no info whatsoever coming out. Ultimately, we got previously unknown details about the innovation paper from George as well as a nod to his future thoughts (LL2). Well, it was good enough for the Daily Record to run two articles off the back of the podcast anyway.

What a pleasant individual you are. “Gatekeeper to all things non-league” is a new one to add to the list. Cheers for that. EDIT: On a serious note, the mute function on Twitter is great - I use it a lot. If you’re fed up of me, that’s the best way to avoid my tweets.

Absolutely fine with that point of view. There seems to be a lot of people making hay with the “no chance this will only be one year” line though. That’s my point.

I understand a lot of the opposition to this. However, I still don’t think it’s valid to boil this down to “it won’t just be for one year though”. You’re making assumptions based on supposition, not evidence. Would be easier if we knew what was contained in that planning document for 2022 mind you. While we’re concentrating on facts, we all know that the Colts don’t attract big crowds in the cup. Financial benefits of this are focused on the “entry fee” paid by both OF clubs. I don’t expect to see more than a couple hundred max turn up in Alloa for example. Essentially, the vote will come down to whether clubs feel like the £3k+ and potential raised profile (debateable in extent) is worth playing an extra four games vs talented youth sides while possibly alienating a section of their fanbases.

All league members, including Bo’ness, get a vote.

Chris put out a deliberately balanced point of view last night because all three of us have differing opinions. We’ll be recording a proper reaction at some point this week which should cover all bases. Safe to say that your point of view will be represented!

I was more referring to the folk saying we get 10/15 fans along, not relating it to this!

As I mentioned in my piece, I was of exactly the same mindset when it came to the League 2 proposal - if it came with further (i.e. automatic) relegation confirmed, I was fine with it. I'm essentially advocating the same thing here. The results being counted seems to be still up in the air, looking at David Severs tweet. The direction of travel may be to leave them out. As for that final point? You could throw that in for anything in Scottish Football. I'll choose to go with the proposal's stated term. It would need voted through again to extend/change.

Good to see the same old nonsense getting peddled about crowd numbers. That's a moot point, mind you. I've put together my thoughts on the proposal. Covered most bases here. We're basically talking about the two Colt sides playing a glorified friendly campaign for a season and paying member clubs for the priviledge. I don't have an issue with it in principle - my problem is with how this looks to the feeder leagues below. Long been a proponent of two relegation spots...now is the time for it if this is possibly getting passed.

No gory details needed, enough is openly known. The boundary will not be moved after the aggressive manner in which they tried to change it last summer.

I believe Swifty is bringing his full team - Stephen Bryceland was our GK coach. Genuinely hope this move works out for all, as gutted as I am to lose him. In truth Swifty has deserved an SPFL shot for a while now and we were lucky to keep him last summer. He will demand commitment (and get it) from the dressing room, while his teams will play decent football on the eye. ...and for the record, both Ross Smith & Jamie McCormack have been excellent at our level (I know they weren't thought of as fondly while with you guys). One of the gaffers strengths is in squad building - look at the experienced names he managed to attract to us while pairing them up with young players of potential. I've absolutely no doubt that you'll be at least a playoff side next time round.

If this was at all possible, I suspect most people would be on board with it. Overall a positive move for the pyramid as a whole. The question is, would the clubs ever vote it through?

I made a mistake with a name. Is my point incorrect?

15 of 20 League 1 & 2 clubs need to agree for any changes to pass. I can't see a situation where that could happen sadly. Too many sides are living in fear of relegation and would vote selfishly.

If the SPFL were minded to stay neutral and allow Brechin their route of appeal via arbritration, dates would have been announced for these games. What we know is that the league were due to get legal advice by today. My impression is that they will now seek to cancel the playoffs via the rulebook or via temporary League 2 reconstruction. The fact that this situation wasn't forseen & planned for when the league returned is a joke quite frankly.

Do we think the SPFL clubs would vote for further relegation? Look at the behaviour of Brechin. Look at the comments from Albion Rovers gaffer Kerr. No chance.