Cornishman
-
Posts
125 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Store
Posts posted by Cornishman
-
-
If LL & HL refused to provide the proposed six or eight teams to play in this 'Conference', in support of all tier5 to tier10 clubs in this matter... that now four-team division would go the way of the European Super League pretty smartish!
2 -
Please could someone confirm the 2022/23 arrangements for me? Tx in advance
0 -
Here's a devious question...
You have the opportunity and wherewithall to kick-out the OF to say, the EPL... the only proviso in doing so is you have to accept the OF Colts into L2.
Wwyd?
-1 -
If WoS clubs; say from Ayr & Southward; could be drafted into the SoS, then the latter could become a very much more viable league at tier6 n'est-ce-pas?
While I readily anticipate inertia against the idea for predictable reasons, there is some merit in allowing clubs in the area the alternative, ostensibly easier, route to promotion chances and in the creation of a much stronger third LL-feeder, create stronger argument for a larger LL trapdoor to tier6!
Further, with the emigration of those clubs from WoS, that league will itself concertina into a sleeker competition, with greater opportunities for all remaining clubs to rise in the hierarchy. Thus established, the argument for a three-up/down arrangement between tier5 & tier6 would be paramount, particularly were the LL to increase to an 18-team competition (which it has already been proven easily possible!).
0 -
27 minutes ago, LongTimeLurker said:
Rod Petrie and Ian Maxwell
OK, so Rod Petrie and Ian Maxwell had a TJ feverdream. D'Oh!
1 -
4 hours ago, LongTimeLurker said:
That's what always gets posted on here but Option Z being actively discussed through the PWG strongly suggests otherwise.
Do I really need to say that Option Z was only ever a TJ feverdream?
It was a strategically placed filibuster designed to significantly muddy the waters..
2 -
On 19/06/2022 at 13:07, LongTimeLurker said:
The only utter tripe that's being peddled at the moment is the refusal of the LL to open up the pro/rel bottleneck and the selfish self-serving attempt of clubs like Civil Service Strollers to link that issue to what happens with the Club 42 playoff. There's a massive imbalance between the HL and LL catchments in population terms so having two central belt tier 5 feeders wouldn't necessarily be a bad thing even if the SJFA's proposal is clearly not going to be the way that it comes about.
All fine and well saying that, but (again) the SPFL's bottom line is two feeder leagues... and if not two, then one!
2 -
The most sensible way to treat with the bottom-28 teams in the EoSFL would be to create them in two parallel 14-team Divisions... either as a North&West/South&East split ~or~ as two random(ish)ly divided Conferences.
I'd allow a surplus of two teams to be promoted than relegated between the Divisions Two and Division One - to bring the latter to an 18-strong constitution, the better to deal with a 4-down/2x2-up promotion and relegation system thereafter.
Sorted!
1 -
Bearing in mind that so far, all we have is a probable notification of proposals yet to be made.
I, personally cannot corroborate the following... "2022/3 is very much a holding position. There will be breathtaking changes for 2023/4". However, the person I'm quoting is a sometimes P&B poster and on the Forum where I mostly interact with him, he is recognised as a sensible, grounded member of long standing who very rarely shares incorrect information, if ever.
I think that he had a simple clerical 'slip', though, in not explaining that the 2023/4 season should be a transitional period, where any proposed changes would become extant in 2024/5.
1 -
Elgin
0 -
2 minutes ago, Ginaro said:
"in the event of a net gain of 1 club from or a net loss of 1 club to the LL" this is an either or situation, so it would not make sense for the Conference X 3rd place being promoted in both cases.
Like the divisions above, an extra club is only promoted if there is space to fill - i.e. if the EOS loses 1 club to the LL, which cannot now happen.
It IS written in plain English. The obvious interpretation seems wholly legitimate. If your standpoint were correct the 'OR clause' is rendered supremely superfluous to requirement. It seems to exist in order to prevent the Premier Division from having to operate with an uneven number in membership.
0 -
On 01/05/2022 at 14:50, Ginaro said:
No it doesn't. It lumps all the possibilities together, using a # to show which league positions are "possibles". Conference X 3rd place was a possible promotion and not a play-off, but only if the EOS loses a club to the LL - which will not happen as Vale of Leithen have been relegated.
I am quite sure your confidence is misplaced... it means what it says!
0 -
On 27/04/2022 at 22:53, Ginaro said:
Two teams up, no play-off (as that was only if the EOS lost a team to the LL).
The note in the bottom left of the graphic states that those playoffs will be played if EOS either loses OR gains a team to/from the LFL.
0 -
Eh. Here's a model which would satisfy both the 'need' for Premiership competitors to have four seasonal OF games, and the 'problem' of perceiving that there are too few teams in each division.
How about we go for an SPFL constructed 16-16-16 in three tiers? The Premiership would include twelve teams plus the OF... but, crucially, the arsecheeks are allowed to play each of their fixtures vs. their various opponents twice ~ once with the identity of '1st.match-team' and followed chronologically in the identity of '2nd.match-team'. Each identity holds it's own separate league place, without opportunity to favour one or the other, simply because it's obvious that in playing any 'Team X', it's difficult to play a second match against them before the first match against them!!!
Of course, a rule to ensure that both identities play their 'best First Team' for each and every match would be required. So... NO B-Team!
The matter of the supposed required fixture: 'Left Cheek 1st.match-team' v. 'Left Cheek 2nd.match-team' would be obviated by the non-match being awarded as a 0-0 draw.
With a 30-game fixture list a top-8/bottom-8 split for seven extra matches would fill-up to 37 games. Noting that no matter 30-game finishing positions, the lower-placed of both OF identities will always play out in the bottom-8 competition, with upward adjustment as necessary for other teams.
Final League positions for the season would only count each Cheek's highest qualified identity, however, all other teams would retain all points earned [same as presently operates in the SLFL]. Same would operate in regard to Euro competition qualification.
Regarding OF relegation: Normally, we'd expect 2-up/down, but each OF lower-finishing team can only be relegated if the higher-finishing identity occupies 3rd.-last place and rarely, 4th.-last place too [only if all OF identities occupy all bottom-4 places in the latter case].
Six extra teams would be needed in the League to fulfil the 16-16-16 model.
Bizarre, I know, but if this model be adopted, have I covered all important points?
0 -
On 19/04/2022 at 13:41, Inanimate Carbon Rod said:
It would be terrible if people started boycotting lowland league clubs sponsors….
I suggested just that, a while back... except I intimated that organising a 'ring-a-thon' (where a group of people organise a telephone bombing campaign), so the sponsor receives a different complainant's phonecall every five minutes or so, might be considered.
0 -
2 minutes ago, welshbairn said:
You've been drinking too much of the local water.
That appears so! My bad! Think I assumed that HL & LL operated a more similar relegation policy. At least it created a little extra 'think space', lol!
0 -
We do realise that if the HL champion promotes to League2, then Fort ain't relegated?
-2 -
18 hours ago, GNU_Linux said:
The Vics become the 2nd team confirmed to be playing tier 7 next season. The Bankies stun the Vale while Talbot draw with Largs in what could prove to be a massive point for the latter. Big win for the Roy who were up four zip at half time.Rossvale are also down, unless they can overturn a 36 goal defecit in two matches, to overtake a Glenafton who've seven games to play; alternatively, overturn a mere 30 goal deficit to overtake Rob Roy, who've still got nine fixtures left! Oh... and they're also sunk if any of Largs (P32/37Pts), Kilbirnie (P36/37Pts) or Cumbernauld (P30/32Pts) reach 41Pts. Bleak!
0 -
Hit them in the headline sponsor's pocket... or, at least, everyone against this decision telephone that sponsor to make their complaints known, say - every fifth minute of the working week?
0 -
1 hour ago, Merkie84 said:
What about the bottleneck for clubs getting promoted from the LL / HFL to League 2 ?
10 teams seems to small for me to allow a reasonable amount of movement between the leagues and I can see why teams there don't want automatic relegation.
It seems to me that 42 SPFL clubs is the number just because that was how many teams there were before the pyramid, not because it is necessarily the most suitable amount of teams in the league.
How many teams ideally should be in league 2 / the SPFL to allow for automatic promotion/ relegation etc ?
Ideally, I think an SPFL of three tiers, constituted of 12, 20 & 20 teams would be ideal.
0 -
16 minutes ago, Meldrew said:
i wonder if Lampard will feature in the equation ?
i think he could be decent for them, add to that, his father in law owns brown brogues
Ha!
0 -
2 minutes ago, Meldrew said:
as good as signed for Norwich
There's two of them, don't forget!
0 -
Frank Lampard
0 -
There IS a perfectly good place for the OF colts and any other (Lowland) SPFL teams!
It's called the Lowland Development League
3
New clubs in the West of Scotland
in West of Scotland Football League
Posted
If you draw a line from Stroud thru Chelmsford produced, it'll fairly accurately separate North and South of the country into its two roughly triangular sections of approximately equal geographic area.